A report described as hasan sahih should not automatically be ranked against one called merely sahih by counting the number of descriptive words. If the combined label truly reflects two independent routes, one hasan and one sahih, corroboration can in some circumstances supply extra strength over a single sahih route.
But if the dual expression reflects uncertainty about one chain's narrator, it must not be treated as proof of multiple supporting routes. Hesitation over a single chain and cumulative strength from distinct chains are different evidentiary situations.
The label alone is not decisive: actual isnads and contextual indicators determine an informed preference.