Personally I’d rather have the second engine than the chute
On pure theoreticals, I agree. You can't replace the added benefit of a second engine. BUT, when you factor these items below, and everything else in.. it pushes the scales to chute, or accepting the risk of a single engine
-need multi engine training
-need to maintain multi engine currency AND proficiency so you don't spiral dive and kill yourself when it actually comes time to USE that second engine
-double the oil
-double the maintenance
-double the fuel burn
-double the potential headaches of engine issues
-double the risk of a power failure
-very weak, and in some cases basically useless, single engine performance. The DA62 is very respectable on one engine.. many planes though are literally just going to keep you in the air a little longer until you crash.. an 8,000 foot single engine ceiling is going to be useless in many parts of the country, especially on hot days
If lack of engine reliability is what justifies the chute, why have it on the jet?
You still only have one engine, and jets do fail. It's not just that though.. the chute also works for
-grandpa has a stroke, so someone else pulls it
-loss of control/disorientation
-overcome with ice
-you're an idiot and can't avoid a stall, or worse, spinning it (and yes, it can recover from a spin, but if you're a bad enough pilot to get into a spin you probably aren't recovering either, so just pull the damn thing)
-mid air collisions (which is, actually, WHY, it was designed)
-etc