I'll push back a little bit. Let me provide VOAs (done by others, I assume they are honest), of the same/similar oils but different companies that show fairly significant differences. Big variations of Moly, Boron, and other ingredients. I assume one formula "must" be a better performer. It would seem that all oil companies would gravitate toward the better product, but that costs more.
First, this inexpensive Carquest/Fram 5w40 has no Moly (a highly regarded friction modifier) and only 68 Boron (a cleaner and friction modifier).
Here's a Quaker State 5w40 Euro. 93 Moly and 242 Boron.
This Mobil1 0w40 has 80 Moly and 313 Boron.
And this Redline 0w40 has over 569 Moly and 91 Boron
I'm inclined to believe, to an extent, MORE MOLY and BORON is probably beneficial. So on the low cost end, we have Carquest and the high end we see what Redline looks like.
How much it matters, is up for debate. But we do see big VOA differences in formulas.
The only problem with your thinking is that you are making assumptions on nothing more then your feelings of what should be in an oil based on no science at all.
They all meet the same requirements of the engine maker. I cant remember the last time I saw a vehicle in my state blowing blue smoke from worn out piston rings or the last time I ever heard of a blown motor.
With that said, even if you choose oil based your comparison above, which I want to say I am not in anyway is inferior to anyway someone else buys oil because in the end, if its the correct API it is all the same even if the reason is wrong. That wrong reason is oil marketing materials get into some peoples head make one product sound better then the other.
As far as flaws in your thinking and what I perceive as marketing getting your head. Your making a comparison of Carquest oil of one viscosity with Mobil 1 of another viscosity. Yet the Mobile 1 Truck and SUV dual rated oil 5w40 oil has no moly in it and almost the same amount of boron as the carquest, two elements that are important to you but make no difference as far as the performance of any of the products mentioned.
All motor oil of the same ratings are equal. Different ways of meeting those standards.
Not that this has anything to do with the conversation but does show a point about different ways of meeting standards.
Piston Aircraft engines, one major concern with them is the build up of piston deposits so NO Moly or Boron is used in AeroShell 15w50 oil and its not even a "full synthetic".
I think we can agree aircraft oil is a pretty important oil much more so then automobile.
From Shell -
"The combination of non-metallic anti-wear additives and selected high viscosity index mineral and synthetic base oils, give exceptional stability, dispersancy and anti-foaming performance. The advanced additive package in AeroShell W 15 W 50 provides excellent protection to engines operating at extreme ambient temperatures. The ashless anti-wear additive package provides exceptional wear protection for camshafts and lifters and other wearing surfaces."