Wild Cohort Stacking or no, which is actually more powerful?

[Coidzor]

So I was just wondering whether the action economy of having at least 3 creatures' worth of actions or the extra HD of wild cohort stacked onto an animal companion would win out in the end, and at what point would having a single one win out over having two of them.

Given that I know that 2 Riding Dogs at 1st level is superior to 1 Riding Dog, even if Wild Cohort got represented by a free warbeasting at that level, and I'm pretty sure that remains the case until the first choice for an alternate animal companion at 4th level at least.

But I'm not really sure on what grounds I should analyze the problem.

Just do a snapshot at 1st, 5th, 10th, 15th, and then the finale at 20?

I suppose if I found that chart of standard AC based upon CR to see how much DPR each of the two setups could bring to bear against "average" enemies. I'd probably have to standardize what animals to bring to bear at each level, since I don't think just leaving them as buffed up riding dogs would be the best assessment.

Any other angles you all can think of?

Am I just massively overthinking this and there's a much, much simpler way to determine the answer?

[Chronos]

One complication is that it'll depend on the buffing situation. If you've got a Dragonfire Inspiration bard in the party, for instance, you'll want as many warm bodies as possible to deliver those wonderful d6s.

Another variable will be the presence or absence of area effects, and the presence or absence of single-target insta-kills. The former favor having a single, tough companion, while the latter favor a bunch of more expendable ones.