Here are a couple of images to consider:
Defiant - need to completely remove the entire rotor & hub set-up to fit in a C-5.
View attachment 699286
Note that even the fuselage is taller than a UH-60.
Valor is available with folding-wing option:
View attachment 699287
View attachment 699288
Isn't that a nice, neat C-5 compatible package?
And even if the US Army version doesn't have the folding (rotating) wing... look at the ferry ranges below.
Here are some specs from the flight tests (of which Valor has conducted more than 3 times as many as Defiant, due to issues getting the Defiant flight-capable)... note that the US Army has said that they are focusing on Pacific-theatre requirements:
Defiant:
max speed: 211 knots (lower than the smaller SB-1, and less than Sikorsky had expected); "expected to be above 250 knots in production form"
combat radius: 229 nm (when the Future Affordable Turbine Engine is installed, rather than the T55s used for the test flights)
ferry range: ~700nm
Valor:
max speed: 300 knots proven in tests
combat radius: 800nm
ferry radius: 2,200 nm
Perhaps the speed & range differences, and the deployability difference (Valor doesn't really need to be shipped in C-5s with that kind of ferry range) plus the lower-than-expected performance of the scaled-up Defiant-X over that of the smaller SB-1 demonstrator led the Army to feel that Valor was significantly better for their purposes than Defiant?