Some operational performance snapshot between SKS,Ujjivan and Satin. Data are taken from investor presentation, DRHP documents and Religare report. It is often require to analyze the AUM growth for which reason? Is it due to Increase of Number of Borrower, Increase in ticket size or due to change in loan duration?
Just a thought , If Opex is reducing without much growth in ticket size is assumed as good. But If ticket size getting increased significantly with reduction of Opex that may be indicates loan outstanding is getting increased per client which is may not good as the GLP loan type is unsecured. For Ujjivan and Satin I don’t have ‘change in loan duration’ value which considered one of the parameter of AUM Growth. Looking for the opinion from fellow boarders.
Cap on the spread for SFB is theoretically and practically impossible. Because the landed cost of fund
for a bank is very distinct from a cost of fund for NBFC. In NBFC, the cost of fund and the interest cost are actually just the same. But for a bank, the landed cost is going to be the interest cost on the deposit plus the cost of mobilizing. The cost of mobilizing which is distinctively different from NBFC as it is going to be something like the cost of an IT system that SFBs are putting in place, the cost of new 400 branches that they are going to setup and the cost of the liability team which is also going to be included. So these are the things SFBs have to factor while fixing their lending rate. SFBs will start to pass on the benefit to their borrower when it is sustainable from an institutional perspective, not before.