If you can get hired when taking into account the risk of having 3 weeks of no work, then you should take the freelancing role. So look at the ratio of time yo

If you can get hired when taking into account the risk of having 3 weeks of no work, then you should take the freelancing role. So look at the ratio of time you spent without work so far, to the amount of work you have on the books now. Build in a bit of a "factor of safety" (I work on the basis that I can keep myself billable about 60% of the time, but you might choose less or more). If the rate your charging is sufficient that you can work only 60% of the time (or whatever you choose) and still make better money than your current job (or that the money isn't better but there is some other advantage like flexible living arrangements that may allow you a cost saving by being able to, for example, relocate to a cheaper location) then go for it. Just factor the risk into your hourly rate, and see if it works out. Of course your "risk assessment" may be completely inaccurate, which I guess is the real risk ;)