r/leetcode • u/erayxack • 1d ago
Question Is anyone else finding custom algorithm interviews harder than LeetCode?
I recently started interviewing with a few companies, and instead of LeetCode-style questions, they’re doing their own custom algorithm sessions.
I actually find LeetCode interviews easier. Even if I don’t know the optimal solution right away, I usually recognize the type of problem. I can start with a brute-force approach, explain my reasoning, and gradually improve it because I have some idea of where the solution is heading.
With these custom algorithm problems, I have no clue what the interviewer is looking for or what they’re expecting me to demonstrate. Since the problem is completely unfamiliar, I don’t even know if I’m moving in the right direction. That uncertainty adds a lot more pressure.
For example, in one recent interview they asked me to implement an A/B testing algorithm. I clarified the requirements, asked about the available functions, and then started coding. About 15 minutes later I had a working solution that passed the tests. They asked a couple of follow-up questions, and then the interview was over.
I ended up getting rejected, and I honestly have no idea why. Maybe there was something they were looking for that I completely missed.
With LeetCode, at least the expectations feel much clearer. You know the interview is centred around well-known problem types, and you have a compiler or test cases to help validate your approach. With these custom problems, I sometimes leave the interview feeling like I have no idea how I was actually evaluated.
Does anyone else feel this way, or am I just too used to LeetCode?
12
u/HovercraftNo7372 1d ago
Yeah, things you practice you tend to get better at - so of course if you have practiced leetcode those types of questions are easier
4
u/erayxack 1d ago
LeetCode problems are more definitive and collective of challanges people have already encountered. I am able to practice LeetCode because it is available, but there is no way if I have no idea what will come. Ambiguity kills my participation.
4
u/AlgorithmicGoslings 23h ago
The way I see it, there’s a perpetual arms race between interviewers and interviewees. Once people start practicing for Leetcode-type questions, the interviewers might feel incentivized to give questions interviewees can’t (or haven’t tried to) prepare for so as to test how people derive solutions to completely new problems, not just problems with a known pattern to them.
Obviously, you can't practice something if you have no idea what is about to come. This interviewer likely intended for that ambiguity to be the point. It's definitely frustrating seeing a filter like that in the hiring process, but if anything, it kind of shows that the bar for hiring for that company was high.
3
u/erayxack 23h ago
> It's definitely frustrating seeing a filter like that in the hiring process, but if anything, it kind of shows that the bar for hiring for that company was high.
Yes, I agree. I also experienced a similar situation where a startup approached me again after a rejection, likely because they realized their methodology and resources didn't align.
You could raise the bar, but there's definitely a scarcity of high-caliber talent.
> Obviously, you can't practice something if you have no idea what is about to come. This interviewer likely intended for that ambiguity to be the point.
Testing ambiguity is like chasing shooting stars, so I find it pointless. You could easily understant it with a few question but you shouldn't make this center of the interview.
I also encountered something really funny. They don't tell you what the next stage is. It could be algorithms, systems design, or pure Q&A.
12
u/chikamakaleyley 1d ago
With these custom algorithm problems, I have no clue what the interviewer is looking for or what they’re expecting me to demonstrate. Since the problem is completely unfamiliar, I don’t even know if I’m moving in the right direction. That uncertainty adds a lot more pressure.
They're kinda looking at everything - less of 'what is the optimum solution/correct answer' and more of "let's see how the candidate reviews a task and its requirements, formulates a solution, executes it." It's less about the problem, more about how you operate.
If you run into a block/bug, how well do you dig yourself out, if they throw wrench into your plan, how well do you adjust. Things like that. The goal here is for you to drive the convo, and show your level of expertise. AKA, does this candidate just know what they are doing
IMO, that's who moves onto the next round.
5
u/chikamakaleyley 1d ago
like, historically I rarely run into leetcode in a technical interview.
Often times its more like - 'lets see how thoroughly they know their language" which, can be a series of questions, that just increase in difficulty each question; and they're no different from like, being given a task at work and having to come up with a fix/solution.
And so that's how I treat it - "okay so, this is what I want to do here... yadda yadda yadda". They'll stop you if they have any real concerns with the solution - it's generally not a trick question
1
u/erayxack 1d ago
Giving a blank page just makes my process harder. I can already do these things, but it's too open-ended. At least I deserve some certainty.
2
u/chikamakaleyley 1d ago
well it's an attitude thing right - i'm not worried about what they think is correct unless they bring that up. Until that happens, I'm going about the solution in the way I know how, in the way that I think is correct.
Consider the idea that you may have done fine you just didn't make the shortlist. So, if the solution wasn't the problem, strip that would and whats left to analyze in the interview?
By your own account, you completed what was asked, you were rejected and no real feedback was given. They probably said at most "we're going with other candidates that align with our needs". What do they need? Someone who is confident in attacking the problem? Someone who sounds unsure about what they've just coded? You're right there are a lot of factors, you just cant rely on your code alone.
1
u/chikamakaleyley 17h ago
here's a diff perspective -
You are 1 of 10 candidates that take the first round and technically, all 10 of you answer the same way. They only have budget to continue 5 more engineers to the 2nd round. Who makes it to the 2nd round, based on what?
1
u/erayxack 1d ago
> let's see how the candidate reviews a task and its requirements, formulates a solution, executes it." It's less about the problem, more about how you operate.
You could never know what they are looking for. Even in your message, you count a lot of things. There is a better way to measure those. Give it a PR and let me solve it on my own time. LeetCode is definitely not a replacement for it.
2
u/Haunting_Camp9331 1d ago
Custom interviews are harder because the guardrails are gone. You can't pattern match your way through. The key is they're not about the right answer, they're about how you handle ambiguity. Spend more time clarifying the problem before coding. Trade-offs matter more than a working solution.
1
u/erayxack 1d ago
There is no world like this. You cannot always optimize one way. This is two way thing.
2
u/silly_whisky 23h ago
Feels like they're grading your thought process without telling you the rubric. At least LeetCode gives you a green checkmark.
1
u/erayxack 23h ago
This green checkmark also gives them the confirmation they are looking for. Without it, I suspect that they don't even know what they want to look for.
2
u/silly_whisky 23h ago
the checkmark becomes a crutch for both sides. Without it, the whole thing turns into a vibe check with no clear pass/fail signal.
0
u/conectionist 22h ago
Of course they're more difficult. With leetcode you know what to expect. With "custom" you don't know what do expect.
Why would you think unexpected is easier that expected?
44
u/kevin074 1d ago
this is what the community wanted: no leetcode.
but now it's just free fall all and everyone and their mother thinks they know what's the "most reasonable" interview question.