View attachment 31152
For what i see have difference in results using XLR vs RCA, XLR have less interference but need more power and have a lower gain.
https://www.soundandvision.com/content/marantz-av7005-surround-processor-and-mm7055-amplifier-ht-labs-measures
I assume you did notice that the Signal to Noise ratio was better using RCA than XLR.
For the original poster's purposes, their is no decisive SQ benefit of one over the other (the RCA usually show better S/N numbers, but XLR is still not at a level that is audible).
If you have some unusual source of interference, I suppose there might be a benefit to XLR on your home audio short run.
XLR is a great technology for pro audio where there are many electronics around (as potential sources of interference) and you are doing a new set-up every night or two (when touring) such that you can't just figure out and remove/isolate the interference one time and be good (as is the case for home audio).
For home audio, it can make sense for subwoofers which might be on the opposite side of the room with a cable running around the baseboards (long runs). It can also make sense if you have a HT equipment closet located well away from the rest of the system, or for a zone 2 situation where you are using an external amp in the Z2 room.
But if you have a normal HT setup with 3-6' cables, interference should not be an issue and RCA connectors work fine.
A bogus, but, I suppose, still worthwhile aspect of XLR cables is that (to my knowledge) snake-oil cables have not penetrated the Pro-Audio XLR Balanced cable market. So, if you are prone to read accounts of day and night improvements based on expensive cables and find yourself being convinced, XLR might be a good way to completely side-step that bullet! The only disadvantage is the cost of the cable, but XLR cables are very reasonable in the grand scheme of home audio.
Last, since XLR cables are designed for use in pro-audio, it is more durable; however pro-audio cable usually has a nice pliability for the cord diameter!