Purpose <p>This systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to investigate the comparative effectiveness of six biophysical agents, including Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), interferential current (IFC), extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT), therapeutic ultrasound, low-level laser therapy (LLLT), and high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) on neck pain rehabilitation.</p> Methods <p>Three bibliographic databases, PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were searched from inception to July 30, 2024. Randomized controlled trials comparing a single biophysical agent with placebo control or another biophysical agent on neck pain intensity as an outcome were selected. Two independent reviewers independently conducted study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment. The methodological quality of included randomized controlled trials was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale.</p> Results <p>A total of 34 randomized controlled trials with 2141 patients with neck pain were included, and all included studies had good or above quality. A random-effects frequentist network meta-analysis, assuming a common random-effects standard deviation for all comparisons in the network. Effects of biophysical agents on neck pain intensity were estimated as mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. League tables were created to display the relative degree of neck pain for all comparisons among the six biophysical agents.</p> Conclusion <p>This study suggests that rehabilitation of neck pain using biophysical agents should be prioritized in the following ranks: HILT, ESWT, IFC, TENS, LLLT, and therapeutic ultrasound. The results clarified how different biophysical agents may influence neck pain outcomes and provided proper evidence to inform clinicians to select biophysical agents prudently for neck pain management.</p>