LEGAL SALARY DATAPOINTS Forum

[synergy]

Industry: Hedge Fund
Experience: 9-11 years. 5 years at a firm prior to going in-house.
Location: NYC
Position: Legal Counsel
Hours: Roughly 50-55 hours/week.
Comp: 180k base, roughly 600k bonus.

Could I ask what the salary progression was like when in-house (i.e. did it start at a 180 bonus and just progress every year)? And was the 600 an outlier due in part to fund performance?

Also, did you have to move around to get to such a high bonus? And/or did you get any promotions that resulted in a big jump?

Would it be possible for you to PM me? I would really appreciate it if you wouldn't mind.

[Anonymous User]

Industry: Hedge Fund
Experience: 9-11 years. 5 years at a firm prior to going in-house.
Location: NYC
Position: Legal Counsel
Hours: Roughly 50-55 hours/week.
Comp: 180k base, roughly 600k bonus.

Could I ask what the salary progression was like when in-house (i.e. did it start at a 180 bonus and just progress every year)? And was the 600 an outlier due in part to fund performance?

Also, did you have to move around to get to such a high bonus? And/or did you get any promotions that resulted in a big jump?

Would it be possible for you to PM me? I would really appreciate it if you wouldn't mind.

It does not make sense. Why would fund pay 600K carry/bonus to inhouse counsel who does not generate revenue/profits?

[Anonymous User]

accidental double posts

[Anonymous User]

Industry: Hedge Fund
Experience: 9-11 years. 5 years at a firm prior to going in-house.
Location: NYC
Position: Legal Counsel
Hours: Roughly 50-55 hours/week.
Comp: 180k base, roughly 600k bonus.

Could I ask what the salary progression was like when in-house (i.e. did it start at a 180 bonus and just progress every year)? And was the 600 an outlier due in part to fund performance?

Also, did you have to move around to get to such a high bonus? And/or did you get any promotions that resulted in a big jump?

Would it be possible for you to PM me? I would really appreciate it if you wouldn't mind.

It does not make sense. Why would fund pay 600K carry/bonus to inhouse counsel who does not generate revenue/profits?

I obviously have no idea whether this guy is telling the truth, but I'm not sure why its crazy to think someone a decade out (who would be a partner/counsel if they were still at a firm) made 780 in a great year for funds.

[nixy]

Yeah, I’m not sure why that’s implausible either.

[Anonymous User]

Industry: Hedge Fund
Experience: 9-11 years. 5 years at a firm prior to going in-house.
Location: NYC
Position: Legal Counsel
Hours: Roughly 50-55 hours/week.
Comp: 180k base, roughly 600k bonus.

Could I ask what the salary progression was like when in-house (i.e. did it start at a 180 bonus and just progress every year)? And was the 600 an outlier due in part to fund performance?

Also, did you have to move around to get to such a high bonus? And/or did you get any promotions that resulted in a big jump?

Would it be possible for you to PM me? I would really appreciate it if you wouldn't mind.

It does not make sense. Why would fund pay 600K carry/bonus to inhouse counsel who does not generate revenue/profits?

I obviously have no idea whether this guy is telling the truth, but I'm not sure why its crazy to think someone a decade out (who would be a partner/counsel if they were still at a firm) made 780 in a great year for funds.

Well, I was a HF investor at a mega fund before law school. I can quickly think of two reasons as to why it doesn't make sense. First, in-house counsel at a fund is just a cost center, not a revenue-generating function. So most funds are not dumb enough to link their in-house counsels' bonus to their fund performance, certainly not to the point of the level of 600K. At least for their point of view, HF's performance has nothing to do with their in-house counsel's performance. It's fixed admin cost to them.

Second, in-house counsels would not be made partner had they stayed in biglaw or at least they chose not to for better work-life balance. So funds are not incentivized to pay their in-house counsel to match what they would have earned had they stayed in biglaw. 10th-year counsel in biglaw, though it's quite rare to find in biglaw, may earn ~600K all-in. It would be at least very surprising even for the in-house counsel him/herself to earn more than that to stay as in-house counsel. Risk/reward or workhour/reward function is totally flipped in this case.

