The two hypothesis have the same exact amount of validity and come from the same kind of unscientific thinking. It's not surprising they could be compatible.
Both are totally made up, plausible, unfalsifiable neat ideas. We have no reason to believe these things might be true, but we also can't prove they're false. Science isn't happening here.
Sure, you can speculate it. Nobody ever complained about speculating creationism either. It's a good thing to do. It's a fun thing to do! Each is a great basis for many great stories. But, yeah, it irritates me when they use the word "theory." That word means something, and these things aren't theories.
And it's a little infuriating when some dickhead says "n% likely" as though this isn't a totally arbitrary shit-dripping number pulled from his reeking ass. That's where they crossed from "neat idea" or maybe "illiterate person who doesn't know what a theory is" to being dishonest sacks of shit. They are lying (not merely speculating) when they assign a probability. Anyone who tells this lie knows he can't show his work. That's not merely an error or mistake, unless you wanna call it an ethical error.