I normally try to avoid referring to other people's perspectives on debated topics, but since Frank Ettin already broke the ice on Greg Ellifritz, here's an article that's somewhat interesting. Granted, it's more of a caliber caparison than a bullet comparison.
I don't know that this data is truly unbiased, however. The author says he only included results from criminal altercations or military battle
. That right there will change the picture a lot.
Are military combatants, who are trained and mentally prepared for fighting, going to as easy to stop as some petty thief who's breaking into homes looking for electronics? And what are these military combatants probably being shot with? I suspect that 9mm and .45 autos look worse in the results simply because they tend to be used when more determined combatants are involved.
So even though the author says he has no dog in the fight, I don't believe any data, no matter how large the sample, can really paint the whole picture so long as the situations and variables are not controlled and identical.
Nonetheless, it's still interesting to look at, even if the only real conclusion is, as Frank stated, "There are no magic bullets."