Key Points
For years, Citigroup’s investment bank sat firmly in the shadow of Wall Street’s dominant dealmakers. That balance is now shifting. Citi vs JPMorgan dealmaking fees became a defining storyline of 2025 after Citigroup posted sharply faster growth in merger advisory revenue than its larger rival, signaling that the bank’s long-running turnaround in investment banking is beginning to gain traction.
According to its latest earnings release, Citigroup Inc recorded a 53% increase in M&A advisory fees for 2025, capped by an 84% surge in the fourth quarter alone. By contrast, JPMorgan Chase & Co — long considered the gold standard in global dealmaking — saw advisory fees rise just 6% over the same period. While JPMorgan still generates far more total revenue from its investment bank, the pace of growth at Citi is reshaping competitive dynamics across Wall Street.
This divergence matters not just for shareholders of the two banks, but for corporate clients, investors, and the broader M&A ecosystem. Advisory fees reflect deal flow, client confidence, and strategic relevance — and Citi’s performance suggests a recalibration in who corporations trust to guide their biggest transactions.
What Happened: Citi’s Advisory Fees Accelerate
Citigroup’s dealmakers delivered their strongest year on record for mergers and acquisitions advisory revenue. Total M&A fees climbed more than 50% year over year, while fourth-quarter advisory fees jumped 84%, capping a record dealmaking year for the bank.
The surge was part of a broader improvement in Citi’s investment banking division. Combined fees from M&A advisory, debt underwriting, and equity underwriting rose more than a third to $1.29 billion in the fourth quarter. While that figure remains well below JPMorgan’s $2.35 billion for the same period, the growth rate tells a more important story: Citi is gaining relevance in a business it has historically struggled to dominate.
The market response was measured but positive. Shares of Citigroup rose modestly in pre-market trading after the earnings release, reflecting investor recognition that fee momentum is improving, even as cost pressures and regulatory investments persist.
Citi vs JPMorgan Dealmaking Fees: Why the Gap Is Narrowing
The contrast in Citi vs JPMorgan dealmaking fees growth stems from strategy, leadership, and timing rather than a sudden collapse at JPMorgan.
JPMorgan entered 2025 from a position of strength. As the world’s largest bank by assets, it already commands a significant share of global M&A mandates. That scale makes rapid percentage growth harder to achieve, especially in a year when deal volumes were uneven and heavily concentrated among the largest transactions.
Citi, by contrast, was rebuilding. Chief Executive Officer Jane Fraser has spent nearly five years reshaping the bank’s investment banking franchise, recruiting senior talent from rivals and refocusing on profitability rather than sheer balance-sheet size. A pivotal move came in 2024 with the hiring of Vis Raghavan from JPMorgan to lead the investment bank. His mandate was clear: restore credibility with top-tier corporate clients and win larger advisory roles.
The results in 2025 suggest that strategy is starting to work. Citi’s advisory teams secured more mandates, particularly in complex, cross-border transactions where its global network offers an advantage. As deal volumes stabilized, Citi benefited disproportionately from improved execution and client perception, while JPMorgan’s already-dominant position left less room for outsized growth.
Why This Matters Now
The timing of Citi’s advisory surge is critical. After a prolonged period of volatility driven by interest rate hikes, regulatory scrutiny, and geopolitical uncertainty, corporate boards have become more selective about M&A activity. When deals do happen, companies increasingly favor advisers with global reach, sector expertise, and proven execution.
For Citi, strong advisory fee growth signals progress in shedding its long-standing reputation as a Wall Street laggard. The bank crossed a symbolic threshold last year when its market value exceeded the book value of its assets for the first time since 2018, reinforcing investor confidence in Fraser’s turnaround.
For JPMorgan, slower advisory growth does not indicate weakness, but it does underscore how competitive pressures are intensifying. Maintaining dominance now requires defending market share, not just expanding it.
Business Impact: What It Means for Corporate Clients
For businesses considering mergers, acquisitions, or strategic divestitures, the evolving Citi vs JPMorgan dealmaking fees landscape suggests more choice and potentially more competitive advisory terms.
As Citi gains traction, corporate clients may benefit from:
- Increased competition among advisers, which can lead to sharper pricing and more tailored advisory services.
- Greater focus on execution quality, as banks work harder to differentiate themselves beyond brand reputation.
- Stronger cross-border capabilities, particularly from Citi, which has emphasized its global transaction network.
For mid-to-large companies operating internationally, Citi’s renewed momentum could translate into more balanced advisory pitches that challenge JPMorgan’s traditional dominance in marquee deals.
Market and Investor Implications
From an investor perspective, advisory fee growth is a critical indicator of franchise health. Unlike trading revenue, which can fluctuate with market volatility, M&A fees reflect long-term client relationships and strategic positioning.
Citigroup’s advisory surge contributed to adjusted earnings per share of $1.81 in the fourth quarter, beating analyst expectations. Return on tangible common equity — a key profitability metric — also exceeded forecasts, reinforcing the narrative that revenue quality is improving.
JPMorgan remains far ahead in absolute terms, but Citi’s faster growth rate suggests potential upside if momentum continues. For shareholders, this raises two important considerations:
- Sustainability: Can Citi maintain advisory momentum while controlling costs?
- Margin discipline: Will increased deal flow translate into durable profitability after compensation and technology expenses?
Cost Pressures and Strategic Trade-Offs
While advisory revenue surged, Citigroup continues to face elevated costs. Operating expenses rose 6% in the fourth quarter, driven by higher compensation, legal, tax, and technology spending. The bank is also in the process of resolving regulatory orders related to internal controls and data systems — an effort it says is about 80% complete.
To offset these pressures, Citi announced plans to cut around 1,000 jobs, with further reductions expected as it completes technology upgrades and spins out its retail business in Mexico. The challenge now is balancing investment in growth areas like M&A advisory with the need to streamline operations.
JPMorgan faces similar pressures but from a different position. Its scale allows it to absorb higher costs more easily, but that same scale can limit agility when market conditions shift.
Broader Implications for Wall Street
The evolving Citi vs JPMorgan dealmaking fees story highlights a broader trend across Wall Street: dominance is no longer guaranteed by size alone. Clients are increasingly willing to spread mandates across multiple banks, rewarding those that demonstrate focus, expertise, and consistent execution.
This environment favors institutions that have invested in talent and infrastructure during slower cycles. Citi’s recent performance suggests that its multiyear investment in rebuilding credibility is beginning to pay dividends at a moment when dealmaking confidence is cautiously returning.
Conclusion: A Turning Point, Not a Finish Line
Citi’s rapid growth in M&A advisory fees does not dethrone JPMorgan as Wall Street’s leading dealmaker. The gap in absolute revenue remains wide. But the acceleration in Citi’s dealmaking business marks a meaningful shift in competitive momentum.
For businesses, it signals a more competitive advisory landscape. For investors, it provides evidence that Citi’s turnaround is translating into core revenue growth. And for Wall Street as a whole, it underscores that leadership in dealmaking is increasingly earned through execution, not legacy alone.
The coming year will test whether Citi can sustain its gains while managing costs and regulatory demands. Regardless, the contrast in Citi vs JPMorgan dealmaking fees has already reshaped perceptions — and that alone represents a significant milestone in Citigroup’s long road back to relevance.
