Funders and market participants

Litigation finance has evolved from a niche specialty into a multi-billion dollar market with distinct participant categories. Understanding who provides capital, how they approach the asset class, and what differentiates them is essential for originators seeking funding and investors evaluating the space.

Major funders

The dedicated litigation finance market is dominated by a handful of established platforms with the legal expertise, track record, and capital to underwrite complex cases.

Burford Capital

The largest litigation funder globally with $7B+ in assets under management. NYSE and LSE listed with investment-grade corporate credit rating. Burford operates across the full spectrum: single-case funding, portfolio financing, law firm facilities, and complex finance (monetization, judgment enforcement, corporate claims management).

Characteristic	Detail
AUM/Commitments	$7B+
Typical single-case	$5M-$100M+
Typical portfolio	$20M-$500M+
Geographic focus	Global, with strength in US, UK, and international arbitration
Case type focus	Commercial litigation, international arbitration, IP, antitrust
Track record	20+ years, originated modern litigation finance market
Approval rate	~3% of reviewed opportunities

Distinguishing characteristics: Scale enables largest and most complex transactions. Public company status provides transparency but also regulatory scrutiny. Investment-grade rating allows corporate bond financing at competitive rates. Full-service platform competes across all product types. Strong brand recognition gives access to highest-quality deal flow.

Omni Bridgeway

Global platform with $3B+ in assets under management, formed through the 2019 merger of IMF Bentham and Omni Bridgeway. ASX-listed. Particularly strong in international arbitration, collective actions, and enforcement.

Characteristic	Detail
AUM/Commitments	$3B+
Typical single-case	$3M-$50M
Typical portfolio	$10M-$100M+
Geographic focus	Global, with strength in Australia, Asia-Pacific, Europe
Case type focus	International arbitration, collective actions, insolvency
Track record	35+ years (legacy IMF Bentham founded 1986)
Approval rate	5-7%

Distinguishing characteristics: Strongest track record in international arbitration and treaty claims. Judgment enforcement capabilities through acquired Omni Bridgeway expertise. Australian origin provides edge in APAC markets. More willing than competitors to fund collective actions and class actions outside the US.

Longford Capital

US-focused funder with $1B+ under management, known for highly selective underwriting and strong returns. Backed by prominent institutional investors.

Characteristic	Detail
AUM/Commitments	$1B+
Typical single-case	$3M-$50M
Typical portfolio	$10M-$75M
Geographic focus	United States
Case type focus	Commercial litigation, IP, antitrust
Track record	10+ years
Approval rate	2-3% (among the most selective)

Distinguishing characteristics: Reputation for exceptional case selection drives premium deal flow. Lower case volume but higher quality. Strong relationships with elite plaintiff-side counsel. Conservative underwriting produces consistent returns with lower loss rates than market average.

Parabellum Capital

US commercial litigation funder with $500M+ under management, particularly strong in intellectual property and antitrust matters.

Characteristic	Detail
AUM/Commitments	$500M+
Typical single-case	$2M-$30M
Typical portfolio	$5M-$50M
Geographic focus	United States
Case type focus	IP, antitrust, complex commercial
Track record	10+ years
Approval rate	4-6%

Distinguishing characteristics: Deep IP expertise with technical backgrounds on investment team. Antitrust specialization positions well for large-damages cases. More flexible on case size than larger peers—will consider smaller cases with strong merit. Strong reputation among patent litigators.

Validity Finance

US-focused funder with $500M+ under management, differentiated by ethical positioning and transparency.

Characteristic	Detail
AUM/Commitments	$500M+
Typical single-case	$2M-$25M
Typical portfolio	$5M-$40M
Geographic focus	United States
Case type focus	Commercial litigation, whistleblower, civil rights
Track record	7+ years
Approval rate	4-6%

Distinguishing characteristics: Founded with explicit ethical mission around access to justice. Publishes industry guidelines and advocates for responsible practices. Whistleblower and civil rights case expertise distinguishes from competitors. Mid-market positioning captures deals too small for largest funders.

Therium

UK-headquartered global funder with $1B+ in assets under management. Strong presence in UK, Europe, and growing US operations.

Characteristic	Detail
AUM/Commitments	$1B+
Typical single-case	$2M-$40M
Typical portfolio	$10M-$100M
Geographic focus	UK, Europe, US, Asia
Case type focus	Commercial, IP, international arbitration, collective actions
Track record	15+ years
Approval rate	5-8%

Distinguishing characteristics: Leading funder in UK market with strong European presence. Established track record in adverse-cost jurisdictions where ATE insurance integration is essential. Growing US business targets mid-market commercial cases.

