The level of each of the surface-shaping processes that occur on a planet throughout its history will determine how its surface appears. The terrestrial planets were formed in basically the same environment, so we can assume that the average frequency of impacts for all of the terrestrial planets has been about the same. In a hypothetical scenario where impacts are the only process that ever shape planetary surfaces, how would the surfaces of the terrestrial planets compare?

For example, in the case of Earth and other planets there was a time on the Solar System era with a great amount of collisions of different objects. Due to volcanic activity and other processes on the Earth's surface the craters of the impacts were erased.

Notice that this is not the case for objects of low mass like the Moon, which have a surface with several craters.

The atmospheres of planets have an important role in the amount of impacts the surface will suffer. Once the meteoroid enters the atmosphere of the planet, it can be disintegrated as a result of the friction between them.

In the case of the Moon, doesn't have an atmosphere so its surface is full of craters.

So, in this hypothetical scenario and with all that, it was already discussed that is easy to get to the conclusion that the terrestrial planets can be compared by the presence of craters in its surfaces.