Hobbies and Interests on a CV: When They Help and When They Waste Space

The interests section is the most argued about part of a CV and the least consequential. Some guides say it humanises you, others say it wastes space that should go to achievements, and both camps state their position as though it settled the matter.

The honest answer is that it depends on what you put in it and how much room you have. A specific, verifiable interest can genuinely help. A list of the words "reading, travelling, socialising" helps nobody and costs you two lines.

Does it belong at all

Start with the question of space, because it decides most cases.

If your CV is full, meaning your experience and skills already fill the pages you have, cut it. Nothing in an interests section outperforms a bullet showing a result. This is the situation for most people with more than a few years of experience.

If you have room, meaning you are early in your career or your CV runs short of the length your market expects, it is worth two or three lines, provided the content is specific.

If you are applying in a country where it is conventional, include it regardless. Germany and parts of Central Europe expect a short line, and its absence reads as an omission rather than an editorial choice.

If a genuine interest connects to the role, include it even on a full CV. A candidate applying to a cycling retailer who races competitively has something worth one line.

Notice what is missing from that list: personality. The idea that this section is where you show you are a human being is the weakest argument for it, because a well written experience section already does that, and a list of hobbies does not.

What actually works

The difference between a useful entry and filler is specificity. Compare.

Interests: reading, travelling, music, socialising.

This is the default and it tells a reader nothing. Everyone reads, everyone travels, and the words are so unspecific that they could belong to any of the four hundred other applicants.

Interests: long distance running (completed three marathons, current club member), amateur astronomy, restoring vintage bicycles.

Same section, entirely different effect. Each entry is checkable, each one implies something about how you spend your time, and any of them could produce a genuine two minute conversation in an interview.

Three tests for whether an entry earns its line.

Is it specific enough to be false? "Reading" cannot be wrong. "Reading nineteenth century Russian novels" can be, which is exactly why it carries information.

Does it suggest a trait without claiming one? Sustained commitment, discipline, teamwork and curiosity all show through activities far better than through adjectives, which is why this section sometimes does the job that "hardworking and motivated" fails to do, as discussed in common CV mistakes to avoid.

Could you talk about it for two minutes? If not, it is not really an interest, it is decoration.

What earns extra weight

Some entries are worth more than a hobby, and they are frequently filed here when they belong somewhere better.

Anything with responsibility attached. Treasurer of a club, coach of a junior team, organiser of a regular event. That is unpaid work, not a hobby, and if it is substantial it belongs in your experience section with bullets, particularly if your paid experience is thin. That approach is set out in writing a CV with no work experience.

Anything that overlaps with the job. Side projects for developers, a personal blog for writers, competitive analysis for analysts. These are evidence, not interests, and they belong near your skills.

Sustained achievement in anything demanding. Grade eight in an instrument, a black belt, a completed ultramarathon, a chess rating. These show a capacity to keep going at something difficult over years, which is a real signal and cannot be faked.

Languages. These are not interests. They belong in their own line or in your skills section, because they are a capability an employer may be searching for.

What to leave out

Politics and religion. Not because either is shameful, but because they invite a reaction unrelated to your ability to do the job, and you cannot predict which reaction you will get.

Anything that implies a protected characteristic you would rather not disclose at CV stage. Some organisational memberships do this indirectly. Include them if you want to, knowingly.

Passive consumption dressed as interest. "Watching films", "listening to podcasts", "spending time with family". True of nearly everyone and therefore uninformative.

Anything that sounds like an availability problem. Not because you should hide a demanding commitment, but because a bare mention without context can invite an assumption. If it is genuinely relevant, frame it with the fact that it fits around work.

Anything risky, stated without care. Certain sports occasionally raise questions in roles with insurance or safety implications. This is not a reason to hide who you are, and it is worth knowing that the question exists.

Jokes. The interests line is where CV humour goes to die, because the reader does not know you and tone does not survive one line of text.

Country conventions

This section varies more between countries than almost any other part of a CV.

Germany, Austria, Switzerland. Conventional and expected. A short line under "Interessen" is standard, and leaving it out is noticeable. Two or three specific entries is the norm.

France, Spain, Italy. Common, usually brief, often labelled "centres d'intérêt" or the local equivalent. Sport and cultural interests are unremarkable.

United Kingdom and Ireland. Optional and declining. Common on graduate CVs, frequently dropped by experienced candidates who need the space.

United States and Canada. Rare on professional resumes, where the one page convention leaves no room for anything that is not evidence. Include only if directly relevant to the role.

Turkey. Common, particularly on graduate CVs, and generally brief.

Netherlands and Scandinavia. Optional, minimal when present.

If you are applying abroad, follow the destination country's convention. This is a small point, but the section is unusually visible when it is either missing where expected or present where nobody includes one.

How to write it

Keep it to one or two lines and use the heading "Interests". Comma separated entries in a single sentence use less space than a bulleted list and read better.

Interests: Distance running (three marathons, current member of Leeds Athletics Club), restoring vintage bicycles, amateur astronomy.

Three entries is plenty. Five starts to look like you are filling space, which is the impression this section is most at risk of creating.

Put it last, below education and skills. It is the least important section on the page and its position should say so.

