No, it isn't. Do you think "student drivers" go around banging into things? Comparing the two is ridiculous and dishonest; FSD regularly gets fooled by things no human would ever be confused by.
=====
I took a shower since the first version of this comment, so the following edit is an actual shower thought about your comment.
If self-driving vehicles succeed, it will be because they're safer than human drivers. That's obvious. But we probably won't be able to cherry-pick an arbitrary driving metric and show that computers always beat humans. Computer drivers will be safer than humans, but they will make different kinds of mistakes. Instead of 40,000 humans dying in auto accidents each year in the US because of inattention, DUI, sleepiness, overreaction, or poor training, we'll have maybe 1,000 humans dying because of ridiculous computer behaviors. And that 1,000 probably won't be a subset of the 40,000; they'll be 1,000 completely different people.
That will seem weird. The 40,000 deaths feel like a natural part of life, but the 1,000 will feel like a grave injustice.
Yet my computer thinks 1 divided by 10 is 0.10000000000000001, and I still use it for arithmetic.
Pucker factor influences any current-generation self-driving. I've given demos to friends in the passenger seat who have had such strong negative reactions that I've had to end the demo -- as in they want to reach over to grab the steering wheel to save our lives in mid-turn. This reaction isn't totally surprising; I've been in human-driven cars with people who simply cannot be a passenger because they're so jumpy.
It takes a leap of faith to let the car drive itself, but with that faith and the requisite attention, the experience is good.