Every such "compact, directly replace..." is a heavy compromise. Costing either a hughe technology complexity (so cost), poor reliability or bad output.
So if you want a reasonable performance at a reasonable cost, dont use any of those retrofits, but a proper purpose made fixture, not needing those extreme compromises in their design.
This applies to all af the technologies ever used: Incandescents replacing oil lamps at homes 120 years ago, HIDs replacing incandescents for street lights 70 years ago, fluorescents or LEDs replacing incandescents at homes the last three decades.
No exception.

You can actually get good retrofits, it depends of how much you want to spend, so what product you buy and where you buy it. If you buy it my local supermarket of course your retrofit will be unreliable, if they sell actual garbage CFLs with 22lm/w 3k that can easily be beaten by some halogens or SBMVs, but the good side is that they sell that garbage for dirt cheap (it costed me around $1,98). The funny thing is that the supermarket chain imported that garbage under their own brand, and considering the price, they just bought to the cheapest and crappiest CFL supplier. But why would the employee import such crap in the first place, I wouldn't mind of paying double for for a little bit more quality? Note that I was aware of that I was buying dirt, I just bought it like some kind of historic piece.

Back to the topic, the reliability of the retrofit purely depends of how much you want to spend, there will be a huge difference between a 20+ bucks retrofit and the 2 bucks crap I bought. And if there's much compromise between price and quality you can find an equilibrium that adapts to you.

Of course higher quality comes with higher costs.
But the point I was trying to make is, every retrofit will always be a compromise of some kind. That includes being way more expensive for otherwise the same performance.
E.g. CFLs were "standard" 8khour life rating, premium at around 15khours, the basic models around 3..5khours.
But linear fluorescents were at 20khours for the basic economy models, the long life were 50..100khours. All at the same cost or even cheaper per installed lm as the CFLs. Plus were offering about 30..50% higher efficacy for the same power package.
So for the same money and light output you can get about 3x the lifetime and 15% lower power consumption with linear fluorescents compare to CFLs. All speaking about the same make.
Same with LEDs: You may get barely 120lm/W filament retrofit where additional 30% of the light get lost in the fixture redirecting the light down (so net system efficacy around 80..90lm/W) and pay for the expensive gas fill to make it last the rated 15..20khours, or use a dedicated flat surface LED light (using rather large board with LEDs) which operates the LED chips at barely 40degC (because of the larger board vs the small bulb surface for cooling) so has no problem reaching 25khours with way lower degradation. Or with way less LED chips, so for way cheaper if the 15khour lifetime is sufficient.

Of course there are huge quality differences between makes and models among the retrofits, so are huge difference among the dedicated lights. So some retrofits are more efficient or last longer than some dedicated lights,or some retrofits have the given lumen output available for cheaper than the dedicated lights, but if you select for most parameters equal, with the last few the dedicated will always be way better than the retrofits.