In the pruned list of DFAs in Table , four functionals reach 90%-ile or above for ω3, two of which also achieved this performance threshold for re(N-O). The Group 1 (GGA) BP86 and Group 2 (meta-GGA) revTPSS-D3(BJ)2B land at 93.1%-ile and 90.0%-ile for ω3, respectively, while also surpassing 95%-ile for re(N-O). The Group 1 functional revPBE and its dispersion variant revPBE-D3(BJ)2B give 94.2%-ile and 92.9%-ile predictions for ω3, whereas their re(N-O) results land in the upper 80%-ile. The PBE functional (Group 1) gave an re(N-O) prediction at 91.9%-ile, but its performance is somewhat diminished for ω3 (85.6%-ile). As is the case for re(N-O), the DFAs that work best for ω3 are not typically the best for ω1 and ω2. For all the aforementioned DFAs with high performances for ω3, their predictions for ω1 do not exceed 25%-ile, with three even below 10%-ile. These same DFAs give mediocre results for ω2, typically in the %-ile range of 65-76, although PBE does appear at 87.5%-ile for this property. In summary, ω3 is another property for which accuracy does not systematically improve as the DFT ladder is climbed. Instead, the first rung (Group 1) showcases the most accurate median with subsequent steps only deteriorating ω3 in a statistical sense.