Women are getting wealthier — and they don't invest the same way as men
Women are becoming richer, and they're changing the face of wealth.
According to a report by McKinsey published last month, women control about a third of all retail financial assets in the US and the European Union.
By 2030, that proportion is expected to rise to between 40% to 45%, wrote Cristina Catania, global co-convener and European lead for the risk and resilience practice, and Jill Zucker, senior partner and co-leader of McKinsey's global growth transformation service line.
The report is based on a survey of about 13,000 American and European investors, nearly half of whom were female financial decision makers. It found that between 2018 and 2023, global wealth rose by 43%, but jumped by 51% for women.
Women's expanding control of assets is being driven by a combination of factors, including a continuing decline in marriage rates, the ongoing boost in women's average earnings, demographic trends like longer life expectancies, and a broad shift in attitudes about women managing their own finances.
Risk doesn't equal reward
As women become wealthier through investing, it's becoming clearer that they don't approach it the same way as men.
"Women are much more risk-aware," Anna-Sophie Hartvigsen, cofounder of financial education and investment platform Female Invest, told Business Insider. "I would like to call it much more realistic in their own ability to invest."
She said women are less likely than men to invest emotionally.
"On average, men trade a lot more often than women because they believe they can beat the market or they read something in the news, and they get pumped up or afraid, and then they invest based on that," Hartvigsen said. Female investors, in her view, tend to be more calm, more realistic, and better at assessing risk.
However, Katie Geery, an advisor at Rise Private Wealth Management, says being more cautious can also hold women back by leading them to miss out on opportunities to build wealth.
"It is important to work with a trusted financial advisor who understands your risk tolerance and can walk you through making well-educated investment decisions based on your long-term goals," she told BI.
Returns aren't everything
The aims of investing also sometimes differ between men and women.
"Women prefer to invest toward achieving specific goals rather than chasing the highest returns," said Avanti Shetye, financial planner at Wealthwyzr.
Geery said female investors tend to be more focused on philanthropy and gifting. They often consider their values when buying stock and want their purchases to help make a better impact on the world.
"Women often seek financial advisors who are empathetic and take the time to get to know them on a more personal level to gain a deeper understanding of their goals and values," she said.
On Female Invest, Hartvigsen said the principles its members care about the most include climate, especially a firm's carbon footprint, and diversity in leadership, in terms of a board having a good gender balance.
Start investing early
For Shetye, it's important to start investing early.
"Women tend to be primary caregivers for children or aging parents and often take unpaid time off," she said. "Not only that, women statistically live longer than men, which implies that women would need to invest as much as they can as early as possible so that their portfolios last them through retirement."
Hartvigsen said long-term financial planning is vital: "When you do that, it doesn't matter what happens today."
Both agree that this plan should be grounded in expert advice.
"Working with a financial planner whose planning process is rooted in financial education can help provide comfort and security to stay consistent even in the roughest of markets," Shetye said.
But she also believes that practice is more important than perfection.
"You are never going to know everything there is to know about investing," Shetye said. "The key is consistency, and time will do the heavy lifting."
Hartvigsen advises her clients to invest monthly on the same day and to diversify their investments. "If you do that, historically, it has been near impossible not to make money in the long run."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
42 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
GOP tax bill would ease regulations on gun silencers and some rifles and shotguns