What's more astonishing to me is above TLS people's thinking that it's plausible. Hedge funds are not that naive. They're greedy bastards who would never compensate whom they think of as admin for their own great performance.

Anyways, I'm not saying OP is lying. Since this is extremely unusual to say the least, I'm dead curious how OP pulled that out.

[Anonymous User]

Industry: Hedge Fund
Experience: 9-11 years. 5 years at a firm prior to going in-house.
Location: NYC
Position: Legal Counsel
Hours: Roughly 50-55 hours/week.
Comp: 180k base, roughly 600k bonus.

Could I ask what the salary progression was like when in-house (i.e. did it start at a 180 bonus and just progress every year)? And was the 600 an outlier due in part to fund performance?

Also, did you have to move around to get to such a high bonus? And/or did you get any promotions that resulted in a big jump?

Would it be possible for you to PM me? I would really appreciate it if you wouldn't mind.

It does not make sense. Why would fund pay 600K carry/bonus to inhouse counsel who does not generate revenue/profits?

I obviously have no idea whether this guy is telling the truth, but I'm not sure why its crazy to think someone a decade out (who would be a partner/counsel if they were still at a firm) made 780 in a great year for funds.

Well, I was a HF investor at a mega fund before law school. I can quickly think of two reasons as to why it doesn't make sense. First, in-house counsel at a fund is just a cost center, not a revenue-generating function. So most funds are not dumb enough to link their in-house counsels' bonus to their fund performance, certainly not to the point of the level of 600K. At least for their point of view, HF's performance has nothing to do with their in-house counsel's performance. It's fixed admin cost to them.

Second, if in-house counsels would not be made partner had they stayed in biglaw or at least they chose not to for better work-life balance, so funds are not incentivized to pay their in-house counsel to match what they would have earned had they stayed in biglaw. 10th-year counsel in biglaw, though it's quite rare to find in biglaw, may earn ~600K all-in. It would be at least very surprising even for the in-house counsel him/herself to earn more than that to stay as in-house counsel.

What's more surprising to me is TLS people's thinking that it's plausible.

Anyways, I'm not saying OP is lying. Since this is extremely unusual to say the least, I'm dead curious how OP pulled that out.

It's honestly exponentially more believable that that poster makes 780k as a 10th year lawyer than it is that someone was truly an investor or other type of front office analyst at a fund and chose to go to law school. Most lawyers I've met are dying to switch over to the business side.

Having said that, just to throw an additional data point, I'm in-house at a hf as a 4th year and I'm making 385 all in. Recruiters have told me this was a pretty good (though not crazy) outcome. Anecdotally I've heard that pretty much all GC's at any decent shop and also most CCO's make 7 figures.

[jsnow212]

Industry: Hedge Fund
Experience: 9-11 years. 5 years at a firm prior to going in-house.
Location: NYC
Position: Legal Counsel
Hours: Roughly 50-55 hours/week.
Comp: 180k base, roughly 600k bonus.

Could I ask what the salary progression was like when in-house (i.e. did it start at a 180 bonus and just progress every year)? And was the 600 an outlier due in part to fund performance?

Also, did you have to move around to get to such a high bonus? And/or did you get any promotions that resulted in a big jump?

Would it be possible for you to PM me? I would really appreciate it if you wouldn't mind.

It does not make sense. Why would fund pay 600K carry/bonus to inhouse counsel who does not generate revenue/profits?

I obviously have no idea whether this guy is telling the truth, but I'm not sure why its crazy to think someone a decade out (who would be a partner/counsel if they were still at a firm) made 780 in a great year for funds.

Well, I was a HF investor at a mega fund before law school. I can quickly think of two reasons as to why it doesn't make sense. First, in-house counsel at a fund is just a cost center, not a revenue-generating function. So most funds are not dumb enough to link their in-house counsels' bonus to their fund performance, certainly not to the point of the level of 600K. At least for their point of view, HF's performance has nothing to do with their in-house counsel's performance. It's fixed admin cost to them.

