I keep hearing about people who are good at SNGS and they seem to just print money there. I heard SNGS are the way to go when you're starting out because you have less of your roll at risk for a greater reward if you're good, can multitable more effectively, and can get more rakeback.

Is there any truth to all this?

As far as I know, EV in S&G is smaller than in cash games BUT you'll find less variance. Is you have great loss aversion, it might be a good choice.

I'm pretty sure both of these are wrong.

Unlikely in the current climate. ROI at high or midstakes are <3% for all but a handfull of crushers. Low stakes are still decently soft but a pre rakeback ROI of >10% is still pretty tough, due to higher rake.
Whether there is less risk involved depends on your bankroll management strategy, but variance certainly isn't lower than cashgames.

Multitabling is just as easy/hard as in other forms of poker, in my experience. It's probably easier in early stages since decisions are mostly straightforward, in later stages playing too many tables could definitely cost you EV.
Rakeback is site dependent obv, but generally speaking grinding sng's generates more rake than mtt's and less than cash games.

I retired from grinding sng's about a year ago, so i'm likely to be somewhat outdated on this topic.

I think sit n gos are the way to go starting out because there is less difficult decisions than in cash games. Push fold strategy can be learnt and a lot of the hands at that stage are obvious folds or shoves so even a beginner can make a lot of correct decisions.
I think it is easier to multi table sit n gos for the same reason. You will encounter more variance playing sit n gos as your going to be getting it in pre with all sorts of hands. Its dependant on opponent but in cash your probably only getting it in pre with JJ+.

no

If you play 10NL, how often do you win or lose 5 buy-ins in 200 hands? Hardly ever, right?
If you play $10 tourneys (including SnGs), it happens on a daily basis.

SnGs have higher variance than cash, so you have to play lower stakes. e.g. a 10NL grinder might switch to $1 or 50c SnGs. In the end, both games should have a similar level of profitability. If one was clearly more profitable, all the clued-up players would switch to it. (A bit like how cash regs are gradually moving to MTTs as cashgames dry up).

Well learning proper push fold and grinding the low micro 180's is a decent idea if your roll is quite low and looking to build imo, then move onto/add some MTT's if that's your thing

I might switch to SnGs myself.

haha yeah I remember playing a Sng where like over the half the field was knocked out in like one orbit.

Ive only played up to the £10 buy ins [6max] on stars but even at that level there is often 2 or 3players at the table who are playing horribly and have clearly have no strategy whatsoever for sit n gos. The standard in the KOs is particularly poor.

can only imagine what SNGs were like back in the day. Probably like ****ing zynga, fold twice, and you're HU in a 9-man SNG.