Certification is generally binary, though - you're either certified or you're not. This might be a good thing though, as it establishes a decent floor for technical competency and can save everyone from having to deal with at least some of the technical interview nonsense.

What some of the people in these comments seem to want though is some sort of standardized score/ranking system, which I suspect might lead to even more nightmarish outcomes than the current leetcode-y interview processes. (e.g. Employers setting absurdly high cutoff scores, choosing one applicant over another because simply because they scored a couple points higher, applicants grinding unimaginable amounts of unpaid hours to bump up their scores a bit, etc.)

I've done first party certification and it was always a joke -- they need you to pass so you can get your employer to use their services. Are there trusted third party certification services that are willing to fail half or more of their customers?

true, the keyword is 'standardized' at national level, even 'global' level.

You're going to hear complaints about bias in selecting the types of problems.

for SAT or GRE, my understanding is they have a huge pool of problems, before the test they're picked and assembled somehow. I hear no one complains about SAT or GRE selections of problems, so it might be less of a concern.