Utility M&A Counsel in 2026: A Smaller Share of Deals Than the Market

A general counsel at a utility who asks for a shortlist of utility M&A lawyers is shopping in a sector where acquisitions are a minor part of the outside legal work. Sartori & Partners data show that corporate and M&A lawyers sat on 16.2% of the 949 utility, water and waste deals on record in the 12 months to October 2026. Across all dated deals, the same practice appears on 23.3%. Capital markets lawyers, by contrast, were on 62.3% of utility deals. The order of hiring follows from that: a utility buys issuance counsel first, and M&A counsel second.

The gap between the utility share and the market share of the corporate practice is 7.1 points. Put as a ratio, corporate lawyers turn up on utility deals at 0.7 times their rate across the whole deal record. Capital markets runs the other way: its utility share is 2.4 times its share of all dated deals. Banking and finance lawyers were on 7.3% of utility deals and projects lawyers on 4.6%.

One deal can carry more than one practice, so these shares overlap and are not a split of the work. Many dated deals also carry no practice label at all. What the comparison does show is weight: across the record a corporate team is on 23.3% of deals, and in utilities on fewer. For a buyer of legal services, that means the M&A partner pitching for the mandate has probably seen fewer utility transactions than the firm's capital markets partner down the hall. Ask how many.

The deal types say the same thing in a different unit. In the Sartori & Partners deal record, capital markets deals were 60.9% of the sector's work over 12 months, against 25.7% across all dated deals. M&A as a deal type was 13.9% of utility deals, under its 19.3% share of the whole record. Disputes and investigations followed at 6.7%, then banking and lending at 5.0%.

Regulated utilities fund their networks with regular debt and equity offerings, and that rhythm shows in the numbers. An acquisition, a disposal or a merger is an occasional event next to a steady issuance calendar. The practical point for a company is that its main outside firm is likely chosen for the offerings, and the M&A team comes with that relationship rather than on its own merits. Before a transaction, test the M&A bench as a separate purchase.

New York is the main base: 46.3% of utility deals with a known lawyer location had lawyers there. Texas comes next. Houston lawyers worked on 22.1% of the sector's deals and Dallas lawyers on 17.6%, both ahead of London at 11.9% and Washington, DC at 10.1%. One deal counts in every city whose lawyers worked on it, so the rows measure where the work is done and do not add up.

The corporate bench in Texas is also where lateral hiring is busy. Houston took 3.2% of corporate and M&A lateral moves, an index of 136 against the city's share of all moves, while Dallas sat near par at 102. These are moves of lawyers, not deals, but they tell a utility in the region that corporate partners there are in demand. A company with Texas assets can source M&A counsel locally, and should expect competition for the same people.

Utility deals rose 13.6% year on year, from 861 to 978 in the settled 12-month windows. Corporate and M&A deals across every sector rose 9.5%, from 10,198 to 11,170. The whole dated deal record rose 10.6%. So the sector is gaining weight while its M&A share stays low: more of the new utility work is issuance, not acquisitions.

Lateral hiring in the corporate practice moved faster than either. Corporate and M&A lateral moves rose 15.8%, from 2,532 to 2,933 on the same settled windows. Firms are adding corporate lawyers across all sectors, and nothing in the record ties that hiring to utilities. For a general counsel, it means the partner who handled the last utility acquisition may have changed firm since; check where the team sits now before reissuing a mandate.

The first list below covers all of the sector's deal work, issuance included, not only its M&A. The second covers all corporate and M&A work in every sector. There is no ranking for corporate work on utility deals alone. Checked name by name, two firms appear on both: Latham & Watkins, second on the utility list, and Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, tenth. Hunton Andrews Kurth heads the utility list in the 151-250 band of deals advised.

The small overlap is what two different measures give: one list counts every utility deal, most of it capital markets work, and the other counts corporate deals across technology, pharma and every other sector. Neither list says who is strongest on utility acquisitions. Ask each candidate firm for its utility M&A matters specifically, separate from its offerings.

Treat the M&A appointment as its own decision. With corporate lawyers on 16.2% of utility deals and capital markets lawyers on 62.3%, the firm on your issuance program is not automatically the right firm for an acquisition. Interview its M&A partners as you would a new firm.

Look in Texas as well as New York. Houston and Dallas lawyers work on a sizable share of the sector's deals, and Houston corporate hiring over-indexes, so the people are there. Move early: utility deals rose 13.6% on the year, faster than the corporate practice's 9.5%, and lateral moves keep reshuffling corporate teams. Confirm who will staff the deal on the day the engagement letter is signed.

Sartori & Partners figures come from public law-firm announcements, firm websites and professional profiles, checked monthly. Deal counts are matters on record, including court filings, not fees or revenue.