Context

Protected characteristics are defined by the Equality Act 2010. As an arm’s length body providing public services, the Money and Pensions Service (MaPS) must uphold its responsibility to the Public Sector Equality Duty, which includes helping to advance equality of opportunity and fostering good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not.

In order to give due consideration to the aims set out in the Duty, MaPS runs three major research surveys to understand UK consumers, including the triennial Adult Financial Wellbeing Survey used in this study. The aim of this report was to add to MaPS’s understanding of how financial wellbeing varies between protected characteristics and inform future decision making, covering:

• age
• disability
• gender reassignment
• marriage and civil partnership
• pregnancy and maternity
• race
• religion or belief (including lack of belief)
• sex
• sexual orientation.

The study

This report is based on questions asked in MaPS’s Adult Financial Wellbeing Survey 2021, a survey undertaken by Critical Research on behalf of MaPS. It was a nationally representative online and postal survey of 10,306 adults aged 18 and over living in the UK, carried out between July to September 2021.

The analysis described in this report was undertaken by MaPS in order to understand the extent to which the financial wellbeing of UK adults varies for people with different protected characteristics. Financial wellbeing was analysed using the MaPS’s summary measure of financial wellbeing, derived from nine questions covering day-to-day money management, financial confidence and satisfaction, and longer-term financial planning.

Based on a maximum possible score of 100 on these nine questions, MaPS split the UK population into roughly three equal groups of financial wellbeing: low (31%), medium (35%) and high (34%). Bivariate analyses were undertaken to compare the proportions of people experiencing low financial wellbeing across the categories of different protected characteristics.

Key findings

The analysis undertaken for the report showed statistically significant variation in financial wellbeing among the different categories of every protected characteristic considered. Statistical significance was reported at the 95% level of confidence.

Compared with the UK average of 31%, low financial wellbeing was common among people with the following characteristics:

• Age: 18–44-year-olds (18-24 - 45%, 25-34 - 41%, 35-44 - 38%)
• Disability: Disabled (40%)
• Gender reassignment: Transgender (59%)
• Marriage and civil partnership: Separated (50%) or single (42%)
• Pregnancy and maternity: On maternity or partner on maternity (39%)
• Race: Black (47%) or mixed ethnicity (43%)
• Religion or belief: No religion (34%). Note that this was compared with the average for Great Britain rather than the UK due to data constraints
• Sex: Women (36%) and non-binary (68%). Note that this was based on a question about gender, rather than sex.
• Sexual orientation: Gay/lesbian (40%) or bisexual (50%)

Additional findings in the report detail important differences between categories on the nine individual questions making up the summary financial wellbeing measure.

Points to consider

Methodological strengths or limitations

• The authors note that this report did not examine the interactions between different characteristics. They hypothesise that interactions between some of the characteristics could increase the likelihood of lower financial wellbeing.
• The analysis was bivariate and as such did not control for the confounding effects of other characteristics, including other protected characteristic. This meets the objective of the report, which was to describe financial wellbeing for different categories of people. However, it means that conclusions cannot be drawn about the unique or independent influence of a particular characteristic on financial wellbeing.
• Which measures were subject to statistical significance testing is not always made explicit within the report, whether: differences between categories; differences between one category and the national average (inclusive of the category of interest); and variations across all categories of the protected characteristic. As such, care should be taken when interpreting the differences to understand the precise nature of the comparison.
• The technical report from the survey noted that non-internet users were under-sampled in the data and that people completing paper-based surveys may have had a different survey experience.

Applicability

• The study should be of interest to financial services providers, government and regulators who provide the frameworks through which people live their financial lives.
• The study should also be of interest to charities and other stakeholders who offer direct support to people with low financial wellbeing, specific characteristics which relate to the protected characteristics, or both.

Relevance

• The findings are highly relevant given the role of the Equality Act 2010 within the UK context, MaPS’s commitment to its published Equality Objectives and MaPS’s commitment to the goals set out in its UK Strategy for Financial Wellbeing 2021.
• The report complements other previously published reports on mental health, gender, and ethnicity: https://maps.org.uk/en/publications/research/2023/cross-cutting-themes-adult-financial-wellbeing-survey

Generalisability/transferability

• The findings relate specifically to UK data. There is likely to be some learning that transfers to similar markets outside of the UK. However, the particular cultural-historical influences on the demographic and social composition of each country’s population suggests that the findings should be generalised with caution.