V10 vs V100: What’s the difference? (Litigation) Forum

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous User
Posts: 432725
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

V10 vs V100: What’s the difference? (Litigation)

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Aug 13, 2025 7:58 am

Assuming both are on the Cravath/Milbank scale (equal pay), what’s the day-to-day difference between being an associate doing litigation work at a V10 firm vs a V100 firm?

Sure, PPEP/PPP are different — but what’s the difference in the day-to-day junior or midlevel associate experience?

User avatar
Lacepiece23

Silver
Posts: 1435
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:10 pm

Re: V10 vs V100: What’s the difference? (Litigation)

Post by Lacepiece23 » Wed Aug 13, 2025 11:41 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Aug 13, 2025 7:58 am
Assuming both are on the Cravath/Milbank scale (equal pay), what’s the day-to-day difference between being an associate doing litigation work at a V10 firm vs a V100 firm?

Sure, PPEP/PPP are different — but what’s the difference in the day-to-day junior or midlevel associate experience?
More or less doc review. More matters vs less higher value matters. Less substantive opportunities.

AUSA3B

New
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:09 pm

Re: V10 vs V100: What’s the difference? (Litigation)

Post by AUSA3B » Thu Aug 21, 2025 10:36 am

I started out at a firm that was V-15 at the time and then lateralled to a firm that was around V-65.

This was 2016-2019 range.

The V-15 had a more national practice, bigger cases, and a stronger national brand when I looked to lateral. Downside was lots of doc review and limited responsibility.

The V-65ish was headquartered in the city I was working in, which was nice, and took on much smaller cases (think state court cases worth under $10 mn), but also had some huge cases. I thought the experience I gained was more useful from this firm. But when I eventually looked to lateral, I did notice, unfortunately, that my application seemed less attractive than from my previous firm, even though I was a 4-5 year in my prime lateral years (COVID may have exacerbated this, as I left before the 2021-22 hiring boom).

TL;DR, I thought the lower-ranked firm had better litigators, but the higher-ranked firm had more sophisticated work and better exits. YMMV.

crossexamination

New
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2021 9:02 pm

Re: V10 vs V100: What’s the difference? (Litigation)

Post by crossexamination » Sat Aug 23, 2025 10:45 am

AUSA3B wrote:
Thu Aug 21, 2025 10:36 am
I started out at a firm that was V-15 at the time and then lateralled to a firm that was around V-65.

This was 2016-2019 range.

The V-15 had a more national practice, bigger cases, and a stronger national brand when I looked to lateral. Downside was lots of doc review and limited responsibility.

The V-65ish was headquartered in the city I was working in, which was nice, and took on much smaller cases (think state court cases worth under $10 mn), but also had some huge cases. I thought the experience I gained was more useful from this firm. But when I eventually looked to lateral, I did notice, unfortunately, that my application seemed less attractive than from my previous firm, even though I was a 4-5 year in my prime lateral years (COVID may have exacerbated this, as I left before the 2021-22 hiring boom).

TL;DR, I thought the lower-ranked firm had better litigators, but the higher-ranked firm had more sophisticated work and better exits. YMMV.
Which firm would’ve been better for lifestyle and partnership prospects?

AUSA3B

New
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:09 pm

Re: V10 vs V100: What’s the difference? (Litigation)

Post by AUSA3B » Wed Aug 27, 2025 12:31 pm

It's a bit tough to say. The V-15 was an equity-only model whereas the V-65 has NEP model.

My sense was that the V-65 was much more straightforward--though not easy, of course. Basically, work hard in a practice area, make the right partner connections, and after enough time (no up or out, so sometimes people would get promoted around year 15) make NEP, and hope to build a business.

My other sense is that it's easier (though difficult) to build a business with regional corporate clients vs. the V-15, which had a lot of institutional clients. The flipside to that is the V-15 seemed to have more service partners.

I think it's also worth re-emphasizing that this is all for litigation. My understanding is that the transactional work at the V-65 is with much smaller companies.

I work in government now and was fairly junior at both firms so I'm probably not the best source for this stuff. That's why I'm being a bit impressionistic.

But overall, I don't have too many great things to say about the V-15 other than it looks great on a resume. The V-15 was much more opaque about professional development, skills development, and business development.

In a perfect world, I'd want to start off in a law firm that 1. offered a reasonable amount of transparency; 2. had good connections in my desired market; and 3. the je ne sais quoi of chemistry/personalities (which the summers can give you a flavor of, but probably not entirely so).

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


Post Reply Post Anonymous Reply  

Return to “Legal Employment”