Purpose To (1) report on trends in immediate procedure reimbursement, patient out-of-pocket expenditures, and surgeon reimbursement in hip arthroscopy (2) compare trends in ambulatory surgery centers (ASC) versus outpatient hospitals (OH) utilization;(3) quantify the cost differences (if any) associated with ASC versus OH settings; and 4) determine the factors that predict ASC utilization for hip arthroscopy. Methods The cohort for this descriptive epidemiology study was any patient over 18 years identified in the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims Encounter database who underwent an outpatient hip arthroscopy, identified by Current Procedural Terminology codes, in the United States from 2013 to 2017. Immediate procedure reimbursement, patient out-of-pocket expenditure, and surgeon reimbursement were calculated, and a multivariable model was used to determine the influence of specific factors on these outcome variables. Statistically significant P values were less than. 05, and significant standardized differences were more than 0.1. Results The cohort included 20,335 patients. An increasing trend in ASC utilization was observed (P=. 001), and ASC utilization for hip arthroscopy was 32.4% in 2017. Patient out-of-pocket expenditures for femoroacetabular impingement surgery increased 24.3% over the study period (P=. 003), which was higher than the rate for immediate procedure reimbursement (4.2%; P=. 007). ASCs were associated with $3,310 (28.8%; P=. 001) reduction in immediate procedure reimbursement and $47 (6.2%; P=. 001) reduction in patient out-of-pocket expenditure per hip arthroscopy. Conclusions ASCs provide a significant cost difference for hip arthroscopy. Although there is an increasing trend toward ASC utilization, it remains relatively low at 32.4% in 2017. Thus, there are opportunities for expanded ASC utilization, which is associated with significant immediate procedure reimbursement difference of $3,310 and patient out-of-pocket expenditure difference of $47 per hip arthroscopy case, ultimately benefiting healthcare systems, surgeons, and patients alike. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective comparative trial.