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

Execution · Grand Arena
WWII squad-tactics RTS where cover micro, sector pressure, and doctrine counters form an interlocking test.

Reads · Grand Arena
Grimdark RTS where requisition nodes, squad reinforcement, and chapter counter-picks define competitive depth.
Company of Heroes leans Execution (Grand Arena); Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War leans Reads (Grand Arena).
Company of Heroes leans a little harder on execution, though the gap is small.
Company of Heroes
Infantry cover micro and suppression-break timing are precise demands
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War
Squad retreat timing and builder unit micro require practiced hands
Same score on reads - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Company of Heroes
Opponent sector pushes and doctrine choices must be predicted
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War
Opponent chapter choice and rush timing must be predicted
Company of Heroes leans a little harder on variance, though the gap is small.
Company of Heroes
Reinforcement point capture variance and munitions drops add uncertainty
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War
Relic capture variance and squad reinforcement timing add uncertainty
Same score on optimization - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Company of Heroes
Resource point priority and doctrine selection are learnable systems
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War
Requisition node priority and tech tree builds are well-studied
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.