Follow The Money Or Get Left Behind, Women Are The Future Of Wealth

Follow The Money Or Get Left Behind, Women Are The Future Of Wealth
Follow the money. It's a sentence that is often tossed around in boardrooms, investment pitches, and economic forecasts. But here's the twist, if you want to truly follow the money, you need to invest in women. The data shows that women-led businesses are more profitable, generate more revenue per dollar invested, and outperform across multiple key performance indicators (KPIs).
But despite the data, women only receive a tiny fraction of global investment capital.
The Funding Gap
Despite the evidence that supports women outperforming, women receive less than two percent of venture capital funding. Women are underfunded, and it's because the system is skewed. Pitch meetings often reward familiarity and pattern matching over innovation and data, meaning investors invest in who they can relate with and what they know. This leaves qualified women founders shut out of the funding opportunities they need to grow their businesses.
Women are launching businesses at record rates yet remain severely undercapitalized. This disconnect between business growth and financial backing isn't just unfair, economically it just doesn't make sense. We're not just holding women back; we are holding back the economy by not investing more in women led businesses.
Proving that Women Outperform When They Get Capital
A study by the Boston Consulting Group found that startups founded or co-founded by women generate 78 cents of revenue per dollar invested, compared to just 31 cents for male-founded startups. Although women receive less funding, these women-led startups delivered 10 percent more cumulative revenue over a five-year period.
This highlights that women often lead with resilience, operational efficiency, and long-term vision, likely a result of the need to bootstrap and get things done on a shoestring budget. They grow their businesses with fewer resources and more strategy, resulting in stronger margins and higher returns.
Why Every Investor Should Care
It's not just venture capital firms that need to pay attention; every type of investor should care. From angel investors and crowdfunding platforms to corporate boards and banks, the opportunity to generate outsized returns by backing women-led businesses is available to everyone. Whether you're investing $1,000 or $1 million, where you invest your money matters.
Even small shifts in funding can create massive ripple effects. It has been noted that when women have more money, they reinvest that money in their communities, create jobs, and scale more sustainable businesses. This isn't just about profit; it's about building stronger, more inclusive economies at every level, from local neighborhoods to global markets.
The under-investment in women isn't just an equity issue; it's a missed financial opportunity. By continuing to overlook women entrepreneurs, investors are ignoring an entire market segment with proven potential to deliver high ROI.
The Call to Action
Investing in women isn't charity. It's an economic imperative. The data is in, and the results are undeniable: women-led businesses are high-performing, high-return opportunities. It's time to stop treating this as a feel-good initiative and start recognizing it for what it is which is a smart, strategic move for anyone serious about profit.
If you're an investor, a fund manager, a board member, or even someone supporting businesses through crowdfunding, now is the time to audit your funding patterns. Are you putting your money where the growth is?
Support funds and platforms that actively prioritize women-led ventures. Challenge the outdated biases still shaping financial decisions because building wealth with purpose means investing where the returns are strongest: in women.
The bottom line is that diverse teams are more innovative, better at problem-solving, and more in tune with emerging market needs. When you exclude women from funding conversations, you're not playing it safe. You are leaving money on the table. If you want to follow the money, invest in women.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Bloomberg

32 minutes ago

• Bloomberg

Meet the Climate Leaders Working to Cut Emissions

Today's newsletter looks at some of the climate leaders working to cut emissions and create a more equitable future. The full version of the story, which is part of Bloomberg Businessweek 's July 2025 edition, can be found on Also, we reflect on the life and work of Manfredi Caltagirone, one of the world's top diplomats on methane, who recently died at the age of 46.

Yahoo

an hour ago

• Yahoo

The debate over whether AI will create or take over jobs is heating up. Here's what AI leaders are saying.

