The most recent Hubble constant ( H _ { 0 } ) estimates from local methods ( z \ll 1 ) , H _ { 0 } = 73.8 \pm 2.4 km s ^ { -1 } Mpc ^ { -1 } , and the one from high redshifts H _ { 0 } = 67.3 \pm 1.2 km s ^ { -1 } Mpc ^ { -1 } , are discrepant at 2.4 \sigma confidence level .
Within this context , Lima & Cunha ( LC ) derived a new determination of H _ { 0 } using four cosmic probes at intermediate redshifts ( 0.1 < z < 1.8 ) based on the so-called flat \Lambda CDM model .
They obtained H _ { 0 } = 74.1 \pm 2.2 km s ^ { -1 } Mpc ^ { -1 } , in full agreement with local measurements .
In this Letter , we explore the robustness of the LC result searching for systematic errors and its dependence from the cosmological model used .
We find that the H _ { 0 } value from this joint analysis is very weakly dependent on the underlying cosmological model , but the morphology adopted to infer the distance to galaxy clusters changes the result sizeably , being the main source of systematic errors .
Therefore , a better understanding of the cluster morphology is paramount to transform this method into a powerful cross-check for H _ { 0 } .