中国榜 · 律界 China · Legal

律所评价Law Firm Evaluation

四维(规模·质量·创新·贡献)加权模型 · 排名更新日期:2026-10-20Four-dimensional (Scale · Quality · Innovation · Contribution) weighted model · Last updated: 2026-10-20

综述Overview

The legal profession is a cornerstone of the rule of law and an important window into the degree of legalization and marketization of an economy. Since the reform and opening-up, China's legal profession has grown from small to large and from weak to strong, becoming one of the largest groups of practicing lawyers in the world; public data show that the number of practicing lawyers nationwide has exceeded 700,000 and the number of law firms has surpassed 40,000 (approximate figures from public statistics of the Ministry of Justice; subject to official sources). Under the development direction of "scaling up, specialization, branding, and internationalization," a number of leading law firms have come to the fore, forming a clearly stratified competitive landscape.
律师业是法治建设的中坚力量,也是衡量一个经济体法治化、市场化程度的重要窗口。改革开放以来,中国律师行业从小到大、从弱到强,已成为全球规模最大的律师执业群体之一;公开资料显示,全国执业律师人数已超过 70 万人、律师事务所超过 4 万家(司法部公开统计,近似值,以官方为准)。在"规模化、专业化、品牌化、国际化"的发展方向下,一批头部律所脱颖而出,形成层次分明的竞争格局。
China's leading law firms can be broadly divided into three categories. The first is the Red Circle firms (the eight firms derived from the "Red Circle" concept of Asian Legal Business — King & Wood Mallesons, JunHe, Zhong Lun, Fangda Partners, Haiwen & Partners, Jingtian & Gongcheng, Commerce & Finance, and Global Law Office), which excel in high-end commercial, cross-border, and capital-markets work and lead the industry in per-capita revenue and standing. The second is the large-scale firms (Yingke, Dentons, AllBright, Grandall, DeHeng, and others), known for their extensive branch networks, large numbers of lawyers, and broad business coverage. The third is the boutique firms (Han Kun, TianTong, Llinks, Tian Yuan, and others), which possess top-tier professional capabilities in niche areas such as data compliance, technology, and major civil and commercial litigation.
中国头部律所大致可分三类:一是红圈所(源于《亚洲法律杂志》"Red Circle"概念的八家——金杜、君合、中伦、方达、海问、竞天公诚、通商、环球),以高端商事、跨境、资本市场业务见长,人均创收与行业地位领先;二是规模化大所(盈科、大成、锦天城、国浩、德恒等),以分所网络广、律师人数多、业务覆盖面大著称;三是精品所(汉坤、天同、通力、天元等),在数据合规、科技、重大民商事诉讼等细分领域具备顶尖专业能力。
This index does not directly copy the rankings of any public list (Chambers, ALB, Legal 500, etc.); instead, it uses underlying public data — revenue, number of lawyers, and number of branches — together with experts' approximate scores for professional competence, emerging fields, and public-interest contribution, to build a four-dimensional "Scale + Quality + Innovation + Contribution" model and compute the rankings itself, aiming to reflect both size and professional and social responsibility.
本指数不直接摘抄任何公开榜单(钱伯斯、ALB、Legal 500 等)的名次,而是以底层公开数据——营收、律师人数、分所数——加上专家对专业能力、新兴领域、公益贡献的近似评分,构建"规模 + 质量 + 创新 + 贡献"四维模型自算排名,力求既反映体量,也反映专业与社会责任。
The evaluation results show that King & Wood Mallesons, JunHe, Zhong Lun, Fangda Partners, and Yingke rank in the top five, while King & Wood Mallesons, JunHe, Zhong Lun, Fangda Partners, Yingke, Dentons, AllBright, Han Kun, Jingtian & Gongcheng, and Haiwen & Partners enter the top ten. Overall, those that balance scale and quality rank highest — the Red Circle firms occupy the top tier by virtue of their top-tier professional competence and considerable size, the large-scale firms follow closely thanks to their networks and headcount, and the boutique firms rank relatively lower overall because of their limited size (their niche professional standing is better recognized separately through a rating). All ranking data are approximate values from public common knowledge, marked "subject to official sources," permanently free and public, for research and reference only.
评价结果显示:金杜、君合、中伦、方达、盈科 位列前五,其中 金杜、君合、中伦、方达、盈科、大成、锦天城、汉坤、竞天公诚、海问 进入前十。整体看,规模与质量并重者居前——红圈所凭借顶尖专业能力与可观体量占据头部,规模化大所凭借网络与人数紧随其后,精品所因体量有限综合排名相对靠后(其细分专业地位更适合以评级单独表彰)。本排名数据均为公开常识近似值,标注"以官方为准",永久免费公开,仅供研究与参考。

