Is 6...Bf5 inferior to 6...Bd6 in the Caro-Kann Tartakower after 6. Bc4? And if so, why? I'm trying out the Tartakower variation of the Caro-Kann.  It begins

[fen ""]
[startply "11"]
[startflipped "0"]

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nf6 5. Nxf6+ exf6 6. Bc4 Bf5 (6... Bd6)


I have not had much success with it thus far.  I lost a recent LiChess game seemingly without much effort from my opponent.  It continued from the above 6. Bc4 Bf5.  It seems for black 6...Bf5 is inferior to 6...Bd6, being played in far fewer master games (and judging from Stockfish's evaluation: +0.6 vs. +0.3), although I'm not sure if this is correct, and I'm not sure why.

Question: Is 6...Bf5 inferior to 6...Bd6 in the Caro-Kann Tartakower after 6. Bc4?  And if so, why?
It is a bit early in the game to be saying that one move is decisively better than another, but there are general principles that can be applied. 

One of these is to ask whether you are already sure where certain pieces belong, and if you are sure, put them there at once unless there is some tactical reason not to. In this variation, where Black recaptures on f6 with the e-pawn, he has already conceded a slightly disadvantageous endgame because he cannot create a passed pawn on the K_side, but White can do so on the Q-side. As compensation, Black has achieved mobility for all of his pieces, and can try to use this to bring off an attack with ....Bd6, 0-0, Qc7 and Bg4 that makes any endgame irrelevant. 

So Black is fairly sure that his KB belongs on d6. His QB could belong on g4, f5, perhaps e6, or it might stay where it is while Black plays Re8 and Nd7-f8. He might even consider ..f6-f5. So ..Bd6 has the advantage of preserving options for the QB. There is less value in maintaining options for the KB because we already know where we want it. 

The possibility of 6...Be6 is dubious. After 7. Bxe6 (or first 7.Qe2) the Pawn on e6 will be a permanent weakness even it gets to e5.