Running is widely recognised for its substantial health benefits; however, it is frequently associated with lower limb injuries caused by repetitive impact forces. To mitigate such injuries, maximal footwear has been developed; nevertheless, evidence comparing its biomechanical effects with those of other footwear types remains inconclusive. A Bayesian network meta-analysis of 14 studies (222 participants) was conducted, based on systematic searches of PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Embase (from inception to 12 November 2024). Multiple biomechanical parameters were evaluated, including vertical average loading rate, vertical instantaneous loading rate, impact peak, active peak and ankle peak eversion. The results revealed a complex and sometimes contradictory biomechanical profile for maximal footwear. Specifically, maximal footwear resulted in a significantly higher impact peak compared to both conventional and minimal footwear. In contrast, for the vertical average loading rate, it performed significantly better than minimal footwear but showed no significant difference compared to conventional footwear. For other impact metrics, no significant differences were observed. Notably, maximal footwear was associated with a significantly lower ankle peak eversion compared to minimal footwear, suggesting a potential for greater control of ankle motion.