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

Execution · Competitive PvP
Hero-shooter aim and team prediction over objective-based arenas.

Execution · Practiced Mastery
Planning approaches with recon tools, then executing them under lethal fire.
Star Wars: Hunters leans Execution (Competitive PvP); Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 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.
Star Wars: Hunters
Aim and ability timing decide 4v4 skirmishes
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter
Lethal firefights punish sloppy aim and exposure
Star Wars: Hunters leans a little harder on reads, though the gap is small.
Star Wars: Hunters
Human squads rotate and bait around objectives adaptively
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter
Multiplayer squads outflank and adapt to your habits
Same score on variance - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Star Wars: Hunters
Hero matchup luck matters more than any RNG
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter
Enemy placements are scripted-but-unknown on first attempt
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter leans a little harder on optimization, though the gap is small.
Star Wars: Hunters
Hero counters, comps and objective timing reward study
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter
Drone recon, squad orders and approach planning decide missions
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.