It's more likely the other way around. For most grants I'm aware off universities can't charge overheads on equipment so a theoretician with lots of phd student

It's more likely the other way around. For most grants I'm aware off universities can't charge overheads on equipment so a theoretician with lots of phd students brings in more overhead than an experimentalist that needs lots of equipment. Obviously the reality is much more complex, depending on country it's easier or more difficult to get funding as a theoretician (in the US it's supposedly much more difficult), theory groups are typically smaller, experimental research often results in more publicity... And all this really depends on the field. I think pitting theory against experiments does not address the issues. The big problem IMO is that the funding systems are so competitive and at the same time (initially) have a large luck component, that it incentives short term, low risk research.