The debate goes on as to whether Clifford Chance (CC), Linklaters and Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer are breaking away from their rivals, with a recent survey showing industry opinion is evenly split.

According to the latest Legal Week/ EJ Legal Big Question survey, almost half (47%) of the UK's leading business lawyers believe the trio of firms are pulling clear of magic circle rivals Allen & Overy (A&O) and Slaughter and May, while 53% said they were not.

CC, Linklaters and Freshfields all saw significant growth in the last financial year, leaving A&O as the least profitable firm of the five, while Slaughters has seen relatively static turnover and partner profits growth over the last five years.

CC head of corporate Peter Charlton said: "The idea that the magic circle firms were all the same at the beginning is a misnomer. There is not so much a split as the fact that the differences are becoming more apparent."

However, A&O head of international capital markets Boyan Wells argued: "I do not think there is a divide. While this year A&O's revenues were less and our profits were slightly behind, in previous years we have been ahead. It balances out."

He added: "It is also a question of the number of non-equity partners – we have fewer non-equity partners than the majority of our rivals."

About 80% of A&O's partners are in the equity, slightly higher than Linklaters and above CC's figure of about two-thirds. Almost all of the partners at Freshfields and Slaughters have equity status.

However, the panel of more than 100 leading business lawyers said it accepts a magic circle does exist, with 73% stating they agreed the classification is correct and 60% agreeing with the five firms listed in it. Thirty percent argued the grouping should be enlarged, while 10% took the view that it should be smaller.

The vast majority (84%) did not think the grouping should be extended to include Herbert Smith.

Olswang banking and insolvency partner Eleni Skordaki commented: "The group of firms in the magic circle is pretty well-defined. It is difficult to come in or out. Its boundaries are very tight. Unless something big happens, it would be hard to find a logical explanation for Herbert Smith's inclusion."

Is there now a big three? Post your comments online at: legalweek.com/talkback