I lack personal experience with the current Sora. My understanding is that the current Tiagra (4700) way outperforms its pricepoint, but it is two steps above Sora.
In general, borrowing the economics concept, we would expect diminishing marginal returns to any input including cost. We can clearly see this in Ultegra vs Dura Ace, 105 vs Ultegra, or the equivalents: the cost is significantly more, but the performance is essentially identical but for half a pound of weight. Conversely, at the lower price points, we would expect that at some point, saving money can cut performance unacceptably.
In the last group test that Cyclingtips did before their parent company folded them into Velo, the reviewers observed that some mechanical disc brake bikes were good, but some had unsafe braking performance. Economizing on cables and housing is one of the things that product managers might do to hit a price point. And we would expect Claris bikes to have cheaper housing and cables than 105 or Ultegra bikes. Thus, I would expect Claris to get out of tune faster than Ultegra, but most of the difference might be explained by poorer cables and housing.
To make cheaper groupsets, you definitely see Shimano economizing on material quality and construction methods, e.g. plastic vs ceramic disc brake pistons, bushings vs bearings for pulley wheels, heavier aluminum alloys in the lower groups, cheaper construction methods overall (e.g. Ultegra and DA now the the Hyperglide+ shift ramps, but 105 omits these due to the manufacturing costs, leaving it with 'just' Hyperglide shifting quality). Tolerances are another area where you might see manufacturers economize. To some extent, material quality might be correlated with tolerances (e.g. it might be harder to hit tight tolerances on lower grade steel or plastic).
For Claris to be more prone to getting out of tune than Ultegra, the materials would need to be weaker in such a way that they might degrade over time, and the tolerances would need to be poor enough to impact the shifting. I would guess that Shimano hits tolerances closely enough, even on Claris. Same with material quality. So, if the durability of Claris falls short of Ultegra, it probably still has sufficient durability to accommodate the sort of riders who might use Claris - new cyclists who buy a bike, then get serious, then upgrade, or occasional cyclists.
And it's worth noting that some of the higher-performance groups may be less durable in some respects. The crankset delamination fiasco was hopefully an outlier, but we can say that if you make things lighter and lighter, you raise the risk of the component failing in general use or of systematic manufacturing flaws. The polymer coated cables found on Ultegra and DA can flake and jam up the housing - I did have a set of Ultegra cables last 3 years, but not everyone gets that experience. The titanium cogs in DA are a clear example, and they wear out fast.
The bottom line is that I think that materials and manufacturing tolerances account for the bulk of the performance and durability difference between Sora and Ultegra as groupsets. Considering them as installed parts of the bike, product spec decisions will make some difference as well, although they can be addressed (although if the bike has through-headset cable routing, that can be expensive).