Gender bias in business funding 2023

Flo Health is the world's first femtech unicorn (yay) but it's also founded and funded by men (hmm) It's great that women's health is gaining more recognition, given the vast inequality in funding, research, and focus... BUT It also exposes a huge problem with the startup ecosystem. → Just 2% of global VC funding goes to women (WEF) → Women's presence on pitches is *neutral at best* and becomes negative when women don't embody typically female traits (Harvard) → Investors prefer pitches presented by men - when presented with two identical pitches, 68% funded the startup pitched by a man and 31% funded the exact same startup pitched by a woman (Harvard) → 83% of investment committees have no female members (British Business Bank) Women are discriminated against at all stages of the investment process. → Women are asked more negative questions around risk and worst-case scenarios, whereas men are asked about opportunity and opportunity (Harvard) → Women have to fight against preconceptions, we are judged more frequently, and held to higher standards (Yale) Ultimately, people with the most privilege raise the most money, and I count myself in that bucket as I am a white, privately educated female. → Just 0.5% of funding goes to black founders (WEF) → 79% of VC Seed funding for diverse founders (which is a tiny amount) goes to white women (BBG Ventures) There is SO much inequality in the startup world, and it's talked about but never taken seriously. Instead, female founders are assumed to be running businesses that aren't VC-backable, or that there just aren't enough of us. This is an uncomfortable topic, but the only way we can improve this system is to educate people about the huge inequality that exists in a sector awash with bonkers amounts of capital. Flexa #Startups #Fundraising #Inequality

𝟭 𝗶𝗻 𝟰 𝘃𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘀𝘁𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝘄𝗼𝗺𝗲𝗻’𝘀 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗽𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝗻 𝗳𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗲𝗮𝗺𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱. 𝟭 𝗶𝗻 𝟭𝟬 𝘀𝗮𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗱𝗼𝗻’𝘁 𝘄𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝘄𝗼𝗺𝗲𝗻. Together with Laura Koch and Elisabeth Berger (JKU - Institute for Entrepreneurship), I surveyed 361 international VCs using a randomized response technique to bypass social desirability bias. The results aren't unconscious bias. The results are open discrimination. And it’s personal. Some of the strongest startups I’ve seen at the University of Hohenheim were women-led, such as Holiroots or Viva la Faba. What a waste of potential. We knew gender bias existed in venture capital. Now we know how much — and where. 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗻𝗼𝘄? One recommendation from our findings that’s both practical and powerful: 👉 Increase the share of women in venture capital. Why it matters:  • Women VCs show significantly less bias.  • Diverse teams make better decisions.  • Mixed teams perform better. If we want fairer funding decisions, we must rethink who’s making them. 𝗟𝗲𝘁’𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗮𝘀𝗸 𝗶𝗳 𝘄𝗼𝗺𝗲𝗻 𝗮𝗿𝗲 “𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲.” 𝗟𝗲𝘁’𝘀 𝗮𝘀𝗸 𝘄𝗵𝘆 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲 𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀 𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻’𝘁. The paper is open access in Venture Capital—An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance. Feel free to share it or use it in teaching, workshops, or policy work. 📄 https://lnkd.in/eN4jfJQx

Last year, female founders in MENA raised just 1% of total VC funding, around $28 million out of $2.3 billion. It’s a clear signal of systemic bias, structural barriers, and untapped potential. Even more concerning, all-women founding teams received less than 0.5% of funding in 2023. Despite record startup funding in Q1 2025, women-led startups with no male co-founder saw almost no increase. As a leader, I see this not only as a call for fairness but as a strategic imperative. We cannot unlock the full potential of our region’s innovation ecosystem without true inclusion. Diversity of thought, experience, and perspective drives better decisions, stronger teams, and more sustainable growth. Changing this means rethinking how we build our ecosystem. It’s about more than just capital, it’s about creating real opportunities, removing barriers, and nurturing talent. Key steps forward include: • Increasing representation of women as investors and decision-makers • Providing practical mentorship, introductions, and tailored support • Implementing policies that commit real resources to female-led ventures Progress requires intentional leadership at every level, from investors, founders, corporates, and policymakers alike. It’s not enough to recognize the problem; we must all be part of the solution. What do you think? What needs to change for true progress? #FemaleFounders #MENA #VC #Startups #WomenInBusiness

