Real Estate Finance Counsel in 2026: Two Partner Markets Pull Apart

A property company that hires real estate finance lawyers is buying from two partner markets at once, and over the past year those markets moved in opposite directions. Sartori & Partners data show that 604 banking and finance partners changed firms in the settled 12 months to September 2026, against 546 a year earlier, so partner moves in the practice rose 10.6%. Among partners whose own focus is real estate, 413 moved against 471, and those moves fell 12.3%. Both figures count lawyers changing firms, not the size of any firm's team. The two markets meet on the deal record. Banking and finance lawyers worked on 9.6% of the 2,164 real estate deals dated in the 12 months to October 2026, and real estate was the client sector on 6.8% of the finance practice's deals. What follows sets the partner movement beside that shared work and spells out what it changes for a company choosing counsel.

The finance practice's lateral partner market rose 10.6% on settled windows, 604 against 546. Counting every level, banking and finance lateral moves rose 14.1%, 2,015 against 1,766. The property side splits by level. Lawyers focused on real estate who changed firms held flat (-3.4%) across all levels, 1,177 against 1,219. The partners among them fell 12.3%, 413 against 471. Partners were still 35.6% of property-focused movers over 12 months, against 30.8% of banking and finance movers.

For a company, partner movement is a continuity question. When the partner who runs your banking and lending work changes firms, the relationship often travels with that partner, and you decide whether to follow. More finance partners made that move this year than last, 604 against 546. Ask any finance team you engage to name a second partner on your matters and write that name into the engagement terms.

The two partner pools are not separate. In the Sartori & Partners lateral database, 33.7% of the lawyers focused on real estate who changed firms were recorded under the banking and finance practice, an index of 242 against the market's share. Among the partners in that group the share was 35.1%, an index of 227. From the finance side, 25.5% of banking and finance movers also carried real estate work. A lawyer's focus and the practice a move is recorded under are counted apart, so these shares are read for direction and never subtracted.

Where the movers landed also differs. Firms of 1,000+ lawyers took 63.8% of banking and finance lateral moves but 44.3% of property-focused moves. Firms of 400-999 lawyers took 29.0% of the property-focused moves against 20.6% in finance.

The overlap widens a company's search. A partner who handles finance for property clients may sit in a firm's finance group or in its real estate group, and the group name on a website does not settle which. Ask candidate firms which partners worked on banking and lending matters for property clients in the last 12 months, whatever group they belong to, and look past the largest firms: property-focused lawyers landed at firms below the 1,000+ lawyers class more often than finance movers did.

Banking and finance lawyers worked on 208 real estate deals in 12 months, 9.6% of the sector's deals. Across all dated deals the practice appears on 6.3%, so a property deal carries a finance lawyer 1.5 times as often as the average deal. Banking and lending was the label on 5.0% of the sector's deals. Many deals carry no practice label and one deal can carry several, so the practice shares on property work overlap and never add up to a whole.

Turn the pair around and the weight changes. Real estate was on 208 of the 3,053 banking and finance deals, or 6.8%. Among the practice's client sectors only banks and financial institutions, at 17.8%, and power and renewables, at 7.8%, sat higher. Real estate appears on 4.5% of all dated deals, so the finance practice meets property clients 1.5 times as often as the deal record does.

The asymmetry is the practical point. On your deals a finance lawyer is a regular, yet to a finance team property is one client sector among several, with real estate on 6.8% of its book. Expect to share partner time with banks, power companies and financial sponsors, and ask how much of the team's last year went to property clients before you agree a timetable.

Real estate deals rose 6.8%, with 2,138 in the settled 12 months to September 2026 against 2,001 a year before. Banking and finance deals rose 12.1% over the same windows, 3,039 against 2,710. All dated deals rose 10.6%, 48,216 against 43,590. No count exists for finance work on property deals alone, so these are separate readings on separate records, each beside its own counts.

Set beside the partner readings, the pattern holds on both sides. Finance work ran ahead of the deal record while finance partners changed firms more often; property work rose more slowly while property-focused partners moved less. For a company with a banking and lending matter on the calendar, the finance practice's deal count rose 12.1%, so retain finance counsel when the timetable is first drawn up, not when it is already short.

Banking and finance deals disclosed a value 47.7% of the time, at a median of $545 million. Real estate deals disclosed one 23.0% of the time, at a median of $401.2 million, so finance deals disclose about 2.1 times as often. The sector median covers every real estate deal, whatever the practice, and the finance median covers finance deals in every sector. Neither is the median of finance work on property deals.

With values public on only 23.0% of property deals, published figures give a thin base for comparing firms on deal size. Ask each candidate firm for the size range of the property matters its finance partners closed in the past year rather than relying on headline totals.

Each list answers its own question. The banking and finance list ranks firms on all the practice's deals, across every client sector. The real estate list ranks firms on all property deals, whichever practice worked on them. Sartori & Partners publishes no firm list for finance work on property deals alone. Latham & Watkins heads both lists, in the 151-250 band of finance deals advised and the 101-150 band of real estate deals advised.

Checked name by name, the firms on both lists are Latham & Watkins, Jones Day, Clifford Chance and Simpson Thacher & Bartlett. Appearing on both shows volume on each side, not that the same partners do the two kinds of work. On the lateral side, DLA Piper hired the most banking and finance partners, in the 11-20 band. Treat the four as a first shortlist and ask each which named partners handled banking and lending for property clients in the last 12 months.

Plan for partner movement on the finance side. Banking and finance partner moves rose 10.6%, 604 against 546, while moves by partners focused on real estate fell 12.3%, 413 against 471. Put two named finance partners on the engagement, and keep your property relationship and your finance relationship documented separately so that either can move without stalling a deal.

Hire the finance lawyer as part of the deal team. They sit on 9.6% of property deals, yet property is 6.8% of their practice's deals, so your matter competes with banks and power companies for the same partners. Search both groups at each firm, include firms below the 1,000+ lawyers class, and engage before the deal calendar fills: finance deals rose 12.1% on settled windows, faster than property deals.