Two candidates for Fetch product roles describe a recruiter outreach, a vague appliance-redesign take-home, and a long wait before a final conversation. Prepare for Fetch-specific product questions and for engagement and prioritization.
$177K
Avg. Base Comp
$215K
Avg. Total Comp
2-3 rounds
Typical Rounds
Not reported
Process Length
Two candidates who interviewed for senior product roles at Fetch Rewards describe a similar opening. A recruiter reached out and was encouraging. Each was then given a take-home task to redesign a household or kitchen appliance. Both called the prompt intentionally vague. One was told it should take about two hours but said it ran longer. The other received it with no phone screen first.
The later conversations differed. One candidate says the interview centered on why Fetch is successful: why they wanted to work there, why the app ranks first in its category, where its value comes from and why users like it. The other describes a video call with the CPO covering product engagement and prioritization, and felt the interviewer had already formed a view. Both reports end in no offer, and both mention weeks of silence after the take-home.
The practical takeaway is to prepare a clear point of view on Fetch's value proposition and competitive position, alongside normal product sense. Write down your assumptions on the design task, ask clarifying questions in writing if you can, and explain your reasoning, since neither candidate describes a feedback session. Have examples ready on how you would measure and grow engagement and how you make prioritization trade-offs. With only two relevant reports, treat the format as something that may vary by team and level.
Synthesized from 3 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 Fetch Rewards, Inc. process.
I got reached out by the recruiter, and honestly, they were personable and encouraging about the role. But then things took a weird turn. Instead of the typical phone screen you'd expect, I was immediately handed a take-home assignment — no conversation, no context, just instructions to redesign a household appliance. The prompt was intentionally vague, which threw me off. I wasn't sure if that was intentional to test how I'd handle ambiguity or just poor briefing. I spent time on it anyway, submitted what I thought was solid work, and then... nothing. Radio silence for weeks.
When I finally did get a video call with the CPO, the energy was completely different from the recruiter. He asked questions about product engagement and prioritization, which seemed straightforward enough, but there was this underlying vibe that he'd already made up his mind. No matter how I framed my examples or walked through my thinking, it felt like the answer wasn't what he wanted to hear. I even recorded it because something felt off, and when I played it back for some product folks I know, they all said the same thing — this either feels like a toxic leadership situation or at least a CPO who's not genuinely open to candidates.
The whole process was a mixed bag of unprofessional and deflating. You get optimistic from the recruiter, then get thrown into an unguided design challenge with no feedback loop, and if you make it to the CPO, you're walking into an interview that feels more like a box-checking exercise than an actual conversation. It's frustrating because you never really get a fair shot to show what you can do or ask if the role and team are actually the right fit.
Prep tip from this candidate
Be prepared for a take-home design assignment with minimal context—clarify the brief in writing before diving in, document your reasoning explicitly, and don't expect feedback or a presentation opportunity. If you reach a CPO round, know that the bar may be high or the fit may be predetermined, so focus on asking probing questions about team dynamics and leadership philosophy rather than just proving yourself.
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 Fetch Rewards, Inc.
Design a secure, real-time, scalable portfolio management system with notifications and caching.
| Question | |
|---|---|
| Rider Discount | |
| Empty Neighborhoods | |
| Experiment Validity | |
| Button AB Test | |
| 2nd Highest Salary | |
| Top 3 Users | |
| Customer Orders | |
| Top Three Salaries | |
| Manager Team Sizes | |
| Subscription Overlap | |
| Rolling Bank Transactions | |
| Comments Histogram | |
| Monthly Customer Report | |
| WAU vs Open Rates | |
| Closest SAT Scores | |
| Employee Salaries | |
| Find the First Non-Repeating Character in a String | |
| Size of Joins | |
| Upsell Transactions | |
| Google Maps Improvement | |
| Download Facts | |
| First Touch Attribution | |
| Hurdles In Data Projects | |
| Instagram TV Success | |
| Group Success | |
| Compute Deviation | |
| Last Transaction | |
| Liked Pages | |
| Network Experiment Design |
Synthesized from candidate reports. Individual experiences may vary.
Both candidates say a recruiter approached them and was personable. One describes a quick phone screen before the assignment. The other says they went straight to the take-home with no conversation. Expect the early stage to vary, and ask the recruiter about the role, team and next steps.
Candidates report being asked to redesign a kitchen or household appliance with a deliberately vague brief. One was told it should take about two hours but says it took longer. Both then waited weeks. Candidates may want to state assumptions clearly, scope the work, and document their reasoning, since no presentation or feedback was reported.
One candidate reports an interview built around why they wanted to join Fetch, why it leads its category and why users like it. The other reports a video call with the CPO on engagement and prioritization. Prepare both a view on Fetch's product value and structured examples of prioritization. Outcomes in both reports were no offer.
