I read the AT's review and I think the review is spot-on, if slightly heavy on the positive sides. IMO it is still amply justifiable. After all, it is impossible to evaluate the Nexus 5 without taking the price in context. Anything it does better than competition gets a point, and anything it falls short on is compensated by the lower price.
Said that, the battery test results methods are somewhat questionable. I am guessing the numbers are higher than my experience because of the way they are measured - especially the fixed brightness and the controlled radios. Under auto-brightness, uneven cellular coverages, and most importantly your Google account that actually moves around Google's radar, those numbers are probably hard to reproduce.
Display results are very nice to look at. The Nexus 5 boasts accurate colors, but somewhat low contrast and high black level, and slightly different red than I am used to. I am happy that the values measured by AT mirror my personal impressions posted earlier in this thread despite my badly nearsighted, contacts-wearing eyes.
I have to say, however, valuing nothing but color accuracy in display seems somewhat myopic () , reminscent of some HDTV intelligentias elevating black-level of Plasma above everything else, or CRT-purists sticking to it for latency advantage. For instance, I find iPhones' (and iPads') display overly reflective and thus distracting but it seems rarely mentioned in the reviews. Color accuracy is a part of a display - an increasinly important part, admittedly, but it is still a part, not the whole. Every chart AT produced deserves to be added in the equation, IMO. In the Nexus 5's case, its low contrast ratio contributes to the perceived lack of clarity, or "pop". To its credit, AT does mention it but kind of buries it as it quite often does when it comes to the Nexus devices.
Which reminds me again, you can't really complain about the Nexus devices if you think about the price tags. Google successfully built a critic-proof platform for itself.