Journie WealthTech Private Limited | AMFI Registered Mutual Fund & SIF Distributor (ARN: 318048)

The ₹52,800 Crore Turnaround: What Fairfax’s IDBI Bet Signals for Indian Banking

A bank that once struggled with bad loans is now attracting a ₹52,878 crore acquisition bid.

On October 14, 2026, the Indian government approved Fairfax Financial Holdings as the strategic buyer for a 60.72% stake in IDBI Bank.

But this is more than a bank changing hands.

From RBL Bank and Yes Bank to Shriram Finance, international investors are making significant bets on India’s financial-services industry.

Why are global investors buying into India’s financial system? And what does this mean for the future of Indian banking?

Let’s look beyond the headlines.

From a Troubled Bank to a ₹52,878 Crore Deal

In September 2018, IDBI Bank was in serious financial distress. Nearly one-third of its loan book was bad, with a gross non-performing asset (NPA) ratio of 31.78%.

Under the RBI’s Prompt Corrective Action (PCA) framework, the bank had required repeated capital support from the government and LIC.

Fast-forward to March 2026.

IDBI Bank’s gross NPA ratio had fallen to 2.32%, while its net NPA ratio stood at just 0.15%. For FY2025–26, it reported a net profit of ₹9,513 crore, up 27% year-on-year.

The turnaround was substantial and set the stage for one of India’s biggest financial deals.

The institution that once needed support had become an acquisition target for a global investor willing to pay ₹52,878 crore for a controlling stake.

The government and LIC are selling 30.48% and 30.24%, respectively, transferring a combined 60.72% interest to Fairfax’s acquisition vehicle.

The transaction still requires the remaining regulatory and completion steps.

The interesting question is not just how IDBI recovered. It is what a new owner believes it can do with the bank next.

What Is Fairfax Really Buying?

Fairfax isn’t treating IDBI as a standalone lender.

The group proposes integrating its existing holdings: Go Digit Insurance and IIFL Capital Services, into the IDBI Bank fold, subject to regulatory approvals.

If implemented, the broader structure could bring banking, insurance and capital-markets businesses closer together.

Think of it as buying an entire financial ecosystem rather than a single office building.

A bank gives you low-cost deposit gathering, lending capabilities, and millions of retail relationships.

Bringing banking, insurance and capital-markets businesses closer together could create cross-selling opportunities and allow the group to serve customers’ broader financial needs.

If the proposed structure goes ahead, Fairfax could have the building blocks of a broader financial-services platform.

But bringing businesses under a common ownership structure is only the first step. Whether they can work together effectively and generate better returns is the real test.

Why Are Global Investors Buying Indian Financial Institutions?

IDBI is not an isolated deal; it’s part of a broader wave of foreign capital entering Indian finance:

RBL Bank: Emirates NBD completed its acquisition of a 60% stake through a primary capital infusion in June 2026.
Yes Bank: SMBC completed its initial 20% acquisition in September 2025 and signed an agreement for a further 4.2%.
Shriram Finance: MUFG completed its ₹39,618 crore investment for a 20% stake in April 2026.

These are not identical bets. One gives an investor control of a bank, another builds a strategic minority position, and a third expands exposure to India’s non-bank lending market.

Together, they suggest that global investors see opportunities across different layers of India’s financial system.

So why buy an incumbent instead of setting up a greenfield operation?

Low-Cost Deposits (CASA): Setting up a retail deposit franchise takes decades. Acquiring a bank grants instant access to cheap, sticky CASA deposits—the ultimate competitive moat in lending.
Turnkey Distribution: Thousands of physical branches, digital channels, and millions of existing relationships provide immediate scale.
Regulatory Moats: Banking licenses in India are rare and prized. Buying an existing institution is the fastest route to a full-service license.
Healthier Balance Sheets: As legacy bad loans have declined across much of the sector, investors can focus more on future credit growth, while still managing the risks that come with lending.

