Most folks here already know this, but I'm sure there are a few who don't. ID-11 and D-76 are for all practical purposes, identical twins. They behave exactly the same in use and can be used interchangeably. I use D-76 regularly, but used ID-11 when it was a better value than D-76 in the US market. That's no longer the case, so I stick to D-76.
A dilution ratio of 1+3 with ID-11 or D-76 is do-able, but tricky. XTOL at that dilution can be a little bit of a challenge too. Either will give with very long development times, and there is a risk of early exhaustion of the developer. I've pretty much given up on using either developer at that dilution ratio, with the exception of using D-76 1+3 for PanF+ for which it works very well.
I've processed a good amount of Delta 100 in rollfilm formats using both D-76 and XTOL and the results are remarkably similar. If I had to give one the edge over the other, XTOL would get the nod. The differences are subtle and not likely to be very noticeable unless one were to compare two negatives where all conditions except the developer are identical.
If you do decide to go with the 1+3 dilution, be sure that you use enough developer. Kodak recommends a minimum of 100 ml. of stock solution for each 80 sq. in. of film. Six 4x5 sheets equals 120 square inches, so you are looking at a minimum requirement of 150 ml. of developer. I'm usually in agreement with Kodak's assessments, but not on this one. Too often I would get really thin, low contrast negatives using that recommendation in a high dilution ratio working solution. Interestingly though, that same minimum works a lot better in a more concentrated working solution. Increasing the minimum requirement by 50% solved the problem most of the time, but not always, and I haven't bothered to analyze the reasons why. Either my development times were too short, or the developer exhausted early. I don't know which. When I stopped using the 1+3 dilution, and started using a little more stock solution, the problem went away. That's good enough for me.
Bottom line is that I don't think it's a really good idea to use either developer at that dilution. I've been much happier using either at 1+1 for almost all the films I run. Most of my negatives produced this way print well using #2 to #2 1/2 contrast filters, so "tonality" must be pretty good. I don't often need to do very extensive dodging and burning unless the scene brightness ratio was exceptionally bad when I made the exposure. Can't complain about sharpness either. Grain, when you can see it, is well defined and not mushy looking.
Compared to the cost of film, the developer cost is chump change. Don't be penny wise and pound foolish here.