If any entry is doing real work, consider whether it deserves promotion. A club treasurer role is worth more as a short experience entry with two bullets than as one word in a list.

Before and after, three cases

Real rewrites, showing what the same person can do with the same life.

A graduate applying for a marketing role

Before: Interests: social media, music, travelling, meeting new people.

After: Interests: run a music blog with around 3,000 monthly readers, five-a-side football (team captain), amateur photography.

Nothing was invented. The blog existed, it just was not mentioned because it did not feel like a qualification. For a marketing role it is closer to evidence than to an interest, and arguably belongs in experience rather than at the bottom of the page.

An accountant applying for a senior role

Before: Interests: reading, cinema, cooking, spending time with family.

After: (section removed, two more achievement bullets added to the current role)

The right answer for most experienced candidates. Nothing here was going to change a decision, and the space was worth more elsewhere.

A career changer moving into software

Before: Interests: computers, technology, gaming.

After: Interests: build small tools in Python for personal use, most recently a script that reconciles bank exports; occasional contributor to an open source scheduling library.

The before version is a claim of enthusiasm. The after version is proof of practice, and for someone without professional experience in the field it may be the most important two lines on the page. That situation is covered more fully in writing a career change CV.

The pattern across all three: either make the entry specific enough to prove something, or delete the section and use the space for work.

Does it matter for the software

No. Parsers extract skills, employers, titles and dates, and nobody searches a candidate database for "amateur astronomy". This section is written entirely for the human who reads afterwards, which is the same distinction covered in ATS keywords.

The one indirect point is space. If your interests section is pushing your recent experience onto a second page or below the fold of the first, it is costing you something real in exchange for something decorative.

The interview angle

The strongest practical argument for a good interests line has nothing to do with impressions.

Interviews often open with two minutes of small talk while people settle, and an interviewer scanning your CV for a conversational opening will land on this section, because it is the only part that is not about work. A specific interest gives them somewhere easy to start, and gives you a comfortable two minutes at the point where nerves are highest.

That is a small, real advantage. It is also why the entry needs to be something you can genuinely talk about, and why "reading" is not just uninformative but actively unhelpful, since it produces the question "what are you reading at the moment" and an awkward pause.

When the section says something you did not intend

Worth being aware of, because this is the only way an interests line does real damage, and it happens by accident rather than by choice.

It can signal an era. Certain activities are strongly associated with a generation, and a reader forms an impression from them without deciding to. This is not a reason to censor yourself, but it is worth knowing that the section is read as a signal even when you meant it as a fact.

It can imply a monoculture. A list consisting entirely of one expensive sport reads differently from a mixed list, and in some sectors it lands as an assumption about background rather than an interest. Again, not a rule, just an effect that exists.

It can undercut a claim you made above. If your summary says you thrive in fast paced collaborative environments and your interests are three solitary pursuits, an attentive reader notices the mismatch. The fix is not to change your hobbies, it is to stop making unverifiable personality claims in the summary, which is better advice anyway.

It can look like a filler section, which is the most common accidental signal of all. Four generic entries at the bottom of a thin CV tell the reader that you did not have enough material and knew it.

None of these will cost you an interview on their own. They are worth knowing because they are all avoidable at no cost, simply by being specific and brief or by leaving the section out.

A thirty second decision

If you would rather not think about this again, here is the whole decision in order.

Does your CV currently fill its pages with experience and skills? If yes, delete the section and stop reading.

Are you applying to Germany, Austria or Switzerland? If yes, include two or three specific entries regardless of space.

Do you have an interest that genuinely connects to the role or shows sustained commitment to something difficult? If yes, include it, even briefly.

Does any entry involve responsibility, an audience or an output? If yes, move it up into experience or skills where it can be described properly.

Is what remains a list of activities that could belong to almost anyone? If yes, delete the section rather than filling it.

That sequence resolves nearly every case, and it takes less time to run than reading one more article arguing about whether hobbies belong on a CV.

Frequently asked questions

Should I include hobbies if I have plenty of experience?

Usually not. Once your experience fills the page, this section is the first thing to cut. The exceptions are a country where it is conventional and an interest genuinely relevant to the role.

Do employers actually read this section?

Some skim it, most ignore it, and a few use it as an interview opener. Nobody hires on it and nobody rejects on it, which is a useful reminder of how much effort it deserves.

Can an interest ever hurt me?

Rarely, and mostly through the categories above: politics, religion, or something stated in a way that invites an unrelated judgement. The more common cost is not harm but waste, where generic entries take space from achievements.

Should I put volunteering here?

No, if it involved real responsibility or time. That belongs in your experience section where you can describe what you did and what came of it, with the approach in quantifying achievements.

What if my interests are genuinely ordinary?

Then leave the section out. There is no obligation to have a distinctive hobby, and an honest omission is better than an invented interest you cannot discuss.

Do I list languages here?

No. Languages are a capability and belong in skills or their own short line, where an employer searching for them will find them.

Spend the space where it counts

Before deciding whether an interests section earns its place, it helps to know how much of your CV is currently carrying real weight. CvLaunch reads your file, shows you what an employer's system extracted, and flags the bullets that describe responsibilities without ever saying what came of them. If those outnumber your achievements, the two lines at the bottom are not your problem. It takes a few seconds, it is free, and there is no sign up.