Women and Wealth Management: The $10 Trillion Opportunity Firms Are Ignoring

Women are rapidly becoming one of the most powerful forces in global capital—and wealth management is not keeping pace. Women already control roughly one-third of retail financial assets in the U.S. and EU, a share expected to climb to 40–45% by 2030, yet a disproportionate amount of that wealth sits unmanaged or poorly served. For CEOs, asset managers, and policymakers, bringing more women into wealth management is no longer a diversity initiative; it is a strategic growth and performance imperative grounded in hard numbers.​

The scale of women-led wealth

Over the past five years, wealth controlled by women has grown faster than overall financial wealth, with female-controlled assets rising by more than 50% versus about 43% for global wealth overall. In several mature markets, forecasts suggest women could soon hold close to half of national wealth—U.K. estimates point to around 60% of wealth potentially sitting in female hands.​

Yet women are still less likely to work with wealth managers, and when they do, they often disengage: an estimated 53% of assets controlled by women are unmanaged versus 45% for men, implying close to $10 trillion in additional managed assets if female engagement matched male levels by 2030. Many affluent women also hold a high share of savings in cash, sacrificing long-term returns and leaving value on the table for both families and firms.​

Why current models underserve women

The industry’s problem is not a lack of marketing campaigns; it is a mismatch between traditional models and how many women now view money, risk, and advice. Surveys of affluent women show that they often prioritize goals such as financial security, family resilience, and long-term flexibility over narrow benchmark outperformance, while also expecting transparency on fees and impact.​

At the same time, women report lower satisfaction with advisors who default to the male spouse, fail to include them in key decisions, or gloss over education and context. These dynamics matter because women are particularly willing to change advisors if their needs are not met, and their price sensitivity and expectations around service quality have risen sharply in recent years.​

The talent gap inside wealth firms

Wealth management teams still look very different from the client base they are trying to serve. Women account for roughly 23% of financial advisors in the U.S. and under 20% across much of Europe, while global data suggest women fill only around 13–14% of key decision-making roles in asset management and single-digit percentages of CIO positions. In investment management teams more broadly, women’s representation often hovers in the mid-20s, as recent survey work in markets such as Australia confirms.​

The picture at the top is similar: across large and mid-cap companies globally, women hold about a quarter of board seats and roughly 6–7% of CEO roles, with slightly higher representation in CFO positions but still far from parity. These statistics translate into a structural reality: products, processes, and policies are still predominantly designed and approved by male-majority leadership.​

Diversity as a performance lever, not a slogan

The business case for bringing more women into investment decision-making is no longer speculative. A large consulting analysis of funds found that asset managers with a high percentage of women on investment teams outperformed gender-diversity laggards by about 45 basis points annually. An international finance study of private equity and venture capital reported that funds with gender-balanced senior investment teams generated 10–20% higher returns, and portfolio companies with gender-diverse leadership outperformed less diverse peers by up to 25%.​

Other research shows that portfolios run by women match or exceed the performance of those run by men while potentially taking different risk exposures, challenging stereotypes about “underperformance” when women are in charge. For institutional allocators and family offices, ignoring gender balance in the manager selection process now looks less like neutrality and more like a systematic performance blind spot.​

What women want from wealth relationships

Affluent and high-net-worth women increasingly arrive with clear expectations shaped by professional experience and digital-native habits. Surveys of wealthy women show rising financial confidence, growing income and asset bases, and a strong desire for advice that recognizes their full role as economic decision-makers. Many also report that they either have received, or expect to receive, significant inheritances—often around six figures or more—which shifts them from “secondary” to primary financial actors.​

At the same time, women are highly attuned to fees, transparency, and responsiveness. Many keep over 70% of their savings in cash or low-risk holdings, not because of irrational fear, but because the industry has not built sufficient trust, education, or tailored offerings to justify moving up the risk curve. Firms that meet women with education-rich, goals-based, and values-aware advice—rather than product pushing—have a structural advantage.​

Five strategic levers for CEOs and boards

For leaders who control platforms, hiring, and capital allocation, bringing more women into wealth management requires treating gender as a core business strategy. Five levers stand out:

1. Set measurable diversity targets tied to pay: Across investment managers, about 80% report having diversity policies, but less than half attach measurable objectives; leading firms are now setting explicit gender targets and linking progress to leadership KPIs and remuneration.​
2. Build real pipelines, not just lateral hires: Global data show that women represent only a small share of senior investment roles and CIO seats, underscoring the need for early-career sponsorship, rotational programs, and leadership training specifically designed to counter attrition.​
3. Redesign advisor roles for flexibility and longevity: Retention research in financial planning indicates that job satisfaction and flexibility are critical for keeping female advisors in the industry, especially through caregiving-heavy life stages.​
4. Embed inclusive client protocols: Firms that standardize practices like addressing both partners, documenting women’s individual goals, and proactively engaging them around life events such as divorce, widowhood, or entrepreneurship see higher retention of female-controlled assets.​
5. Use data and technology to personalize at scale: Digital platforms now make it possible to tailor communications, education, and portfolio construction to women’s stated preferences around risk, impact, and liquidity, while collecting granular data on behavior and satisfaction.​

Next moves for asset owners and allocators

Large asset owners—sovereign funds, pensions, endowments, family offices—have exceptional leverage over the gender composition of the managers and products they back. Mandating gender-disclosure standards, requiring data on investment-team diversity, and incorporating gender balance into manager scoring frameworks can push the market faster than regulation alone.​

Some allocators already evaluate managers on whether they track gender diversity, set formal targets, and tie leadership incentives to diversity outcomes, as seen in recent surveys where over 70% of firms reported formal diversity targets and more than 80% linked expectations or KPIs to inclusion. As evidence accumulates that gender-balanced teams can deliver equal or better risk-adjusted performance, not applying such lenses looks increasingly like a breach of fiduciary curiosity.​

Policy and regulatory signals that matter

Regulators and policymakers can accelerate change without micromanaging investment decisions. Global governance data show that disclosure requirements, “comply or explain” rules, and soft quotas have collectively nudged women’s representation on boards toward the mid-20% to low-30% range in many markets. Extending similar transparency around senior investment roles, pay gaps, and promotion rates would give markets better tools to price governance quality and long-term risk.​

Policymakers can also incentivize inclusive finance by supporting initiatives that expand women’s access to formal financial services, as demonstrated by inclusive finance networks that now reach tens of millions of women with tailored products and policies. Combined with broader labor-market gains—such as narrowing income gaps and improved female participation—these measures increase the flow of women into both the client and talent pools of wealth management.​

For firms that move first

The core question for CEOs, CIOs, and board chairs is no longer whether diversity is a moral good; the evidence now frames it as a competitive variable in capital markets. Women’s share of global wealth is rising, their expectations are higher, and their willingness to switch providers is real—yet much of their capital still sits in cash or outside traditional advisory relationships.​

Firms that bring more women into wealth management—both as clients and as decision-makers—stand to capture new assets, improve performance, and build franchises that look like the next generation of wealth. Those that do not will watch a growing pool of female-led wealth go elsewhere.

Women and wealth management – key indicators