Investment Banking Interview Questions 2026: Who Prints

Who publishes a process, and who publishes nothing

Eleven banks, eleven versions of the investment banking interview process, and the first useful finding is how differently these firms treat their own hiring as public information.

Three banks publish nothing about their own process. On Evercore's students page the words interview, process, assessment and superday appear zero times in the full source, which we checked rather than inferred. Morgan Stanley publishes three steps and no offer stage, and its step three promises to explain how the process works, then links to a page that describes no stages.

Nothing here aggregates. Step counts run from three to six with no two banks sharing a list, so any article telling you "the investment banking interview process" in the singular has picked one bank and not said which. What follows takes the questions, the clocks and the caps one at a time, each attributed.

The nine interview questions one bank actually prints

Morgan Stanley is the only bank in this set that publishes interview questions under its own name. Six of them appear in an article signed by its vice chairwoman, dated 11 August 2017, each with guidance attached.

1. "Tell Me about Yourself"
2. "Describe Yourself in Three Words"
3. "What's Your Biggest Weakness?"
4. "Why Should We Hire You?"
5. "Describe a Time You Failed"
6. "Why Are You Interested in Us?"

On the three-word question it gives a worked example for this industry: "if you're going for an internship on Wall Street, you might say: 'analytical, detail-oriented, quantitative.'" On the weakness question it gives a prohibition in four words: "Don't say you're a perfectionist."

Three more questions appear in a second article, attributed to "our senior interviewers": "There are questions that are standard, like: 'Tell me about yourself,' 'Why our firm,' 'Why this position?'" The same page states what closes the conversation: "We will always ask whether you have any questions."

And it carries the only instruction in the whole set written for this job specifically: "If you're going for an Investment Banking position, know what deals the firm has done recently." That one line is also the nearest thing any bank here publishes to an answer for the why investment banking question, and it asks for the deal list rather than for a motive.

Nine published questions, from one bank, with its own guidance. Every one of them is behavioral. So the investment banking behavioral questions are the published half of this interview, and no bank in the set prints a technical one. Every other question you have read for this interview came from somewhere that was guessing, and the gap between those two states is the reason this section leads.

What the banks say the investment banking interview is for

Beyond the questions, four banks describe what they are measuring, and the vocabulary differs enough to matter.

Morgan Stanley gives the widest frame: "Interviews could be competency, strengths based, skills based or technical." J.P. Morgan names the formats rather than the content: "Examples of some of the types of assessments we use include structured live interviews, on-demand/recorded interviews, and virtual skills assessments." Of the recorded one it says it exists "to evaluate your skills such as language proficiency, verbal presentation and/or technical abilities".

Goldman Sachs is specific in one country and silent in the rest. Its page for experienced hires in India says "Interviews focus on technical and functional ability", which is the only sentence across eleven banks that names what the questioning is about.

Rothschild & Co states three criteria for its own assessment: "authenticity, insight and individual contribution". Those appear in its policy on artificial intelligence, which is covered further down, and they are the nearest thing to a published rubric anywhere in this set.

Deutsche Bank publishes what sits inside its final stage: "competency assessments, case studies, and a technical interview". Rothschild publishes what sits inside its own: "This includes a further interview with senior colleagues, a collaborative group exercise, and a case study", and that group exercise is the only one published by any bank here.

What nobody publishes is a weight, a threshold or a score. We looked on every page in the ledger below, and the closest any bank gets is a list of qualities with no arithmetic attached.

The two banks that print the word superday

Superday is the word everyone uses for the final round. Two of eleven banks print it.

Goldman Sachs titles its sixth step "Superday" and quantifies it: "If selected following your HireVue interview, you'll be invited to a series of final round interviews. Typically, we conduct between two and five interviews for campus hires, depending on the division." Deutsche Bank titles its fifth stage "Assessment Centre/Super Day", spelled as two words.

Six banks describe the shape of a final round, and no two descriptions match. Citi's wording is the one to read twice, because "either multiple interviews, an assessment or a case study exercise" tells you the firm has not committed to a format at all.

