A new LexShares investment opportunity opens Tuesday, November 24 at 1:00 PM ET. Read the details here →

Log in

Forgot password?
Not a LexShares investor yet? Sign Up →

A new LexShares investment opportunity opens Tuesday, November 24 at 1:00 PM ET. Read the details here →

Log in

Forgot password?
Not a LexShares investor yet? Sign Up →
➔
Get funding
➔
Sign up to invest

You're steps away from the future of investing.

Investing in commercial legal claims is a new way to diversify your portfolio.
Get Started

What are the benefits of investing in litigation finance assets?

Historical Performance
Resolved case investments have generated a median 47% net annualized return to investors as of August 31, 2020.
Uncorrelated Asset
Legal claims are largely uncorrelated to broader market conditions and macroeconomic activity.
Moderate Durations
On average, a civil lawsuit in the United States takes 27 months from filing to disposition.
Institutional Strategy
Harvard's endowment, sovereign wealth funds and leading institutions all have made investments in litigation finance.
Sign Up
Learn More
Out of the thousands of prospective litigation funding opportunities reviewed by our veteran underwriting team, less than 5% are approved for investment, yielding strong results.
Past performance is not indicative of future performance. Returns are based on principal's internal reporting for offerings through the LexShares platform reaching resolution as of August 31, 2020. Results reported reflect the simple median annualized rate of return per the xirr function, net of fees and expenses. Diversification does not guarantee profits or protect against losses

Launching soon

Confidential Plaintiff vs.
Fortune 500 Company
Open Soon
$1.00M
Deal Size
Products Liability
This is a products liability claim against a multinational Fortune 500 manufacturer relating to the use of its product.
Access Details

The LexShares process

Plaintiffs are eligible to submit claims directly for review.
1
Apply
Submit your application for funding and execute NDA.
2
Review
LexShares' team reviews your case.
3
Approve
LexShares sends a contract detailing terms of funding.
4
Fund
Contract executed and funding deployed.

