Optiver vs IMC vs Flow Traders: The Amsterdam Market Maker Comparison

Three firms, three very different assessments — and an honest look at comp, culture, and which offer candidates actually take.

Updated July 3, 2026 · QuantVault

Written by the QuantVault team. Everything below about assessment formats and interview stages comes from candidate reports (Glassdoor, Wall Street Oasis, Reddit) and the firms' own careers pages, and formats do change year to year — treat specifics as directional, not gospel.

Optiver, IMC, and Flow Traders are the three names every Amsterdam trading candidate ends up googling against each other. All three are market makers headquartered within a few kilometres of each other on the Zuidas, all three recruit heavily from European STEM programmes, and all three will make you do timed math under pressure. Beyond that, they diverge more than the Reddit threads suggest.

The firms in one paragraph each

Optiver (founded 1986) is the most globally recognised of the three: an options market maker with major offices in Amsterdam, Chicago, and Sydney, and a reputation for having one of the hardest trader assessments anywhere. IMC (founded 1989) is similar in size and prestige but more diversified across asset classes, with a strong tech culture and a well-known structured entry programme (Launchpad) for interns. Flow Traders (founded 2004) is the specialist: it built its business on ETP/ETF market making and is the only one of the three that is publicly listed, on Euronext Amsterdam since 2015 — which matters for how it pays, as we'll see.

The assessments, side by side

This is where the three genuinely differ, and it's the part you can actually prepare for. The famous formats:

	Optiver	IMC	Flow Traders
Signature test	80 arithmetic questions in 8 minutes	~24 questions in 18 minutes (sequences, numerical & logical reasoning) plus BrainsFirst cognitive games	Timed mental-math test (~8 min) plus a separate sequences test (~25 min)
Time per question	~6 seconds	~45 seconds	Varies; math section is speed-focused, sequences allow more thought
What it selects for	Raw arithmetic speed and accuracy under a scoring penalty	Pattern recognition and reasoning; speed matters but less brutally	Both: fast arithmetic and pattern spotting, with ETF-flavoured questions later on
Later rounds	Sequences, probability, market-making games, multi-round onsite	Behavioural screen, then probability and game-style trading interviews	HR/motivation round, then ETF pricing and market-making questions

The pacing math is worth internalising. Optiver's 80-in-8 gives you $\frac{8 \times 60}{80} = 6$ seconds per question — there is no "working it out," only instant recall of fraction-decimal conversions and two-digit products. IMC's format gives you $\frac{18 \times 60}{24} = 45$ seconds per question, seven and a half times longer, because the questions require actual reasoning: spotting that a sequence is second-difference arithmetic or alternating-rule takes thought, not reflex. Flow sits in between — candidate reports and Tradermath's guides describe an 8-minute mental math section where most people don't finish, plus a longer sequences section. If you're deciding where your natural edge lies: pure speed demons should favour Optiver's format, puzzle people IMC's, and all-rounders Flow's. Full format breakdowns are on our IMC OA and Flow Traders OA pages.

Compensation: private vs public matters

Hedge everything here heavily — samples are small and bonus years vary wildly. That said, the pattern in the data is consistent. Amsterdam Trading Jobs puts first-year Optiver Amsterdam traders around €120k–180k total. Glassdoor's IMC Amsterdam trader range runs roughly €100k–230k. Flow Traders shows lower on Glassdoor — around €70–75k base plus ~€50k variable for junior traders — but with a structural quirk: as a listed company, Flow pays a discretionary profit share tied to firm results, so comp swings with ETF volumes. In a volatile year (2020, 2022) Flow bonuses spiked; in quiet years they compressed. Optiver and IMC, being private partnerships, historically pay higher and steadier at the junior level. For broader context on how these figures compare across the industry, see our quant salary guide.

Culture and selectivity, honestly

Optiver is generally considered the most selective and most intense of the three — it sits near the top of our interview difficulty ranking, and its assessment is explicitly meritocratic: score well and you get interviewed regardless of school. IMC's candidate reviews skew collaborative and tech-forward, with a somewhat gentler interview arc. Flow Traders is the most accessible entry point of the three: it hires larger graduate classes, runs a 3-month structured training programme, and candidates who miss at Optiver or IMC frequently land there. That's not a knock — Flow's ETF specialisation teaches creation/redemption mechanics that the options shops don't, and plenty of traders build excellent careers there. But if you hold all three offers, most candidates rank them Optiver, IMC, Flow on prestige and expected comp, while noting IMC often wins on work-life balance in employee reviews.

How to prepare for all three at once

The good news: the skills overlap almost completely. Fast arithmetic, sequences, probability, and a market-making game round appear across all three processes — only the weights differ. Drill arithmetic to Optiver's standard and IMC's and Flow's math sections become comfortable; learn sequence taxonomy for IMC and Flow's sequences test is the same muscle.

Ready to practise? Run timed drills against the real formats with our Optiver assessment simulator, sharpen quoting instincts in the make-me-a-market game, and work through the full set of trading games before your first round.

More comparisons

Frequently asked questions

Which is harder to get into: Optiver, IMC, or Flow Traders?

Optiver is generally considered the most selective, largely because its 80-questions-in-8-minutes arithmetic test filters out most applicants before any interview. IMC sits close behind with a reasoning-heavy assessment, while Flow Traders hires larger graduate classes and is widely seen as the most accessible of the three. All three still reject the large majority of applicants.

Who pays more: Optiver, IMC, or Flow Traders?

Candidate-reported data suggests Optiver and IMC pay more at the junior level, with first-year Amsterdam trader compensation roughly in the €100k–180k+ range versus lower base figures at Flow Traders. Flow's pay includes a profit share tied to firm results, so it swings more with market volatility since the company is publicly listed. In strong ETF-volume years the gap narrows considerably.

How is the Optiver test different from the IMC test?

Optiver's 80-in-8 gives you about 6 seconds per arithmetic question, so it tests pure calculation speed and accuracy under a wrong-answer penalty. IMC's assessment gives roughly 45 seconds per question across sequences, numerical, and logical reasoning, plus BrainsFirst cognitive games, so it rewards pattern recognition over raw speed. Flow Traders combines both styles with a short mental-math test and a longer sequences test.

Should I take a Flow Traders offer over waiting for Optiver or IMC?

If you hold only a Flow Traders offer, most candidates take it rather than gamble on a future cycle, since it provides real market-making experience and a structured 3-month training programme. Flow's ETF creation/redemption specialisation is genuinely valuable and traders do move between Amsterdam firms later. If you hold multiple offers simultaneously, most candidates rank Optiver first on prestige and expected compensation.

Practice the real thing

QuantVault has 2,800+ quant interview problems with full solutions, intuition, and hints, firm-by-firm interview funnels, and an auto-graded coding judge. Start free.

Browse problems Firm interview guides