average savings in workplace plans at retirement
At a glance
+69%
Increase in match maximization for women using Sun Life One Plan
+92%
Increase in women receiving any match when using Sun Life One Plan
24%-80%
Low-confidence women's match maximization change with access to advice + Sun Life One Plan
Women and retirement security: The challenge
Women: $164,000
Men: $225,000
average savings in workplace plans at retirement
Source: Sun Life Designed for Savings
Canadian women face a retirement security challenge that is multilayered. Women retire with 27% less in savings than men—yet live approximately three years longer, to age 87 versus 84, meaning they must stretch fewer resources across more years. Women also spend 24% more of their lives in poor health, often during prime earning years, further straining their financial security in retirement.
The factors driving this gap are well documented. In 2024, Canadian women earned 88 cents for every dollar earned by men. Parental leave remains unevenly shared, with 94% of mothers taking leave compared to just 47% of partners. More than half of women shoulder the majority of caregiving responsibilities at some point in their careers.
Ready to close the gap?
Our employer playbook translates these findings into practical steps you can take today—from promoting digital tools and advice access to optimizing plan design and communications that drive measurable improvements in retirement readiness.
What we found is both sobering and hopeful. Women systematically underutilize their workplace savings plans across nearly every income level and career stage. But the root cause is not a lack of financial knowledge, but rather a confidence gap.
By empowering women with digital tools, professional guidance and tailored educational content, we can dramatically improve financial outcomes and reduce the workplace savings gap.
Women systematically underutilize workplace savings
Fig. 1.0 — Gender participation gap by household income grouping
The matching problem — Women are leaving employer contributions on the table
Employer matching is one of the most valued incentives of a workplace savings plan—an immediate return on a member’s investment. Yet women are consistently less likely than men to take full advantage of their employer’s matching contributions.
Every income level
Women trail men in employer match maximization across all 5 income groups
Every age group
Women maximize match at lower levels at every age
Peak career gap
Women are 18 % points behind in match maximization
Match maximization gaps between men and women surveyed are present at every income level.
Among households earning less than $70,000, 30% of women surveyed maximize their employer match compared to 40% of men. At the highest income levels ($200,000 and above), 45% of women surveyed maximize versus 57% of men. Similar gaps appear when considering whether members receive any level of employer matching at all—and at the $200,000+ level, this gap reaches 16 percentage points.
The pattern extends to plan members taking advantage of any level of employer match, where women lag behind men in every household income category. Once again, the smallest gaps are observed among households earning $70,000-$100,000, where 51% of women receive any employer match, compared to 57% of men (a gap of 6 percentage points).
| Age Group | Women | Men | Gap (% points) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 25–34 | 35% | 44% | -9 |
| 35–44 | 39% | 57% | -18 |
| 45–54 | 49% | 53% | -4 |
| 55–64 | 34% | 45% | -11 |
| 65+ | 27% | 48% | -21 |
When considering plan metrics by age, the picture sharpens further. Surveyed women aged 35 to 44—prime career-building years—show a 18-percentage-point match maximization gap (39% versus 57%).
Regardless of personal income level or age, women lag men in every plan metric grouping.
Primary, secondary, equal and sole earners
This pattern persists even when we control for household dynamics. We examined whether someone’s role as the primary, secondary, sole, or equal earner in their household would explain the gap. It does not. While earner status influences the magnitude of the gap, the direction is remarkably consistent:
Fig. 1.2 — Gender contribution gap by household earner type
Note: The contribution rates and gaps presented may be influenced by the specific plan designs, contribution formulas, and employer matching structures of the plans in which these members participate. Some plans may offer higher matching contributions than others, which can affect the rates observed across different earner groups. Without controlling for plan design differences, these figures may not fully reflect member contribution choices alone.
Secondary earners face the largest contribution gap, with women surveyed contributing 2.5% less of their incomes than men in comparable positions
Primary earner women surveyed still contribute 2.1% less than primary earner men, despite also being the household’s main income source
Even earners (couples earning 45–55% of household income each) show the smallest gap at just 0.1%
Sole earning households show a gap of 1.3%
Women are leaving money on the table. We noted gaps across the board of how often women maximize their plans—this is a retirement security gap that compounds over time.
The compounding problem — Gaps persist over women’s careers
Our analysis of years of service in a workplace plan reveals patterns in how engagement evolves throughout members' careers.
Fig. 1.3 — Match maximization rate by years of service
The data shows that gender gaps in workplace plan utilization persist throughout careers. While some metrics improve with years of service, women continue to lag men across all career stages—highlighting the need for sustained, not merely initial, plan engagement strategies.
The contribution rate gap between men and women varies between 1.4% at less than 2 years of experience with their workplace plan employer and widens to 4.2% for those who spend 21-30 years. These differences may partially be explained by disparities in plan design or employment roles.
Match maximization serves as a more equivalent comparison: Regardless of percentage contributed, were women maximizing the employer match available to them? While this gap narrows over time—from 14 percentage points among those surveyed with fewer than 2 years of plan experience, to just 2 percentage points at the 21-to-30-year mark— it also persists.
