I only have the one Hydraulic roller 440 stroked to 505". In my setup the cost was maybe a bit more for the hydraulic roller lifters than the solid roller lifters, but the valve springs/retainers were less expensive, so I don't think there is much difference in cost?
I though the hydraulic would be quieter, but I can't tell much difference in sound between it and the mild solid roller 505 we just built.
I have the hydraulic roller engine rev-limited to 6,000 RPM, so I don't know how much higher it could rev? The solid roller has no rev-limiter and stiffer valve springs, so it should be able to rev-higher (although both are mild cams making power below 6,000 RPM.) These are both using traditional style valve springs. With conical or taper valve springs, and the hydraulic roller you should be able to extend the RPM range of the hydraulic cam if needed?
For valve train adjustments, I just gave the Hydraulic Roller 0.040" pre-load and really no need to check it unless doing something else where removing the valve cover.
On my old 451" stroker with a mild "street" solid roller cam, I would check valve lash once a year, and it never needed any adjustments. It is good to check once in awhile just in case something is starting to go bad.
The bronze oil pump drive gear did get worn pretty good after about 10,000+ miles on that engine.
On the bracket race 400 to 500" stroker with the 0.726" lift solid roller cam, the lash and valve train are check much more often because of the problems I have had with the rocker stand hold downs on the Victor heads.

Anyhow, I can't say I have had any "issues" with either retro-fit roller cam setup. For street, just run a "street" lobe profile, not a "race" lobe profile cam. If RPMs are limited, the Hydraulic is maybe a better choice, but the valve spring selection more critical than with a solid roller cam.