All-In Podcast -- Rank the 4 Besties

How would you rank the 4 besties on the all-in pod in terms of 1) quality of analysis & genuine insight (not boilerplate) and 2) relative accuracy of that analysis / insights if we look back on it? 

I think I'd put Freidberg as #1 / Sacks as #2 / Chamath as #3 / Jason as #4. Maybe Chamath and Sacks are tied since they have a lot of blind spots (though they are also the ones with the most contrarian takes vs. Jason who says the most generic stuff). Friedberg is consistently good with his analysis 

14 Comments
 

I only just started watching them, but Friedberg seems level headed, prescient and a total cutie-patootie. Sacks seems blinded by his politics and Chamath has an asshole streak. Jason seems to me to be neutral.

That being said I have watched less than 10 hours of content, but looking forward to future shows

 
Most Helpful

Top 3 of the podcasts I follow and IMO one of the best tech/investing podcasts out there bar none, been listening to them since 2021.

Tie for first between Friedberg and Sacks - actual operators with amazing track records, level-headed, rationale to T, Friedberg is particularly insightful for big picture discussions/thinking about large scale political trends whereas Sacks leans a bit too hard into defending the current admin on some points IMO (understandable considering his position so don't fault him for it, but Friedberg just gives better objective analysis on those topics) 

Chamath - clearly very intelligent and wonderful insight into software/AI (could listen to him for hours on the nitty gritty of the operating side) but does tend to trend follow/hype some things up to unreasonable extremes (SPAC King after all), really enjoy when he takes the contrarian position and seeing how he lays out the opposite side of the argument before explaining how his counter makes more sense

Jason - the most humanitarian of the group which I appreciate, makes the podcast feel more approachable for non-technical folks despite being an amazing tech investor in his own right, like that he provides a counter-weight to Sacks but he does get unreasonably ideological over silly things at times, kind of whiny but I think he plays that up for the foil dynamic with Sacks, a much needed lightning rod for catching shade from the other 3 during certain debates, great closer on discussions

"If you don't have any enemies in life you have never stood up for anything" - Winston Churchill | "It's a testament to the sheer belligerence of the profession that people would rather argue about the 'risk-adjusted returns' of using inferior tooth cleaning methods." - kellycriterion
 

While Jason is #4 (by far) in terms of providing insights on the topics they discuss, but he is still IMHO the most important person on the show because it's way more digestible with him moderating.  He's good at managing the show and he's funny.  Without him it's just 3 smart and relatively annoying guys, which you can get on many podcasts.   Reason I like All-In is that its a smooth listen, which is a big credit to him.

For insights I'll rank Sacks #1, Chamath a close second and Friedberg #3.  Friedberg used to be #1 in the early years when he was the humble guy who always did his homework before raising his hand.  He had a very low opinion/knowledge ratio.  Then everyone told him how great he is, his opinion/knowledge ratio increased and now he's a guy who talks too much and has an annoying voice.  

 
  1. Friedberg: wholesome chungus science nerd
  2. Sacks: some decent stuff from him but spends way too much time and gets too many ideas from the X hivemind
  3. Scamath: terribly insecure huckster who talks nothing but his books and 'edgy' SV ideas from 3 years ago
  4. Jason: turbo lib moron who believes in nothing

Started listening when they started the show during COVID. My advice to young WSO'ers - turn off business podcasts for the most part. People are just trying to sell you something or are selling their brand. It's all bullshit.

 

I'm seeing a lot of hate for Jason ("turbo lib moron who believes in nothing", "whiny", and ranked 4th in almost every comment), but you have to admit he is almost guaranteed to have the most laugh out loud moments every podcast. Also, as much as he is very biased politically (as mentioned above), isn't it refreshing how he admits when his side is wrong? I feel like that is very rare in this hyper-political time we live in. 

There is more than one way to get there. I'd rather have 30 chapters than 3000 pages.
 

No you're right, but it's not "hate". I said I think he plays up the whiny liberal stuff because it triggers Sacks who's one of his best friends + the podcast NEEDS the foil since Sacks is obv right wing, Chamath is more right-leaning, and Friedberg presents himself as more politically neutral. He's a refreshing alternative voice with a great laugh & attitude + he moderates the rest of them so it doesn't devolve into technical gobbledygook and become unenjoyable for the laymen.  

"If you don't have any enemies in life you have never stood up for anything" - Winston Churchill | "It's a testament to the sheer belligerence of the profession that people would rather argue about the 'risk-adjusted returns' of using inferior tooth cleaning methods." - kellycriterion
 

He's gotten better at admitting he was wrong. That said, he always has the most generic possible takes (pretty much at the level of the average senior in high school which is disappointing to see in All-In)

He just gets really whiny too around stupid positions like around AI paying journalists. Yes Jason, let's go ahead and cripple our AI industry and let China win -- he has 0 response for this. He also doesn't recognize the MSM's biases

 

Rem est aut voluptates qui quam quos voluptatem. Laboriosam molestiae et voluptas id molestias in et. Inventore quo voluptatibus atque id beatae deserunt. Fugiat molestias dignissimos et cumque adipisci dolorem. Quaerat nulla est veritatis natus sed voluptatum.

Career Advancement Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.8%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.2%
  • Guggenheim Partners 01 97.7%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Morgan Stanley 01 98.8%
  • Evercore 01 98.2%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.6%
  • Banco Santander 01 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Evercore No 98.8%
  • Morgan Stanley 05 98.2%
  • JPMorgan No 97.7%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (14) $434
  • Associates (43) $259
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (22) $179
  • Intern/Summer Associate (13) $156
  • 1st Year Analyst (75) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (67) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
3
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
4
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
5
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
6
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
bolo up's picture
bolo up
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”