employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

Amazon Web Services

Part of Amazon

Is this your company?

Front End Developer II - Front End Developer II Amazon Web Services Employee Review

5.0
Apr 21, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

I worked with a highly talented and motivated team of engineers who cared deeply about quality and ownership. There was a strong engineering culture with a high bar for code reviews and long-term maintainability. The work provided great exposure to building complex, large-scale systems, and I had opportunities to contribute to impactful features and UI architecture. Collaboration with cross-functional partners, including design and product, was generally strong and helped drive thoughtful, user-focused solutions.

Cons

On-call expectations could be quite demanding at times, depending on the team, which occasionally impacted work-life balance. There was also a consistently high feature delivery pace, which sometimes made it challenging to balance speed with deeper technical improvements or long-term investments. Prioritization could feel heavily weighted toward delivery timelines over iteration or refinement.

Explore other reviews about Amazon Web Services

5.0
Jun 8, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Great team when you have a manager and full team that works well and collaborates well. Stock is great. And you know when youre doing well, the pay increase is roughly the same as everyone else.

Cons

Low perks compared to other FAANG companies and most teams have high turn over

4.0
May 12, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Operated in systems that had real scale, operational constraints, and production consequences.

Cons

Working at Amazon Web Services gave me strong exposure to distributed systems, operational ownership, and production-scale infrastructure, but there were definitely tradeoffs as well. One downside was that, like many large organizations, ownership could become fragmented. You often own a subsystem or workflow rather than an entire product end-to-end, which can limit exposure to broader architectural decision-making unless you deliberately seek it out. There was also significant process overhead. Design reviews, operational processes, dependency coordination, and organizational alignment were valuable for learning rigor, but they can slow iteration compared to smaller engineering teams. Another challenge is that large internal ecosystems can abstract away infrastructure complexity. AWS has extensive internal tooling, deployment systems, and operational platforms, which are powerful, but some of that experience does not transfer directly outside the company. I also found that operational work could dominate engineering time at points. Handling production issues, retries, integration failures, and on-call responsibilities teaches reliability engineering well, but it can reduce the amount of time spent on deeper technical exploration or greenfield development. Finally, there is the perception aspect. AWS is a strong name, but experienced interviewers know there is wide variance between teams and roles. The company name opens doors, but ultimately you still need to demonstrate technical depth, ownership, and strong engineering judgment independently of the brand.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All