DPS isn't the only thing you need to account for.
Personally, I would use the following formula to get a good first impression on unit cost-efficiency. The same formula works the same regardless of whether you're taking individual models or entire squads into account. Slot items will, of course, skew the result of the formula.
Cost efficiency per squad: (DPS of squad) * (effective health; received accuracy/hitpoint sum) / (cost to reinforce entire squad)
Ofc we should take into account more factors then just dps. Although I mentioned dps because its the main source of veterancy. But if you want to go this way lets not just narrow it down to dps on one side and received accurasy hp on the other. Things like accuracy, sight range, passive healing. Thats also a part of the units kit.
First of all we should take into account that there are two seperate stages for any unit, its vanilla state, without weapon upgrades, vet or upgrades and then its the upgraded, upgunned and vetted version. Imo the performance of a vanilla unit should be represented by its initial mp cost. In this case cons are outmatched both againt volks and grens. Taking into account the fact the access to both molotovs and at nades requires an upgrade each it makes vanilla cons cost-effeciency far lower than that of volks or grens.
We should also take into account the actualy effectivness of abilities. Wanna talk about molotovs? I remember people talked about molotov balance a for years now. Is there really a good reason you can come up with that would explain why molotovs are still a fucking meme? Fix it. Increse its cost if needed but make it useful. It pains me when I see people not even upgrading that ability although it should increase the value of their basic units. Maybe wanna compare effectivness of molotovs to incediary or rifle nades which axis get for free?
The cost efficiency of the squad is not a static value, and varies with range.
Exactly thats why units with better long range dps always have advantage over the short range units because every engagement they enter in long range friendly environment. Thats why all long range infantry is blob friendly. Also units that are forced to close the distance risk stepping over a minefield or into mg range. Problem that grens or volks dont actually have. Grens especially becasue they mow down any mgs in sight or rifle nade it to death in an instant. Thats why mgs are ineffective vs axis blobs, meaning the main anti blob mechanic is not effective vs a specific blob. Also did you see the range on incediary nades? Playing ost for instance is all about camping a point without pushing, you have literally no pressure to do anything which lowers your losses by a lot. You just wait for your enemies to come so you can mow them from afar. OKW can do the same but its more fun to chase and mow down defensless cons at close range. Force them out of cover with lava nades denying them the only mechanic that was supposed to help them.
There is a little bit of a conundrum here, let me explain. This game has great mechanics called cover. Cover basically negates a large portion of enemy units damage. Cover also promotes static engaments. Combined with long range weapons and mechanics of effective cover denial (like rifle nades and incediary nades) it makes axis basic infantry even more cost effecient.
Moreover, even relative cost efficiency isn't a good metric, since squads will almost never fight it out stationary over long periods of times (or if they do, there will be snipers/etc involved). A low-DPS squad will be useless at killing enemy troops while they move to THEIR optimal range. A high-DPS (but low-survivability) squad, will have trouble surviving to get to close-range. That's why you can have stuff like cost-inefficient vanilla Conscripts and OP ppsh conscripts at the same time.
OP ppsh cons, thats a good one. You really wanna go that lane? OP in which game mode at what map? In close quarters they are merely as effective as volks. So you just basically admitted that volks are op. On open maps they lose to gren blobs any day. Snipers? Thats a good one too. You know that long range weapons like in case of grens, volks, obers allows them to oneshot my sniper? Also ppsh is a doctrinal weapon, the same as g43 which enables grens to combat effectively even rifleman thx to stun nades. You really want to go this way?
Conscript cost efficiency at Vet3 is bad; but not super-duper-bad.
I agree its not super-duper-bad its just super bad.
The major issue is how unreliable Conscripts are at getting it (due to their low-accuracy, RNG Mosins), and how badly they become bled while getting it (due to terrible long-range performance of Mosins). Also, if Conscripts die, forget about getting a late-game squad; they will never gain that level of vet again.
True rng mosins are a joke, so is the magical 25 range for cons. After you reach 25 range your dps doesnt increase. Which is somewhat retarded.
PS: Try Vet3 Conscripts vs Vet3 G43 Grenadiers. Pick any range you want and see which squad will always win. Now, take into account the kind of weapons supporting OST and Soviets.
I literally have no idea what you tried to prove here? Soviet and ost weapons are worlds apart. G43 grens are terminators.
My solution was and still is simple. Take into account all the factors and readjust cons price to match its vanilla and scaling performance. That way they might be shit but at least dirt cheap.
If not then start with making molotovs throw speed better, increase cons close dps a little bit so it actually scales beyond range 25 and make accuracy more reliable.
So no historically its not really accurate at all.
Fury
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
