Venture Capital interview preparation

Questions

100

Traced to a firm

31

Firms

12

Updated

September 2026

Asked at

All firmsGeneral Atlantic9Insight Partners7Silver Lake6Vista Equity Partners4Bessemer Venture Partners3ACAccel2Advent International2Battery Ventures2Andreessen Horowitz1Coatue Management1Sequoia Capital1WPWarburg Pincus1

Topic

All topicsSourcing and deal flow5Market sizing and estimation8Founders and teams5Unit economics and cohorts11Term sheets12Cap table and dilution7Early-stage valuation7Portfolio construction6Board and governance4Down rounds and secondaries4Exits and liquidity4Fund economics5Sector theses and markets6India venture market6Fit and motivation10

Level

AnyCoreIntermediateHard

Type

AnyTechnicalFitCaseMarket viewBrainteaser

1. 002What are your connections in the healthcare tech industry?Sourcing and deal flowIntermediatefirst roundAndreessen HorowitzTechnology, Media and Telecom · San Francisco · 2020

   Say this

   Answer with named, specific relationships and what each one gives you, not with a claim to be well-connected. And be honest about where the network is thin, then say how you are filling it, because a junior candidate is not expected to have a partner-level rolodex.

   Then walk it

   1. Name three or four real people and the category of access each represents. A clinician who can tell you whether a workflow product actually saves time. An operator at a payer who understands reimbursement. A founder or two in the space.
   2. Say what you get from each. The clinician tells you if adoption is real; the payer contact tells you whether the thing gets paid for, which is the whole game in healthcare.
   3. Then show the machine that builds it. A monthly cadence of calls, notes you keep, and a habit of writing something public in the space so inbound starts working for you.
   4. Be concrete about the gap. Something like: I have good clinical depth and almost no relationships on the payer or hospital procurement side, and here are the two people I am trying to get to this quarter.
   5. Then tie it to the firm. If their healthcare thesis is provider workflow, say which of your contacts is directly useful for diligence on that, because they are testing whether you can add to the firm's diligence bench, not whether you are popular.

   Where candidates lose it

   Inflating the network. VC is a small world and the interviewer probably knows your named contacts or can check in one call. Also answering with a count rather than a use: 'I know a lot of people in health tech' is worse than naming two people and exactly what each one can verify for you.

   Expect next

   • Who would you call to diligence a claims-automation company?
   • What is the single biggest thing you have learned from one of those people?
   • How do you build a network in a sector you are new to?

   Reported by candidates at Andreessen Horowitz (Technology, Media and Telecom, San Francisco, 2020). Source: Wall Street Oasis.

2. 095What is the greatest failure of your life?Fit and motivationIntermediatesuperdayInsight PartnersInvestments · New York · 2020

   Say this

   Pick a real failure with a real cost where the fault was genuinely yours, then give the specific behaviour you changed and the evidence it stuck. The structure is short setup, clear ownership, concrete change, and proof — about ninety seconds.

   Then walk it

   1. It has to be a genuine failure. Not 'I took on too much and was a bit stressed'. Something that failed: a project that was cancelled, a team that lost people, a business that did not work, an exam or a goal you missed badly.
   2. Own it cleanly and early. No shared blame, no circumstances. 'I misread how much the client's new CFO had changed the priorities, and I kept building the analysis nobody had asked for' is ownership. 'The client changed the brief' is not.
   3. Name the specific cost. Three months of work discarded, a colleague who had to fix it, a deadline the team missed. Quantifying the damage is what makes it credible, and it is the step most candidates skip because it is uncomfortable.
   4. Then the behavioural change, and be specific to the point of being boring: 'I now write down what I think the deliverable is and send it in the first 48 hours to be corrected.' Small, mechanical, checkable changes are believable in a way that 'I learned to communicate better' is not.
   5. Then the evidence it stuck. A later situation where the new behaviour was tested and worked. Without that, it is a story, not a lesson.
   6. And why venture asks this so often: the job has a very high base rate of being wrong. They are testing whether you can sit with being wrong, say so out loud, and update — because a person who cannot admit a mistake will hide a portfolio company's problems for six months, and that is the specific failure mode that costs a fund money.

   Where candidates lose it

   The humblebrag — a failure that is really an achievement, or one where the fault lies with someone else. Interviewers hear it constantly and it reads as an inability to be honest, which is exactly the trait being screened. The other trap is no concrete change, which turns the answer into a confession with no point to it.

