Question about vault rankings Forum

[learntolift]

So I am curious about ratings on vault and perhaps put too much emphasis on them. For example with Schulte; they are the best in the business for investment management especially with hedge funds. So how are they rated so low on vault? Even if their other practice areas are weaker I'd think someone who is at the top of a practice area like that would be at least top 30 material.

Can anyone educate me a bit on this?

[Pikappraider]

vault rankings are not based on anything substantive. It is a poll of associates saying who they think the most prestigious firms are. It is literally nothing more than a prestige fest.

[Anonymous User]

Vault rankings are just based off of size pretty much/NY centric (i.e. voted by associates) - so most associates are just going off of name prestige not off a specific practice group. Firm like Schulte as strong as they are in hedge fund work doesn't have the name recognition in other groups where tons of other associates work so naturally not going to get voted as high by the masses of associates. If you did a vault ranking where only hedge fund associates could vote, bet Schulte is much higher.

If you KNOW you want to do hedge fund work, just go to Schulte, work like 2-3 years then go to Goldman and be happy with your decision and never look back. It's a great firm. My roommate is there and its pretty much a revolving door with GS, etc and the hedge funds. I think over the past 5 years its been the #1 feeder to GS.

[Anonymous User]

Law firm associate here. Schulte Roth is one of those firms that everyone "in the know" realizes is misranked (for whatever reason). Generally, in NYC for corproate work, it is considered about on the same level as Davis Polk. It's similar to law schools like Baylor - it may be ranked lower than Alabama or WUSTL, but people who want to be litigators will definitely receive a better education, experience, and opportunities there.

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

Law firm associate here. Schulte Roth is one of those firms that everyone "in the know" realizes is misranked (for whatever reason). Generally, in NYC for corproate work, it is considered about on the same level as Davis Polk. It's similar to law schools like Baylor - it may be ranked lower than Alabama or WUSTL, but people who want to be litigators will definitely receive a better education, experience, and opportunities there.

(Baylor grad at Schulte)

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

OP: Correct answer is that it doesn't matter at all. If your life's ambition has been to do hedge fund stuff, go to Schulte. If you can't imagine life without capital markets, go to Cahill. If you want to do sports, go to Proskauer. Everybody pays the same; it's up to you to decide if the work and people at each place are palatable enough for you. I know law students have been circle-jerking prestige forever, but seriously, the whole point of law school prestige is to find a place that can get you a job. Once you have a job, you can stop worrying about what respondents in an anonymous survey think.

[Morgan12Oak]

OP: Correct answer is that it doesn't matter at all. If your life's ambition has been to do hedge fund stuff, go to Schulte. If you can't imagine life without capital markets, go to Cahill. If you want to do sports, go to Proskauer. Everybody pays the same; it's up to you to decide if the work and people at each place are palatable enough for you. I know law students have been circle-jerking prestige forever, but seriously, the whole point of law school prestige is to find a place that can get you a job. Once you have a job, you can stop worrying about what respondents in an anonymous survey think.

(capital markets associate at Cahill)

[SLS_AMG]

Vault rankings are just based off of size pretty much/NY centric (i.e. voted by associates) - so most associates are just going off of name prestige not off a specific practice group. Firm like Schulte as strong as they are in hedge fund work doesn't have the name recognition in other groups where tons of other associates work so naturally not going to get voted as high by the masses of associates. If you did a vault ranking where only hedge fund associates could vote, bet Schulte is much higher.

If you KNOW you want to do hedge fund work, just go to Schulte, work like 2-3 years then go to Goldman and be happy with your decision and never look back. It's a great firm. My roommate is there and its pretty much a revolving door with GS, etc and the hedge funds. I think over the past 5 years its been the #1 feeder to GS.

While Vault rankings do tend to favor New York firms, they're definitely not just based on size. DLA Piper, K&L Gates, and Baker & McKenzie are ginormous but not ranked highly, while Wachtell, Boies Schiller, and Williams & Connolly are all ranked highly in Vault and smaller than Schulte.

