BACKGROUND:Patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting are susceptible to haemodynamic labiality during anaesthesia induction. AIMS AND OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the hemodynamic effects of etomidate in comparison to that of propofol during induction of general anaesthesia. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: The study was conducted in the department of anaesthesia of a tertiary care medical college setting over a period of one year from October 2013 to October 2014 on patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass surgery under general anaesthesia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 40 adult patients who are aged 35-65 years belonging to American Society Anaesthesia grades 1 and 2 undergoing elective surgery under general anaesthesia, were divided randomly into two groups of 20 patients each. By using bispectral index of 50 as a goal for induction, group a patients were given intravenous propofol injection, and group B were given etomidate injection. STASTICAL ANALYSIS: Data is presented as mean and standard deviation. The statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 15.0, Stata 8.0, medicals 9.0.1 and Systat 11.0. A "p" value of less than 0.05 was taken as significant. RESULTS: Our results in both (P and E respectively) groups showed significant reduction in arterial pressure (30%-22%), SVRI (31%-23%), and LVSWI (38%-32%) after anaesthesia induction. However, the heart rate (3%-10%) and cardiac index did not change significantly. SVRI significantly increased in the etomidate group after intubation. CONCLUSION: Propofol can produce a larger reduction in contractility, arterial pressure, and after load when compared to etomidate as an induction agent in patients with coronary artery disease. Etomidate is less effective in preventing stress response to intubation.