Tech leaders are divided on whether AI will cause mass job destruction or create new roles. Anthropic's Dario Amodei said AI may cut 50% of white-collar roles. Nvidia's Jensen Huang disagrees. From Sam Altman to Demis Hassabis, here's what AI leaders are saying about the AI jobs debate. AI leaders are split on whether AI will take over jobs or create new roles that mitigate disruption. It's a long-running debate — but one that has been heating up in recent months. While tech leaders seem to agree that AI is shaking up jobs, they are divided over timelines and scale. From Jensen Huang to Sam Altman, here is what some of the biggest names in tech are saying about how AI will impact jobs. Dario Amodei AI may eliminate 50% of entry-level white-collar jobs within the next five years. That was the stark warning from Dario Amodei, the CEO of AI startup Anthropic. "We, as the producers of this technology, have a duty and an obligation to be honest about what is coming. I don't think this is on people's radar," Amodei told Axios in an interview published in May. He said he wanted to share his concerns to get the government and other AI companies to prepare the country for what's to come, adding that unemployment could spike to between 10% and 20% in the next five years. He said that entry-level jobs are especially at risk, adding that AI companies and the government need to stop "sugarcoating" the risks of mass job elimination in fields including technology, finance, law, and consulting. Jensen Huang Huang, the CEO of chipmaker Nvidia, was withering when asked about Amodei's comments. "I pretty much disagree with almost everything he says," Huang said. Amodei "thinks AI is so scary," but only Anthropic "should do it," he continued. An Anthropic spokesperson told BI that Amodei had never made that claim. "Do I think AI will change jobs? It will change everyone's — it's changed mine," Huang told reporters on the sidelines of Vivatech in Paris in June. He also said that some roles would disappear, but said that AI could also unlock creative opportunities. Yann LeCun Yann LeCun, Meta's chief AI scientist, wrote a short LinkedIn post just after Huang dismissed Amodei, saying, "I agree with Jensen and, like him, pretty much disagree with everything Dario says." LeCun has previously taken a more optimistic stance on AI's impact on jobs. Speaking at Nvidia's GTC conference in March, LeCun said that AI could replace people but challenged whether humans would allow that to happen. "I mean basically our relationship with future AI systems, including superintelligence, is that we're going to be their boss," he said. Demis Hassabis Demis Hassabis, the cofounder of Google DeepMind, said in June that AI would create "very valuable jobs" and "supercharge sort of technically savvy people who are at the forefront of using these technologies." He told London Tech Week attendees that humans were "infinitely adaptable." He said he'd still recommend young people study STEM subjects, saying it was "still important to understand fundamentals" in areas including mathematics, physics, and computer science to understand "how these systems are put together." Geoffrey Hinton You would have to be "very skilled" to have an AI-proof job, Geoffrey Hinton, the so-called "Godfather of AI," has said. "For mundane intellectual labor, AI is just going to replace everybody," Hinton told the "Diary of a CEO" podcast in June. He flagged paralegals as at risk, and said he'd be "terrified" if he worked in a call center. Hinton said that, eventually, the technology would "get to be better than us at everything," but said some fields were safer, and that it would be, "a long time before it's as good at physical manipulation. "So a good bet would be to be a plumber," he added. Sam Altman "AI is for sure going to change a lot of jobs" and "totally take some jobs away, create a bunch of new ones," Altman said during a May episode of "The Circuit" podcast. The OpenAI CEO said that although people might be aware that AI can be better at some tasks, like programming or customer support, the world "is not ready for" humanoid robots. "I don't think the world has really had the humanoid robots moment yet," he said, describing a scenario where people could encounter "like seven robots that walk past you" on the street. "It's gonna feel very sci-fi. And I don't think that's very far away from like a visceral 'oh man, this is gonna do a lot of things that people used to do,'" he added. Speaking at the Snowflake Summit in June, Altman said AI agents are already acting like junior employees. Read the original article on Business Insider

Washington Post

an hour ago

• Washington Post

The Social Security time bomb is near. No, really, this time.

One thing I've learned by getting old is that dates that sound very far-off will eventually arrive, and the bills payable on those dates will come due. The long-foretold tipping point of Social Security and Medicare into insolvency seemed like science fiction when I first tried to imagine the 2030s, but a new examination of the numbers confirms that the time is almost here.