What makes more sense: a macro or micro career?

Hopefully I can word this clearly enough to make some sense. Very keen to hear your thoughts.

Imagine the following dichotomy:

Route 1 - a "macro"-focused career, looking across asset classes, industries, geographies, with economics as the background knowledge.

Route 2 - a "micro"-focused career, learning specific skills in valuing and assessing companies and single securities, with (corporate) finance as the background knowledge.

I don't make the distinction between buy/sell-side here because there's some connection with both. i.e. you can be an investment analyst at an equity fund, or a sell-side equity research analyst etc. Or you might be a strategist at a multi-asset fund, and a market strategist at a bank etc.

Which sphere do you think "makes more sense" as a career choice?

I'm not looking for a "do what you enjoy" kind of answer. I know this is a very broad question, but I'll let people answer in the way they interpret the question (as an extra point of interest).

Thanks!