Nope. What did they hit and what was the effect on the target? Or the effect on the reason for the shot ( did it strike the target where desired).
Top right in second picture performed well.
Bullet mushroomed,expanding into about double the original diameter while tracking a straighter course than lopsided ones.
The medium struck matters. Clean sand is good for testing for a cheaper medium than ballistic gel.
Lower left in second pic struck a stone or other hard material and slid off/ around.
Perfect hits are subjective.
Nose first is good, but a tumbling bullet in warfare disabling a target is good too?
The energy from the charge being left in the target ....vs passing through , can be considered good.
Bullet design ,energy it carries when striking target , performance through target , studied together give a better idea.
Mattered less in warfare during the civil war ....when a minie ball shattered a limb ,that was good enough regardless of what the bullet looked like after.