Houlihan Lokey publishes the detail the others leave out, and it is about what happens afterward. It says "we always offer feedback for all candidates who have done in-person interviews", then draws the line: feedback is "not offered to candidates in the telephone interview stage". Goldman Sachs' Japanese FAQ states the opposite policy in writing, declining to give reasons for an outcome at all.

The recorded banking interview, and the only published clocks

Nearly every bank here screens with a recorded interview, and almost none of them say how long you get.

Deutsche Bank does: "two minutes to prepare your response. You then have two minutes to record your responses and just have the one attempt." It also publishes the order of what comes first: "Situational Judgment Test, Behavioral Questionnaire and an Ability Test. After which you'll be asked to do a pre-recorded Video Interview", and adds that "Only the ability test is timed."

Goldman Sachs gives a total rather than a per-question clock: "you will be asked to participate in a video interview, which will take approximately 30 minutes to complete. Engineering applicants will be asked to take a HackerRank assessment." It is also the only bank naming two vendors inside its own process description.

Lazard publishes no process page at all. Its only published surface on hiring is a regulatory notice dated 3 September 2026, and that notice is unusually informative. It names "standard psychometric tests (such as cognitive, skills, and personality assessments) that do not use artificial intelligence, as well as an AI-enabled video interview tool", and explains the mechanism: "The AI Tool analyzes the text transcript of your recorded video interview responses against predefined, job-relevant competencies." It also grants a right to an alternative format without the tool.

Read that sentence for what it changes about preparation. If a tool scores the transcript rather than the delivery, then what the words say carries the weight, and filler that survives a human listener does not survive a transcript. Morgan Stanley's own guidance points the same way, and it is the firm that advises against reading from notes while the vendors permit it.

Houlihan Lokey breaks the pattern entirely: its first round is a telephone interview, and it is the only bank in this set where the opening screen is not recorded.

The application cap, which varies by a factor of seven

This is the most actionable thing on the page and no single bank's site can tell you it, because it only appears when you read them together.

Seven published positions and no two the same. Goldman Sachs states the consequence of exceeding its own: "Any additional application will be auto withdrawn." So the cost of a scattergun application is not a soft disadvantage at that bank; it is the removal of an application you already submitted.

Three readings follow, and all three are decisions rather than opinions.

1. Research the cap before you research the bank. At one bank you get a single shot across the whole firm, and at another you get seven across the world. The order you apply in matters only at the first kind.
2. A recommendation is not a rule. J.P. Morgan recommends three and does not say it enforces anything. Deutsche Bank's single-role rule is written as a rule.
3. A regional cap is not a global one. Citi's three applies to Asia clusters. Goldman Sachs' three applies in Japan and its four applies globally, which means the two numbers are not in conflict.

The calendar, where it is published to the day

Most banks publish a season. Two publish dates.

Deutsche Bank prints a table of windows by city and desk, including "New York / 2027 Summer Internship Recruitment / IBCM: Coverage, IBCM: Captial Markets / 25 July - 19 August 2026", with the typo in the original, and "London / 2027 Summer Internship / Investment Banking & Capital Markets / 7 September - 11 October 2026". Read those two rows together: New York closes seven weeks before London opens, for the same programme year.

Citi publishes a deadline with a timezone on its own requisitions, "Application Deadline: Friday, November 27, 2026 - 23:59 Taiwan Time", and states the pattern on its programmes page: applications "typically open in September the year prior".

Deutsche Bank is also the only bank publishing elapsed times for the stages in between.

J.P. Morgan publishes the opposite of a calendar, and says so plainly: applications are reviewed on a "rolling basis and are unable to accelerate our decision-making process." For a candidate holding two timelines, that sentence is the one that decides which offer deadline is negotiable.

Internship lengths disagree even inside one bank. Goldman Sachs says "nine to ten week" in its requisitions, J.P. Morgan says nine weeks, Jefferies says ten, and Citi's programmes page says 8 to 16 weeks while its own requisition says ten.

The thresholds that do get published, and where they hide

A standing rule on this site is that banks do not publish academic or pay thresholds. That rule needs correcting, with a precise boundary: the careers pages publish none, and the job postings publish several.