I do agree that someone wanting to do the sort of work Schulte specializes in would be a fool to not go there because of Vault rankings. I think Vault is a rough estimator of a firm's strength across practice areas (Wachtell being an exception), and perhaps indicates the firms at the top that are strong across virtually all of their practices. As you move down the rankings you'll find firms that are very good at some things but perhaps not as well balanced. Though, as this poster mentioned, Vault really is only a measure of prestige as seen by associates.

Law firm associate here. Schulte Roth is one of those firms that everyone "in the know" realizes is misranked (for whatever reason). Generally, in NYC for corproate work, it is considered about on the same level as Davis Polk

It's considered on the same level as a firm that has like 15 Band 1 rankings? lol ok.

[KidStuddi]

So I am curious about ratings on vault and perhaps put too much emphasis on them. For example with Schulte; they are the best in the business for investment management especially with hedge funds. So how are they rated so low on vault? Even if their other practice areas are weaker I'd think someone who is at the top of a practice area like that would be at least top 30 material.

It's got once niche practice it excels at, why is that instantly top 30 material? It's a relatively lucrative practice, granted, but plenty of firms have similar claims to fame as being the top of a niche practice.

Out of sheer boredom:

Schulte (V76) has two nationwide rankings, including one band 1.
McGuire woods (V75) has three nationwide rankings including one band 1.
Arent Fox (V74) has 7 nationwide rankings, but no band 1.
Hunton & Williams (V73) has 10 nationwide rankings including three band 1s.

So yeah, the Chambers assessments seem to line up pretty well with Vault here. Vault can be dumb and definitely has a NYC / transactional bias, but if anything that probably means it overrates Schulte.

Law firm associate here. Schulte Roth is one of those firms that everyone "in the know" realizes is misranked (for whatever reason). Generally, in NYC for corproate work, it is considered about on the same level as Davis Polk.

Lol, no. Precisely no one says that, probably not even Schulte's own people. They are several rungs down that ladder. For kicks:

Davis Polk (V5) has 21 nationwide rankings, including eight band 1s.

[2014]

Vault is a good proxy for overall corporate practice in New York. The more you deviate based on niche areas or different markets Vault loses a ton of value. Like the poster above suggested, if you did some sort of remedial regression for firms with large NY presences comparing Chambers (probably weighting like Credit, M&A, etc heavier) and Vault, they would correlate pretty well I imagine.

[Anonymous User]

so will these lower vault rated firms have a harder, almost impossible, time with placing inhouse jobs at various companies after a few years at the firm? that is my concern

[2014]

so will these lower vault rated firms have a harder, almost impossible, time with placing inhouse jobs at various companies after a few years at the firm? that is my concern

It seems like most corporate attorneys at least exit to work with clients so to the extent lower Vault firms work with smaller clients who have smaller in house departments that might matter I guess. I imagine going to a more prestigious firm might help with cold emailing employers since you are relying more on your resume standing out, but not positive. Others can surely answer better.

[84651846190]

so will these lower vault rated firms have a harder, almost impossible, time with placing inhouse jobs at various companies after a few years at the firm? that is my concern

No. Vault rankings are a very shitty metric for most practice areas. First, you need to decide what practice area you are going to commit to. Then you can look at firms that are strong in that practice area. Considering Vault rankings before you've even picked a practice area is retarded.

[Anonymous User]

if you want investment management, schulte is supreme. esecially hedge funds, wont get anywhere better. but thats for this practice area specifically

[jbagelboy]

Shulte Roth is hardly the most underrated vault firm though. Places like Munger, Perkins Coie or even W&C (relatively speaking) feel far more slighted IMO.

[84651846190]

Shulte Roth is hardly the most underrated vault firm though. Places like Munger, Perkins Coie or even W&C (relatively speaking) feel far more slighted IMO.

It's not even something you can break down by firm. People should really be looking at specific OFFICES of firms. For example, Baker Botts offices in Houston, Dallas or Austin will give you infinitely better and more exit options in Texas than any other firm ranked above them in the Vault rankings.

[Anonymous User]

Shulte Roth is hardly the most underrated vault firm though. Places like Munger, Perkins Coie or even W&C (relatively speaking) feel far more slighted IMO.

