I'm gonna play the devil's advocate here and say that you're wrong. In general, there's a massive difference between MGTOW and feminists that is very much overlooked: the role of the state in regards to gender. The mindset of feminists seems to be something like this:
Premise 1: Men and women are equal
Premise 2: Men and women do not achieve equal results
Conclusion: There is some untouchable factor that discriminates against women (micro-aggressions, "the patriarchy" et cetera).
Solution: The state must be involved in dismantling "the patriarchy" (through the use of gender quota's, various female-only beneficial programs, the Duluth model et cetera).
The mindset of MGTOW and MRAs alike seems to be the mirror image of the feminist reasoning, as in its similar but at the same time the opposite.
Premise 1: Men and women are -formally- equal before the law
Premise 2: There are many laws, programs and policies that actively benefit women over men
Conclusion: The state is actively discriminatory against men
Solution: The state must be restrained, either by reducing actively misandrist elements (MRAs), rolling back state power altogether (libertarians) or by undermining the state through non-participation (MGTOW).
While there are exceptions, MGTOW are as a rule economically right wing and want to be left alone while feminists are as a rule economically left wing and think the state has the duty to make women equal to men at all costs. That, and MGTOW tends to be a lot more decentralized whereas feminists focus more on "activism". MRAs focus on activism as well but... well, 50 years of trying that has netted them exactly zero victories.
That's just my two cents. IMO it's a lot more complex than the blanket statement that feminists and MGTOW are the exact same.