Randy, it is only fraction of equation. You must count with prop diameter (and also blade count, blade width) etc etc.
There is aproximate equation that speed stability (how much model slows down at higher drag) at constant rpm depends on delivered power. It means if you have the same power for both aplications, and you go up with pitch while keeping the same diameter you will go down with power and clearly you will have lower speed stability. To compensate that, you must go to larger prop, to load the shaft. Such prop is typically more efficient, but it also does not pull so well stalled. Because larger part of blade is over its critical AoA. You can tell it if you try to keep running piped model with low pitch prop and jurrassic bubling ST60. Difference in static thrust is large, but both will reach the same speed, so the in flight thrust is the same.
I wrote somewhere in some article that folloing props are _aproximately_ equivalent "powerwise" :
2 blades 12”x6”
2 blades 11”x4”
2 blades 11”x6” with 50% wider blades
3 blades 11”x6”
So advantage of higher pitch is little lower consumption, and disadvantage lower static thrust (could be visible in critical situations) however reason why I like relatively low pitch (motor running over 10 000) is that while power = torque x rpm, lower pitch at the same rpm make lower prop torque (moment) to airframe what make trimming easier. For example that 11"x4" prop has 1/3 moment to airframe compared to those other 3.