Every year around Budget time, there’s talk of a Gender Investment Gap. The Gap, and its consequences – not just for women, but for all of us – are real. But if we’re going to close it, then it’s worth looking at the reasons it exists in the first place. 

So what exactly is the Gender Investment Gap?

The gap in the UK between men and women when it comes to investment rose to £678 billion in 2025, roughly the size of the GDP of Switzerland.

As of February 2025, according to research by Boring Money, there are 3.3 million more male investors in the UK than women, with 10 million men investing, compared to just 6.7 million women. The average amount invested, measured by those currently investing, is £70,000 for women and £115,000 for men.

What’s more, while other gender indicators are narrowing, the investment gap appears to be widening. The overall lag widened by 200,000 people in the 12 months between June 2024 and June 2025. Young men are investing at double the rate of young women – 41% of men aged 18-34 invest vs 20% of women.

But what’s behind the phenomenon? 

One factor is a persistent gender pay gap, which means women simply have a harder time clearing their costs and identifying sums that can be invested.

While the UK’s overall gender pay gap has been closing slowly, it remains wide. On average, men earned 13.1% more than women in April 2024 (the latest period published by the Office of National Statistics), down by 1.1% from 14.2% in 2023.

As Monique Wong, Head Of Multi-Asset Portfolio Management at Coutts, says: “While the gender pay gap plays a big role, some of its effects are social.” Because this disparity in pay also has knock-on effects – on families, relationships, homes, life paths, expectations and attitudes.  

If a couple is planning a family, and the male partner is paid more for his job than the woman, things like the amount of salary potentially sacrificed during parental leave mean that the couple are pushed by numbers alone, to delegate the majority of parental leave to the woman.

“That means women are more likely to have their career paths put on hold,” says Monique. “Because they become mothers. Then coming back into employment? Then they might come back into employment, but not into full time employment. And if they do, and their roles require professional certification, they may have to get re-certified (depending on the length of absence and the profession), so it takes even longer to get back to where you would otherwise be. And if you have multiple children – and let’s say there’s an average of 2.3 children? That means just under two-and-a-half times you’re going to have your path interrupted.”

The result is that while men are often able to view their income as a steady upward curve through their lives, often women reckon with a life path that includes periods of immense unpredictability and earnings interruption that their male counterparts rarely have to negotiate.

But they also birth some gender myths. 

For example, the apparent finding that “women in general, have an aversion to risk taking” or are “too cautious to invest” has been the subject of much research, (for example, this study from City St George's, University of London) and has become a cultural commonplace in finance. It is also a false one, according to Alice Ross of the Financial Times.

The lower uptake by women is not some strange habit somehow inherent to women at all. It is an effect of economic distress and anxiety. Women reported far greater economic anxiety than men in the last national Census. This anxiety is part of the cycle: less control over their future path, lower income security, less independence, and ultimately less money to ‘risk’ on investing.

Investment itself has also – historically at least – had an image among the public as a male-coded domain.

Surprisingly, it wasn’t until the mid-1970s that women were even allowed admittance to the London Stock Exchange. This puts a world of literal ‘men-only’ share trading well within the adult lifetime of almost a quarter of the UK population according to the ONS. Even today, the media makes investment sound macho, with its bull markets, bear markets, ‘hard’ versus ‘soft’ investments, and Wall Street Wolves.  

One of the solutions proposed in the Boring Money report is so-called ‘loud investing’ by women – that is, to increase the visibility of women investors among other women, to demonstrate their presence and confidence. As Monique says, “If you can see it, you can be it.”

If that measure was taken up by female investors en masse, estimates the report, the gap could potentially close in just nine years.

But education as early as school is also needed, says Monique Wong. “Part of it the challenge among the wider public has been education without a doubt. Financial education needs to be central in schools, taught as a fundamental life skill.”

The Financial Times’ international economic news editor Alice Ross agrees, writing in the FT’s Financial Inclusion and Literacy Campaign that “Women shouldn’t be allowed [by the finance industry] to think that equities are a daunting prospect any more than girls should be allowed to think that triangles are.”

And if this sounds like a hefty national project, up there with road safety measures and drink awareness, then perhaps it is.

But then, the upside – not just for women, but for the economy as a whole, is hefty too.

Enabling women to invest with greater ease, confidence and fluency, and to grow their capital in the same way as men,  could ultimately mean greater wealth, and greater agency, for all of us. 

Please note: this content has been reviewed for accuracy; however, it does not necessarily reflect the views of the Bank.