← JP Morgan Interview Insights

JP Morgan·Software Engineer·Onsite - System Design / Architecture·Senior

Senior
Jul 2026

Summary

System design round at JP Morgan for a software engineer role. The whole session was basically one big URL shortener deep dive, which sounds straightforward but they kept pushing on every layer until you ran out of answers.

Questions Asked (8)

Q1

Design a URL shortening service like bit.ly or TinyURL. Walk through your full system design.

System DesignTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

This was the anchor question for the whole interview.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying functional and non-functional requirements, then propose a high-level design with a load balancer, application servers, and a distributed key-value store. Dive into the core algorithm for generating short codes, discuss trade-offs (e.g., hash vs. counter-based), and address scalability, reliability, and data consistency.

Pro tip: Emphasize how you would handle read-heavy traffic and ensure low latency, as this is critical for a URL shortener at scale. Also, mention monitoring and analytics to show business awareness, which is valued in fintech.

1. Clarify Requirements

Ask about expected traffic (e.g., 100M URLs/day), read/write ratio, latency requirements, and custom short codes. Confirm if analytics or expiration are needed.

2. High-Level Design

Sketch components: client, load balancer, application servers, database, cache, and analytics. Explain the flow: client sends long URL, server generates short code, stores mapping, returns short URL.

3. Short Code Generation

Discuss algorithms: base62 encoding of a globally unique counter (e.g., using Snowflake or ZooKeeper) or hash-based (MD5 + collision handling). Compare trade-offs: counter is predictable but simple; hash is unpredictable but needs collision resolution.

4. Data Storage & Retrieval

Choose a distributed NoSQL database (e.g., Cassandra, DynamoDB) for scalability and high availability. Use a cache (Redis) for hot URLs to reduce latency. Discuss sharding by short code or hash.

5. Scalability & Reliability

Address horizontal scaling of app servers, database replication, and caching. Discuss handling failures, rate limiting, and analytics (e.g., click counts) via async processing.

Key Points to Mention

  • Base62 encoding for short codes and collision avoidance strategies
  • Read-heavy workload optimization with caching and CDN
  • Database choice: NoSQL for scalability vs. SQL for consistency
  • Handling custom short codes and expiration policies
  • Analytics and click tracking without impacting latency
  • Security considerations: preventing abuse, rate limiting, and validation

AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.

Q2

What are the core functional and non-functional requirements for a URL shortener at scale?

System DesignTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

Pretty standard opener but the non-functional part is where they actually cared.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying the scope and scale (e.g., read/write ratio, expected QPS, latency SLAs) to show you think before designing. Then systematically list functional requirements (core features) and non-functional requirements (scalability, availability, latency, consistency, security), and briefly discuss trade-offs for each. Conclude by prioritizing requirements based on business needs and technical constraints.

Pro tip: In a financial institution like JP Morgan, emphasize non-functional requirements such as security, auditability, and compliance (e.g., GDPR, SOX) alongside scalability, as these are often as critical as functional features.

1. Clarify Scope and Assumptions

Ask questions to understand expected scale (e.g., 100M URLs, 10K QPS), read/write ratio, latency requirements, and any compliance needs. State your assumptions clearly.

2. Define Functional Requirements

List core features: URL shortening, redirection, custom aliases, expiration, analytics, and user authentication/authorization if needed. Prioritize must-haves vs. nice-to-haves.

3. Define Non-Functional Requirements

Cover scalability (horizontal scaling, partitioning), availability (99.99% uptime), latency (p99 < 100ms), consistency (eventual vs. strong), durability, security (rate limiting, encryption), and compliance.

4. Discuss Trade-offs and Priorities

Explain how requirements interact (e.g., strong consistency vs. low latency) and propose a prioritized list based on business impact and technical feasibility.

5. Summarize and Validate

Recap the key requirements and ask if the interviewer wants to dive deeper into any area, showing collaborative problem-solving.

