How much does a first year Big Law partner make (equity and non-equity)? Forum

[Anonymous User]

I think DPW/Cravath equity partner is well north of $2 million

DPW, sure. Cravath? No. Cravath's PPP is $1.8 million less than DPW. Their economics are not the same. Unless Cravath has an extraordinarily tight band from top to bottom of the partnership (doubtful), a new Cravath partner probably pulls in ~$1.0-1.5 million under the new system, not "well north" of $2 million. There are probably half a dozen or a dozen less prefftigious law firms than Cravath that pay their new equity partners as much. No clue why they are still fawned over.

I mean, before they moved to modified lockstep, the band was strictly 3:1. Their PPP last year was $4.5 million, so the highest paid class of partners had to be making a good chunk more than the average for the math to work out, right? Assuming the highest paid partners make $5-6 million (maybe even more?), then the most junior partner at Cravath takes home $1.6-2 million. Again, that's on pure lockstep and their self-professed 3:1 band. I wouldn't be surprised if junior partners make around what you say (around $1 million) after they're forced to shift around funds to keep rainmakers under modified lockstep.

As for why they are still fawned over...I literally do not know. Maybe the relatively short equity partnership track (some of the partners in the newest classes have made it in 7 - not even 8! - years, which is pretty unheard of at peer firms, I think)? Though no law student seriously chooses a V10 firm based on partnership chances lol...

Davis Polk first year partners are not making over $2m a year and Cravath partners are not making $1M a year. As others have alluded in this thread PPP is highly misleading. Most old schools firms have set minimums that have risen with inflation and firm profits. The rest is based on the firms allocation system (points, rainmaker allocations etc). Lockstep has been dead for a very long time. Why would you ever believe their lies?

You are wrong. DPW only has equity partners, not income partners, and they definitely make over $2 million a year. I would be shocked if 1st year Cravath equity partners are not making $1 million a year, and I would venture that it is well north of that.

[Anonymous User]

L&W first year income partners make ~750k-1m and first year equity partners make around 2.5m

No chance on the 2.5mm. That's not correct.

[Anonymous User]

L&W first year income partners make ~750k-1m and first year equity partners make around 2.5m

No chance on the 2.5mm. That's not correct.

Can people add some meat to the bones of comments like these? Otherwise it becomes a pointless exercise of he said / she said. As someone at K&E who doesn't have access to the actual spreadsheet (so being fully transparent here) but does hear a lot of these conversations, the comp. right now is supposed to start around 1.5m (that's for the transitional year or two where they aren't full equity since Ballis made that announcement last year) and then their first year as a full equity partner they're getting around 2.5m (assuming they only get minimum shares -- not sure whether it's possible to get more than min. shares as a 1st year equity partner). Other end of the spectrum, that Bloomberg article at the beginning of the year reported max shares are now valued at more than $20m per year, although it's unclear whether that means max cap is 21, 22, 25 (ah, the trivialities of life making 8-figures per year).

As an aside, these figures are eye-watering and in a way depressing for anyone not already in the ranks of equity because they drive home how big of a commitment it is for the firm to promote to equity; they're not just handing this out and the gap between associate / NSP compensation and equity compensation keeps growing.

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

Should be mentioned that Amlaw PPP is very frequently inflated compared to actual audited financials. I've seen exaggerations of up to 25% and I'm guessing some firms might bullshit even more than that.

(Not to say there aren't firms who don't do it, or who only do it to a very minor degree)

[Anonymous User]

L&W first year income partners make ~750k-1m and first year equity partners make around 2.5m

No chance on the 2.5mm. That's not correct.

Can people add some meat to the bones of comments like these? Otherwise it becomes a pointless exercise of he said / she said. As someone at K&E who doesn't have access to the actual spreadsheet (so being fully transparent here) but does hear a lot of these conversations, the comp. right now is supposed to start around 1.5m (that's for the transitional year or two where they aren't full equity since Ballis made that announcement last year) and then their first year as a full equity partner they're getting around 2.5m (assuming they only get minimum shares -- not sure whether it's possible to get more than min. shares as a 1st year equity partner). Other end of the spectrum, that Bloomberg article at the beginning of the year reported max shares are now valued at more than $20m per year, although it's unclear whether that means max cap is 21, 22, 25 (ah, the trivialities of life making 8-figures per year).

