Objective To compare color change magnitude of an infiltrative resin and a flowable composite resin after immersion in commonly consumed beverages. Materials and Methods Disks (1 × 9 mm) of a flowable composite (Filtek Supreme Ultra Flowable) and a resin‐infiltrative product (Icon) were made. Specimens were dark‐stored in tap water (24 hours). Baseline color parameters (CIE L*a*b*) were obtained using a colorimeter (Easyshade V4, VITA). Specimens were immersed (dark stored, 37°C, 1 week) in commercial beverages: Kool‐Aid, coffee, Coca‐Cola, and tap water (control). ΔE00 between final and baseline conditions for each material/beverage combination was determined (N = 10/group). Initial analysis of variance indicated significant impact of major factors/interactions on ΔE00. Subsequently, t‐tests between ΔE00 values of restorative materials within each beverage was performed: alpha 0.05. Results Kool‐Aid produced the greatest color change for flowable composite, with a ΔE00 significantly greater than the infiltrative product. No significant ΔE00 differences were noted between products immersed in coffee, however color parameters causing these differences were not similar. Water or Coca‐Cola immersion showed lowest ΔE00 values for both materials, considered visually imperceptible: ΔE00 values <0.8. Conclusions Color change potential of infiltrative resin or resin composite was highly dependent on beverage type, with no general trends observed in which material was affected more. Clinical Significance Staining potential of an infiltrative restorative resin differs from that of a filled, flowable composite material on a beverage‐by‐beverage basis. The potential for color change seems not related to the presence or absence of fillers in the restorative material.