Rethinking Investment in Women-Led Businesses: A Shift from Readiness to Ecosystem Reform
For many years, discussions about investing in women-led businesses have often revolved around familiar explanations—or arguably, excuses—such as the pipeline of women entrepreneurs, their confidence, and whether they are “investment-ready.” However, the narrative is decisively changing. According to Debbie Wosskow and Hannah Bernard, co-chairs of the Invest in Women Taskforce, the focus is no longer on questioning women founders’ readiness but on scrutinizing whether the investment ecosystem itself is truly fit for purpose.
The numbers they are talking about are difficult to ignore.
When the Invest in Women Taskforce launched in 2024, it set an ambitious target: to fundamentally change the flow of capital to women-led businesses across the UK. Hannah Bernard highlights that through concerted collaboration among government entities, financial institutions, and the investment community, the Taskforce has successfully convened £635 million in capital commitments—a figure that more than doubles the original £250 million goal. By 2025, capital deployment was underway, with over £70 million already invested in female-led funds and founders, marking measurable progress from commitment to tangible investment.
Bernard and Wosskow emphasize that this initiative is far from a niche diversity effort or corporate social responsibility side project. Instead, the Taskforce operates as a commercial, systems-focused movement aimed at long-term economic impact.
“Since its inception, the Taskforce has shifted the national dialogue on women’s access to finance,” Bernard explains. “What was once seen largely as a demand-side issue—an assumed shortage of women founders or fund managers—is now widely recognized as a supply-side problem: systemic bias in capital allocation and decision-making.”
Women backing women investment model gains scale
A pivotal development underpinning this shift is the creation of the Women Backing Women Fund of Funds, managed by Bootstrap4F. This fund is notable not only in the UK but globally, being the largest female-led fund of funds with a clear mandate to support female-led and gender-balanced investment teams.
Wosskow highlights the importance of scale in transforming conversation into market correction. “Out of the £635 million funding pool, £130 million pertains to the first close of Bootstrap4F’s landmark Women Backing Women fund,” she says. “This is a truly significant moment for UK investment.”
She is candid about the reasons for this intervention. “Capital reaching women founders has been unacceptably low for too long,” Wosskow asserts. “Decisive action was necessary, which is why we prioritized a fund of funds led by general partners. We also need to support more women founders in building strong commercial track records in this space.”
Both leaders agree that the core issue is not a lack of viable women-led businesses but rather the composition and culture of the investment world itself.
“When walking into a room to pitch for investment, nearly everyone present is male,” Wosskow shares from her extensive experience. This gender imbalance significantly influences where capital flows, a fact backed by data.
“Only 16% of senior investment professionals in the UK are women, yet women are twice as likely to invest in women-led businesses,” she notes. “This persistent underrepresentation helps explain why so many women-led ventures are overlooked.”
UK investment system faces pressure to change
Bernard adds that the problem runs deeper than representation alone. “Deal origination has been fundamentally broken,” she says. “For decades, capital has flowed through male-dominated networks. This creates a structural blind spot, causing the system to miss numerous opportunities by looking repeatedly in the same places.”
This bias extends to the methods used to evaluate businesses. “Women-led companies have historically been assessed using frameworks designed around male entrepreneurs—the messaging investors expect, the pitching cycles rewarded, and the sectors prioritized,” Bernard explains.
Yet, Wosskow and Bernard stress that their work is not about charity or preferential treatment. “Our goal is not to favor women,” Wosskow clarifies. “It is to stop overlooking profitable returns. The fund of funds is a commercial vehicle. Capital has missed opportunities because it keeps looking at the same people.”
The commercial argument is compelling, especially when supported by data. “Women-led businesses generate 35% better returns,” Wosskow notes, underscoring the clear business case for change.
Bernard adds that institutional backing signals a broader market shift. “The collaboration among major UK financial institutions—Barclays, the British Business Bank, M&G plc, and Nationwide—demonstrates that this is a commercially serious proposition.”
However, both acknowledge that early-stage funding is only part of the challenge. “The transition from Seed funding to Series A and beyond is where many women founders stall, and where the funding gap is most acute,” Bernard explains.
Wosskow warns of the broader economic consequences if this gap remains unaddressed. “The cost of inaction could be as high as £250 billion—representing the value that could be added to the UK economy if women entrepreneurs received investment on par with men.”
She also highlights the risk of losing talent to other markets. “Ambitious founders may stop waiting for the UK to catch up. These businesses either stall due to lack of capital and support or seek international markets more willing to recognize and reward their value. The UK cannot afford to let that happen.”
For more in-depth insights on this critical issue and the efforts reshaping the investment landscape for women entrepreneurs, see the full interview Here.
