I think plenty of judo people would disagree with you about the compromises that judo has made.
I agree, though, that aikido lacks a success metric. Just look at the threads here, and how often it turns out that people disagree because they are pursuing fundamentally different goals.
Which goes back to my original point. Aikido is a very big tent. At one extreme you have people who are so allergic to any kind of conflict that you wonder why they are studying a martial art at all. At the other, you have people who will tear your arm off and beat you with it. Both extremes call what they do "aikido," and scoff at the other extreme. Very few generalizations will apply to both extremes.
Oh, I agree; but, I am not arguing whether judo picked a good metric of success or the prudence of corresponding decisions to achieve that metric. I am simply saying that judo picked a metric of success and based on that metric you could argue they are successful.
I think this speaks exactly to your point. Put more bluntly, I think aikido's concessions to a wide spectrum of consumers is what over-taxed the art. Everyone is not always right.