There are no automatic updates, which is a security risk.
This is a serious concern, and probably enough for LibreWolf to not be recommended by Privacy Guides.
I agree that this is the most important reasons why I’m wary about considering Librewolf for recommendation at this time.
Basic features such as easy (that includes automatic) updates are essential to keeping our readers secure. Firefox does that for them on Windows, macOS, and the Linux distributions we recommend are generally good about keeping Firefox up to date.
The moment updates become a manual thing, the person using that software has to start keeping track of things. We want to minimize this, as it is an important part to making privacy and basic security practices (keeping up-to-date) accessible and easy to accomplish.
However, I would suggest that it deserves something like an “honorable mention” slot. When automatic updates are available, such as on Linux via flatpak, it matches or outclasses Firefox in every way; save for the slight delay in updates. Everything can be configured the same way as Firefox, but LibreWolf is far more convenient and minimal. People learning from this site deserve to know about LibreWolf and the conditions that make it viable.
I would not be comfortable with an “honorable mention”. Privacy Guides, in previously iterations, has historically had a “worth mentioning” section which was scrapped because it made no sense. Either we recommend something and can provide concrete reasons as to why, or we shouldn’t recommend it at all.