I'm beginning to think that the term "recoil" in the polymer autoloaders needs to be replaced with another term, but I don't know what exactly?
A revolver is more directly a recoil to hand affair, moderated by the weight of gun, the power of the loading, the size/shape of the grips and the grips relationship to the bore's centerline.
In autoloaders (especially the polymers) a lot of that changes. All kinds of things now affect it. All the one's mentioned above, along with weight of slide vs. weight of frame vs. speed of slide, etc.. I've never found "recoil" in any autoloader to be as unpleasant as that of a revolver weight to weight, power to power? Lot's of it due to some energy being used up operating the action? Back to your original question though. I find the polymer guns "waspier" than their all steel counterparts. In that the upper half of the gun when fired has much more inertia than the frames have "mass". So they whip a bit more when fired, especially as they begin to get even lighter as they empty.
Though a shooter for 45 years of 1911' pattern pistols, I bought my first ever polymer and my first ever 9X19 in the same gun M&P9c. On my way too the purchase, I shot every hi-cap piece of Tupperware in the rental cases in 9X19, 40S&W and .45ACP. I found that none of the 3 even in compacts are "kickers", but more accurately described as "shovers". With weight for weight the .40S&W doing the "shoving" at a slightly higher speed. What all had in common was a preference for a firmer grip as the caliber it's chambered for rises, and the gun lightens as it empties.