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
Execution on the ball plus constant prediction of the other player's shape.

Execution · Competitive PvP
A rugby simulation testing input timing and tactical play against opponents.
Pro Evolution Soccer 2009 leans Execution (Competitive PvP); Rugby World Cup 2015 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.
Pro Evolution Soccer 2009
Close control and finishing windows demand stick precision
Rugby World Cup 2015
Timing passes, tackles, and kicks needs consistent inputs
Same score on reads - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Pro Evolution Soccer 2009
Online and couch opponents adjust tactics against you
Rugby World Cup 2015
Human opponents can be read in multiplayer matches
Rugby World Cup 2015 leans a little harder on variance, though the gap is small.
Pro Evolution Soccer 2009
Ricochets and keeper parries add small randomness
Rugby World Cup 2015
Ball bounces and AI add some unpredictability
Rugby World Cup 2015 leans a little harder on optimization, though the gap is small.
Pro Evolution Soccer 2009
Squad setup and tactical sliders reward preparation
Rugby World Cup 2015
Set plays, team selection, and tactics form a systems layer
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.