This.
I think that preference plays a huge part here. I just auditioned the Andromeda, Lyra II and Vega.
I don't think that the Vega has any significant qualities that jump out at you upon first listen, apart from the heftiness of bass. With critical listening however, the Vegas begin to shine. It's perhaps the first IEM I've heard so far where the bloominess of bass doesn't add any veil to the midrange. Quite peculiar. Sense of space is also top-notch, not in the traditional airiness and enormous stage sense, but in terms of excellent layering, separation and imaging. I also feel that the instrument timbre of the Vega is superb, much in line with the rest of their lineup.
Many IEMs are designed/tuned in a way that leave a strong first impression (wow-factor?) due to a particular aspect of its sound signature. Sustainability of this impression notwithstanding, it often doesn't correlate to the technical competency of the IEM as a whole. 'Holistic' evaluation is key, instead of surgically dissecting and isolating each particular trait sonic trait, classifying them under some ranking system. The CA Vega is IMO one such IEM that examplifies this. Bass aside, it does a number of things subtly very well.
That being said, the signature of the Andromeda appeals the most to me, and would no doubt be my choice if I decided to go for a pair of expensive IEMs. Vega had some HF peaks that didn't tickle my fancy. Overall bass was also a little too much for my tastes. As mentioned -- a matter of preference.