If you know HF is your end goal, is IB + PE actually worth it?

I’ve seen a lot of discussions about the traditional IB → PE → HF path, but what if you already know you want to end up in public-markets investing and have the opportunity to intern through an academy at a top MMHF (Point72, D.E. Shaw, BAM, etc.)?

Would you still choose IB → PE, or go directly to the HF?

One argument for IB → PE is that you develop deeper industry knowledge, but how valuable is that for HF? In PE, you're learning to underwrite businesses and conduct diligence, whereas an HF analyst is focused on public companies, catalysts, earnings, valuation, market expectations, etc. If the end goal is HF, is PE actually giving you a more valuable form of industry expertise than you would get by going directly into public markets?

At the same time, the direct HF route obviously comes with more risk. At an MMHF, your career can be much more performance-driven, so if you underperform, your PM gets cut, or your pod shuts down, it potentially leavs you without a seat very early in your career. IB to PE provides much more career stability and optionality.

So for someone who is very confident HF is the end goal and has a legitimate opportunity at a top MMHF, would you take the direct route despite the risk, or still do IB to PE first?

How much should you value the additional industry experience and career optionality of IB to PE versus getting four years of directly relevant public-markets experience?