I disagree with the statement that current-mode control is faster than voltage-mode control. The control-to-output transfer functions are certainly different between the techniques and probably easier to compensate with current-mode control. However, the controlled parameter in both cases remains the same: the duty ratio \$D\$. It is the way you construct it which differs between the adopted approaches. Remember that available volt-seconds are identical for a given structure whether you talk about voltage- or current-mode control.
In voltage-mode control or VM, you directly control \$D\$ via a comparator observing the error voltage and an artificial sawtooth. In current-mode control or CM, the artificial sawtooth is an image of the inductor current whose peak is controlled by the error voltage, hence the name also found in the literature of indirect duty ratio control. But if you take a boost converter for instance, the maximum crossover frequency is limited by the RHP zero and it is the same in CM and VM. You have a similar situation with a buck-boost or a flyback converter. If you take a buck converter operated in voltage-mode control, there is no theoretical upper crossover limit below half of the switching frequency. More complicated with current-mode control where subharmonic poles hamper the response at half the switching frequency.
Oui, the dynamic response of a CM converter is of 1st-order at low frequency (3rd-order converter in general for the 3 basic structures) and thus easier to control - in most cases - than the VM counterpart. Also, mode transition from CCM to DCM and vice versa is less troublesome in CM than in VM, making CM the most popular control scheme. But a lot of dc-dc bricks are still operated in VM not CM: better open-loop output impedance, no need for slope compensation which distorts current limit, feed-forward brings excellent input rejection in VM etc. As a preliminary conclusion, no straight answer!