Reasons to Invest in Women Founders

Less than 2% of venture capital goes to women. Two percent. And if you’re a woman of colour, the number gets even smaller. I’ve seen it firsthand. When I started fundraising for indē wild, I walked into rooms where no one looked like me. Where I was questioned more, doubted more, and had to prove myself in ways my male counterparts didn’t. I came prepared with numbers, a solid business, a brand that already had a community behind it, and still, the skepticism was there. And yet, research proves that when women-led businesses get funded, they don’t just succeed. They outperform. According to Boston Consulting Group (BCG), women-founded companies generate more than twice as much revenue per dollar invested as those led by men. Forbes research shows that startups backed by First Round Capital performed 63% better when they had a female founder. Women-led businesses have also proven to be more resilient during economic downturns and foster higher employee engagement. Women aren’t lacking ideas or drive or results. We’re lacking access. That’s the part that needs to change. Funding shouldn’t be about who looks the part or who fits a certain mold, it should be about vision, strategy, and impact. Women don’t need more confidence. We need capital. And it’s time for investors to realize that betting on women isn’t just the right thing to do…it’s the smart thing to do. If you've been through this, I see you. If you're in a position to change this, I hope you do. #womeninbusiness #vc

Investing in women is not a statement of values. It is a measure of economic intelligence. For decades, women have been systematically underinvested in as entrepreneurs, farmers, scientists, and decision-makers. The cost of that mistake is still being paid. When women gain access to capital, land, and leadership, economies grow faster, communities become more resilient, and businesses outperform. That is not a claim. It is a pattern visible across every sector and region where serious investment has been made. We have recently marked International Women's Day. It is a useful marker, but the real test is what happens on the other 364. Across the world, there are leaders who understand this. Carolina Müller-Möhl's taskforce4women is pushing structural reforms that remove the barriers quietly penalising women's participation in the workforce. Project Dandelion, championed by Pat Mitchell, Mary Robinson, Hafsat Abiola, and Ronda Carnegie, is connecting leaders across climate, food, health, and finance, making visible the strategic role women play in systems change. Through Daughters for Earth, founded by Zainab Salbi, women-led initiatives are receiving the funding and visibility they have long deserved. And at IMAGINE, led by Valerie Keller, gender parity across our leadership networks is not aspirational, it is foundational. At Unilever, investing in women was never a side programme. It was core strategy. We built the first gender-balanced board in the UK, trained women smallholder farmers, backed women entrepreneurs, and ensured women accounted for at least half of all participants in our community programmes. The results were unambiguous: stronger supply chains, more resilient communities, better business performance. The companies that understand this will outperform. Those retreating in the face of political pressure will simply fall behind. That is not a prediction. It is already happening.

Women founders, on average, get less than half the funding that men do ($935K vs $2.1M). Yet, they generate 10% more revenue. Why don't we bet on them more?   Boston Consulting Group (BCG) analyzed 5 years of startup data and found women deliver 78 cents per dollar invested compared to 31 cents for male-founded startups.   I don't think it's intentional bias, but when 92% of VC partners are men, pattern recognition kicks in. We tend to back founders who remind us of ourselves, problems we've faced, and markets we understand. It's not malicious, but it creates blind spots we should acknowledge.   Women can, and often do, bring user-centric innovation, community-building, and sustainable growth strategies to the table, among many other skillsets.   Look at Canva. Melanie Perkins built it because she lived the problem. Design tools were too complicated for regular people. Now it's worth $40 billion and competes with Adobe.   So, what can we do to bet more on women? ↳ VCs: Bring women into investment decisions. Support them as founders and investors. ↳ Accelerators: Recruit women founders. Build better networks. Fix the pipeline. ↳ Women founders: Pitch bigger. Push back with data. The numbers prove you're worth it.   The opportunity is massive. Women founders can scale successful businesses. Underserved markets can get better products. There's strong returns all around. We just need to fund it.   Women founders and VCs, I'd love to hear your take on this.   𝘚𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘤𝘦: 𝘉𝘊𝘎 + 𝘔𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘊𝘩𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘨𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘶𝘥𝘺   💰 Woman founder or VC? Tools to help you raise: ↳ Fundingstack (VCs): https://t2m.io/0TftUjMk ↳ Foundersuite (founders): https://t2m.io/0SoFER8   P.S. Read BCG's full take: "Why Women-Owned Startups Are a Better Bet" 👇

