Real, anonymous reports from people who interviewed for Quantitative Analyst at AKUNA CAPITAL, newest first and distilled into what to expect across the loop.
After a recruiter-style step, I got routed into an online assessment sequence that felt tightly scheduled. One part was tied to canditech and was harder, with multiple questions where the expectation was that I’d walk through my thinking and math as I went. The other part was supposed to be a Hackerrank take right after, but I never actually received access to it, even after I tried reaching out multiple times.
The first part of my run was an online assessment followed by a video interview, and then I moved into a technical round where things started to get more interactive. In the video step, I was asked math and probability questions and I had to explain how I was arriving at my solutions. It wasn’t just about giving an answer—it was about making my reasoning legible.
Candidates typically start with a series of online assessments, including coding challenges and math tests, which often have a tight time limit and require clear articulation of thought processes. The assessments are designed to filter candidates quickly based on their performance in probability, statistics, and coding skills.
The technical interviews focus heavily on probability and quantitative reasoning, with candidates expected to explain their thought processes in detail while solving problems. The difficulty ramps up throughout the interviews, often including complex, real-world scenarios that test both technical knowledge and reasoning under pressure.
Throughout the interview process, candidates are evaluated not only on their answers but also on their ability to articulate their reasoning clearly, especially during live coding and math interviews. This emphasis on communication is crucial, as many candidates noted that their ability to explain their thought processes impacted their evaluations significantly.
While the initial stages can feel high-pressure and somewhat impersonal, many candidates reported that the final rounds, especially in-person interviews, had a more supportive and friendly atmosphere. This shift can help candidates focus better and engage more effectively with interviewers.
Candidates frequently expressed frustration with the communication and follow-up after interviews, noting long waits for feedback or unclear outcomes. Many felt that the lack of timely communication detracted from an otherwise structured process, leaving them uncertain about their performance and next steps.
The overall difficulty of the interview process is described as high, with candidates facing rigorous assessments that require both depth of knowledge and quick thinking. Many noted that the evaluation criteria felt strict, and even small mistakes could lead to not advancing in the process.