Second, if in-house counsels would not be made partner had they stayed in biglaw or at least they chose not to for better work-life balance, so funds are not incentivized to pay their in-house counsel to match what they would have earned had they stayed in biglaw. 10th-year counsel in biglaw, though it's quite rare to find in biglaw, may earn ~600K all-in. It would be at least very surprising even for the in-house counsel him/herself to earn more than that to stay as in-house counsel.

What's more surprising to me is TLS people's thinking that it's plausible.

Anyways, I'm not saying OP is lying. Since this is extremely unusual to say the least, I'm dead curious how OP pulled that out.

This is a not right take, and I'm surprised you've made it so forcefully...while at the same time calling others gullible for believing it?

This is absolutely heard of at *good* HFs, even for lawyers. These high-paying HF-lawyer jobs are rare, for sure, but this level of paint-brushing without commensurate knowledge is not helpful. I mean, very senior associates/counsels at WLRK are getting paid more than what the HF in-house anon stated, so there's already a counterexample even if we accept your incorrect premise (in-house should always be paid less than comparable biglaw year).

[Anonymous User]

Industry: Hedge Fund
Experience: 9-11 years. 5 years at a firm prior to going in-house.
Location: NYC
Position: Legal Counsel
Hours: Roughly 50-55 hours/week.
Comp: 180k base, roughly 600k bonus.

Could I ask what the salary progression was like when in-house (i.e. did it start at a 180 bonus and just progress every year)? And was the 600 an outlier due in part to fund performance?

Also, did you have to move around to get to such a high bonus? And/or did you get any promotions that resulted in a big jump?

Would it be possible for you to PM me? I would really appreciate it if you wouldn't mind.

It does not make sense. Why would fund pay 600K carry/bonus to inhouse counsel who does not generate revenue/profits?

I obviously have no idea whether this guy is telling the truth, but I'm not sure why its crazy to think someone a decade out (who would be a partner/counsel if they were still at a firm) made 780 in a great year for funds.

Well, I was a HF investor at a mega fund before law school. I can quickly think of two reasons as to why it doesn't make sense. First, in-house counsel at a fund is just a cost center, not a revenue-generating function. So most funds are not dumb enough to link their in-house counsels' bonus to their fund performance, certainly not to the point of the level of 600K. At least for their point of view, HF's performance has nothing to do with their in-house counsel's performance. It's fixed admin cost to them.

Second, if in-house counsels would not be made partner had they stayed in biglaw or at least they chose not to for better work-life balance, so funds are not incentivized to pay their in-house counsel to match what they would have earned had they stayed in biglaw. 10th-year counsel in biglaw, though it's quite rare to find in biglaw, may earn ~600K all-in. It would be at least very surprising even for the in-house counsel him/herself to earn more than that to stay as in-house counsel.

What's more surprising to me is TLS people's thinking that it's plausible.

Anyways, I'm not saying OP is lying. Since this is extremely unusual to say the least, I'm dead curious how OP pulled that out.

This is a not right take, and I'm surprised you've made it so forcefully...while at the same time calling others gullible for believing it?

This is absolutely heard of at *good* HFs, even for lawyers. These high-paying HF-lawyer jobs are rare, for sure, but this level of paint-brushing without commensurate knowledge is not helpful. I mean, very senior associates/counsels at WLRK are getting paid more than what the HF in-house anon stated, so there's already a counterexample even if we accept your incorrect premise (in-house should always be paid less than comparable biglaw year).

Apologies for making my position seemingly forcefully. I was purely too surprised to make it sound plain. I mean, I don't want to be nitty-gritty about wordings but since you brought logic/counterexample, I never said it's "always" but just "very surprising" and arguing against with a counterexample with a very rare case is not exactly counterexample. (there are not many counsel/non-equity partners at let's say V10, not to mention at Wachtell. Only 10 corporate/corp-related counsels at Wachtell. At this level, I believe it's still less than $1M even at Wachtell.) So it's still surprising to pay the in-house counsel to a degree that "closely" matches it.

