No.
The main issue with this chaps test is that you do not test power transistors without heatsinks. FAIL.
You will get wildly inaccurate and inconsistent results. Some of those devices will go into runaway before others.
That's nothing more than marketing nonsense. The device has been brought to the forum a few times and debunked.
That said... the marketing slogans all over the video about having "consistent results" or "adherence to NIST" are pure comedy when looking at how this so-called test was performed.
NIST and others have publications on how to do this.... and it does not involve floating a power transistor in the air and touching the back with a probe.
So, aherence to NIST went out the window really, really fast.
The reason these do not work is because elements that have an impact on the thermal dissipation of the device are not being changed.
The current flowing through the device is not being changed, no heatsinking is being added/changed, etc.
You might find a few devices out of a tube that are slightly better but whether or not that translates into a meaningful change is doubtful.
There are no test conditions published or specified. Even if those were specified it's still all wrong to start with.
There is no controlled condition whatsoever!
To really test this some jigs would have to be fashioned and a test methodology defined.
I would be curious as to what some of the metrologists on the forum think about it.
When I was researching this I came across several papers on the subject authored or co-authored by David L. Blackburn @ NIST:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/author/37283764700A lot of very good reads. Also see NIST 400-86 that he co-authored.
https://www.nist.gov/publications/semiconductor-measurement-technology-thermal-resistance-measurementsBut, marketing BS seems to win over the actual science..... even when the test is an obvious colossal failure.