← Optiver Interview Insights

Optiver·Software Engineer·Technical Phone Screen·Intermediate

IntermediatePrefer not to say
Apr 2026

Summary

Optiver SWE interview with a pretty involved algorithmic problem called OptiCargo. Two parts: a batch optimization problem and a streaming version of the same thing. The problem itself was interesting but there's a lot going on and I felt like I was constantly behind.

Questions Asked (3)

Q1

Given a set of flights (each with a cost, capacity, and arrival time) and a set of cargo jobs (each with a weight, revenue, and deadline), design an algorithm to select which flights to book and which cargo to assign to each flight in order to maximize total profit.

Algorithms & Data StructuresTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

This is basically a variant of a knapsack problem but with two layers: you're picking flights AND packing cargo into them, and the flight cost only hits you if you actually book it.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying the problem constraints and objectives, then model it as an optimization problem. Propose a solution using dynamic programming or integer linear programming, and discuss trade-offs between optimality and efficiency.

Pro tip: Demonstrate awareness of real-world constraints like time windows and capacity, and suggest a greedy heuristic with proof of optimality under certain conditions, showing both theoretical and practical insight.

1. Clarify Requirements

Ask about constraints: can cargo be split? Are flights one-time or recurring? What are the ranges of costs, capacities, deadlines? This ensures you address the correct problem.

2. Formalize as Optimization

Define decision variables: which flights to book (binary) and how much cargo to assign to each flight. Objective: maximize total revenue minus flight costs.

3. Identify Problem Structure

Recognize this as a variant of the knapsack problem with multiple knapsacks (flights) and time constraints (deadlines). Note that it may be NP-hard.

4. Propose Algorithm

Suggest a dynamic programming approach if deadlines are small, or an integer linear programming formulation. For large instances, propose a greedy heuristic or approximation algorithm.

5. Analyze Trade-offs

Discuss time complexity, optimality, and scalability. Mention potential improvements like column generation or Lagrangian relaxation.

Key Points to Mention

  • Model as a variant of the multiple knapsack problem with time windows
  • Use dynamic programming with state (flight, time, capacity) if deadlines are discrete
  • Formulate as integer linear program for exact solution, but note NP-hardness
  • Propose greedy heuristic: sort cargo by revenue/weight ratio and assign to earliest feasible flight
  • Consider capacity and deadline constraints as knapsack constraints
  • Discuss trade-offs between optimality and computational efficiency

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

Q2

Extend your solution to work as a streaming class: flights and cargo arrive as events over time, and the system should maintain a current best plan that can be queried at any point.

System DesignAlgorithms & Data Structures
Author's notes

This part tripped me up more than I expected.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying the streaming model: events arrive over time, and we need to maintain a current best plan that can be queried at any point. Then, describe how to adapt the batch solution to an incremental one, focusing on data structures that support efficient updates and queries, and discuss trade-offs between latency, throughput, and consistency.

Pro tip: Emphasize that the 'best plan' must be queryable at any time, so you need to maintain a valid state after each event; consider using a priority queue or balanced tree to keep the top candidate readily available, and discuss how to handle out-of-order events if they can occur.

1. Clarify requirements and assumptions

Ask about event types (flights, cargo), arrival order (in-order or out-of-order), query frequency, and whether the plan must be exact or approximate. Confirm that the plan should be updated after each event.

2. Define the state and update mechanism

Identify what constitutes the 'best plan' (e.g., max profit, min cost) and how a new event affects it. Determine if the plan can be updated incrementally or if recomputation is needed, and choose appropriate data structures (e.g., heaps, segment trees) to support efficient updates.

3. Design the streaming architecture

Outline components: an event ingestion layer, a state manager that applies updates, and a query interface. Discuss how to handle concurrency, backpressure, and fault tolerance if needed.

4. Analyze complexity and trade-offs

Compare time/space complexity of incremental updates versus batch recomputation. Discuss trade-offs between latency (immediate query response) and throughput (processing many events), and consider approximations if exactness is too costly.

5. Address edge cases and extensions

Mention handling of out-of-order events, event time vs processing time, and potential need for windowing or late data. Suggest how to extend to distributed streaming (e.g., using Kafka, Flink) if scale increases.

Key Points to Mention

  • Incremental update algorithms: e.g., maintaining a max-heap of candidate plans, or using dynamic programming with state compression.
  • Data structures for efficient querying: priority queues, balanced BSTs, or segment trees to retrieve the best plan in O(1) or O(log n).
  • Trade-offs between exact and approximate solutions: when to use approximation (e.g., sketching) to meet latency requirements.
  • Handling out-of-order events: using watermarks or buffering to ensure correctness.
  • Concurrency and consistency: ensuring the plan is consistent when queried while updates are in progress (e.g., using locks or immutable snapshots).
  • Scalability: partitioning events by key (e.g., flight route) to parallelize processing.

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

Q3

How would your system handle the case where a flight booking attempt fails after you've already planned to use it?

System DesignAdaptability & Ambiguity
Author's notes

Short follow-up but I actually liked this one.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Clarify the context first—whether this is a real-time booking system or a planning tool—then outline a robust failure-handling strategy using patterns like saga, compensation, and idempotency. Emphasize that the system should detect the failure, roll back or compensate, and maintain consistency while providing clear feedback to the user.

Pro tip: Show you think beyond just retries: discuss how you'd design for graceful degradation and eventual consistency, and mention monitoring/alerting to catch such failures early. This demonstrates a production-ready mindset that Optiver values.

1. Clarify the scenario and requirements

Ask questions to understand the system's context: is it a real-time booking engine, a travel planning tool, or a distributed transaction? Determine consistency and availability requirements.

2. Identify failure points and impact

Map out where the booking attempt can fail (e.g., payment, inventory, network) and what downstream processes depend on the booking (e.g., itinerary, notifications). Assess the blast radius.

3. Design a failure-handling strategy

Propose patterns like saga for distributed transactions, compensation logic to undo partial work, and idempotent retries. Consider fallback options like alternative flights or manual intervention.

4. Ensure consistency and user experience

Explain how to maintain data consistency (e.g., eventual consistency, two-phase commit) and provide clear, timely feedback to the user with next steps.

5. Add observability and continuous improvement

Include logging, metrics, and alerts to detect failures. Suggest post-mortems and automated recovery to improve resilience over time.

Key Points to Mention

  • Saga pattern for managing distributed transactions and compensating actions
  • Idempotency to safely retry booking attempts without duplicating side effects
  • Eventual consistency and how to handle temporary inconsistencies
  • Fallback mechanisms such as rebooking on alternative flights or notifying the user
  • Monitoring, alerting, and logging for failure detection and diagnosis
  • User communication: clear error messages and recovery options

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