J'ai postulé via un recruteur. Le processus a pris 1 jour. J'ai passé un entretien chez Revolut (Londres, Angleterre) en févr. 2021
Entretien
I'm describing here my experience with the Live Coding Interview.
This is the first of their 6 steps process.
I was given to implement a service that does something relatively simple. Think simple business logic.
My approach was to gain all the clarifications at the beginning to make sure that what I implement I won't have to change too much.
After I completed the first requirement the second requirement required me to do quite a bit of refactor and also introduced a new concept that wasn't given any requirement. Normally introducing a new concept requires also it's own set of business use cases.
Anyway, the third requirement in the same manner and I got a bit confused with the refactoring but my interviewee help me not to go off track with solving the problems that come with refactoring, such as refactoring the previous tests.
Another tiny bit was maybe understanding the person because of the specific foreign English accent.
At then end I could ask him questions and he did his best to reply to them.
All in all a great experience but maybe unnecessary when you want to hire a Senior Engineer.
Questions d'entretien [2]
Question 1
I see you have this method here, is there a way that we can eliminate it?
The experience was similar to what has already been described by others. I passed the first two stages but did not pass the system design interview.
My first attempt was definitely on me — I was not prepared well enough. I took the feedback seriously, prepared much better for the second attempt, and expected a more balanced evaluation. However, the second system design interview felt frustrating because the interviewer repeatedly guided the discussion toward minor or less important parts of the design, which consumed a significant amount of time and prevented me from properly covering the core architecture and trade-offs.
Overall, the process was useful, but the system design stage felt inconsistent and highly dependent on the interviewer’s style.
Questions d'entretien [1]
Question 1
Live coding:
Implement a load balancer.
Implement an account ledger.
SD:
apartment booking system
card delivery system
J'ai postulé via un recruteur. J'ai passé un entretien chez Revolut
Entretien
The experience was disappointing and reflected a lack of professionalism.
The interaction gave the impression of a disorganised or potentially unhealthy work culture.
Answered most of the questions accurately and to the best of my ability.
The interview was initially scheduled for a short time slot. Toward the end, the interviewer asked for my availability and indicated that they would schedule a follow-up session to continue the discussion. However, no further communication or follow-up was received.
J'ai postulé en ligne. Le processus a pris 5 jours. J'ai passé un entretien chez Revolut en mai 2026
Entretien
During the initial HR screening call, the recruiter explicitly stated that Revolut was not hiring for a specific team and that team fit would be determined only after the coding and system design stages.
However, after passing the screening, I received the following rejection message: “After carefully reviewing your experience, we've decided to move forward with candidates whose profiles more closely align with the specific requirements of the role. Please note that this decision is based on current team needs.”
This creates a clear inconsistency in the communication. If team allocation and specific requirements were to be evaluated only in later technical rounds, a rejection citing “current team needs” right after screening appears contradictory. Such practices can lead to candidates investing time in the interview process based on incomplete or misleading information at the early stage.