Moneyview Limited IPO

01At a glance

What the company does: runs the Moneyview app, through which it arranges personal loans of up to ₹10 lakh for 22 regulated lenders, including its own NBFC subsidiary Whizdm Finance (WFPL), and distributes cards, insurance, digital gold and payments for 48 financial partners in all (RHP p.217, RHP p.215).

Who pays it: partner lenders pay origination and servicing fees, and borrowers pay interest on loans WFPL holds; the largest partner was 13.41% of FY26 revenue and the top ten 37.36% (RHP p.219, RHP p.32).

Why it is raising money: ₹325.0 crore to put up more default-loss-guarantee collateral for partner lending and ₹250.0 crore of equity for WFPL, with the rest for general corporate purposes (RHP p.139).

How fast it has grown: revenue from ₹1,342.4 crore in FY24 to ₹3,351.2 crore in FY26, about 58.0% a year, and profit from ₹171.1 crore to ₹242.7 crore, about 19.1% a year (our arithmetic, RHP p.96).

The one thing to understand: the company carries the credit risk of the loans it arranges. Default-loss guarantees to partners stood at ₹1,060.8 crore at June 30, 2026, 43.92% of net worth, and the impairment charge was ₹983.5 crore in FY26 against revenue of ₹3,351.2 crore (RHP p.37, RHP p.36).

02The business, in plain words

Moneyview finds borrowers on its app, scores them with its own models, and either passes the loan to a partner bank or NBFC or lends it from WFPL's balance sheet (RHP p.219). On partner loans it earns fees and promises to cover losses up to 5% of the portfolio; on WFPL loans it earns the interest spread and bears the whole loss (RHP p.219).

A salaried borrower in a smaller city needs ₹96,000 → applies on the Moneyview app → the models approve the loan and a partner lender or WFPL disburses it → Moneyview earns fees or interest and pays its share of any default.

The company was founded in 2014 by Puneet Agarwal and Sanjay Aggarwal, began personal loans with lending partners in FY17 and began lending on its own balance sheet through WFPL in FY20 (RHP p.214). It has no branches and served 99.04% of India's pin codes at June 30, 2026, handling close to 200,000 loan applications a day (RHP p.213).

Borrowers had an average monthly income of ₹46,517.55 and an average age of 32, and 79.54% lived outside cities of a million people (RHP p.214). Long-tenure loans average about ₹96,000 over 23 months and were 71.72% of managed loans; small starter loans average ₹20,000 over 8 months (RHP p.227). It had 725 full-time employees at March 2026 (RHP p.34).

Earnings equation: Profit ≈ fees on loans arranged + interest on WFPL loans − interest on borrowings − default-loss-guarantee payouts and WFPL credit losses − marketing and operating cost. In FY26: fees ₹1,899.5 crore, interest income ₹1,312.7 crore, finance costs ₹631.7 crore, impairment ₹983.5 crore (RHP p.96).

03Where the money comes from

Source: RHP p.96. Fees fell from 75.64% of revenue in FY24 to 56.68% in FY26 as interest income rose from 22.41% to 39.17% (RHP p.48).

Source: RHP p.32. The partners are the banks, NBFCs and other institutions that pay the company fees, including WFPL (RHP p.31). Revenue depends less on the top ten than it did: from 56.78% in FY24 to 37.36% in FY26, though the largest single partner's share rose to 13.41% (RHP p.32). New products launched from FY25 were not a material part of revenue (RHP p.387).

04The growth record

Source: RHP p.96, RHP p.97, RHP p.95, RHP p.51, RHP p.150; PAT margin is our arithmetic. RoNW uses profit before exceptional items (RHP p.150).

Our arithmetic: revenue grew about 58.0% a year from FY24 to FY26 and reported profit about 19.1%; profit before exceptional items (₹397.3 crore in FY26) grew about 52.4% (RHP p.96). The PAT margin fell 551 basis points, from 12.7% to 7.2%, because FY26 carried ₹206.7 crore of exceptional charges (RHP p.96). The prospectus does not report EBITDA; for a lender, interest on borrowings is an operating cost. In the three months to June 30, 2026 revenue was ₹1,041.1 crore and profit ₹173.8 crore, against ₹693.0 crore and ₹67.2 crore a year earlier (RHP p.96).

05What the growth is made of

More loans arranged, and more of them held on WFPL's own books. Loan disbursals rose from ₹14,527.2 crore in FY24 to ₹23,098.5 crore in FY26, about 26.1% a year, and managed loans from ₹12,884.8 crore to ₹21,380.1 crore (our arithmetic, RHP p.221). WFPL's own loans grew faster, from ₹2,037.4 crore to ₹5,571.3 crore, which is why interest income rose from ₹300.8 crore to ₹1,312.7 crore (RHP p.221, RHP p.96). Repeat borrowers' loans were 60.86% of managed loans in FY26, up from 42.08% in FY24 (RHP p.226).