But overall you're missing the point. As I said, ~$800K all-in (especially with $600K bonus for an in-house) an extremely rare case that everyone would be curious about. It's not just a case where you say, well yeah it's not impossible.

To the different anon above - well I went to law school to become a litigator. I've made money enough to pursue what I want independently from economics. Not saying I'm super rich, but just saying I don't have a lavish lifestyle. But anyway, I've seen and understand why many lawyers are reluctant to believe that I worked in HF.

In addition, although ~$400K all in at 4th year is certainly a great number but it's not comparable with ~$800K with majority of it being bonus, because in-house counsel position does not normally come with such a high comp growth. I suppose, that's most likely due to carry, which like I said above by itself is not an usual comp structure for in-house.

My point is not like 'OP is lying. Don't believe him,' but more like 'how did s/he pull that off??? I demand details.'

[Anonymous User]

Industry: Hedge Fund
Experience: 9-11 years. 5 years at a firm prior to going in-house.
Location: NYC
Position: Legal Counsel
Hours: Roughly 50-55 hours/week.
Comp: 180k base, roughly 600k bonus.

Could I ask what the salary progression was like when in-house (i.e. did it start at a 180 bonus and just progress every year)? And was the 600 an outlier due in part to fund performance?

Also, did you have to move around to get to such a high bonus? And/or did you get any promotions that resulted in a big jump?

Would it be possible for you to PM me? I would really appreciate it if you wouldn't mind.

It does not make sense. Why would fund pay 600K carry/bonus to inhouse counsel who does not generate revenue/profits?

I obviously have no idea whether this guy is telling the truth, but I'm not sure why its crazy to think someone a decade out (who would be a partner/counsel if they were still at a firm) made 780 in a great year for funds.

Well, I was a HF investor at a mega fund before law school. I can quickly think of two reasons as to why it doesn't make sense. First, in-house counsel at a fund is just a cost center, not a revenue-generating function. So most funds are not dumb enough to link their in-house counsels' bonus to their fund performance, certainly not to the point of the level of 600K. At least for their point of view, HF's performance has nothing to do with their in-house counsel's performance. It's fixed admin cost to them.

Second, if in-house counsels would not be made partner had they stayed in biglaw or at least they chose not to for better work-life balance, so funds are not incentivized to pay their in-house counsel to match what they would have earned had they stayed in biglaw. 10th-year counsel in biglaw, though it's quite rare to find in biglaw, may earn ~600K all-in. It would be at least very surprising even for the in-house counsel him/herself to earn more than that to stay as in-house counsel.

What's more surprising to me is TLS people's thinking that it's plausible.

Anyways, I'm not saying OP is lying. Since this is extremely unusual to say the least, I'm dead curious how OP pulled that out.

It's honestly exponentially more believable that that poster makes 780k as a 10th year lawyer than it is that someone was truly an investor or other type of front office analyst at a fund and chose to go to law school. Most lawyers I've met are dying to switch over to the business side.

Having said that, just to throw an additional data point, I'm in-house at a hf as a 4th year and I'm making 385 all in. Recruiters have told me this was a pretty good (though not crazy) outcome. Anecdotally I've heard that pretty much all GC's at any decent shop and also most CCO's make 7 figures.

Well I understand where your hostile attitude comes from and I apologize. I didn't mean to trash lawyers' role at HF but it was just to show how comp structure works at HF and what's general investors' view on in-house lawyers at funds. Don't take it personally.

[Anonymous User]

Hedge Fund OP on this chain here.

This past year was better for the fund than would be expected normally, in large part due to overall volatility.
Bonus progressed over time, though this last year was a meaningful uptick. I expect to make (meaningfully) less this year.

Carry for lawyers is rare but not non-existent - for color, I know at least two others from my social group at law school who have carry as in-house lawyers (I have absolutely no idea as to their numbers).

I've entertained discussions with recruiters, though no alternative I've seen has been in the same comp ball park so haven't pushed too hard. I think it is likely I don't have a huge number of funds that would compensate me on an equal scale.

