Latham & Watkins LLP vs. Covington & Burling LLP
Side-by-side on the metrics that actually drive the student's call. Sources: Vault 2027, AmLaw 200 FY2025, and reported Chambers records from the years shown.
Swipe sideways to see every firm, or focus the comparison and use the arrow keys.
Est. 1934 · Los Angeles
Latham & Watkins LLP is a 2,000-plus-attorney global firm, Vault #4 / AmLaw #2, founded in Los Angeles, CA. Jurisdiction-specific Chambers rankings include Band 1 in Antitrust, Antitrust: Cartel, and Appellate Law. Operates from 29 offices worldwide.
Est. 1919 · Washington
Covington & Burling LLP is a 1,000-plus-attorney firm, Vault #12 / AmLaw #30, founded in Washington, DC. Jurisdiction-specific Chambers rankings include Band 1 in Corporate Crime & Investigations, Corporate/M&A: Deals in Asia, and False Claims Act.
- Vault rank
- #4
- AmLaw rank
- #2
- Reported Chambers Band 1 records
- 96 records
- Vault rank
- #12
- AmLaw rank
- #30
- Reported Chambers Band 1 records
- 24 records
- First-year comp
- $225,000+
- Profits per partner
- $8.65M
- Firm revenue
- $8.30B
- Revenue per lawyer
- $2.23M
- First-year comp
- $225,000
- Profits per partner
- $3.25M
- Firm revenue
- $2.06B
- Revenue per lawyer
- $1.57M
- Billable target
- 1,900
- Partnership track
- -
- US associates per partner
- 2.7:1
- Firm size (rounded to 50)
- ~3,700
- Offices
- 29
- Billable target
- -
- Partnership track
- 8 years
- US associates per partner
- 2.5:1
- Firm size (rounded to 50)
- ~1,300
- Offices
- 14
- Offer rate
- -
- Class size
- -
- How associates get work
- -
- Specific practice area
- No
- Offer rate
- -
- Class size
- 118 (year not confirmed)
- How associates get work
- -
- Specific practice area
- No
Shared results are listed once. Green marks only a lower reported Chambers band for the same exact practice, market and year. Records with a missing year or market are not compared. Historical records are retained; individual ranking verification status is not available.
Shared rankings
Rank differences
Firm-only and additional rankings remain available on each firm profile so missing coverage is not mistaken for a head-to-head loss.
Data sources: Vault 2027, AmLaw 200 FY2025, and reported Chambers records from the years shown. Chambers record counts can span years and reporting coverage varies; missing years or markets are not compared. Current Chambers bands were checked against each firm’s Chambers profile on Sep 26, 2026; where Chambers splits a table, every Elite firm ranks above every Highly Regarded firm. Missing values shown as “-”.
More head-to-head comparisons
- Cravath, Swaine & Moore vs. Latham & Watkins
- Cravath, Swaine & Moore vs. Covington & Burling
- Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz vs. Latham & Watkins
- Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz vs. Covington & Burling
- Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom vs. Latham & Watkins
- Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom vs. Covington & Burling
- Latham & Watkins vs. Sullivan & Cromwell
- Latham & Watkins vs. Kirkland & Ellis
- Latham & Watkins vs. Davis Polk & Wardwell
- Latham & Watkins vs. Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher
- Latham & Watkins vs. Milbank
- Latham & Watkins vs. Simpson Thacher & Bartlett
Firm data comes from each firm’s own publications, Chambers USA and Vault; see Latham & Watkins and Covington & Burling for sources and dates.