The growing global prevalence of heart failure (HF) necessitates innovative methods for early diagnosis and classification of myocardial dysfunction. In recent decades, non-invasive sensor-based technologies have significantly advanced cardiac care. These technologies ease research, aid in early detection, confirm hemodynamic parameters, and support clinical decision-making for assessing myocardial performance. This discussion explores validated enhancements, challenges, and future trends in heart failure and dysfunction modeling, all grounded in the use of non-invasive sensing technologies. This synthesis of methodologies addresses real-world complexities and predicts transformative shifts in cardiac assessment. A comprehensive search was performed across five databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, IEEE Xplore, and Google Scholar, to find articles published between 2009 and March 2023. The aim was to identify research projects displaying excellence in quality assessment of their proposed methodologies, achieved through a comparative criteria-based rating approach. The intention was to pinpoint distinctive features that differentiate these projects from others with comparable objectives. The techniques identified for the diagnosis, classification, and characterization of heart failure, systolic and diastolic dysfunction encompass two primary categories. The first involves indirect interaction with the patient, such as ballistocardiogram (BCG), impedance cardiography (ICG), photoplethysmography (PPG), and electrocardiogram (ECG). These methods translate or convey the effects of myocardial activity. The second category comprises non-contact sensing setups like cardiac simulators based on imaging tools, where the manifestations of myocardial performance propagate through a medium. Contemporary non-invasive sensor-based methodologies are primarily tailored for home, remote, and continuous monitoring of myocardial performance. These techniques leverage machine learning approaches, proving encouraging outcomes. Evaluation of algorithms is centered on how clinical endpoints are selected, showing promising progress in assessing these approaches’ efficacy.