Barclays states a grade floor, hedged: "Ideally you'll have A GPA of 3.2 or above". Deutsche Bank publishes the sharpest requirement in the set: "Have achieved at least 3 A-Levels at grade AAA, with a minimum grade A in A-Level Maths or the UCAS points equivalent (FIC/ IBCM only)", alongside a degree floor of "2:1 or First". The parenthesis matters, because the A-level rule applies to two desks and not to the bank.

Deutsche Bank also publishes a ceiling, which is rarer than a floor: "no more than 12 months full-time, relevant work experience". A candidate who spent two years somewhere else is outside that programme by a published rule rather than by a recruiter's judgment.

And one pay figure is published outright, through state salary transparency: a Barclays Summer Associate posting in New York names $175,000, with the minimum and the maximum identical. A single-point range is a decision the bank has already made, so there is nothing to negotiate on base for that seat.

Citi publishes its criteria as a list on the requisition and names "Penultimate year university students" as the target. Goldman Sachs' Japanese FAQ publishes the smallest instruction of all, requiring a suit, a student ID and something to write with.

So the rule to carry forward is about which document to read. The careers page tells you the shape of the process. The requisition tells you whether you are eligible, and it is the document candidates skim.

The rules on using an AI tool, from a ban to a right

Three banks published a position by October 2026, and the three positions are incompatible.

Barclays publishes the hardest line in the set: "Any use will result in your interview being stopped and your application withdrawn and may also impact your eligibility to apply for future roles at Barclays." That is a present consequence and a future one, in one sentence.

Rothschild & Co publishes the most detailed, separating what is allowed from what is not and giving the reason in three words we have already quoted: it assesses "authenticity, insight and individual contribution". So the objection is to a tool substituting for the thing being measured rather than to the tool itself.

Lazard goes the other way and grants a right. Because its own screening uses an AI tool on your transcript, its notice offers an alternative format for candidates who ask.

J.P. Morgan addresses a neighboring question, about whether completing a third-party virtual experience programme helps an application. Its answer is unusually direct: "Registration or completion of Forage virtual experience programs is optional and will not impact consideration or hiring decisions."

That last quote is worth more than it looks. It is a bank stating, in writing, that a credential marketed as helping your application does not help your application. Anywhere else, the claim that something is neutral in hiring is an assumption. Here it is a published statement from the employer.

The three statements, linked with one transaction chain

Now the technical half, and this is where most of this interview actually happens. Tax is 21 percent throughout, which the IRS states is the rate corporations apply to taxable income, checked 1 October 2026 at irs.gov.

1. Buy $100 of inventory on account. The income statement does nothing. Inventory rises $100 and accounts payable rises $100. Cash from operations shows minus $100 of inventory and plus $100 of payables, which nets to zero.
2. Sell the lot for $150 cash. Revenue $150, cost of sales $100, so pre tax profit is $50. Tax is $10.50 and net income is $39.50. Cash from operations is net income of $39.50 plus the $100 inventory release, which is $139.50.
3. Pay the supplier $100. No income statement effect. Cash falls $100 and payables fall $100.
4. Book $20 of depreciation. Pre tax profit falls $20, tax falls $4.20, and net income falls $15.80. Cash from operations is minus $15.80 plus $20 of depreciation, which is plus $4.20. Property falls $20.

Check the last row. Assets are 43.70 less 20.00, which is 23.70. Liabilities are zero and retained earnings are 23.70. It balances, and it balances at every earlier step too.

Say the check out loud when you answer. "Assets moved by minus 15.80, equity moved by minus 15.80, so it closes." That sentence is the answer to the question behind the question.

The depreciation question, and the 21 percent that answers it

The most asked question in the category. Depreciation rises by $10. What happens to the three statements.

Income statement first. Operating profit falls $10, pre tax profit falls $10, tax falls by 21 percent of $10, which is $2.10, and net income falls $7.90.

Cash flow next. Start from net income of minus $7.90 and add back the $10 of depreciation, because no cash left. Cash from operations rises $2.10.

