I wonder if there’s some sort of theory behind having candidates quizzed on vaguely-related topics. I also had a similar experience where I was quizzed on a bunch of electrochemistry items that were totally irrelevant. That was for the job I’m at now. Managing your stress is important. It took me a while to learn that yes, it’s ok to do things for yourself to lower your burden and YES there may be major consequences if you can’t regulate that properly. You might go through periods where you’re less resilient than before for little reasons like a long commute or seemingly minor personal changes. Don’t let them sneak up on you.
Those aren't vaguely-related, though. Basel III outlines best practices for banks, how low/high-risk operations should be distributed and a whole bunch of similar topics. CRD IV is, broadly speaking, the EU-compliant implementation of those. It's just that I was expecting more, high-level maths for this kind of position. Something closer to "global and local gauge invariance in open systems" not "sophomore data analysis". I mean, they were explicitly looking for maths/physics post-grads, so it's not like it wasn't at least somewhat justified. I never really learned how to even identify stress. It goes unnoticed (by me, friends usually see it first) until physiological problems (lack of appetite, nausea, loss of weight etc.) start messing me up. That's why I'm not sure if it's really that I'm stressed, but I'll heed your words regardless. If you have other tips or insights I'm all ears.