21 June 2025

A Century Later: Two Family Trees and Two Vastly Different Family Fortunes

This contrast between college-educated and non-college educated women is stark and oddly fascinating. 

Four forces at play here.

1. Women with a college degree have fewer children.

2. Women who get a college degree are older when they have their first child.

3. Women with a college degree have more wealth.

4. The difference in levels of wealth compounds over time, as does the difference in the number of heirs, or descendants. 

Assumptions:

  • Initial Wealth: $1,000,000 (college) vs. $200,000 (non-college) (based on current data contrasting households with and without a college education)

  • Children per woman: 1.28 (college) vs. 2.8 (non-college) (these are the current rates)

  • Generations: every 30 years (college) vs. 24 years (non-college) (again, these are the current average ages for a first child for women with and without a degree) 

  • Annual wealth growth: 4% (real, after inflation, applied to both the initial $1,000,000 and the initial $200,000)

  • Time horizon: 100 years


Results after 100 years:

MetricCollege Degree LineageNon-College Lineage
Total Compounded Wealth$50.5 million$10.1 million
Total Number of Descendants~2.1 people~61.5 people
Wealth Per Descendant (on average)~$24.1 million~$164,300

In simple language, the one million dollars the college-educated household starts with compounded at 4% a year over a century will result in about $50 million. The $200,000 the non-college educated household starts with compounded at 4% a year over a century will result in $10 million. But given the big difference in the number of descendants, the $10 million will be divided over 61 people, whereas the $50 million is divided among only 2 people. So, the heirs of the college educated are vastly outnumbered but have vastly more resources. 

Summary Insight:
College-educated women have fewer descendants who will potentially inherit more wealth. Compounding over time results in her descendants ending up vastly wealthier—about 146× richer per person after 100 years. This curious dynamic is just one more way that differences in wealth can compound over time. 

No comments: