Vibrio parahaemolyticus is the leading cause of infectious illness associated with seafood consumption in the United States. Molecular fingerprinting of strains has become a valuable research tool for understanding this pathogen. However, there are many subtyping methods available and little information on how they compare to one another. For this study, a collection of 67 oyster and 77 clinical V. parahaemolyticus isolates were analyzed by three subtyping methods--intergenic spacer region (ISR-1), direct genome restriction analysis (DGREA), and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE)--to determine the utility of these methods for discriminatory subtyping. ISR-1 analysis, run as previously described, provided the lowest discrimination of all the methods (discriminatory index [DI]=0.8665). However, using a broader analytical range than previously reported, ISR-1 clustered isolates based on origin (oyster versus clinical) and had a DI=0.9986. DGREA provided a DI=0.9993-0.9995, but did not consistently cluster the isolates by any identifiable characteristics (origin, serotype, or virulence genotype) and ∼ 15% of isolates were untypeable by this method. PFGE provided a DI=0.9998 when using the combined pattern analysis of both restriction enzymes, SfiI and NotI. This analysis was more discriminatory than using either enzyme pattern alone and primarily grouped isolates by serotype, regardless of strain origin (clinical or oyster) or presence of currently accepted virulence markers. These results indicate that PFGE and ISR-1 are more reliable methods for subtyping V. parahemolyticus, rather than DGREA. Additionally, ISR-1 may provide an indication of pathogenic potential; however, more detailed studies are needed. These data highlight the diversity within V. parahaemolyticus and the need for appropriate selection of subtyping methods depending on the study objectives.