To further validate the recommendations of DELFI, we chose two of these molecules, namely SP1 and SP2, and ran ADC(2) and TD-DFT calculations at the same level of theory the scores were obtained for the training set. All the functionals perform similarly and reproduce the same errors. In the case of SP1 (Figure , left), for all three functionals the state order matches, and a systematic error in the energies is found. The similarity in the performances are reflected by the very similar calculated scores (Figure , in parenthesis). S 1 and S 5 are calculated to be less dark than in the reference, with ωB97X-V that mitigates this error more than the other two, and results have the top both predicted and calculated score. In contrast, for SP2 (Figure , right), the order of S 1 and S 2 is inverted with respect to the reference ADC . The calculated scores are lower than the one of SP1, and this important trend is successfully reproduced by the prediction of DELFI, which is able to capture the different performances of TD-DFT due to chemical changes in the molecules due to the presence of the nitro group. However, if one functional needs to be chosen to compare the photophysical properties of the whole set of the molecules considered, accounting for relative energies, brightness, and chemical intuition, ωB97X-V seems to actually be the best performer on these molecules with respect to the reference calculations, following the recommendation of DELFI that predicts to be always in the top three for the ten molecules considered and in particular the best performer in half of them.