Context : Recent spectroscopic surveys of the Galactic bulge have unambiguously shown that the bulge contains two main components , that are best separated in their iron content , but also differ in spatial distribution , kinematics , and abundance ratios . The so-called metal poor component peaks at [ Fe/H ] \sim -0.4 , while the metal rich one peaks at [ Fe/H ] \sim +0.3 . The total metallicity distribution function is therefore bimodal , with a dip at [ Fe/H ] \sim 0 . The relative fraction of the two components changes significantly across the bulge area . Aims : We provide , for the first time , the fractional contribution of the metal poor and metal rich stars to the stellar mass budget of the Galactic bulge , and its variation across the bulge area . Methods : This result follows from the combination of the stellar mass profile derived empirically by \citet valenti+16 from VISTA Variables in the Vía Láctea data , with the relative fraction of metal poor and metal rich stars , across the bulge area , derived by \citet zoccali+17 from the GIRAFFE Inner Bulge spectroscopic Survey . Results : We find that metal poor stars make up 48 \% of the total stellar mass of the bulge , within the region |l| < 10 , |b| < 9.5 , with the remaining 52 \% made up of metal rich stars . The latter dominate the mass budget at intermediate latitudes |b| \sim 4 , but become marginal in the outer bulge ( |b| > 8 ) . The metal poor component is more axisymmetric than the metal rich one , and it is at least comparable , and possibly slightly dominant in the inner few degrees . As a result , the metal poor component , which does not follow the main bar , is not marginal in terms of the total mass budget as previously thought , and this new observational evidence must be included in bulge models . While the total radial velocity dispersion has a trend that follows the total stellar mass , when we examine the velocity dispersion of each component individually , we find that metal poor stars have higher velocity dispersion where they make up a smaller fraction of the stellar mass , and viceversa . This is due to the kinematical and spatial distribution of the two metallicity component being significantly different , as already discussed in the literature . Conclusions :