Key Evidence

Evidence shows that traditional KYC requirements constrain women’s financial inclusion through three primary mechanisms: women are less likely to possess required forms of documentation due to structural inequalities; KYC frameworks rely on narrow definitions of identity and financial behavior that exclude valid alternatives; and requirements are often not proportionate to risk, creating unnecessary barriers to entry for basic financial services. Together, these factors reinforce women’s reliance on informal financial systems rather than enabling entry into formal services.

KYC requirements are not gender-neutral.

Evidence shows that women are less likely to possess the forms of identification required for KYC due to structural inequalities, creating a direct barrier to accessing financial services.

• Identity systems often reflect and reinforce existing gender inequalities. Women face barriers to obtaining identification due to social norms, time constraints related to unpaid care, and limited interaction with formal institutions. These constraints restrict women’s ability to meet KYC requirements and contribute to persistent gaps in access to financial services. (Women's World Banking, 2025)

Rigid definitions of identify present steep hurdles for women. Mobile money, simplified customer due diligence, and alternative forms of identification enable marginalized customers to access financial services. 

• KYC and AML/CFT frameworks often rely on rigid definitions of identity and verification that do not reflect how low-income women participate in the economy. In practice, regulators and providers frequently underuse risk-based approaches, defaulting to standardized documentation requirements that exclude women who rely on informal income sources or lack formal records. This disconnect between regulatory expectations and lived realities contributes to systematic exclusion. (CGAP 2025)
• Recent evidence on digital financial services shows that mobile money and simplified customer due diligence (CDD) approaches can expand financial inclusion, particularly for women, by lowering onboarding requirements and aligning verification with actual risk. These approaches demonstrate that alternative KYC frameworks can increase access without compromising financial integrity, especially for low-value, low-risk accounts. (UNCDF 2025) 
• Country-level experience further shows that acceptance of alternative forms of identification - such as passports for migrants and product-tiered onboarding requirements - can expand access to regulated financial services. However, uneven adoption and regulatory ambiguity continue to limit the extent to which these approaches are implemented in practice. (FinMark Trust, 2021).

mexKYC requirements are grounded in AML/CFT regulations intended to manage financial system risk. This means that barriers to access often stem not from the existence of these rules, but from how risk-based approaches are applied in practice.

• Global AML/CFT standards explicitly support a risk-based approach to customer due diligence, allowing simplified KYC requirements for low-risk accounts. However, in practice, many jurisdictions apply more stringent requirements than necessary, extending high-risk compliance standards to low-risk products. This misalignment creates unnecessary barriers to entry without improving financial system integrity. (FATF n.d.)