Balance sheet last. Property falls $10 and cash rises $2.10, so assets fall $7.90. Retained earnings fall $7.90. It closes.

The answer everyone wants is the last sentence, and the reason it is worth saying is that $2.10 is the whole of the tax shield. Depreciation is valuable because it is deductible, and 21 cents of every dollar of it comes back as cash.

Two follow ups are automatic. Ask what happens if the company is loss making with no taxable income: the shield is worth nothing that year, and the deduction carries forward. Ask what happens to EBITDA: nothing at all, which is why EBITDA is the measure buyers reach for and also why it says nothing about the cost of keeping the assets running.

Deferred tax, on the rule actually in force

Most worked examples of deferred tax use a declining balance tax table. That describes an earlier regime. The IRS states that "P.L. 119-21, commonly known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, reinstated the 100% special depreciation allowance for certain qualified property acquired and placed in service after January 19, 2025", checked 1 October 2026 at irs.gov. The same publication records that a taxpayer "can elect to take a 40% special depreciation allowance" instead.

So build the example on the current rule. A company buys a $500 asset. For book purposes it depreciates straight line over five years, so $100 a year. For tax purposes it deducts the whole $500 in year one. Operating profit before depreciation is $400 a year.

Read year one carefully, because two things happen at once. Taxable income is 400 less 500, which is minus $100, so there is no cash tax and a $100 loss carries forward. The gross deferred tax liability on the asset is 21 percent of the $400 basis gap, which is $84, and the deferred tax asset on the carried forward loss is $21. Net, $63.

Year two uses the loss. Taxable income is $400, the $100 carryforward absorbs some of it, taxable income becomes $300, and cash tax is $63. Years three to five have no shelter left, so cash tax is $84 while book tax stays at $63, and the liability unwinds by $21 a year.

Total book tax over five years is $315. Total cash tax is $315. The deferred tax liability was never a saving. It was a schedule, and its value is the time value of the money.

Working capital, and the denominator that decides it

A company reports revenue of $1,200, cost of sales of $780, receivables of $148, inventory of $132 and payables of $96.

Receivable days are 148 divided by 1,200, times 365, which is 45.0 days. Inventory days are 132 divided by 780, times 365, which is 61.8 days. Payable days are 96 divided by 780, times 365, which is 44.9 days. The cash conversion cycle is 45.0 plus 61.8 less 44.9, which is 61.9 days.

Now the trap. Inventory and payables belong over cost of sales, because that is what they are measured in. Receivables belong over revenue, because that is what customers were billed. Measure inventory against revenue instead and you get 40.2 days, which is 35 percent lower than the correct figure. Both divisions are arithmetically fine and only one answers the question.

Then price the improvement, because that is the part interviewers actually want. Take receivable days from 45.0 to 35.0 and receivables fall to 35.0 over 365 times 1,200, which is $115.07. That releases $32.93 of cash, once, and it does nothing at all to profit.

The "once" matters. A working capital improvement is a one time cash release followed by a permanently lower balance. Presenting it as a recurring benefit is the single most common error in a cash flow story, and it is not an arithmetic error.

What interest does to the tax line

An earnings question turns into a tax question the moment a company is leveraged, and the reason is a cap.

The IRS lists three components of the allowed deduction, and the one that binds a leveraged borrower is the applicable percentage of adjusted taxable income. It states that "The applicable percentage is 30% (30% ATI limitation)", checked 1 October 2026 at irs.gov. For tax years beginning after 2024, that base adds depreciation and amortization back.

Work a case. Operating profit before depreciation is $200, depreciation is $60, and interest is $75. Adjusted taxable income is $200, so the cap is $60. Fifteen dollars of interest is disallowed and carried forward.

Follow it through. Taxable income is 200 less 60 of depreciation less 60 of deducted interest, which is $80. Cash tax is $16.80. Book pre tax profit is 200 less 60 less the full 75 of interest, which is $65, so book tax would be $13.65. The gap of $3.15 is a deferred tax asset on the carried forward interest, worth something only if the company later has capacity to use it.

