It's a bit like declaring your bike outperforms cars in crash safety because a magazine gives it 8/10 for handling and 9/10 for the visibility of your yellow jacket and your rear light having a "flash" mode.
They even have a specific callout for Comma:
> A determination was made to include the Comma Two Open Pilot system manufactured by > Comma.ai. Although Consumer Reports does not endorse after-market modifications to all > consumers, we feel that it is important to include the test results in this report to the industry. The > direct comparison of this system to the other OEM systems will hopefully provide insight on this > alternative approach and highlight the areas across the industry that have room for improvement.
It is at least SOMETHING. I haven't seen anything else even close to as formalized that looks across all the various systems out there. Do you have better ones to look at?
This is a deflection. I'm responding to a comment that stated:
>> as they state on their website, they scored #1 for best at that by Consumer Reports compared to the stock offerings
CR is irresponsible for issuing ranked scores while saying in the fine print that these scores aren't actually recommendations.
That they didn't foresee comma.ai using their recommendation in marketing only makes them that much more irresponsible.
Read through the Consumer Reports PDF [1]. It's abundantly clear that they have no idea how to properly evaluate adaptive cruise systems.
What this report tells you is exactly what you would expect from a Consumer Reports publication: the generic impression that a typical consumer will have after a few hours of use. This sort of superficial analysis is completely unrelated to anything approaching a real safety analysis.
[1] https://data.consumerreports.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/...