<p>The comparative efficacy of psychotherapy modalities remains contested among researchers, clinicians, and patients. We present results of a systematic review and meta-analysis of recent controlled trials from the decade 2014–2024 (<i>k</i> = 90; <i>n</i> = 9637), finding statistical and clinical significance in overall effect sizes as measured by psychometric outcomes among cognitive-behavioral, psychodynamic, person-centered, art, and mindfulness-based psychotherapies (<i>g</i> = − .32). The effect was not moderated by either the modalities or the 18 mental disorders in the sample, providing a conceptual replication, update, and extension of the equivalence hypothesis in comparative psychotherapy research known as the “dodo-bird effect.” We additionally modeled post-treatment effect sizes using factor analysis, finding that all five modalities load onto a common latent variable signal that provided novel support for their equivalence. Finally, we modeled the rate-of-change in effect sizes during trial interventions for the first time, finding that psychotherapy modality had a moderating effect <i>contra</i> the equivalence hypothesis. Post-hoc modeling showed the moderation was driven by faster rates-of-change for the mindfulness intervention relative to the others. In sum, we found that while psychotherapy modalities are similarly effective overall, some modalities are faster-acting than others. The implications of our findings are discussed, as are the limitations and future directions, and we offer several methodological recommendations for trial designs and meta-analytic work in psychotherapy research based on our results.</p>