Deal Flow vs Lateral Hiring by Practice: Where They Part in 2026

Does deal activity drive lateral hiring? Across the whole market the two series look like twins. Sartori & Partners data show dated deals rose 10.6% year on year, from 43,590 to 48,216, while lateral moves between law firms rose 9.0%, from 13,128 to 14,305. Split the same figures by practice and the match disappears. Projects and infrastructure posted strong deal growth and no growth in hiring; funds hiring climbed on a deal count that barely moved. For a firm that sizes its lateral plan on deal flow, that gap is the point of this report.

At market level the gap between the two growth rates is 1.6 points. Both changes use the same settled 12-month windows, which end one month before the newest data, so they compare like with like. Read on their own, those two lines suggest that hiring follows the deal count. The practice view below does not support that reading.

A total can hide offsetting moves underneath, and that is what happens here. Of the four practices in this report, two posted deal growth on flat hiring and two posted hiring growth on flat deal counts. A deal count is the number of matters on record for a practice, not a measure of revenue or of the staff a matter needs, so each practice below is read only against its own year-earlier figures. For a hiring committee, the market total is the wrong yardstick: across all firms, partner hiring rose 8.4%, but a lateral budget belongs next to the practice's own hiring trend.

Projects and infrastructure shows the widest split. Sartori & Partners data on dated deals show the projects deal count rose 26.2%, from 903 to 1,140. Projects lateral hiring held flat (+1.3%) over the same windows: 537 moves against 530 a year earlier. The partner tier reads the same way: projects partner hiring held flat (+16.5%), from 182 to 212, a gap that counts of this size cannot separate from chance.

The deal mix shows where the extra work sits. Project and infrastructure finance makes up 70.4% of projects deals, and power and renewables 57.1%. That work runs through finance teams: 46.7% of projects laterals also carry a banking and finance practice. Hiring is concentrated too. Firms of 1,000+ lawyers took 71.1% of projects moves, 17.5 points above their share of all moves. Houston over-indexes hardest, at 409 on an index where the whole market scores one hundred.

For a firm adding projects capacity, the split matters. The work grew, but neither projects partners nor the wider bench changed firms in clearly larger numbers, so new capacity has to be won from a pool that did not expand. The wider bench worth approaching sits inside banking and finance teams at large firms, with Houston and London as the deepest pools.

Intellectual property repeats the pattern on a larger base. The count of dated IP matters rose 20.9%, from 4,399 to 5,319, while IP lateral hiring held flat (+7.2%), at 1,058 moves against 987. In plain terms, IP deal counts include disputes taken from public court and trademark-office records, so they count matters on file, not fees or headcount. That shows in the mix: disputes and investigations make up 95.3% of IP deals.

What moves in IP is teams. The share of IP laterals who joined as part of a group is 5.1%, 3.4 times the market rate of 1.5%. Partner moves were steady as well, at 352 against 326. A firm that wants IP capacity should not wait for a hiring wave to follow the matter count: none has formed, and the realistic route to scale is a group hire, which needs more preparation than a single lateral.

Funds and investment management runs the other way. The funds deal count held flat (+2.8%): 1,224 deals against 1,191. Funds lateral hiring rose 23.7%, from 507 to 627 moves, the fastest hiring growth of the four practices here. The partner tier moved faster still: funds partner hiring rose 29.7%, from 165 to 214.

In the Sartori & Partners lateral records, this hiring sits in a narrow band of firms and cities. Firms of 1,000+ lawyers took 75.8% of funds moves, and New York 27.1%, an index of 183 against the market. Fund formation is 39.1% of funds deals, the largest single type in the practice.

For a firm hiring a funds partner, the flat deal count is no comfort. Partner hiring in the practice is up sharply, and the ten most active hirers, listed below, took 28.9% of funds partner moves between them. Expect competing offers and build the short list early.

Restructuring and insolvency is the other practice where hiring outran deals. The restructuring deal count held flat (-5.5%), at 721 against 763. Restructuring lateral hiring rose 10.0%, from 638 to 702 moves. The partner tier rose faster: restructuring partner hiring rose 21.1%, from 237 to 287.

This is a partner-heavy market in any year. Partners make up 41.5% of restructuring moves against 27.7% across all practices, a gap of 13.8 points. New York takes 24.4% of restructuring hires. A firm that reads the flat deal count as a quiet market will misjudge it: more restructuring lawyers, and more partners, changed firms than a year earlier.

In all four practices here, the deal trend and the hiring trend part ways: in projects and IP the deal count rose on flat hiring, and in funds and restructuring hiring rose on a flat deal count. Sartori & Partners data give no basis for reading cause either way. The practical lesson is narrower: a deal count tells you where matters are recorded, not where competition for laterals is rising.

Set lateral targets from the practice's own hiring trend. Market-wide, dated deals rose 10.6% and lateral moves rose 9.0%, but that agreement does not survive the split by practice. In projects, the work grew 26.2% while total hiring did not. Partner hiring there also held flat (+16.5%): every projects hire is taken from a pool that has not grown, so look to the banking and finance teams that already staff the work. In funds, budget for competing offers and longer negotiations, because hiring rose 23.7% with no deal growth to point to. In restructuring, judge the market by moves rather than deal counts: hiring rose 10.0% while deals did not. In IP, plan for group hires, which run at 3.4 times the market rate.