In theory an SSD failure should always be more recoverable: eventually they should be put into a read-only state, and then data can be pulled off easily. In pr

In theory an SSD failure should always be more recoverable: eventually they should be put into a read-only state, and then data can be pulled off easily. In practice, it's a bit more nuanced since SSD failures aren't always the "we wrote too many cells, this block is now read only", and tend to be more potential other issues (driver malfunction, controller chip issue, power hardware, etc). With an HDD failure, if the hard drive itself is damaged/end of life/whatever, the act of reading it can cause further damage, so in a graceful failure the SSD seems to win. I'd suggest that the cost of data recovery on a HDD exceeds the practical limit for what most consumers would be able to stomach (since data recovery companies tend to charge thousands...) even for HDDs. Hence why redundancy/backups/RAID are important, I guess.