These advantages can make established institutions attractive acquisition targets.

But buying a bank is not the same as creating value from it. The purchase price, competition, cost of funding and ability to execute will ultimately determine the returns.

Is IDBI the Beginning of a Bigger Banking Reset?

The IDBI transaction comes amid renewed discussion about the future ownership and structure of public-sector banks.

Reports indicate plans to trim government stakes in Central Bank of India, UCO Bank, Punjab & Sind Bank, and IOB down to 75% to meet public shareholding norms, along with potential fresh rounds of PSU consolidation.

Separately, the government is reportedly working on another round of public-sector bank consolidation that could identify two more banks for potential privatisation.

There is an important distinction here.

Reducing government ownership does not automatically mean privatisation. The government can sell shares while retaining management control. A strategic sale, by contrast, transfers control to a buyer.

The government has previously announced plans to privatise two public-sector banks in addition to IDBI Bank. However, the latest reports do not amount to a confirmed list of new banks being put up for sale.

The broader policy question is whether India should retain its existing structure of state-owned banks or move towards a smaller number of larger institutions.

Larger banks may benefit from scale, technology investment and operational efficiencies. Consolidation, however, also brings integration risks and potential consequences for competition.

Privatisation and consolidation are different tools. One changes ownership; the other combines institutions.

IDBI’s proposed sale has brought both questions back into focus: who should own India’s banks, and what structure will help them serve a growing economy most effectively?

The Price of a Turnaround

There is one final question worth asking: does ₹52,878 crore represent fair value for IDBI Bank?

Fairfax’s offer of ₹81 per share is approximately 6.6% above the government’s independent valuation benchmark of ₹75.99 per share. Fairfax also said its offer represents a premium of around 23% to the bank’s book value as of June 30, 2026.

While some will debate whether this fully captures the bank’s long-term book value, M&A in Indian banking is rarely just about current asset multiples.

Foreign buyers are paying a strategic premium for control, platform scale, and the multi-decade growth runway of Indian credit.

For Fairfax, the question is whether the value it can create over time justifies the acquisition price.

For the government and LIC, it is whether the sale represents a reasonable realisation of value for the stakes being transferred.

And for the broader market, the transaction offers a useful lesson.

The value of an asset depends not only on what it is worth today, but also on what a capable owner can make of it tomorrow.

The Bottom Line

India's financial system is attracting international capital as investors look for opportunities to expand through established banks and lending institutions.

IDBI, RBL Bank, Yes Bank and Shriram Finance represent different routes into the same financial ecosystem. Some investors want control. Others want a strategic stake. Some are investing in banks; others are backing non-bank lenders.

But the real test begins after the deal closes.

Can new ownership translate into better products, stronger institutions and sustainable returns? Can investors unlock value without underestimating the complexity of running a financial institution?

IDBI's next chapter will help answer those questions.

Because in finance, an asset gives you ownership. Creating value from it is what makes the investment worthwhile.

Disclaimer: This update is for informational purposes only. Please consult a SEBI-registered advisor before investing.

Enjoyed this week’s Sunday Shots? Share it across WhatsApp, LinkedIn, or X — and invite someone else into the conversation.
Subscribe to Sunday Shots for a fresh perspective delivered every week.

Recent Blogs

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

3 Oct 2026

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

10 Oct 2026

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

17 Oct 2026

Banking & Finance, Indian Economy, Uncategorized

24 Oct 2026

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

Journie WealthTech Private Limited | AMFI Registered Mutual Fund & SIF Distributor (ARN: 318048)

When ₹2.8 Crore Became a ₹28,000 Crore Question

Imagine a company with annual revenues of over ₹28,000 crore.

It has factories across India, thousands of dealers, a presence in international markets and a balance sheet that most businesses would envy.

It has more than ₹4,000 crore in net cash. No net debt. A net worth running into thousands of crores.