[Anonymous User]

Hedge Fund OP on this chain here.

This past year was better for the fund than would be expected normally, in large part due to overall volatility.
Bonus progressed over time, though this last year was a meaningful uptick. I expect to make (meaningfully) less this year.

Carry for lawyers is rare but not non-existent - for color, I know at least two others from my social group at law school who have carry as in-house lawyers (I have absolutely no idea as to their numbers).

I've entertained discussions with recruiters, though no alternative I've seen has been in the same comp ball park so haven't pushed too hard. I think it is likely I don't have a huge number of funds that would compensate me on an equal scale.

Thanks much for this. Quick followup. How much bonus you'd get in normal years? % of base? Looking from your base, i guess there is not much of growth in the base salary as you prgress?

[Anonymous User]

Thanks much for this. Quick followup. How much bonus you'd get in normal years? % of base? Looking from your base, i guess there is not much of growth in the base salary as you prgress?

Recent normal years total bonus has been 125-200% of base. Roughly no growth in base over time.

[Anonymous User]

Industry: Hedge Fund
Experience: 9-11 years. 5 years at a firm prior to going in-house.
Location: NYC
Position: Legal Counsel
Hours: Roughly 50-55 hours/week.
Comp: 180k base, roughly 600k bonus.

Could I ask what the salary progression was like when in-house (i.e. did it start at a 180 bonus and just progress every year)? And was the 600 an outlier due in part to fund performance?

Also, did you have to move around to get to such a high bonus? And/or did you get any promotions that resulted in a big jump?

Would it be possible for you to PM me? I would really appreciate it if you wouldn't mind.

It does not make sense. Why would fund pay 600K carry/bonus to inhouse counsel who does not generate revenue/profits?

I obviously have no idea whether this guy is telling the truth, but I'm not sure why its crazy to think someone a decade out (who would be a partner/counsel if they were still at a firm) made 780 in a great year for funds.

Well, I was a HF investor at a mega fund before law school. I can quickly think of two reasons as to why it doesn't make sense. First, in-house counsel at a fund is just a cost center, not a revenue-generating function. So most funds are not dumb enough to link their in-house counsels' bonus to their fund performance, certainly not to the point of the level of 600K. At least for their point of view, HF's performance has nothing to do with their in-house counsel's performance. It's fixed admin cost to them.

Second, if in-house counsels would not be made partner had they stayed in biglaw or at least they chose not to for better work-life balance, so funds are not incentivized to pay their in-house counsel to match what they would have earned had they stayed in biglaw. 10th-year counsel in biglaw, though it's quite rare to find in biglaw, may earn ~600K all-in. It would be at least very surprising even for the in-house counsel him/herself to earn more than that to stay as in-house counsel.

What's more surprising to me is TLS people's thinking that it's plausible.

Anyways, I'm not saying OP is lying. Since this is extremely unusual to say the least, I'm dead curious how OP pulled that out.

It's honestly exponentially more believable that that poster makes 780k as a 10th year lawyer than it is that someone was truly an investor or other type of front office analyst at a fund and chose to go to law school. Most lawyers I've met are dying to switch over to the business side.

Having said that, just to throw an additional data point, I'm in-house at a hf as a 4th year and I'm making 385 all in. Recruiters have told me this was a pretty good (though not crazy) outcome. Anecdotally I've heard that pretty much all GC's at any decent shop and also most CCO's make 7 figures.

385k is a lot too.... care to break down the comp? You are making more as a 4th year in-house compared to a 4th year big-law associate.

[DildaMan]

Location: SF/SV
Position: In-house at international organization
Experience: 7 years
Salary: 300k (200k base, 100k bonus, 50k one time signing bonus)
Benefits: 4 wks vacation, 6% 401k employer contribution, tech stipend
Hours: 9-5, mostly no evening and weekend work except for foreign proceedings

[Anonymous User]

Location: SF/SV
Position: In-house at international organization
Experience: 7 years
Salary: 300k (200k base, 100k bonus, 50k one time signing bonus)
Benefits: 4 wks vacation, 6% 401k employer contribution, tech stipend
Hours: 9-5, mostly no evening and weekend work except for foreign proceedings

This sounds like an ideal in-house position! May I know if the 7 years of experience is from a V5/V10 firm?

