I reached out to another Time-Nut to get another opinion on this topic. After reviewing the thread, he agreed with Texas and Tomato that a short test isn't enough to draw any conclusions regarding the performance of a GPSDO because there are too many things that can go wrong.
As I thought about that, I realized that my experience with GPSDOs isn't that great. Because of that, I just haven't seen the problems that you guys have. To me, a GPSDO is just as stable and reliable as a quartz oscillator. They just work! So I couldn't understand why you were being so negative.
And since they just worked, and basically worked the same, I got bored with them and stopped buying them. That left me with older, perhaps higher quality units that were more likely to be stable and reliable.
So the end result was that my idea of a possible quick way to rank GPSDOs was based on a limited data set that didn't reflect reality. Sorry if I caused any confusion or bad feelings.
Homedad, after totally hijacking your thread, it looks like there's no easy way to rank GPSDOs. Personally, I've always thought that my Z3801A was the best one I've got and slightly better than my Trimble Thunderbolt. But they've both gotten rather expensive lately. The only two 'newer' GPSDOs I've got are the Trimble UCCM, and the NEC unit, both of which are still available on ebay. Both units tracked well, but I find that the outputs have more frequency/phase noise than the Z3801A although they both look good on my jitter test - which I still think has value even though it's not a definitive test.
I find that other features aren't very important on a GPSDO because, for me, they're just install and forget. YMMV
One other thing I'll say is that you can cripple a good GPSDO by having a poor antenna setup. Work hard to get a location clear of obstructions and with good visibility towards the equator. That's the direction where you'll see more satellites. It becomes more important as you move away from the equator.
Ed