Now picture this company facing insolvency proceedings over a disputed payment of approximately ₹2.8 crore.

That’s roughly 0.01% of its annual revenue.

Sounds absurd?

Welcome to the world of corporate India, where a small commercial dispute can sometimes shift the conversation around a business—from growth to litigation, from profits to legal risks.

The dispute that took an unexpected turn

In October 2026, a major listed Indian manufacturer of wires and cables found itself at the centre of an unexpected legal development.

A supplier approached the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), claiming that the company owed it approximately ₹2.79 crore in operational dues.

The supplier invoked Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), the law that allows an operational creditor to initiate insolvency proceedings when qualifying dues remain unpaid.

On October 7, the NCLT’s Ahmedabad bench admitted the insolvency petition.

This was not a declaration that the company had run out of money. Nor did it mean the business had suddenly become financially weak.

The company disputed the claim, describing it as a commercial dispute and pointing to issues involving credit notes and the underlying transactions.

But the legal process had taken a turn that few would have expected for a company of this size.

The company challenged the order before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT).

On October 9, the appellate tribunal stayed the insolvency order, keeping it in abeyance pending further orders. The relief was subject to the company depositing the claimed amount, without prejudice to its rights and contentions. The appeal was listed for October 26.

In other words, the insolvency process was put on hold, but the underlying dispute was not finally resolved.

And that makes the episode worth studying.

When a small dispute becomes a big risk

At first glance, this looks like a straightforward dispute between a buyer and a supplier.

But the real story lies in the chain of events that happens next.

1. The legal domino

The IBC is a powerful tool. Once an insolvency petition is admitted, the consequences can be significant, including a moratorium and the commencement of a formal resolution process.

That is why an admission order can matter far beyond the amount being claimed.

2. The market’s reaction

Investors rarely react only to the rupee value of a dispute. They also react to uncertainty.

Will the matter be resolved quickly? Could it affect business relationships? Are there other unresolved issues? Does the event reveal something about the company’s processes or governance?

A dispute worth a few crores can raise questions about thousands of crores in market capitalization.

Not because the claim itself justifies that valuation change, but because uncertainty can alter how investors price risk.

3. The reputation cost

For a large company, reputation is an asset.

Banks, suppliers, distributors, employees and institutional investors all make decisions based on how they perceive a business.

Even when a company has the financial capacity to meet its obligations, a legal controversy can temporarily shift attention from its operating strengths to its unresolved risks.

That is the second-order effect: the original dispute may be small, but the consequences of uncertainty need not be.

The twist: the market doesn't wait for the final verdict

The story did not end with the appellate tribunal staying the insolvency order.

The National Stock Exchange had also initiated action under its insolvency-related framework. It announced that the stock would be excluded from the equity derivatives segment from December 30, 2026. From October 14, a 100% margin requirement applied to existing and new derivative positions under the exchange’s circular.

Existing October, November and December contracts would continue until their respective expiry dates, but no new expiry-month contracts would be introduced.

This created another layer of uncertainty for market participants.

For traders, the change affected how they could manage derivative positions. For investors, it raised questions about liquidity, sentiment and the difference between a company’s underlying business and the way its shares trade.

Importantly, the exclusion from derivatives trading was not a verdict on the company’s financial health or the merits of the supplier’s claim. It was an exchange action under the applicable framework.

When separate events become one big story

There was also a separate tax-related chapter.

Earlier in 2026, the company had disclosed an income-tax demand of ₹327.45 crore relating to an assessment for FY2023–24. After a rectification order addressing computational and clerical errors, the demand was reduced to ₹57.58 crore. The company maintained that the remaining demand was not sustainable in law and was pursuing further remedies.

These were separate proceedings, involving different issues and legal processes. They should not be treated as evidence that one caused the other.

Yet, when multiple developments arrive close together, markets can begin to view them as one larger story.

And that is where perception becomes important.