As an aside, these figures are eye-watering and in a way depressing for anyone not already in the ranks of equity because they drive home how big of a commitment it is for the firm to promote to equity; they're not just handing this out and the gap between associate / NSP compensation and equity compensation keeps growing.

Also at K&E and this aligns with the conversations I’ve had with share partners over the past year. $1.5m for the transition year (after they opened up the possibility of making shares a year earlier). Minimum shares is somewhere around ~$2.5m and was closer to $2m the year before, which reflects the significant increase in profits in 2021. The ratio is 10-to-1 so the lucky bastards at the top of the pyramid are making something a little under $25m (a little over $20m the prior year).

[Anonymous User]

L&W first year income partners make ~750k-1m and first year equity partners make around 2.5m

No chance on the 2.5mm. That's not correct.

Definitely is correct.

[Sackboy]

L&W first year income partners make ~750k-1m and first year equity partners make around 2.5m

No chance on the 2.5mm. That's not correct.

Probably assuming it can't be correct based on KE 1st year partners making around the same while Latham has a lower PPP. But, Latham could just have a lower spread between top and bottom partners. KE could also have a pension scheme or the like that lowers partner pay while LW doesn't. I'm sure it could be a few other factors. I'm not speaking to whether it's true or not, but it could be.

[Anonymous User]

Anyone know what it is at Skadden?

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone know what it is at Sidley? Anon because I work there.

[Anonymous User]

L&W first year income partners make ~750k-1m and first year equity partners make around 2.5m

No chance on the 2.5mm. That's not correct.

Any info on STB first year nonequity vs. equity? Anon also bc I work there.

[Anonymous User]

L&W first year income partners make ~750k-1m and first year equity partners make around 2.5m

No chance on the 2.5mm. That's not correct.

Any info on STB first year nonequity vs. equity? Anon also bc I work there.

As a rule the easier it is to make partner the less it is going to pay.

Sidely: fairly easy

Skadden: moderately hard

STB non-equity: fairly easy

DPW/CSM: very difficult

I would expect comp to scale accordingly. STB especially, where non-equity partner seems more like a way let senior associates/counsel feel good about themselves as they make a case for equity. Kinda like Kirkland NSPs.

[Anonymous User]

L&W first year income partners make ~750k-1m and first year equity partners make around 2.5m

No chance on the 2.5mm. That's not correct.

Any info on STB first year nonequity vs. equity? Anon also bc I work there.

As a rule the easier it is to make partner the less it is going to pay.

Sidely: fairly easy

Skadden: moderately hard

STB non-equity: fairly easy

DPW/CSM: very difficult

I would expect comp to scale accordingly. STB especially, where non-equity partner seems more like a way let senior associates/counsel feel good about themselves as they make a case for equity. Kinda like Kirkland NSPs.

On your scale of fairly easy to very difficult, are you basing that just on total number who make it each year, on number of partners as a percentage of overall number of attorneys, of percentage who make it from each incoming class, or some other metric?

[Anonymous User]

L&W first year income partners make ~750k-1m and first year equity partners make around 2.5m

No chance on the 2.5mm. That's not correct.

Any info on STB first year nonequity vs. equity? Anon also bc I work there.

As a rule the easier it is to make partner the less it is going to pay.

Sidely: fairly easy

Skadden: moderately hard

STB non-equity: fairly easy

DPW/CSM: very difficult

I would expect comp to scale accordingly. STB especially, where non-equity partner seems more like a way let senior associates/counsel feel good about themselves as they make a case for equity. Kinda like Kirkland NSPs.

On your scale of fairly easy to very difficult, are you basing that just on total number who make it each year, on number of partners as a percentage of overall number of attorneys, of percentage who make it from each incoming class, or some other metric?

None of those. Those are all really bad metrics. For example, at DPW, a high percentage of the people up for partner make partner, because the vast majority of the rest are told well before then that partnership isn't in the cards, and move on in life. At Kirkland, a really low percentage up for "shares" make "shares", but that's because they string people along to squeeze 3k hours a year out of them and make the Executive Committee bigwigs richer, until finally throwing them to the curb.

It is a much more qualitative measure of how smart and good you have to be to make partner, and whether basically anyone who is reasonably smart and a grinder can make it, or whether you need to be something special. DPW/CSM have always required a lot more than just hard work, you have to wow the partnership to even have a shot (and need the business dynamics to be in your favor as well). Skadden is not quite that demanding, but still lots of competent hard-working people don't make it. At Sidley, if you are reasonably smart and willing to grind the outlook is pretty good. I don't know much about STB non-equity, but all indications are that it is not very tough to get once you are a senior associate (with equity being a whole other story, perhaps at the Skadden level).

