The only reason I've seen from people saying Nani's better than Malouda is that he's more exciting, basically, which while true isn't really relevant to who's the better player.
Does Malouda benefit from Chelsea's system more than Nani does from ours? Probably. Does that take away from his performances over the last 8 months or so? I don't think so. He's been very, very good. Nani's not been far off, he's just not quite maintained his form for as long. In terms of general play Malouda's just better than Nani, he's more involved and he's more effective with it.
Here's a comparison of the two games they were most involved in last season. In terms of end product, well you've got all that in the stats. I don't know how you can argue Nani's more productive when the stats are so obviously against him, Malouda's goal/assist contributions are quite underwhelming in general but does that really matter when the outcome is the same?
He doesn't provide any sort of spark or brilliance, but he provides consistent, reliable quality and is a big part of Chelsea's successful move to pass-and-move football from their more direct game, his style and their style married together to make Malouda the best wide player in the league, IMO.
Saying that if I was offered a straight loan swap, for example, and was given the opportunity to swap them for a year, I'd probably not take it. Honestly, I don't think there's a big difference between what Giggs offers and what Malouda offers, in style or quality. They're both creative, intelligent dribbling playmakers who like to play pass and move football at speed, and they both get back to help out their defence regularly. Malouda offers it more consistently no doubt, but you're losing Nani's spark and ability to create something out of nothing in that deal and I'm not sure it'd be beneficial in the end.
I think Malouda thrives off space, he uses his intelligence to find the time space and then uses it to make simple yet effective goal contributions. It's why most of his contributions are somewhat underwhelming, because most of the hard work has been done before he even touches the ball. He has the likes of Anelka, Drogba and Lampard constantly offering a threat in and around the box and he plays off of that, I don't think he'd benefit in the same way here. He'd still make a very valuable contribution and he'd still show himself to be a very good player, but I'm not sure he or we would be as effective. I think we need Nani's spark and ability to offer something different, something out of the ordinary, because as direct attackers we've only really got Rooney for that and if we're playing against an organised defence who can nullify Rooney we need someone who can unorganise them, who can change the game in an instant. He's got a matchwinning quality and mentality I don't think Malouda has.
Malouda's been performing better over the last year though, regardless of the reasons why, so I don't think it's unfair to say he's been the best left-sided player in the league in recent times.
Guinguamp finished 7th of the Ligue 1 the season before Malouda left for Lyon.