Sarah Turner’s Post

A recent study reveals a troubling reality for #femalefounders in femtech: they face significant funding disparities compared to their male counterparts. Even in female-focused industries, women struggle to secure the same #investment, especially when using advocacy language like “empower” or “equality.” The research shows that male founders receive more #funding when pitching the same ideas. If we want true #innovation in #women’shealth, we must address the gender bias in venture capital. But what can be done to address this? 1️⃣ Diversify Investors: Increasing diversity among VCs is key. Research shows that female and diverse investors are more likely to back women-led companies. 2️⃣ Rethink Pitch Language: Women founders can adapt language to emphasize financial potential while still advocating for social #impact. 3️⃣ Investor Education: Encourage investors to undergo training on #unconsciousbiases, especially in sectors like #femtech where these biases are pervasive. 4️⃣ Public Support for Women-Led Startups: Investors should commit to backing more women #founders, especially in sectors like #healthcare where they bring unique insights. Read more👇 https://lnkd.in/eau8qsau

This is so disheartening. We need to do better. Investors need to catch themselves and be self-aware enough to know when they are exhibiting this bias. We can't excuse this behavior - it needs to be called out and addressed. Femtech needs innovation and female innovators, full stop. New research shows: "Healthcare technology designed to target a wide range of women’s issues is less likely to get funding if there is a woman on the founding team, according to research. Female founders of femtech products are also less likely to secure funding if they use “advocacy” words in their funding applications, including “women’s rights”, “take control” or “freedom”, the analysis showed. Male femtech founders, however, can benefit from increased investment if they use the same words." 😡 https://lnkd.in/gpychkTY #femtech #femalefounders #startups #women #Innovation #entrepreneurship #Investors #angelinvestors #entreprenuers

Why do companies with male founders often receive more funding than those led by women? Here’s an anecdotal insight. A frustrating bias persists: women founders are frequently perceived as less profit-focused, with their businesses labeled as “passion projects” rather than scalable, high-growth ventures. Investors often assume women prioritize impact over profit, despite plenty of evidence proving otherwise. This outdated view ignores women’s proven ability to lead profitable companies and keeps female-led ventures underserved by essential capital. We need a sociological deep-dive into why women’s businesses are often dismissed as “side hustles,” “vanity projects,” or “hobbies,” underestimating the dedication, hard work, and talent they bring to their work.

🚨 Women’s health tech startups are ‘less likely’ to secure funding if a woman is on the founding team or if they use the terms "women's rights"—a headline I never wanted to read in 2024, and one I never want to see again. This isn't news to me. I bootstrapped my previous company, Gapsquare, because it focused on exactly that: developing SaaS solutions to advance women’s rights in the workplace, specifically pay. And despite the lack of funding, it became a successful business, with top-tier clients, acquired by a FTSE100 company. So, all those investors? They missed out on great returns. 💡 It’s time to call out VCs who back male-led apps in femtech, while countless incredible women founders are creating equally (if not more) innovative solutions. Who’s ready to start the list - DM me names of investors and I will add them to the list 💬👇 #Femtech #WomenInTech #StartupLife #VCFunding #WomenEntrepreneurs #EqualityInBusiness #InvestmentBias #PayEquity #FundingGap #DiversityMatters #Innovation

Mad stuff... Women’s health tech ‘less likely’ to get funding if woman is on founding team. Research also shows pitches from female founders less likely to succeed if using phrases such as ‘women’s rights’. The hurdles facing women behind femtech phenomenon; Amelia Hill writing in The Guardian. “The depressing message is that even when you’re working in an area where 75% of companies are founded by women, and you’ve developed a product aimed specifically at women, having a woman on your founding team – even when she’s paired with a male counterpart – damages your chance of getting funding,” said Ludovica Castiglia a researcher working in partnership with FemHealth Insights, a consultancy firm specialising in women’s health and femtech. “Instead of regarding female entrepreneurs in one of the most female-dominated sectors in the startup world as a positive, potential investors frequently see them as a negative and withhold funding as a result,” she said. The findings have been described as “deeply demoralising but not surprising” by funders who specialise in supporting female startups. Kirsten Connell who co-leads a team funding early-stage startups for Octopus Ventures, said: “Femtech might be for women, by women, but the funders are still largely men who don’t understand the scale of the problems femtech sets out to solve or the incredible financial returns on offer. “These gendered assumptions feed into men getting more funding, even if they produce femtech products and use the same words.” Dr Brittany Barreto, Ph.D. the founder of Femhealth Insights, said lack of funding was one of the most significant challenges that femtech companies faced. “Gender bias in funding is a primary barrier to femtech innovation,” she said. “This research is really important. It proves that even when it comes to women’s bodies, investors trust men more than women to get the job done.” read more below: The Guardian #womenleadership #femalefounders #femtech #womensrights #funding #systemschange #research #femaleentrepreneurs read more below: https://lnkd.in/exDYMqJB

