Greenberg Traurig, LLP vs. Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP vs. Foley Hoag LLP
Category by category. Sources: Vault 2027, Am Law 200 FY2025, and reported Chambers records from the years shown.
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP
Est. 1967
- Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP
Est. 1856
- Foley Hoag LLP
Est. 1943
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.
Est. 1856
A transatlantic full-service firm with U.S. strength in corporate, litigation, real estate, intellectual property, and regulated-industry work.
Est. 1943
Foley Hoag LLP is a ~350-attorney firm. Jurisdiction-specific Chambers rankings include Band 1 in Environment; Band 2 in Cannabis Law and Energy & Natural Resources.
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP#55
- Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLPNot Reported
- Foley Hoag LLP#90
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP#17
- Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP#76
- Foley Hoag LLP#134
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP31 records
- Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP12 records
- Foley Hoag LLP1 record
- #55
- #17
- 31 records
- Vault rank
- Not Reported
- Am Law rank
- #76
- Reported Chambers Band 1 records
- 12 records
- Vault rank
- #90
- Am Law rank
- #134
- Reported Chambers Band 1 records
- 1 record
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPVaries by office
- Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLPNot Reported
- Foley Hoag LLP$225,000+
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP$2.90M
- Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP$757K
- Foley Hoag LLP$1.45M
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP$2.91B
- Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP$828.04M
- Foley Hoag LLP$323.68M
Revenue per lawyer
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP$1.04M
- Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP$688K
- Foley Hoag LLP$1.25M
- Varies by office
- $2.90M
- $2.91B
- Revenue per lawyer
- $1.04M
- First-Year Comp
- Not Reported
- Profits Per Partner
- $757K
- Firm revenue
- $828.04M
- Revenue per lawyer
- $688K
- First-Year Comp
- $225,000+
- Profits Per Partner
- $1.45M
- Firm revenue
- $323.68M
- Revenue per lawyer
- $1.25M
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPVaries by office
- Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLPNot Reported
- Foley Hoag LLPNot Reported
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP9 years
- Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLPNot Reported
- Foley Hoag LLPNot Reported
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP0.7:1
- Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLPNot Reported
- Foley Hoag LLP0.7:1
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP~3,000
- Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP~1,300
- Foley Hoag LLP~350
Offices
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP52
- Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP42
- Foley Hoag LLP6
- Varies by office
- 9 years
- 0.7:1
- ~3,000
- Offices
- 52
- Billable target
- Not Reported
- Partnership track
- Not Reported
- US associates per partner
- Not Reported
- Firm size (rounded to 50)
- ~1,300
- Offices
- 42
- Billable target
- Not Reported
- Partnership track
- Not Reported
- US associates per partner
- 0.7:1
- Firm size (rounded to 50)
- ~350
- Offices
- 6
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP95%
- Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLPNot Reported
- Foley Hoag LLP76.5%
Class size
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP92 (year not confirmed)
- Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLPNot Reported
- Foley Hoag LLP15 (year not confirmed)
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPNot Reported
- Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLPNot Reported
- Foley Hoag LLPNot Reported
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPCase by Case
- Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLPNot Reported
- Foley Hoag LLPCase by Case
- 95%
- Class size
- 92 (year not confirmed)
- Not Reported
- Case by Case
- Offer rate
- Not Reported
- Class size
- Not Reported
- How associates get work
- Not Reported
- Specific practice area
- Not Reported
- Offer rate
- 76.5%
- Class size
- 15 (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
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPBand 1
- Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLPBand 1
- Foley Hoag LLPBand 2
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPBand 4
- Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLPBand 4
- Foley Hoag LLPBand 3
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”.