Gender Gap Persists at the CEO Level of S&P 500

Despite all of the attention placed on increasing the number of female executives at American companies, the needle on the gender gap has hardly moved.

When S&P Capital IQ looked at the annual growth of female Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) in the S&P 500 Index from 2006 to 2015, we saw an increase of one new female CEO every two years. Furthermore the current number of female CEOs running S&P 500 Companies stands at a meager 21 out of 500; which is down from 25 female CEOs at the end of 2014.

For full report click here.

By focusing on S&P 500 Companies as of Nov. 23th 2015 (which accounts for approximately 75 percent of the US equity market by capitalization) and analyzing the male/female ratios of CEOs, we get a modest representation of how the gender gap has changed over the years for the largest publically owned companies.[1] Our assessment revealed the following key findings:

• The gender gap at the CEO level of S&P 500 Companies is not closing. Growth rate for new female CEOs is only one per every two years.
• Information Technology (Info Tech) has the most female CEOs. While Energy, Materials and Telecoms have no female CEOs in the S&P 500.
• 2015 Female CEO’s lag Male CEO’s in terms of tenure by two years.
• Things may not change any time soon. At the end of 2014 the S&P 500 Index had 25 female CEO’s. Latest figures show this number has declined to 21 female CEOs.

Female CEOs of S&P 500 Companies as of November 23rd, 2015

Source: S&P Capital IQ November 23, 2015.

Note: A CEO’s tenure starting in 2015 is counted as one year. A CEO’s tenure that started in 2014 and is currently active is counted as two years.

DISCLAIMER

Copyright © 2015 by Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC. All rights reserved.

No content (including ratings, credit-related analyses and data, valuations, model, software or other application or output therefrom) or any part thereof (Content) may be modified, reverse engineered, reproduced or distributed in any form by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC or its affiliates (collectively, S&P). The Content shall not be used for any unlawful or unauthorized purposes. S&P and any third-party providers, as well as their directors, officers, shareholders, employees or agents (collectively S&P Parties) do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or availability of the Content. S&P Parties are not responsible for any errors or omissions (negligent or otherwise), regardless of the cause, for the results obtained from the use of the Content, or for the security or maintenance of any data input by the user. The Content is provided on an “as is” basis. S&P PARTIES DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE, FREEDOM FROM BUGS, SOFTWARE ERRORS OR DEFECTS, THAT THE CONTENT’S FUNCTIONING WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR THAT THE CONTENT WILL OPERATE WITH ANY SOFTWARE OR HARDWARE CONFIGURATION.  In no event shall S&P Parties be liable to any party for any direct, indirect, incidental, exemplary, compensatory, punitive, special or consequential damages, costs, expenses, legal fees, or losses (including, without limitation, lost income or lost profits and opportunity costs or losses caused by negligence) in connection with any use of the Content even if advised of the possibility of such damages.

Credit-related and other analyses, including ratings, and statements in the Content are statements of opinion as of the date they are expressed and not statements of fact. S&P’s opinions, analyses and rating acknowledgment decisions (described below) are not recommendations to purchase, hold, or sell any securities or to make any investment decisions, and do not address the suitability of any security. S&P assumes no obligation to update the Content following publication in any form or format. The Content should not be relied on and is not a substitute for the skill, judgment and experience of the user, its management, employees, advisors and/or clients when making investment and other business decisions. S&P does not act as a fiduciary or an investment advisor except where registered as such.  While S&P has obtained information from sources it believes to be reliable, S&P does not perform an audit and undertakes no duty of due diligence or independent verification of any information it receives.

To the extent that regulatory authorities allow a rating agency to acknowledge in one jurisdiction a rating issued in another jurisdiction for certain regulatory purposes, S&P reserves the right to assign, withdraw or suspend such acknowledgement at any time and in its sole discretion. S&P Parties disclaim any duty whatsoever arising out of the assignment, withdrawal or suspension of an acknowledgment as well as any liability for any damage alleged to have been suffered on account thereof.

S&P keeps certain activities of its business units separate from each other in order to preserve the independence and objectivity of their respective activities. As a result, certain business units of S&P may have information that is not available to other S&P business units. S&P has established policies and procedures to maintain the confidentiality of certain non-public information received in connection with each analytical process.

S&P may receive compensation for its ratings and certain analyses, normally from issuers or underwriters of securities or from obligors. S&P reserves the right to disseminate its opinions and analyses. S&P's public ratings and analyses are made available on its Web sites, www.standardandpoors.com (free of charge), and www.ratingsdirect.com and www.globalcreditportal.com (subscription), and may be distributed through other means, including via S&P publications and third-party redistributors. Additional information about our ratings fees is available at www.standardandpoors.com/usratingsfees. 

[1] This study only covers S&P 500 Companies. We have not taken into account or analyzed Small to Medium Enterprises (SMEs) or privately own institutions whose leadership composition could vary significantly.