Overall dogs are lower than most cats, but not than wolves. Cats are more like having a roommate who learns to appreciate you like family, while Dogs are like having a child that can grow into a roommate.
I like dogs, but after what humanity's done to them they are literally stunted from all the Neoteny. Breeds closer to the wild though tend to show more redeeming qualities, and some other breeds like the Basenji offer an odd twist on the species.
Dogs are lower than most cats by what measure?
Autonomy, we can literally compare them to wolves and other wilder canine forms to see how far they've fallen.
Cats and other animals closer to their original nature meanwhile have to be impressed by you rather than simply liking you by default like a baby duckling.
Dogs are stimulated by training and pleasing their owner, which gives them the drive to constantly learn new things. Dogs are intuitive and active, while cats are typically lazy and unmotivated to preform simple tasks.
Only on command, and if you're one of those people who measure an animal's ability by how much you can alter it then it's not that cats aren't capable or motivated when it comes to training, it's moreover that it takes more work to do.
There are dogs bred specifically for home life family members, protective nature, work, or a mix of traits which cannot be applied to cats. Sure, cats can take care of rodent populations and be a companion at the same time, but don't have the sheer customizability of dog breeds. There is a dog breed out there waiting to fill the exact role you're looking for.
Sure, Neoteny is a valid point. Pugs, Cocker Spaniels, Bulldogs all have health issues directly related to selective breeding, but cats are no exception. The Birman, Bengal, Siamese breeds all have major health complications due to the same methods.
The ratios of damage are far more widespread among dogs, plus the goals of those breeding them were quite different from those steering the paths of cat breeds.
The goal was to make animal rearing easy and serve a practical goal, they're like the machines of the old world with spunky child-like quirks over how they were literally designed in many cases with a form and function, a symbiotic relationship with people, rather than a truly independent life form.
Sure there's breeds of dog with the ability to smell specifics down to a way finer line than we'll ever be able to, and sure it can be nice for a dog to help you steer your cattle or whatever, but my criteria is more over how I'd judge a person, as an individual expression of sentience that can study the world and respond to it with cunning. It's about how layered their capacity for thinking proves to be.
People who comment on canine loyalty as a redeeming factor usually yield to me that they aren't good animal communicators.
Since dogs are pack animals, loyalty is a built-in survival mechanism. I'd say that's a redeeming biological factor.
Again, compare it to Wolves. They have loyalty as well, but only as pups does it prove as easy to appeal to them as dogs.
Wolves have the entire spectrum of mental growth, it makes them more clever but also harder to impress. This is more akin to being alive if you ask me.
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
