Payments and Fintech Regulation: Where Crypto Meets Payments

Firms that hire fintech regulatory lawyers are buying exposure to crypto whether they plan to or not. Sartori & Partners data show that clients in digital assets and crypto sat on 28.9% of the matters on record for payments and fintech regulation over three years, beside fintech and payments clients on 49.4%. The lawyers who carry that work moved in a narrow channel: 86.8% of their lateral moves in the 12 months to October 2026 went to firms of 1,000+ lawyers.

The client mix is the clearest signal in this speciality. Over three years, 83 matters were recorded for payments and fintech regulation. Fintech and payments clients appeared on 49.4% of them, and digital assets and crypto clients on 28.9%. One matter can carry more than one client industry, so the two shares overlap and are not a split of the work.

The type of work is just as concentrated. Regulatory and antitrust matters made up 48.2% of the three-year record. Recent activity carries real weight: the last 12 months account for 43.4% of the three-year matters on record. In plain terms, a payments partner today advises licensing, conduct and market-entry questions for money transmitters, card and wallet businesses, and issuers of digital assets.

For a firm, this changes what a payments hire has to bring. A candidate whose book stops at card schemes and bank partnerships covers only part of the demand. Ask in the first interview how much of the practice touches stablecoins, custody or digital asset offerings, and price the hire on that answer.

Firm size separates this speciality from its parent practice. In the Sartori & Partners lateral database, firms of 1,000+ lawyers took 86.8% of payments and fintech moves over 12 months, against 66.7% across financial services regulatory and 53.6% across the whole market. The gap with the practice is 20.1 points.

Firms of 400-999 lawyers took 13.2% of the speciality's moves, against 22.2% in the practice. The pattern holds over a longer window: across three years, firms of 1,000+ lawyers took 74.1% of payments and fintech arrivals, against 64.3% for the practice.

A firm below that size competes for these lawyers against the largest platforms on almost every search. The case it makes has to rest on something other than scale: a payments group the candidate would lead, a regulatory bench in the right capital, or a client base the larger firms cannot serve without conflicts.

The city mix has a London tilt. Over three years, London took 19.4% of payments and fintech arrivals, against 13.5% for financial services regulatory and 10.0% for the whole market. Washington, DC followed with 13.1%, close to the practice's 13.4%.

London is also where many of the movers started: 14.4% of the lawyers who moved over three years had left a London firm. A payments search that starts outside London or Washington should expect to recruit across borders or to relocate the hire.

Volume tells a quieter story. Payments and fintech regulation hiring held flat (+5.4%) year on year, with 56 moves in the earlier settled window and 59 in the latest. Financial services regulatory as a whole rose 19.6% over the same windows, from 204 to 244.

Partner hiring in the speciality was unchanged, at 27 and 27 partner moves in the two settled windows. The practice's partner hiring rose 40.2%. Payments lawyers also form a real slice of that practice: moves by lawyers focused on payments and fintech made 22.6% of the moves recorded under financial services regulatory over 12 months.

The practice's rise did not show up in payments hiring. A firm that reads it as a deeper payments market will budget for a candidate pool the figures do not show.

Partners made 39.6% of payments and fintech moves over 12 months, against 47.9% in financial services regulatory and 27.7% across the market. Associates made 41.5% and counsel 18.9%.

Promotion through the move is rare as well. Sartori & Partners figures put the share of payments and fintech moves made at a higher title at 11.3%, against 13.7% in the practice. A firm that wants a payments partner should look first at sitting partners and senior counsel, and treat an associate step-up as the exception.

Over three years, 80 firms hired at least one payments and fintech lawyer. The ten that hired most took 28.9% of individual hires, against 22.3% for the ten most active hirers in financial services regulatory over the same three years.

Simmons & Simmons ranked first, in the 6-10 hires band; the other nine sat in the 3-5 band. With so little separating the group, the next payments hire can change the order, and every firm on the list is a likely rival on a search.

Hire for crypto as well as payments. With digital assets and crypto clients on 28.9% of the speciality's matters, a candidate with no digital asset or custody experience covers a narrower share of the work than the title suggests.

Expect to compete with the largest firms. Firms of 1,000+ lawyers took 86.8% of moves over 12 months, so a smaller firm should lead with the role and the client base, not the platform.

Plan the search around London and Washington, DC, and budget time. Partner hiring was flat at 27 moves in the latest settled window, and law-firm career pages listed 76 open payments and fintech roles on the data date. A mandate opened now should allow for a longer approach and a counsel candidate as a fallback.