Why subjectivity could be the issue when it comes to VCs backing female founders

The 60 funds we surveyed (please let us know if we missed yours)

1835i, Black Sheep Capital, Folklore Ventures, Macdoch Ventures, Shearwater Capital, Tenacious Ventures, Airtree, Brandon Capital, Galileo Ventures, Main Sequence, Side Stage Ventures, Giant Leap, Marbruck Investments, Significant Early Venture Capital, Tenmile, Alberts, Breakthrough Victoria, Gravel Road Ventures, Melt Ventures, NAB Ventures, NAB, Skalata, Skip Capital, Tidal Ventures, Archangel, Network of Funds, Carthona Capital, CP Ventures, Grok Ventures, OIF Ventures, OneVentures, Sprint Ventures, Square Peg, Upswell Ventures, Artesian (Alternative Investments), Ellerston Capital, InterValley Ventures, Rampersand, Touch Ventures, Reinventure Group, Virescent Ventures, BetterLabs, EVP, Investible, Blackbird, Five V Capital, King River Capital, Jelix Ventures, Right Click Capital, Taronga Ventures, Telstra Ventures, Black Nova Venture Capital, Flying Fox Ventures, LUXEM Ventures, Scalare Partners, SecondQuarter Ventures, and TEN13

While 16% is a long way from parity, what’s actually happening in the world of Australian VCs funding women is much better than the media reports and there’s been much progress over the past decade.

It’s interesting that the percentage of companies with female CEOs in Lighter Capital’s Australian portfolio is double that of VC firms.

We believe this has to do with the fact that most VCs cite the quality of the team or founder as the most important factor in their investment decision. This is a subjective measurement with the potential to incorporate unconscious biases.

At Lighter Capital, our decision making process is 100% data driven, so it’s perhaps not surprising that when you take subjectivity out of the equation, a greater percentage of women led businesses receive funding.