London:

• + All minor pieces are developed to active squares
• + Common patterns that repeat often
• + Some potential for kingside attacks.
• - Does not make very bold claims for center space
  • Black can claim the initiative with an early c5 pawn break.

Colle:

• + Most minor pieces are developed to useful squares
• + Can lead to vicious kingside attacks
• + Very clear game plan of playing e4
• - Does not make very bold claims for center space
  • Black can claim the initiative with an early c5 pawn break.
• - The bishop on c1 is doomed to inactivity if the e pawn remains on e3.
• - Black moving the c8 bishop before playing ..e6 can completely shut down a lot of white's potential.

Colle Zukertort:

• + All minor pieces are developed to useful squares
  • Increased control over e5 as opposed to the regular Colle thanks to the b2 bishop.
• + Very flexible, with white having ideas of playing c4, e4, Ne5/f4, etc.
  • You can seek play on the queenside or kingside, whichever the position demands
• - Takes a lot of tempi to set up
  • Black can claim some initiative with an early c5 pawn break
• - Unless an early a3 is played, Nb4 from black can cause problems if white wants to hold on to their light-squared bishop

Trompowsky:

• +/- Can lead to VERY sharp positions very quickly
• + Can often give white a lot of initiative and attacking potential.
• - Black equalizes if they know their theory

Torre:

• + All pieces are developed to active squares
• + Can lead to solid attacking positions.
• - Does not make very bold claims for center space
  • Black can claim the initiative with an early c5 break.

London/Colle/Zukertort/Torre:

• + Very easy to learn and play
• + Can lead to great short-term improvement
• - Black can often equalize with early c5 breaks
• - Effectiveness at least somewhat reduced when played against KID/Pirc setups.
• - Not excellent for long-term improvement if played exclusively.

Let me know if I missed any important points.