Shutts & Bowen vs. Greenberg Traurig, LLP vs. Akerman LLP
Category by category. Sources: Vault 2027, Am Law 200 FY2025, and reported Chambers records from the years shown.
- Shutts & Bowen
Est. 1910
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP
Est. 1967
- Akerman LLP
Est. 1920
Est. 1910
Shutts & Bowen is a ~280-attorney firm. Jurisdiction-specific Chambers rankings include Band 1 in Banking & Finance and Intellectual Property; Band 2 in Construction.
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. 1920
Akerman LLP is a mid-size firm of ~594 attorneys. Jurisdiction-specific Chambers rankings include Band 1 in Bankruptcy/Restructuring, Cannabis Law, and Environment. Operates from 21 offices worldwide.
- Shutts & BowenNot Reported
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP#55
- Akerman LLP#95
- Shutts & Bowen#170
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP#17
- Akerman LLP#96
- Shutts & Bowen2 records
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP31 records
- Akerman LLP5 records
- Not Reported
- #170
- 2 records
- Vault rank
- #55
- Am Law rank
- #17
- Reported Chambers Band 1 records
- 31 records
- Vault rank
- #95
- Am Law rank
- #96
- Reported Chambers Band 1 records
- 5 records
- Shutts & Bowen$225,000
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPVaries by office
- Akerman LLP$215,000
- Shutts & Bowen$1.12M
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP$2.90M
- Akerman LLP$1.50M
- Shutts & Bowen$221.19M
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP$2.91B
- Akerman LLP$626.93M
Revenue per lawyer
- Shutts & Bowen$821K
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP$1.04M
- Akerman LLP$1.06M
- $225,000
- $1.12M
- $221.19M
- Revenue per lawyer
- $821K
- First-Year Comp
- Varies by office
- Profits Per Partner
- $2.90M
- Firm revenue
- $2.91B
- Revenue per lawyer
- $1.04M
- First-Year Comp
- $215,000
- Profits Per Partner
- $1.50M
- Firm revenue
- $626.93M
- Revenue per lawyer
- $1.06M
- Shutts & BowenNot Reported
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPVaries by office
- Akerman LLPNot Reported
- Shutts & BowenNot Reported
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP9 years
- Akerman LLPNot Reported
- Shutts & BowenNot Reported
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP0.7:1
- Akerman LLPNot Reported
- Shutts & Bowen~300
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP~3,000
- Akerman LLP~600
Offices
- Shutts & Bowen8
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP52
- Akerman LLP21
- Not Reported
- Not Reported
- Not Reported
- ~300
- Offices
- 8
- 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
- Billable target
- Not Reported
- Partnership track
- Not Reported
- US associates per partner
- Not Reported
- Firm size (rounded to 50)
- ~600
- Offices
- 21
- Shutts & BowenNot Reported
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP95%
- Akerman LLP100%
Class size
- Shutts & BowenNot Reported
- Greenberg Traurig, LLP92 (year not confirmed)
- Akerman LLP22 (2026)
- Shutts & BowenNot Reported
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPNot Reported
- Akerman LLPNot Reported
- Shutts & BowenYes
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPCase by Case
- Akerman LLPYes
- Not Reported
- Class size
- Not Reported
- Not Reported
- Yes
- Offer rate
- 95%
- Class size
- 92 (year not confirmed)
- How associates get work
- Not Reported
- Specific practice area
- Case by Case
- Offer rate
- 100%
- Class size
- 22 (2026)
- How associates get work
- Not Reported
- Specific practice area
- Yes
Green marks the stronger for the same practice, market and year. Shared results are listed once. split some top tables.
Shared rankings
Rank differences
- Shutts & BowenBand 1
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPBand 1
- Akerman LLPBand 2
- Shutts & BowenBand 2
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPBand 1
- Akerman LLPBand 1
- Shutts & BowenBand 1
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPBand 2
- Akerman LLPBand 2
- Shutts & BowenBand 2 · Highly Regarded
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPBand 1 · Elite
- Akerman LLPBand 2 · Elite
- Shutts & BowenBand 2
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPBand 1
- Akerman LLPBand 3
- Shutts & BowenBand 3
- Greenberg Traurig, LLPBand 1
- Akerman LLPBand 2
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”.