It's not even something you can break down by firm. People should really be looking at specific OFFICES of firms. For example, Baker Botts offices in Houston, Dallas or Austin will give you infinitely better and more exit options in Texas than any other firm ranked above them in the Vault rankings.

I think you're probably right if you're looking to go in-house and your firm has relationships with the corporation. But if it's firm-to-firm? I think prestige whoring will still be a thing.

When I was a neurotic-as-fuck rising 2L trying to pick a firm, I actually called the two biggest legal headhunting agencies in D.C. and asked them if picking a satellite office of a V10 would hamper my ability to lateral when compared to a D.C. institution (think Cleary/S&C/STB/Weil D.C., not big offices like Skadden, Kirkland, or Latham, versus Cov/A&P/Wilmer). One actually laughed at me and was like "do you really think people haven't heard of S&C or STB here in D.C.? No chance it hurts you." The other told me it'd probably be easier to find a lateral spot for the V10 associate explaining that they'd be easier to talk-up and have the benefit of not being 1 of 10 fungible Cov. associates looking to lateral that month alone.

[84651846190]

Shulte Roth is hardly the most underrated vault firm though. Places like Munger, Perkins Coie or even W&C (relatively speaking) feel far more slighted IMO.

It's not even something you can break down by firm. People should really be looking at specific OFFICES of firms. For example, Baker Botts offices in Houston, Dallas or Austin will give you infinitely better and more exit options in Texas than any other firm ranked above them in the Vault rankings.

I think you're probably right if you're looking to go in-house and your firm has relationships with the corporation. But if it's firm-to-firm? I think prestige whoring will still be a thing.

When I was a neurotic-as-fuck rising 2L trying to pick a firm, I actually called the two biggest legal headhunting agencies in D.C. and asked them if picking a satellite office of a V10 would hamper my ability to lateral when compared to a D.C. institution (think Cleary/S&C/STB/Weil D.C., not big offices like Skadden, Kirkland, or Latham, versus Cov/A&P/Wilmer). One actually laughed at me and was like "do you really think people haven't heard of S&C or STB here in D.C.? No chance it hurts you." The other told me it'd probably be easier to find a lateral spot for the V10 associate explaining that they'd be easier to talk-up and have the benefit of not being 1 of 10 fungible Cov. associates looking to lateral that month alone.

My main point was that it's a lot easier to lateral to another firm in your same state/city. Obviously, this doesn't apply to DC where you can just waive in. I have seen people lateral up to my firm from lower ranked firms. What really matters is that 1) you come from a "large" firm and 2) you have the right kind of work experience. Firms aren't going to choose an S&C associate over a Cooley associate if the Cooley associate has the right kind of experience and the S&C associate doesn't. In fact, if they both had the same experience, it might be a wash (unless, perhaps, you're at one of a few select NYC firms that view themselves as elite peers of S&C; but that's a ridiculously small number of firms compared to the entire NLJ350 or whatever).

[5ky]

OP: Correct answer is that it doesn't matter at all. If your life's ambition has been to do hedge fund stuff, go to Schulte. If you can't imagine life without capital markets, go to Cahill. If you want to do sports, go to Proskauer. Everybody pays the same; it's up to you to decide if the work and people at each place are palatable enough for you. I know law students have been circle-jerking prestige forever, but seriously, the whole point of law school prestige is to find a place that can get you a job. Once you have a job, you can stop worrying about what respondents in an anonymous survey think.

(capital markets associate at Cahill)

basically

protip: when i'm asked to find precedents from top cap markets firms, cahill isnt on that list. they're good, but not great.

[Old Gregg]

Cahill is a debt finance firm, not a capital markets firm.

[ResIpsa21]

Look, you have to understand preftige for what it is. More general preftige means greater opportunities in a broad range of practice areas and employers. Preftige keeps more doors open, but if you already know which door you want to go through, it doesn't matter all that much. As an example, if you want to do energy litigation, a Big Three TX firm is way better than a V10 NY firm. If you want to do hedge funds, hit up SRZ. If you don't really have a clue what you want to do, then take the most preftigious option to keep as many doors open as you can until you figure it out.

