$\newcommand\A{\mathcal{A}}$Let $\A$ be an additive category, and $D(\A)$ be its derived category (i.e. the category of chain complexes of $\A$ localized at quasi-isomorphisms). It is easy to show that if $X \simeq Y$ in $D(\A)$, then such equivalence induces a graded isomorphism on their homologies $H(X) \simeq H(Y)$. Therefore, $H(-)$ is an invariant for objects in $D(\A)$.
If $\A$ is abelian and hereditary (i.e. $\operatorname{Ext}_{\A}^2(-,-) \equiv 0$; e.g. the category of abelian groups), then any bounded $X \in D(\A)$ is isomorphic to $H(X)$ in $\A$ (see [1][2]). (The converse seems to be true as well, according to [1].) Therefore, homology is a complete invariant in this case.
Question
How about if $\A$ is abelian but non-hereditary (say those with $\operatorname{Ext}_{\A}^{3}(-,-) \equiv 0$ and so on)?
- What are some examples of a pair of non-isomorphic objects that have graded-isomorphic homologies?
- Are there other (complete) invariants?
Remark
I asked a similar but perhaps harder question "Invariants of objects in $\operatorname{Ch}(\mathrm{Ab})$ up to chain homotopy" on MathOverflow before localizing at the quasi-isomorphisms. Turned out that may be too hard, so I try my luck here.
$that ends the command definitions on the same line as the beginning of the body. I have edited accordingly (also on MO). – LSpice Nov 28 '22 at 23:14