How did we get here? As it turns out, higher billing rates<\/a> aren\u2019t just for the Am Law Top 50 \u2014 everyone can play this game. That\u2019s part of the reason why the Second Hundred did so well in 2024. Here\u2019s more from\u00a0Am Law<\/a>:<\/p>\n Last year, industry experts pointed to the comparatively lower profitability metrics of the Second Hundred and described it as an \u201cinvestment story,\u201d where those firms sacrificed short-term profitability for longer-term success through investments in talent, scale, technology, and business expertise.<\/p>\n This year, those experts say it is the harvest.<\/p>\n \u201cIt is payoff and profitability,\u201d Marcie Borgal Shunk, president and founder of The Tilt Institute, said in an interview. \u201cI think the firms are doing a really good job in a couple of areas. One is the topline growth, and we know from other research that a lot of that is coming from increased rates.<\/p>\n \u201cBut what they are doing is, they are translating that topline growth into profitability,\u201d she said. \u201cProfit per lawyer and leverage have gone up because of where firms are investing this year and last. They are not making a lot of equity partners, keeping them to small single-digit growth, and increasing the nonequity and associate levels.\u201dIt is a formula that has worked well for some larger firms.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Now, the moment you\u2019ve been waiting for: the top 10 firms in the gross revenue rankings, and the top five firms for the RPL and PPP rankings.<\/p>\n Gross Revenue<\/strong><\/p>\n The top 10 firms by gross revenue appear below, with the Second Hundred led by a firm that slipped out of the Am Law 100. The full Am Law 200 gross revenue chart can be found\u00a0here<\/a>.<\/p>\n 101. Dorsey: $512,882,000 Revenue Per Lawyer<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n See the alphabetical Am Law 200 revenue per lawyer chart\u00a0here<\/a>.<\/p>\n Profits Per Equity Partner<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n See the alphabetical Am Law 200 profits per equity partner chart\u00a0here<\/a>.<\/p>\n We will undoubtedly have even more to say as we continue to dig into these numbers. But what\u2019s clear is that the Second Hundred know what works \u2014 and what doesn\u2019t \u2014 and they\u2019re in it to win it. Congratulations!<\/p>\n Healthy Billing Rate Hikes Aren\u2019t Just For the Am Law 50<\/a>\u00a0[American Lawyer] Staci Zaretsky<\/a>\u00a0is a senior editor at Above the Law, where she\u2019s worked since 2011. She\u2019d love to hear from you, so please feel free to email<\/a> her with any tips, questions, comments, or critiques. You can follow her on\u00a0Bluesky<\/a>,\u00a0X\/Twitter<\/a>, and\u00a0Threads<\/a>,\u00a0or connect with her on\u00a0LinkedIn<\/a>.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n The post The Am Law 200: Biglaw\u2019s Second Hundred Crushes The Competition In Almost Every Financial Metric (2025)<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n The past year was wonderful for law firms, and the Am Law Second Hundred had an incredible showing when it came to all things financial.<\/p>\n The American Lawyer recently released its Am Law 200 law firm rankings \u2014 a closely watched list of the smaller yet still elite law firms that represent the very best of what the legal profession has to offer. The highlights from the report reveal that in 2024, Biglaw\u2019s Second Hundred had much to celebrate, with overall revenue growth (11.1%) that came oh-so close to that of the Am Law 100 (13.3%), with great successes in every other metric. In fact, the Second Hundred outperformed their higher ranked competitors in almost every financial metric that there is, including revenue per lawyer and profits per equity partner. <\/p>\n While some firms came out on top, others completely exceeded expectations. How did the Am Law 200 stack up?<\/p>\n Here\u2019s an overview of how Biglaw\u2019s Second Hundred performed in 2024:<\/p>\n How did we get here? As it turns out, higher billing rates<\/a> aren\u2019t just for the Am Law Top 50 \u2014 everyone can play this game. That\u2019s part of the reason why the Second Hundred did so well in 2024. Here\u2019s more from\u00a0Am Law<\/a>:<\/p>\n Last year, industry experts pointed to the comparatively lower profitability metrics of the Second Hundred and described it as an \u201cinvestment story,\u201d where those firms sacrificed short-term profitability for longer-term success through investments in talent, scale, technology, and business expertise.<\/p>\n This year, those experts say it is the harvest.