
Chubb AI Engineer interviews reported by candidates include a conceptual LLM screen, a hiring-manager chat, an insurance-claims agentic case study, and theory-heavy technical rounds, with slow communication.
$118K
Avg. Base Comp
$149K
Avg. Total Comp
4 rounds
Typical Rounds
6 weeks
Process Length
Candidates describe Chubb's AI Engineer interviews as a mix of conceptual machine learning questions and applied design discussion, with varying structure from one person to the next. One candidate reports a screening call that moved from behavioral and logistical questions into transformers, LLMs, and RLHF, and says their limited hands-on exposure showed. Another reports four rounds that were entirely theoretical, with no practical questions. Topics included positional embeddings, transformers versus RNNs, temperature and top-k sampling, correlation versus covariance, and agent workflows. Question difficulty in that account ranged from backpropagation to basic Python list-versus-dictionary differences.
A third candidate describes a phone screen, a hiring-manager conversation about LLM and agentic experience, and an emailed case study: design an agentic system for insurance claim submission and processing. They presented an architecture diagram and were told they fit the AI Engineer level better than Senior because of limited production deployment experience. A fourth candidate describes a final technical round that included typing code live, with questions that did not closely match the job description.
For preparation, review core LLM concepts well enough to explain them aloud. Sketch an agentic claims workflow with clear components and failure handling. Prepare concrete stories about systems you have run in production, such as monitoring and deployment. Several candidates mention slow replies, so confirm timelines and any flexibility in writing. All four reports here ended without an accepted offer.
Synthesized from 4 candidate reports by our editorial team.
Had an interview recently?
Share your experience. Unlock the full guide.
Real interview reports from people who went through the Chubb process.
What stuck with me from this process was the seniority feedback more than any single question. The first step was a phone screen, followed by a conversation with the hiring manager. He wanted a high-level picture of my background, especially my experience with LLMs and agentic systems.
The case study was the main event. They emailed the prompt ahead of time, so I had time to think before the interview. The task was to design an agentic AI system that automates the insurance claim submission and processing workflow. I prepared a diagram of the architecture of an agentic application I had built and used it to explain my design.
Afterward, they told me I was a better fit for a regular AI Engineer role than a Senior one. The reason given was my lack of experience with production-level deployments. The frustrating part was that they had no openings at the Senior level at the time, so I didn't get an offer. Going in, I'd recommend being ready to talk concretely about how your systems have run in production, not just how they were designed.
Prep tip from this candidate
Expect the case study to be sent by email in advance, so prepare an architecture diagram for an agentic workflow like insurance claim processing. Be ready to back up your experience with specific production deployments, since that was the gap that cost the Senior-level consideration.
Share your own interview experience to unlock all reports, or subscribe for full access.
Sourced from candidate reports and verified by our team.
Topics based on recent interview experiences.
Featured question at Chubb
Select the 2nd highest salary in the engineering department
| Question | |
|---|---|
| Top Three Salaries | |
| Get Top N Frequent Words | |
| Covariance vs Correlation | |
| Find Duplicate Numbers in a List | |
| Employee Salaries | |
| Hurdles In Data Projects | |
| Size of Joins | |
| Bagging vs Boosting | |
| Random SQL Sample | |
| P-value to a Layman | |
| Rectangle Overlap | |
| Booking Regression | |
| Always Excited Users | |
| Total Spent on Products | |
| RAG Strict Source Control | |
| Fine-Tuning VS RAG | |
| Data Preparation for Imbalanced Data | |
| Transformer Encoder Layer | |
| Distribution of 2X - Y | |
| Digitizing Student Test Scores | |
| Fair Coin | |
| Lasso vs Ridge | |
| Assumptions of Linear Regression | |
| Type-ahead Search | |
| Xgboost vs Random Forest | |
| Integer String Addition | |
| Precision and Recall | |
| Data Pipelines and Aggregation | |
| Boarding Times Bias |
Synthesized from candidate reports. Individual experiences may vary.
Candidates report an initial phone screen covering behavioral and administrative questions. One candidate says it turned technical, with questions on transformers, LLMs, and RLHF asked by a non-technical interviewer. Prepare to explain these concepts conceptually even in an early call.
One candidate reports a conversation with the hiring manager after the phone screen, focused on a high-level view of their background, especially LLM and agentic system experience. Be ready to summarize projects and the scope of your own contribution.
One candidate reports receiving an emailed prompt in advance: design an agentic AI system automating insurance claim submission and processing. They presented an architecture diagram of a system they had built. Feedback centered on production deployment experience, so expect follow-ups about how systems actually run.
One candidate reports four rounds over six weeks with only theoretical questions: positional embeddings, transformers versus RNNs, temperature, top-k sampling, correlation versus covariance, and agent workflows. Another reports a final technical round with live typing of code. Content may not closely track the job description.
Candidates report waiting periods and slow or unclear communication after stages. Reported outcomes in this set were no offer for three candidates and a withdrawn offer for one after a start-date disagreement. Confirm timing and any flexibility in writing and follow up politely.