The Lessons Hidden in a Small Dispute

1. A Strong Balance Sheet Cannot Solve Everything

Cash, profits and net worth tell us a great deal about a company’s financial strength. But they cannot automatically settle contractual disputes or prevent legal action.

A company can be financially strong and still face legal uncertainty.

Financial strength and legal certainty are two different things.

2. Paperwork Can Protect More Than Money

Invoices, purchase orders, credit notes and payment terms may seem like routine paperwork when business is running smoothly.

But when a disagreement arises, those documents can become central to the outcome.

A dispute that appears minor can become a much bigger problem if the underlying transactions are poorly documented or disagreements are not formally recorded.

Sometimes, the smallest administrative details can carry the biggest consequences.

3. A Headline Is Not the Final Verdict

An insolvency admission, an appellate stay, a tax demand and a final judicial decision are not the same thing. Each represents a different stage of a process.

Reacting to a headline without understanding its legal status can lead to poor investment decisions. But dismissing every controversy simply because a company has a strong balance sheet can be equally dangerous.

The right approach is neither panic nor complacency.

It is to understand what has happened, what remains unresolved and what could happen next.

The business is one thing. The story is another

A business spends years building factories, distribution networks, customer relationships and financial strength.

Yet, an unexpected legal development can change the conversation around it in a matter of days.

That doesn't erase what the company has built. But its financial strength doesn't make every controversy irrelevant either.

For investors, the challenge is to separate the fundamentals of a business from the risks surrounding it.

For business owners, the lesson begins much earlier: strong financials matter, but so do clear contracts, reliable documentation and processes that hold up when disagreements arise.

Sometimes, the biggest lesson in a small dispute is not about the money involved. It is about how quickly the story can change.

Disclaimer: This update is for informational purposes only. Please consult a SEBI-registered advisor before investing.

Enjoyed this week’s Sunday Shots? Share it across WhatsApp, LinkedIn, or X — and invite someone else into the conversation.
Subscribe to Sunday Shots for a fresh perspective delivered every week.

Recent Blogs

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

3 Oct 2026

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

10 Oct 2026

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

17 Oct 2026

Banking & Finance, Indian Economy, Uncategorized

24 Oct 2026

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

Journie WealthTech Private Limited | AMFI Registered Mutual Fund & SIF Distributor (ARN: 318048)

The RBI Has Raised Rates. But Can Higher Interest Rates Fix India's Inflation Problem?

On October 7, the Reserve Bank of India raised its benchmark interest rate by 25 basis points, the first rate hike since February 2023.

The Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) increased the policy repo rate by 25 basis points, from 5.25% to 5.50%, and shifted its stance from neutral to calibrated tightening.

At first glance, the decision appears straightforward. Inflation is rising, so the central bank is making borrowing more expensive to contain it.

But when we look at the numbers, the decision becomes more interesting.

The RBI raised its FY2026–27 GDP growth forecast from 6.7% to 7.1%. At the same time, it raised its inflation projection from 5.0% to 5.2%.

In other words, the central bank expects the economy to grow faster than previously anticipated, but it is also becoming more concerned about prices.

Why tighten monetary policy when growth is holding up? And more importantly, can higher interest rates solve an inflation problem partly driven by expensive oil, weather uncertainty and global supply disruptions?

To understand the decision, we need to look beyond the repo rate.

Not all inflation comes from the same place

Imagine two situations.

In the first, consumers are spending freely, businesses are expanding and demand is growing faster than the supply of goods and services. Businesses find they can raise prices without losing customers.

In the second, crude oil becomes more expensive, food supplies face weather-related disruptions, or global supply chains come under pressure. Businesses see their costs rise and pass some of those increases on to customers.

Both situations can produce inflation. But the underlying problems are different.

Higher interest rates can help cool demand. More expensive borrowing may discourage some purchases, delay business investments and encourage households to save rather than spend.

But higher rates cannot bring down the international price of oil. They cannot improve agricultural output or reverse a poor monsoon.

