Most tests I've seen, such as [0] don't support your statement. Zstd can compress almost as well as xz but decompresses much faster. It can also compress more

Most tests I've seen, such as [0] don't support your statement. Zstd can compress almost as well as xz but decompresses much faster. It can also compress more than xz with tweaks, though I don't know the compute/memory tradeoffs. [0] https://archlinux.org/news/now-using-zstandard-instead-of-xz-for-package-compression/ https://archlinux.org/news/now-using-zstandard-instead-of-xz... Edit to fix typo.