The default ones feel that way to me. I use a Pi-hole equivalent plus a client side adblocker (uBlock Origin), request/domain blacklist manager (uMatrix), and JavaScript blocker (NoScript) on Firefox. The Pi-hole-like-thing needs to be disabled or something needs to be whitelisted at most once every couple months.

I have to enable JS or third-party content much more often than that, but the trade off to protect my privacy is worth it.

Why do you use both NoScript and uMatrix? It was my understanding that uMatrix would block JS, but thinking about it now maybe it doesn’t block JS embedded in HTML? Is that the idea?

Both uBlock Origin and uMatrix are able to prevent execution of inline JavaScript.

I could probably consolidate, but I’ve grown accustomed to the defaults and interfaces in both and the combo works well enough as it is. There’s no better reason than simply my personal idiosyncrasies.

Idk about Pi-hole, but I use AdvancedTomato on my router, which has built-in ad-block, and I've run into many issues with it.

Sometimes, I really do want to click that ad on Google search, or I'm looking at some "deal site" which routes URLs through an advertiser, and there's no way for me to open that link. It gets really annoying. Not only that, blocking the request is nothing like a real ad-blocker removing the element, most of the time it still leaves boxes with errors in the middle of the content you're browsing.

I find these lists to be super helpful: https://v.firebog.net/hosts/lists.php. It's an aggregator of blocklists that classify them based on your likelihood to get a false positive block. In my experience, they live up to their claim.