there are some generalities you can consider (they're not my recommendations, but only some points that you can think about):

All other things equal, taller sidewalls or higher aspect ratios (e.g., 70 vs 65) absorb and transmit less pothole impact to the suspension and passenger compartment. The tradeoff is reduced steering feedback, less precise steering, and lowered cornering forces -- possibly also less dry braking traction, although (again, all other things equal) wet braking and hydroplaning resistance is improved because the tire is narrower. Likewise, such a narrower tire is better in snow, especially in a snow tread.

Tires with more supple belts (aramid or Kevlar vs steel), and also those with a more diagonal alignment of accessory sidewall layers (although radials will have at least one sidewall layer that is truly radial) likewise transmit less impact -- however, because the walls and tread flex more (absorbing impact forces), the tire may be more vulnerable to impact damage of larger, or more sharp-edged, pothole rims because the fibers of the tread and sidewall bend more, and the sidewall layers may even separate (e.g., analogous to an arterial aneurysm, aortic dissection, etc.).

Finally, going to an H tire instead of a V, or W (or higher) may also soften your ride and you'll feel the impacts less, but again (as above) can reduce your car's handling and pothole damage resistance.

But the reason I wrote that these thoughts were not my personal recommendations is that your car is designed for a tire size of a certain configuration, and altering your tire size to accommodate pothole impacts may significantly reduce your car's handling, which I don't like. It's IMHO better to stick with Volvo's recommended size and bear the brunt of pothole impacts, and their costs. But it's a free country ...