Harbour Litigation Funding

UK and European leader with $2B+ under management. Focused on high-value commercial disputes and international arbitration.

Characteristic	Detail
AUM/Commitments	$2B+
Typical single-case	$5M-$75M
Typical portfolio	$15M-$150M
Geographic focus	UK, Europe, international
Case type focus	Large commercial disputes, international arbitration
Track record	15+ years
Approval rate	3-5%

Distinguishing characteristics: Among the largest dedicated funders in Europe. Focuses on high-value disputes with sophisticated counterparties. Strong in BIT (bilateral investment treaty) claims and investor-state arbitration. Selective approach with emphasis on quality over volume.

Comparative summary

Funder	AUM	Minimum Case Size	Geographic Focus	Primary Strength
Burford	$7B+	$5M	Global	Scale, full service
Omni Bridgeway	$3B+	$3M	Global, APAC	International arbitration
Harbour	$2B+	$5M	UK/Europe	Large commercial, BIT
Longford	$1B+	$3M	US	Selectivity, returns
Therium	$1B+	$2M	UK/Europe, US	UK market, collective
Parabellum	$500M+	$2M	US	IP, antitrust
Validity	$500M+	$2M	US	Ethical, mid-market

Credit funds with litigation exposure

Beyond dedicated funders, large credit managers have built meaningful litigation finance allocations. Their approach differs from specialists: larger check sizes, preference for co-investment, and different risk/return expectations.

Fortress Investment Group

The most active credit fund in litigation finance with a dedicated allocation and deep experience in the asset class.

Approach	Detail
Typical involvement	Direct investment, co-investment, law firm finance
Deal size preference	$25M-$200M+
Structure preference	Portfolio deals, law firm facilities, large single-case
Relationship with specialists	Frequently co-invests alongside dedicated funders

Fortress has built internal litigation expertise and will lead transactions independently. Particularly active in law firm finance where facility sizes match their check-size requirements.

Apollo Global Management

Opportunistic exposure through credit strategies rather than dedicated allocation.

Approach	Detail
Typical involvement	Co-investment alongside specialists, portfolio participations
Deal size preference	$20M-$100M+
Structure preference	Portfolio, larger single-case
Relationship with specialists	Co-investor, not lead underwriter

Apollo brings scale capital to transactions that exceed specialist fund capacity. Generally relies on dedicated funders for case diligence and portfolio construction rather than building internal litigation expertise.

Ares Management

Selective exposure through private credit strategies.

Approach	Detail
Typical involvement	Portfolio participations, co-investment
Deal size preference	$25M-$100M
Structure preference	Diversified portfolios, law firm credit
Relationship with specialists	Co-investor on larger transactions

Ares approaches litigation finance as one component of a diversified private credit allocation. Prefers structured exposure through portfolio participations rather than case-by-case underwriting.

HPS Investment Partners

Growing litigation finance allocation through their credit platform.

Approach	Detail
Typical involvement	Portfolio participations, co-investment
Deal size preference	$15M-$75M
Structure preference	Portfolios, selective single-case co-investment
Relationship with specialists	Co-investor, increasing direct activity

HPS has been building internal capabilities while primarily participating alongside established funders. Well-positioned for mid-market opportunities where dedicated funds seek co-investment partners.

Blue Owl Capital

Newer entrant with expanding litigation finance allocation.

Approach	Detail
Typical involvement	Portfolio participations, co-investment
Deal size preference	$20M-$100M
Structure preference	Diversified exposure
Relationship with specialists	Co-investor, learning the market

Blue Owl has been increasing litigation exposure as part of their alternatives expansion. Currently relies on specialist partnerships rather than leading transactions.

Credit fund participation patterns

Fund	Direct Capability	Typical Role	Preferred Structure
Fortress	High	Lead or co-lead	Law firm, portfolio, single-case
Apollo	Medium	Co-investor	Portfolio, large single
Ares	Medium	Co-investor	Portfolio, law firm credit
HPS	Developing	Co-investor	Portfolio
Blue Owl	Limited	Participant	Portfolio

Credit funds typically require $20M+ check sizes to justify diligence effort. Smaller transactions remain the domain of dedicated funders.

Law firm finance providers

Law firm lending is a distinct category with different providers than case funding.