[Anonymous User]

Anyone know what it is at Skadden?

I heard regular payments are similar-ish to senior associates (call it like 500k-600k a year), with a fat distribution toward end of year (a little south of a million), so call it like 1.4m-1.5m all-in sorta thing.

[Anonymous User]

L&W first year income partners make ~750k-1m and first year equity partners make around 2.5m

No chance on the 2.5mm. That's not correct.

Definitely is correct.

Can confirm this is correct. Based on direct data. Would love to see the support for the person saying no chance.

And in fact comp is even higher for first year equity partners who made it from income partner (rather than straightaway) because they get a small amount of additional shares.

[Anonymous User]

L&W first year income partners make ~750k-1m and first year equity partners make around 2.5m

No chance on the 2.5mm. That's not correct.

Definitely is correct.

Can confirm this is correct. Based on direct data. Would love to see the support for the person saying no chance.

And in fact comp is even higher for first year equity partners who made it from income partner (rather than straightaway) because they get a small amount of additional shares.

Always amused by the "no chance" crowd. The people up for equity at these top firms have an enormous wealth of alternative options. You really think they are sticking around billing 2800 hours/year and shattering their health and personal lives unless there is a huge payout involved? We aren't talking about DLA Piper associates from Pace law school or something. If DPW/CSM isn't going to offer big bucks to junior equity partners, the people they want are going to walk.

[Anonymous User]

L&W first year income partners make ~750k-1m and first year equity partners make around 2.5m

No chance on the 2.5mm. That's not correct.

Definitely is correct.

Can confirm this is correct. Based on direct data. Would love to see the support for the person saying no chance.

And in fact comp is even higher for first year equity partners who made it from income partner (rather than straightaway) because they get a small amount of additional shares.

Always amused by the "no chance" crowd. The people up for equity at these top firms have an enormous wealth of alternative options. You really think they are sticking around billing 2800 hours/year and shattering their health and personal lives unless there is a huge payout involved? We aren't talking about DLA Piper associates from Pace law school or something. If DPW/CSM isn't going to offer big bucks to junior equity partners, the people they want are going to walk.

Agree in principle, but I don't see how ~$1m (double what they are making as an associate) doesn't fit that bill. Don't get me wrong, $2m+ is all the more enticing, but I think a seven figure income (which will presumably continue to grow) is "a huge payout." Doesn't mean these firms aren't paying $2m+, but I don't think we need to talk about big payouts to agree that the "no chance" crowd is out of line. Also DPW/CSM are not the only places where you have to work insane hours to make equity - my V20 is identical, but with a much smaller (but still 7-figure) first year payout.

[Anonymous User]

L&W first year income partners make ~750k-1m and first year equity partners make around 2.5m

No chance on the 2.5mm. That's not correct.

Definitely is correct.

Can confirm this is correct. Based on direct data. Would love to see the support for the person saying no chance.

And in fact comp is even higher for first year equity partners who made it from income partner (rather than straightaway) because they get a small amount of additional shares.

Always amused by the "no chance" crowd. The people up for equity at these top firms have an enormous wealth of alternative options. You really think they are sticking around billing 2800 hours/year and shattering their health and personal lives unless there is a huge payout involved? We aren't talking about DLA Piper associates from Pace law school or something. If DPW/CSM isn't going to offer big bucks to junior equity partners, the people they want are going to walk.

Agree in principle, but I don't see how ~$1m (double what they are making as an associate) doesn't fit that bill. Don't get me wrong, $2m+ is all the more enticing, but I think a seven figure income (which will presumably continue to grow) is "a huge payout." Doesn't mean these firms aren't paying $2m+, but I don't think we need to talk about big payouts to agree that the "no chance" crowd is out of line. Also DPW/CSM are not the only places where you have to work insane hours to make equity - my V20 is identical, but with a much smaller (but still 7-figure) first year payout.

Supply and demand. The type of guy making partner at DPW/CSM has huge value as a 1st year partner, and will bail if the payoff is only $1 million. Lots of places require crazy hours, but few places require you to be truly spectacular to make partner (which DPW/CSM very much do). You will note that a lot of the people who end up not making partner at DPW/CSM or whatever cruise into partner positions at V30s, so imagine what kind of comp deal the people who could make partner could get.

