Background: To study the Creep behavior for a series of biodegradable nanocomposites, which are used as implantable devices in the body such as bioscrews, is a crucial factor. In the current paper, we are investigating these biomaterials ‐, short‐, time Creep and Creep recover manners‐,in several classic models. Methods: The Creep and Creep recovery behaviors of nanocomposites composed of biodegradable polymer blends, poly (D/L) lactic acid (PDLLA) and polycaprolactone (PCL) reinforced with three different contents of 1, 3 and 6 percent weight percentage bioactive glass nanoparticles (m‐, BGn) were modeled. Several theoretical models including Findley power law, Burgers and Weibull models were used to establish the relations between m‐, BGn dispersion and final Creep and Creep‐, recovery behaviors of nanocomposites. Results: The Findley power law model confirmed that the lowest ‘, A’,and highest ‘, n’,parameters ( A is the amplitude of the transient Creep strain and n is the time exponent) belong to the sample with the highest young modulus and the nanocomposites compared to PDLLA/PCL blends have the lower ‘, A’,and higher ‘, n’,which can be related to retardation effect of m‐, BGn on Creep strains. Besides, the burgers model results illustrated that all viscoelastic and viscoplastic parameters for nanocomposites possess higher values than those of the neat PDLLA/PCL blend. It means that the addition of glass nanoparticles leads to decrease Creep strain, increasing the Burgers model prediction values which have inverse trend with. Moreover, the weibull distribution model results acknowledge that the introduction of m‐, BGn into PDLLA/PCL polymeric blends cause decrease in the viscoelastic strain recovery values. This is due to hindering effects of m‐, BGn on Creep recovery behavior of nanocomposites. Conclusion: The results obtained from Modeling of Creep‐, recovery manners of PDLLA/PCL blend and its nanocomposites approved that the bioactive glass reinforcement nanoparticles play impeding role on Creep and Creep recovery behaviors. Level of evidence: I