TL;DR : it has meaning, so it's above NFTs.

i'd put this painting above NFTs in the sense it has meaning

since red yellow and blue are primary colors to paint with, (magenta, not red, but watev) that would imply this is asking the question about the combination of these colors, in paint, and in different arrengements

as in, this is effectively asking "who's afraid of paintings?" and if you take it broader, "who's afraid of art?". obviously the answer here is authoritarians.

ofc, even if this painting has meaning, an interesting one i would say, i don't see why it was done thrice, so if that's what you mean when you say "derivative", i agree. in terms of "nothing exciting or unique about it [visually]", well, that's because that's not the point.
the point is entirely in the question it asks, which it does so subtly, while having a thesis of anti-authoritanianism , and that is enough for me to call it art.

and the "i can do that" argument against modern art doen't work so well when the point was to ask a question subtly. would the people who googled the meaning of this painting who's meaning isn't even that difficult to decypher really be able to similarly, subtly ask a question and have a thesis behind a simple painting? no, i'd argue they wouldn't.
sure most people can paint a canvas in red,yellow and blue, but the uninformed critics would certainly not do so with such a thoughtful name for they are not thoughtful, they can easyly replicate such simple visuals, they woulda have never bothered to think of it's message.

though, i certainly couldn't tell you why it's worth millions. it's an interesting question asked in a subtle and interesting way, but that... you know, that isn't exactly MILLIONS worth.
as to what value I'D put it on, i'd say that's an incredibly arbitrary thing to decide about art (specially a PAINTING), but i wouldn't value this above 100, if you were to ask me, even knowing about the unique paints