Differences in Pitch Feedback for Male vs Female Founders

"Are you dating anyone?" “What was your childhood like?" "What is your timeline on kids, do you want them?" A VC asked me these during due diligence. After a month of meetings with this fund, I was promised a term sheet for Wednesday. But Tuesday night, I got a last-minute call—they wanted to “get to know me better.” That's when the personal questions came. Wednesday arrived—no term sheet. By Friday—still nothing. Three weeks later—ghosted. Being promised a term sheet and not receiving one is bad enough. I'm not naïve—I know it's never real until the money's in the account. But this felt different. This felt personal. Weeks later, still ghosted, I kept wondering: What did I say wrong? Should I have lied about wanting kids? Nothing had changed about the business—just their questions about me. At first, I told myself: VCs invest in people, especially pre-seed. There's nothing wrong with getting to know the founders. But let me ask: Male founders—have you EVER been asked about your dating life or future kids during diligence? Not as casual small talk—but with clear intent with several follow-up questions? I never wanted to play the "female founder card." I grew up in a male-dominated household. Worked in finance—mostly men, never minded it. I always played the same game, on the same field. But after years of fundraising as a sole female founder, my perspective changed. Even my male CTO left one of our investor meetings shocked: "I've never been asked those questions in all my years." Here's what I've learned: Male founders get: "How will you grow revenue?" (promotion — assumes success). Female founders get: "How will you avoid losing revenue?" (prevention — assumes failure). The data backs it up: 67% of questions to men are promotion-oriented; only 34% for women. Founders asked promotion questions raise 7× more. Now let me be clear - I don't mind prevention questions. Learning to reframe and get back on offense. I love the challenge. I love the game. BUT the data shows a clear gender difference—and there shouldn't be. 👉 To founders: when prevention questions come, pivot back to offense. 👉 To investors: pause and ask—would I frame this the same way to a male founder - or in this case- would I even ask this type of question? That investor? Never heard from them again. That term sheet? Never came. But what's meant for you will find you. If you stay focused on building a sound business—rooted in value, strong economics, and mission. We eventually raised from partners who saw the vision, believed in our team, and trusted us to execute. And as for the things we can't control—that's why I'm telling this story. Because awareness is the first step to change. Have other founders experienced something similar? I'd love to hear.

Flo Health is the world's first femtech unicorn (yay) but it's also founded and funded by men (hmm) It's great that women's health is gaining more recognition, given the vast inequality in funding, research, and focus... BUT It also exposes a huge problem with the startup ecosystem. → Just 2% of global VC funding goes to women (WEF) → Women's presence on pitches is *neutral at best* and becomes negative when women don't embody typically female traits (Harvard) → Investors prefer pitches presented by men - when presented with two identical pitches, 68% funded the startup pitched by a man and 31% funded the exact same startup pitched by a woman (Harvard) → 83% of investment committees have no female members (British Business Bank) Women are discriminated against at all stages of the investment process. → Women are asked more negative questions around risk and worst-case scenarios, whereas men are asked about opportunity and opportunity (Harvard) → Women have to fight against preconceptions, we are judged more frequently, and held to higher standards (Yale) Ultimately, people with the most privilege raise the most money, and I count myself in that bucket as I am a white, privately educated female. → Just 0.5% of funding goes to black founders (WEF) → 79% of VC Seed funding for diverse founders (which is a tiny amount) goes to white women (BBG Ventures) There is SO much inequality in the startup world, and it's talked about but never taken seriously. Instead, female founders are assumed to be running businesses that aren't VC-backable, or that there just aren't enough of us. This is an uncomfortable topic, but the only way we can improve this system is to educate people about the huge inequality that exists in a sector awash with bonkers amounts of capital. Flexa #Startups #Fundraising #Inequality

An investor once did 30 reference calls on me, behind my back. And surprise, surprise… not all the feedback was glowing. It was soul-crushing. I kept asking myself, why did it hurt so much? I was proud of my accomplishments, and I valued my relationships. Did being liked really matter? Then I realized: it wasn’t just about trust. It was about bias. Kristen Rae Pucci said something recently that really stuck with me: “Some people simply don’t like you because your existence reinforces that they need to do better.” For male founders, reference calls are a formality. For female founders, they feel like an investigation. “Is she difficult?” “Can she handle pressure?” “Do you like working with her?” We never ask those questions about men. And we know women are 1.5x more likely to receive negative personality feedback in performance reviews with words like abrasive, emotional, intense. Men get decisive, visionary, strategic. Or in investor terms = founder material. So I can’t help but wonder, if we’re still doing unsolicited “character” reference calls on female founders… are we just institutionalizing the same bias? Because here’s the reality: Women-founded startups still receive less than 2% of venture funding. Maybe the problem isn’t the pipeline. Maybe we need to find new ways to evaluate.

