It's often said that millions of people in the UK don't save enough - with one in ten adults saving no money at all. That figure from a 2025 report from the Financial Conduct Authority regulator came with a warning that it's leaving people walking a financial tightrope.
Author
- Karina Pavlisa
Lecturer in International Business Management, University of Bristol
The UK household saving ratio (the proportion of income available but not spent) stood at 11.1% in 2024, below the EU average of around 14.5% . This gap shows the importance of encouraging a savings habit among the UK population.
Research shows that even modest savings buffers significantly improve financial resilience. A reserve of £2,000, for example, halves the risk of someone falling behind with bills in later years.
Gaps in income are often named as a key reason for not saving enough, alongside limited numeracy skills . But there are other dimensions that explain why some groups tend to save more than others.
Women, for example, are less likely to save than men. But this is just one part of the picture. My latest research suggests that people's ability to navigate their finances stems partly from their professional background.
Workers in some professions are much more likely to save than others - and not necessarily because they earn more. Different professions encourage different competencies, habits and ways of thinking, as well as social influences. Financial confidence is a lifelong pursuit, yet my study found it comes more easily to people in some professions.
Who is more likely to save?
To understand these dynamics and test the differences between professions, I explored data from the Understanding Society survey, which explores social and economic change using data collected from around 40,000 UK households every year.
My study focused on more than 37,000 adults in the UK between 2009 and 2019. It adjusted the data to account for the effects of income and characteristics such as age and number of children, to examine how much (and how likely) people in various professions are to save.
Even with similar income increases, people working in business, finance and sales were 31 percentage points more likely to save every month than creative professionals and ten percentage points more likely than those in education.
Professions in business, finance and sales tend to encourage commercial acumen and confidence in handling financial decisions. And their workplaces are often guided by commercial logic, the need to save money, risk assessment, and more pronounced on-the-job learning about financial decision-making. This normalises discussions about money.
By contrast, creative professionals such as artists and writers, whose fields emphasise intrinsic motivation and creative fulfilment, are significantly less likely to save, even when their income increases.
Similar patterns appeared across managerial occupations. Corporate directors working in more finance-aligned environments were 40 percentage points more likely to save every month than managers in sectors such as retail, logistics and hospitality.
Of course, professional environments orientated towards finance draw on employees with relevant backgrounds. But finance-related conversations are also more common in these workplaces, and this can strengthen personal money-management capabilities.
We tend to think that saving is mainly down to an individual - their planning, numerical skills, confidence, and family background . Yet some careers build financial resilience more actively, while others do not. Professional environments in some ways represent the hidden structures that shape how people think about managing money. This creates a structural advantage (or disadvantage).
Differences in saving behaviour and ways of thinking about money translate into larger gaps in financial resilience. This is a subtle driver of financial inequality. Jobs quietly and subtly "teach" financial habits and norms, and workers should be aware that their professional circle may bias their financial habits.
One practical approach is to look beyond your own occupational circle, observing how friends in professions with stronger financial cultures talk about money - and adopting some of their planning strategies. If your role gives you little exposure to financial decision-making, you could seek out this knowledge by surrounding yourself with people who discuss finances. Using financial-literacy tools such as apps, podcasts or articles can also help to fill that gap.
Importantly, people tend to blame themselves for a lack of discipline and planning. My study shifts some of this blame on to other, broader conditions. It does not suggest that personal discipline is unimportant. But replacing self-blame with an awareness that your social and professional environments can be more or less supportive of financial resilience can build confidence and encourage positive steps forward.
This also has implications for employers, especially in workplaces or departments that are less orientated towards finance. For example, efforts to support employees' financial resilience could include practical sessions with advisers who can teach money-management skills, talk through steps to strengthen financial resilience and discuss ways of short-term and long-term saving.
While this study illustrates the significance and size of disparities in saving habits, its findings could help to identify solutions. Universities, for example, are well placed to offer financial education . Similar to my findings about professions, students in some subjects (such as the arts, humanities, social sciences or health fields) may particularly benefit from workshops or modules to feel more confident about money matters.
Good savings habits are not only a matter of individual choice - social and structural factors also play a part in financial resilience and have implications for inequality. Initiatives aimed at improving financial wellbeing should recognise that when it comes to saving, it's a very uneven playing field.
Karina Pavlisa does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