A new report from Antler interviewing 43 female tech founders from across Europe has been published, and the findings are disappointing…and not surprising. Just 1.8% of European VC funding goes to female-led startups – and, even when investors do engage with women, those women report biases and frankly sexist (my words not Antler’s) behaviour that their male counterparts would never face. “What is it like being 30 and not having children?” “Are you planning to have a major life event soon?” “Do you think you’ll lose interest in the business once you’ve had your baby?” The list goes on, each question more disappointing than the last. The solution? 72% of the founders Antler interviewed reported that when they did receive funding it was from female investors – who recognised them as competent and valuable individuals with names and backgrounds and talents rather than as just ‘women’. It’s not rocket science – the imbalance in funding distribution is changing at a snail's pace while the investor landscape itself is so heavily unbalanced, with a report from Diversity VC stating that there has been no improvement in the gender demographics of VCs since 2019 - almost 5 years 🤯 Until VC investment stops resembling some sort of old boys club, we will continue to see this kind of bias and sexism continue unchallenged, and countless talented women give up on their dreams because they just can’t find anyone to give them the capital they need. That is a tragedy, and a path to a future that is worse for all of us. It’s a global act of shooting ourselves in the foot. So, let’s start at the top. More female VCs. More funding for women. More talented founders empowered to change the world for the better.

43% less funding for female founding teams. The gap is widening. The stats from Dropbox DocSend’s 2024 Funding Divide report paints a dire picture: ↳ All-female teams raised 43% less than all-male teams in 2023. ↳ Racially diverse, all-female teams spent 25 weeks fundraising, a 75% increase from the previous year Yet secured the least funding, averaging $460K And this isn’t just about numbers. It’s about real people, real founders, facing real struggles. A while ago I shared Female Invest’s story behind their Series A. During their Series A raise, one of the founding team members was giving birth. They signed the term sheet the day before she was due. Instead of feeling excited, they felt terrified. Because of the prejudice that exists against female founders who start families. The expectation? That they’ll fail. As a male founder, I recognise that we have a huge role to play in changing this narrative. Balancing motherhood and entrepreneurship is tough. But let’s be honest—don’t all founders face challenges? We still have dinosaurs who believe women can’t do both. If you’re in a position to invest, advocate, or open doors for female founders—do it. Change won’t happen unless we make it happen.

"The chronic underfunding of Black, Hispanic, and Latine founders only got worse in 2023...Only 0.6% of all dollars invested through priced venture rounds in 2023 went to companies with a Black founder, compared to 1.68% in 2022. Hispanic and Latine founders experienced a similar decline, with just 1.02% of #VentureCapital raised in 2023 compared to 2.6% in 2022 and nearly 4.6% in 2021. *77.7% of new co-founder teams did not include a single woman or non-binary person. This is a higher rate of teams made up only of men than the previous 5 years. When women are part of founding teams, they often receive less equity than their co-founders who are men. The exception is teams of two, where founder equity is often split equally. In teams with more than 2 founders, co-founders often prorated equity, rather than splitting equally among founders. In these cases, women tend to receive less #equity than their counterparts who are men.... *White men receive about 3.4x more #equity value than white women, whereas East Asian men receive 2x more equity than East Asian women. Among all these groups, the largest gap between the percentage of employees and the percentage of equity is among Hispanic women. They account for 2.39% of all employees yet receive just 0.94% of equity value.... *The proportion of new equity-receiving hires who are women dipped slightly to 35% in 2023, the first annual decline in the past decade... *Over the past 4 years combined, 78.7% of #startups raising priced rounds did not have any women or non-binary individuals on their founding teams. *73.1% of funding for priced seed rounds went to founding teams made up entirely of men... *Women-only teams raised only 2.8% of all venture funding this year, the first time in the past 4 years that figure has fallen below 3%.... Our data shows that this environment has had an outsized impact on women founders and founders of color. While previous years showed some progress, this year is a reminder that time alone does not move us forward. Across the startup ecosystem, we must work actively to build a more fair and equitable industry." all excerpts and charts in image below from Carta report credits: Editorial: Kiley Roache, Kevin Dowd, Zoran Basich, Peter Walker #Data: Lucy Wang, Irvin Ding, Winston V. #Communications: Lauren O'Mahony, Tania Zaparaniuk 🇺🇦, Jessica Capibaribe Web: Alex Danoff #Leadership: Mita Mallick, Jane Alexander, Julia King Link to full report (a must read): https://lnkd.in/evpFzYix Carta Team - #InspiredByYou all of you! #gratitude Does this data make you wonder: who is the most marginalized? #intersectionality #systemschange #entrepreneurship #finance #investing #assetmanagement #economy #innovation #power #business #money #cultureofmoney #NotJustVenture #UniteforChange #FearlessFreedom