   Expect next

   • What would you do differently if you faced that again?
   • Tell me about a time you were wrong about a person.
   • What is your biggest weakness as an investor?

   Reported by candidates at Insight Partners (Investments, New York, 2020). Source: Wall Street Oasis.

3. 096Discuss an area of development for you recently and how you have been improving on it.Fit and motivationIntermediatefirst roundInsight PartnersVenture Capital · New York · 2022

   Say this

   Name a weakness that is real and that matters for this job, then give the mechanism you put in place and a specific instance where it worked. A weakness with no mechanism is an admission; a mechanism with no instance is a plan.

   Then walk it

   1. Pick something that costs you something but is not disqualifying. Good candidates: being slow to reach a view because you want more data, over-engineering analysis, avoiding conflict in a meeting, weak public speaking. Bad candidates: anything about integrity, reliability or working with people.
   2. It should be recognisable in this seat. Something like: I default to depth and I have been slow to commit to a view with 70 percent of the information, which matters in a job where deals close in a week.
   3. Then the mechanism, specific and slightly mundane. 'I started writing a one-page view with a recommendation within 48 hours of picking up anything, before I felt ready, and treating it as a draft to be attacked rather than a conclusion to defend.' Mechanisms sound like process because real ones are.
   4. Then the instance, with the outcome. A time the mechanism was tested, what happened, and honestly whether it worked. If it partially worked, say so — 'it has fixed the timeliness and I still over-hedge the language' is far more credible than a clean success.
   5. Then how you would keep working on it here. Something like asking a reviewer to push me to a recommendation in the first meeting rather than the third. That turns it into a working preference the interviewer can actually act on.
   6. Keep the whole thing to about sixty to ninety seconds. This is a short question and a long answer makes the weakness feel bigger than it is.

   Where candidates lose it

   The fake weakness — perfectionism, working too hard, caring too much. Interviewers hear it every day and it reads as evasion. The opposite trap is confessing something disqualifying like unreliability or difficulty with colleagues. Pick something real that costs you time or precision, not trust.

   Expect next

   • What feedback have you had most often in your career?
   • What would your last manager say you need to work on?
   • How do you know you have actually improved?

   Reported by candidates at Insight Partners (Venture Capital, New York, 2022). Source: Wall Street Oasis.

4. 099Describe a time you worked on a live deal with short timelines.Fit and motivationIntermediatetechnicalGeneral AtlanticTechnology, Media and Telecom · New York · 2021

   Say this

   Pick one deal or project, name the deadline and the constraint, then spend most of the answer on how you decided what to cut. The content of this question is triage under time pressure, not stamina.

   Then walk it

   1. Set it up in two sentences: the situation, the deadline, and the specific reason it was hard — missing data, a competing bidder, a counterparty who went quiet, three workstreams and two people.
   2. Then the triage, which is the actual answer. What was decision-critical and what was nice to have, and how you worked that out. Something like: I asked what could change the recommendation, found it was two assumptions, and put my time into those while the rest went in at a rougher level with the roughness flagged.
   3. Then the escalation, which is what a growth or venture firm is really testing. Who did you tell, and when? The correct behaviour is telling the person above you before the deadline that two sections are thin, so they can decide whether to buy more time. Discovering it afterwards is the failure mode.
   4. Then the outcome, honestly. Whether the deal happened matters less than what your work enabled, and if something went wrong, say what you would do differently. An answer where everything went perfectly is less believable than one with a specific residual regret.
   5. One concrete number makes it real: 'four days from the NDA to the committee memo' or 'we had eleven months of data and needed cohort behaviour over three years'. Numbers stop it sounding like a template.
   6. And keep it to two minutes. The temptation is to narrate the whole deal; the interviewer wants the decision structure and will ask for detail on whatever interests them.

   Where candidates lose it

   Telling a story about working very long hours. Everyone can work long hours and it does not distinguish you. The differentiator is what you deliberately deprioritised, and whether you flagged the gaps upward before the deadline rather than after. And use a real deal with real specifics — a vague composite is obvious.

   Expect next

   • What did you deliberately leave out, and how did you decide?
   • What went wrong, and what would you do differently?
   • How do you do diligence properly in 48 hours?

   Reported by candidates at General Atlantic (Technology, Media and Telecom, New York, 2021). Source: Wall Street Oasis.

Firm tags come from public, anonymous candidate reports on Wall Street Oasis: strong signal, not sworn testimony. Firms are named as the places a question was reported, not as partners of Fin Maverick. Answers are written for this page to show how to think out loud; they are not scripts to recite.