The aim of this study was to compare the in vitro caries inhibition of various resin-based materials. Class V cavities were prepared in twenty-five freshly extracted human premolar teeth which were then restored with glass-ionomer cement (Chemfill II), compomer (Compoglass F, Dyract AP) and composite resin (Tetric Ceram and Z 100). The teeth were submerged in an acid gel for 6 weeks. Each specimen was sectioned. These sections were left in water for 24 hours, and then examined using polarized light microscopy. The lesion consisted of two parts, the outer surface lesion and the cavity wall lesion. There was no significant difference in the body depth of the outer lesion and in the depth of the wall lesion among teeth restored with Compoglass F, Dyract AP and Chemfill II (P > 0.05). There was a significant difference between those restored with Z 100 and Tetric Ceram (P < 0.05). The length of the wall lesion for the teeth restored with Chemfill II was significantly smaller than that in the remaining groups (P < 0.05). The length of the wall lesion for teeth restored with Tetric Ceram and Z 100 was significantly higher than in the remaining groups (P < 0.05). These results suggest that composite materials and compomer provide less caries inhibition than glass-ionomer cements.