Two offers, and I have to answer by Friday. Which one?

Option B is selected because, on the information given, it offers the stronger long-term expected career value. The biggest risks of joining an unknown early-stage company—team quality and lack of meaningful upside—are explicitly mitigated: building with two trusted people is one of the best predictors of early-stage success, and real equity provides genuine participation in upside rather than token exposure. Building from scratch with no process to hide behind means broad ownership, high accountability, and faster learning velocity, all of which compound career capital more quickly than a mature product with a narrow remit and a flat learning curve. Option A's higher salary and recognizable brand are real advantages, but they are more recoverable later; its narrow remit and flat learning curve create stagnation and differentiation risk. The framing also suggests genuine conviction lies with B. The main caveat is financial runway: startup equity can be worthless and the pay cut is a real cost, so if there are heavy financial obligations or an immediate need for stability, Option A would be rational. The objection to “no process to hide behind” is not decisive; in a startup context it conventionally means there is no bureaucratic cover, making impact and mistakes visible. Overall, absent signs of financial distress, B is the better bet for growth, agency, and upside.