Is comparative juror analysis relevant in determining whether to strike a prospective juror?

Comparative juror analysis, however, is subject to inherent limitations especially where, as here, the analysis is performed for the first time on appeal. (Snyder v. Louisiana (2008) 552 U.S. 472, 483 ["[A] retrospective comparison of jurors based on a cold appellate record may be very misleading when alleged similarities were not raised at trial."]; Gutierrez, supra, 2 Cal.5th at p. 1174.) "A transcript will show that the panelists gave similar answers; it cannot convey the different ways in which those answers were given. Yet those differences may legitimately impact the prosecutor's decision to strike or retain the prospective juror. When a comparative juror analysis is undertaken for the first time on appeal, the prosecutor is never given the opportunity to explain the differences he [or she] perceived in jurors who seemingly gave similar answers." (Lenix, supra, 44 Cal.4th at p. 623.)