Some of our recent investments

LexShares invests in a wide range of litigation finance assets, from single commercial matters, to portfolios, to direct law firm fundings. Below is a look at some recently funded deals, or you can view all of our case investments here.
  • IT Reseller vs.
    Fortune 100 Company
    100% Funded
    $2.20M
    Closed
    Breach of Contract; Fraud
    A Fortune 100 company allegedly sold counterfeit equipment to an IT reseller.
  • Supplier vs.
    Manufacturer
    100% Funded
    $2.00M
    Closed
    False Advertising; Antitrust
    Defendant allegedly breached its non-disclosure agreement with plaintiff, misappropriated trade secrets, and interfered with plaintiff's business.
  • Confidential plaintiffs vs.
    Confidential defendants
    100% Funded
    $300K
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    This is a law firm funding collateralized by a portfolio of cases in the pharmaceutical industry.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Municipality
    100% Funded
    $300K
    Closed
    Complex Tort
    Plaintiff suffered catastrophic injuries as a result of the alleged negligence of the Defendants.
  • Confidential Plaintiffs vs.
    Insurance Companies
    100% Funded
    $250K
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    Defendants allegedly engaged in a scheme to sell products to Plaintiffs through illegal means.
  • Shareholders vs.
    Company
    100% Funded
    $2.00M
    Closed
    Fraud
    Defendants allegedly defrauded plaintiffs, squeezing them out of their equity interest in the company.
  • Confidential plaintiffs vs.
    Confidential defendants
    100% Funded
    $4.00M
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    This is a law firm funding collateralized by a portfolio of cases in the pharmaceutical industry.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Confidential Defendant
    100% Funded
    $750K
    Closed
    Breach of Contract
    This is a breach of contract case regarding division of property and valuation of stock options.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Government Entity
    100% Funded
    $475K
    Closed
    Breach of Fiduciary Duty
    Plaintiff alleges that Government Entity, in its capacity as trustee, breached duties to plaintiff by mismanaging plaintiff's assets.
  • IT Reseller vs.
    Fortune 100 Company
    100% Funded
    $2.20M
    Closed
    Breach of Contract; Fraud
    A Fortune 100 company allegedly sold counterfeit equipment to an IT reseller.
  • Supplier vs.
    Manufacturer
    100% Funded
    $2.00M
    Closed
    False Advertising; Antitrust
    Defendant allegedly breached its non-disclosure agreement with plaintiff, misappropriated trade secrets, and interfered with plaintiff's business.
  • Confidential plaintiffs vs.
    Confidential defendants
    100% Funded
    $300K
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    This is a law firm funding collateralized by a portfolio of cases in the pharmaceutical industry.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Municipality
    100% Funded
    $300K
    Closed
    Complex Tort
    Plaintiff suffered catastrophic injuries as a result of the alleged negligence of the Defendants.
  • Confidential Plaintiffs vs.
    Insurance Companies
    100% Funded
    $250K
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    Defendants allegedly engaged in a scheme to sell products to Plaintiffs through illegal means.
  • Shareholders vs.
    Company
    100% Funded
    $2.00M
    Closed
    Fraud
    Defendants allegedly defrauded plaintiffs, squeezing them out of their equity interest in the company.
  • Confidential plaintiffs vs.
    Confidential defendants
    100% Funded
    $4.00M
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    This is a law firm funding collateralized by a portfolio of cases in the pharmaceutical industry.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Confidential Defendant
    100% Funded
    $750K
    Closed
    Breach of Contract
    This is a breach of contract case regarding division of property and valuation of stock options.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Government Entity
    100% Funded
    $475K
    Closed
    Breach of Fiduciary Duty
    Plaintiff alleges that Government Entity, in its capacity as trustee, breached duties to plaintiff by mismanaging plaintiff's assets.
  • IT Reseller vs.
    Fortune 100 Company
    100% Funded
    $2.20M
    Closed
    Breach of Contract; Fraud
    A Fortune 100 company allegedly sold counterfeit equipment to an IT reseller.
  • Supplier vs.
    Manufacturer
    100% Funded
    $2.00M
    Closed
    False Advertising; Antitrust
    Defendant allegedly breached its non-disclosure agreement with plaintiff, misappropriated trade secrets, and interfered with plaintiff's business.
  • Confidential plaintiffs vs.
    Confidential defendants
    100% Funded
    $300K
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    This is a law firm funding collateralized by a portfolio of cases in the pharmaceutical industry.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Municipality
    100% Funded
    $300K
    Closed
    Complex Tort
    Plaintiff suffered catastrophic injuries as a result of the alleged negligence of the Defendants.
  • Confidential Plaintiffs vs.
    Insurance Companies
    100% Funded
    $250K
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    Defendants allegedly engaged in a scheme to sell products to Plaintiffs through illegal means.
  • Shareholders vs.
    Company
    100% Funded
    $2.00M
    Closed
    Fraud
    Defendants allegedly defrauded plaintiffs, squeezing them out of their equity interest in the company.
  • Confidential plaintiffs vs.
    Confidential defendants
    100% Funded
    $4.00M
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    This is a law firm funding collateralized by a portfolio of cases in the pharmaceutical industry.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Confidential Defendant
    100% Funded
    $750K
    Closed
    Breach of Contract
    This is a breach of contract case regarding division of property and valuation of stock options.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Government Entity
    100% Funded
    $475K
    Closed
    Breach of Fiduciary Duty
    Plaintiff alleges that Government Entity, in its capacity as trustee, breached duties to plaintiff by mismanaging plaintiff's assets.
  • IT Reseller vs.
    Fortune 100 Company
    100% Funded
    $2.20M
    Closed
    Breach of Contract; Fraud
    A Fortune 100 company allegedly sold counterfeit equipment to an IT reseller.
  • Supplier vs.
    Manufacturer
    100% Funded
    $2.00M
    Closed
    False Advertising; Antitrust
    Defendant allegedly breached its non-disclosure agreement with plaintiff, misappropriated trade secrets, and interfered with plaintiff's business.
  • Confidential plaintiffs vs.
    Confidential defendants
    100% Funded
    $300K
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    This is a law firm funding collateralized by a portfolio of cases in the pharmaceutical industry.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Municipality
    100% Funded
    $300K
    Closed
    Complex Tort
    Plaintiff suffered catastrophic injuries as a result of the alleged negligence of the Defendants.
