Bulk-fill composite materials have been developed to streamline the composite placement procedure and decrease chairside duration, providing advantages for both dentists and patients. This study aimed to compare and assess the compressive strengths of three composite materials: conventional composite (Filtek Z250), Bulk-fill non-self-adhesive composite (SureFil), and recent self-adhesive bulk-fill composite (Surefil one). This study included thirty discs, ten for each of the three restorative materials: the conventional composite (Filtek Z250), the bulk-fill composite (SureFil), and the self-adhesive bulk-fill composite (Surefil one). A compressive force was applied to the specimens until fracture occurred to assess the compressive strength using a universal testing machine. The collected data were first assessed for outliers, then subjected to a normality evaluation at a significance level of 0.05, utilizing the Shapiro-Wilk and/or Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests. A statistically significant difference in compressive strength was observed among the three tested restorative materials (ANOVA, p<0.001) among the Filtek Z250 group (mean=164.2MPa), SureFil group (mean=121.0MPa), and Surefil one group (mean=55.7MPa). Self adhesive bulk-fill Surefil one composite showed the lowest compressive strength among the three materials.