Objective: To compare the reliability and efficiency of Down’s and Steiner’s cephalometric analysis between conventional method and digital method using the CephNinja application. Materials and Methods: 50 lateral cephalograms were used. Down’s and Steiner’s cephalometric analyses were carried out using the conventional method and digital method using a mobile application, CephNinja. Values and time taken for the analyses were recorded for both manual and digital methods. Non-parametric test (Wilcoxon matched test) and parametric test (paired t test) were carried out. A correlation between values of manual and digital methods were carried out using Karl Pearson’s correlation method. Results: Comparison of manual and digital methods with parameters related to Down's analysis by paired t / Wilcoxon matched pairs test showed significant differences in interincisal angle, lower incisor to occlusal plane angle and time scores. The mean time taken for manual cephalometric analysis was 4.86 minutes while the digital method took 2.18 minutes. Paired t / Wilcoxon matched pairs test for comparison of manual and digital method in Steiner’s analysis showed significant differences in mandibular plane angle, linear measurement for upper incisor position, S-line to upper lip, and time scores. The mean time taken for manual took 4.1 minutes and CephNinja was 2.14 minutes. Significant correlation using Karl Pearson’s method was seen between manual and digital methods except in the values of Y-axis and S-line to upper lip. Conclusion: CephNinja app is as reliable as the conventional method and significantly reduces the time taken for carrying out Down’s and Steiner’s analyses.