← Bank of America Interview Insights
This took me longer than I expected to set up correctly.
First, clarify the schema and definitions: what constitutes a visit and a purchase, how to handle users with multiple events, and the exact 7-day window relative to the fixed date. Then, write a SQL query that aggregates events per user per country within the window, flags users with at least one visit and at least one purchase, and finally computes the conversion rate as the ratio of distinct purchasing users to distinct visiting users, grouped by country.
Pro tip: Mention that you would validate the conversion rate by checking edge cases like users with purchases but no visits (which should be excluded from both numerator and denominator) and ensure the denominator only includes users with at least one visit. Also, discuss how to handle users with multiple countries (e.g., take the country from their first event or user profile) to avoid double-counting.
Confirm the definition of a 7-day window (e.g., the 7 days ending on the fixed date), what constitutes a visit and a purchase, and how to assign a country to a user if they have events from multiple countries.
Filter the events table to the 7-day window and aggregate by user and country, creating flags for whether the user had at least one visit and at least one purchase.
Count distinct users with at least one purchase (numerator) and distinct users with at least one visit (denominator) per country, ensuring each user is counted once in each metric.
Divide the numerator by the denominator for each country, handling division by zero (e.g., using NULLIF or CASE) to avoid errors.
Check for anomalies, such as countries with zero visits, and consider whether the conversion rate should be expressed as a percentage. Discuss any limitations or assumptions.
AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.
The window function requirement felt a bit forced here since MIN() in a GROUP BY would've done the job.
Use a window function like ROW_NUMBER() partitioned by user_id and ordered by event timestamp to deduplicate events and identify the first purchase per user. Then join to the signup table and compute the date difference (e.g., DATEDIFF) between signup date and first purchase date. Ensure the query handles users with no purchases appropriately (e.g., left join).
Pro tip: Always clarify the grain of the data and whether 'first purchase' means the earliest purchase event or the earliest purchase after signup. Also, consider time zones and date truncation to avoid off-by-one errors in day calculations.
Identify the relevant tables (e.g., users, events) and columns (user_id, event_type, event_timestamp, signup_date). Confirm the definition of 'first purchase' and 'days between' (calendar days vs. 24-hour periods).
Use ROW_NUMBER() OVER (PARTITION BY user_id ORDER BY event_timestamp) to assign a rank to each purchase event per user. Filter to rank = 1 to get the first purchase.
Left join the first purchase result to the users table on user_id to retain users without purchases. Ensure signup_date is available for each user.
Compute the difference between first_purchase_date and signup_date using DATEDIFF or equivalent, handling NULLs for users without purchases (e.g., return NULL or 0).
Check for edge cases (e.g., purchases before signup, duplicate signups) and ensure the output includes user_id, first_purchase_date, and days_to_first_purchase.
AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.
Self joins always make my brain do a little stutter.
Start by clarifying the schema of the events table, especially the columns for user ID, event type, and timestamp. Then explain how a self join can pair each user's purchase events with their visit events, filtering for visits that occur strictly before the first purchase. Finally, use a subquery or window function to identify the first purchase per user and select distinct users meeting the condition.
Pro tip: Mention that a self join can be inefficient on large datasets and suggest an alternative using window functions (e.g., MIN(CASE WHEN event_type='purchase' THEN timestamp END) OVER (PARTITION BY user_id)) for better performance, showing awareness of scalability.
Identify the columns: user_id, event_type (e.g., 'visit', 'purchase'), and timestamp. Confirm that each row represents an event.
Use a subquery or window function to compute the earliest purchase timestamp for each user.
Join the events table to itself on user_id, where one side represents visits and the other represents the first purchase. Filter for visit timestamps strictly less than the first purchase timestamp.
Return the distinct user_ids that satisfy the condition, ensuring no duplicates.
Discuss handling users with no purchases, ties in timestamps, and the efficiency of self joins versus window functions.
AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.
This was more conceptual and I actually liked it.
Start by clarifying the join direction and the definition of conversion rate, then explain how LEFT JOIN preserves all countries (including those with no purchases) while RIGHT JOIN preserves all purchases (potentially excluding countries with no purchases). Show that the choice affects the denominator and numerator, leading to different conversion rates, especially when some countries have zero purchases.
Pro tip: Emphasize that the business question should drive the join choice: if you need to report on all countries (even those with no activity), use LEFT JOIN; if you only care about countries with purchases, RIGHT JOIN might suffice. Always validate with a quick count of distinct countries before and after the join.
Identify which table is on the left and right in the join. Typically, the countries table is left and purchases table is right, but confirm with the interviewer.
State the conversion rate as (number of purchases / number of visitors) or similar, and specify how the join affects the numerator and denominator.
With LEFT JOIN, all countries are kept; countries with no purchases will have NULL purchase counts, which may be treated as 0, thus including them in the denominator and potentially lowering the overall conversion rate.
With RIGHT JOIN, only countries with at least one purchase are kept; countries with no purchases are excluded entirely, so they don't affect the conversion rate, potentially inflating it.
Summarize that the choice depends on whether you want to include zero-purchase countries in the analysis. Recommend LEFT JOIN for a complete view and RIGHT JOIN for a purchase-focused view.
AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.