Debates on gig work often treat flexibility and social protection as substitutes. This paper shows that gig workers value different forms of flexibility differently, and that preferences for flexibility and social protection can be complementary. Using discrete-choice experiments with digital freelancers in Malaysia, with standard workers as a benchmark, we examine preferences for work location and scheduling autonomy. Four findings emerge. First, gig workers strongly value spatial autonomy and are willing to pay to work-from-home. Second, preferences for scheduling flexibility are heterogeneous, with many, including freelancers, preferring fixed schedules. Third, willingness to pay for long-term protection in the form of retirement savings increases with both types of autonomy. Fourth, willingness to pay for unemployment insurance is linked only to work-location flexibility. Gig workers possibly associate remote work, but not flexible hours, with greater employment uncertainty, and therefore demand stronger protection against unemployment risks. Flexibility and protection can therefore act as complements rather than substitutes in the gig economy.