[ng12]

> Consider that the percentage of VC deals with female-founded companies is 5.4% and yet they receive only 2.2% of VC dollars

Stats like this are so useless. Obviously if males make up 95% of the pool they're more likely to have founded some of the unicorns, therefore skewing the average. If one of the 5% of females founded a unicorn I bet they'd have a greater share of VC dollars.

[jakelazaroff]

The reason that companies become unicorns is that VCs invest in them at a certain valuation. You have cause and effect reversed. If VCs are underinvesting in female-founded companies, it's entirely expected that fewer of those companies will become unicorns.

[ng12]

I'm not talking about cause and effect, I'm talking about a lazy misapplication of statistics to bolster a talking point.

[jakelazaroff]

How can you separate them? Lack of female-founded unicorns is a direct consequence of underinvestment in female-founded companies.