I asked this question before. If there is a real tangible difference between your low end (Anderson/PSA), mid range (Ruger/Smith/Aero) and upper end (Colt/BCM/Noveske/KAC) and the general consensus is no. For a regular run of the mill lower you're paying for a lot for the name which in turn translates to potentially better resale value. That said I absolutely would pay $100+ for a lower that I was going to Form1.
This is where I'mat as well. I've built with several different "brand" recievers. Mil-Spec is Mil-spec. In fact I put the least amount of money in the upper/lower. It doesn't essentially 'do' anything accept house all the moving components and the business end. So I don't really care, I tend to really spluge on Barrels, FCG, BCG, Handuards, Muzzle Devices, Charging Handles, even grips but not the receivers. I've got Anderson's with thousands of rounds shot without a single malfunction. Not that big of a deal to me. That being said, if it's a build I plan to Form 1 it will be at least Aero and upper because of finish. If I'm throwing an extra $200 on a stamp I want it to look a little nicer since it will be a more "desirable" rifle anyway because of the stamp.
I done builds with a lot of different makes of lowers. The biggest difference I have seen is the quality of finish (slick and smooth black to grayish easily scratched) and a few extras on certain brands. That being said, Aero is probably one of my favorites. About the only issue I have ran into is having Anderson trigger guard roll pins being oversized and not working. Well beside launching some the springs and detents into never land.
Fit and finish is really the only difference in DI recievers. Aero is my preferred as well, because you get the fit and finish without dropping $300 on a set. I had to buy a couple spring kits because I got tired of scrounging on hands and knees for detent springs... ughhh


