head to head
Neither is meaningfully harder - they pose close to the same test. The widest gap is optimization, and it is a single point.

Execution · Pure Mechanics
Tests NES-hard execution and rote memorisation of brutal fixed stages.

Execution · Practiced Mastery
High-speed cyborg slasher built on precise parries and slicing anything in half.
Battletoads / Double Dragon leans Execution (Pure Mechanics); Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance leans Execution (Practiced Mastery).
Same score on execution - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Battletoads / Double Dragon
Unforgiving brawls and vehicle stages punish any input slip
Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance
parry timing and blade-mode cuts demand sharp reactions
Same score on reads - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Battletoads / Double Dragon
Enemies run fixed NES-era scripts
Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance
bosses telegraph fixed patterns
Same score on variance - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Battletoads / Double Dragon
Everything is deterministic once stages are memorised
Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance
deterministic encounters
Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance leans a little harder on optimization, though the gap is small.
Battletoads / Double Dragon
Memorising stage layouts and enemy spawns is mandatory progress
Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance
learning movesets and upgrade priorities
A matching score does not mean a matching test. Two games can both sit at 10 on execution and demand completely different things of you - which is why the reasoning above matters more than the number beside it.