I've recruited for Bloomberg and a few similar financial software companies. Going to demystify the behavioral round because candidates consistently bomb it not because they have bad stories, but because they don't understand what Bloomberg actually values.
Bloomberg's unofficial value system (from observing many debrief calls):
Ownership. Did you see something broken and fix it without being asked? Did you push a project through when it got hard? They are not a consensus-by-committee culture. They want people who move.
Speed vs. quality tradeoffs. Their terminal has hundreds of thousands of users who depend on it every day. They've burned on bugs that hit at the wrong moment. So they care: how do you decide when something is done enough to ship?
Directness. Bloomberg culture skews toward frank communication, especially on the engineering side. Stories where you avoided a conflict or consensus-managed your way around a disagreement land flat. Stories where you stated your view, heard pushback, and either updated or held your ground tend to do better.
Actual questions I've heard: "Tell me about a time you disagreed with a technical decision and what you did." "Describe a project that didn't go as planned. What broke, what did you do?" "Tell me about a time you had to move fast and make a call with incomplete information." "When have you had to tell a stakeholder something they didn't want to hear?"
What kills candidates: vague answers, too much "we" with no "I," and stories without a clear decision point. They want to know what YOU specifically did.
Seniority note: at senior levels and above, they also look for evidence you leveled up others, not just yourself. Mentoring, code review, driving alignment. Pure IC hero stories get less traction the more senior you're applying for.