Basal cell carcinoma is the most common form of human malignancy, and as such there are varied methods for treating its various forms. Its more advanced and aggressive forms have required both the use of and advent of therapies which offer differing safety profiles, cost, and efficacy. Two therapies which differ substantially in these respects but have overlap in their recommended use are Mohs micrographic surgery and the pharmaceutical drug vismodegib. Few studies have sought to compare the two methods using these criteria, and as vismodegib has only received FDA approval in the past ten years, it is worthwhile to explore the limitations and advantages of each therapy. In exploring previous clinical trials and retrospective studies, the two therapies are put side by side to contrast their results with their shared intended use. The general findings were that Mohs micrographic surgery remains the gold standard for the treatment of locally advanced basal cell carcinoma, and there are few demonstrable instances in which vismodegib could be deemed a more appropriate therapy. The future of vismodegib appears to be in its use as a neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced basal cell carcinomas for which a decrease in size by vismodegib would allow for better treatment outcomes.