Aim: The purpose of this study was to clinically evaluate applying propolis versus formocresol as a pulpotomy material in exposed primary molars. Methods: This study included 60 primary molars in 60 children 4–9 years of age who underwent an identical conventional pulpotomy technique; the molars were allocated to propolis, Formocresol groups. The patients were recalled after an interval of 1 monthand 3 months for clinical and radiographic evaluation. Results: The clinical success rates according to presence or absence of pain swelling sensitivity to percussion for propolis group were 93%, 100%, 100% respectively after 1 month and 90%, 93%, 96% after 3 months and for fc group it was 96%, 100%, 100%after 1 month and 93%, 96%, 96% after 3 months which indicates that there was no significant difference between the two materials. And for radiographic examination therewasno significant difference between the two materials at one month, three months intervals regarding root resorption and periapical radiolucency Conclusions: it could be concluded that propolis offers good clinical and radiographical results when compared with formocresol, but with no statistically significant differences