We expected a confidence gap. We found a design gap.

In 2025, we started asking a simple question: why aren't more women investing in venture capital funds?

Not as founders. That conversation is well-documented. As Limited Partners. The people who write the cheques that fund the funds.

Six months later, with respondents from 21 countries, I think we got a more useful answer than the one we expected. We expected to find a confidence gap. The data shows something else.

8 in 10 say they're ready to invest in venture capital today. Almost none have a way in. Almost none have been told where to start. The barrier isn't confidence. It's a design gap. The LP layer between angel cheques and institutional fund commitments hasn't been built.

IT'S NOT CONFIDENCE. IT'S DESIGN.

Before we ran the survey, the working assumption I'd built up across a lot of conversations was that the answer would be some mix of confidence, knowledge, or risk appetite. Get women more comfortable with the asset class, and the participation gap closes. The data didn't back that up.

76% of respondents come from finance, VC, or angel investing backgrounds. The confidence-scale gap between active LPs and explorers is 0.38 points on a five-point scale. Basically noise. And the famous cliff (94% would invest at €10K, 38% at €100K) doesn't show a willingness gap. It shows a regulated ticket size that almost no fund actually offers. And the bigger frame: 81% of respondents want in. 3.6% have a way. A 77-point access gap that confidence can't explain.

So if it isn't confidence, what is it? It's a design gap. Specifically: ticket sizes set above where most of this capital actually sits, regulatory tiers where a €10K position in a diversified VC fund triggers higher friction than a €50K position in a single startup, FoF concentration preferences that filter out smaller cheques before discovery even starts, and a network-gated discovery layer where the people who hear about funds are mostly the people who already know other LPs.Not just women. Not just VC.

Not just women. Not just VC.

This isn't a women-in-VC story. It's a missing-layer-of-European-VC story. Sub-€100K LP capital is where most emerging LPs want to start. It's also where a lot of operators, angels, and family-office juniors sit.

Feeder funds, syndicates, and pooled vehicles do exist. But they're scattered, network-gated, and rarely surface outside an existing LP circle. And VC fund LP investing isn't angel investing. 10-year lockups, real loss risk, slow capital return. The bar is real. The demand is too. 80% of respondents are interested in a pooled structure. 72% prefer pooled over direct. The supply hasn't been built for the entry tier.

This is a snapshot, not an answer. A start, not the last word. The point isn't that Pathways has solved anything. The point is that we're now measuring it, together with 15 partners. We hope everyone working on this takes part in what comes next.

THREE ASKS

There's real capital looking for a way in. The market exists. The product hasn't been built.

Here are three things I'm asking the people who design this layer to do next. The full report goes deeper, with audience-specific recommendations for GPs, LPs, FoFs, ecosystem, and policy.

1. Measure what's missing.

   No European body currently tracks LP diversity. Preqin, Invest Europe, the national VC associations all measure GP-side composition extensively. The LP side has been a data void. That void protects no one. It also costs FoFs the ability to read GP LP-base concentration as a portfolio risk signal, which matters more, not less, as the cycle keeps testing how stable funds' capital sources actually are. The fix is procedural, not philosophical: make LP-base composition a routine diligence question, the way LP geography or vintage already is. What gets measured gets managed. What isn't measured can't be priced.
   

   "This data makes clear that the issue isn't a lack of diverse capital, but a lack of access."

   Meghan Stevenson-Krausz, CEO, Diversity VC
   

2. Design for the entry tier.

   60% of respondents cite minimum ticket size as the #1 barrier. Twice the next factor. Most have the wealth to invest more. They want a smaller way in first. That's a fund-design choice, not a market constraint. Lower-ticket structures already exist: feeder funds, pooled vehicles, syndicate layers. They need broader distribution, not just network-gated access. A €25K LP today is a €100K allocator in five years and a €500K commitment in a decade. This is a graduation path, not a destination. GPs who treat it that way build a more diversified, more durable LP base than GPs who don't.
   

   "Experienced women who want to invest in funds but are locked out by EUR 100K minimums and network-gated access. This research has measured what the industry has preferred not to see."

   Matt Penneycard, Co-founding Partner, Ada Ventures
   

3. Make the pathway visible.

   82% of respondents have never received guidance from a bank or wealth manager on VC investing. Fund discovery runs almost entirely on personal networks. If you're not already connected, you don't hear about opportunities. The fix has two parts. First, surface the diverse LPs who already exist, so aspiring LPs can see the pathway is real. Second, build the structured education and community on-ramps that personal networks have so far monopolised. Pathways aren't aspirational when they're invisible. They're aspirational when they're named.
   

   "Diversity in the LP industry is worse than in VC itself. The first step for change is always data — and we need recognition of the diverse LPs that already exist to show that there is a pathway available to aspiring LPs."

   Anisah Osman Britton, Unlock VC

One program already exists. The LP Institute runs a two-month cohort for accredited investors exploring fund-LP investing. Small, peer-led, invitation-based. They've kindly extended their application deadline for the Pathways audience. Mention FOV on the form. The answer to "what does a pathway look like?" should be a real program, not a report or a blog post.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT

This is only the beginning. The data is published. The asks are concrete. What happens next depends on whether the people who design the LP layer treat its current shape as a market opportunity or a market failure.

I think it's an opportunity. The capital is there. The interest is there. Nobody has built the structures around it yet.

Read the full report below.