  • Confidential Plaintiffs vs.
    Insurance Companies
    100% Funded
    $250K
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    Defendants allegedly engaged in a scheme to sell products to Plaintiffs through illegal means.
  • Shareholders vs.
    Company
    100% Funded
    $2.00M
    Closed
    Fraud
    Defendants allegedly defrauded plaintiffs, squeezing them out of their equity interest in the company.
  • Confidential plaintiffs vs.
    Confidential defendants
    100% Funded
    $4.00M
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    This is a law firm funding collateralized by a portfolio of cases in the pharmaceutical industry.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Confidential Defendant
    100% Funded
    $750K
    Closed
    Breach of Contract
    This is a breach of contract case regarding division of property and valuation of stock options.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Government Entity
    100% Funded
    $475K
    Closed
    Breach of Fiduciary Duty
    Plaintiff alleges that Government Entity, in its capacity as trustee, breached duties to plaintiff by mismanaging plaintiff's assets.
  • IT Reseller vs.
    Fortune 100 Company
    100% Funded
    $2.20M
    Closed
    Breach of Contract; Fraud
    A Fortune 100 company allegedly sold counterfeit equipment to an IT reseller.
  • Supplier vs.
    Manufacturer
    100% Funded
    $2.00M
    Closed
    False Advertising; Antitrust
    Defendant allegedly breached its non-disclosure agreement with plaintiff, misappropriated trade secrets, and interfered with plaintiff's business.
  • Confidential plaintiffs vs.
    Confidential defendants
    100% Funded
    $300K
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    This is a law firm funding collateralized by a portfolio of cases in the pharmaceutical industry.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Municipality
    100% Funded
    $300K
    Closed
    Complex Tort
    Plaintiff suffered catastrophic injuries as a result of the alleged negligence of the Defendants.
  • Confidential Plaintiffs vs.
    Insurance Companies
    100% Funded
    $250K
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    Defendants allegedly engaged in a scheme to sell products to Plaintiffs through illegal means.
  • Shareholders vs.
    Company
    100% Funded
    $2.00M
    Closed
    Fraud
    Defendants allegedly defrauded plaintiffs, squeezing them out of their equity interest in the company.
  • Confidential plaintiffs vs.
    Confidential defendants
    100% Funded
    $4.00M
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    This is a law firm funding collateralized by a portfolio of cases in the pharmaceutical industry.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Confidential Defendant
    100% Funded
    $750K
    Closed
    Breach of Contract
    This is a breach of contract case regarding division of property and valuation of stock options.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Government Entity
    100% Funded
    $475K
    Closed
    Breach of Fiduciary Duty
    Plaintiff alleges that Government Entity, in its capacity as trustee, breached duties to plaintiff by mismanaging plaintiff's assets.
  • IT Reseller vs.
    Fortune 100 Company
    100% Funded
    $2.20M
    Closed
    Breach of Contract; Fraud
    A Fortune 100 company allegedly sold counterfeit equipment to an IT reseller.
  • Supplier vs.
    Manufacturer
    100% Funded
    $2.00M
    Closed
    False Advertising; Antitrust
    Defendant allegedly breached its non-disclosure agreement with plaintiff, misappropriated trade secrets, and interfered with plaintiff's business.
  • Confidential plaintiffs vs.
    Confidential defendants
    100% Funded
    $300K
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    This is a law firm funding collateralized by a portfolio of cases in the pharmaceutical industry.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Municipality
    100% Funded
    $300K
    Closed
    Complex Tort
    Plaintiff suffered catastrophic injuries as a result of the alleged negligence of the Defendants.
  • Confidential Plaintiffs vs.
    Insurance Companies
    100% Funded
    $250K
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    Defendants allegedly engaged in a scheme to sell products to Plaintiffs through illegal means.
  • Shareholders vs.
    Company
    100% Funded
    $2.00M
    Closed
    Fraud
    Defendants allegedly defrauded plaintiffs, squeezing them out of their equity interest in the company.
  • Confidential plaintiffs vs.
    Confidential defendants
    100% Funded
    $4.00M
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    This is a law firm funding collateralized by a portfolio of cases in the pharmaceutical industry.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Confidential Defendant
    100% Funded
    $750K
    Closed
    Breach of Contract
    This is a breach of contract case regarding division of property and valuation of stock options.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Government Entity
    100% Funded
    $475K
    Closed
    Breach of Fiduciary Duty
    Plaintiff alleges that Government Entity, in its capacity as trustee, breached duties to plaintiff by mismanaging plaintiff's assets.
  • IT Reseller vs.
    Fortune 100 Company
    100% Funded
    $2.20M
    Closed
    Breach of Contract; Fraud
    A Fortune 100 company allegedly sold counterfeit equipment to an IT reseller.
  • Supplier vs.
    Manufacturer
    100% Funded
    $2.00M
    Closed
    False Advertising; Antitrust
    Defendant allegedly breached its non-disclosure agreement with plaintiff, misappropriated trade secrets, and interfered with plaintiff's business.
  • Confidential plaintiffs vs.
    Confidential defendants
    100% Funded
    $300K
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    This is a law firm funding collateralized by a portfolio of cases in the pharmaceutical industry.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Municipality
    100% Funded
    $300K
    Closed
    Complex Tort
    Plaintiff suffered catastrophic injuries as a result of the alleged negligence of the Defendants.
  • Confidential Plaintiffs vs.
    Insurance Companies
    100% Funded
    $250K
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    Defendants allegedly engaged in a scheme to sell products to Plaintiffs through illegal means.
  • Shareholders vs.
    Company
    100% Funded
    $2.00M
    Closed
    Fraud
    Defendants allegedly defrauded plaintiffs, squeezing them out of their equity interest in the company.
  • Confidential plaintiffs vs.
    Confidential defendants
    100% Funded
    $4.00M
    Closed
    Law Firm Funding
    This is a law firm funding collateralized by a portfolio of cases in the pharmaceutical industry.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Confidential Defendant
    100% Funded
    $750K
    Closed
    Breach of Contract
    This is a breach of contract case regarding division of property and valuation of stock options.
  • Confidential Plaintiff vs.
    Government Entity
    100% Funded
    $475K
    Closed
    Breach of Fiduciary Duty
    Plaintiff alleges that Government Entity, in its capacity as trustee, breached duties to plaintiff by mismanaging plaintiff's assets.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9

