The ranking is stated plainly and will keep being stated: pkcs11 > pkcs11-wrapped ≈ software. "HSM-backed" is a phrase that hides the difference; strict pkcs11 is the mode that earns it. The key is generated by the token's own RNG, inside the token, and never leaves it. Every signature is one C_Sign call, bounded by the appliance's signature rate — not your CPU's.
Choose at the point of choice. A root CA that signs a handful of times a year should be strict: the signature rate is irrelevant and the custody claim is the whole point. Before trading it away for throughput, check whether the appliance's rate is actually your constraint — if it is not, you are giving away the strong mode for nothing.
And the claim is read back, never assumed: PKCS#11 permits a token to ignore attributes it does not implement and still return success, so goca re-reads the object after creation and rests the claim on the historical attributes — a key that was briefly extractable and then had the flag flipped is not a key that never left.
Everything above is a claim about a device goca has not met yet. The frames ahead make the introduction: describe the module, wire the PIN, prove the connection — then put a real key in real hardware.
Now I can say what strict custody buys and what it costs.