The Vault rankings are well-correlated with breadth of exit opportunities, but not the likelihood of any particular exit opportunity. As far as actual substantive experience at the firm, I'd say they're more than worthless. The very basis of the Vault ranking is the perception of associates who haven't actually worked for the firms they're ranking. It's also comical to assume that someone's experience will be uniform across a firm's offices or practice groups.

[Anonymous User]

What do folks in this thread think it means to be working in SRZ's hedge fund practice? I.e., what sort of transactions would you be doing?

Just curious - as a practicing attorney who does a lot of work with hedge funds - to see what the 2L expectations are.

[baal hadad]

Look, you have to understand preftige for what it is. More general preftige means greater opportunities in a broad range of practice areas and employers. Preftige keeps more doors open, but if you already know which door you want to go through, it doesn't matter all that much. As an example, if you want to do energy litigation, a Big Three TX firm is way better than a V10 NY firm. If you want to do hedge funds, hit up SRZ. If you don't really have a clue what you want to do, then take the most preftigious option to keep as many doors open as you can until you figure it out.

The Vault rankings are well-correlated with breadth of exit opportunities, but not the likelihood of any particular exit opportunity. As far as actual substantive experience at the firm, I'd say they're more than worthless. The very basis of the Vault ranking is the perception of associates who haven't actually worked for the firms they're ranking. It's also comical to assume that someone's experience will be uniform across a firm's offices or practice groups.

Doors start closing as soon as you get slotted into your practice group bro

If you're at skadden and all you're primarily doing is toxic waste dumping regulatory shit for 3 yrs(I dunno I just made that up no clue if they do this)

It's pretty obvs what your exit options are, and skaddens name isn't going to increase te breadth of what's available

Guess what bro you're breadth means jack shit you're an RCRA bro now

[84651846190]

Look, you have to understand preftige for what it is. More general preftige means greater opportunities in a broad range of practice areas and employers. Preftige keeps more doors open, but if you already know which door you want to go through, it doesn't matter all that much. As an example, if you want to do energy litigation, a Big Three TX firm is way better than a V10 NY firm. If you want to do hedge funds, hit up SRZ. If you don't really have a clue what you want to do, then take the most preftigious option to keep as many doors open as you can until you figure it out.

The Vault rankings are well-correlated with breadth of exit opportunities, but not the likelihood of any particular exit opportunity. As far as actual substantive experience at the firm, I'd say they're more than worthless. The very basis of the Vault ranking is the perception of associates who haven't actually worked for the firms they're ranking. It's also comical to assume that someone's experience will be uniform across a firm's offices or practice groups.

Doors start closing as soon as you get slotted into your practice group bro

So credited. No one wants to hire laterals without specialized experience.

[KidStuddi]

Look, you have to understand preftige for what it is. More general preftige means greater opportunities in a broad range of practice areas and employers. Preftige keeps more doors open, but if you already know which door you want to go through, it doesn't matter all that much. As an example, if you want to do energy litigation, a Big Three TX firm is way better than a V10 NY firm. If you want to do hedge funds, hit up SRZ. If you don't really have a clue what you want to do, then take the most preftigious option to keep as many doors open as you can until you figure it out.

The Vault rankings are well-correlated with breadth of exit opportunities, but not the likelihood of any particular exit opportunity. As far as actual substantive experience at the firm, I'd say they're more than worthless. The very basis of the Vault ranking is the perception of associates who haven't actually worked for the firms they're ranking. It's also comical to assume that someone's experience will be uniform across a firm's offices or practice groups.

You've got the first part of this right, I think, but I question the second part. Yeah, sure, Vault rankings are done by attorneys ranking places they've never worked at, but lateral hiring is also done by attorneys judging the training / experience gained at a firm they've never worked at. When our boy learntolift is trying to lateral in 3 years, do you really think firms are just going to take his word for it that he got world-beating training and exposure to the very best hedge fund work in the whole entire world? Or are they going to make a decision based on their preconceived perceptions of his firm's brand? I'm betting on the latter. Hiring committees continue to demonstrate year after year that they give sincere weight to U.S. News Rankings despite everyone knowing the methodology is flawed; I kind of doubt that they suddenly become bastions of critical thinking when hiring laterals.