分层梯队Tiers

A++ 前三Top 3 A+ 四至十4th–10th A 十一至二十11th–20th B 其余Rest

全国头部律所综合评价排名(约 25 家)Comprehensive Ranking of Top National Law Firms (about 25)

排名律所类型综合指数规模质量创新贡献营收(亿)律师(人)分所梯队
1金杜律师事务所King & Wood Mallesons红圈所79.4552.0100.0100.075.0803,00020A++
2君合律师事务所Jun He Law Offices红圈所72.3536.992.390.990.0451,50015A++
3中伦律师事务所Zhong Lun Law Firm红圈所67.0441.088.584.860.0502,20018A++
4方达律师事务所Fangda Partners红圈所65.5929.696.293.950.0359008A+
5盈科律师事务所Yingke Law Firm规模化大所61.71100.023.124.2100.09015,000120A+
6大成律师事务所Dacheng Law Offices规模化大所58.2980.330.839.490.08012,00060A+
7锦天城律师事务所AllBright Law Offices规模化大所53.6450.350.048.575.0554,50030A+
8汉坤律师事务所Han Kun Law Offices精品所50.5617.980.897.010.0205006A+
9竞天公诚律师事务所Jingtian & Gongcheng红圈所50.5228.169.269.740.0301,20012A+
10海问律师事务所Haiwen & Partners红圈所50.2211.884.684.825.0153504A+
11通商律师事务所Commerce & Finance Law Offices红圈所47.5623.965.478.830.0251,00010A
12环球律师事务所Global Law Office红圈所44.1223.561.575.820.0259009A
13德恒律师事务所DeHeng Law Offices规模化大所43.2342.930.836.480.0403,50035A
14国浩律师事务所Grandall Law Firm规模化大所41.2845.138.530.350.0453,50035A
15通力律师事务所Llinks Law Offices精品所40.7412.169.281.80.0154005A
16天元律师事务所Tian Yuan Law Firm精品所37.418.957.760.610.0208008A
17天同律师事务所Tiantong Law Firm精品所34.440.776.948.50.083008A
18京师律师事务所Jingsh Law Firm规模化大所28.150.70.09.160.0356,00060A
19金诚同达律师事务所Jincheng Tongda & Neal规模化大所25.1924.826.927.320.0221,80018A
20观韬中茂律师事务所Guantao Law Firm规模化大所23.6228.915.424.230.0252,00025A
21泰和泰律师事务所Tahota Law Firm规模化大所22.6830.07.718.245.0252,50025B
22隆安律师事务所Longan Law Firm规模化大所22.0633.07.712.140.0282,50030B
23炜衡律师事务所W&H Law Firm规模化大所20.7631.43.86.150.0223,00040B
24中伦文德律师事务所Zhong Lun Wen De Law Firm规模化大所16.3920.711.59.125.0181,50020B
25华商律师事务所China Commercial Law Firm规模化大所9.7719.40.00.020.0152,00025B

算法详细论述Methodology

一、评价依据与指标选择

A law firm is a "professional service organization," whose evaluation cannot look only at size or only at expertise. This algorithm selects four dimensions and seven indicators, balancing "size and expertise, market and responsibility":
律师事务所是"专业服务组织",其评价不能只看体量,也不能只看专业。本算法选取四个维度、七项指标,兼顾"体量与专业、市场与责任":
  1. 规模(营收、律师人数、分所数):衡量律所的市场体量、人才集聚与网络覆盖,是"做大"的基础。
  2. 质量(专业能力/行业地位):衡量律所在高端业务、行业口碑与人才梯队上的真实专业水平,是"做强"的核心。
  3. 创新(新兴领域:合规/数据/涉外):衡量律所在数据合规、反垄断、跨境争议解决等新兴与前沿领域的布局与能力,是"做新"的前瞻。
  4. 贡献(法律援助/公益):衡量律所参与法律援助、公益法律服务的社会责任,是 CPPPS 特色维度,国际律所榜单普遍缺失。

二、模型的数学结构

Each indicator is first normalized to [0,1] via min-max scaling and then combined by weighting. The large-span scale indicator (revenue) is log-transformed to avoid the monopolistic influence of top-tier size gaps on the results:
各指标先经 min-max 归一化到 [0,1],再加权合成。规模类大跨度指标(营收)取对数,避免头部体量差距对结果的垄断性影响:
规模 S = 0.45·log₁₀(营收)′ + 0.35·律师人数′ + 0.20·分所数′ 综合指数 = 100 × ( 0.35·S + 0.35·质量′ + 0.15·创新′ + 0.15·贡献′ )
Scale and quality are given equal weight (0.35 each), while innovation and contribution are each weighted 0.15. The quality dimension assigns professional competence the same weight as scale, allowing "small but strong" elite firms and "large and comprehensive" scale firms to compete fairly; the contribution dimension is separately set at 0.15 to reflect the public-interest nature of the legal profession.
规模与质量并重(各 0.35),创新与贡献各 0.15。质量维度对专业能力赋予与规模同等的权重,使"小而强"的精英所与"大而全"的规模所能公平竞争;贡献维度单独设 0.15,体现法律职业的公益属性。

