Objectives: To evaluate and compare the clinical performance of three contemporary nano-composite resin restorations as anterior restorations in class IV cavities in maxillary anterior teeth over one year follow-up period after the bleaching. Materials and methods: A total of 30 restorations (twelve subjects), 18-38 year olds with class IV carious upper anterior teeth were included, divided into three groups. Each group (n=10 restorations) was randomly restored with the same restoration material type; Beautifil II nano hybrid composite resin (Shofu Dental Corporation, USA), IPS Empress Direct nano hybrid composite resin (Ivoclar Vivadent, USA), and the nano ceramic micro hybrid composite resin Ceram-x-mono (DeTrey, Dentsply, Germany). They were restored according to the manufacturers’ instructions. A clinical evaluation was conducted before bleaching (baseline) and two days, 3 months, 6 months, and one year after bleaching for modified Ryge criteria. The A and B scores were considered clinically acceptable while C and D scores were considered clinically unacceptable. The data were subjected to statistical analysis using Chi-squared test (Х2) and ANOVA. Results: All materials were considered clinically acceptable as anterior dental restoration. The survival rate was 100% between the Ceram-x-mono and Beautifil II materials in the clinical performance after 6 months and one year (P=0.00), whereas ISP Empress Direct was inferior in anatomical form, color match, and marginal discoloration integrity. Conclusion: It was concluded that a three-tested dental restoration is considered clinically acceptable as an anterior restoration. Therefore, the use and the long-term effects of bleaching on ISP Empress Direct should be carefully considered. Keywords: Beautifil II; ISP empress direct; Ceram.x.mono Composite resin; Modified ryge criteria; In-office bleaching