As the displayed chart of the "Team Behavior" looks very similar to the one of the "Team Efficiency" and the index, it can only contain marginal alpha. However, the time span of 25 years is much too short for presumed alpha to be statistically significant. Thus, this comparison is hardly relevant for the porpose.

Why didn't you compare pure equity beta of MSCI World or S&P500 with definitely statistically significant pure alpha, e.g., of the SG Trend Index? Its risk adjusted return is about the same or slightly better than that of equity beta, but uncorrelated. During financial crises it is even mostly negatively correlated.

Thus, their combination in one portfolio provides significantly higher risk adjusted returns than pure beta or alpha alone. The Harvard Finance Professor John Lintner, who also contributed to the CAPM along with William Sharpe, discovered this already more than 40 years ago and published it in his legendary "Lintner paper" in 1983:

“The combined portfolios of stocks (or stocks and bonds) after including judicious investments in appropriately selected sub-portfolios of investments in managed futures accounts (or funds) show substantially less risk at every possible level of expected return than portfolios of stock (or stocks and bonds) alone.”

This holds true until today as proven by the SG Trend Index. Thus, why not take such proven and dependable uncorrelated pure alpha for your analysis instead of questionable alpha, highly correlated with equity beta?