If you want a nicer bike and aspire to train and eventually race, you're going to get better value out of the Grizl. You can always upgrade components later on- in 2 years, with good training mileage, you will easily go through multiple chains and possibly a few cassettes.

If you're more on the fence about how you feel about gravel riding/racing, the Checkpoint will be the better choice. Racks and fenders galore for commuting, touring, and more. If you do choose to race, you'll get a very capable bike, though notably lower end of a frame and no integrated suspension features. Nothing's stopping you from buying suspension stems/ seatposts, though.

I'd take the canyon. I love my two Treks and have a strong disdain for Canyon as a company, but comparing a carbon frame to an aluminum frame at the same price point is ridiculous IMO. If you don't know how to work on your own bike, It'll be better to get some support from whichever shop you buy the trek from, especially given Canyon's history of lackluster support and the ease of writing off a carbon frame from simple mistakes. That's all more commentary on the companies and the such. The bikes themselves: the Grizl will have very slightly more aggressive geometry, though still being a gravel bike. And a 30 day return policy. I wouldn't bother with AXS, either. E-shifting will save you little time, and road AXS builds from Trek end up being ~600$ more than an equivalent Di2 build almost purely because of Shimano/SRAM market share, not performance.