- Own AUM (avg):
₹30 Cr (same as Scenario A).
- Co-lent partner AUM (avg) (partner’s share, 80:20 ratio):
₹70 Cr.
- Co-lent total per loan: own
20% + partner 80%. So ₹70 Cr partner share = own share ₹17.5 Cr of co-lent loans. Plus standalone own book of ~₹12.5 Cr. Total own = ₹30 Cr.
- Total live AUM:
~₹100 Cr.
- Annual disbursement:
~₹400 Cr (4× turn on ₹100 Cr).
| Line | Annual ₹ |
|---|
Interest on own share (19% × ₹30 Cr) | ₹5.70 Cr |
Processing fee on own disbursals (1.5% × ₹120 Cr) | ₹1.80 Cr |
Processing fee on partner share (1.0% × ₹280 Cr partner disbursal) | ₹2.80 Cr |
Servicing fee from partner (1.0% × ₹70 Cr) | ₹0.70 Cr |
Servicing on own line (0.25% × ₹30 Cr) | ₹0.075 Cr |
| Penal / other | ₹0.10 Cr |
| Gross revenue | ₹11.18 Cr |
| Line | Annual ₹ |
|---|
Cost of funds (own ₹20 Cr debt × 12.5%) | ₹2.50 Cr |
Operating cost (slightly higher than A; 3.3% × ₹100 Cr) | ₹3.30 Cr |
Tech + vendor cost (0.8% × ₹100 Cr) | ₹0.80 Cr |
DSA / channel payout (assume 60% of own + 30% of co-lent via DSA at 0.6% blended) | ₹1.10 Cr |
| Total operating cost | ₹7.70 Cr |
Credit cost own share (2.5% × ₹30 Cr) | ₹0.75 Cr |
Credit cost on DLG (assume 2.5% × ₹70 Cr × 5% cap recovered) — net partner loss | ~₹0.50 Cr opportunity but capped |
| Net credit cost burdening own books | ~₹0.75 Cr + cost of DLG instrument ₹0.35 Cr funding = ₹1.10 Cr |
| Total cost | ₹8.80 Cr |
| Line | Annual ₹ |
|---|
| Gross revenue | ₹11.18 Cr |
| Less: total cost | ₹8.80 Cr |
| Pre-tax profit | ₹2.38 Cr |
Tax (25%) | ₹0.60 Cr |
| Net profit | ₹1.78 Cr |
| Ratio | Value |
|---|
| Gross revenue / total AUM | ~11.2% |
| Pre-tax profit / total AUM | ~2.4% |
| Pre-tax profit / own equity (₹10 Cr) | ~24% |
| Cost-income ratio | ~78% (op-cost / total revenue; higher than A due to capacity build) |
| Metric | A (₹30 Cr own) | B (₹30 Cr own + ₹70 Cr co-lent) |
|---|
| Total AUM | ₹30 Cr | ₹100 Cr |
| Gross revenue | ₹7.68 Cr | ₹11.18 Cr |
| Pre-tax profit | ₹2.33 Cr | ₹2.38 Cr |
| ROA (on total AUM) | ~7.8% | ~2.4% (looks lower because partner share doesn’t add credit-risk equity) |
| Pre-tax ROE | ~23% | ~24% |
| Equity required | ~₹10 Cr | ~₹10 Cr (same; co-lent doesn’t need own equity) |
ROA on total AUM looks lower in Scenario B, but return on own equity is similar/better. Co-lending earns fees on the partner share without using own capital — so the right measure is ROE / return on capital deployed, not ROA on the combined book.
- Co-lending adds
₹3.5 Cr of gross revenue (mostly fees) on the same own equity base.
- Operating costs scale
~50% more (manage 3.3× the book) — sub-linear with revenue.
- Pre-tax profit barely moves — operating costs absorbed all the gain. This is the painful truth of early co-lending: first partner pays for the operational build-out, not for shareholders.
- The break to real economics happens at Scenario C with multi-partner.
- Partner pulls back mid-year →
₹70 Cr book disappears → operating costs locked → loss year.
- DLG cap breach (portfolio shrinks fast) → ratio exceeds 5% → operational scramble.
- Reconciliation gaps → partner disputes → operational drag.
Scenario B is the necessary stepping stone, not the destination. The right read is: prove operations on partner #1, then scale via partners #2, #3, #4 in Scenario C.