I will add my disagreement on the heat management side of things - if you can fly around at 18% with shields on, and remain parked at maximum scooping rate distance indefinitely without the heat ever going above 60%, I don't understand the heat argument. If anything, I found that a properly set up exploration conda runs a tad cooler than an Asp in a similar setup. I've seen the myth of condas running hot perpetrated from time to time and found it has no basis in fact.
Also, people often like to go for the heat argument when trying to elevate their preferred ship over others - often used by the DBX crowd - ignoring the fact that the heat signature differences between Asp E, DBX and Anaconda do exist, but all three ships are more than cool running enough for all your exploration needs, so the comparison doesn't mean much when all three are in the "more than good enough" zone. The fact the DBX runs a tiny bit cooler than the Asp doesn't make it a better explorer when the Asp runs very cool and well within tolerance levels itself, and is objectively better than the DBX in every way that matters (apart from looks, perhaps, though that's not a category we can stat-compare). The same argument can be applied to comparing the Conda with an Asp - both ships are very cool running so you need to compare other things to decide which you like better for exploration.
Also, you can't just put a "yes" on the jump range category for both the Asp and the Anaconda, thereby implying they are equal in this category, when they clearly are not. It's a bit like saying a Mazda MX-5 and Bugatti Veyron are both fast cars. Sure, but if you're running a comparison table just saying they're both fast isn't enough, surely
Misleading tables notwithstanding, the Asp Explorer has two tangible, meaningful advantages over the Anaconda; it's cheaper and it turns faster in supercruise. That's it.
