This is actually a pretty interesting way to factor out the micro-volatility of the stablecoin side in stablecoin pairs. I can see an immediate benefit to quality, accuracy and smoothness of the price points 
@eboado 's points on synchronicity are critical though. With no guarantees on the order of the price feed updates (which are price driven), we could be momentously getting even bigger price divergence.
Maybe one interesting point to explore is whether the price feeds could be updated on demand upon a 1% divergence on the “composite” price feed. I don’t think this is a possibility in the current Chainlink architecture, but it shouldn’t be too hard to implement if the economics work (the benefit from updating the feed so as to reduce divergence needs to be greater than the gas cost incurred by the node operators).
I think I will try to further explore the possibilities of this construct in the Witnet price feeds. I’ll share here any advancements or findings.
P.s.: @pakim249 your code looks just right. Only the virtual modifier in latestAnswer() and decimals() seems somehow redundant to me because I wouldn’t expect this contract to be inherited.