There are a few major flaws in this measure. The first and most obvious is it doesn't take into account income. Clinton, for example, had a massive amount of tax revenue to play with so he could have spent more and still have increased the debt less.

The second issue is it doesn't take congress into account. Particularly the House whose Constitutional jobs is to control the purse strings. By that measure George W. Bush and Barack Obama come off quite a bit worse since both had clear majorities (I know that wasn't the case for any President since Reagan but my knowledge of congressional majorities is non-existent before that)

Finally there's the spill over effect. Reagan and Obama both walked into pretty big messes and the government always spends more in a financial downturn than it does in an upturn.