<\/p>\n \u201cIt is payoff and profitability,\u201d Marcie Borgal Shunk, president and founder of The Tilt Institute, said in an interview. \u201cI think the firms are doing a really good job in a couple of areas. One is the topline growth, and we know from other research that a lot of that is coming from increased rates.<\/p>\n \u201cBut what they are doing is, they are translating that topline growth into profitability,\u201d she said. \u201cProfit per lawyer and leverage have gone up because of where firms are investing this year and last. They are not making a lot of equity partners, keeping them to small single-digit growth, and increasing the nonequity and associate levels.\u201dIt is a formula that has worked well for some larger firms.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Now, the moment you\u2019ve been waiting for: the top 10 firms in the gross revenue rankings, and the top five firms for the RPL and PPP rankings.<\/p>\n Gross Revenue<\/strong><\/p>\n The top 10 firms by gross revenue appear below, with the Second Hundred led by a firm that slipped out of the Am Law 100. The full Am Law 200 gross revenue chart can be found\u00a0here<\/a>.<\/p>\n 101. Dorsey: $512,882,000 Revenue Per Lawyer<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n See the alphabetical Am Law 200 revenue per lawyer chart\u00a0here<\/a>.<\/p>\n Profits Per Equity Partner<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n See the alphabetical Am Law 200 profits per equity partner chart\u00a0here<\/a>.<\/p>\n We will undoubtedly have even more to say as we continue to dig into these numbers. But what\u2019s clear is that the Second Hundred know what works \u2014 and what doesn\u2019t \u2014 and they\u2019re in it to win it. Congratulations!<\/p>\n Healthy Billing Rate Hikes Aren\u2019t Just For the Am Law 50<\/a>\u00a0[American Lawyer] Staci Zaretsky<\/a>\u00a0is a senior editor at Above the Law, where she\u2019s worked since 2011. She\u2019d love to hear from you, so please feel free to email<\/a> her with any tips, questions, comments, or critiques. You can follow her on\u00a0Bluesky<\/a>,\u00a0X\/Twitter<\/a>, and\u00a0Threads<\/a>,\u00a0or connect with her on\u00a0LinkedIn<\/a>.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n The post The Am Law 200: Biglaw\u2019s Second Hundred Crushes The Competition In Almost Every Financial Metric (2025)<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The past year was wonderful for law firms, and the Am Law Second Hundred had an incredible showing when it came to all things financial. The American Lawyer recently released its Am Law 200 law firm rankings \u2014 a closely watched list of the smaller yet still elite law firms that represent the very best […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":118005,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-118098","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-above_the_law"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/xira.com\/p\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Staci-Zaretsky-YuvCOV.jpeg?fit=150%2C100&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/118098","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=118098"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/118098\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/118005"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=118098"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=118098"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=118098"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}\n
<\/blockquote>\n
102. Baker Donelson: $508,274,000
103. Bradley Arant: $507,205,000
104. Gunderson Dettmer: $503,000,000
105. Shook Hardy: $500,981,000
106. Kramer Levin: $467,200,000
107. Cahill: $463,600,00
108. Manatt: $455,900,000
109. Jackson Walker: $453,579,000
110: Lowenstein Sandler: $441,919,000<\/p>\n\n
\n
The 2025 Am Law 200: Ranked By Gross Revenue<\/a>\u00a0[American Lawyer]
The 2025 Am Law 200: At a Glance<\/a>\u00a0[American Lawyer]<\/p>\n
\n![\"Staci](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/abovethelaw.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2016\/11\/Staci-Zaretsky.jpg?resize=150%2C100&ssl=1\" "\\"\\"")
\n
\n
<\/blockquote>\n
102. Baker Donelson: $508,274,000
103. Bradley Arant: $507,205,000
104. Gunderson Dettmer: $503,000,000
105. Shook Hardy: $500,981,000
106. Kramer Levin: $467,200,000
107. Cahill: $463,600,00
108. Manatt: $455,900,000
109. Jackson Walker: $453,579,000
110: Lowenstein Sandler: $441,919,000<\/p>\n\n
\n
The 2025 Am Law 200: Ranked By Gross Revenue<\/a>\u00a0[American Lawyer]
The 2025 Am Law 200: At a Glance<\/a>\u00a0[American Lawyer]<\/p>\n
\n