Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP vs. Latham & Watkins LLP vs. Greenberg Traurig, LLP
Category by category. Sources: Vault 2027, Am Law 200 FY2025, and reported Chambers records from the years shown.
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP
Est. 2018 · Merger
- Latham & Watkins LLP
Est. 1934 · Los Angeles
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP
Est. 1967
Est. 2018 · Merger
Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP is a 1,000-plus-attorney firm. Jurisdiction-specific Chambers rankings include Band 1 in Antitrust, Corporate/M&A, and Environment. Operates from 30 offices worldwide.
Est. 1934 · Los Angeles
Latham & Watkins LLP is a 2,000-plus-attorney global firm, Vault #4 / Am Law #2, founded in Los Angeles, CA. Jurisdiction-specific Chambers rankings include Band 1 in Antitrust, Antitrust: Cartel, and Appellate Law. Operates from 34 offices worldwide.
Est. 1967
Greenberg Traurig, LLP is a 2,000-plus-attorney global firm, Am Law #17. Jurisdiction-specific Chambers rankings include Band 1 in Banking & Finance, Construction, and Corporate/Commercial. Operates from 52 offices worldwide.
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP#99
- Latham & Watkins LLP#4
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP#55
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP#67
- Latham & Watkins LLP#2
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP#17
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP8 records
- Latham & Watkins LLP96 records
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP31 records
- #99
- #67
- 8 records
- Vault rank
- #4
- Am Law rank
- #2
- Reported Chambers Band 1 records
- 96 records
- Vault rank
- #55
- Am Law rank
- #17
- Reported Chambers Band 1 records
- 31 records
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP$200,000
- Latham & Watkins LLP$225,000
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPVaries by office
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP$1.41M
- Latham & Watkins LLP$8.65M
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP$2.90M
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP$912.07M
- Latham & Watkins LLP$8.30B
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP$2.91B
Revenue per lawyer
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP$1.17M
- Latham & Watkins LLP$2.23M
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP$1.04M
- $200,000
- $1.41M
- $912.07M
- Revenue per lawyer
- $1.17M
- First-Year Comp
- $225,000
- Profits Per Partner
- $8.65M
- Firm revenue
- $8.30B
- Revenue per lawyer
- $2.23M
- First-Year Comp
- Varies by office
- Profits Per Partner
- $2.90M
- Firm revenue
- $2.91B
- Revenue per lawyer
- $1.04M
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLPNot Reported
- Latham & Watkins LLP1,900
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPVaries by office
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLPNot Reported
- Latham & Watkins LLPNot Reported
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP9 years
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLPNot Reported
- Latham & Watkins LLP2.7:1
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP0.7:1
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP~1,200
- Latham & Watkins LLP~3,700
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP~3,000
Offices
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP30
- Latham & Watkins LLP34
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP52
- Not Reported
- Not Reported
- Not Reported
- ~1,200
- Offices
- 30
- Billable target
- 1,900
- Partnership track
- Not Reported
- US associates per partner
- 2.7:1
- Firm size (rounded to 50)
- ~3,700
- Offices
- 34
- Billable target
- Varies by office
- Partnership track
- 9 years
- US associates per partner
- 0.7:1
- Firm size (rounded to 50)
- ~3,000
- Offices
- 52
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP100%
- Latham & Watkins LLP100%
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP95%
Class size
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP20 (year not confirmed)
- Latham & Watkins LLP398 (year not confirmed)
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP92 (year not confirmed)
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLPNot Reported
- Latham & Watkins LLPNot Reported
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPNot Reported
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLPNo
- Latham & Watkins LLPNo
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPCase by Case
- 100%
- Class size
- 20 (year not confirmed)
- Not Reported
- No
- Offer rate
- 100%
- Class size
- 398 (year not confirmed)
- How associates get work
- Not Reported
- Specific practice area
- No
- Offer rate
- 95%
- Class size
- 92 (year not confirmed)
- How associates get work
- Not Reported
- Specific practice area
- Case by Case
Green marks the stronger for the same practice, market and year. Shared results are listed once. split some top tables.
Rank differences
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLPBand 4
- Latham & Watkins LLPBand 1
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPBand 3
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLPBand 1
- Latham & Watkins LLPBand 2
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPBand 2
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLPBand 5 · Highly Regarded
- Latham & Watkins LLPBand 1 · Elite
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPBand 4 · Elite
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLPBand 5
- Latham & Watkins LLPBand 2
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPBand 1
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLPBand 3 · Highly Regarded
- Latham & Watkins LLPBand 2 · Elite
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPBand 4 · Elite
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLPBand 5
- Latham & Watkins LLPBand 2
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPBand 4
- Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLPBand 2
- Latham & Watkins LLPBand 2
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPBand 4
Firm-only and additional rankings remain available on each firm profile so missing coverage is not mistaken for a head-to-head loss.
See which of these firms are open on the Job Board
Data sources: Vault 2027, Am Law 200 FY2025, and reported Chambers records from the years shown. Chambers record counts can span years and reporting coverage varies; missing years or markets are not compared. Current Chambers bands were checked against each firm’s Chambers profile on Sep 26, 2026; where Chambers splits a table, every Elite firm ranks above every Highly Regarded firm. Missing values read “Not Reported”.