What is your opinion?

Forget about balsa wood, the balsa planes are invariably harder to put together and heavier. HK has any number of foam planes which would do a better job.

I'm sorry to off-track, but I do not think balsa planes are heavier than foams if built correctly. I had 2 cubs which are of the same wingspans and dimensions where the balsa actually summed up over a 100g lighter than the EPO. The interior fuselage is much more spacious than that of the foam model. If u notice, foam planes has thicker walls to compensate to the rigidity of the fuselage surface. Balsa/ply on the other hand uses reinforcement of material. Of course it's easier to repair a foam plane. A crash high enough could drive the wood plane in the thrash. 1 cent.

THis day & age balsa/ply planes are getting very light & are generally lighter than the equivalent in the same wing span as an EPO airframe, EPO are more forgiving in certain ways when in comes to flopping a plane on its back from a low height. Either EPO or balsa will be right-off's if flown into the ground.

Balsa airframes are usually arf's that require you to finish the build & install all your own electronics, EPO on the most part are PNF/PNP types that require less hours getting them in the air.

As for the OP question, I feel that the Sbach could be the better package due to what appears to be the better quality airframe, I have no experience with either of them & are just basing my opinion of what I see in the pics. I feel that they both would be great sport/aerobatic planes so end of the day pic the one you like better.

The choice may be easier by the packs you already have.