Had a initial call with the recruiter where we went through my experience and what I was looking for, nothing new there. Next there were 3 more interviews. 2 of them were on the same day at their office in London, one with two engineers and the other with a product manager. The last interview was a hangout call a week later with their lead engineer. The technical interview was to basically challenge my understanding of some scenarios, including in the project I'm currently working on (after I told them about it). The one with the product manager was more focusing on how we get feedback to improve the product, etc. Overall, I think the one thing that can be improved is that the whole process and the interviews are too subjective. Ideally, tech interviews should be objective without much room for biases. I can easily see some of the engineers having a bad day and failing someone because they didn't "like" them without really knowing why. Transferwise could be missing on really good engineers out there. Tech side of things should be an objective assessment (a test could be used as well). And then the subjective criteria could be assessed by RH, people with a psychology background. On a slightly different note, the recruiters were always very prompt with the feedback after every stage.

Applied online. Received online assessment link. Gave their hackerrank test which had 2 coding questions. All test cases passes. Immediately received automated mail that recruiter will contact you. After few hours got email that they have decided to move forward with other candidates. That is my application was not even reviewed by the recruiter(which usually takes 1-2 mins) before sending the test link.