[CanadianWolf]

Location: SF/SV
Position: In-house at international organization
Experience: 7 years
Salary: 300k (200k base, 100k bonus, 50k one time signing bonus)
Benefits: 4 wks vacation, 6% 401k employer contribution, tech stipend
Hours: 9-5, mostly no evening and weekend work except for foreign proceedings

This sounds like an ideal in-house position! May I know if the 7 years of experience is from a V5/V10 firm?

Earlier posts show Vault 50.

[DildaMan]

Location: SF/SV
Position: In-house at international organization
Experience: 7 years
Salary: 300k (200k base, 100k bonus, 50k one time signing bonus)
Benefits: 4 wks vacation, 6% 401k employer contribution, tech stipend
Hours: 9-5, mostly no evening and weekend work except for foreign proceedings

This sounds like an ideal in-house position! May I know if the 7 years of experience is from a V5/V10 firm?

Earlier posts show Vault 50.

Confirmed V50. Went to a firm client which helped with the bonus and higher salary.

[Anonymous User]

Location: Boston
Experience 7 years at v10
Position: 1st year in house in tech (public non FAANG)
Comp 230 base plus 75k rsu grant each of 4 years; other fringe benefits

[Anonymous User]

Experience: 6 years
Location: CA
Position: Associate at a national class action plaintiff's side law firm
Comp: 160k base. Bonus: variable between 40k to 100k+
Hours: 40ish/week.

[Anonymous User]

Any thoughts/collective wisdom on below?

*Fifth year corporate associate at a V5
*Offer for a fully remote generalist/M&A-focused corporate role
*Late stage private company (probably IPO in next 12 months)
*Legal team is a handful of people
*165k w/ 10% bonus
*1% 401k match
*~400k equity cliff vesting after 4.5 years
*Start date in September (i.e., they can't push back to ensure I can get this year's year-end bonus, which of course is real money..)

Pay seems really low, but apparently also it's a truly much much chiller job (so not like going in house to an investment bank or Google or something, work-life balance wise).

[The Lsat Airbender]

Any thoughts/collective wisdom on below?

*Fifth year corporate associate at a V5
*Offer for a fully remote generalist/M&A-focused corporate role
*Late stage private company (probably IPO in next 12 months)
*Legal team is a handful of people
*165k w/ 10% bonus
*1% 401k match
*~400k equity cliff vesting after 4.5 years
*Start date in September (i.e., they can't push back to ensure I can get this year's year-end bonus, which of course is real money..)

Pay seems really low, but apparently also it's a truly much much chiller job (so not like going in house to an investment bank or Google or something, work-life balance wise).

Definitely try and negotiate for a signing bonus to make up some of the ground you're losing on your 2021 year-end bonus. Seems like an awesome job in the abstract although comp will feel stingy if you're in NYC; if you're down to remote from somewhere cheaper then you'll truly be crushing it

[Anonymous User]

Location: secondary market in the midwest
Position: IP Counsel at late stage private tech company (IPO potentially on the horizon)
Experience: 4 years V40
Salary: 200K base, 10K signing bonus, ~20% annual target bonus, ~200K in RSUs with a normal 4 year vesting schedule

[Anonymous User]

Experience: 6 years (c/o 2015)
Location: NYC
Position: General Counsel at multinational real estate developer
Base: $180k
Bonus: up to 15% of base
Equity: none

I haven’t started yet, but comp-wise this was the best I could negotiate. Doesn’t seem that great after all the talk of the raises in biglaw.

[Definitely Not North]

Obviously not a ton of datapoints to benchmark against, but that seems SHOCKINGLY low (and no equity???) for a GC role at what sounds like a big-ish company that likely has a fair amount of legal issues that will keep you busy/stressed.