In most cases, the systematic blueshift observed with a TDA approach also corresponds to an increase in MAD, however, with all increases being slightly under the chemicalaccuracy threshold of 0.1 eV. There are some notable exceptions: all variations of ωB2PLYP have slightly lower MADs when using the TDA (decreases in MAD of 0.03 eV and 0.01 eV for SOS-ωB2PLYP and ωB2PLYP, respectively). Employing the TDA also decreases MADs for SCS/SOS-ωB2GP-PLYP, SOS-RSX-QIDH, and SOS-ωPBEPP86. No MAD changes are observed for ωB2GP-PLYP, SOS-ωB88PP86, and SCS-ωPBEPP86. Across the TDA results, the lowest MAD is 0.16 eV for SCS-and SOS-ωB2GP-PLYP as well as SOS-ωB2PLYP. This is also the lowest-found MAD value across the entire set of 45 excitations and all assessed functionals. SOS-RSX-QIDH, SOS-ωB88PP86, and SOS-ωPBEPP86 perform similarly, with MADs of 0.17 eV. At 0.19 eV, SCS-ωPBEPP86 is the only remaining TDA-DHDF with an MAD below 0.2 eV. Note that we adopted a 0.1 eV chemical-accuracy threshold to be commensurate with other TD-DHDF papers. We acknowledge that both in ground and excited states, the idea of a chemical accuracy threshold is somewhat arbitrary. As this issue has already been discussed elsewhere and has no influence on our findings and functional rankings, we refer the reader to Ref. 19 for a discussion of the original literature around this topic.