[Anonymous User]

Supply and demand. The type of guy making partner at DPW/CSM has huge value as a 1st year partner, and will bail if the payoff is only $1 million. Lots of places require crazy hours, but few places require you to be truly spectacular to make partner (which DPW/CSM very much do). You will note that a lot of the people who end up not making partner at DPW/CSM or whatever cruise into partner positions at V30s, so imagine what kind of comp deal the people who could make partner could get.

Sorry, but if most people ITT don't even know what a first year DPW/CSM partner makes, much less what partners make elsewhere, how can you say this with such confidence? Besides, I (and probably most people here) would take issue with the idea that some 8th year CSM/DPW associate with no book of business is somehow more valuable to lower ranked firms with associates who worked similar hours for that firm's clients. Your assumption that other firms would recognize freshly minted DPW/CSM partners to be wildly more valuable than anybody else in the marketplace seems far fetched to me. If that were the case, then wouldn't you expect to see more new partner defections to lower ranked firms that can afford the $2.5m first year partner salaries? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't seen poach-heavy firms like KE pick up anybody like this.

[BigLawPartner]

Supply and demand. The type of guy making partner at DPW/CSM has huge value as a 1st year partner, and will bail if the payoff is only $1 million. Lots of places require crazy hours, but few places require you to be truly spectacular to make partner (which DPW/CSM very much do). You will note that a lot of the people who end up not making partner at DPW/CSM or whatever cruise into partner positions at V30s, so imagine what kind of comp deal the people who could make partner could get.

Sorry, but if most people ITT don't even know what a first year DPW/CSM partner makes, much less what partners make elsewhere, how can you say this with such confidence? Besides, I (and probably most people here) would take issue with the idea that some 8th year CSM/DPW associate with no book of business is somehow more valuable to lower ranked firms with associates who worked similar hours for that firm's clients. Your assumption that other firms would recognize freshly minted DPW/CSM partners to be wildly more valuable than anybody else in the marketplace seems far fetched to me. If that were the case, then wouldn't you expect to see more new partner defections to lower ranked firms that can afford the $2.5m first year partner salaries? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't seen poach-heavy firms like KE pick up anybody like this.

Completely agree with all of this and was just about to say the same. The prior post reads like a student or junior associate speculating on what happens in the market.

[Anonymous User]

Supply and demand. The type of guy making partner at DPW/CSM has huge value as a 1st year partner, and will bail if the payoff is only $1 million. Lots of places require crazy hours, but few places require you to be truly spectacular to make partner (which DPW/CSM very much do). You will note that a lot of the people who end up not making partner at DPW/CSM or whatever cruise into partner positions at V30s, so imagine what kind of comp deal the people who could make partner could get.

Sorry, but if most people ITT don't even know what a first year DPW/CSM partner makes, much less what partners make elsewhere, how can you say this with such confidence? Besides, I (and probably most people here) would take issue with the idea that some 8th year CSM/DPW associate with no book of business is somehow more valuable to lower ranked firms with associates who worked similar hours for that firm's clients. Your assumption that other firms would recognize freshly minted DPW/CSM partners to be wildly more valuable than anybody else in the marketplace seems far fetched to me. If that were the case, then wouldn't you expect to see more new partner defections to lower ranked firms that can afford the $2.5m first year partner salaries? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't seen poach-heavy firms like KE pick up anybody like this.

I have no idea what new partners make (and am not going to speculate for the reasons you described), but, at my "brand" firm, in addition to KE, there's definitely a market for 'probable shot at partner' 6th/7th/8th Corp associates in "Partner" roles at firms in the teens/20s/30s Vault rankings

have seen it with recent departures. and looking at bios of associates who worked at my firm 5-10 years ago. and if you're a smart senior associate w/shot at partner at our firm, you should be entertaining those conversations to put a little pressure on partnership -- i.e., I need visibility into my path here or I'm gonna leave for the sure thing.

I don't know why a Cooley or whatever would value our 6th/7th/8th year Corp associates so much, but they appear to

[Anonymous User]

Supply and demand. The type of guy making partner at DPW/CSM has huge value as a 1st year partner, and will bail if the payoff is only $1 million. Lots of places require crazy hours, but few places require you to be truly spectacular to make partner (which DPW/CSM very much do). You will note that a lot of the people who end up not making partner at DPW/CSM or whatever cruise into partner positions at V30s, so imagine what kind of comp deal the people who could make partner could get.

