The effect of preservation solutions on outcomes has been subject of many debates but the relative benefits of the various solutions remain unclear. We retrospectively compared short‐term outcomes of 885 liver transplantations performed between 1/2000 and 12/2017 and preserved with either Histidine–Tryptophan–Ketoglutarate (HTK, n = 190), University of Wisconsin (UW, n = 557), or Institute George Lopez 1 preservation solution (IGL‐1, n = 139). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was performed to account for baseline differences between groups and analyses were adjusted for confounders. In the IPTW analyses, peak AST within 7 days was 44% higher (95% CI 15–81%, P < 0.001) in HTK than in UW. Mean model of early allograft function (MEAF) score was 0.61 points (95% CI 0.12–1.10, P = 0.01) higher in HTK than in UW. Early allograft dysfunction (EAD) was more likely to occur with HTK compared to IGL‐1 (IPTW OR = 2.87, 95% CI = 1.00–8.19, P = 0.049) and UW (IPTW OR = 1.75, 95% CI = 1.06–2.88, P = 0.023). The type of preservation solution had no impact on hospital stay, ICU stay, incidence of biliary strictures, or graft and recipient survival. HTK was the least effective on reducing graft injury and increased the probability of graft dysfunction after transplantation. UW and IGL‐1 were equally effective in reducing graft injury and dysfunction.