Objectives: The purpose of the present study conducted in a school was to compare the one-year to two-year clinical performance of a polyacid-modified resin composite (Dyract AP); a resin modified GIC (Fuji IILC); a viscous glass ionomer (Fuji IX) and amalgam (Permit C). Methods: A total of 149 Class I and Class II cavities in 45 patients aged 6 to 8 years were restored with Dyract AP, Fuji IILC, Fuji IX and amalgam (Permit C). Restorations were evaluated at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months and 24 months of oral function according to USPHS criteria by two examiners. The data was submitted to statistical analysis (hyper geometric distribution test, p<0.05). Results: No significant difference was found between one and two- year recall in color match, caries and surface texture for Dyract AP, Fuji II LC and Fuji IX restorations. Difference in Dyract AP restorations, in marginal discoloration, anatomic form and marginal adaptation was statistically significant with p value, respectively ( p=0.007, p=0.0226 and p= 0.000057); difference in Fuji II LC restorations in marginal discoloration, anatomic form and marginal adaptation was statistically significant with p, value respectively ( p=0.0088, p= 0.023 and p = 0.04217) and difference in Fuji IX restorations in anatomic form and marginal adaptation was statistically significant with p, value respectively ( p = 0.0429 and p = 0.0035). Conclusion: The materials tested showed degradation at two year recall except for color match, caries and surface texture. However regarding USPHS evaluation, their clinical performance in Class I and Class II cavities at two-year recall is acceptable. And further in vitro research is intended.