Is wealth management too male-dominated?

Wealth management being male heavy doesn't automatically mean it's unfair or built for men. Men and women, on average differ in what they're drawn to in that men lean toward things and systems, women toward people. Finance sits firmly in the numbers and systems camp, so a skew toward men is what you'd expect even in the freest societies. Scandinavia has some of the strongest equality policies anywhere, yet the gender gap in fields like this got wider, not narrower, once people were free to choose. Still, the HSBC data shows that many women clients want a woman across the table. That's a market signal, not a moral failing. Representation matters because trust matters, not because every field needs a 50/50 split. Will more women join? Probably, as the job becomes more relationship driven. But expect movement, not parity.

Yes, wealth management is still too male-dominated, but the bigger problem is that much of the industry was built around a traditionally male picture of wealth.

Women’s financial journeys can look different. Career breaks, maternity, caring responsibilities, longevity and pension gaps can materially change financial planning. Yet women are still too often treated as a niche audience rather than half the population.

Representation matters because financial advice is deeply personal. Clients discuss divorce, bereavement, relationships, children, retirement and financial mistakes. Feeling understood matters.

That does not mean women need female advisers, or that men cannot advise women brilliantly. It means clients deserve choice, and an industry where around four in five advisers are men does not provide enough of it.

I expect that to change. As more women build, control and inherit wealth, wealth management will have to evolve with them.

Wealth management is still too male dominated, both in who works in the industry and, historically, how it has marketed itself. Too much financial communication has assumed the investor is male, even though women control an increasing share of wealth.

Representation matters, not because women need different advice, but because people are more likely to engage with an industry in which they can see themselves. HSBC’s figures suggest that adviser gender matters to a meaningful proportion of women.

The imbalance needs to be addressed. More wealth is passing to women through earnings, entrepreneurship, and inheritance, creating a strong commercial incentive for firms to recruit and retain more female advisers. The firms that fail to adapt risk looking increasingly out of date.

Financial advice is still male-dominated, although FCA research suggests things are moving in the right direction, with women under 50 around twice as well represented as those over 50. I also think there is a distinction between an industry being male-dominated and being deliberately targeted at men.

There are firms that specifically market advice to women, while I am not aware of equivalent firms focused solely on male clients. Employers are also trying to increase female representation.

Given the imbalance, and evidence that some women prefer a female adviser, there are significant opportunities for women entering financial planning. Just last week, a prospective client specifically asked for a female adviser.

Small details matter too. I have previously been thanked for addressing correspondence as “Mrs and Mr” where the woman first contacted us, rather than defaulting to “Mr and Mrs”. We simply treat whoever first contacts us as the first client.