Have had both single and twin as liveaboard/cruisers.
Both had engine failures such as split high pressure fuel lines, fuel issue (both quality and supply issues), alternator bracket failure/belt breakage. No major issues as I had all running again in hours or could have if I had spares (which I did) except for a carbide drill to modify fix the bracket.
Each of my 3 liveaboards/cruisers were different enough that each was a huge learning curve about systems and handling. Looking back over those 45 years, I would say that many of the failures were preventable or fixable with a pretty small, but specific set of tools.
Commercially, had but just a few engine problems that were the accessory variety rather than the base engine in many, MANY thousands of hours.
Botom line.... I don't know what my next one would be.... the biggest difference is with the internal concern about engine failure (even by attached systems) at the wrong time. That problem came from many years of excellent training.
Any pilots here probably have heard the old jokes about helo pilots being paranoid compared to fixed wing pilots. I thought my fears would subside when the USCG went to a 2 engine helo and was a more modern aircraft. In reality, for several reasons, that engine was kind enough to just barely able to fly you to the scene of the crash.
All in all, I get to use my favorite expression..... single/versus twin?
It depends. And when I say it depends...to me it depends on almost EVEY aspect of each boat, each skipper, the skill set aboard, the equipment/tools onboard, etc, etc.
Fortunately I will probably not buy another long distance cruiser, if I did, knowing enough makes the decision a very difficult one. The other common saying in boating besides "it depends" is
" every boat is a compromise".