IN APRIL this year, 92 females graced the Sunday Times Rich List, an annual round-up of Britain's 1,000 wealthiest people. Ten years ago there were 64. And rich women are getting richer, too: over the decade the average worth of female millionaires has grown by more than half. Today Britain's wealthiest woman has £4.9 billion ($9.6 billion) to her name, compared with the paltry £1.5 billion her counterpart had in 1997. The Centre for Economics and Business Research (CEBR) reckons female millionaires will outnumber male ones by 2020, and by 2025 women will control 60% of the nation's private wealth. They do better at school and in higher education, and they live longer. Girl power, it seems, never had it so good.

Is this wave of affluence a chimera or does it have solid underpinnings? A report this week by the Economist Intelligence Unit, our sister company, for Barclays Wealth, a financial-management firm, claims that the historical sources of women's wealth—marriage, inheritance and divorce—have been replaced by independent income, business ownership and investments. More than 80% of women now derive their riches from personal earnings, it says, particularly from their own businesses. Divorce, long the engine that propelled women into prosperity, is cited by only 2.9% of those questioned as the main source of their wealth.

But Philip Beresford, who compiles the Rich List, dismisses the idea that women are breaking into its ranks independently of men. “There is no evidence, yet, of seriously rich female entrepreneurs coming in huge numbers,” he says. The woman who tops the list is in fact Lady Green, whose husband made them both a fortune in retailing. If the CEBR is correct, Mr Beresford thinks most British millionairesses will still be wives, daughters and divorcees.

A glance at the number of women in the top ranks of business suggests he is right. Women make up only a tenth of the directors of FTSE-100 firms. They are also under-represented in the upper echelons of management. In a report in March, PricewaterhouseCoopers, an accountancy firm, said that the number of female senior managers in FTSE-350 firms had fallen by 40% since 2002. This may be due to a prevailing macho culture at the top; or it may reflect the costs of child care, which have risen by 27% in the same period.

If things look sticky at the top, women at the bottom find the relative going far tougher. Although the gap between men's and women's earnings has shrunk for those at all income levels, it remains far bigger among the poorest tenth than in any other group (see chart). The latest annual report from the Equal Opportunities Commission shows why: men still dominate highly paid work, and the proportion of female graduates in low-level jobs has rocketed in the past decade, along with the number of people going to university.

It will take another 60 years before there is equality between the sexes in British business (and 200 to achieve the same in Parliament), the commission calculates. Progress, it moans, is “painfully slow and at risk of going into reverse”. It's still hard to be a woman.