Hey Street...
An old school thought is that a solvent borne is a better product than a water-borne - and once upon a time that was absolutely true. Not so much today though...to begin with, most (many) of today's water borne (WB) epoxies are actually true epoxies - not the acrylic modified, epoxy esters versions of old. They are much more durable than earlier versions (circa 1980's & 90's)...and there is very little difference from a performance perspective between solvent and wb. Typically, if additional durability is experienced with a solvent borne, it's more likely due to a heavier film build (in fewer apps) than what you'd typically experience with a WB. So, if that's the only advantage, take a look at the advantages a WB offers: (1) Soap and water clean-up (2) faster dry than solvent (3) no strong solvent smell (4) no fire hazard (5) little chance of reaction to existing coatings as compared to hot-solvent/solvent borne products, and (6) usually no induction time once mixing A & B, and (7) most (many) WB epoxies have better resistance to chalk and fading than do solvent borne counter-parts*.
* (7) is not actually a true statement. WB epoxies are often (not always) a poly-amine cure epoxy compared to solvent bornes which are often (not always) a poly-amide cure. Poly-amine cure typically weathers better than poly-amide even though neither is necessarily recommended for exterior use (where chalking may be a problem).
From an application perspective, it's probably slightly cheaper on a cost per square foot basis to go with solvent borne...but the ease of application advantage goes to the WB - a little "stickier" than conventional water-borne products, but rolls easily and flows beautifully.
Hope that info helps.