Revenue grew faster than disbursals: the loan margin the company computes, net loan revenue over disbursals, rose from 7.48% to 8.55% (RHP p.221). The prospectus does not split fee income by partner rate and volume, so the fee increase cannot be separated into price and volume. The acquisition of Zeo Fin Technology was completed in FY25 and, per the company, did not change the KPIs (RHP p.157).

06Earnings quality

The item that needs explaining is the drop in reported FY26 profit relative to operating profit. Profit before exceptional items was ₹397.3 crore, but the board approved a one-time payment of ₹160.0 crore to Puneet Agarwal in March 2026, which cut profit by ₹119.7 crore after tax, 30.13% of profit before exceptional items (RHP p.33, RHP p.47). Separately, WFPL lost ₹48.3 crore in unauthorised transfers in August 2025 and had recovered ₹2.3 crore by June 30, 2026 (RHP p.46).

07The balance sheet

At June 30, 2026 borrowings were ₹5,484.8 crore: ₹3,353.9 crore of secured debentures, ₹1,934.1 crore of term loans including pass-through certificates, and ₹196.7 crore of commercial paper (RHP p.430). Cash was ₹1,342.3 crore (RHP p.95). Debt to equity was 2.27 times (RHP p.54). The company has guaranteed ₹4,464.0 crore of WFPL's borrowings (RHP p.430). Its only contingent liability is ₹1,060.8 crore of default-loss guarantees to partners (RHP p.98). WFPL's capital adequacy was 24.32% against a 15% minimum (RHP p.46).

Source: RHP p.95, RHP p.429; the second column is our arithmetic, gross of issue expenses, which the RHP leaves blank (RHP p.145).

08What the money is for

Source: RHP p.139; percentages are our arithmetic on ₹750.0 crore.

Guarantee collateral: partners require the guarantee as a fixed deposit or bank guarantee; the ₹325.0 crore raises guarantees outstanding by ₹125.0 crore in FY27 and ₹200.0 crore in FY28 (RHP p.141, RHP p.142). WFPL: ₹250.0 crore of equity in FY27 to support its loan book and capital ratio (RHP p.143). Issue expenses are not yet stated (RHP p.145). CARE Ratings is the monitoring agency (RHP p.146).

Into the business ₹750.0 crore (fresh issue) (RHP p.139). To selling shareholders about ₹341.7 crore at the upper band: 100,494,200 shares at ₹34 (our arithmetic, RHP p.3).

09Who is selling

Source: RHP p.3, RHP p.127, RHP p.129; the last column is our arithmetic. The offer for sale is 100,494,200 shares, about 31.3% of the issue at the upper band (our arithmetic, RHP p.3). The sellers' average acquisition cost ranges from ₹0.34 a share for Sanjay Aggarwal and ₹0.74 for Puneet Agarwal to ₹37.42 for Crimson Winter (RHP p.1).

10Promoters

The promoters are Puneet Agarwal, managing director and chief executive, Sanjay Aggarwal, executive director and chief technology officer, and Sushma Abburi, chief product officer (RHP p.310). Sushma Abburi was identified as a promoter by a board resolution of February 22, 2026 (RHP p.311). The document states that Sanjay Aggarwal is the spouse of Sushma Abburi and that Chitra Agarwal is the spouse of Puneet Agarwal (RHP p.295, RHP p.312). None of the promoters' shares are pledged (RHP p.121). Litigation against the promoters: none (RHP p.436).

Pay: Puneet Agarwal received ₹4.0 crore in FY26 plus the one-time incentive of ₹160.0 crore paid in March 2026; Sanjay Aggarwal received ₹3.0 crore from WFPL (RHP p.296). Promoter economics: the two founders subscribed at ₹10 a share in 2014, then received a 5-for-1 bonus in March 2017, a 500-for-1 bonus in March 2024 and shares on conversion of preference shares in March and June 2024 (RHP p.113, RHP p.115, RHP p.116).

In August 2022 the company repurchased shares from Puneet Agarwal, Sanjay Aggarwal, Chitra Agarwal and Sushma Abburi at ₹14,752 a share (RHP p.115). From December 2025 to January 2026 the founders gifted shares to relatives and trusts, including 47,000,000 shares to the Agarwal Family Trust (RHP p.120, RHP p.121). Sushma Abburi received 4,346,676 shares from the employee trust at ₹1 on exercise of options in September 2026 (RHP p.121).

