diversity rankings::Boston::asian (from betterlegalprofession.org)
| partners | associates | ||||||||||
| rank | firm | percent | M | F | rank | firm | percent | M | F | ||
| 1 | Ropes & Gray | 4.3 | 4 | 2 | A | 1 | Fish & Richardson | 16.7 | 3 | 1 | A |
| 2 | Fish & Richardson | 3.1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | Dla Piper Us | 13.0 | 1 | 2 | ||
| 3 | Foley & Lardner | 3.0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks | 13.0 | 1 | 2 | ||
| 4 | Wilmerhale | 2.6 | 1 | 2 | 4 | Bingham Mccutchen | 12.2 | 6 | 8 | ||
| 5 | Edwards Angell | 2.2 | 0 | 2 | B | 5 | Proskauer Rose | 11.1 | 4 | 5 | B |
| 6 | Mintz, Levin | 1.5 | 0 | 2 | 6 | Mcdermott Will & Emery | 10.5 | 1 | 1 | ||
| 7 | Choate, Hall & Stewart | 1.2 | 0 | 1 | 7 | Edwards Angell | 10.0 | 2 | 6 | ||
| 8 | Goodwin Procter | 1.1 | 1 | 1 | 8 | Wilmerhale | 9.6 | 7 | 11 | ||
| 9 | Hinckley, Allen & Snyder | 1.1 | 1 | 0 | C | 9 | Foley & Lardner | 8.7 | 0 | 2 | C |
| 10 | Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | F | 10 | K&L Gates | 8.7 | 1 | 3 | |
| 11 | Dla Piper Us | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 11 | Ropes & Gray | 8.6 | 10 | 18 | ||
| 12 | Mcdermott Will & Emery | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 12 | Goodwin Procter | 8.4 | 8 | 12 | ||
| 13 | Seyfarth Shaw | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 13 | Nixon Peabody | 7.4 | 0 | 4 | D | |
| 14 | K&L Gates | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | Choate, Hall & Stewart | 7.1 | 0 | 4 | ||
| 15 | Proskauer Rose | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | Nutter, Mcclennen & Fish | 6.9 | 1 | 3 | ||
| 16 | Holland & Knight | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 16 | Holland & Knight | 6.0 | 2 | 1 | ||
| 17 | Nutter, Mcclennen & Fish | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 17 | Mintz, Levin | 4.6 | 2 | 4 | F | |
| 18 | Nixon Peabody | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 18 | Seyfarth Shaw | 4.3 | 1 | 0 | ||
| 19 | Bingham Mccutchen | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 19 | Hinckley, Allen & Snyder | 2.6 | 0 | 1 | ||
An asterisk indicates that the firm did not provide this information. We treated missing data as if it were zero.
See How We Did This for more information on our methodology.
Bold denotes the most prestigious law firms in Boston, according to vault's 2011 regional rankings