Everything is very efficient and well-organised, no big surprises for the most part. Video interviews went well and the results were as expected. After the in-person interviews, however, I found out that they were not satisfied even though I felt having done just as well as in the video interviews. Their arguments were subjective and somewhat silly (including some arrogance). For instance, it appears that they would have preferred me to spend 5 minutes nicely writing down a complete solution like at school instead of verbally giving an almost exact answer and explain my reasoning in less than a minute. My suggestion would be to always ask, after giving your answer, whether they want more details, because some of them just proceed with the next question.

The interview process consists of multiple stages with hard quantitative bars to be met. After CV screening, they send you their proprietary online assessment of 10 MC. Some questions seem unusual, some are intentionally tricky, but most are similar to standard quant brainteasers and you can pass if you have really grinded through standard material. Then, there is an online interview with a quant which will ask you technical questions in barrage. The bar probably depends on your answers' grades and how many questions you can answer. I did not expect some questions, so I was caught unprepared and I fumbled spectacularly.