That last clause is the answer to "is a deferred tax asset always worth its face value". No. It is worth its face value only when future taxable income arrives to absorb it, which is why filers carry valuation allowances against the part they do not expect to recover.

LIFO against FIFO, and what a real filing discloses

Three purchases of 100 units each, at $8, $9 and $10. Two hundred units are sold at $15. Operating expenses are $400. First in first out charges the two oldest lots, so cost of sales is $1,700. Last in first out charges the two newest, so cost of sales is $1,900.

Get the sentence the right way round, because this is where answers fall apart. LIFO pays $42 less cash tax and reports $158 less net income. The tax saving is the small number and the earnings hit is the large one, and a candidate who says LIFO "saves money" without that ratio has skipped the interesting part.

The lease question has moved the same way, from existence to measurement. A real filer discloses that "the Company's remaining lease obligations were $81 million for 2026, $157 million from 2027 through 2028, $140 million from 2029 through 2030 and $201 million from 2030 through 2039", checked 1 October 2026 at sec.gov. Those add to $579 million of future payments, and the balance sheet liability is smaller because it is the present value of that stream. Comparing one company's undiscounted total to another's discounted liability invents a difference that does not exist, and it is the same unit error as the inventory denominator above.

The same filing shows a sensitivity done properly: the company "estimates that its annual operating income relating to cash and cash equivalents would increase by approximately $15 million in the event interest rates were to increase by 1%". A direction, a size and a base.

How an accounting answer gets marked

Our math rubric puts four weights on a calculation, and the weights are ours. No bank publishes a marking scheme, and we checked all eleven. The reasoning behind each weight sits on how an answer is assessed.

Drilling the linkages, and where the rest of the interview lives

1. Push a write down through. Impair inventory by $50. Pre tax profit falls $50, tax falls $10.50, net income falls $39.50, and cash from operations is minus $39.50 plus the $50 non cash charge, which is plus $10.50. Inventory falls $50, cash rises $10.50, equity falls $39.50.
2. Push a debt raise through. Borrow $200. No income statement effect on day one. Cash rises $200 and debt rises $200. Interest starts next period.
3. Push a share buyback through. Repurchase $100 of stock. Cash falls $100 and equity falls $100. Earnings per share rise because the denominator shrank, and net income did not move.
4. Close the loop each time. State the change in assets, the change in liabilities and the change in equity, and confirm they reconcile before you stop talking.

The rest of the investment banking technical questions have their own pages here, each worked the same way. For how these statements feed a valuation, see valuation interview questions. For the discount rate machinery, see the DCF built step by step. For the deferred tax liability created when one company buys another, see merger model interview questions. For the interest cap applied across a full five year debt schedule, see the LBO model explained and LBO interview questions. And for anyone still weighing consulting against investment banking, the published question record on this side is nine behavioral questions from one bank out of eleven, while the consulting side of the same decision runs through the McKinsey case interview guide.

What no investment banking interview guide can give you is the question list, because only one bank publishes one. The nine questions near the top of this page are that bank's, quoted. Everything else in investment banking interview prep is a format a bank has described, and the technical chains above are the part you can actually check.

What changed on this banking interview page

7 October 2026. The page was previously titled Accounting Interview Questions for Investment Banking and answered one slice of the interview. It now answers the whole interview, and the four accounting chains it was built on are kept whole as four sections. The old URL redirects here, and the four pages that linked to it had their anchors rewritten so they describe what they now point at.

7 October 2026. Added the first reading of eleven banks' own hiring pages side by side: the published step counts, the two banks that print the word superday, the application caps, the recorded interview clocks, the dated windows and the published rules on using an AI tool.

7 October 2026. Corrected a standing claim. Earlier pages here said banks do not publish academic or pay thresholds. The careers pages do not. The job postings do, and three are quoted above with their hedges and their scope limits intact.

Where this will go stale. The application windows are for 2027 programmes and will be replaced each spring. The tax figures rest on IRS publications that change with legislation. The nine published questions date from 2017 and 2015 and have been stable on the bank's site since.