NQ role guidance

Hi all,

I’m due to qualify soon and could really do with some advice on choosing between two NQ offers.

My long-term goal is to practise in general commercial litigation, but my current firm (top 50, regional office) didn’t have any commercial litigation NQ roles available.
I’ve received two offers in the same city. Salary is broadly the same (within about £3k of each other), and both teams are Legal 500 ranked in their respective practice areas. My main question is which role would make it easier to move into general commercial litigation in a few years’ time.

Offer 1 – Professional Negligence / Insurance Disputes
International firm (think along the lines of DAC Beachcroft, Clyde & Co or RPC).
Work is primarily professional negligence and insurance-related disputes.
Around 1,500 billable hours target.
The team seemed competent, but the culture felt a little more formal and less welcoming.
I’ve only had limited exposure to professional negligence during my training contract.

Offer 2 – Property Litigation
National firm (think Freeths, TLT, Thrings etc.).
Broad range of property litigation work.
Around 1,390 billable hours, with a slightly better salary and bonus structure.
The team came across as genuinely friendly and enthusiastic about developing junior lawyers.
They suggested I’d get a good breadth of work and responsibility early on.

Assuming all else is broadly equal, which route would you choose if your end goal was to move into mainstream commercial litigation?

I’d be particularly interested to hear from anyone who’s made a similar move, or who recruits into commercial disputes and has views on how each background is perceived.

Thanks in advance. I know no one can make the decision for me, but I’d really appreciate some outside perspectives.