Background: In recent years, the first-line treatment options for advanced HCC has been increasingly abundant, including transarterial therapies, combination of the immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor, ICIs combined with ICIs, and tyrosine kinase inhibitors. However, it remains to be confusing which treatment pattern would benefit people most, especially for different subgroups. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and American Society of Clinical Oncology and European Society of Medical Oncology meeting proceedings for III phase randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating first-line treatments for HCC compared with sorafenib. The survival outcomes and toxic effects of RCTs should be reported, including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs) of grade 3 or higher. This systematic review was performed in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Guidelines. The random-effects model was used to calculate the summary hazard ratios (HRs) of OS and PFS. The likelihood of ORR, and AEs of grade 3 or higher was performed by odds ratios (ORs) using a random-effects model. Results: A total of 13 phase III RCTs involving 8505 patients were included in this study. Hepatic arterial infusion of oxaliplatin combined with fluorouracil (FOHAIC-1) showed OS, PFS, and ORR benefit over all other first-line therapies, except for the regimen of sorafenib plus HAIC of FOLFOX (OS: HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.37-2.09; ORR: OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 0.29-8.13). More importantly, we found that sorafenib combined with FOLFOX was superior to other regimens in patients with HBV infection regarding OS except FOHAIC-1 (HR, 0.57; 95%CI, 0.21-1.52) and tremelimumab-durvalumab (HR, 0.42; 95%CI, 0.16-1.11). While in HCV-infected subgroup, ICIs combined with anti-VEGF inhibitor improved OS benefit compared with tremelimumab-durvalumab (HR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.11-0.84) and sorafenib (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.16-0.88). HAIC-FO also showed significant OS benefits to other therapies in patients with portal invasion or extrahepatic metastasis. The probability of adverse events of grade 3 or higher was significantly lower with HAIC-FO than with others except for nivolumab (RR, 0.96; 95%CI, 0.51-1.82) and tislelizumab (RR, 0.57; 95%CI, 0.30-1.08). Conclusions: This network meta-analysis supports arterial infusion as the first-line treatment for patients with HCC. In portal invasion and extrahepatic metastasis subgroups, HAIC-FO may be a preferred option, with sorafenib combined with FOLFOX as an additional option in those with HBV infection. Besides, novel combination therapy should be focused on in patients with certain subgroups.