"Your AI pitch is impressive... for a woman." 🤢 I heard it in investor meetings. Saw it in term sheets. Felt it in every handshake. The reality about being a woman in AI: They don't just question your company. They question your competence. What they don't tell you: ➡️ Late-night product release reviews ➡️ Explaining basic tech to men who assume you're non-technical ➡️ Being the only woman in rooms full of "visionaries" ➡️ Fighting for legitimacy while others fight for funding The price of female founders: • Double the scrutiny • Half the trust • Triple the preparation • Quarter of the funding My reality check: ❌ Being brilliant isn't enough ❌ Being technical isn't enough ❌ Being successful isn't enough You also have to be: ✅ Twice as prepared ✅ Three times as confident ✅ Four times as resilient Because when you're a woman in AI: Every pitch is a test. Every meeting is a proof point. Every success is "surprising." To every woman building in High Tech: Your battle isn't just about funding. It's about changing the game. Stay technical. Stay fierce. Stay you. Follow Eva Karnaukh for AI, Voice & Dialogue ➕ Subscribe: https://lnkd.in/ewZTxFcE

The VC system is rigged against women. I'm done pretending otherwise. 2% of funding goes to female founders.  Not 20%. Not 12%. TWO percent 🤯 That's not a pipeline problem. It's the system working exactly as designed. The reality of pitching as a female founder is: Man: "How big could this get?" Woman: "What happens when you want babies?" Man: "Tell me about your vision" Woman: "Are you sure you can handle the pressure?" Man: "Who else is investing?" Woman: "Is your co-founder doing the real work?" It could be the same pitch deck. But it'll be an entirely different interrogation. VCs aren't cartoon villains. They're smart people trapped in a broken system. Here's what they don't say out loud: They're not betting on your business. They're betting on whether OTHER VCs will fund you next. And since 98% of funding goes to men... Betting on women is "career risk." So I said f*ck it. Bootstrapped to $20M revenue. THEN raised $10M years later - on my terms. To every female founder reading this: The system won't change fast enough for your dreams. Build anyway. Build angry. Build to prove them catastrophically wrong. Nothing changes minds like a strong P&L 💪🏽 Fellow female founders - what questions did YOU get? 👇🏽

'Why can’t women raise money? It’s not because they don’t perform: statistics suggest women are actually better at running businesses. Research by entrepreneurship group The Kauffman Foundation found that female-led tech teams generated a 35 per cent higher return on investment than all-male teams. When First Round Capital, the venture capital (VC) firm, analysed its 300 investments over ten years, it found that the female-founded firms it backed had performed 63 per cent better than its all-male businesses. One key reason for the discrepancy is that men back men. Male investors are half as likely to fund a woman as a female investor would be, according to Kauffman research. And only about 5 per cent of angel and VC investors across Europe are women. Venture capital funds need to be wary of “investor homophily”, according to Marta Zaccagnini, European manager for Village Capital. She defines this as “the tendency to invest in people who are similar to oneself”. “Investors struggle to allocate funds to women-led companies due to the lack of diversity within their own ranks,” she said. Research shows that when a female founder walks into a VC boardroom, investors quiz her about risk. When a man does the same, the questions focus on growth. “When I was pitching, I faced ‘what if?’ questions and worst-case scenarios, while male founders were asked about vision and growth,” said Janthana Kaenprakhamroy, whose insurance firm for the self-employed, Tapoly, is now valued at £10 million. “This shifts the discussion toward the positive and made it more likely for them to secure funding.” Lucy Tobin The Sunday Times https://lnkd.in/eexTcyKv #FundFemaleFounders

The 2% statistic about women's VC funding is shocking, but the reason behind it will make you rethink how investment decisions are actually made. When people first hear that stat, they assume it's because fewer women are fundraising. That's partially true- women are 13% of startup founders in the US. So in a fair system, they should get 13% of funding, not 2%. But here's what's really happening behind closed doors. A Columbia study analyzed nearly 2,000 investor questions and found that  VCs ask fundamentally different questions based on gender. Men get promotion questions: "How will you capture this massive market opportunity?" Women get prevention questions: "How will you defend against competitors if growth stalls?" Startups asked promotion questions raised 7x more funding than those asked prevention questions. Every prevention question cost entrepreneurs $3.8 million in potential funding. Whether the VC was male or female, this bias exists - it's industry-wide, not individual prejudice. Women who flipped prevention questions into promotion-focused answers raised 14x more money. As investors, lets recognize that the questions we ask shape the answers we get - and the funding that follows. So, what questions are you asking? #venturecapital #womenfounders #VC Image: female-founders org