WASHINGTON — The massive tax and spending cuts package that President Donald Trump wants on his desk by July 4 would loosen regulations on gun silencers and certain types of rifles and shotguns, advancing a longtime priority of the gun industry as Republican leaders in the House and Senate try to win enough votes to pass the bill. The guns provision was first requested in the House by Georgia Rep. Andrew Clyde, a Republican gun store owner who had initially opposed the larger tax package. The House bill would remove silencers — called 'suppressors' by the gun industry — from a 1930s law that regulates firearms that are considered the most dangerous, eliminating a $200 tax while removing a layer of background checks. The Senate kept the provision on silencers in its version of the bill and expanded upon it, adding short-barreled, or sawed-off, rifles and shotguns. Republicans who have long supported the changes, along with the gun industry, say the tax infringes on Second Amendment rights. They say silencers are mostly used by hunters and target shooters for sport. 'Burdensome regulations and unconstitutional taxes shouldn't stand in the way of protecting American gun owners' hearing,' said Clyde, who owns two gun stores in Georgia and often wears a pin shaped like an assault rifle on his suit lapel. Democrats are fighting to stop the provision, which was unveiled days after two Minnesota state legislators were shot in their homes, as the bill speeds through the Senate. They argue that loosening regulations on silencers could make it easier for criminals and active shooters to conceal their weapons. 'Parents don't want silencers on their streets, police don't want silencers on their streets,' said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. The gun language has broad support among Republicans and has received little attention as House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., work to settle differences within the party on cuts to Medicaid and energy tax credits, among other issues. But it is just one of hundreds of policy and spending items included to entice members to vote for the legislation that could have broad implications if the bill is enacted within weeks, as Trump wants. Inclusion of the provision is also a sharp turn from the climate in Washington just three years ago when Democrats, like Republicans now, controlled Congress and the White House and pushed through bipartisan gun legislation. The bill increased background checks for some buyers under the age of 21, made it easier to take firearms from potentially dangerous people and sent millions of dollars to mental health services in schools. Passed in the summer of 2022, just weeks after the shooting of 19 children and two adults at a school in Uvalde, Texas, it was the most significant legislative response to gun violence in decades. Three years later, as they try to take advantage of their consolidated power in Washington, Republicans are packing as many of their longtime priorities as possible, including the gun legislation, into the massive, wide-ranging bill that Trump has called 'beautiful.' 'I'm glad the Senate is joining the House to stand up for the Second Amendment and our Constitution, and I will continue to fight for these priorities as the Senate works to pass President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill,' said Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who was one of the lead negotiators on the bipartisan gun bill in 2022 but is now facing a primary challenge from the right in his bid for reelection next year. If the gun provisions remain in the larger legislation and it is passed, silencers and the short-barrel rifles and shotguns would lose an extra layer of regulation that they are subject to under the National Firearms Act, passed in the 1930s in response to concerns about mafia violence. They would still be subject to the same regulations that apply to most other guns — and that includes possible loopholes that allow some gun buyers to avoid background checks when guns are sold privately or online. Larry Keane of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, who supports the legislation, says changes are aimed at helping target shooters and hunters protect their hearing. He argues that the use of silencers in violent crimes is rare. 'All it's ever intended to do is to reduce the report of the firearm to hearing safe levels,' Keane says. Speaking on the floor before the bill passed the House, Rep. Clyde said the bill restores Second Amendment rights from 'over 90 years of draconian taxes.' Clyde said Johnson included his legislation in the larger bill 'with the purest of motive.' 'Who asked for it? I asked,' said Clyde, who ultimately voted for the bill after the gun silencer provision was added. Clyde was responding to Rep. Maxwell Frost, a 28-year-old Florida Democrat, who went to the floor and demanded to know who was responsible for the gun provision. Frost, who was a gun-control activist before being elected to Congress, called himself a member of the 'mass shooting generation' and said the bill would help 'gun manufacturers make more money off the death of children and our people.' Among other concerns, control advocates say less regulation for silencers could make it harder for law enforcement to stop an active shooter. 'There's a reason silencers have been regulated for nearly a century: They make it much harder for law enforcement and bystanders to react quickly to gunshots,' said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety. Schumer and other Democrats are trying to convince the Senate parliamentarian to drop the language as she reviews the bill for policy provisions that aren't budget-related. 'Senate Democrats will fight this provision at the parliamentary level and every other level with everything we've got,' Schumer said earlier this month.
