I've done some reading around this topic. I'm not a scientist or a qualified medical professional, my reading of various resources on this topic could be wrong, but there appear to be three main schools of thought:
1) All LDL is bad and must be lowered. This school of thought generally ignores all other cholesterol related numbers, e.g. HDL, triglycerides, and any ratios. I'd note that from what I've seen, targets for LDL in this school of thought appear to only be achievable with statins in my opinion, even for "normal" healthy people living on a low cholesterol diet.
2) LDL has subtypes - LDL-C and LDL-P. Providing LDL-P is low, risk of cardiovascular complications are low. This school of thought generally says that triglycerides must be low for LDL to not be a higher risk factor. I've also seen various opinions on "fluffiness" and "LDL particle size" from this school of thought, but I must confess, I don't really understand much of the detail on these points. Worth noting that some countries, e.g. the UK, don't offer this level of cholesterol testing as standard. It may be available privately in these countries, I don't know.
3) No idea which is correct. This school of thought is where I am. I'm not anywhere near qualified enough to know whether the experts on either side of the argument are correct, but I do have enough statistical and scientific education to know all of them seem to rely on flawed interpretation of data in places to suit their agendas. The opposing experts can't all be correct, but I can't determine who is right or wrong, or if as is possible, they're both wrong and the answer is somewhere in-between. All I do know is that every health marker I can track myself is improving on low carb, including my BG and BP. My triglycerides halved in 3 weeks on this diet. My next round of blood tests is at the beginning of November, so I guess that's when I find out which stats are winning out on low carb, or losing.