CMANO is fine. Even though data cant be confirmed since it is mere OSINT estimation, the general model itself is quite good.
In reality vs. CMANO, the LRASM seems to be less god-tier as depicted in the database: In CMANO, for example, the AShMs cruise at seaskimming altitude all the way, while in reality, they typically only do that for the last few dozen kilometers. The LRASM too will cruise at higher altitudes, making it slightly easier for any counterdetection assets to see them and discriminate them from the sea-clutter.
On the other hand, CMANO does give a pretty high/optimistic PoH for SAM vs incoming missiles, as well as a robot-like OODA-loop performance for a ship's crew. So, it might cancel each other out. Generally, I totally approve using CMANO/CMO as a tool for rough guestimation.
No matter what, I think having a swarm of some 20 missiles of any kind coming at you will pose a grave danger in reality.
China should definitely look at adopting a vast quantity of more stealthy and/or RCS-reduced munitions ASAP. With those in service, even older platforms like the H-6s could stay highly relevant in a future conflict. If CMANO/CMO teaches one anything, I guess, it is that possessing advanced and capable munitions and ordnance are vastly more important than having advanced platforms.
What use is a H-20 if all you can drop are iron bombs or non-stealthy KD-20 ALCMs that get chewed up by SAM systems as old as Taiwanese I-HAWKs? On the other hand, a 30yo rusting Ticonderoga equipped with a nominally inferior radar to the newest Type 346B still vastly outperforms the Type 055 by virtue of having the option to load up stealthy VLS-launched LRASM, while the Type 055 still uses big and non-stealthy YJ-18 cruise missiles that only have their speed but also get chewed up by SM-6s the moment they get detected by E-2Ds.