A friend got a Meta recruiter ping last month and immediately texted me "what do I even do now." I'd been through the loop, so I wrote her a long reply. This is basically that reply, cleaned up.

The first thing worth saying is that Meta's process is predictable, and that's good news. Once you know the shape of it, most of the panic goes away and you can spend your energy on the parts that actually move the needle.

It starts with a recruiter call, usually around half an hour. Low pressure. They want your background, what you're looking for, and roughly where you'd fit. Be honest about your timeline here, because it sets the pace for everything after.

Then comes the technical phone screen, about 45 minutes in a shared editor like CoderPad, with one or two coding problems. The mistake people make is treating it like a silent LeetCode session. The interviewer is listening to how you think, so narrate. Talk through your approach before you write, mention the edge cases you're weighing, say it out loud when you spot a better time complexity. A correct answer delivered in silence scores worse than a slightly slower one they can actually follow.

If that goes well, you get the onsite, or the "full loop." It's usually four to five rounds, and Meta has these internal nicknames you'll hear people throw around.

The coding rounds are called "Ninja." You'll do two of them, roughly 45 minutes each, a couple of medium problems per round. Nothing exotic. Arrays, strings, hash maps, trees, graphs, a little dynamic programming. They lean on patterns far more than obscure tricks.

If you're going for a senior level (E5 and up) there's a system design round, nicknamed "Pirate." They hand you something open-ended like "design the news feed" or "design a rate limiter" and watch how you reason about scale. There's no single right answer they're fishing for. They want to see you clarify requirements, estimate load, sketch something sensible, and then talk honestly about the trade-offs.

And then there's behavioral, which they call "Jedi." I'll be blunt: this is the round people underestimate the most, and it's the one that quietly sinks otherwise strong candidates. Meta takes it seriously and maps your answers to how they actually operate, things like moving fast, owning outcomes, and focusing on impact. Have real stories ready, use a loose STAR structure so you don't ramble, and put numbers on your impact wherever you honestly can.

Quick note on levels, because it changes what they expect from you. Meta runs from E3 (new grad) through E4, E5 (senior), E6 (staff) and up. The higher you go, the more the system design and the "how do you handle ambiguity" signals matter. For real compensation by level and city, just look it up on Levels.fyi. Those numbers move around and I'd rather you see current data than trust something I half-remember.

So how do you prep without losing your mind? Less grinding than you'd think. For coding, a focused set of around 150 problems you genuinely understand beats blasting through 500 you'll forget by Friday. Drill the common patterns: two pointers, sliding window, BFS and DFS, heaps, intervals, the usual DP shapes. For system design, learn the building blocks (load balancers, sharding, caching, queues) and rehearse one repeatable way of walking through any prompt. For behavioral, write out six to eight stories and get comfortable actually saying them.

The single biggest thing that helped me wasn't more problems, though. It was practicing out loud under something close to real conditions. Solving quietly at your desk does nothing for the moment a stranger is watching and your mind goes blank. Once I started running mock interviews where I had to speak my answers, that gap finally closed. I've been using LastRound AI for it lately. It runs voice mock interviews that score how you actually respond, and it keeps interview breakdowns for Meta and a few hundred other companies that pull the round structure and question patterns from public sources, so you walk in already knowing the format.

If I had to compress all of this into one line: stop trying to be impressive and start being clear. Meta interviewers are genuinely rooting for you. Give them a clean view of how you think, treat the behavioral round like it's technical, and the rest tends to fall into place.

If you've been through a Meta loop recently, I'd love to hear what caught you off guard. The comments are the best part of these posts.