I don't see what equivalent bokeh has to do with it, but I will say this again.
M43 50mm f/1.2 has shallower DOF at the same distance as FF 50mm f/1.2. Please see my previous calculations. Does that mean it has more blur?
When the photo is taken at twice the distance with M43 the DOF is exactly the same. Is the blur the same?
So that is what the calculator says about DOF.
No, no, no, no, no.
The point of photography is to actually take actual photographs, so it is only what happens in the final print/image that matters.
To compare, you have to compare apples to apples. Same camera to subject distance, same effective focal length, same pixel count, same print (or screen image) size. Even same viewing distance. Otherwise you are taking _different_ photographs, and the comparison is meaningless.
E.g. 35mm on APS-C to 50mm on FF
E.g. 50mm on APS-C to 85mm on FF.
At that point, you are taking (essentially) the same photo.
At which time there are _two_ differences (at the same f stop): the amount of light hitting each pixel and the DoF/bokeh. To match those, you have to open up the APS-C lens one whole stop.
At which point (other than lens resolution performance and availability of one-stop faster lenses) you get exactly the same photo. (Or would if the multiplier were 1.4 instead of 1.6. But for all practical purposes that difference is small.)
This is why a 35/1.4 on APS-C is equivalent to a 50/2.0 lens on FF. It really is. In every photographically significant way.
(APS-C cameras use a different definition of ISO: one with twice the noise of FF cameras (i.e. one-half the dynamic range: smaller pixel = smaller well depth.).)
In real life, the one f-stop loss of sensor sensitivity/bokeh isn't much of a big deal, and APS-C is a lot of fun. And you have to work really hard to get much advantage from FF.