3 cm wingspan vs 1 cm height, which one would you choose?

This question is actually for people whose wingspan is the same as their height, the question is simple: would you  rather lose 1 cm of your height and gain 3 cm of wingspan.
and you can do this by folding it like losing 3cm of your height and gaining 9cm of wingspan ( I want to know how   necessary wingspan is )
 I'm waiting for your opinions

There's a man who's 165 cm tall but has a wingspan of 165 cm; he's aware that if he were to grow to 175cm, there would be disproportionate growth. If this person loses 2 cm in height and gains 6 cm in wingspan, they will be 163 cm tall and have a wingspan of 171 cm.  He now thinks that with a wingspan of 171 cm and a height of 175 cm, it won't look strange, but he will have to femur and tibia the length to make up for the centimeters he lost. I am 166.5 cm tall in the mornings and 165.0 cm in the evenings, and my wingspan measures between 168-170 cm. I don't think I can reach 175 cm in one go. Maybe I can gain 1.5-2cm by improving my posture (my posture is terrible) and then add 8.5cm from my femur to reach my target height, but even then I'll still have a wingspan problem.Probably a -6 cm wingspan deficiency; for some reason, I keep thinking that this will be a problem. I just wanted to ask you a different question: whether wingspan is an incredibly important thing or not. And what is the beginning of what looks strange, in terms of negative wing span centimeters? In my case, with a -6cm wingspan, if we disregard elements like the fuselage, each of my arms will be 3cm higher than where they should be. Considering arm length, I don't think 3cm will really make a difference right now, but looking at the history of this forum, wingspan has been given very important roles.