Trending Now
Commercial Special Features

Key Findings from Westfleet’s 2024 Litigation Finance Market Report

The U.S. litigation finance market continued to cool in 2024, according to the latest Westfleet Insider report. New capital commitments dropped 16% YoY, marking the second straight year of decline. According to the report, this reduction is being driven mostly by tight capital markets rather than any deep issues with litigation finance itself.

That said, the report doesn’t just show a market in retreat—it highlights how the space is adjusting and evolving. For one, deal sizes are getting bigger. Single-matter deals averaged $6.6 million (up from $4.8 million in 2023), while portfolio deals jumped to $16.5 million. Portfolio structures continued to dominate overall, making up about two-thirds of all new capital committed—roughly the same ratio we’ve seen since 2019.

One of the most interesting trends is the continued rise of claim monetization—essentially, turning a legal claim into upfront capital. This strategy made up 26% of new commitments in 2024, up from just 8% three years ago. Corporate claimants, in particular, seem to be driving this trend as they look for cash flow in a tougher funding environment.

Patent litigation is still the biggest slice of the pie, accounting for 32% of all new capital. Notably, most of that funding went into patent portfolios rather than one-off cases—suggesting funders are leaning into more diversified, lower-risk plays in the IP space.

Another first this year: Westfleet started tracking contingent risk insurance, and the data shows 19% of new capital commitments were insured in some way. That’s a big signal that funders are getting more creative about managing risk.

Big Law’s share of the pie grew a bit too, up to 37% of total capital commitments—though the actual dollars going to the top 200 firms fell to $850 million (down from $960 million the year before), simply because the total pool shrank.

Bottom line: while the market’s clearly under pressure, the players that are still active are getting smarter about how they deploy capital. With signs that capital flows could loosen up in 2025, funders focused on monetization, patent portfolios, and insured deals may be best positioned to ride the next wave of growth.

Commercial

View All
Commercial People Moves

Fieldfisher Taps Jackson-Grant as Pricing Chief

By John Freund |

Fieldfisher has recruited litigation-funding specialist Verity Jackson-Grant to the newly created post of Head of Commercial Pricing, underscoring the firm’s intent to capitalize on sophisticated fee and finance structures in the wake of last year’s PACCAR fallout. Jackson-Grant, best known for translating third-party capital into user-friendly products for corporate clients, will sit within the firm’s European finance team and manage a multi-office pricing unit.

An update on LinkedIn confirms her appointment, noting that she will “drive and shape” Fieldfisher’s pricing strategy across the continent. The role’s blueprint calls for rolling out “creative pricing models” that enhance client profitability and embed alternative fee arrangements into disputes workflows.

Jackson-Grant brings a rare blend of funding fluency and law-firm know-how. A former director at TheJudge, she brokered litigation-finance and ATE insurance packages before moving in-house to develop alternative pricing frameworks for major UK and US practices.

Commercial Regulatory Issues

Chubb & Marsh Chiefs Turn Heat on Litigation Funders

By John Freund |

The insurance industry’s long-simmering feud with third-party litigation finance boiled over on Monday.

In an article originally posted in the Wall Street Journal and covered in Insurance Business America, Chubb CEO Evan Greenberg and Marsh McLennan counterpart John Doyle deliver a joint broadside against what they dub the “litigation investment industry.” The duo argue that multi-billion-dollar capital inflows from hedge funds and foreign investors are fueling a 52% year-on-year jump in “nuclear verdicts,” pushing the average blockbuster award to US $51 million.

The duo's ire is heightened by Congress’ failure to preserve a 40.8% surtax on funder income that was stripped from President Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” during reconciliation. Without tax parity, they warn, funders can pay 0 % capital-gains rates while plaintiffs shoulder income-tax burdens of up to 37%.

The executives cite data showing 135 verdicts above US $10 million in 2024 and estimate tort costs at US $529 billion—figures they link directly to opaque funding arrangements. Chubb, they reveal, is reviewing counterparties to sever any ties with litigation financiers, while Marsh has already refused to place insurance that facilitates funding.

Funders are already responding to the pair's remarks. William Marra, Director at Certum Group, wrote on LinkedIn: "Funders and their allies need to prepare for the policy debates ahead, because misguided proposals to kill funding may continue." Marra then highlighted proactive education, rapid response, success stories and coalition building as four strategies that funders should consider moving forward.

Commercial Fundraising

Burford Capital Clinches US $500 Million Bond Upsize

By John Freund |

Burford Capital has once again reminded the debt markets that litigation finance is anything but niche.

An article in PR Newswire reports that the New York- and London-listed funder upsized its private offering of senior notes from an initial $400 million to $500 million after books closed multiple times oversubscribed. The eight-year paper priced at 7.5 %, Burford’s tightest spread over Treasuries to date, and will refinance $180 million in 6.125 % notes maturing this August while extending the weighted-average life of the balance sheet to 2033.

According to Burford CEO Christopher Bogart: "We're very pleased with the results of this latest debt offering, which added a half-billion dollars in capital, building on our momentum and strengthening our position to achieve our growth targets."

For investors, the transaction offers two signals: first, that the firm’s cash-realisation cycle—driven by landmark wins such as Petersen—continues to convert headline judgments into distributable cash; and second, that fixed-income desks are increasingly comfortable underwriting the risk profile of litigation finance even in a high-rate environment.