Target date funds, the most common default plan investment, are structured to provide larger equity exposure for members earlier in their careers. Women may eventually narrow gaps in employer matching, but over decades—and by then, they have missed the critical early accumulation years when compounding has the greatest impact.
The plan maximization gap shrinks slowly as women’s careers advance. That’s decades of compounding disadvantage that “set it and forget it” enrollment strategies would not address.
Traditional enrollment strategies that rely on a single setup moment are insufficient. Women would benefit from both automatic features and sustained plan engagement at multiple career stages. Automatic features—such as auto-enrolment at match-maximizing levels or auto-escalation—close gaps by eliminating decision barriers. Nearly 80% of surveyed members value these features. This combined approach helps build the confidence needed for informed financial decisions.
The confidence factor — Knowledge alone doesn’t drive action
Our Member Mindsets research identified four investor profiles based on two dimensions: financial knowledge and financial confidence.
The four profiles are:
Profile |
Confidence Level |
Knowledge Level |
Investable wealth accumulated |
|---|---|---|---|
Sophisticated Investors |
High |
High |
3.9× annual income |
Overconfident Investors |
High |
Low |
3.1× annual income |
Cautious Investors |
Low |
Low |
2.2× annual income |
Cautious Experts |
Low |
High |
2.1× annual income |
Sophisticated Investors:
3.9x
Annual income accumulated in investable assets
(High confidence + high knowledge)
Cautious Experts:
2.1x
Annual income accumulated in investable assets
(Low confidence + high knowledge)
The most revealing comparison was between Sophisticated Investors and Cautious Experts. Both score high on financial literacy. The difference is confidence—and that difference translates to 86% higher wealth accumulation. Among all investor profiles, confidence drives 64% higher savings outcomes; knowledge alone adds only 12%.
Women are disproportionately represented in low-confidence groups. Women surveyed make up 34% of Cautious Investors (compared to 21% of men) and are underrepresented among Sophisticated Investors (21% of women versus 35% of men).
Digital tools close the gap — 69% increase in match maximization for women
Sun Life One Plan is a goal-based digital planning tool available to Sun Life Clients. Group plan members create a personalized financial roadmap, either independently or by seeking assistance from a licensed retirement consultant. It helps turn big decisions into easy choices, and it’s proven to also serve as a confidence building experience. And the results are dramatic.
Both men and women who use planning tools take more advantage of their plan maximization and match. But women benefit more than men, even reversing gaps in some metrics. Advice begets confidence, which encourages action, and digital tools provide exactly that validation.
WITHOUT SUN LIFE ONE PLAN:
32%
of women maximize their employer match
WITH SUN LIFE ONE PLAN:
54%
of women maximize their employer match
Among members who complete Sun Life One Plan, match maximization rates improve significantly for both men and women—but the amplitude of impact on women is substantially larger:
- Women’s match maximization rates increase from 32% to 54%—a 69% improvement and a 22-percentage-point jump
- Men’s match maximization rates increase from 42% to 62%—a 48% improvement, with women’s gain 1.4 times larger than men’s
- Women receiving any level of employer match jumps from 37% to 71%—a 92% increase, nearly doubling participation
What makes these results particularly important is their scalability. Sun Life One Plan is available to all plan members. It delivers measurably stronger results for women than for men—precisely because it addresses the confidence barrier.
Fig. 2.0 — Impact of Sun Life One Plan on match maximization
| Contribution Rate change (% points) | Maximizing match change (% points) | Receiving any match change (% points) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Women | +0.7 | +22 | +34 |
| Men | +0.5 | +20 | +28 |
| Women benefit more by (% points) | +0.2 | +2.0 | +7.0 |
| Women benefit more by (ratio) | 1.7 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
Tools for everyone — The greatest impact where it’s needed most
The data becomes even more powerful when we break it down by confidence level.
Fig. 3.0 - Match maximization increase by confidence level
Low-confidence women: from 33% to 75% match participation
Among the surveyed women with low-confidence who create a Sun Life One Plan:
- Match maximization more than doubles, rising from 28% to 59%—a 31-percentage-point increase.
- Participation in any level of employer matching jumps from 33% to 75%—effectively eliminating the participation gap with men.
- Remarkably, low-confidence women who create Sun Life One Plan actually exceed low-confidence men’s match maximization rate (59% versus 52%), reversing the gap entirely.
This finding reinforces the Cautious Expert insight from our broader research: surveyed members with high financial knowledge but low confidence accumulate less wealth than Sophisticated Investors despite having equivalent knowledge. When tools which boost confidence are employed, the data shows how confidence correlates with concrete financial decisions.
High-confidence women: closing the contribution gap
High-confidence surveyed women who use Sun Life One Plan see their match maximization rates nearly double, rising from 33% to 60%—a 27-percentage-point increase that outpaces the gains seen by highly-confident men (+18 percentage points).
Also, the gender gap in match maximization among high-confidence members shrinks from 12 percentage points to just 3 percentage points—a 75% reduction.
High-confidence women who use Sun Life One Plan see match maximization jump from 33% to 60%. Even with high confidence, the structure and validation of digital planning tools unlock action.
