Rapid-diagnosis kits able to detect influenza A and B virus by immunochromatography developed by different manufacturers, while useful in early diagnosis, may vary widely in detection sensitivity. We compared sensitivity results for eight virus-detection kits in current use--Quick Chaser FluA, B (Mizuho Medy), Espline Influenza A & B-N (Fujirebio), Capilia Flu A + B (Nippon Beckton Dickinson & Alfesa Pharma), Poctem Influenza A/B (Otsuka Pharma & Sysmex), BD Flu Examan (Nippon Beckton Dickinson), Quick Ex-Flu "Seiken" (Denka Seiken), Quick Vue Rapid SP Influ (DP Pharma Biomedical), and Rapid Testa FLU stick (Daiichi Pure Chemicals)--against influenza virus stocks, contained five vaccination strains (one A/H1N1, two A/H3N2, and two B) and six clinical strains (two A/H1N1, two A/H3N2, and two B). Minimum detection concentrations giving immunologically positive signals in serial dilution and RNA copies in positive dilution in real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) were assayed for all kits and virus stock combinations. RNA log10 copy numbers/mL in dilutions within detection limits yielded 5.68-7.02, 6.37-7,17, and 6.5-8.13 for A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and B. Statistically significant differences in sensitivity were observed between some kit combinations. Detection sensitivity tended to be relatively higher for influenza A than B virus. This is assumed due to different principles in kit methods, such as monoclonal antibodies, specimen-extraction conditions, and other unknown factors.