No FOIL test rated better than the standard. Every comparative application test that exists in this drop came back inferior. The only "better" note is a within-iteration comparison, still inferior to the standard.

Which tests rated better than the standard?

None in the structured records. No FOIL test was rated better than the standard on any parameter.

What the records DO contain:

• The only comparative application test reports present are the five "S 9076" reports for Batches 63, 65, 66, 68, 69 — each verdict is vs that day's BYK-9076 standard run and each is "Not OK" with two parameters inferior:
• Batch 63 & 65 & 66: "Gloss and Re-solubility inferior"
• Batch 68 & 69: "Gloss and Colour strength inferior"

None rated better.

• The closest thing to a "better" note is Batch 9 II in the 9076 Expt Table: "Tested on Red pigment found better result than earlier and very finely inferior than standard (5% less) while other parameters gloss tinting strength good." That "better" is only vs its *earlier* iteration — it is still explicitly 5% inferior to the standard, and "good" (not "better than standard") for gloss/tinting strength.

Notes:

• The only other "better"/"superior"/"higher" hits are in reference/patent material (BYK-9076 TDS, EP0893155A2, EP2115023B1, EP0154678B2) — vendor/competitor claims, not FOIL experimental data.
• Per rule 6, this drop contains only failed application test reports; "no test rated better" here does not mean passing samples existed — it means no "better-than-standard" result was recorded.