From what I have seen (aside from the monetary argument) is the trade offs are stability vs freedom. At a larger, more established company you can benefit from

From what I have seen (aside from the monetary argument) is the trade offs are stability vs freedom. At a larger, more established company you can benefit from the knowledge that they won't be going under any given year. They will also most likely have most of their systems dialed in already, ie: build system, performance reviews, etc. This can be beneficial for a person who is just starting in their career or somebody who doesn't thrive in an uncertain environment. Start ups tend to have a lot more flux in all things. When there is no established review cycle you are required to advocate for your own merit increases. Additionally you may be required to hack things together, or take on many roles in order get your product to succeed. The trade off is that if you are knowledgable/confident then you won't have existing mistakes from previous generations and you can help forge the path of the company. In a smaller company your voice is much louder (yes this is good and bad). Finally from a finance perspective, you don't end up on top if your company goes out of business or never IPO's. You're investing in the startup with hopes of seeing a payout.