Finding LGBTQ-Focused Investments Can Be Difficult. Here’s Where to Begin.
By ROB CSERNYIK
Wed, Jun 26, 2024 12:15pm
5 min
5 min
While nearly half of U.S. investors surveyed by Morgan Stanley want to invest in companies led by or making products and services for the LGBTQ community, these investments are difficult to find unless you know where to look.
Several LGBTQ-focused ETFs failed in recent years due to lack of investment, though stock investors can still put money in firms with openly queer leadership, such as Tim Cook at Apple. While opportunities for LGBTQ investments stretch across asset classes—startups attract the most attention.
For an answer as to whether this strategy can be successful, look at Grindr. One of the most prominent LGBTQ startups, the social networking app went public in 2022 and has a US$1.78 billion market cap today.
“Almost in every industry that exists, there is an LGBTQ person building [a company],” says Jackson Block, CEO of New York-based LGBT+ VC, a nonprofit addressing investment in the LGBTQ community. This means wide-ranging opportunities to invest in privately-held LGBTQ companies.
Identifying such investments often centres on two key criteria, says William Burckart, co-founder of Colorful Capital, a venture capital firm that invests in early-stage LGBTQ startups: Investors want to know whether someone in the community leads the company or if they are the target market for products and services.
Individuals and families can invest directly in companies getting off the ground or in a growing number of niche funds. Colorful Capital and Gaingels are among several firms that have formed specifically to address a longstanding lack of opportunities for LGBTQ startup founders. Others, like Backstage Capital or Elevate Capital, focus on underserved founders more broadly, including those who are LGBTQ.
According to research from StartOut, a San Francisco-headquartered LGBTQ entrepreneurship nonprofit, only 0.5% of venture funding goes to LGBTQ founders, yet they create 44% more exits, where equity investors earn capital gains through the sale or stock listing of the company, and 114% more patents than the average founder.
Colorful Capital chose to invest in seed- and early-stage funding after determining it was the “glaring gap” that needed to be filled based on conversations with LGBTQ founders, says Burckart.
Backstage Capital and Gaingels, which are syndicates with multiple investors, will support companies at several stages of development. Meanwhile, Elevate Capital, which counts 7% of founders it supports as LGBTQ, offers three funds for investors depending on what stage of investment and type of business they are interested in.
There are economic reasons to consider LGBTQ investments: Multiple studies show correlations between diversity among firm leadership and company performance as measured by internal rates of return, risk management factors, and firm valuations. “From a purely financial benefits perspective, there’s real value in beginning to embrace and integrate that kind of diverse thinking,” Burckart says.
Gaingels, whose members have invested more than US$800 million since 2019, principally invests in health, fintech, and enterprise software, according to Dealroom.co. Recent deals include taking part in a post-seed, series A funding round for San Francisco-based social care platform Grayce and a seed-funding round for Menlo Park, Calif.-based financial community platform AfterHour.
More than 70 unicorns—firms that have reached US$1 billion valuations—have been funded at different stages by Gaingels. These include Seattle-based, goal-oriented telehealth platform Ro and Dapper Labs, a Vancouver-based digital games and entertainment firm.
Block, whose organisation has a mission to educate, train, and mobilize 10,000 LGBTQ and ally investors by 2030, suggests wealthy investors enter the venture capital fray by becoming a limited partner in a fund. This allows investors to get involved with less risk and comparatively steady return expectations compared to angel investing.
Geographically, many LGBTQ companies attracting investment are North American, though regional funds exist in Europe and Latin America, Block says.
For wealthy families, investing in LGBTQ-related businesses can be a strategy to engage the next generation, as products and investment strategies that advance LGBTQ equity and inclusion are in high demand among younger investors (56% of millennials and 67% of Gen Z, according to Morgan Stanley). This is unsurprising, given that Gallup polling suggests more than one in five Gen Z adults and one in 10 millennials identify as LGBTQ.
Morgan Stanley’s Institute for Sustainable Investing estimates that those interested in LGBTQ investments control about one-third, or US$20 trillion of U.S. wealth managers’ assets under management. With the impending generational wealth transfer, the bank says control of interested investors could grow to nearly half of the assets under management at all wealth managers. Block expects that creating opportunities for LGBTQ fund managers will also help grow LGBTQ investments, and will create a “natural pipeline” for them to find roles with major investment banks.
In identifying investments, Morgan Stanley offers strategies that screen-out certain companies, says Emily Thomas, head of Investing with Impact, Morgan Stanley Wealth Management, the bank’s platform featuring funds and other investment vehicles for values-based investing.
“Per our survey, 76% of investors interested in LGBTQ impact objectives are also interested in the ability to exclude companies that don’t explicitly include protections for LGBTQ people in their labor rights policies,” Thomas says.
There are also companies owned or run by individuals with family and friends who are LGBTQ and want to make sure their company helps support and gives back to the community.
Recently, a banking executive spoke about their experience being raised by lesbian parents at an LGBT+ VC ally event. Morgan Stanley reports 76% of heterosexual investors with an LGBTQ household member want such investment options, more than the general population.
The biggest barrier to finding LGBTQ investment strategies is being able to gather data on the community, Thomas says.
Individuals can have reservations about sharing information regarding sexual orientation or gender identity—54% of LGBTQ individuals in the U.S. live in areas without state-level protections. Ongoing stigma against the community also prevents some people from openly identifying as LGBTQ.
“Only with more data can we know the extent of inclusion in, and exclusion from, the structures that make up the foundation upon which the U.S. economy is built,” Colorful Capital said in a May report.
(There are forces trying to change this. Earlier this year, the U.S. Census Bureau’s monthly American Community Survey announced it is looking into asking about sexual orientation and gender identity.)