11Who already owns it

Source: RHP p.129. Promoters and promoter group hold 23.96% and the employee trust 0.80% (RHP p.128). After the issue at the upper band the promoters would hold about 15.6% and the promoter group about 19.3% of 1,760,231,268 shares (our arithmetic, RHP p.127, RHP p.128). Because the promoters will hold less than 20%, Accel India IV, Internet Fund III and Ribbit Capital will contribute shares to the 18-month lock-in (RHP p.125).

Early investors came in at ₹2,642.97 a share in 2014 (Ribbit Capital, Accel India IV) and ₹8,697.91 in 2015 (Internet Fund III), before the 500-for-1 bonus (RHP p.113). The last cash placements were at ₹64.15 a share in September 2024 and March 2025 (RHP p.116).

12What changed just before the IPO

• Public company: converted in June 2025 (RHP p.3).
• Cyber incident: ₹48.3 crore debited from WFPL's account in August 2025 (RHP p.46).
• Incentive: ₹160.0 crore paid to Puneet Agarwal in March 2026 (RHP p.33).
• Employee trust: 75,000,000 shares allotted at ₹1 in February 2026 (RHP p.116).
• Preference shares: 1,082,475,864 shares issued on conversion on September 9, 2026 (RHP p.84).
• Gifts: promoters moved shares to relatives and trusts, December 2025 to January 2026 (RHP p.120).
• New partners: financial partners rose from 19 in FY24 to 48 at June 2026 (RHP p.32).
• Rating: WFPL upgraded to IND A- in August 2025; outlook to positive in August 2026 (RHP p.53).
• SEBI: WFPL filed a settlement application in February 2026 over a debenture issue held by 254 holders (RHP p.45).

13Capacity and expansion

The company does not manufacture; its capacity is capital and partner appetite. Guarantees outstanding were 43.92% of net worth at June 30, 2026, and the proceeds add ₹325.0 crore of guarantee collateral (RHP p.142). WFPL's capital adequacy was 24.32% at June 30, 2026, against a 15% floor, on ₹5,587.1 crore of risk-weighted assets (RHP p.142). The prospectus does not say what disbursals the new capital supports, so it cannot be turned into loan volume.

14Market size and industry structure

As claimed: the Redseer report, commissioned and paid for by the company and dated September 11, 2026, puts retail loan sanctions at ₹76.6 trillion in FY26 and projects ₹138 to ₹151 trillion by FY31; it says digital personal loans were about 15% of unsecured personal loans sanctioned in FY26 (RHP p.212, RHP p.174). Those projections are Redseer's.

The part that is addressable: unsecured digital personal loans to households earning ₹3 lakh to ₹11 lakh a year (RHP p.213).

What the company is today: the commissioned report credits Moneyview with about 10.5% of digital unsecured personal loan sanctions and about 1.6% of all unsecured personal loan sanctions in FY26 (RHP p.174). The same report puts the company's annualised loss rate at 6.95% in FY26 against an industry average of 8.29% (RHP p.174).

Structure: lending is regulated by the RBI; the company works as a lending service provider under the RBI's 2025 credit directions, which cap guarantees at 5% of the portfolio (RHP p.36).

15Competitive position

Source: RHP p.151, RHP p.155, RHP p.156; PAT margins are our arithmetic on revenue from operations.

The company says there is no listed Indian company with a similar business (RHP p.154). What it cites for why users and partners use it: its own risk models on over 100,000 variables, an app rating of 4.8 stars, repeat borrowing, and marketing cost that fell from 2.92% of disbursals in FY24 to 1.90% in FY26 (RHP p.227, RHP p.213, RHP p.224).

16Peers the company named

Peers named in the offer document: OnEMI Technology Solutions, PB Fintech, One97 Communications, Bajaj Finance, and SBI Cards and Payment Services (RHP p.151).

OnEMI is the closest in model and is about 0.7 times Moneyview's FY26 revenue; PB Fintech and One97 run distribution and payments platforms about 2.0 and 2.5 times its size; SBI Cards and Bajaj Finance are lending NBFCs about 5.9 and 24.5 times its size (our arithmetic, RHP p.151, RHP p.154). Their P/E ratios at BSE prices of September 18, 2026 were 16.62, 120.33, 213.45, 27.98 and 33.66 (RHP p.151).

