One of the most common, and most demoralizing, rejection patterns: you do well in interviews, get to final round, and the email says "we chose someone with more experience."
Here's what's actually happening 80% of the time:
The role was posted as Senior but the team really wanted Staff. Or it was posted as Mid but the team needed Senior. The hiring manager screened your resume thinking you'd grow into the role; the panel decided they wanted a sure thing instead.
This is positioning, not skill. You didn't lose because you weren't good enough. You lost because the role's level was ambiguous and the team resolved the ambiguity in favor of the safer candidate.
Three things this should change about your job search: Ask about level expectations explicitly during recruiter screen. "What level is this role calibrated for, what's the gap between someone you'd hire and someone you'd pass on?" If the answer is hand-wavy, the role's level is ambiguous and you're more likely to lose in panel. Look for roles posted with a clearly-defined level band (e.g., "L5 SWE" not "Senior SWE"). Clearer bands = fewer surprises in the final-round conversation. If 3+ rejections in a row cite "more experience," you might be applying to roles 1 level above your current calibrated level. The fix isn't to interview better; it's to target one level down for 2-3 applications and see if the conversion rate jumps.
The "more experience" rejection is fixable. It's a positioning problem with a positioning solution.