Purpose: To assess satisfaction and preference among rugby union players for custom mouthguards with and without labial reinforcement, and to assess discomfort and perceived protection. Materials and Methods: This prospective RCT used a crossover design of four 1-week periods to compare conventional (Type A) and labial reinforced (Type B) customized mouthguards for rugby union players from February to May 2022. Type B mouthguards included a 0.75-mm insert of polyethylene terephthalate glycol (Duran) in the anterior labial region. We ensured intraoral occlusion accommodation for both mouthguards. Players wore each mouthguard type when training and in competitive matches for 2 weeks according to one of two randomized sequences. After each session, they rated the mouthguard on 10-point scales regarding discomfort, functional interference, protection, and general satisfaction. After 4 weeks, we asked participants to nominate their preferred mouthguard. Results: In total, 22 of the 24 invited players (16 men and 6 women) were included. We observed no significant differences in discomfort, functional interference, protection, or general satisfaction by mouthguard type (P > .05, Wilcoxon test). Ultimately, 12 players (55%) preferred the Type A mouthguard and 10 (45%) preferred the Type B mouthguard (P = .832; one-sample binomial test). No serious adverse events occurred. Conclusions: Labial reinforcement does not affect satisfaction, perceived comfort and protection, or mouthguard preference among rugby union players.