Haha yeah, both sides are trying to interpret the data in their favour.
What I will say though, and I promise I'll stop after this, battle performance is very dependent on the collection. Some collections will do better with XBOT, some better with AM. In this case AM was slightly stronger, but that's certainly not the case on average. Also, you didn't use XBOT's boost mode, which is designed to improve battle performance.
In cases where AM performs better, you're paying more in fees, which negates the difference. (Like in your example)
In cases where XBOT performs better, the difference in net earnings is huge. (Because of more earnings AND less fees)
Also if you care about extra features, like automatic SB combining, card rentals, SPS rentals, in-depth analysis, liquid rewards, XBOT beats AM by a landslide.
I love the xtra features of xbot! That's part of what made me go that route at the end of the day. I like the interface better. I like the charts and analysis. I like the daily check in rewards which I can use to rent sps.
And yeah, the "bots perform differently with different accounts" was basically the impetus for doing this at all, since all I can publicly obviously see is how they perform for the leaderboard. If my account ever gets a solid enough deck to fight for leaderboard spots, I'll have to rerun the experiment, where I imagine XBOT will come up nicely ahead.
As a final thought, I am a bit pleased with myself that this experiment and the write-up yielded well-thought-out responses from the folks on both bots. I'm pretty sure like 3 people read my articles on Hive, so it's nice to have some legit engagement. So thanks :)