17Valuation at the issue price

At the upper band of ₹34, the fresh issue of ₹750.0 crore is 220,588,235 new shares, added to 1,539,643,033 shares outstanding (our arithmetic, RHP p.112):

Source: RHP p.96, RHP p.149, RHP p.150; ratios are our arithmetic. On FY26 profit before exceptional items of ₹397.3 crore the P/E is 15.1 times (our arithmetic, RHP p.96). At the lower band of ₹32 the market capitalisation is ₹5,676.9 crore on 1,774,018,033 shares (our arithmetic, RHP p.112). Enterprise value on the shares before the issue, with June 2026 borrowings of ₹5,484.8 crore and cash of ₹1,342.3 crore, is ₹9,377.2 crore (our arithmetic, RHP p.95); most of those borrowings fund WFPL's loans.

The five peers the prospectus names traded at 16.62 to 213.45 times FY26 diluted EPS on September 18, 2026, with a median of 33.66 and an average the company computes at 82.41 (RHP p.149, RHP p.151). At the upper band the issue is priced at 24.7 times FY26 profit on the enlarged share count, about 27% below that median (our arithmetic, RHP p.151).

18Risks, in plain words

Credit: impairment was ₹983.5 crore in FY26 (RHP p.36) → every rise in defaults on guaranteed or WFPL loans comes out of profit → it was 5.16% of average managed loans in FY26, up from 2.46% in FY24 (RHP p.36).

Guarantees: the company guarantees partners against loss up to 5% of the portfolio (RHP p.36) → a bad cycle is paid in cash from the deposits pledged to partners → ₹1,060.8 crore outstanding, 43.92% of net worth (RHP p.37).

Partners: arrangements are not exclusive (RHP p.33) → a partner leaving reduces fee income → the largest partner was 13.41% of FY26 revenue (RHP p.32).

Funding: WFPL borrows to lend (RHP p.51) → a rating cut or tighter credit raises its costs → debentures at 11.15% to 15.00% and total borrowings of ₹5,484.8 crore (RHP p.430).

Regulation: RBI rules govern guarantees, capital and digital lending (RHP p.41) → a change can alter the model → WFPL needs 15% capital adequacy and a 100% liquidity coverage ratio (RHP p.44).

Cyber: attackers used WFPL's banking interface in August 2025 (RHP p.46) → a repeat would be another direct loss → ₹48.3 crore debited, ₹2.3 crore recovered (RHP p.46).

Complaints: five complaints reached SEBI or the lead managers after the DRHP, mostly about collection practices (RHP p.59) → reputational and regulatory attention → none has become a legal proceeding (RHP p.61).

Issue-specific: the promoters will hold less than 20% after the issue (RHP p.85), and general corporate purposes are not yet quantified (RHP p.139).

19Litigation and regulatory matters

There are no criminal, regulatory, tax or material civil proceedings by or against the company or the promoters (RHP p.434, RHP p.436). The FEMA matter relates to Subrata Mitra's past role as a nominee director at Flipkart; the company is not a party (RHP p.435).

20Related-party transactions

Source: RHP p.100. Within the group, the company invested ₹325.0 crore of equity in WFPL in FY26 and earned ₹576.9 crore of service fees from it, eliminated on consolidation (RHP p.101). New in the period: the Moneyview Employees Trust from March 2025, Zeo Fin Technology from September 2024, independent directors from August and September 2025; Moneyview Solutions was struck off in June 2024 (RHP p.99).

21What the offer document does not say

The price band, lot size and issue expenses are left blank in the RHP. How much the company has actually paid out under its guarantees in cash, as opposed to the expense recognised, is not given in the pages read. Credit costs are not shown by partner or by loan product. Fee rates per loan are not disclosed. Why the fresh issue was halved from the draft is not explained. What disbursals the new WFPL capital is meant to support is not stated.

22Five questions for management

1. How much cash was paid to partners under default-loss guarantees in each of FY24 to FY26, against the ₹451.0 crore expense recognised in FY26?
2. Why was the fresh issue reduced from ₹1,500.0 crore in the draft to ₹750.0 crore?
3. What loss rate on WFPL's own loans is built into its FY27 plans, against Gross Stage 3 of 2.72% at June 2026?
4. What disbursals will the ₹250.0 crore of WFPL equity support at its target capital ratio?
5. What share of FY26 fee income came from the largest partner, and on what notice can that partner end the arrangement?

24Draft to final: what changed

The lead managers are the same in both documents: Axis Capital, BofA Securities India, IIFL Capital Services and Kotak Mahindra Capital (DRHP p.3, RHP p.3). The three promoters are unchanged (DRHP p.3, RHP p.3).

1Sources and cited facts

This study was read from 1 document the company filed. The 138 figures it cites are listed under the document each came from, with the page and the sentence as printed.