Real, anonymous reports from people who interviewed for Software Engineer at Revolut, newest first and distilled into what to expect across the loop.
I started with what was framed as a technical screening invite, but the opening felt like I first had to figure out who I was actually speaking with and what they expected from me. The first technical prompts arrived via chat, and then the format shifted into a more verbal back-and-forth for later questions without any clear explanation. That inconsistency made it awkward to read what the interview was really measuring, and I found myself spending extra attention on the process itself rather than the technical content.
After the recruiter stage, my journey followed a classic sequence: live coding, then system design, plus a culture-fit style round. The coding itself wasn’t the hardest part; the real challenge was that the time limit completely changed how the task felt. I didn’t need to build something perfect, but I had to be deliberate about the engineering choices I made while moving quickly.
The interview process typically begins with a recruiter call, followed by a series of technical interviews including live coding, system design, and culture-fit discussions. Candidates noted a clear structure, but some experienced inconsistencies in communication and scheduling throughout the process.
Candidates faced live coding challenges that emphasized backend fundamentals, particularly around concurrency, data handling, and production-ready coding practices. The time pressure during these sessions was a common theme, requiring candidates to balance speed with correctness.
The system design interviews often focused on real-world applications, requiring candidates to articulate architecture and trade-offs clearly. However, candidates reported variability in the interviewers' expectations, leading to frustration over unclear priorities during discussions.
Behavioral interviews were mixed with technical scenarios, assessing both technical skills and cultural alignment. Candidates noted that these rounds shifted the focus from technical prowess to collaboration and fit within the team.
Feedback and communication throughout the process were inconsistent, with some candidates experiencing delays in updates or lack of clarity after interviews. This led to feelings of uncertainty and disappointment regarding the overall candidate experience.
Candidates appreciated when interviewers provided clear expectations and preparation materials, which helped them focus their study efforts. However, some felt that specific implementation styles were overly emphasized, leading to misalignment in expectations during technical assessments.