Objective: To compare the effectiveness of mobile video-guided home exercise program and standard paper-based home exercise program. Methods: Eligible participants were randomly assigned to either experimental group with mobile video-guided home exercise program or control group with home exercise program in a standard pamphlet for three months. The primary outcome was exercise adherence. The secondary outcomes were self-efficacy for exercise by Self-Efficacy for Exercise (SEE) Scale; and functional outcomes including mobility level by Modified Functional Ambulatory Category (MFAC) and basic activities of daily living (ADL) by Modified Barthel Index (MBI). All outcomes were captured by phone interviews at 1 day, 1 month and 3 months after the participants were discharged from the hospitals. Results: A total of 56 participants were allocated to the experimental group [Formula: see text] and control group [Formula: see text]. There were a significant between-group differences in 3-months exercise adherence (experimental group: 75.6%; control group: 55.2%); significant between-group differences in 1-month SEE (experimental group: 58.4; control group: 43.3) and 3-month SEE (experimental group: 62.2; control group: 45.6). For functional outcomes, there were significant between-group differences in 3-month MFAC gain (experimental group: 1.7; control group: 1.0). There were no between-group differences in MBI gain. Conclusion: The use of mobile video-guided home exercise program was superior to standard paper-based home exercise program in exercise adherence, SEE and mobility gain but not basic ADL gain for patients recovering from stroke.