Aa for ugrep, flipping the question around would be more appropriate. ugrep has caught up with ripgrep in some common cases, but not all.

First of all, the ugrep performance comparisons are online (and haven't been updated to compare against this version that was only released 3 days ago). So your question is answerable:

https://github.com/Genivia/ugrep-benchmarks

The two are very close and both are head and shoulders faster than most other options.

And backwards compatibility is a mixed thing, not a mandatory goal. It's admirable that ugrep is trying to be a better drop-in replacement. It's also cool that ripgrep is trying to rethink the interface for improving usability.

(I like ripgrep in part because it has different defaults than grep that work very well for my use cases, which is primarily searching through codebases. The lack of backwards compatibility goes both ways. Will we see a posix ripgrep? Probably not. Is ripgrep a super useful and user-friendly tool? Definitely.)

I didn't bother switching to `ag` when it came around because of having to retrain.

But eventually I did switch to `rg` because it just has so many conveniences.

I even switched to `fd` recently instead of `find` because it's easier and less typing for common use-cases.

I've been using the terminal since 1997, so I'm happy I can still learn new things and use improved commands.