I really wish there were a hard fact method to test cartridges, but each method seems to be fraught with problems.
"Scientific" uses ballistic gel. That doesn't tell you how well it incapacitates, though common sense would tell you the bigger wound channel, the better (though proponents of hydro-static shock would say otherwise).
"Experimental" sounds better because it uses real-world shooting incidents. But there are so many variables...
Shot placement is generally acknowledged to be key.
But you have the shooter's ability, where the shot hit, and who it hit to consider. Was the hit individual on any kind of drugs? Adrenaline? What weight, athletic fitness and age? I'm convinced that the best round against one individual (a big, slow round) might not be best against another (perhaps small and faster). So many variables...
I think the Strasbourg goat tests (real or not) had the right idea in using large, live animals (however questionable). But even then, the only thing it can tell you for sure is what rounds statistically work best when shooting a goat through the lungs.
http://www.thegunzone.com/strasbourg.htmlI'll stick with my 9mm for now.