Among the biggest companies in the world, these firms still have a relatively small presence in the wealth management space. And for those wirehouse advisors who want something new, but don’t quite have the nerve to go independent, these elite boutiques look mighty attractive.

The big question is: Do they want you?

Looking over the carnage of the past year, advisors can be forgiven for shaking their heads in disbelief. Not one wirehouse was left untouched. The once almighty Merrill Lynch bought by a commercial bank; Smith Barney submitted to long time rival Morgan Stanley to create a “mega firm” of brokers; UBS’s wealth management head named a fugitive as the Internal Revenue Service pounded the Swiss giant over its alleged use of offshore accounts to hide U.S. clients’ money; and Wachovia acquired by Wells Fargo, leading to yet another change of ownership for the merger-weary former A.G. Edwards brokers.

Facing question after demanding question from angry clients, no wonder that advisors started to assess their options. And for those who don’t want the hassle of going independent, and don’t want to take what they consider a step down in the advisor pecking order, there is one option that has been getting a lot of attention lately: big name boutiques. In what sounds like a corporate platitude, there are a handful of firms that have avoided the scorching headlines that the wirehouses suffered last year, yet also maintained a boutique-like feel because their advisor forces are relatively much smaller.

Companies such as Goldman Sachs, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank Alex. Brown, Bear Stearns/JPMorgan and Barclays Wealth are hardly lightweights. (Goldman and JPMorgan are in the top 40 of the Fortune 500.) But each offers a valid option for advisors looking to leave their wirehouse problems behind but stay affiliated with a prestigious brand name. “Brand is a big issue,” says Sean Cunniff, research director in TowerGroup’s brokerage and wealth management business. “When people think of Merrill Lynch, instead of thinking of the top firm on the Street, they think of excessive compensation and bonuses. And they’re owned by a big bank now. It’s not the same level of prestige,” he says.

Indeed, a small scale brokerage force enables each of these firms to safeguard their brand name, according to Anthony DeChellis, chief executive officer of Credit Suisse’s Private Banking Americas. “If you’re one of 25,000 using that business card in the marketplace, it’ll be saturated very quickly,” he says. “If you’re one of 400, with what we believe is a superior brand, your earning capacity is much higher.”

And these firms are using their prestigious brand names as a carrot to lure some big producers from the troubled wirehouses. “There’s a limited subset of advisors who have the skill set to serve clients with a net worth of $5 million or $10 million. There’s a constant demand for advisors who have success in that space,” says Bing Waldert, a director at Boston-based consulting firm Cerulli Associates.

The big name boutiques, however, insist that they’re not on a campaign to boost numbers indiscriminately. This is not, they say, a lead-with-the-checkbook hiring binge. The target is specific: advisors focusing on the very high end of the market. Most boutiques are looking for advisors with a relatively small number of clients (40 to 50 families, says California-based recruiter Bill Willis) sporting at least $5 million in investable assets.

For example, in May 2008 Credit Suisse managed to snag Richard Zinman and his $11.6 billion in client assets from Smith Barney. Zinman made the move despite some observers’ concerns (so far unfounded) that Credit Suisse could end up embroiled in UBS-style tax evasion issues.

He was joined at Credit Suisse by a number of other billion-dollar advisors, including Sanford Katz, one of UBS’s former top producers, who oversees $1.7 billion in assets, and joined Credit Suisse’s Los Angeles office last October. The firm also snagged another team overseeing $1.7 billion in client assets from its Swiss rival UBS last September, when Charles McKinney, David Kelton, Barry Pechenik and Claren David Bellamy joined the firm’s Dallas office. Credit Suisse’s DeChellis says potential recruits are aware of the importance of being associated with a stable brand name, and have asked him about the capital structure of the bank and the potential for any “hidden bombs.” He says he feels confident expressing his belief in the stability of the company, and is also confident that Credit Suisse won’t face UBS-type problems over its use of offshore accounts.