Let’s get straight to the point – there’s no real difference. The titles Finance Director (FD) and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) are often used interchangeably, and in many businesses, they mean the exact same thing: the most senior finance person in the organisation.
Why do both titles exist then?
The rise of the CFO title is more about perception than function. Over the past couple of decades, “CFO” has become the preferred term in larger or more internationally-facing companies – partly influenced by American job title trends.
That doesn’t mean CFOs are always more senior than FDs. In many businesses, it is just a question of semantics as the role and responsibilities are identical. The only difference is the label.
When the structure creates both roles
However, just to complicate matters some organisations – particularly larger groups or private equity-backed firms – use both titles at once. In this setup, the CFO typically sits at group level, with Finance Directors operating within subsidiaries or divisions.
But it’s worth noting: those divisional FDs are not what many would consider “true” FDs. They are, in practice, senior heads of finance for that business unit – still critical roles, but reporting into a group CFO who holds ultimate financial responsibility.
So which title should you use?
That’s entirely up to you. There are no strict rules. It depends on:
- The size and structure of your organisation
- The level of external visibility or stakeholder interaction
- How you want to position the role internally and externally
Some SMEs use FD because it feels more traditional and grounded. Others opt for CFO to reflect strategic intent or to align with investor language.
The important thing is not what you call the role – but what the role is actually responsible for.
