I was informed that the interview should consist of 6 parts. First part was 30min zoom call with HR, typical introduction + some basic Java questions from the list. Second part was an one hour live coding session, also via zoom. What was good: HR was friendly and oriented on understanding if candidate matches or not, she had an understanding that correct answer might be spoken in different word, so she tried to clarify the answer to make sure it is correct, not just blindly match it with symbols on the Q&A paper. Feedbacks after each stage were provided relatively fast, also feedback about live coding session was provided with mentioning what was good and bad, also a follow up call to discuss the feedback was suggested. What was bad: Calendar link leaded to buggy service. Q&A from a paper is a bit risky if HR matches answers only with symbols, so I was worrying not about how to provide the correct answer, but rather that my answer should exactly match answer from the paper. Luckily in my case HR was wise enough to clarify if something didn't match exactly, so I had a chance to rephrase the answer. Live coding part: 1) interviewer was not really friendly, also blamed me in connection problems and even didn't assume that the problem might be on his side... like I tried to use laptop micro, headphones micro(both worked perfectly before), still issue was present and 0 tries to check something on his side. And I felt like his mood went down because of that. 2) the task itself was really easy, and together with feedback gives an impression that you're looking for fast typing coding monkeys, cause 3) in negative points of feedback a coding speed was mentioned(when the task was more about typing rather than real case coding), also nothing was mentioned about sound issues and time which was spent to resolve the issue, which even could have been not on my side. 4) other two negative point are valid to some extension but just for the interview, like think loudly. You usually keep silence while coding. And even during interview it is pointless to comment some boilerplate code which you have to implement for tests for example. 5) some interviewer's instructions were misleading, good that he could recognize it as well, however don't feel like it had some impact on feedback. Also overall impression was exactly like " Live coding is a part which made me think that here was no intention to hire, like conveyor type of an interview."(c) Sr. Software Engineer Interview on Feb 19, 2020 https://www.glassdoor.com/Interview/Revolut-Interview-Questions-E1176471.htm?filter.jobTitleExact=Sr.+Software+Engineer#InterviewReview_31965370 Actually it seems I experienced almost the same issues as this guy. And in a prart of coding monkeys with this guy https://www.glassdoor.com/Interview/Revolut-Senior-Software-Engineer-Interview-Questions-EI_IE1176471.0,7_KO8,32.htm#InterviewReview_32825188 Hopefully this and rest feedbacks will make process better for other candidates. Best Regards.