Because of the sensitive nature of data and laws around personally identifiable information, there isn’t readily available data on the percent of employees who identify as LGBTQ or what representation looks like at senior levels, unlike for gender diversity. Comparably more data is available on corporate policies on LGBTQ matters, so some asset managers use that to identify companies as investments, Thomas says.
“For example, [an] asset manager can tilt portfolios toward companies that offer domestic partner benefits to same-sex couples,” she says. Other strategies could include screening for companies that offer LGBTQ diversity training or have not faced Equal Employment Opportunity Commission disciplinary actions. Investors can also use benchmarks such as the Human Rights Campaign Corporate Equality Index, which scores about 1,400 publicly and privately held firms on several areas of LGBTQ policies and practices, including whether they offer domestic partner and transgender-inclusive benefits,
Institutional Allocators for Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion, a nonprofit group of asset owners aiming to promote those principles within investment management, has a publicly available diverse manager database, which allows funds to self-report LGBTQ affiliation, Thomas says.
MOST POPULAR
What a quarter-million dollars gets you in the western capital.
Alexandre de Betak and his wife are focusing on their most personal project yet.
The bequests benefit charities, distant relatives and even pets
By TALI ARBEL
Sun, Oct 6, 2024 4 min
4 min
Charities, distant relatives and even pets are benefiting from surprise inheritances. They can thank people without children.
Not having children is becoming more common, both among millennials and older people. A July Pew Research Center analysis found that 20% of U.S. adults age 50 and older hadn’t had children.
And many of these people don’t have wills. An AARP survey found half of childless people age 50-plus who live alone have a will, compared with 57% of others that age. Those without wills have less control over what happens to their money, which often ends up in the hands of people who don’t expect it.
This phenomenon of a surprise inheritance is common enough that it has a name: the laughing heir .
“All they do is get the money and go, ‘Ah ha ha, look at that,’ ” said Michael Ettinger , an estate lawyer in New York.
Kelley Gilpin McKeig, a 64-year-old healthcare-industry consultant in Ridgefield, Wash., received a phone call several years ago saying her cousin Nick Caldwell left behind money in a savings account. They hadn’t been in touch for 20 years.
“I thought it was a scam,” she said. “Nobody else in our family had heard that he had passed.”
She hunted down his death certificate and a news article and learned he had died about a year and a half before in a workplace accident.
Caldwell, who was in his 50s, had died without a will. His estate was split among cousins and an uncle. It took about two years for the money to be distributed because of the paperwork and court approval involved. Gilpin McKeig’s share was $2,300.
Afterward, she updated her will to make sure what she has doesn’t go to “just anybody down the line, or cousins I don’t care about.”
Who inherits
There are trillions of dollars at stake as baby boomers age.
Most people leave their money to spouses and children when they die. A 2021 analysis of Federal Reserve survey data found that 82% of heirs’ inheritances came from parents.
People with no children say they want to leave a greater share of their estates to charity, friends and extended family , according to research by two Yale law professors that surveyed 9,000 U.S. adults.
Rebecca Fornwalt, a 33-year-old writer, created a trust after landing a book deal. While her heirs are her parents, her backup heirs include her sister and about a half-dozen close friends. She set aside $15,000 for the care of each of her two dogs.
Susan Lassiter-Lyons , a financial coach in Florence, Ariz., said one childless client is leaving equal interests in her home to her two nephews. Another is leaving her home to a man she has been friends with for a long time.
“She broke his heart years ago and she feels guilted into leaving him property,” Lassiter-Lyons said.
A client who is a former escort estranged from her family is leaving her estate to two friends and to charity.
Lassiter-Lyons, who doesn’t have children, set up a trust for her two dogs should she and her wife die. The pet guardian, her wife’s sister, would live in their house while taking care of the dogs. When the dogs die, she inherits the house.
In the Yale study, people without descendants—children or grandchildren—intended to give 10% of their estates to charity, on average, more than triple the intended amount of those with descendants.
The Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles, which manages $1.3 billion of assets, a few years ago added an “heirless donors” section to its website that profiles donors and talks about building a legacy.
“Fifteen years ago, we never talked about child-free donors at all,” said Lew Groner , the foundation’s vice president for marketing.
In the absence of a will, heirs are determined by state law . Assets can wind up in the state’s hands. In New York, for example, $240 million in unclaimed funds over the past 10 years has arrived from estates of the deceased, not including real estate, according to the state comptroller’s office. In California, it is $54.3 million.
Hard questions
Financial advisers say a far bigger concern than who gets what is making sure there is enough money and support for a comfortable old age, because clients without children can’t call on them for help.
“I hope there is something left to leave,” said Stephanie Maxfield, a 43-year-old therapist in southern Colorado. “But if there isn’t, I think that’s OK, too.”
She said she would like to leave something to her partner’s nieces and nephews, as well as animal shelters and domestic-violence shelters. Her best friend is a beneficiary.
Choosing an estate executor and who would handle money and health decisions on your behalf can be difficult when you don’t have children, financial advisers say. Using a promised inheritance as a reward for taking care of you when you are older isn’t a good solution, said Jay Zigmont , an investment adviser focused on childless people.
“Unfortunately, it is relatively common to see family members who are in the will decide to opt for cheaper medical care (or similar decisions) in order to protect what they will be inheriting,” he said in an email.
Kirsten Tompkins, who is from Birmingham, U.K., and works in consulting, along with her husband divided their estate among their dozen nieces and nephews.
Choosing heirs was the easy part. What is hard is figuring out whom to ask for help as she and her husband get older, she said.
“A lot of us are at an age where we are playing that role for our parents,” the 50-year-old said, referring to tasks such as providing tech support and taking parents to medical appointments. “Who is going to do that for us?”
