On balance, subsequent antitrust/competition enforcement has roughly matched Chamath’s ranking: Meta/Facebook has faced the heaviest global antitrust pressure, Google substantial but slightly less, Apple somewhat below Google, and Amazon—while clearly targeted—has still seen comparatively lighter competition remedies and outcomes.

Meta / Facebook (predicted: highest risk)

• In December 2020 the FTC, joined by 46 states, sued Facebook (now Meta) for illegal monopolization of personal social networking, seeking structural relief including potential divestiture of Instagram and WhatsApp; the case is ongoing and went to trial in April 2025. (ftc.gov)
• The U.K. Competition and Markets Authority ordered Meta to unwind its completed acquisition of Giphy, forcing a full divestiture—widely noted as the first time a major regulator unwound a Big Tech deal. (cnbc.com)
• In 2024, the European Commission fined Meta about €797.7 million for abusing its dominance by tying Facebook Marketplace to Facebook and imposing unfair conditions on rivals, and ordered it to stop the behavior. (dw.com)
• In 2025, the EU fined Meta a further ~€200 million under the Digital Markets Act (DMA) for its “consent or pay” ad model, and national authorities in countries such as France and Italy opened additional competition probes into Meta’s advertising and WhatsApp/AI practices. (apnews.com)
  Assessment: Meta has clearly been a top target for structural antitrust remedies and very large competition fines—consistent with “highest risk.”

Google (predicted: second-highest risk)

• The DOJ and 11 states sued Google in October 2020 for maintaining monopolies in search and search advertising; in August 2024 a federal judge held that Google violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act. (justice.gov)
• A second DOJ case filed in 2023 targets Google’s ad-tech stack; in April 2025 the court ruled that Google formed an illegal monopoly in digital advertising and signaled that significant structural remedies (such as spinning off parts of the ad-tech business) may be required. (en.wikipedia.org)
• Google has also continued to face multi-state U.S. suits and long‑running EU antitrust enforcement with multi‑billion‑euro fines in prior years, reinforcing its status as a core focus of global competition policy. (ag.ny.gov)
  Assessment: Multiple, large-scale DOJ cases with adverse liability findings, layered on top of EU actions, place Google near the top of the enforcement‑risk spectrum, though Meta’s breakup‑style scrutiny arguably edges it out.

Apple (predicted: third‑highest risk)

• In March 2024 the DOJ and 16 state AGs filed a sweeping Section 2 case accusing Apple of monopolizing smartphone markets by restricting interoperability and foreclosing rival apps/services in the iPhone ecosystem; the complaint explicitly contemplates structural remedies. (justice.gov)
• In March 2024 the European Commission imposed Apple’s first major EU antitrust fine—about €1.84 billion—for anti‑steering rules that prevented music‑streaming apps (e.g. Spotify) from telling users about cheaper subscriptions outside the App Store. (dw.com)
• In April 2025 the EU fined Apple another ~€500 million under the DMA for restricting app distribution and steering, while India’s competition authority has an ongoing abuse‑of‑dominance investigation that Apple says could theoretically expose it to a very large turnover‑based fine. (apnews.com)
  Assessment: Apple has become a major enforcement target, but its big U.S. antitrust case and principal EU fine land later and in somewhat narrower product markets than Google’s long‑standing search/ad-tech dominance cases; its overall exposure appears substantial but plausibly below Google’s and Meta’s.

Amazon (predicted: lowest risk / “most inoculated”)

• In the EU, Amazon settled two antitrust investigations in December 2022—over use of marketplace sellers’ data and preferential treatment in the Buy Box—by offering commitments on ranking, access to Prime/Buy Box, and data use. The Commission accepted behavioral remedies; no fine was imposed, but non‑compliance could trigger penalties up to 10% of global turnover over the next 5–7 years. (techcrunch.com)
• In September 2023 the FTC and 17 states filed a landmark monopolization suit against Amazon, alleging it uses interlocking strategies to maintain monopoly power in the online “superstore” and marketplace services markets, and seeking a permanent injunction and structural relief. A judge allowed most claims to proceed; trial is scheduled for 2026–27. (ftc.gov)
• Separately, the FTC sued Amazon in 2023 over “dark patterns” in Prime sign‑up and cancellation. That case (a consumer‑protection/ROSCA enforcement, not classic antitrust) ended in a 2025 settlement where Amazon agreed to pay $2.5 billion (including a $1 billion civil penalty) and issue about $1.5 billion in customer refunds, plus interface changes. (ftc.gov)
  Assessment: Amazon clearly is under serious regulatory scrutiny, including a major U.S. monopolization case. However, compared with its peers by late 2025:
• It is the only one of the four that has not yet been found liable for an antitrust violation by a U.S. or EU authority (Meta has an EU antitrust judgment and U.K. divestiture order; Google has two adverse DOJ liability findings; Apple has multiple EU competition/DMA fines). (dw.com)
• Its EU matters were resolved via commitments rather than immediate billion‑euro fines, and the main U.S. antitrust case remains pending without a remedial order, whereas Meta, Google, and Apple are already subject to large penalties or structural obligations. (techcrunch.com)
• The largest dollar hit to date (the Prime settlement) arises from consumer‑protection law, not from competition‑law monopolization findings.

Overall judgment
While all four companies have faced aggressive enforcement since mid‑2020, the realized competition‑law outcomes support the relative ordering Chamath suggested:

• Meta/Facebook: breakup‑style FTC case + EU/UK structural remedies and massive fines → clearly top tier of antitrust risk.
• Google: two major DOJ cases with liability findings and potential structural break‑up of core ad/search businesses → very high risk, likely second only to Meta.
• Apple: one major DOJ case plus significant but more targeted EU competition/DMA fines → substantial but somewhat lower relative risk.
• Amazon: one U.S. monopolization case still pre‑judgment, EU cases resolved via commitments, and major but non‑antitrust consumer‑protection enforcement → material scrutiny but, so far, the least severe antitrust outcomes of the four.

Because Amazon has indeed faced comparatively lighter antitrust/competition sanctions and findings than Meta, Google, and Apple over the ensuing years, Chamath’s directional prediction—that Amazon would be the most “inoculated” and Facebook the most exposed, with Google then Apple in between—is broadly right.