Sorry, but if most people ITT don't even know what a first year DPW/CSM partner makes, much less what partners make elsewhere, how can you say this with such confidence? Besides, I (and probably most people here) would take issue with the idea that some 8th year CSM/DPW associate with no book of business is somehow more valuable to lower ranked firms with associates who worked similar hours for that firm's clients. Your assumption that other firms would recognize freshly minted DPW/CSM partners to be wildly more valuable than anybody else in the marketplace seems far fetched to me. If that were the case, then wouldn't you expect to see more new partner defections to lower ranked firms that can afford the $2.5m first year partner salaries? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't seen poach-heavy firms like KE pick up anybody like this.

This stuff isn't some well-guarded secret. Pick up the phone when recruiters call you and talk through with them what the market looks like. You do this with 5 or 6 reputable ones, and get to know them a bit, they are happy to share with you where the comp is at and who they have placed recently at specific comp levels. The lockstep firms also have well known caps on the comp variability between the top and the bottom, so you can also back into the approximate figures. Some firms like Kirkland are also very open about what 1st year "shares" are worth.

And sorry to bust your bubble, but the v30s of the world are very much interested in the v5 lawyers who were almost good enough to make partner, but not quite there. These people have resumes that the v30s can't get through OCI, and very well developed skillsets operating at the highest levels. If you are Cooley or Goodwin or whatever, you would be thrilled to get a highly competent and very detail oriented corporate lawyer, who is willing to work crazy hard, for like a $900k non-equity partner role (and some of the firms will give equity as well, albeit equity worth a lot less than CSM/DPW). Their skill level is likely a lot higher than your homegrown talent. I regularly see counsel from the very top firms move into partner positions lower down the totem pole.

[Anonymous User]

And sorry to bust your bubble, but the v30s of the world are very much interested in the v5 lawyers who were almost good enough to make partner, but not quite there. These people have resumes that the v30s can't get through OCI, and very well developed skillsets operating at the highest levels. If you are Cooley or Goodwin or whatever, you would be thrilled to get a highly competent and very detail oriented corporate lawyer, who is willing to work crazy hard, for like a $900k non-equity partner role (and some of the firms will give equity as well, albeit equity worth a lot less than CSM/DPW). Their skill level is likely a lot higher than your homegrown talent. I regularly see counsel from the very top firms move into partner positions lower down the totem pole.

I'm the previous poster who observed this anecdotally at his firm w/o having an explanation for why it occurs.

my guess - and this is speculation - is that it's less 'resume' (I don't really think people care a great deal if I theoretically went to HLS and graduated magna vs UC Irvine) and more just volume + profile of deal experience

In past 8 months, my 'announced' matters include 3 announced M&A (two public/public, one private-public), an activist defense, two debt offerings, and a chapter 11. by year 8, that's a lot of reps

[Anonymous User]

These people have resumes that the v30s can't get through OCI...

We can disagree about other parts of your post, but it continues to baffle me that people think this matters after a few years into biglaw.

Anyway, I see your point about people leaving to the V30s of the world - but that's when they don't make partner (or don't have a surefire shot). It doesn't follow that CSM/DPW have to offer $2.5m first year partner comp just to stop people from leaving. The $4m+ prospects down the line are probably enticing enough, considering that they "survived" for 8-10 years with way less than that based on the remote potential of making partner.

To be clear, the desirable people you describe have some sick obsession with preftige (not unlike yourself, see resume comment), and probably would stick around at CSM/DPW even for just an extra $100k. What CSM/DPW senior would jump to Goodwin unless Goodwin promised them partnership where CSM/DPW could not or paid them more $$$? Nobody. That is to say, CSM/DPW may want to offer more than the lowly V30s to cut out the later option, but my point still stands that they don't need to be $2m+ just for retention of good seniors. Thus, the $2.5m comp probably has more to do with maximum ratios or something else than it does retention.

The only argument I can see to support your proposition would be if CSM/DPW think seniors will take the firms' business elsewhere if they leave. Then they would need to offer comp that roughly matches what the seniors could get if they truly took away that business. But I highly doubt that's possible with CSM/DPW's clientele.

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone know what it is at Sidley? Anon because I work there.

Also interested in this.