Dear investors: If your portfolio doesn't include women founders, you're leaving money on the table. And not just a little money. A lot of money. There’s a plethora of data showing women-led startups outperform. We generate more revenue on every dollar invested, according to BCG research, and we deliver exits faster, according to Pitchbook. I've sat in countless pitch rooms where male founders get asked about upside potential while I get grilled about downside risk. Same business metrics, wildly different questioning. Here's what smart money knows that average money doesn't: Women founders bring unique advantages to the table. We tend to build more capital-efficient companies. We typically have lower burn rates and higher customer retention. And we often understand the end user in ways our male counterparts miss. I'm not saying "invest in women because diversity." I'm saying "invest in women because you like making money." The next unicorn will likely be founded by someone who doesn't look like the last generation of founders. The question is whether you'll be an early investor or playing catch-up. Investors: What percentage of your portfolio is female-founded? And if it's under 20%, I'd love to hear why.

We often talk about the gender pay gap, but what about the investment gap? According to a powerful study by BCG and MassChallenge: - Startups founded or co-founded by women receive less than half the average funding of male-led startups — $935K vs. $2.1M. - But here’s the kicker: they generate more revenue. For every dollar invested, women-led startups generated 78 cents, while male-led startups generated just 31 cents. Let that sink in. Less capital. More return. So why the gap? The report highlights a few stark realities: Women face more skepticism in pitches, especially around technical credibility. Male founders are more likely to oversell, while women tend to pitch with caution. Most VCs are men — and may not relate to or recognize the market value in female-focused products or services. But here’s the opportunity: Women-founded companies are not just equal — they are statistically a better bet. It’s time for: ✅ Investors to rethink their filters ✅ Accelerators to actively support women founders ✅ Women entrepreneurs to pitch bigger, bolder — and know their value This isn’t about charity. It’s about untapped ROI. Let’s change the narrative — with data, action, and conviction. Read the full BCG report if you haven’t already. It’s an eye-opener: Why Women-Owned Startups Are a Better Bet #Startups #Entrepreneurship #AngelInvesting

As an investor, I often reflect on the journeys of women-founded companies and the challenges they face in accessing opportunities. Despite growing awareness, female founders still receive a fraction of venture capital compared to their male counterparts. Yet, the ones who do break through consistently prove that their ideas, execution, and impact are just as strong if not stronger. Access to networks, mentorship, and funding remains critical. Every time a woman-led startup secures support, it’s not just a win for that company, it’s a signal to the ecosystem that talent and innovation are everywhere, not confined by gender. Investing in women-founded companies is more than a diversity metric. It’s smart business. Research shows that diverse founding teams often outperform in growth, resilience, and innovation. As investors, we need to ask ourselves: are we giving equal chances to the ideas that could redefine industries? Are we actively seeking the untapped potential in female founders? Let’s challenge the status quo and make sure women-led ventures get the opportunities they deserve. The ecosystem and society benefit when everyone has a fair shot at building something extraordinary. 💡 The next big idea could very well be led by a woman. Are we ready to back it?

