The field of numerical optimization has recently seen a surge in the development of "novel" metaheuristic algorithms, inspired by metaphors derived from natural or human-made processes, which have been widely criticized for obscuring meaningful innovations and failing to distinguish themselves from existing approaches. Aiming to address these concerns, we investigate the applicability of statistical tests for comparing algorithms based on their search behavior. We utilize the cross-match statistical test to compare multivariate distributions and assess the solutions produced by 114 algorithms from the MEALPY library. These findings are incorporated into an empirical analysis aiming to identify algorithms with similar search behaviors.