Provide reference data on which EQ-5D-3L value set should be used with Chinese patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD); assess differences in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) based on the use of the Chinese (from 2014 and 2018), the UK, and the Japanese value sets; and examine differences in utility scores for key preventive influencing factors. Data from 373 patients with CKD recruited for a cross-sectional multicenter HRQoL survey were used. Differences among utility scores based on the four value sets were determined using Wilcoxon signed rank test. Intra-class correlation coefficient (ICCs) and Bland–Altman plots were used to evaluate consistency among utility scores and Tobit regression model was used to analyze the influencing factors of utility scores. There were significant differences between utility scores based on the four value sets, with the Chinese 2018 value set yielding the highest utility (0.957). ICCs between the value sets for China 2014, the UK, and Japan were all greater than 0.9, whereas the ICCs between the value sets for China 2018 and the other three were all less than 0.7. The influencing factors of utility scores included CKD stages, age, education level, city, and primary renal disease. This was the first study to report findings on the health utility of patients with CKD based on the two Chinese EQ-5D-3L value sets. Overall, the Chinese value sets performed similarly to the other two value sets (UK and Japan) commonly used in the Chinese population; however, value sets for different countries were not interchangeable. In Chinese contexts, the two value sets for China were recommended and the choice of which one should consider whether the value set of choice was established with a sample that is consistent with the targeted population.