New research has shown that healthtech products for women are less likely to get funding if there is a woman on the founding team 😠 Female founders of femtech products (short for female technology) are also less likely to secure funding if they use “advocacy” terms in their funding applications, such as “women’s rights”, “take control” or “freedom”, the analysis showed. Male femtech founders, however, can benefit from increased investment if they use the same words. FemHealth Insights, a US consultancy firm specialising in women’s health and femtech, also found that since 2010, female-founded femtech companies in the UK, US and Canada have raised 23% less capital on average for each deal, compared with similar, male-founded companies. Researcher Ludovica Castiglia conducted an online experiment by submitting identical startups to participants with investment experience, with the pitch coming from fake founders of different sexes. “When the femtech idea was pitched by a woman, the investor admitted they saw the founder more as a feminist who prioritised social impact at the expense of financial returns than the man. This perception may explain why investors tend to award less funding to female funders of femtech companies,” she said. Read more in The Guardian: https://loom.ly/eM93UrQ

Women’s health tech ‘less likely’ to get funding if a woman is on founding team. Our south west founders buck this trend, perhaps our investors are more aware that gender doesn’t dictate ambition. Research also shows pitches from female founders less likely to succeed if using phrases such as ‘women’s rights’, though male founders benefit from using these phrases. “When the femtech idea was pitched by a woman, the investor admitted they saw the founder more as a feminist who prioritised social impact at the expense of financial returns than the man. This perception may explain why investors tend to award less funding to female funders of femtech companies,” she said. Thanks to Ludovica Castiglia for the research. Celebrating our south-west femtech founders Dr Chen Mao Davies, Anya, Frances Lucraft, Grace & Green, Kira Goode, Eleria and all those who back them.

The femtech market, targeting half the global population and valued at $𝟮𝟴 𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗼𝗻, is projected to reach $𝟲𝟬 𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗯𝘆 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟳. Yet, it receives a mere 𝟭-𝟮% of total health technology funding, and between 2011 and 2021, only 4% of new medical technology drugs for female-specific health conditions were approved in the US. Companies face crippling censorship, with 100% of surveyed femtech firms reporting challenges like denied bank accounts and product listings banned for using “vagina,” while male counterparts sail through. Investing in femtech isn’t just a moral imperative; it’s a savvy business decision that we can no longer ignore! #FemTech #EquityInHealth #WomenInBusiness

"Women’s health tech ‘less likely’ to get funding if woman is on founding team Research also shows pitches from female founders less likely to succeed if using phrases such as ‘women’s rights’ ‘Huge disadvantage’: the hurdles facing women behind femtech phenomenon" Amelia Hill Tue 8 Oct 2024  The Guardian "#Healthcare #technology designed to target a wide range of #women’s issues is less likely to get funding if there is a #woman on the founding team, according to # research. #Female #founders of #femtech products – short for #female #technology – are also less likely to secure #funding if they use “#advocacy” words in their funding applications, including “women’s rights”, “take control” or “freedom”, the analysis showed. #Male femtech founders, however, can benefit from increased investment if they use the same words, found Ludovica Castiglia, a #researcher working in partnership with FemHealth Insights, a consultancy firm specialising in women’s #health and femtech." ... "Castiglia analysed 1,720 funding agreements made by 513 #venture-backed femtech companies in #UK, #US and #Canada for her study, The Cassandra Curse: The Liability of Identity-Issue Fit in Femtech. She found that a “shocking number” of cases of femtech companies run by women received less #financing compared with similar companies run by men."... https://lnkd.in/edvTbsZT

Feels like a constant uphill battle doesn’t it… I’ve said it countless times and will keep shouting it: the only way we can make a systemic change is by GROWING THE POOL OF DIVERSE CHEQUE WRITERS 💰 Kirsten Connell highlights the issue well in this article “Femtech might be for women, by women, but the funders are still largely men who don’t understand the scale of the problems femtech sets out to solve or the incredible financial returns on offer.” Women investors understand women’s issues and fund women’s ventures. We need MORE CAPITAL. More women investing - at angel level, at fund level, at institutional level. 🤜 For all the founders reading these articles and all the stats, I know it’s demoralising but KEEP GOING! You are building much more resilient businesses and you will be successful. Not all businesses need VC capital to grow and succeed. Our Alma Angels invest in over 50 deals a year and there are more and more communities and syndicates building for you ⁉️if your syndicate or fund invests in WOMEN-LED #femtech, comment here!