chess.com game report and CAPS (game "accuracy" and move annotations like "Innaccuracy" or "Brilliant") is commonly misunderstood. The chess.com definition for "Brilliant" has changed a lot over the years. It used to be very difficult to get the elusive Brilliant. You had to play a move which was BETTER than the "best move" and the engine would only see your move as better upon analyzing at a deeper depth! Needless to say, I probably had about half a dozen Brilliant moves over 1000+ games.
Then chess.com made Brilliant moves easier to get because people complained how hard they were to earn. They changed the criterion to be some solid sacrifice which also met other hidden elements. Recently chess.com changed the definition again and now ANY sacrifice which is sound is considered "Brilliant." It is visually nice to see that blue double exclaim annotation, but now they pass them out like packs of gum and they don't mean much now.
Watch this nice clip where chess.com caps Computer-Aggregated-Percentage-Score (accuracy) is interpreted a little bit for those misinformed.
Also like your current chess.com status about being a chess master xD
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/off-topic/do-you-want-to-be-a-master
I PLAYED 3 BRILLIANT MOVES AND MY RATING RANGE IS 1300-1400. IS THIS IS GOOD?