Closing the gap in health interventions between men and women could add $1tn to the global gross domestic product (GDP) – unlocking seven additional healthy years for women and expanding workforce potential.

Despite this economic potential, women’s health remains underfunded, with major disparities in research and investment.

A research collaboration between McKinsey & Company and the World Economic Forum found that while women live longer than men, they spend 25% more of their lives in debilitating conditions. This directly impacts productivity, with 60% of the gap occurring during prime working years (20-60 years of age), accounting for 80% of the economic burden on GDP.

Despite this clear business case, investment in women’s health is still seen as niche. Dame Lesley Regan, women’s health ambassador for England, pushed back against this perception at the Royal Society of Medicine’s Innovation in Women’s Health And Femtech meeting on 3 March 2025: “Whenever anyone says that you just have to shout at them. How can 51% of the population be a niche market?”

Funding disparities in women

At the meeting, McKinsey partner Anouk Petersen laid out a stark funding reality. Conditions affecting women uniquely, such as endometriosis or premenstrual syndrome (PMS), receive disproportionately low investment.

“Simply, the standard of care for women is vastly missing,” stated Petersen. She highlighted that research funding rarely aligns with disease burden, for example, PMS, which affects 5% of the population at any given time, receives “virtually no research”. Endometriosis receives eight to ten times less funding than diabetes, despite their prevalence being similar at about 10% of the population.

Petersen outlined a five-step blueprint for closing this gap, focusing on investment, data collection, and equality.

Breaking the investment cycle

Beyond research funding, venture capital investment in women’s health startups is lagging. Afua Basoah, a healthtech venture capital investor at Fern Capital Group, highlighted that only 2.2% of venture funds are led by women, despite female-led businesses outperforming male-led ones by 35%. At this rate, gender economic parity would take 250 years, according to the World Economic Forum.

However, Regan highlighted that in England, things have started to change in women’s health. This is potentially due to myth-busting reports such as McKinsey’s and new political leadership.

“What we’re seeing in the women’s health space at the moment is just the tip of the iceberg,” Basoah stated. “There is real potential to reinvigorate our economy.”

Yet, many women’s health startups struggle to attract funding due to misconceptions among traditional investors. “Too niche, too complex, too risky” are common rejections, according to Basoah. However, she argues these labels actually highlight the sector’s potential.

“Too complex?” This complexity creates a high barrier to entry, providing a competitive edge for innovative startups. “Too risky?” In venture capital, risk often translates to “high reward and high returns,” explained Basoah.

Despite slow progress, Basoah sees momentum building: “This space is exciting. The evaluations are getting larger, and we certainly see the potential is huge.”