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
Legislative Branch spending bill takes aim at key government watchdog
House Republicans are aiming to slash funding for the nonpartisan watchdog for waste, fraud and abuse within the federal government by nearly half in the next fiscal year, according to spending bill text released Sunday night. The House Appropriations subcommittee funding Congress and its support agencies, led by chairman David Valadao (R-Calif.), is set to mark up their fiscal 2026 measure Monday evening, with the full committee set to act Thursday. The Legislative Branch bill would provide $6.7 billion — $51 million below the current funding level, which was set in fiscal 2024. Per tradition, the House bill does not touch any Senate funding. 'Chairman Valadao's bill puts the American people first — in strengthening the institutions that represent them, protecting effective governance, and safeguarding taxpayer dollars,' said House Appropriations Committee Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) in a statement. The deepest cuts in the bill are to the Government Accountability Office, an arm of Congress that would see a $396.5 million reduction from current levels to $415.4 million. GAO has served as the nation's chief investigator of wrongdoing at federal agencies for more than a century, but has been fighting for months as Republicans in Congress and the Trump administration have attempted to undercut its legal conclusions and independence. Now, they are attempting to shrink the agency into submission as it pursues nearly 40 investigations into whether the White House is illegally withholding, or 'impounding,' money Congress had previously approved. Also tucked into the bill is a major policy change that would eliminate the GAO's ability to bring civil action against the executive branch over impoundments of funds. 'GAO's work makes it possible for the legislative branch to hold government accountable,' said Daniel Schuman, executive director of the American Governance Institute. 'Congress needs independent expert advice, which is exactly what GAO provides.' Also on the chopping block is the Library of Congress, which is another legislative branch agency also engaged in a power struggle against intrusion by the Trump administration. The bill allocates $767.6 million for the Library of Congress, which is $84.5 million below the current funding level and $133.7 million below the FY26 request. 'This bill does nothing to safeguard against the growing levels of executive overreach into legislative branch agencies,' said Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.), the top Democrat on the legislative branch subcommittee. Some other key provisions in the GOP-written bill include: Capitol Police: The Capitol Police would see a $84.4 million boost to their funding under the bill, bringing the total to $891 million. Some lawmakers had asked for an increase in office funding for use for security, but the bill flat-funds the Members Representational Allowance, which can be used for some member security purposes. Member Pay: The bill would continue the member pay freeze that has been in effect since 2013, halting automatic cost of living increases that members of Congress are supposed to get under law. Gay marriage: The bill includes language that prohibits discrimination against any person who 'speaks, or acts' in accordance with a 'sincerely held religious belief, or moral conviction, that marriage is, or should be recognized as, a union of one man and one woman.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Art of the Deal: Nippon Steel's ‘Golden Share' Model Hints at Trump's Playbook for TikTok
By Exec Edge Editorial Staff This week, the Trump administration celebrated a major victory for American industrial policy: the Nippon Steel acquisition of U.S. Steel. The deal was restructured to include a 'golden share' mechanism, which gave the U.S. government veto power over key strategic decisions while preserving jobs and keeping headquarters in Pittsburgh. The deal also includes a guarantee that the leadership of U.S. Steel will remain American, including the CEO and a majority of board members. Now, as President Trump faces a similarly complex challenge with TikTok and its Chinese parent company ByteDance, the Nippon Steel deal may offer a template for resolving one of the most politically charged tech disputes of his second term. Trump granted a third extension of the TikTok divestiture deadline last week, this time pushing the decision 90 days beyond the previously extended cutoff of June 19. While the Protecting Americans from Foreign-Adversary Controlled Applications Act (PAFACA) only authorized one 90-day extension beyond its original January 19, 2025, deadline, the administration's repeated delays point to a preference for a negotiated solution over swift enforcement. This evolving approach traces back to legislation Biden signed into law on April 24, 2024. Under PAFACA, ByteDance was initially given 270 days to divest from TikTok or face a national ban, with the possibility of a single 90-day extension. But as the divestiture saga stretches well past that window, the White House may have to turn to creative frameworks, such as the 'golden share' mechanism used in the Nippon Steel–U.S. Steel deal, to reconcile national security concerns with market realities. A TikTok adaptation could follow similar principles. Rather than forcing complete ByteDance divestiture, the U.S. could require the creation of a golden share structure governing TikTok's American operations, potentially including oversight of data management protocols, algorithm modifications affecting U.S. users, and an American CEO of TikTok U.S. Political Calculations and Conservative Voices Within Trump's political orbit, some voices have argued that banning TikTok outright would be strategically counterproductive. John McEntee, former White House Personnel Director turned conservative TikTok star, has been among the critics of GOP efforts to ban the platform and was perhaps the first in Trump's orbit to advocate for a pro-TikTok approach. 'It's a ridiculous self-own that Republicans are trying to ban [TikTok],' McEntee said in an April 2023 interview. 