>>still better than Cortland though lol.>>
I think it very much depends upon what sort of fishing you primarily do, how much attention you pay to line care and what types of rods you usually use.
In all the years I spent running around PA fishing mostly smaller water, Cortland lines were head and shoulders above the rest when it came to durability and ability to make do with only indifferent maintenance. I could walk all over my peach DT 444's and clean them only once a year and they'd still last 2 seasons. SA lines never performed anywhere near as well for me, seldom making a full season. I had one of the first generation of Wulff TT's and it was the nicest casting line I've ever owned. But if you even showed it a picture of a rock, it began to crack and check. My one TT lasted from March to the 1st week in June and it was shot.
Admittedly, this was a while ago (like 15 years..) and maybe Cortland's quality went down the tubes in the interim while I was out in the Midwest where I mostly fished WF's from whatever came my way free or very cheaply. This was mostly mid-range SA's (Supra, etc.) and those $25 Aquanova lines from Canada. But I also had two Rio Golds. One disintegrated (and for no good reason..) in a half season and the other one was a pretty good line that lasted almost a season and a half.
Now, I'm back in PA and I've turned all my old 444's around and respooled them and so far, they are as good as I remember. They need pushed a little harder than the newer, slicker lines to make the (very rare) 50-60 foot cast, but at least I can drag them across a couple logs and between the occasional boulders and be fairly confident I haven't mortally wounded them.
So long as Cortland is in business, I'll always at least give them first shot at filling my line needs, for trout anyway..