Millions of voters in the United States are casting ballots today in support of women’s rights. But in the world of venture capital, the discrimination against women remains far from resolved. Take this for a crazy example: 75% of femtech companies are founded by women, yet they were able to raise, on average, 23% less capital than femtech companies founded by men. Think about that. A recent study exposes another uncomfortable truth: you can say "penis" at a VC pitch, but "vagina" is basically taboo. Female founders are "advised" to use a more "neutral" tone if they hope to secure funding, an absurd expectation in a supposedly progressive industry. This new research found that terms like “women’s rights,” “empowerment,” and “gender gap”—and God forbid, any mention of female anatomy—tend to undermine credibility for female founders in pitches, suggesting emotional or ideological motives, and fall under the “yuck factor”. Consider this: 98% of all venture capital dollars go to male-founded startups. And yet, the data speaks volumes. Female entrepreneurs generate more than double the revenue per dollar invested compared to male founders, and they tend to exit a year earlier on average. On the VC side, firms that increased the proportion of female partners by just 10% saw an average 1.5% increase in fund returns and gained 9.7% more profitable assets. The numbers don’t lie—the industry’s gender bias is not only unfounded but also costly to LPs. For me, the pressing question remains: In this gender-biased world, what future awaits my daughters?

There’s definitely something wrong with this picture. Techpoint Africa reports that female startup founders in Africa raised only $48 million in 2024, four times less than the previous year and the lowest on record since 2019. In contrast, male founders secured over $2 billion, a stark indicator of the gender disparity in venture funding. Even more sobering is the fact that startups led by solo female founders or all-female teams received only $21 million in funding last year, just 2% of what all-male teams raised in 2023. Sub-Saharan Africa boasts one of the highest rates of female entrepreneurship globally, yet this is not reflected in the startup funding ecosystem. This isn’t just about numbers—it’s about missed opportunities. Research consistently shows that gender-diverse teams outperform their peers, driving better financial returns, innovation, and decision-making. However, biases in the venture capital space often hinder female founders from accessing the resources and support they need. At Nubia Capital, we recognize the immense potential of female-led startups and are committed to closing this gap through our gender-lens investment strategy. We believe in: ✔ 𝐄𝐦𝐩𝐨𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐅𝐞𝐦𝐚𝐥𝐞 𝐅𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬: Actively supporting women entrepreneurs by providing capital, mentorship, and guidance. ✔ 𝐁𝐮𝐢𝐥𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐈𝐧𝐜𝐥𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐏𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐟𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐬: Backing startups with gender-diverse teams to unlock superior performance and innovation. ✔ 𝐀𝐝𝐯𝐨𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐄𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐭𝐲: Challenging stereotypes and biases in the venture ecosystem by spotlighting female founders and success stories. While the numbers tell a sobering story, the future holds promise. As investors and stakeholders, we have a unique role to play in reshaping the narrative and driving sustainable, inclusive growth. At Nubia Capital, we’re not just investing in businesses—we’re investing in bold ideas, resilient leaders, and a more equitable future. #VentureCapital #FemaleFounders #GenderDiversity #InclusiveInvestment

