The IPO of fintech player Moneyview will be open for subscription until September 28. It combines a fresh issue of shares worth ₹750 crore and an offer for sale (OFS) of ₹342 crore, totalling to ₹1,092 crore. Co-founders and promoters, Puneet Agarwal and Sanjay Agarwal, and a few other investors are set to pare part of their stake in the OFS. Promoters and promoter group stake of about 24 per cent before the IPO is expected to fall to around 19.4 per cent after the IPO.

Among other things, Moneyview predominantly distributes unsecured personal loans on its platform. While some of the loan applications are underwritten by the company’s lending partners (banks and NBFCs), some are underwritten by Moneyview’s own NBFC subsidiary. One-third or ₹250 crore of the fresh issue proceeds are earmarked for augmenting the capital base of this subsidiary. Another ₹325 crore is earmarked for providing DLG (default loss guarantee) cover to lending partners (discussed in business model) and the rest for general corporate purposes.

At the upper band of the issue price, on a post-issue basis, Moneyview’s market cap works out to ₹5,985 crore or 1.9x post-issue book value (Q1 FY27 net worth + fresh issue proceeds). This puts it slightly at a discount to the recently-listed OnEMI Technology Solutions, which has a comparable business model. OnEMI trades at about 2.6x trailing book value, after posting gains of over 100 per cent from its IPO price. The accompanying chart shows that RoAUM (return on average AUM or profit to average AUM) of OnEMI is higher than that of Moneyview — largely explaining the valuation discount.

As with OnEMI’s IPO, we recommend that long-term investors give Moneyview’s offering a pass for now and await greater clarity on the risk factors discussed below. The two companies have similar business models and face many of the same risks. OnEMI’s gains may reflect short-term market momentum, but our recommendation was based on a long-term view. More importantly, common key concerns including the limited operating track record and the lack of clarity on an evolving portfolio mix are still relevant.

Business model

Moneyview offers a fintech platform that primarily lends personal loans to ‘middle India’ or the households earning ₹3-11 lakh annually. It does not have a branch network and interfaces with customers only through its mobile app.

Two kinds of personal loans are on offer. The first one has a tenure of 23 months on an average, an average ticket size of ₹96,000 and makes about 72 per cent of the managed AUM. The other kind has an average tenure of eight months and a ticket size of about ₹20,000. The latter is extended to users with limited credit history.

Loans applied for by the users are either assigned to Moneyview’s lending partners or underwritten by Whizdm Finance Pvt Ltd (WFPL), Moneyview’s own NBFC subsidiary. Moneyview assumes the full credit risk in the latter and earns a net interest margin on the loan (interest received from the customer minus interest paid on WFPL’s borrowings). In the former, Moneyview shares the credit risk with its lending partners to an extent, through something called a DLG arrangement. Under this arrangement, if the borrower defaults, Moneyview is required to assume the loss up to 5 per cent of the disbursement value of the loan. The company is required to park a deposit with the lending partner or provide a bank guarantee for this purpose. Moneyview makes fee income from origination and servicing the loan on the lending partner’s behalf under this model.

Fee income and gross interest income made 57 per cent and 39 per cent of FY26 revenue. Interest income on the lien-marked DLG deposits and gain on sale of loans accounted for the rest.

Besides personal loans, since FY25, Moneyview has also introduced other products on its app such as housing loans, loans against property, credit cards and earned wage access (EWA). Under EWA, Moneyview allows employees of companies it has tied up with to access a portion of their accrued salary ahead of the scheduled payday for a processing fee. It has also launched a marketplace for fixed deposits, insurance policies and digital gold, along with UPI service (like PhonePe) and bill payments. However, all these are yet to scale up and do not meaningfully contribute to revenue yet.

Performance

Between FY24 and Q1 FY27 (2.25 years), registered users have grown 1.7x and monetised users even faster at 2.6x. Monetised users refer to the cumulative number of users who have availed at least one revenue-generating product. Managed AUM (includes both on-book and off-book/ assigned loans outstanding) has grown at a CAGR of 28 per cent in the same period, with the on-book portfolio (on-book/ underwritten by WFPL) growing faster at 57 per cent. As of Q1 FY27, gross on-book portfolio accounts for 25 per cent of the managed AUM.

Revenue has grown at a CAGR of 58 per cent and net profit at 19 per cent in FY24-26. Net profit CAGR adjusted for exceptional items works out to 52 per cent. Exceptional items in FY26 include ₹47 crore lost to a cyber fraud (details under risk factors) and ₹160 crore in one-time incentive to the CEO. With scale, operating expenses are on a decline, when seen as a share of total income — from 56 per cent in FY24 to 35 per cent in FY26. Revenue and net profit have grown 50 per cent and 159 per cent in Q1 FY27 over Q1 FY26.

Capital adequacy ratio stands at 24.3 per cent, against a regulatory minimum of 15 per cent.

Risk factors

One, paying ₹160 crore to the CEO in FY26, although one-time and then hitting the capital markets for funds is worth pondering.

Two, Moneyview’s yield on loans (interest income on average on-book gross loans) works out to 25-28 per cent. Though the RHP suggests that 98 per cent of the monetised users have a credit score of over 700, at such elevated rates, one is led to assume that these could be borrowers with multiple loans, whose applications may have been rejected by large, mainstream banks (where rates are relatively lower) and who finally may have tapped platforms such as Moneyview, because of lack of options. If so, Moneyview could be serving borrowers at the higher-risk end of the credit spectrum. This will be risky, especially given tougher macros now, with expectations of interest rate hikes.

Three, gross stage-3 assets ratio (GNPA ratio) is on the rise—from 0.94 per cent as of FY24 to 2.7 per cent as of Q1 FY27. Though these levels do not spell crisis, the ratio has not cooled with newer loan disbursals. Given Moneyview’s small scale and the short track record presented in the RHP, we are unable to reliably conclude whether it can remain resilient through credit downcycles.

Four, Moneyview lost ₹47 crore in a cyber fraud when threat actors withdrew money from WFPL’s bank accounts. The company’s investigation has concluded that it was not perpetrated by insiders. An insurance claim for the same is pending approval. Though the company has strengthened the IT infrastructure since, there is no guarantee that this will remain a one-off, especially in today’s AI world.

Five, currently, the portfolio is concentrated in unsecured loans, with no recourse in case of default. The recently-launched, more-secure products of housing loan and others could help diversify the risk profile of the portfolio, when scaled. However, it will not be without trade-offs — lower yields for lower risk cost. The portfolio could take some time to evolve and stabilise, making the case to sit out the IPO for now.

Published on September 26, 2026