According to the molecular benchmarks, the error estimate for vertical and adiabatic excitation and fluorescence energies can be assumed to be below 0.5 eV, a deviation which is slightly increased, but still comparable to the MAD of 0.4 eV of conventional PBE0. Similar relative error ranges are found for the investigated COFs and a comparison of ADMM and sTDA oscillator strengths suggests qualitative accuracy of the tight binding method. The most critical parameter in the sTDA method is the exact exchange scaling. This parameter should be adjusted with respect to the selected hybrid functional ground-state reference and a sub-optimal value can lead to large geometrical errors and even negative excitation energies.