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

Execution · Competitive PvP
Vehicular arena duels of handling and aim against human drivers.

Execution · Competitive PvP
Accessible large-scale shooting with light prediction against human players.
Hardware: Rivals leans Execution (Competitive PvP); Star Wars Battlefront leans Execution (Competitive PvP).
Same score on execution - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Hardware: Rivals
Vehicle handling and turret aim decide most duels
Star Wars Battlefront
Aimbot dominates blaster fights despite generous hitboxes
Same score on reads - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Hardware: Rivals
Human opponents' arena rotations reward some prediction
Star Wars Battlefront
Human lobbies add modest positional prediction
Star Wars Battlefront leans a little harder on variance, though the gap is small.
Hardware: Rivals
Pickup spawns add mild positional randomness
Star Wars Battlefront
Power-up pickups and spawn flow inject chaos
Star Wars Battlefront leans a little harder on optimization, though the gap is small.
Hardware: Rivals
Weapon-pickup control and map knowledge underpin wins
Star Wars Battlefront
Objective timing and pickup control reward learned routes
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.