Fintech Capital Raising Counsel in 2026: Venture at 4.4 Times the Norm

A general counsel at a payments or fintech company who is lining up fintech capital raising lawyers needs two benches, not one. Sartori & Partners data show 493 fintech and payments deals on record in the 12 months to October 2026. Venture and growth deals were 16.6% of them, against 3.8% of all dated deals, while capital markets deals were 21.9%. On the lawyer side, capital markets lawyers worked on 23.7% of the sector's deals, second only to corporate and M&A lawyers at 45.4%. These shares overlap: one deal can carry several practices, and some deals carry no type or no practice label at all. The sector raises money from private investors and in the public markets in parallel, and each route calls on a different group of lawyers inside a firm.

The type mix is where fintech parts company with the rest of the record. Venture and growth deals were 16.6% of fintech and payments deals and 3.8% of all dated deals, a gap of 12.8 points and a ratio of 4.4 to one. Capital markets deals lean the other way, at 21.9% of fintech deals against 25.7% across the record. Disputes and investigations also sit lower in fintech, at 15.0% against 25.0%, while banking and lending is close to its market level at 4.1% against 3.3%. Some deals carry no type and others carry more than one, so these figures are not a complete split of the sector. For a fintech company, the point is that a private round is routine business in this sector rather than an exception. The firm advising on the next round should show a steady record of venture and growth work, judged separately from its capital markets credentials.

By practice, corporate and M&A lawyers worked on 45.4% of fintech and payments deals and capital markets lawyers on 23.7%, so the corporate bench reaches 1.9 times as large a share. Across all dated deals, capital markets lawyers were on 26.4%, a gap of 2.7 points: fintech uses the practice slightly below its market rate. Intellectual property lawyers follow at 9.7%, banking and finance lawyers at 6.3% and financial services regulatory lawyers at 5.9%. The capital markets practice itself seldom touches private rounds: venture and growth deals were 0.2% of its own deals across every sector, against 96.0% for capital markets deals. A fintech company should not expect its capital markets counsel to run a growth round as a matter of course; that mandate calls for the corporate side of the firm.

Where a value was disclosed, the median fintech and payments deal was $237.9 million. The median capital markets deal across all sectors was $563.2 million, 2.4 times the fintech figure. Values were disclosed on 32.0% of fintech deals and 29.5% of capital markets deals, so both medians rest on a minority of the record. In the Sartori & Partners deal record these are matters, not fees, and the medians describe ticket size only. A smaller typical ticket matters for staffing. A fintech company raising capital is a mid-sized client for a capital markets team used to larger work, so it should ask who will run the deal day to day and how much partner time a transaction of its size will receive.

Year on year, the fintech and payments deal count held flat (-3.8%), from 506 to 487 in the settled 12-month windows. Over the same windows the capital markets practice's deal count rose 10.0%, from 11,838 to 13,024, and the whole deal record rose 10.6%. The count of lateral moves of capital markets lawyers between firms held flat (+6.7%), from 571 to 609; these are lawyers changing firms, not deals, and the two trends sit side by side without one explaining the other. Taken together, the capital markets partners a fintech company relies on carry a growing book from other sectors, while the hiring that would add capacity is level. Expect to compete for their calendar, and engage a team before a market window opens rather than once it has.

Sartori & Partners also follows lawyers whose own focus is fintech and payments when they change firms: 127 did so in 12 months. Financial services regulatory lawyers were 60.6% of them, an index of 3,649 against their share of all lateral moves. Corporate and M&A lawyers were 26.0%, with an index of 126, and banking and finance lawyers 22.8%, with an index of 164. Over three years, capital markets lawyers were 6.6% of these moves, against 59.9% for regulatory lawyers. Partners were 58.3% of the 12-month moves, against 31.5% among capital markets lateral moves. The count of fintech-focused moves held flat (+7.4%), from 121 to 130. The talent that moves in this sector is regulatory and senior, and capital markets skill with a fintech focus is thin. A company should plan to pair a regulatory adviser with a capital markets team rather than expect one lawyer to cover both.

No firm list is published for capital markets work on fintech deals. The first list below ranks firms by all of the sector's deals on record, every practice and deal type included; the second ranks firms by all capital markets deals in every sector. Counted name by name, six firms sit in both top 10 lists: Davis Polk & Wardwell, Latham & Watkins, Sidley Austin, White & Case, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett and A&O Shearman. The other four on the fintech list, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, Gunderson Dettmer Stough Villeneuve Franklin & Hachigian, Fenwick & West and DLA Piper, rank there on the sector's full mix of work. A company preparing a capital raise can start from the overlap when the public markets are the route, and look across the full fintech list when a private round is on the table, checking each firm's own record on that deal type before engaging it.

Four points follow. First, plan for two kinds of capital raise: venture and growth deals were 16.6% of fintech deals, 4.4 times their share of the whole record, alongside capital markets deals at 21.9%. Second, staff them separately: the capital markets practice put only 0.2% of its own deals into venture and growth, so a private round needs a corporate team. Third, size the request: a median disclosed fintech deal of $237.9 million is a mid-sized mandate for a practice whose median is $563.2 million, so ask for named partner time in the engagement letter. Fourth, bring in regulatory depth early, since financial services regulatory lawyers were 60.6% of fintech-focused lateral moves. Sartori & Partners builds these figures from public law-firm announcements, firm websites and professional profiles, checked monthly.