Though you have listed the below, I don't see how anyone's choice would affect your opinions, unless you're picking on popularity-based votes:
- Resource Usage (eg: CPU, RAM)
- Real World System Impact
- User Friendliness
- User Interface
- Level of Protection and Features (eg: Antivirus , Firewall, Behavior Blocker)
- Overall Winner
I've read the FAQ, but Ublock and Ublock Origin are very similar in what they do. However, they are developed by different people, as you know. It's similar to a Chromium or Firefox clone, do you use the original or forked-version? And why, for what reason?
For testing purpose, I have used Ublock (when gorhill owned it), it's resource usage was lower than most common (free) AdBlockers on the market (at the time).
It's Real World system impact would differ from system to system; do you have a powerful or weak machine?
I would base User Friendliness on the Options, which include modification of settings and using custom lists, whitelists etc.
User Interface would be quite simply the icon on the browser UI, and it's menu (when clicked).
Levels of protection / features would depend on what you are looking for in an AdBlocker. Some users would want more than an AdBlocker, and include features for Anti-Tracking, Disable of Acceptable Ads etc.
Overall winner is the preferred choice with some of reasons give by other members, ie. actively developed etc.