That is where the RBI’s dilemma begins.

Why raise rates if the problem is expensive oil?

India imports much of the crude oil it consumes. When global oil prices rise, the impact can travel through transportation, logistics, manufacturing and other energy-intensive activities.

A weaker rupee can add to the pressure by making dollar-denominated imports more expensive in rupee terms.

The RBI cannot directly reverse these developments. So why tighten monetary policy?

Because it can influence what happens after the initial shock.

If businesses and households believe inflation will remain elevated, their decisions may begin to reflect that expectation. Businesses may raise prices in anticipation of higher costs. Workers may seek higher wages to preserve purchasing power. Consumers may bring forward purchases if they expect prices to increase further.

If these effects become widespread, an initially external shock can turn into a more persistent domestic inflation problem.

Higher interest rates cannot eliminate the original shock. They can, however, restrain demand and help keep inflation expectations from becoming entrenched.

The growth paradox: why tighten when India is expected to grow faster?

The RBI’s upward revision to its FY27 growth forecast makes the rate hike particularly interesting.

A stronger growth outlook does not mean every household or business is doing well. Nor does a forecast guarantee the outcome.

But it suggests the central bank believes economic activity can remain resilient even as it responds to inflation risks.

There is also a timing issue.

Interest-rate changes do not affect the economy overnight. A business deciding whether to build a factory, a family considering a home loan and a bank deciding how much to lend all respond to financing costs differently.

The effects unfold over time.

If demand is robust, a modest increase in borrowing costs may help prevent the economy from generating additional inflationary pressure. If growth is already weakening, the same increase could have a more damaging effect.

The RBI must weigh both risks.

Its task is not to maximize growth in any single quarter. It is to maintain price stability while supporting sustainable economic growth over time.

That is why the growth forecast and the rate hike are not necessarily contradictory.

What does 'calibrated tightening' actually mean?

The change in the RBI’s policy stance deserves as much attention as the 25-basis-point hike.

The repo rate tells us the current policy price of short-term central-bank borrowing for banks. The policy stance signals the direction in which monetary policy is inclined to move.

By shifting from neutral to calibrated tightening, the MPC has signalled a greater emphasis on containing inflationary pressures.

It does not mean that another rate increase is guaranteed at the next meeting. Nor does it establish a predetermined path for interest rates.

Future decisions will depend on how inflation evolves, whether price pressures broaden further, how growth holds up and what happens to external conditions.

The RBI has also adjusted other policy rates alongside the repo rate. Following the October decision, the Standing Deposit Facility rate stands at 5.25%, while the Marginal Standing Facility rate and Bank Rate stand at 5.75%.

Together, these rates form part of the framework through which the RBI influences short-term money-market conditions.

How does a 25-basis-point hike reach your wallet?

The RBI does not directly set the interest rate on every home loan, business loan or bank deposit.

Its policy rate influences the financial system, and the effects travel through several stages.

For borrowers, the impact depends on the loan’s interest-rate structure.

A floating-rate loan linked to an external benchmark such as the repo rate may become more expensive when the benchmark changes, subject to the loan’s reset terms and applicable spread. A fixed-rate loan may not change at all during its fixed-rate period.

For a household, that could mean a higher EMI or a longer repayment period, depending on how the lender adjusts the loan.

For businesses, higher financing costs can affect working capital, refinancing and the economics of new projects.

Depositors may see a different outcome.

Banks may raise rates on new fixed deposits if they need to attract funding or respond to competitive pressures. But a 25-basis-point repo-rate increase does not mean every deposit rate will rise by the same amount.

Banks make those decisions based on their funding needs, liquidity, credit demand and profitability.

The broader lesson: policy transmission is neither immediate nor uniform.

The RBI influences financial conditions, but banks and borrowers respond according to their own circumstances.

What happens to bonds, equities and the rupee?

A rate hike affects financial markets in different ways.

