I've gone through 3 interview processes - Coding challenge ( MCQ, 1 problem solving (easy)) - a Tech interview ( where they give you a specific task project and ask you to continue with some points) - a System Design interview ( with a focus on the mobile design, but goes to the backend for on-surface knowledge)

The process started well. The recruiter was responsive, kept me updated at each step, and shared helpful preparation materials. The first round was a coding interview. The interviewer was friendly and engaging, and the problem-solving discussion felt collaborative. The interview format was quite “high volume” in terms of questions/pace, but overall this stage was a good experience. The next round was system design. I was asked to solve a business-oriented problem based on a few screenshots. This stage felt significantly less candidate-friendly: the interviewers seemed irritated when I asked clarifying questions, and there was an expectation to quickly define requirements and propose a solution for a Revolut Business–related scenario. In my view, it assumed detailed domain knowledge I hadn’t worked with before and wasn’t provided during the interview. After this round, I was told I was being evaluated at a lower level than originally discussed. Afterwards, there was a team-matching stage. One team declined to proceed, citing “lack of motivation.” That particular conversation was scheduled at 8pm for me on a Friday, which may have affected how I came across. The second team-matching discussion was more productive, but overall I felt the atmosphere became increasingly tense as the process went on. The culture felt more “Russian-style” and not particularly aligned with what I’d expect from a Western company. Overall: strong recruiter experience and a solid first technical round, but the later stages felt unstructured in expectations and less respectful in communication.