Pieter Levels vs Sahil Lavingia: Ship Fast and Alone or Start With a Community
Comparing Pieter Levels's solo, ship-fast approach to building profitable internet products with Sahil Lavingia's Minimalist Entrepreneur playbook: two bootstrapping philosophies, shaped by very different experiences.
Pieter Levels and Sahil Lavingia are both known for advocating small, profitable businesses over venture-funded growth. They arrive there from opposite directions: Levels, a solo maker who ships constantly, and Lavingia, the founder of a venture-backed company who now teaches a slower, community-first path. People compare them to choose how to start.
What is the core difference?
Levels treats products as experiments. A small version is built in days or weeks, released publicly, and kept if people pay. He works alone, builds with simple tools, and makes his progress visible. Speed is the main source of learning.
Lavingia treats the first customers as a conversation. He recommends starting with a community you already belong to, finding a problem people will pay to solve, doing the work manually, and building software only when the demand is proven. Care is the main source of learning.
One asks how quickly you can test. The other asks how well you know the people you are testing it with.
What does Levels do?
Pieter Levels, a Dutch developer, became known in 2014 for his challenge to launch twelve startups in twelve months. Nomad List, a site for remote workers choosing where to live, and Remote OK, a job board, became lasting businesses. He later launched AI products and shares revenue figures and process in public posts.
His MAKE: Bootstrapper's Handbook (2016) collects his advice. He prefers simple technology and a small, solo operation.
What does Lavingia do?
Sahil Lavingia founded Gumroad in 2011, a platform for creators to sell directly to their audiences. The company raised venture capital, struggled in the mid 2010s, and was restructured into a smaller business. He has written and spoken about those lessons.
The Minimalist Entrepreneur (2021) was written with Matt Warren. It describes a process of starting from a community, doing the work manually for early customers, building a minimum viable product, and growing profitably. He also invests in and advises small companies.
How do they compare?
| Dimension | Levels | Lavingia |
|---|---|---|
| Starting point | An idea shipped quickly | A community and a manual service |
| Team | Solo | Small; founder-led |
| Funding | No outside investors for main products | Venture-backed history; now argues for minimalism |
| Key works | MAKE: Bootstrapper's Handbook (2016); public posts | The Minimalist Entrepreneur (2021, with Matt Warren) |
| Validation | Launch and see who pays | Talk, serve by hand, then build |
| Pace | Fast, many experiments | Deliberate, profit-focused |
| Visibility | Very public building | Books, essays, and investing |
When does each one fit?
Levels's approach fits when you can build quickly, are comfortable shipping imperfect things in public, and want many small bets. It suits people with technical skill and a high tolerance for failed launches.
Lavingia's fits when you already belong to a community or have a deep understanding of a problem, and want a sturdy first customer before writing much code. It suits founders without time to make many bets.
Neither requires a particular technology, but each favors a particular temperament.
What does this look like in practice?
Someone with a full-time job wants to start a side business. A Levels-style plan sets a deadline of a few weeks to build and launch a basic version, posts about it in public, and judges the idea by whether anyone pays. If not, it moves to the next idea.
A Lavingia-style plan picks a community the person belongs to, interviews ten members about a recurring problem, offers to solve it by hand for a fee, and builds software only if several people pay. It takes longer to launch but starts with customers. The choice depends on skills, time, and risk tolerance.
"I want to start a side business in [area]. First, in Levels's spirit, describe the smallest version I could build and launch in two weeks, how I would announce it, and what result would tell me to continue or stop. Then, in Lavingia's spirit, describe the community I could start with, five questions to ask its members, and how I would serve the first customer by hand. Compare the two on time, risk, and what I would learn."
Why it works: comparing the two plans shows which fits your skills and constraints.
Can you use both together?
Yes. A founder can talk to a community before building, then ship a small version quickly and keep iterating. The two approaches meet at the point where a person pays for something real.
Be wary of survivor bias. Both men are visible because their efforts worked, and many people who tried similar approaches are not seen.
"Here is my plan for a small business: [paste]. List what would have to be true for it to reach [income goal], how likely each condition is, what a typical outcome for this kind of project looks like, and what I would do if it earns nothing after three months."
Why it works: asking about typical outcomes counters the pull of success stories.
For a related comparison, see Arvid Kahl vs Pieter Levels.
Where to go next
Pieter Levels and Sahil Lavingia both sit in the Bootstrapper category. For the originals, read The Minimalist Entrepreneur by Lavingia and Warren and MAKE: Bootstrapper's Handbook by Levels, and follow Levels's public posts. To keep a regular rhythm of review while you build, Founder Weekly Review is a $129 tool built for it.
Frequently asked questions
What is Pieter Levels known for?
Levels is a solo developer known for Nomad List and Remote OK, along with a 2014 challenge to launch twelve startups in twelve months, and for sharing his revenue and process publicly. He builds products himself with simple tools and no outside investors. His MAKE: Bootstrapper's Handbook (2016) describes his approach. Much of his story is told in his own posts, so it reflects his account.
What is The Minimalist Entrepreneur?
It is a 2021 book by Sahil Lavingia, founder of Gumroad, written with Matt Warren. It argues that entrepreneurs should start with a community they belong to, build by hand to test what people will pay for, and grow at a pace that keeps the business profitable and the founder in control. It draws on Lavingia's experience of raising venture capital and later rebuilding Gumroad.
How do they differ in how they validate ideas?
Levels typically builds something quickly and puts it in front of the public to see whether people pay, treating launches as cheap experiments. Lavingia advises beginning with a community, learning its problems, and finding a first customer by hand before building software at all. One validates by shipping, and the other validates by conversation first. Both aim to avoid long builds nobody wants.
Do they differ on venture capital?
Both are associated with bootstrapping. Levels has never taken outside funding for his main products. Lavingia raised venture capital for Gumroad, found it difficult, and now argues for a different path, so his case is partly a lesson learned from experience. Neither says that every founder should avoid investment, and each describes what worked in his own circumstances. Their methods come from different starting points, and each describes what worked for him.
Are their results typical?
No. Both are visible examples who are unusually productive, and reports of their successes reflect survivor bias. Many solo founders and community-first founders earn little or nothing. Treat their methods as options to test against your own skills, audience, and finances, and not as a promise of income. Many founders who launch quickly or start with a community still earn little, and the survivors are the ones whose stories get told.
Can AI help me use these approaches?
It can help list ideas to test quickly, draft questions for community research, and plan a small launch. It cannot judge demand. Use it to speed up preparation and then put the idea in front of real people who might pay. For example, ask it to list ten quick tests for an idea, or to turn community research notes into a first offer. Check its claims about either author against their own writing.
Written by Gareth Hoyle. Last updated 8 October 2026. Part of the authority.md guides library.
More guides.
Daron Acemoglu vs Ha-Joon Chang: Do Good Institutions Cause Growth, or Follow It?
Comparing Daron Acemoglu's institutions-first account of national prosperity in Why Nations Fail with Ha-Joon Chang's historical critique of the institutions literature: two views of development, with the main point of disagreement. General education.
Bill Ackman vs Carl Icahn: Two Styles of Activist Investing. Not Investment Advice
Comparing Bill Ackman's public, thesis-driven activism with Carl Icahn's decades of corporate pressure campaigns: how each approaches companies, boards, and the public. Not investment advice.
Adam Grant vs Simon Sinek: Evidence and Rethinking or Purpose and Why
Comparing Adam Grant's research-based work on giving, originality, and rethinking with Simon Sinek's purpose-driven Start With Why and Infinite Game: two popular voices on leadership, with different relationships to evidence.