What is the test for substantive review of a sentence?

the range of permissible decisions." United States v. Matta, 777 F.3d 116, 124 (2d Cir. 2015) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also United States v. Villafuerte, 502 F.3d 204, 206 (2d Cir. 2007) ("Substantive reasonableness involves [assessing] the length of the sentence imposed in light of the factors enumerated under 18 U.S.C. 3553(a).").¹ "[O]ur substantive review of a sentence is akin to review under an 'abuse-of-discretion' standard." United States v. Park, 758 F.3d 193, 199 (2d Cir.2014). Thus, the reviewing court must "take into account the totality of the circumstances, giving due deference to the sentencing judge's exercise of discretion, and bearing in mind the institutional advantages of district courts," and we will "set aside a district court's substantive determination only in exceptional cases." United States v. Cavera, 550 F.3d 180, 189-190 (2d Cir. 2008) (internal quotation marks omitted). In "the overwhelming majority of cases, a Guidelines sentence will fall comfortably within the broad range of sentences that would be reasonable in the particular circumstances." United States v. Perez-Frias, 636 F.3d 39, 43 (2d Cir. 2011) (internal quotation marks omitted).