No Guarantee....
I was interested to hear that, here in the UK, the Cirrus is not approved because it hasn't got demonstrated spin recovery. The one I was looking at was 'N' registered and this was given as the reason for that. The CAA don't accept the BRS as a substitute, it would seem.
From my point of view I would rather have two engines, assuming enough power easily to fly on one, over any other safety system.
You get into a lot of statistics with this one, of course, plus you need enough skill to control a twin in an asymmetric condition where with the Cirrus I suppose you would hope to simply actuate the BRS and float to earth.
There you would have the argument for 'active' versus 'passive' safety. Either you can actively avoid a forced landing with the twin or else you can passively avoid injury with the BRS.
It's sort of like driving a BMW or else a Land Cruiser. Either you hope to avoid a crash by deft driving or else you just plan to ride it out inside your safety cage.
It's pretty interesting to look at all these light aircraft after a long time away. The most attractive one I have seen is the Diamond DA-42 TwinStar. It seems to have a fairly high level of inherent safety (twin engines, redundant displays, StormScope, some kind of basic TCAS, known icing approval, etc,)with a lot of sophisticated modern systems in a small package, plus it burns Jet-A at about 10 gallons per hour. Of course I have no idea what it costs but it can't be cheap!