To say that some people are more trans than others is cruisin' for a bruisin', so I'm sticking my neck out here.
The transgender umbrella includes a wide range of individuals who, in one way or another, are gender nonconforming vis-a-vis their birth assigned gender. The most recent study by the Williams Institute put the number of adults who self-identify as 'transgender' at 1.4 million, but we get no insight into what being transgender means to these people.
But another study by Benjamin Harris of the U.S. Census Bureau analyzed 2010 Census data against the US Social Security Administration database and found that only about 90,000 individuals have transitioned as far as changing their gender code and/or gendered name, important steps for transsexual men and women who sooner or later transition. Granted not all transsexual men and women change their official government documentation, but even doubling that number would indicate that a minority of trans-identifying people transition to live as the opposite sex.
That tells me that the vast majority of transgender individuals are not experiencing gender dysphoria at a level that leads to full gender transition. Why would anyone transition if there was another less debilitating, disruptive, stigmatizing, and difficult option? I do believe that as transgender people become more accepted within society, when the costs to transition, both personal and financial, lessen, more and more will chose to take the jump. But, to assume that all transgender people are cut from the same cloth, so to speak, as regards the source and strength of their transgender identity, doesn't make sense in my experience.
Does that mean that some transgender people are more trans than others based on their level of GD? Sounds like a case of comparing apples to oranges because both are labelled fruit.