  In recent years, cosmological hydrodynamical simulations have proven their
utility as key interpretative tools in the study of galaxy formation and
evolution. In this work, we present a like-for-like comparison between the
baryon cycle in three publicly available, leading cosmological simulation
suites: EAGLE, IllustrisTNG, and SIMBA. While these simulations broadly agree
in terms of their predictions for the stellar mass content and star formation
rates of galaxies at $z\approx0$, they achieve this result for markedly
different reasons. In EAGLE and SIMBA, we demonstrate that at low halo masses
($M_{\rm 200c}\lesssim 10^{11.5}\, M_{\odot}$), stellar feedback (SF)-driven
outflows can reach far beyond the scale of the halo, extending up to $2-3\times
R_{\rm 200c}$. In contrast, in TNG, SF-driven outflows, while stronger at the
scale of the ISM, recycle within the CGM (within $R_{\rm 200c}$). We find that
AGN-driven outflows in SIMBA are notably potent, reaching several times $R_{\rm
200c}$ even at halo masses up to $M_{\rm 200c}\approx10^{13.5}\, M_{\odot}$. In
both TNG and EAGLE, AGN feedback can eject gas beyond $R_{\rm 200c}$ at this
mass scale, but seldom beyond $2-3\times R_{\rm 200c}$. We find that the scale
of feedback-driven outflows can be directly linked with the prevention of
cosmological inflow, as well as the total baryon fraction of haloes within
$R_{\rm 200c}$. This work lays the foundation to develop targeted observational
tests that can discriminate between feedback scenarios, and inform sub-grid
feedback models in the next generation of simulations.
