It’s easy to rank people playing a zero-sum game where the only thing that varies is opponent, use ELO and call it a day. Software development is more complicated because the problems and quality of solutions aren’t even clear. So to me it makes sense that we don’t have software development grandmasters outside of things like IOI.
e.g. You build something for sales that makes customer service unhappy or vice versa.
You build something and keep it backwards compatible and that makes your prior users happy but puts off new users who were willing to adopt or vice versa.
At this point, it's no longer about programming. Doesn't diminish that those activities are just important. We could also argue that there are 10x user interface and interaction designers, 10x project managers, 10x product managers, etc. The confluence of such folks is a beautiful thing to experience, however it's not needed, just 1 or 2 of those with a bunch of "average" folks can ship and release a really good product.
Part of it is subjective yes but a lot of the field can be measured and ranked in terms of quality and effectiveness.
What I have seen with such developers is that they can jump into a system they have no idea about and ramp up faster than most people. I don't believe that everyone can be a 10x, I also don't believe that everyone that can be a 10x is even going to reach that field. From what I have seen, these folks are the sorts that enjoy working on non user centric app. They hate those ambiguities, so you might find them in security, or working on compilers, networking and lower level sort of codes where it's possible to conquer whatever demon that will arise from the code. It's almost impossible to WIN in user centric app where what's correct is subjective.