BIPOC women in Canadian finance face a growing “Performance Tax” as they advance toward senior leadership, according to new research from VersaFi. The report finds that 61% believe they must work harder than peers for comparable recognition or advancement, while 71% aspire to reach the C-suite, highlighting a widening gap between ambition and career progression.
A new study from VersaFi is challenging Canadian financial institutions to reconsider how leadership potential, performance and advancement are evaluated, finding that BIPOC women face increasingly significant barriers as they move toward senior roles.
The report, “Dismantling the Performance Tax: Strategies to Advance BIPOC Women in Canadian Finance,” describes what it calls a “Performance Tax”—an invisible professional surcharge that requires BIPOC women to repeatedly demonstrate competence, credibility and leadership readiness that may be assumed of other professionals.
The research draws on data and first-person accounts from BIPOC women working across Canadian banks, dealers, asset managers and advisory firms.
One of its central findings is the disconnect between ambition and advancement. 71% of respondents aspire to reach the C-suite, yet many remain concentrated in lower-paying positions than both white women and men. Meanwhile, 61% say they have to work harder than others to receive the same level of recognition or advancement.
For financial institutions competing for scarce talent, the findings point to a problem that extends beyond representation. If high-performing professionals encounter additional barriers as they approach leadership, organizations risk losing experienced talent precisely when that expertise becomes most valuable.
VersaFi identifies four interconnected dimensions of the Performance Tax.
Burden of Proof
The first is what the report calls the Burden of Proof: an expectation that BIPOC women must provide more evidence of competence than peers.
Nearly 68% of respondents believe BIPOC women in finance are evaluated against a different standard when leadership capability is assessed. Another 60% say they face greater scrutiny of their leadership decisions.
The disparity becomes more pronounced at higher levels of the organization. Among respondents who are already senior leaders, those figures rise to 82% and 74%, respectively.
That pattern is particularly important because it challenges the assumption that career progression naturally reduces barriers. According to the research, the opposite can occur: obstacles become more visible as BIPOC women gain seniority and enter roles with greater decision-making authority.
Recognition Gap
The second dimension is the Recognition Gap, where individual contributions are not consistently attributed to the people who made them.
Only 50% of respondents say they feel supported by their organization in advancing to or within senior leadership. Meanwhile, 47% say colleagues take credit for their work often or always.
Again, seniority increases the reported disparity. Among senior BIPOC women, 61% say they feel supported by their organizations, while 58% report that colleagues take credit for their contributions often or always.
The issue has implications for performance-management systems. When promotion decisions depend partly on visibility, sponsorship and perceptions of impact, inconsistent attribution can affect both formal evaluations and informal reputations.
Access Deficit
The third dimension is the Access Deficit—limited access to sponsorship, informal networks and high-visibility assignments.
The research finds that 88% of respondents believe sponsorship is important to reaching a leadership position. Yet 46% identify a lack of sponsorship from senior leaders as a significant advancement barrier.
Another 58% say they have limited opportunities to take on high-visibility roles.
This creates a potential cycle within financial institutions. Senior roles often require relationships with decision-makers, exposure to strategic projects and advocates who can support advancement. If access to those opportunities is uneven, employees can face a disadvantage even when their formal performance is strong.
For banks, asset managers, investment firms and advisory businesses, the challenge is therefore not simply increasing participation in leadership programs. It is ensuring that those programs connect employees with opportunities that can materially influence career progression.
Visibility Shortfall
The fourth dimension is the Visibility Shortfall created by limited representation of BIPOC women in senior leadership.
More than half of respondents—52%—identify non-inclusive workplace culture as a barrier to advancement. Among senior BIPOC women, that figure rises to 61%.
Meanwhile, 51% cite limited representation of BIPOC women in leadership as a key obstacle.
Representation can have a reinforcing effect. Fewer senior BIPOC women can mean fewer potential sponsors, advocates and visible examples of successful advancement. That can make leadership pathways appear less accessible even when formal career-development programs exist.
From Diversity Targets to Advancement Infrastructure
VersaFi’s recommendations focus on changing the mechanisms through which advancement occurs rather than relying exclusively on broad diversity commitments.
The organization recommends that financial firms clarify advancement requirements through measurable success criteria, reducing reliance on subjective feedback and informal access to decision-makers.
It also recommends standardizing how contributions are credited, particularly on high-profile projects where recognition can disproportionately flow toward senior or more visible participants.
Another recommendation is to make sponsorship measurable by incorporating sponsorship outcomes into senior-leader evaluations. This would shift sponsorship from an informal leadership behavior toward an organizational accountability mechanism.
VersaFi additionally recommends institutionalizing shadowing opportunities, allowing emerging leaders to gain exposure to senior decision-making without requiring additional workloads that could undermine participation.
The final recommendation is to redefine leadership archetypes by evaluating leadership potential based on capability and impact rather than expectations about how executives should look, communicate or behave.
That last point is particularly relevant to financial services, where leadership pipelines have historically depended heavily on informal networks and established professional norms.
Implications for Financial Technology and Banking
Although the report focuses on people and organizational culture, its implications extend into financial-technology strategy.
Banks and fintech companies are increasingly competing for professionals with expertise in artificial intelligence, data science, cybersecurity, risk management, digital payments and financial engineering. Retaining experienced employees is therefore becoming part of technology and operational strategy, not simply an HR concern.
The Performance Tax concept also highlights a potential weakness in data-driven talent management. Organizations can automate parts of recruitment, performance measurement and workforce analytics, but technology does not automatically eliminate subjective judgments. If the criteria used by a system reflect existing organizational biases, automation can reproduce rather than resolve them.
For financial institutions adopting AI-powered HR and talent platforms, that creates an additional governance question: which performance signals are being measured, who receives visibility, and how are promotion decisions validated?
VersaFi’s findings suggest that institutions may need to examine the complete advancement infrastructure—from performance criteria and project allocation to sponsorship and executive evaluation.
The report was supported by Women and Gender Equality Canada, giving the research a public-policy dimension alongside its implications for employers.
Ultimately, the study argues that the challenge is not a lack of ambition among BIPOC women. The data instead points toward structural conditions that can make advancement progressively more difficult.
For Canadian financial institutions, dismantling that Performance Tax could therefore become less about creating another diversity initiative and more about redesigning how leadership potential is identified, recognized and sponsored.
Market Landscape
Canadian financial institutions are simultaneously navigating digital transformation, AI adoption, changing workforce expectations and competition for specialized talent. That makes leadership development and retention increasingly connected to technology strategy.
VersaFi’s research suggests that formal representation targets alone may not address the mechanisms influencing advancement. Performance measurement, sponsorship, project visibility, contribution attribution and leadership assessment can all affect who reaches senior roles.
For fintech companies and established financial institutions alike, the broader issue is whether workforce systems can provide equitable access to the opportunities that ultimately produce executive experience.
Top Insights
- VersaFi identifies a “Performance Tax” affecting how BIPOC women are evaluated, recognized, sponsored and represented within Canadian financial institutions.
- Although 71% aspire to reach the C-suite, 61% say they must work harder than peers to receive comparable recognition or advancement.
- Reported scrutiny increases with seniority, suggesting that advancement barriers can intensify rather than disappear as BIPOC women approach executive roles.
- Sponsorship is widely viewed as essential, but nearly half of respondents identify insufficient senior-leadership sponsorship as an advancement barrier.
- VersaFi recommends measurable promotion criteria, contribution-credit mechanisms, sponsorship accountability, shadowing and broader definitions of leadership potential.
Get in touch with our fintech expert
