If I had to rank the indicators, I'd go:
1) Statistical indicators (doing the things that size/athleticism are supposed to do)
2) Film and how they "look"
3) Testing numbers
FWIW, I do think it's worth revisiting film/statistical indicators when the testing numbers come back different than expected. I think sometimes players get labeled as athletic/unathletic and we review the film/data with that bias. If the testing numbers tell a different story it's probably worth reviewing everything with a fresh set of eyes.