On #MothersDay, everyone wants to celebrate Mom - nobody wants to fund her health. This is a really excellent, MUST-READ insightful analysis by Halle Tecco, MPH, MBA and Carolyn Witte of the funding cliff women's health startups hit at growth stage, the negative implications of that across so many fronts, and what the solutions are 💥 'The data confirmed our hunch: women's health companies aren’t just underrepresented—they’re under-capitalized at the growth stage, exactly the moment when capital matters most. This results in fewer scaled women’s health companies, fewer comps, and fewer exits. It’s a vicious cycle that holds the whole category back. Let’s break it down. ... While momentum is real, the majority of deals in women’s health are still happening in the early stages of a company’s journey. A striking 81% of women’s health deals in 2023–2024 (excluding bridge, debt, and unlabeled rounds) were Seed or Series A. That’s a significantly higher concentration than the broader digital health sector, where just 68% of deals fall into those early stages. ... Negotiating power is often limited in women’s health and is compounded by the female founder factor. Many of the funds investing in this space—especially the newer, women’s health-focused ones—are smaller and more valuation-sensitive. Some don’t have the ability to lead rounds or write larger follow-on checks, which makes it harder for founders to run competitive processes or set favorable terms. That lack of leverage can translate into lower valuations, “party rounds” made up of lots of little checks, more investor-favorable governance provisions, and higher traction bars in order to get a deal done at all. The result? A compounding dilution effect: smaller rounds, more equity given up, and less flexibility to raise future capital on founder-friendly terms. It’s a quiet penalty that builds over time—and holds back the very people trying to scale solutions in this space. ... 🔄 Break the “one-and-done” mindset. Too often, we hear investors say they’ve “already made their women’s health bet.” Imagine if someone said, “I already made my SaaS bet!” We need to normalize—and celebrate—investors who back multiple, adjacent players in women’s health (say, a maternity care startup and a menopause platform). Women benefit from having more choices in the market. So do the founders who get to scale, and the investors who back them. Treating women’s health like a box to be checked undercuts the plethora of women’s needs and the scale of the market opportunity.' https://lnkd.in/eVk2jCEs #FundFemaleFounders #FundFemaleFoundedFunds

Only 2.2% of VC funding went to women founders in 2024. Black founders? 0.48%. LGBTQ+ founders? 0.5%. If VCs actually want to improve these numbers (big if), here are 5 things they could start doing: 1. Ban the warm intro You can't get warm intros without social capital. And underrepresented founders often lack the networks that make this possible. As long as access to capital requires social capital, diverse founders are going to take an L. 2. Be direct with your "no" - "Let me know when you have a lead investor" - "You're too early for us" - "Keep us updated on your progress" These are all indirect ways of saying no. So instead of beating around the bush, just say you’re not interested so founders can pursue investors who are genuinely interested. 3. Give real feedback Don't say that the "metrics aren't there." Tell us which metrics matter and what benchmarks you're looking for. Specific feedback helps founders improve and better understand what investors want. 4. Look beyond SF and NYC When you only invest in major tech hubs, you're saying you only want founders who can afford $4K/month rent. Remember: Mailchimp ($12B), Calendly ($3B), and Duo Security ($2.35B) weren't built in SF. 5. Diversify LP bases It makes sense that diverse LPs would lead to diverse founders. They bring different networks, understand overlooked markets, and can better evaluate opportunities in their communities. Will any of this happen? Probably not. These changes would mean disrupting systems that work really well for VCs and their existing networks. It would cost them traditional deal flow and require more work. But maybe in 2025, we'll see some brave firms try something different. Until then, we’ll keep building, growing, and finding ways to succeed despite the barriers. Founders: What other changes could help improve funding access for underrepresented founders? Share your ideas below 👇🏾 - - - If you found this insightful, follow me Toby Egbuna for more real talk about startup building and funding 🤝🏾