Female founders generate 78 cents per dollar raised. Male founders? 31 cents. And yet women-only teams got 1.1%* of VC dollars in 2025. The numbers don't lie. The money just keeps not following the data. → 63% better performance from teams with at least one female founder → 35% higher ROI (Kauffman Foundation). → 223% return on equity over a decade vs. 130% for male-led companies. → 15% less burn. → 6 months faster to exit. More revenue per dollar, Less burn, Faster exits, Stronger returns. I've been a female founder in a space where competitors raised $10M, $20M, $100M. Most of them are out of business. We're still here. Capital discipline, speed to market, doing more with less. That's what defines the best-run companies I work with. That's also what the data says about female founders. If you're building with women on your founding team, the returns aren't a debate. They're a math problem VCs keep getting wrong. Last day of Women's History Month. This one's for the ladies. 🤠 Who's a female founder you think more people should know about? Tag her below 👇 *just over 2% if you count Anthropic

🚨 Female founders are making strides - but the road is getting steeper. In 2024, female founders collectively raised nearly $39 billion, a testament to the talent, resilience, and market value of women-led companies. But here’s the catch: the share of funding awarded to women actually dropped. And with anti-DEI sentiment rising, the entry points that helped open doors - like funds dedicated to underrepresented founders - are now under legal threat. As a female founder, I know firsthand that we don’t need a handout - we need a fair shot. The numbers prove that investing in women delivers strong returns. Yet, access to capital remains an uphill battle. While the broader landscape is shifting, there’s one thing that remains constant: breakout founders will find a way. Last year, 13 female-founded unicorns emerged, and some of the most sought-after minds in tech, like Anthropic’s Daniela Amodei and Thinking Machines’ Mira Murati, are leading industries forward. Their success isn’t an exception; it’s proof of what’s possible when women get the backing they deserve. The economy rewards innovation, and women are building companies that deliver. The question isn’t whether female founders can succeed - it’s whether we’re willing to invest in them at the scale they deserve. #WomenInBusiness #FemaleFounders #FundingTheFuture #EconomicOpportunity #InclusiveGrowth

"Why do you invest in so many female-led startups? How are you comfortable with that risk?" A well-known investor asked me this. I was shocked by what he defined as risk. Here's what I've learned backing 100+ companies: The best founders share certain traits: They solve problems they deeply understand. They build before they talk. They stretch capital like their life depends on it. These traits aren't gendered. But they're often forged through adversity. Female founders in my portfolio: • Take 40% less capital to reach profitability • Build stronger unit economics from day one • Generate 35% higher revenue per dollar raised Not because they're women. Because they've had to be better to get in the room. The Real Risk: When you pattern match too narrowly, you miss exceptional founders. I've watched VCs pass on female founders solving billion-dollar problems because they didn't fit the "typical founder profile." Those same founders went on to build category-defining companies. I don't invest in female founders to fill a quota. I invest in the best founders, period. It happens that many of them are women who've been overlooked by others. They don't want special treatment. They want a fair shot to be judged on their talent and traction. That gap isn't a diversity problem. It's an arbitrage opportunity. The best investors find value where others aren't looking. Every founder wants the same thing: To be evaluated on their merit, not someone's assumptions. When we expand our pattern recognition, we expand our returns. Good investing isn't about betting on people who look like us. It's about betting on people who see what we don't. #VentureCapital #Startups #Founders #Investing #Leadership

PitchBook reported that startups with at least one female founder raised a record $73.6 billion last year. That looks like real progress until you dig into the numbers. Anthropic and Scale AI alone accounted for more than $30 billion of that total, and if you remove those two companies the record disappears. Meanwhile deal count for female founded companies has fallen four years in a row, which tells you the capital is concentrating into a small number of later stage companies while the early stage pipeline keeps shrinking. I see this firsthand as an LP representative investing into venture capital funds on behalf of a large corporation. The performance data on diverse teams is strong. Boston Consulting Group found that female founded companies generate 78 cents of revenue per dollar invested compared to 31 cents for all male teams. First Round Capital's portfolio analysis showed 63% better performance from companies with at least one female founder. And so the returns are clearly there, but the capital allocation has not caught up to what the data is showing. That is exactly why the #BindersProject exists. It connects women founders directly with funders. More at BindersProject.com. And if you are in a position to allocate capital, one of the most revealing things you can do is ask the people writing the checks how many small deals they are making with female founders. The dollar amount deployed can be misleading because of concentration. The number of deals tells you whether the early pipeline is actually being funded.