I interviewed at JpMorgan Chase Nutmeg.The interview questions were easy but the process was very slow and took 2 months for 3 rounds. The screening round was very easy. Forgot the question but It was a simple one on parsing String and storing it in a map and doing some operation. The interviewer was polite. Then came the second round. It was a medium level question. An undirected graph was to be implemented and traversed. The addNode( String val) function would take a string value and add the node with that label. Similarly there was a function to add edges between nodes. However in this function apart from adding the edge we had to make sure that it is not creating any cycle. Then there was traverse() function which would traverse the graph and print the nodes. I could not write code for detecting cycles due to shortage of time but told the approach to detect cycle. Finished other functionalities. Then came the design round. The question was simple. Design a service to take user inputs(FirstName, LastName, email, Addresses) and perform CRUD operation in the backend.(Follow-up - extend this application to make another API call to an external service which would do a background check.) One of the interviewers was faking his accent and was asking follow-up questions on the design in a very condescending tone. One of the remarks passed by him was "Let's not worry about cost as we would be spending more money by talking about this(another ec2 instance) for another 10 mins" and I could hear both interviewers giggling. Well next time say the same thing to the higher management when a project budget is being discussed. When I tried to understand the scale of this application in the beginning he said let's not worry about those details. Again later when he asked me a follow-up question and wanted me to add another functionality to this application, I asked about the scale / number of requests per second. In his fake accent with a condescending tone he said "let's not worry about these unnecessary details". Scalability is not an unnecessary detail. Design decisions are made based on that. Design rounds are meant to be abstract. There is a high chance that the candidate's design won't be exactly same as you have in your mind. At least let him/her think and explain calmly instead of trying to show-off how smart you are. Instead of passing such remarks try to understand the solution and make your decision after the interview. It's completely OK to reject a candidate in an interview but we should have a sense of empathy because at the end of the day he/she is a a human under a lot of interview induced stress and is not in a comfort zone like you are. The least you can do is be kind. Overall it was a very bad experience getting interviewed at Nutmeg Chase.

A Nightmare Interview Experience - Feedback That Doesn't Even Match the Conversation I recently had the misfortune of interviewing with JP Morgan - Nutmeg for a Senior Associate role, going through 4 rounds - basic CS concepts, coding on HackerRank, system design, and a behavioral round. What made this experience truly stand out was the feedback they provided afterwards, which was completely unrelated to the actual interview discussions. The feedback mentioned topics that were never even brought up during the conversation, making it seem like they were describing a different interview altogether. This lack of attention to detail and carelessness is appalling. Despite my requests for clarification, the feedback remained inconsistent with my actual experience, revealing a clear lack of seriousness in their interview process. To make matters worse, the interviewers seemed biased, provided irrelevant feedback that didn't reflect the discussions. It's a waste of candidates time and a clear indication of unprofessionalism. I'd give this experience a 0/10. Avoid JP Morgan - Nutmeg at all costs if you value your time and mental peace.