does a different priority assigned to a static routes for same prefix make sense in SD-WAN?

hi all,

thanks for your any help in advance?

think of the scenario:

initially we have a sd-wan rule for traffic destined to 10.74.0.0/15 with an MPLS underlay interface as the SD-WAN member interface, and sure we have a static route 10.74.0.0/15 and the MPLS interface is the egress interface, priority stays the default 1.

afterwards we think of the security and we have existing ipsec overlay tunnel based on Internet (yes the phase 2 selector something are all configured well for the traffic, it's verified working), so we created another static routes to 10.74.0.0/15 and pointing to that ip sec overlay interface, the tunnel interface is one of the sd-wan member interface of course.

the question is, in this scenario, assigning a different (in this case, priority 20) to the second static routes via ipsec tunnel interface make any sense? I think sd-wan rule (lowest SLA as outgoing interface selection rule) will automatically steer the member selection, which results in the selection of the  egress interface, it has nothing to do with the priority difference on the two static routes. So, in my opinion we do not need to assign a different priority for the second static routes that is pointing to ipsec tunnel interface.

what is your opinion? Thanks for any advice.