I was under the impression that junctions were just around for legacy reasons and symbolic links were altogether better (things appear this way at face value). Turns out, that's not entirely true. There are some good reasons to use a junction instead of a symbolic link. The major difference comes down to security and remote vs. local paths. Yes, remote targeting makes symbolic links more functional, but also raises their security profile. So, if you want a local link and can live with an absolute path, you're probably better off with a junction; otherwise, consider a symbolic link for its added abilities.
**The statement of difference in speed/complexity comes from an unverified statement in the Wikipedia entry on NTFS reparse points (a good read).*
Other NTFS Link Comparisons
Here are some other comparisons on the topic, but these can be misleading when considering junctions because they don't list the benefits I list above.
Taken from here (a good introductory read)
From SS64 page on MKLink
Comments about Terminology
Junctions are Symbolic Links
Junctions and Symbolic links are really doing the same thing in the same way (reparse points), aside from the aforementioned differences in how they're processed. In fact, technically, a Junction is a symbolic link, and sometimes documentation might call a Junction a symbolic link, as is the case here. So, that's just something to be aware of regarding terminology.
Even though the OP specifies this, it's worth pointing out that "symbolic link" is a very general term that is not specific to NTFS. So, to be specific, this comparison is about NTFS Junctions vs. NTFS Symbolic Links.