Bringing the challenges into focus3 Parity in capital allocation can be boosted at identifiable nodes – who gets in the room, how risk is assessed, which instruments are offered and who holds decision rights. Addressing these nodes is the fastest route to a more balanced and efficient market.Reducing recipient frictions and allocator concentration can unlock a new wave of resilient growth. As shown in Section 2, women’s representation in private equity and venture capital remains consistently below the broader financial industry average, and the gaps are even more pronounced in roles defining financial and relational powers. These gender imbalances can mean mandate setting and deal selection circulate within homogenous networks, reinforcing existing patterns and limiting the diversity of capital allocation. Product design, distribution and communications still reflect a historical default, muting engagement even as women hold a growing share of wealth.16 Decision rights remain concentrated where mandates are written and final sign-offs occur. Within this environment, capital recycles through familiar circles: pattern-matching defines who is deemed “fit”, narrowing deal flow and reinforcing selection bias.17 At the asset-owner level, many LPs still lack explicit gender criteria in manager selection and monitoring, weakening incentives for GPs to diversify teams and investment committees. In a global survey of 400 institutional investors, almost half said senior-team diversity matters more than short-term returns when choosing funds.18 Yet practice lags behind principle: an emerging-markets study found that while around 75% of investors view gender diversity as important, only about 25% actually ask about it during due diligence.19 Crucially, the consequences of these allocator-side frictions extend beyond women: when allocator power concentrates, markets under-discover opportunities, over-concentrate exposures and slow the diffusion of frontier technologies – reducing growth and resilience for everyone.3.1 Who holds decision rights Women founders and CEOs currently face systemic barriers at every stage of the capital pipeline. At the entry point, access to investors still depends heavily on “warm introductions”, so qualified entrepreneurial teams without those ties struggle to get meetings. Furthermore, early screening often favours familiar resumes and backgrounds, which means strong women-led firms may be overlooked for not fitting the usual demographic pattern even when fundamentals are strong.20 How risk is assessed: Due diligence, collateral and signalling Due diligence and credit processes often set higher evidence and collateral bars for women-led firms than for comparable male peers. At entry point, women-led companies are more likely to be asked for extra proof, more collateral and longer timelines, adding cost and delay.21 Even when women secure early funding, not all capital is equal: “smart” capital from experienced, reputable investors professionalizes young firms, speeds commercialization and certifies quality to later rounds and public markets, whereas passive “pure cash” lacks these spillovers.22 Consistent with this, companies backed by top- tier/experienced VCs attract stronger follow-on and enjoy better exit odds, and founders will even accept lower valuations to affiliate with high-reputation investors for their governance, recruiting and signalling advantages.23 3.2 Who gets in the room Transforming Capital for the Next Era: Gender Parity and the Expansion of the Investable Frontier 13

Transforming Capital for the Next Era 2025