Why I default to composite
Composite is bonded to enamel and dentine. That single property changes everything: I can remove only the carious tissue and leave the sound structure alone, instead of cutting an undercut shape into the tooth to mechanically retain a non-bonded material. Less drilling means more remaining tooth. More remaining tooth means a stronger restored unit and a longer working life for the tooth itself, which is the only metric that ultimately matters.
Modern systematic reviews consistently report annual failure rates for posterior composites in the range of 1-3% [1][2]. The most recent updates confirm that direct composite restorations remain durable when bonded under good isolation [3]. The number that matters in practice is not the average but the slope: failure rates climb when isolation is compromised, when caries is over- or under-removed, or when the restoration is built up in a single bulk increment without attention to polymerisation shrinkage.