Key Points to Mention

  • Read-heavy workload (e.g., 100:1 read/write ratio) and need for caching (e.g., Redis) to achieve low latency.
  • Scalability via horizontal scaling, database sharding (e.g., by hash of short URL), and load balancing.
  • High availability and fault tolerance: multi-region deployment, replication, and graceful degradation.
  • Security: rate limiting to prevent abuse, input validation, encryption in transit and at rest, and audit logging for compliance.
  • Data consistency and durability: trade-offs between eventual consistency (for scalability) and strong consistency (for critical redirects).
  • Analytics and monitoring: tracking click events, metrics (QPS, latency, error rates), and alerting for operational excellence.

AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.

Q3

How would you design the API surface for this service?

API & IntegrationsSystem Design
Author's notes

Easy part.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying the service's domain, consumers, and key use cases, then propose a resource-oriented RESTful API with clear versioning and consistent error handling. Emphasize security, scalability, and alignment with JP Morgan's regulatory and enterprise standards.

Pro tip: Show awareness of financial industry constraints like audit trails, idempotency, and data sensitivity; mention how you'd handle PII and comply with regulations such as GDPR or SOX.

1. Clarify Requirements and Constraints

Ask about the service's purpose, target consumers (internal/external), expected load, and any regulatory or security requirements. This ensures the API design meets actual needs.

2. Define Resources and Operations

Identify core entities and map them to RESTful resources with standard HTTP methods (GET, POST, PUT, DELETE). Consider using nouns for resources and keeping operations idempotent where necessary.

3. Design for Consistency and Evolvability

Establish conventions for naming, versioning (e.g., URI versioning), pagination, filtering, and error responses. Plan for backward compatibility and deprecation strategies.

4. Address Security and Compliance

Incorporate authentication (OAuth 2.0, JWT), authorization (RBAC), rate limiting, and encryption. Ensure audit logging and data privacy controls are in place.

5. Consider Performance and Scalability

Discuss caching, asynchronous processing, and load balancing. Mention how the API will handle high throughput and potential spikes in traffic.

Key Points to Mention

  • RESTful principles and resource-oriented design
  • API versioning strategies (URI, header, or media type)
  • Consistent error handling and status codes
  • Security measures: OAuth 2.0, JWT, rate limiting, encryption
  • Idempotency and audit trails for financial transactions
  • Documentation and developer experience (OpenAPI/Swagger)

AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.

Q4

How would you generate short keys, and how do you handle collisions?

Algorithms & Data StructuresSystem Design
Author's notes

This is where I fumbled a bit.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying the requirements: what 'short' means (e.g., 6-8 characters), expected scale, and whether keys must be unique or just low-collision. Then discuss generation methods like base62 encoding of random numbers or hashing, and collision handling strategies such as checking a database, using a bloom filter, or appending a counter.

Pro tip: Mention that in a distributed system, you can avoid collisions entirely by using a unique node ID or timestamp in the key generation, but always have a fallback collision resolution mechanism. Also, consider the trade-off between key length and collision probability using the birthday paradox.

1. Clarify Requirements

Ask about the expected scale (number of keys), acceptable key length, and whether keys need to be globally unique or just unique within a namespace. This determines the approach.

2. Choose Generation Method

Discuss options: random generation (e.g., using a secure random generator and base62 encoding), hashing a unique input (like a URL or ID), or using a counter with base62 encoding. Mention trade-offs like predictability and length.

3. Analyze Collision Probability

Explain how to estimate collision probability using the birthday paradox. For example, with 62^6 possible keys, collisions become likely after ~62^3 keys. This informs whether collisions need active handling.

4. Handle Collisions

Describe strategies: check if key exists in storage (e.g., database) and regenerate if collision; use a bloom filter for efficient pre-check; or append a counter or random suffix. In distributed systems, use a centralized service or unique node IDs to avoid collisions.

5. Consider Scalability and Trade-offs

Discuss performance implications: database lookups add latency, bloom filters use memory but are fast, and pre-allocating key ranges can reduce collisions. Mention that for very high scale, a dedicated key generation service (like Snowflake) might be better.