How we invest.

LexShares uses a multi-channel investment approach to ensure speed and certainty of funds.
LexShares Marketplace Fund
In June 2020, LexShares launched its second privately managed fund, a $100 million fully discretionary litigation finance fund that gets deployed into each legal investment made by LexShares.
LexShares Funding Platform
LexShares operates an online platform that enables institutional and individual accredited investors to participate in certain funding opportunities. Offerings are typically fully funded by LexShares prior to being made available to investors.
Explore Funding Options

Request our litigation finance guide.

LexShares' comprehensive guide provides in-depth coverage of the litigation finance industry.
Request Free Guide
125 High Street
25th Floor
Boston, MA 02110
33 Whitehall Street
16th Floor
New York, NY 10004
Funding
Investors
Resources
Company
Contact

IMPORTANT MESSAGE: www.LexShares.com (the “Site”) is a website owned and operated by LexShares, Inc. (“LexShares”).  By accessing this Site and any pages on this Site, you agree to be bound by its Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, as may be amended from time to time without notice or liability.  Investment opportunities posted on the Site are indirect investments in legal claims offered through single purpose pooled investment funds managed by LawShares LLC and sold through WealthForge Securities, LLC, a registered broker-dealer and member FINRA / SIPC. WealthForge Securities, LLC and LexShares, Inc are separate entities. Please find WealthForge Securities privacy policy here. Certain employees of LexShares Inc are registered representatives of WealthForge Securities LLC (check the background of this firm on FINRA's BrokerCheck). LexShares is not an investment advisor, broker-dealer or crowdfunding portal and does not engage in any activities requiring any such registration. The securities offerings posted on the Site are available to Accredited Investors only.

All accredited investors using the Site must acknowledge the speculative nature of these investments and accept the high risks associated with investing in legal claims including but not limited to concentration risk, lack of control over the prosecution of underlying claims and claimant's inability to assert and collect on their claims. Investment opportunities posted on this Site are “private placements” of securities that are not publicly traded, are subject to holding period requirements, and are intended for investors who do not need a liquid investment. The plaintiff may not prevail in their lawsuit, resulting in a loss of invested capital for investors. Investors must be able to afford the loss of their entire investment without a change to their lifestyle. Diversification does not guarantee profits or protect against losses. The securities are offered pursuant to an exemption from the registration requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and are not required to comply with specific disclosure requirements that apply to registration under the Securities Act. Neither the US Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state regulator or other regulatory body has passed upon the merits of or given its approval to the securities, the terms of the offerings, or the accuracy or completeness of any offering materials. Neither LexShares nor any of its directors, officers, employees, representatives, affiliates or agents shall have any liability whatsoever arising, for any error or incompleteness of fact or opinion in, or lack of care in the preparation or publication, of the materials and communication herein or the or that the valuation of any securities offering is appropriate. LexShares does not give investment advice, provide analysis or recommendations regarding any offering posted on the Site. Prior results are not indicative of future performance; actual results may vary materially. Any testimonials are examples from clients or press, and may not be representative of your experience. They are not a guarantee of performance and they have not been compensated for their testimonials. Articles or information from third-party media outside of this domain may discuss LexShares or relate to information contained herein, but LexShares does not approve and is not responsible for such content. Hyperlinks to third-party sites, or reproduction of third-party articles, do not constitute an approval or endorsement by LexShares of the linked or reproduced content. The Site may contain “forward looking statements” which are not guaranteed. All investors should make their own determination of whether or not to make any investment, based on their own independent evaluation and analysis. You are strongly advised to consult your legal, tax and financial advisors before investing. The securities offered on this Site can only be marketed in jurisdictions where public solicitation of offerings are permitted; it is solely your responsibility to comply with the laws and regulations of your country of residence.

Learn more about investing in private placements from the SEC, FINRA or LexShares’ specific financing model.

© 2020 LexShares, Inc. All rights reserved.