Chewy software engineer candidates report a recruiter screen, often an online assessment or HackerRank, then a behavioral and technical final. Coding is usually easy to medium, with customer-focused STAR questions.
$145K
Avg. Base Comp
$173K
Avg. Total Comp
3-6 rounds
Typical Rounds
Not reported
Process Length
Candidates describe Chewy's software engineer interview as lighter on algorithms than many tech loops and heavier on behavioral fit. Some report a recruiter screen, sometimes an online assessment, and then a final made up of a 45-minute behavioral round and a 45-minute technical round on the same day. Coding is most often described as LeetCode or HackerRank easy to medium, with examples like BST postorder traversal, valid parentheses, binary search and a 2D array problem.
Behavioral questions come up repeatedly. Candidates mention conflict with a coworker or manager, a mistake, why Chewy, leading a team, and times they went above and beyond for a customer. Have STAR stories that map to the company's principles and a customer-first theme.
The loop is not identical for everyone. Some candidates report longer finals with several interviews. These added system design (a shopping cart, or a database schema and API endpoints), a debugging and testing round, and hiring manager or senior leader conversations about the impact of past work. One candidate heard basic Java comparisons such as HashMap versus Map and ArrayList versus Vector, and another had an OA with an OOP focus. One final-round rejection cited limited experience with the team's stack, after a recruiter screen that asked about React, Spring Boot and AWS. Be ready to speak specifically about the tools in the posting.
Outcomes were mixed, with offers and rejections both reported. Practice explaining your code aloud, since interviewers in several reports were helpful when candidates talked through their reasoning.
Synthesized from 24 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 Chewy process.
I got through the initial phone screening with the recruiter, which was pretty straightforward. Then they told me I'd be moving forward to the next stage—two back-to-back 45-minute rounds, one behavioral and one technical. Honestly, I was prepared for standard LeetCode problems based on what I'd heard, but the technical round threw me off. They gave me what seemed like an easy to medium string problem with parentheses, and I got through it, but the real standout was how much they dug into personal projects during the behavioral portion. They asked a lot of questions about what I'd built on my own time, how I approached problems, and whether I had examples of going above and beyond. The interviewers were genuinely nice and spent a good chunk of time talking about their teams and what they worked on, which was refreshing. That said, I didn't end up getting an offer. Looking back, I think they were assessing cultural fit and curiosity pretty heavily, and maybe I didn't articulate my project experience in a way that resonated. The process itself felt organized and respectful, even though the outcome wasn't what I hoped for.
Prep tip from this candidate
Be ready to discuss personal projects in depth—Chewy seems to place significant weight on what you've built independently and your ability to articulate your problem-solving approach, not just algorithmic chops. Also, one review mentioned a system design round covering parking lot design and a separate debugging round, so depending on the role level, prepare for multiple technical flavors beyond just LeetCode.
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 Chewy
Select the 2nd highest salary in the engineering department
| Question | |
|---|---|
| Customer Orders | |
| Random SQL Sample | |
| Top 3 Users | |
| Retailer Data Warehouse | |
| Valid Anagram | |
| Hurdles In Data Projects | |
| Monthly Product Sales | |
| Max Quantity | |
| String Palindromes | |
| Find Mismatched Words | |
| Client Solution Pushback | |
| Why Do You Want to Work With Us | |
| Weighted Average Sales | |
| Generative AI Privacy | |
| Subscription Overlap | |
| Empty Neighborhoods | |
| Monthly Customer Report | |
| Closest SAT Scores | |
| Top Three Salaries | |
| Merge Sorted Lists | |
| Prime to N | |
| Rolling Bank Transactions | |
| Comments Histogram | |
| Scrambled Tickets | |
| Over-Budget Projects | |
| Bagging vs Boosting | |
| Flight Records | |
| Over 100 Dollars | |
| Upsell Transactions |
Synthesized from candidate reports. Individual experiences may vary.
Candidates report a recruiter call, about 15 minutes in one account, covering background, current work and why Chewy. One candidate was also asked about salary expectations and experience with React, Spring Boot and AWS, so confirm the posting's stack beforehand.
Some candidates report an online assessment shortly after applying. One described it as easy and another as OOP-focused. Others describe a HackerRank coding round with an engineer, including a simple 2D array exercise. This step does not appear in every report, so it may vary by team.
Candidates report LeetCode or HackerRank-style problems like BST postorder traversal, valid parentheses, binary search and 2D arrays. Interviewers often wanted the reasoning explained aloud. One candidate also heard basic Java comparisons such as HashMap versus Map and ArrayList versus Vector.
Behavioral rounds are commonly STAR-style. Candidates report questions on conflict with a coworker or manager, mistakes, leading a team, why Chewy, and going above and beyond for a customer. One candidate said senior leaders dug into the impact of past work.
Some candidates report a longer final, such as four one-hour interviews in one account. These may include system design (a shopping cart, or a database schema and API endpoints), a debugging and testing round, and hiring manager or senior leader conversations. The format appears to vary by team and level.
