Aim: The purpose of this study is to compare and evaluate the water sorption and solubility of five different types of restorative cements, in order to show variations that may reduce their effectiveness. Materials and methods: Five discs each of five different materials viz. Ketac Molar (3M ESPE), Universal Restorative 2 (GC Gold Label), Ionofil plus (VOCO), High Strength Posterior Restorative 9 (GC Gold Label) and Cention–N (Ivoclar) were prepared. The discs were weighed individually on precision weight scale, dehydrated and weighed again after storing for 1 day at 37oC in 50 ml distilled water. Again, the discs were stored for a week in 50 ml of distilled water at 37oC. All the discs were weighed individually after 7 days, dehydrated and new weights were again recorded. Water solubility of material and its water sorption were obtained from the difference between the intial and the final dry mass of each disc, after 1 day and 7 days of immersion in distilled water. Data was analyzed for significant difference by one–way ANOVA and Tukey’s test. Results: The water sorption values were minimal with Cention–N after 1 day followed by Ketac Molar, Ionofil Plus, Universal Restorative 2 and High Strength Restorative 9; and after 7 days, water sorption values were minimal for High Strength Restorative 9 followed by Ketac Molar, Ionofil Plus, Cention– N and Universal Restorative 2. The solubility values were minimal with Cention–N after 1 day and 7 days followed by Ionofil plus, Ketac molar, High strength restorative 9 and Universal restorative 2. Conclusion: Among the tested restorative cements, water sorption was minimal with Cention –N after 1 day whereas it was minimal for High Strength Restorative 9 after 7 days. Solubility was minimal for Cention–N after 1 day and 7 days.