You know, ballistic uplifting trajectory does not mean no maneuvering capabilities. Actually rocket engine missiles maneuvers better than air breathing ones because they are not constrained by inlet air. Ramjets and Scramjets choke with large attack angles. What they should have are longer ranges but zircon is not very successful in that critique.
I'm a aware that ballistic missiles can maneuver, but the degree is always up for debate, also no ballistic missile is doing tight turns and aerobatics, so the lack of an inlet, or the existence of an inlet on an air breather isn't much of an issue. We're not talking about highly maneuverable AAMs here (although even there the Meteor is making a case for that layout).
Also generally speaking Ballistic missiles are the preferred choice for high payload, long range fire, as they offer the package in a more compact form and can extend their range greatly with additional stages. Why do you think everyone uses intercontinental ballistic missiles and not intercontinental cruise missiles? Or why are air launched ballistic missiles seeing increasing popularity (especially in China and Russia)? Food for thought for you. There are very long ranged cruise missiles, like the Kh-101, but even these come hardly close to the longest ranged ballistic missiles.
Furthermore, YJ-21 has a larger diameter than Zircon, while both are probably in the 8-9m range with regards to length. Meaning that the BM should pack quite some propellant to get it on a good and thus long range trajectory. Either way, I'm rather confident both missiles exceed the range cited, as missiles tend to do.