Infection with Hepatitis A virus (HAV) is a significant cause of acute hepatitis, posing an important public health problem worldwide. This study aimed to compare the efficiency of the immune-chromatography test and the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) in detecting infection with hepatitis A virus (HAV). For this purpose, 5 ml of blood was collected from 176 patients (92 males and 84 females) who attended the virology unit at Kirkuk General Hospital and the serological examination unit at the pediatric hospital, as well as private clinics in Kirkuk city for the presence of clinical signs or complaint directed towards infection doubt with hepatitis A virus (HAV), during the period between March 2020 and December 2021. The seropositive rate of anti –Hepatitis A immunoglobulin M antibody was 46(26.13%) of total patients of the study, while the ratio of the seronegative of HAV was 90(51.13%). The percentage of false-positive and false-negative results by immune-chromatography (ICT) was 34(19.38%) and 6(3.4%). These findings suggest that the fast test (ICT) is not a suitable screening test for detecting specific antibodies to the hepatitis A virus due to the high frequency of false-negative results caused by the test's low sensitivity and negative predictive value. This emphasizes employing ELISA or PCR methods to confirm hepatitis A virus diagnosis in public hospitals. Although ICTs are cheap, they alone are not useful in diagnosing and deciding treatment for patients infected with Hepatitis A virus, so it is recommended to use the ELISA test to confirm the diagnosis of infection and identify the Hepatitis A virus in public hospitals, healthcare units and blood transfusion centers. Keywords. Hepatitis A virus, Seroprevalence, immuno-chromatographic test, ELISA test, IgM