This review article examines the socio-economic performance of agroecology, a sustainable agricultural approach, by consolidating evidence from a large number of case studies globally. The study uses a rapid review methodology to screen over 13,000 publications, focusing on the socio-economic outcomes of various agroecological practices. Key findings include: 1. **Overall Positive Outcomes**: Agroecological practices are associated with more positive socio-economic outcomes (51% positive, 30% negative, 10% neutral, 9% inconclusive) across a broad range of metrics. 2. **Financial Capital Dominance**: The majority of evaluated metrics (83%) are related to financial capital, showing positive outcomes in areas such as income, revenues, productivity, and efficiency (53% positive). 3. **Human Capital and Social Capital**: Human capital metrics (16%) show a larger number of negative outcomes (46% negative, 38% positive), primarily due to higher labor requirements and costs, but also include positive outcomes on labor productivity (55% positive). 4. **Practice-Specific Outcomes**: Results vary by practice type. For example, agroforestry shows 53% positive outcomes, while cropping system diversification shows 35% positive outcomes. 5. **Challenges and Future Research**: The study highlights the need for further research to address the magnitude, temporal aspects, success factors, and trade-offs of these outcomes, as well as the system-level effects of an agroecological transition. The review underscores the potential for farms to benefit from positive socio-economic performance through the adoption of agroecological practices, while also identifying areas for further investigation to enhance the understanding and implementation of these practices.This review article examines the socio-economic performance of agroecology, a sustainable agricultural approach, by consolidating evidence from a large number of case studies globally. The study uses a rapid review methodology to screen over 13,000 publications, focusing on the socio-economic outcomes of various agroecological practices. Key findings include: 1. **Overall Positive Outcomes**: Agroecological practices are associated with more positive socio-economic outcomes (51% positive, 30% negative, 10% neutral, 9% inconclusive) across a broad range of metrics. 2. **Financial Capital Dominance**: The majority of evaluated metrics (83%) are related to financial capital, showing positive outcomes in areas such as income, revenues, productivity, and efficiency (53% positive). 3. **Human Capital and Social Capital**: Human capital metrics (16%) show a larger number of negative outcomes (46% negative, 38% positive), primarily due to higher labor requirements and costs, but also include positive outcomes on labor productivity (55% positive). 4. **Practice-Specific Outcomes**: Results vary by practice type. For example, agroforestry shows 53% positive outcomes, while cropping system diversification shows 35% positive outcomes. 5. **Challenges and Future Research**: The study highlights the need for further research to address the magnitude, temporal aspects, success factors, and trade-offs of these outcomes, as well as the system-level effects of an agroecological transition. The review underscores the potential for farms to benefit from positive socio-economic performance through the adoption of agroecological practices, while also identifying areas for further investigation to enhance the understanding and implementation of these practices.