While I understand your point, I agree with
@Ertyqway that the FPB is the gold standard for ocean crossing powerboats. Yes, they are a tiny fraction of the market compared to Nordhavn. But you might be surprised to learn a large percentage of transocean treks by Nordhavns have additional fuel in a bladder. Using the yardstick TwistedTree laid out, the Nordhavn is capable but not optimized. Dashew optimized the FPB for transocean passages to comfortably compete with cruising sailing yachts. The speed and distances FPBs have covered are remarkable to say the least. The relative comfort in >Force 7 conditions cannot be ignored.
Money aside, if I wanted a boat capable of circumnavigating at pace, no question an FPB would be my top choice. If my circumnavigation were a typical multi-year affair with stops along the way (some lengthy while I return home), a Nordhavn (or similar) would be my choice.
Returning to the OP, the FPB is not only fast and incredibly long range, but it's very fine bow allows comfortable running in very difficult conditions - it pierces waves vs rides over them (Santa Cruz yacht designer Bill Lee's "Merlin" was infamous for speed and wet ride - Lee coined the term "fast is fun"). How would a multi-hull compare? What problem is being solved?
Peter