To evaluate the color-match with extracted natural teeth of three single-shade universal composites, a group-shade universal composite, and a highly translucent-shade conventional composite. Twenty extracted human teeth were divided into light- and dark-shade groups (n = 10, LSG and DSG). A preparation was restored with the 3 single-shade universal composites, OMNICHROMA (OMC), Admira Fusion x-tra U (AFU), and Essentia U (ESU); a highly translucent-shade conventional composite, Tetric EvoCeram T (TEC-T); and two shades of a group-shade universal composite-Filtek Universal Restorative (FUR A1 and A4). Composites were photopolymerized, polished, and stored in water for 24 h. The ΔE00 value between the unprepared and restored surfaces was obtained using a spectrophotometer. Composite placement and measurements were repeated three times per tooth. Color differences were statistically analyzed with the within-between-subjects t-test and repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), followed by post hoc pairwise comparisons with a Bonferroni adjustment (α = 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between OMC and FUR (A1 and A4). AFU and ESU showed significantly higher ΔE00 values than OMC and TEC-T (p < 0.05). Single-shade composites exhibited significantly higher ΔE00 values in the DSG than in the LSG except ESU (p < 0.05). None of the composites satisfied the criteria for an acceptable match (ΔE00 >1.8). OMC showed the same color matching ability as a group-shade universal composite. A highly translucent-shade conventional composite and OMC exhibited better color matching ability than other single-shade composites. Overall, single-shade universal composites performed better in lighter-shaded teeth. Single-shade universal composites have the potential to reduce chair time by eliminating shade selection in cavities with lighter-shade teeth. Highly translucent incisal conventional composites also may be used if the appropriate shade of composite is not available.