Real, anonymous reports from people who interviewed for Software Engineer at LSEG (London Stock Exchange Group), newest first and distilled into what to expect across the loop.
After a recruiter touchpoint, I had two back-to-back rounds that mixed technical and techno-managerial discussion. The sessions were led by a senior manager or engineering manager, and they weren’t only focused on coding—they also asked some scenario-style questions and a handful of technical checks to see how I thought through real problems.
My process started with timed assessment activity and quickly turned into a multi-round sequence. I first joined an online AC that ran from late morning into the afternoon, built around a group round followed by a technical interview, and then a motivation-focused interview. Most of the questions were pretty standard, but it still felt highly competitive—everything I did seemed measured tightly against other candidates.
The interview process typically includes multiple rounds, starting with an online assessment followed by technical interviews and sometimes managerial discussions. Candidates noted variations in the number of rounds and the pacing, with some experiencing unexpected additional interviews that disrupted the timeline.
Interviews heavily emphasize technical skills, particularly in data structures, algorithms, and system design, often involving live coding tasks or discussions about problem-solving approaches. Candidates are expected to articulate their thought processes clearly while solving problems.
Candidates often face behavioral questions that assess motivation, past experiences, and cultural fit, alongside technical discussions. The interviews aim to gauge how candidates communicate their experiences and thought processes in a collaborative context.
There is a strong focus on practical application of knowledge rather than theoretical understanding, with interviewers looking for candidates to demonstrate how they would apply their skills in real-world scenarios. This includes discussions around previous projects and technical challenges faced.
The overall atmosphere is described as highly competitive, with candidates feeling closely evaluated against one another throughout the process. Some reported that the assessment stages felt like elimination rounds based on performance rather than simple screenings.
Several candidates expressed frustration with the lack of timely communication and feedback throughout the process, noting that delays and unclear timelines contributed to a negative experience. Many felt that better communication could have improved their overall impression of the process.