The need for the decarbonization of heavy-duty vehicles requires a deep understanding about the effects of biofuels, which represent a viable pathway to cut the emissions in the hard-to-abate sectors, like agricultural tractors. A novel meta-analysis approach can help to thoroughly investigate the effects of biodiesel blends on farm tractor engines in terms of performance and emissions. Studies were identified using the main keywords related to internal combustion engines in prominent scientific databases. Standardized mean differences were calculated for each study to evaluate engine performance and gas emissions. Mixed-effects regression models were developed to investigate performance and environmental pollution changes over different biodiesel blending ratios, biodiesel sources, and engine types. The analysis revealed significant effects of biodiesel blending ratio on decreasing torque [−13.0%, CI 95% (6.7%–19.3%); I² = 97.67; p = 0.000; Q = 129.94], engine power [−15.0%, CI 95% (10.0–20.0%); I² = 54.82; p = 0.000; Q = 101.81], CO₂ emissions [−24.1%(15.0–32.0%); I² = 0.198; p = 0.000; Q = 20.04], and CO emissions [−17.5%, CI 95% (16.0–18.0%); I² = 98.62; p = 0.000; Q = 97.69], while increasing specific fuel consumption [+5.2%, CI 95% (1.0–9.0%); I² = 95.94; p = 0.000; Q = 129.74] and NO emissions [+11.0%, CI 95% (6.0–15.0%); I² = 98.51; p = 0.000; Q = 157.56]. The same analysis did not show any influence of the sources of biodiesel and the engine type. Finally, meta-regression found a significant positive association between increasing ratios of biodiesels and decreasing torque, engine power, CO and CO₂ emissions, and increasing fuel consumption and NO emissions in terms of linear equations. Although through these equations it is not possible to individuate an optimal range of blending ratios able to lower the emissions and not affect the engine parameters, the range from 9.1% to 13.0% of biodiesel is a good tradeoff. Within it, the only decrease in engine performance is in charge of the power, however contained within 4%, while CO and CO₂ emissions are reduced (respectively by 0.0%/−2.8% and −3.6%/−6.0%) without using any specific pollutant abatement systems.