Background The application of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol in gastrointestinal surgery has been widely accepted. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of ERAS in total robotic distal gastrectomy (TRDG) versus 3D total laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (3D-TLDG) for gastric cancer. Methods We retrospectively evaluated 73 patients underwent TRDG and 163 patients who received 3D-TLDG. The propensity score was used for matching analysis according to a 1:1 ratio, so that there was no significant difference in the baseline data between the two groups. The short-term effect and safety of the two groups were compared.Results The TRDG group had a less intraoperative bleeding (30.21 +/- 13.78 vs. 41.44 +/- 17.41 ml, P < 0.001), longer intraoperative preparation time (31.05 +/- 4.93 vs. 15.48 +/- 2.43 min, P < 0.001), shorter digestive tract reconstruction time (32.67 +/- 4.41 vs. 39.78 +/- 4.95 min, P < 0.001), shorter postoperative ambulation time (14.07 +/- 8.97 vs. 17.49 +/- 5.98 h, P = 0.007), shorter postoperative anal exhaust time (1.78 +/- 0.79 vs. 2.18 +/- 0.79 days, P = 0.003), shorter postoperative hospital stay (7.74 +/- 3.15 vs. 9.97 +/- 3.23 days, P < 0.001), lower postoperative pain score (P = 0.006) and higher hospitalization cost (89,907.15 +/- 17,147.19 vs. 125,615.82 +/- 11,900.80 RMB, P < 0.001) than the 3D-TLDG group.Conclusion TRDG and 3D-TLDG under ERAS protocol are safe and feasible. Compared with 3D-TLDG, the TRDG has better intraoperative bleeding control effect and greater advantages in digestive tract reconstruction. After the combination of ERAS protocol, TRDG also has certain advantages in the recovery process of patients after surgery.