Aligning values isn't the same as matching personalities. What's important is that each appreciates the other's personality -- that they complement each other, not that the personalities are the same.

> Aligning values isn't the same as matching personalities

This depends on how you define "personality" and "values". Because for example, according to psychological research, personality traits (as defined by the Big 5 model of personality) are strongly correlated with things such as political beliefs (which could be argued is a subset of a person's values at least), and are largely stable over time. So it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to suggest that the more similar the personalities between a couple, the higher the probability of them also having a large set of overlapping "values", however you choose to define them.

"Attract" is not the same as compatible for long term relationships and especially marriage. Initial chemistry is important, but it fades after a honeymoon phase (which usually happens long before the real honeymoon.) There's also a lot of equivocation here on "opposites."

Not every point of disagreement is important: not every value has relevance to a family and not every value one holds is equally difficult to compromise. It's more important to agree on things like finances, children, moral/ethical standpoints, etc... than on politics, music, or hobbies and interests.

Agreeing on, let's say abortion or how to discipline children is not the same as an extrovert marrying an introvert. Some opposites can work together others (think religion) can not.

I think this is the big one. If you don't disagree on anything in a way that makes compromise turn into regret, then things will likely turn out alright.

That's a narrative popular in fiction, and not actually reflected in real life; I'm not going to bother to find the studies showing this, but essentially opposite poles don't attract and people tend to marry others who are much more similar to them than a random person.