In know way do the following terms apply specifically and exclusively to one or the other. Instead they are terms where there is a bias in their prevalence.
Capitalism = driven by Merit
Socialism = Patronage, Nepotism, Partisanship, knavery.
Because a focus on equality minimizes merit. I believe this is self evident.
Without merit there is only partisanship, nepotism, patronage, and knavery to advance ones position.
Egalitarian revolutions degenerate into dictatorships because the most partisan and extreme elements gather power.
Merit, as it is widely dispersed in multiple fields of talent, by it’s very nature is an antidote to centralized power.
Hence capitalism, a merit based system, is more egalitarian at the root, fosters virtue, and delivers freedom and choice to those in the system.
A trademark of capitalism is class mobility. Socialism eliminates upward mobility as there are only a ruling class and a working class. perhaps you could include a management class between the working class and ruling class. But then how does a working person become a manager or a ruler?
Socialism promises , food, shelter, clothing and medicine with only two prices. First is your voice, second is your opportunity.
Socialism, which is susceptible to the knavery of men, is inherently intolerant and must minimize the person to survive.
Societies which place equality above merit will not serve the people well as all will suffer disproportionately.
In capitalism, the poor suffer less and the wealthy enjoy the most.
Who would choose a system that increases suffering and punishes the pursuit of happiness?