Wells Fargo’s Breakthrough 2025 in U.S. Investment Banking: Deals, Rank & Strategy

Wells Fargo’s 2025 performance in investment banking represents a marked strategic shift: moving from a regional and loan-focused past toward full participation in big-ticket advisory work. Under Charlie Scharf, who became CEO in 2019, the bank has executed a recruitment blitz—adding over 90 managing directors across major sectors—while aggressively chasing mandates on mega-deals. These moves are paying off: the bank rose to 7th in U.S. M&A rankings from 14th previously, its best result since 1980.

Several external tailwinds have aligned to support this transformation. First, the removal of the asset cap freed up Wells Fargo’s balance sheet to take on larger commitments. Second, market conditions improved: elevated equity valuations, tightening credit spreads, and clearer regulatory signals (including expectations around easing) have increased deal confidence. These factors, combined with stronger deal pipelines, have allowed Wells Fargo to compete for and win major advisory and bridge financing roles in large-scale transactions.

Operationally, the bank is shifting revenue mix. Its investment banking fees, trading income, and advisory have become larger slices of the pie, reducing dependency on traditional net interest income. For instance, revenue from its Corporate & Investment Banking (CIB) division has increased significantly since 2019, with investment banking fees alone rising from about US$1.81 billion in 2019 to higher levels in recent years. This reflects both market share gains and successful sectoral investment (in sectors like technology, media, telecom, industrials, health).

Notwithstanding its progress, Wells Fargo still faces strategic challenges. In fee earnings—particularly advisory fee revenue—it remains behind top-tier firms like Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, and Morgan Stanley. Ranking by fees earned sees them lower in the league tables, even if volume and deal counts have improved. Moreover, maintaining momentum amid macro uncertainty, regulatory shifts (e.g., interest rates, tax policy), and tight competition (from boutiques and global firms) presents risks. Wells Fargo’s target—top-five global investment bank status—is ambitious and will require sustained performance, investment, and perhaps M&A of its own.

Strategic implications for the bank and its stakeholders include:

• A more diversified earnings profile, better positioning Wells Fargo to withstand headwinds in interest income or loan demand.
• Higher leverage of its balance sheet and capital base, which now free from asset caps, to engage in financings, underwriting more aggressive mandates, bridge loans, etc.
• Talent acquisition and sector leadership as competitive differentiators. Success in major deals boosts credibility and future pipeline in which relationships and sector reputation matter.
• Potential margin pressures—win-rates for large mandates are competitive; talent costs are rising; regulatory, compliance, and underwriting risks may increase with larger deals.

Open questions remain:

• Can Wells Fargo sustain the rate of senior hiring without diluting culture, increasing compensation drag, or incurring misalignment of incentives?
• Will macroeconomic variables (rate cuts, inflation, tax changes) support capital markets activity long enough for Wells to close the gap with traditional investment banking leaders?
• How will Wells handle regulatory oversight now that the asset cap is removed; will compliance, risk management scaled adequately for larger exposure?
• To what extent can Wells leverage its U.S. focus into global advisory mandates, especially as cross-border dealmaking picks up or slows?
• Finally, what is the sensitivity of its business to adverse conditions: shifting credit spreads, market downturns, political instability?