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
Large-battle aim and positioning with light prediction against human players.
Hardware: Rivals leans Execution (Competitive PvP); Star Wars: Battlefront II 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 II
Aimbot dominates infantry fights and starfighter dogfights
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 II
Human opponents in multiplayer create modest prediction play
Star Wars: Battlefront II leans a little harder on variance, though the gap is small.
Hardware: Rivals
Pickup spawns add mild positional randomness
Star Wars: Battlefront II
Spawns, vehicle availability and hero pickups add chaos
Star Wars: Battlefront II leans a little harder on optimization, though the gap is small.
Hardware: Rivals
Weapon-pickup control and map knowledge underpin wins
Star Wars: Battlefront II
Class choice and map control reward learned plans
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.