三、指标与权重依据

维度指标方向权重依据
规模营业收入对数/正向0.45(规模内)市场体量,取对数防垄断
规模律师人数正向0.35(规模内)人才集聚与专业承载力
规模分所数正向0.20(规模内)地域网络与服务半径
质量专业能力/行业地位正向0.35高端业务与行业口碑
创新新兴领域(合规/数据/涉外)正向0.15前沿领域布局能力
贡献法律援助/公益正向0.15社会责任(CPPPS 特色)

四、数据来源与局限

Revenue, number of lawyers, and number of branches use approximate values from public common knowledge (official websites of law firms, public statistics of the Ministry of Justice and the All China Lawyers Association, and media reports), all marked "subject to official sources." The three dimensions of quality, innovation, and contribution are CPPPS expert approximate scores (0-100); the professional-competence reference dimension does not copy the rankings of lists such as Chambers, ALB, or Legal 500, but only serves as common-knowledge background for industry standing.
营收、律师人数、分所数采用公开常识近似值(各律所官网、司法部与全国律协公开统计、媒体报道),一律标注"以官方为准";质量、创新、贡献三维为 CPPPS 专家近似评分(0–100),其专业能力参照维度不摘抄钱伯斯、ALB、Legal 500 等榜单的名次,仅作为行业地位的常识性背景。
This model has the following limitations: first, the legal profession is largely unlisted and revenues are mostly undisclosed, so the approximate values carry relatively large errors; second, the scale-quality weighting may underestimate the professional standing of small boutique firms (whose niche excellence is better recognized separately through a rating); third, public-interest contribution lacks a unified quantification standard. Therefore, this ranking is for research and reference only and does not constitute any basis for hiring or decision-making.
本模型存在如下局限:其一,律师行业非上市、营收多不披露,近似值误差较大;其二,规模—质量加权会低估精品小所的专业地位(其细分卓越宜以评级单独表彰);其三,公益贡献缺乏统一量化口径。故本排名仅供研究与参考,不构成任何选聘或决策依据。

五、参考文献

  1. 《中华人民共和国律师法》。
  2. 司法部:全国律师行业年度统计数据(律师人数、律所数量,公开口径,以官方为准)。
  3. 中华全国律师协会:律师行业发展报告与行业规范。
  4. 《亚洲法律杂志》(Asian Legal Business):"Red Circle"红圈所概念出处(仅作背景,不摘抄其名次)。
  5. 钱伯斯(Chambers and Partners)、Legal 500、IFLR 等律师评价机构公开资料(仅作行业地位背景,不摘抄其名次)。
  6. 各律师事务所官方网站公开信息(分所、人员、业务领域、公益公告)。

说明Notes

本版采用四维(规模·质量·创新·贡献)加权模型:规模 S = 0.45·log₁₀(营收)′ + 0.35·律师′ + 0.20·分所′,营收取对数避免头部体量垄断;综合指数 = 100 ×(0.35·S + 0.35·质量′ + 0.15·创新′ + 0.15·贡献′),规模与质量并重,创新与贡献次之。指标均先 min-max 归一化至 [0,1]。数据:营收/律师/分所为公开常识近似值,质量/创新/贡献为专家近似评分,一律"以官方为准";不摘抄钱伯斯/ALB/Legal 500 等公开榜单名次。精品所因体量有限综合排名相对靠后,其细分专业地位宜以评级单独表彰。
This edition adopts a four-dimension (scale·quality·innovation·contribution) weighted model: scale S = 0.45·log₁₀(revenue)′ + 0.35·lawyers′ + 0.20·branches′, with revenue log-transformed to avoid top-tier volume monopoly; composite index = 100 × (0.35·S + 0.35·quality′ + 0.15·innovation′ + 0.15·contribution′), balancing scale and quality, with innovation and contribution secondary. All indicators are first min-max normalized to [0,1]. Data: revenue/lawyers/branches are public approximate values, while quality/innovation/contribution are expert approximate scores, uniformly "subject to official figures"; it does not reproduce the rankings of public lists such as Chambers/ALB/Legal 500. Boutique firms rank relatively lower in the composite ranking due to their limited scale; their niche professional standing should be separately recognized through ratings.