The way I phrased my first comment suggested quantum dot LEDs and OLEDs degraded at the same rate.
That wouldn't even matter. If the degradation rate of OLED pixels would be uniform, it would simply lose brightness, which would be ok. Every light source does, LED, laser, whatever. The problem with OLED is, that the rate of degradation depends on the energy/heat applied to a pixel. That means that some parts of the panel might degrade faster than other parts, depending on image content that is shown. At that point it might make sense to differentiate between classical burn in, where so much energy/heat is applied to a pixel that the material is damaged and what is commonly called burn in, which is faster degradation of the material, so there's a loss in brightness in comparison to other pixels.
Think of it as discrete fuel cells, the more fuel burns away in a cell, the dimmer it gets. The whole idea is that sometimes a cell on the top left is burning bright, sometimes one on the bottom right and so on. Over time, it will be uniform so all cells can burn equally bright. That is not the case with static image content such as station logos. That's why these spots can leave a "shadow image" or burn, which is nothing else than inability of a pixel to be as bright as it should be.
In addition, different colored pixels have different efficiency and degradation rates. That's the reason why LG made the red sub-pixels larger, starting with 2019 models. The heat/energy dispersion just works better with larger areas. That's also the reason Samsung is only using blue OLED material in their quantum dot - OLED hybrid, they're using the QDs for the other panels.
That's just how OLED works. You won't see a difference in one hour of certain parts being bright and others not, but over time, you will. LG has a feature in the firmware that checks after what time a channel is switched. If you watch a single channel for more than 8 hours (or was it 10?), the warranty for your panels is void, as they consider it not normal use. If they still exchange the panel is up to them. In the end, their margins are so high by now, they cut easily offer the TVs at half the price and still make a nice profit, but then they couldn't change panels all the time for free.
So for those using their TVs to watch movies and a TV show here and there, that isn't a problem. But if you just turn it on and let it run for hours, day after day, then be prepared to be "burned". No technology is perfect, for OLED I'd like to see higher brightness, better shadow detail (blacks are great, but they're crushing some stuff just above that), color gamut, a few other things, but mainly the fact that we need it much bigger. Even their 88" is way too small for a proper movie experience, so bring out the 10' to 20' rollable panels and sell these like motorized projection screens. They showed a 65" rollable screen at CES (2019!), which is still not out, but the price is ridiculous. $60k for a stamp sized screen? Hm, no thanks. They need to get their act together and show something as an alternative to projection and micro LED walls, NOW, because the time is ticking. I'd happily buy a 15' wide (rollable or not) OLED screen for a dedicated room (movies only) and not worry about burn in. Would have to be in the right price range though, because if they're approaching micro LED prices, there'd be absolutely no point going with OLED.
