They’re honestly not quite miscible. I know that, when .NET came out, everyone responded with “haha they copied Java,” but the truth is that they make a pile of very different technical trade-offs. The CLR has explicit stack allocation, the JVM does not. The JVM is genuinely a JIT, the CLR is really all about AOT. The CLR has full support for low-level code (pointers and such), while the JVM does not. The JVM and its class library has been cross-platform from day one, the CLR in a meaningful sense has not. The CLR has a really simple FFI, the JVM traditionally has not. The CLR has reified generics, the JVM does not. The JVM has a much more advanced GC, the CLR’s use of value types and things like Span<> means that such an advanced GC is (at least arguably) not necessary, and so on.

I really love the CLR, and I think it’s just as much “alien technology” as the JVM. I suspect the lack of love for it likely has more to do with the official versions being Windows-only than anything else. But I think it’s also just true that, while they both fill the same niche in a grand way (they’re both high-level VMs), their details are sufficiently different that a direct comparison doesn’t honestly make a ton of sense.