Key Points to Mention

  • Base62 encoding (A-Z, a-z, 0-9) for compact, URL-safe keys
  • Birthday paradox to estimate collision probability
  • Database unique constraint or check-then-insert for collision detection
  • Bloom filters for efficient probabilistic collision checks
  • Distributed ID generation (e.g., Snowflake, UUID) to avoid collisions
  • Trade-offs: key length vs. collision rate, performance vs. simplicity

AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.

Q5

What storage solution would you use, and what does the data model look like?

Data ModelingTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

I went with a key-value store for the redirect path since the access pattern is basically a point lookup by short code.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying the requirements and constraints of the system, then propose a storage solution that aligns with those needs, and finally describe the data model with entities, relationships, and access patterns. Emphasize trade-offs and justify your choices based on factors like scalability, consistency, and query patterns.

Pro tip: At a financial institution like JP Morgan, always mention regulatory compliance, data security, and auditability as key considerations in your storage and data modeling decisions.

1. Clarify Requirements

Ask questions to understand the use case, data volume, read/write patterns, latency requirements, consistency needs, and budget constraints.

2. Propose Storage Solution

Recommend a storage technology (e.g., relational, NoSQL, data lake, time-series) and explain why it fits the requirements, mentioning alternatives and trade-offs.

3. Describe Data Model

Outline the main entities, their attributes, relationships, and how they will be stored (e.g., tables, documents, key-value pairs). Include indexing and partitioning strategies.

4. Address Access Patterns

Explain how the data will be queried and updated, and how the model supports those operations efficiently.

5. Discuss Trade-offs and Scalability

Summarize the pros and cons of your approach, and how it can scale or evolve over time.

Key Points to Mention

  • CAP theorem and consistency models (e.g., ACID vs. BASE)
  • Scalability and performance considerations (e.g., sharding, replication)
  • Data integrity and normalization vs. denormalization
  • Security and compliance (e.g., encryption, access controls, audit trails)
  • Cost implications of the chosen storage solution
  • Real-world examples or past experience with similar systems

AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.

Q6

How would you add a caching layer for popular redirects?

System DesignTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

Talked about an in-memory cache sitting in front of the KV store for hot URLs.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying the requirements: what 'popular' means (e.g., top N redirects by request volume), expected read/write ratio, latency targets, and consistency needs. Then propose a caching layer (e.g., Redis or in-memory cache) with a well-defined key structure, TTL, and invalidation strategy, and discuss trade-offs like cache stampede, memory limits, and consistency vs. performance.

Pro tip: Mention that you would start with a simple cache-aside pattern and measure hit rate and latency improvements before adding complexity like write-through or multi-level caching. Also, highlight the importance of monitoring cache effectiveness and having a fallback to the origin to avoid outages.

1. Clarify requirements and constraints

Ask about traffic patterns, definition of 'popular', read/write ratio, latency SLOs, and consistency requirements. This ensures your solution aligns with business and technical needs.

2. Choose caching strategy and technology

Select a cache-aside approach with a distributed cache like Redis for scalability, or an in-memory cache for lower latency. Justify based on requirements.

3. Design cache key and data model

Define a key structure (e.g., 'redirect:{short_code}') and store the target URL and metadata. Consider TTL based on how often redirects change.

4. Handle cache invalidation and consistency

Decide on TTL, explicit invalidation on updates, or write-through. Discuss trade-offs between consistency and performance, and how to avoid stale redirects.

5. Address scalability and failure modes

Plan for cache stampede (e.g., using locks or probabilistic early expiration), hot keys, and cache outages. Include monitoring and fallback to origin.

Key Points to Mention

  • Cache-aside pattern with TTL and explicit invalidation on updates
  • Choice of cache technology (Redis, Memcached, in-memory) based on latency and scalability needs
  • Handling cache stampede and hot keys (e.g., locking, jittered TTLs)
  • Consistency trade-offs: eventual consistency vs. strong consistency for redirects
  • Monitoring cache hit rate, latency, and error rates
  • Fallback mechanism to origin database when cache misses or fails

AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.

Q7

How would you implement click analytics and track redirect counts?

