I think the headline for #1 is a bit misleading. I'd infer that teams with a female founder doing better than ones without one does not correlate to "Female Founders Outperform Their Male Peers." I'd think a better title would be more along the lines of, "Diverse Founding Teams Outperform All-male Ones."
We don't actually know if that's what the data shows. For one, diversity can refer to age, race, national origin, etc. They only refer to sex, all those other forms of diversity could actually be a negative for all we know.
Additionally, it's possible teams with 100% female founders do better than ones with a mix of sexes among the founders. That would mean again that diversity is not good, but being female is.
Obviously though, this is an n of 300. I would guess that includes less than 100 companies with female founders, making it not exactly proven.
Yeah, but what's more important: Accuracy or the amount of attention this listicle gets?
Women > Men = more clicks. All kinds of places that wouldn't give this post the time of day will talk about it. People promoting feminism/diversity/what have you will cite it for years.
