Unlike The Crown, which is faithful enough to bear watching, I gave up on Victoria for its painful inaccuracies. I felt much the same about Victoria as Professor Aldrete feels about HBO's Rome: good in some places but the writers really felt they had to add scandal? To Ancient Rome at the end of the Republic? To the British monarchy? Seriously?
However, Victoria, like the other productions, uses the well-known historical relationships, including, specifically, the relationship between Victoria and Lord Melbourne (prime minister at the time of Victoria's accession); Victoria and her husband, Prince Albert. All productions present events and characterizations that correspond to what historians know about those relationships.
The stunningly handsome, charismatic, and gently wry Rufus Sewell plays Melbourne in Victoria, and he plays him as a contender for Victoria's heart, only he is too upstanding to go down that path. The relationship is plausible. Melbourne's usurpation by Albert is also plausible.
Albert, played by Tom Hughes, is played as very moody. His youth (he and Victoria were incredibly young, being both 20!), his good looks, and his sex appeal overwhelm Victoria, which reaction is, in in truth, quite accurate.
In The Young Victoria, Paul Bettany plays Melbourne as clever with an eye for the long game, exactly like a politician. Victoria does rely on him, and they flirt, but Albert, Rupert Friend, has already captured her heart. The movie plays up the developing relationship through letters between Victoria and Albert when they are apart. Melbourne is a distraction, not a rival, since Victoria and Albert are very much in love.
From a romance point of view, this last series may disappoint since Albert is presented as not being entirely sure whether he loves Victoria when he marries her. He does his duty. But he isn't sure what he feels about her. 
Whether or not the inner workings of the Prince Consort's heart can ever be entirely known, I consider Jonathan Firth's Albert the most accurate in terms of his behavior and attitudes. Albert wasn't broody; he was smart, well-organized, and, uh, proper--far more proper than Queen Victoria was when she became queen. She was the product of Regency England. He had witnessed aristocratic shenanigans growing up and found them all rather appalling and tacky.
He was, in essence, a middleclass guy, the guy who organized the queen's staff, held a Great Exhibition of scientific advances, and expected people at the palace to behave themselves.
Victoria was arguably lucky in her first prime minister and her husband. Melbourne took her side on a number of court issues, including her decisions regarding the detestable Conroy. And some scholars think that Prince Albert saved the British monarchy, much the same way that Elizabeth II and Kate Middleton have saved it in the twenty-first century. See, the royal family isn't just a bunch of freeloading reprobates!
Put all three Melbournes together as well as all three Alberts and one achieves a fairly accurate portrait of both men!