Traditional banks

Major banks will lend to established law firms, but with significant limitations:

Bank Category	Borrower Profile	Typical Facility	Limitations
Money center banks	Am Law 50, diversified practices	$25M-$250M	Avoid contingent-fee-heavy practices
Regional banks	Large regional firms	$10M-$75M	Conservative advance rates

Banks underwrite to firm credit, not case value. They require diversified fee structures (significant hourly billing), strong historical cash flow, and conservative leverage. A plaintiff-side contingent-fee practice will not qualify for bank credit regardless of case quality.

JPMorgan, Citi, and Bank of America participate in the law firm credit market but focus on defense-side and balanced practices. Pricing for qualified borrowers runs SOFR + 200-350 bps, substantially below private credit alternatives.

Credit funds

Private credit fills the gap for firms that don’t qualify for bank lending.

Provider	Typical Facility Size	Typical Pricing	Focus
Fortress	$25M-$200M	SOFR + 600-900 bps	Large contingent-fee practices
Specialized credit managers	$10M-$75M	SOFR + 700-1000 bps	Mid-size plaintiff firms

Illustrative pricing. See pricing disclaimer.

Credit funds accept contingent fee collateral but price for the risk. They understand case valuation, will lend against probability-weighted expected fees, and structure facilities with case-specific concentration limits.

Specialized platforms

Litigation funders have expanded into law firm finance as a related product.

Provider	Typical Facility Size	Approach
Burford	$10M-$200M+	Full-service lending integrated with case funding
Longford	$10M-$75M	Selective facilities to strong plaintiff practices
Validity	$5M-$40M	Mid-size plaintiff firms, ethical practices
Law Finance Group	$2M-$25M	Smaller firms, case-specific facilities

Specialized platforms bring litigation expertise that banks lack. They can underwrite case portfolios, assess law firm track records, and structure facilities that reflect litigation timing realities.

Typical law firm facility terms

Term	Bank (Qualified Borrower)	Private Credit
Size	$25M-$250M	$5M-$200M
Pricing	SOFR + 200-350 bps	SOFR + 600-1000 bps
Advance rate	30-50% of eligible receivables	50-70% of probability-weighted fees
Maturity	3-5 years	2-4 years
Recourse	Full	Limited to firm

Secondary market participants

The secondary market enables liquidity for an otherwise illiquid asset class.

Westfleet Advisors

The leading placement agent and market-maker for litigation finance secondary transactions.

Role	Detail
Primary function	Placement agent for secondary sales
Transaction types	Single-case, portfolio, fund interests
Typical transaction size	$5M-$100M
Services	Buyer outreach, auction process, valuation guidance
Market position	Dominant player with deepest buyer relationships

Westfleet maintains relationships with the full universe of potential buyers and runs structured sale processes. They provide valuation guidance based on comparable transactions and case stage analysis. Virtually all marketed secondary transactions in the US involve Westfleet.

Secondary buyers

Several categories of buyers participate in the secondary market:

Buyer Type	Typical Size	Investment Thesis
Dedicated secondary funds	$10M-$100M	Specialist underwriting of de-risked positions
Credit funds	$15M-$75M	Opportunistic; attracted by discount to NAV
Insurance companies	$5M-$50M	Long-duration capital, uncorrelated returns
Strategic buyers	$1M-$25M	Case-specific interest, often parties adjacent to dispute

Secondary buyers pay discounts to NAV ranging from 10-30% depending on case stage, portfolio composition, and seller motivation. Distressed sellers accept deeper discounts; orderly processes achieve better pricing.

How the secondary market works

Transaction process:

Seller engages Westfleet or approaches buyers directly under NDA
Marketing materials distributed to qualified buyers
Interested parties conduct preliminary diligence (docket review, public filings)
Serious bidders request counsel access for deep diligence
Bids submitted; seller negotiates with preferred buyer
Purchase agreement executed; consent obtained from plaintiff/counsel
Funds transfer; position assigned

Timeline: Single-case transactions typically close in 4-8 weeks. Portfolio transactions require 8-16 weeks.

Consent requirements: Most funding agreements require plaintiff consent to assignment. Sophisticated funders build in broad assignment rights upfront; positions without assignment rights are difficult to trade.

Pricing drivers:

Factor	Impact on Pricing
Case stage	Later stage = smaller discount
Recent rulings	Favorable rulings compress discount
Seller motivation	Distressed sellers accept deeper discounts
Diversification	Portfolio trades tighter than single-case
Information quality	Better data reduces buyer risk premium

Illustrative pricing. See pricing disclaimer.

The secondary market remains relatively thin compared to other private credit markets. Transaction volume depends heavily on fund life cycles driving forced exits. The market functions but is not liquid in the traditional sense—sellers should expect meaningful discounts and 4-16 week transaction timelines.