'TikTok has been one of the best tools for startups and small business owners in America.' McEntee's perspective has increasingly become the dominant one on the right after President Trump embraced TikTok during the last election cycle. TikTok's value in political messaging has also been picked up on by conservative influencers. Charlie Kirk, founder of the conservative nonprofit Turning Point USA, was initially skeptical of TikTok. But he has since shifted his position and now supports Trump's efforts to preserve the app, noting its value in 'pushing younger voters to the right.' Nonetheless, the political dynamics around TikTok remain complex inside the Trump administration. Secretary of State Marco Rubio previously called for a complete ban on TikTok, calling it a 'spyware' tool for China. Similarly, Brendan Carr, Federal Communications Commission Chair, has stated that he does 'not see a path forward that's short of a ban' and considers TikTok a 'huge national security concern.' Economic Stakes and Geographic Impact The economic argument for preserving TikTok operations centers on substantial job and GDP impacts. A 2023 Oxford Economics study estimated the platform contributed more than $24 billion to U.S. GDP and supported over 224,000 American jobs across marketing, music, e-commerce, and creator-driven content sectors. These economic benefits are concentrated in politically significant battleground states including Florida, Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, where creator economies depend on TikTok for revenue and audience development. A complete shutdown would eliminate these economic opportunities while potentially alienating voters who view the platform as essential to their businesses. Beijing remains a critical variable in any potential resolution. China designated TikTok's algorithm as 'protected technology' in 2020, meaning substantial changes to the platform's core functionality require Chinese government approval. According to AP News reporting from April, China 'hit the brakes' on TikTok deal discussions after Trump announced wide-ranging tariffs, illustrating how broader U.S.-China tensions complicate the negotiation. The golden share model could potentially work around this issue by establishing operational separation—U.S. data storage, American oversight of content moderation, domestic control of user privacy—while leaving core algorithmic functions intact. Legal Questions Around Extensions The administration's multiple deadline extensions raise questions about executive authority under PAFACA. The statute explicitly provides for one 90-day extension, which would have expired in April 2025. The subsequent extensions push beyond the law's stated framework. According to AP News reporting, legal experts have noted that Trump's actions 'violate the law' as written, with one law professor characterizing the extensions not as legal extensions but as 'unilateral non-enforcement declarations.' However, no successful legal challenges have emerged to date, partly due to the difficulty of establishing legal standing to challenge the delays. A Digital-Era Trade Pact For Trump, a successful TikTok resolution using a golden share approach could demonstrate economic nationalism adapted for the digital age. Such an agreement would allow the administration to claim it protected American interests, preserved jobs, and established oversight mechanisms without economically disruptive bans. The urgency of reaching a resolution was underscored by the timing of the most recent extension. With the previous deadline set for June 19—just two days after the June 17 extension announcement—the administration was operating under immediate pressure to prevent TikTok from going dark. The challenge now lies in satisfying American security concerns, Chinese sovereignty sensitivities, and ByteDance's commercial interests while maintaining credibility with Trump's political base. The 90-day extension provides additional negotiating time, but success would require navigating complex multilateral interests and internal political divisions. A TikTok deal would establish precedent for how the U.S. manages foreign-controlled digital platforms that have become integral to American economic and cultural life—a framework that could prove valuable well beyond the TikTok case. What a TikTok Deal Based On The Nippon Playbook Could Look Like An optimal TikTok golden share structure would establish clear American oversight while preserving operational continuity. The framework would likely include: Government Veto Powers: The U.S. golden share would provide presidential authority over critical decisions, including data transfers to foreign entities, algorithm modifications that could affect content delivery to American users, appointment of an American CEO for TikTok U.S., and any partnership agreements involving data sharing or technology transfer. Operational Safeguards: U.S. user data would be stored exclusively on American servers under domestic oversight, with content moderation and privacy protection policies subject to U.S. regulatory approval. The algorithm's core functionality could remain intact, but any modifications affecting American users would require government clearance. Implementation Timeline: Following the Nippon Steel precedent, the deal would include a 120-day closing period to finalize legal documentation and financing arrangements, with the golden share mechanism taking effect immediately upon completion. However, Trump has already indicated this approach faces complications. In May, he stated that any TikTok agreement would 'not mirror' the Nippon Steel arrangement and emphasized that such a deal 'would need Beijing's approval.' Trump's Strategy: Delay, Leverage, Deal Political analysts argue that Trump is using time as leverage – raising tariffs, invoking CFIUS authority, and applying public pressure in order to bring ByteDance to the table. When asked what he thinks the Trump Administration will do, John McEntee commended Trump for not enforcing the law, which he says was 'based on a national security hoax.' The golden share model offers the President a viable path to claim a win that would be positioned as both economic and symbolic: America gets control of TikTok's most sensitive levers while avoiding the political blowback of banning an app used by more than 170 million Americans and the economic engine behind countless U.S.-based small businesses. Contact: Exec Edge Editor@
