But it is the only valid comparison to be made, apart from outliers like Hancock.
In reality I believe Marvel are successful because they manage to strike the right balance nearly every time between honoring the comicbook and translating to cinematic, and satisfying hardcore fans, without embracing general audiences. It really is Kevin Feige, who has built a 'smart' machine in terms of the MCU and its output.
An example is Falcon. How do you translate the comicbook to film. Feige knew. Ex-Military Paratrooper using top-secret wing tech. What about Redwing? Make it a drone?, of course you do. And fans don't care because you instantly appreciate those decisions and why they were made. In hindsight it's common-sense, but you just know that DC Films in the same position would F it up.
I think Marvel are nothing special.
They just put loads of films, time and money into the Marvel film franchise. That dedication and good casting got them to where they are.
DC didn't although their casting is decent.
I'd say over around 60-70% of the Marvel films are 5-7 out of 10. Its nothing amazing (Iron Man 2, GOTG 2, Ant man, ant man and the wasp, the incredible hulk, avengers 2 etc.) They have 23+ films to create and characterise the Avengers IW/End game masterpices. With that much backstory and time, you're going to do well.
Its like an anime which has 150 episodes and has an amazing pllot and characters... well of course.. u had 150 episodes.
DC haven't put time, money, continuity or future planning into their films.
But they still have the Nolan trilogy and Joker film which minute for minute quality wise IMO DESTROYS most of what Marvel has ever made.
Even the jewel in Marvel's crown (Endgame) had to rely on a very crap time travel mechanic. Infinity War was pretty amazing tho but again.. many films of storytelling and characterisation to make it easier for them.