I've thought about it.
An absolutely ideal feudal system characterized by a benevolent, honest, fair, selfless, etc... lord ruling over his kingdom with the best interest of all his subjects in mind and demanding that all of his lords rule their fiefdoms similarly could certainly be better than a bad capitalist or socialist economy but the problem with feudalism is that you could, and very often did, wind up with a ruler and lords who ran the gamut from being outright despots and tyrants along a continuum heading toward the "ideal" but never really arriving there.
In the event that the government was abusive, corrupt, dishonest, selfish, etc... there was absolutely no recourse for the population to arrive somehow at a better leadership without resorting to armed rebellion and the deck was almost always stacked against the subjects along these lines.
Ultimately, feudalism is no better than any other form of totalitarian government and to try to run a feudal economy without a feudal government is pointless since the two are so inextricably intertwined.
Either democratic socialism or capitalism is better.