Snowflake Software Engineer candidates report recruiter screening followed by coding and design evaluation, with algorithmic follow-ups, live design tradeoffs, and behavioral discussion appearing across accounts.
$195K
Avg. Base Comp
$238K
Avg. Total Comp
4-7 rounds
Typical Rounds
3 weeks
Process Length
Snowflake Software Engineer interviews in these accounts place substantial weight on reasoning through technical tradeoffs, not merely arriving at a first coding answer. Several candidates describe coding screens or technical calls that began with data-structures-and-algorithms problems and then added follow-ups. Reported examples include graph cycle detection, BFS and shortest-path variants, tree traversal or delete-node work, and Trie questions. Explaining assumptions, complexity, edge cases, alternatives, and revised approaches was an important part of those reports.
System design also appears in several paths, but the format varies. One candidate reported designing a shared quota service for several products using the same storage allowance. Another described an interactive whiteboard-style discussion, while a senior candidate encountered a broad design round alongside questions about networking, cloud, and databases. Prepare to clarify requirements, establish the main components, name tradeoffs, and adjust the design during the conversation rather than presenting a memorized architecture.
Behavioral conversations were reported in later loops and, in some accounts, alongside technical evaluation. The overall structure is not uniform: one process included an AI recruiter interview and HackerRank assessment, while others moved from recruiter screening into coding, system design, and behavioral stages. Use these as preparation areas rather than assuming one fixed sequence. One candidate reported roughly three weeks from the initial screen to the final decision.
Synthesized from 11 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 Snowflake process.
My Snowflake process started with both a recruiter conversation and a separate AI recruiter interview. The recruiter screen covered my background and the process. The AI interview required my camera to be on, lasted about 25 minutes, and asked about my experience, including the most complex backend work I had done. I also received an online HackerRank coding round early in the process.
After that, I had two technical coding screens on CoderPad. The questions were medium-to-hard LeetCode difficulty and algorithm-heavy. Both screens involved trees: one was a traversal problem and another was a variation on deleting nodes. I also encountered graph/BFS-style questioning, including a modified shortest-path problem, and a hard Trie question. The follow-ups mattered, so landing an initial solution was not enough.
The onsite included one coding interview, one system-design interview, and one behavioral conversation. The system-design prompt was a shared quota system for multiple products under one storage plan, where all services consume from the same quota bucket. The interviewer wanted a different solution direction than I expected.
Overall, I found the technical bar high, especially for data-structure and graph/tree questions with follow-ups. I did not receive an offer.
Prep tip from this candidate
Practice tree traversal and delete-node variants, Trie problems, and BFS shortest-path questions with follow-ups. For system design, practice a shared quota service coordinating usage across multiple products and adapt when the interviewer takes the discussion in a different direction.
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 Snowflake
Select the 2nd highest salary in the engineering department
| Question | |
|---|---|
| Comments Histogram | |
| Random SQL Sample | |
| Level Of Rain Water In 2D Terrain | |
| Real-Time Transaction Streaming | |
| Basic Regex | |
| Merge N Sorted Lists | |
| LLM Enterprise Search | |
| Log Anomaly Detection Model | |
| Sample Time Series | |
| Average Unique Counts | |
| Minimum Days for Scheduling All Meetings | |
| Shortest Path Algorithms | |
| Order Assignment and Delivery Time | |
| Client Solution Pushback | |
| Reddit-like Notifications | |
| Empty Neighborhoods | |
| Top Three Salaries | |
| Merge Sorted Lists | |
| Closest SAT Scores | |
| Subscription Overlap | |
| Monthly Customer Report | |
| Rolling Bank Transactions | |
| Prime to N | |
| String Shift | |
| Customer Orders | |
| Upsell Transactions | |
| Minimum Change | |
| Top 3 Users | |
| Largest Salary by Department |
Synthesized from candidate reports. Individual experiences may vary.
Candidates report recruiter screening at the start of several processes. One account also included a separate 25-minute AI recruiter conversation and an early HackerRank round; another began with two online coding screenings. The exact opening sequence varies.
Candidates report one or more coding evaluations covering graphs, trees, BFS, Trie work, regex-style matching, and event logs. Follow-ups may introduce performance, data-quality, edge-case, or alternative-solution discussion, so narrating the approach matters.
Several candidates report a system-design interview or technical call. Reported prompts include a shared quota service and recurring notifications; another candidate described class-structure-oriented design. Candidates may need to drive the discussion and explain tradeoffs.
Some candidates report later loops combining coding, system design, behavioral interviews, hiring-manager discussion, presentations, or director conversations. Behavioral prompts may cover conflict, feedback, ownership, and project decisions; the combination is not consistent across reports.