Product Analytics & MetricsSystem Design
Author's notes

I said async event queue to avoid adding latency to the redirect path.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying the requirements: what events to track (clicks, redirects), expected scale, latency needs, and existing infrastructure. Then propose a high-level architecture that captures events reliably, processes them (e.g., stream or batch), and stores aggregated counts for fast querying. Finally, discuss trade-offs and how you'd ensure data accuracy and scalability.

Pro tip: Emphasize idempotency and exactly-once processing to avoid double-counting, especially in financial systems where accuracy is critical. Also, mention the importance of monitoring and alerting on data quality metrics.

1. Clarify Requirements

Ask about the scale (events per second), latency requirements (real-time vs batch), data retention, and how the analytics will be consumed (dashboards, reports).

2. Design Event Collection

Propose a client-side or server-side event capture mechanism, such as a lightweight API endpoint or SDK, that logs click and redirect events with necessary metadata (timestamp, user ID, URL, etc.).

3. Choose Processing Pipeline

Select a stream processing framework (e.g., Kafka + Flink) for real-time or a batch system (e.g., Spark) for periodic aggregation, depending on latency needs.

4. Implement Counting and Storage

Use a scalable datastore (e.g., Cassandra, Redis, or a time-series DB) to maintain counts, ensuring atomic increments or idempotent writes to avoid double-counting.

5. Ensure Reliability and Monitoring

Add error handling, retries, and dead-letter queues; monitor for data loss or duplication and set up alerts on key metrics.

Key Points to Mention

  • Idempotency and exactly-once semantics to prevent double-counting
  • Scalability: handling high throughput with partitioning and distributed processing
  • Data model: storing raw events vs aggregated counts, and retention policies
  • Latency requirements: real-time vs batch processing trade-offs
  • Fault tolerance: replication, retries, and dead-letter queues
  • Security and compliance: anonymizing user data, adhering to financial regulations

AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.

Q8

How would you prevent abuse, such as malicious URLs or API misuse?

System DesignTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

Rate limiting on the write endpoint, URL scanning against a blocklist.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying the types of abuse (malicious URLs, API misuse) and the context (e.g., public API, user-generated content). Then outline a layered defense strategy covering prevention, detection, and response, emphasizing trade-offs between security, usability, and performance. Conclude with how you would measure and iterate on the solution.

Pro tip: In a financial institution like JP Morgan, emphasize compliance and risk management—mention specific regulations (e.g., PSD2, GDPR) and the need for audit trails. Also, highlight the importance of rate limiting and anomaly detection to protect both customers and infrastructure.

1. Clarify Requirements and Threat Model

Ask questions to understand the system: Is it a public API? What data is sensitive? Who are the users? Identify potential abuse vectors like URL injection, DDoS, credential stuffing, and data scraping.

2. Preventive Measures

Implement input validation, URL whitelisting/blacklisting, and sanitization. Use API keys, OAuth, and scopes for authentication/authorization. Apply rate limiting and quotas per user/IP.

3. Detection and Monitoring

Set up logging, monitoring, and alerting for anomalous patterns (e.g., sudden spikes, repeated failed logins). Use machine learning for behavioral analysis and threat detection.

4. Response and Mitigation

Define automated responses like temporary bans, CAPTCHAs, or throttling. Have a manual review process for escalations. Ensure incident response playbooks are in place.

5. Trade-offs and Continuous Improvement

Discuss trade-offs: strict validation may block legitimate users; rate limiting may impact performance. Propose A/B testing, feedback loops, and regular security audits to refine rules.

Key Points to Mention

  • Rate limiting and throttling (e.g., token bucket, leaky bucket algorithms)
  • Input validation and sanitization (e.g., URL parsing, regex patterns)
  • Authentication and authorization (OAuth, API keys, JWT scopes)
  • Anomaly detection and monitoring (e.g., SIEM, ML-based fraud detection)
  • Compliance and audit trails (e.g., GDPR, PSD2, SOC 2)
  • Trade-offs between security, usability, and performance

AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.