My observation is that they all have their pros and cons. MR's big plus is their presence in almost all locations I've worked. Their minus is the ratio of earned benefits to investment. I suspect that tradeoff is true of all programs - there is an efficient frontier on which you need to place yourself to be competitive. Obviously a program with lousy benefits and few chains wouldn't do very well. Super benefits and ubiquitous properties would be great for us, but the competitive market drives them to equality with others.

So you need to figure out which is best for your preferences, stay patterns, etc. I selected MR and SPG after trying out HH and HY for a couple of years. HY just doesn't have the ability to stay/earn points where my projects have taken me. HH regularly seems to underestimate where they need to be to be competitive and end up less than efficient from a competitive standpoint.

So there is no "right" answer. As Sharon noted, you need to figure out what's best for you. Unfortunately, after 10+ years here, I've seen many. many FT'ers proclaim "I've had it, I'm headed to XYZ", only to find that the grass may be greener but it's shorter and less dense when you get close-up - there are pro/con tradeoffs and nothing is ever better in every way.

Give HY a try - it's the only way you'll know whether it's the right fit for you. I spend about 5 years before settling on my portfolio.