This study developed a comprehensive techno-economic assessment (TEA) framework to evaluate an innovative algae resource recovery and near zero-liquid discharge potable reuse system (i.e., the main system) in comparison with a conventional potable water reuse system (i.e., the benchmark system). The TEA study aims to estimate the levelized costs of water of individual units and integrated processes including secondary wastewater treatment, advanced water purification for potable reuse, and sludge treatment. This would provide decision-makers valuable information regarding the capital and operational costs of the innovative main system versus a typical potable water reuse treatment train, along with possible routes of cost optimization and improvements for the design of full-scale facilities. The main system consists of (i) a novel algal-based wastewater treatment coupled with a dual forward osmosis and seawater reverse osmosis (Algal FO-SWRO) membranes system for potable water reuse and hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) to produce bioenergy and subsequent nutrients extraction from the harvested algal biomass. The benchmark system includes (ii) an advanced water purification facility (AWPF) that consists of a conventional activated sludge biological treatment (CAS), microfiltration (MF), brackish water reverse osmosis (BWRO), ultraviolet/advanced oxidation process (UV-AOP), and granular activated carbon (GAC), with anaerobic digestion for sludge treatment. Capital expenditures (CAPEX) and operational expenditures (OPEX) were calculated for each unit of both systems (i.e., sub-systems). Based on a 76% overall water recovery designed for the benchmark system, the water cost was estimated at $2.03/m. The highest costs in the benchmark system were found on the CAS and the anaerobic digester, with the UV-AOP combined with GAC for hydrogen peroxide (HO) quenching as the driving factor in the increased costs of the system. The cost of the main system, based on an overall 88% water recovery, was estimated to be $1.97/m, with costs mostly driven by the FO and SWRO membranes. With further cost reduction and optimization for FO membranes such as membrane cost, water recovery, and flux, the main system can provide a much more economically viable alternative in its application than a typical benchmark system.