What is the test for determining whether counsel acted in a tactical or tactical manner in opposing the prosecution's closing argument?

" 'Unless a defendant establishes the contrary, we shall presume that "counsel's performance fell within the wide range of professional competence and that counsel's actions and inactions can be explained as a matter of sound trial strategy." ' [Citations.] When the record on direct appeal sheds no light on why counsel failed to act in the manner challenged, defendant must show that there was ' " 'no conceivable tactical purpose' " for counsel's act or omission. [Citations.]' [Citation.] '[T]he decision facing counsel in the midst of trial over whether to object to comments made by the prosecutor in closing argument is a highly tactical one . . . .' [Citation.], and 'a mere failure to object to evidence or argument seldom establishes counsel's incompetence' [Citation]." (People v. Centeno (2014) 60 Cal.4th 659, 674-675.)