Why do we react so negatively to “for women?”
by Sallie Krawcheck
When Ellevest was just an idea, and the team totaled about five of us, we surveyed 1,900 women to ask them what they thought about the idea of an investment platform for women. I’m telling you, we couldn’t wait to get the results.
And 55% of you thought it was a good, even great, idea. And 45% of you…well…didn’t. At all. We were deflated. That is, until we explained why women’s longer lifespans and different salary curves require a unique approach, and all of a sudden 90% of you warmed up to the idea.
Same thing when we started posting ads on Facebook, like this one:
Some of the initial comments included doozies like this:
• “What the $%^& does that mean?’ my little lady brain can’t understand maths!!”
• “… because we can’t possibly handle the stress of managing our investments through the same brokers as those super-smart men. -_____-”
• “I’m surprised you didn’t use glitter and throw in something about how women only need to know about money until they find a man.”
Interesting, right?
There are a lot of assumptions in those responses, and not one is “Wow, it’s for women; it must be smarter” or even “Wow, it’s for women. I’ll bet it’s different in a good way.”
Here at Ellevest, we’ve built a financial planning program and use investment algorithms that take into account women’s longer lifespans and that our salaries grow differently than men’s. Both really matter. And we work to get you to your goals — or better — in 70% of markets with portfolios built using sophisticated techniques specifically suited for investing toward these goals; this is higher than other advisors. From my experience, Ellevest is a significant advancement over what was on offer even a couple of years ago (see our white papers on how we invest and how we forecast); we have four patents pending.
So, dumbed down? No. Tailored to women — in a good way? Yes.
Then what is it about “for women” that drives us nuts? Has it been this?
We’ve been conditioned to believe that “for women” is inferior or a gimmick.
But in the case of investing, one gender simply does not fit all. Might we even agree that not taking gender-specific differences into account results in an inferior experience for us? And that it can put us at risk of outliving our money? And that the gender investing gap can cost us hundreds of thousands, or even millions, of dollars over our lives? So it can substantially impact the lives we lead.
What’s even crazier is that if someone says you “invest like a woman,” it’s actually a compliment. Women have been shown to trade less, take a longer-term view of their investments and to be less…I’m going to say it…emotional in investing than the guys are, on average. And these in turn have led to higher returns, on average, for women than for men. This is true for both professional and individual investors.
So we’re all about closing the gender investing gap. But if we can also make just a little dent in the perception that “for women” doesn’t have to be “dumbed down,” that would be good too.
And if you’re prepping for your year-end review or looking ahead to your next sit-down with your boss, see Chapter 1 in our new guidebook Mind the Gap — and Close It: The Ellevest Guide to Dominating Your Financial Future. The gender pay gap can cost you hundreds of thousands over the course of your career. It’s one worth working to close.