The ultimate combination — Advice plus planning can reverse gaps
If digital planning tools alone produce breakthrough results, what happens when they are combined with professional advice? The answer: the workplace gender gap in plan maximization doesn’t just narrow—it reverses.
Once again, the positive financial actions from this combination benefit both men and women. But they benefit women to a stronger degree.
Among surveyed women who both create a Sun Life One Plan and have access to a financial advisor, our data shows improvements across every metric:
| Investor Profile | Gender | Without Advisor/ Sun Life One Plan |
With Advisor + Sun Life One Plan |
Percentage Point |
Gap Without Advisor + One Plan |
Gap With Advisor + One Plan |
Gap Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cautious Expert | Women | 50% | 77% | +27 | +4 pp | +19 pp | Gap widens in women's favor |
| Men | 46% | 58% | +13 | ||||
| Cautious Investor | Women | 29% | 90% | +61 | −25 pp | +23 pp | Gap reverses |
| Men | 54% | 67% | +12 | ||||
| Overconfident Investor | Women | 43% | 77% | +34 | −6 pp | +5 pp | Gap reverses |
| Men | 49% | 72% | +23 |
|
|||
| Sophisticated Investor | Women | 37% | 67% | +30 | −12 pp | −9 pp | Gap narrows |
| Men | 49% | 76% | +27 |
|
Women respondents who have an advisor and completed a Sun Life One Plan show higher match maximization and any-match participation rates than women with only one of these supports.
For certain Investor Profiles, the combination reverses both the receiving any match and plan maximization gap—meaning women outperform men.
Access to personalized guidance from a licensed financial services consultant* combined with Sun Life One Plan reverses matching and maximization gaps for women across confidence levels.
*Registered as financial security advisors in Quebec
Professional advice provides personalized validation—a human element that affirms a member’s financial decisions. Sun Life One Plan provides structure and a tangible action plan. Together, they address both the emotional and practical dimensions of the confidence gap.
What this means — Implications for plan sponsors and members
This research tells a clear story: women are systematically undersaving for retirement at every household income level and career stage, but the gap is driven primarily by confidence, not knowledge.
Implications
Targeted interventions can drive measurable increases in plan utilization without requiring plan design changes:
- Increased use of tools like Sun Life One Plan or access to professional advice leads to measurable equity outcomes supporting inclusion goals.
- Scalable solutions. Digital tools, communications, and tailored financial wellness webinars can improve outcomes for women.
- Sustained engagement. Clear communications reminding employees of the value of their workplace savings plan and the tools and advice available to them can help accelerate action and improve outcomes.
Opportunities for plan sponsors
Measure and monitor: Track gender gaps in contributions and match maximization over time using available reporting tools. Sun Life's Retirement Readiness and Planalytics reports provide actionable insights to help optimize plan design and monitor plan performance.
Promote digital tools and educational resources: By proactively promoting digital tools like Sun Life One Plan to all members, in particular women, we empower them to take charge of their finances and help to build their confidence with self-serve tools and resources.
Communicate advice access and benefits: Licensed Retirement and Financial Services Consultants* are available at no charge through 360 Plan Advice, with no minimum balance required. Proactively sharing this information helps women—who are less aware of plan benefits—take full advantage of available resources.
Optimize targeted, member-centric communications: Segment communications by gender, career stage and other demographics to highlight employer match and other plan benefits. Our customer-centric campaigns deliver measurable improvements in member engagement. Plan sponsors are encouraged to include all eligible members in communications to maximize reach and impact—removing exclusions ensures every employee benefits from targeted education and plan resources.
For members
The message is straightforward: The tools to improve retirement readiness often exist within workplace plans. Sun Life One Plan is free, easy to use, and makes a measurable difference. Professional advice is available regardless of how much you have saved.
Conclusion — Reducing the gap is within reach
The gender retirement savings gap is driven more by confidence than knowledge—and confidence can be built. When women use Sun Life One Plan, match maximization increases and when combined with professional advice, there are instances when this gap reverses.
For plan sponsors, the opportunity is significant: targeted, scalable interventions that can meaningfully improve retirement outcomes for women. The evidence shows they work. By taking action today—whether through digital planning tools, professional advice, or both—members are not just closing a gap, they're building the confidence and capability to shape their financial future
About this research
This supplemental analysis draws on data from Sun Life’s Member Mindsets survey, conducted in partnership with Ipsos. Survey respondents—all Sun Life workplace plan members—were matched to their actual plan data to compare self-reported attitudes, confidence, and knowledge against observed savings behaviours.
The online survey was conducted of Sun Life group savings plan members between July 21, 2025, and August 11, 2025. We surveyed 1,981 members who participated, or were eligible to participate, in Sun Life administered group savings plans. All members were aged 25 to 75 and had primary or shared financial decision-making responsibilities.
Key metrics include contribution rates (as a percentage of salary), match maximization (whether a member fully maximizes available employer matching on at least one product), and match participation (whether a member receives any level of employer matching). Household income groupings are self-reported and aligned to quintiles of survey respondents. Earner status was derived by comparing personal and household income responses.
Sun Life One Plan completion was identified through platform data.