Bonds

Bond prices and yields move in opposite directions. When market yields rise, existing fixed-coupon bonds tend to lose value.

Longer-duration bonds are usually more sensitive to these changes.

While higher yields can improve returns on new investments, they can also create short-term losses in existing debt portfolios.

Equities

Higher interest rates can increase borrowing costs and reduce the value investors assign to future earnings.

Companies with substantial debt may face greater pressure, although earnings growth, valuations and business fundamentals also matter.

The rupee

Higher domestic interest rates can sometimes support a currency, but they are only one part of the equation.

US Treasury yields have also been rising, making dollar-denominated assets more attractive to investors and adding to pressure on emerging-market currencies. For India, this comes alongside expensive crude oil, which increases demand for dollars to pay for imports.

The story didn't end with the repo-rate decision

On October 9, the RBI announced additional liquidity-management measures.

These included a ₹25,000 crore open-market sale of government bonds, scheduled for October 13, and an increase in the minimum daily cash reserve ratio (CRR) maintenance requirement for banks from 90% to 99%, effective from the fortnight beginning October 16.

The overall CRR ratio remains unchanged.

Why does this matter?

The repo rate and banking-system liquidity are related, but they are not the same thing.

The repo rate sets the benchmark policy price. Liquidity operations influence how much money is available in the banking system and the conditions under which banks manage their funding.

Together, these measures can influence short-term money-market rates and bond-market conditions

The RBI's next move: defending the rupee

On October 10, the RBI announced further measures to ease pressure on the rupee.

From October 12, it will meet the daily dollar requirements of three public-sector oil companies—IOC, HPCL and BPCL—through designated banks, reducing their direct demand in the spot market.

It also tightened rules for rupee-linked forex derivatives.

These include a 20% Foreign Exchange Risk Reserve for certain eligible transactions above $2 million, reducing the threshold for transactions without establishing underlying exposure from $100 million to $5 million, and prohibiting the rebooking of cancelled contracts. Rollovers at maturity remain permitted.

The aim is to strengthen market discipline and improve risk management. While these measures may ease pressure on the rupee, they cannot eliminate the impact of expensive oil, rising US yields or global capital flows.

The bigger picture

A repo-rate increase is easy to describe in terms of 25 basis points. Its consequences are much harder to predict.

It influences borrowing costs, savings decisions, financial-asset valuations and business investment. But it cannot solve every problem that pushes prices higher.

The real test of the RBI's decision will be whether tighter financial conditions help contain persistent inflation without imposing disproportionate costs on economic activity.

For households, investors and businesses, the lesson is simple: when the economic environment changes, financial decisions need to be reassessed.

Because understanding the direction of interest rates is useful.

Knowing what that means for the decisions you make with money is far more valuable.

Disclaimer: This update is for informational purposes only. Please consult a SEBI-registered advisor before investing.

Enjoyed this week’s Sunday Shots? Share it across WhatsApp, LinkedIn, or X — and invite someone else into the conversation.
Subscribe to Sunday Shots for a fresh perspective delivered every week.

Recent Blogs

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

3 Oct 2026

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

10 Oct 2026

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

17 Oct 2026

Banking & Finance, Indian Economy, Uncategorized

24 Oct 2026

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

Journie WealthTech Private Limited | AMFI Registered Mutual Fund & SIF Distributor (ARN: 318048)

India Is Raising Record Money. So Why Does the Market Feel Weak?

India is raising money at a record pace.

And yet, the stock market doesn’t feel particularly healthy.

In the first half of FY27, Indian companies and shareholders raised a record ₹2.43 lakh crore through equity markets, up 75% from the same period last year. IPOs alone crossed ₹1 lakh crore, while mainboard IPOs accounted for ₹94,205 crore.

Then came September.

The Nifty 50 fell 6.1%, its sharpest monthly decline since March. Foreign investors were heavy sellers, with global rates, rising oil prices and geopolitical tensions adding pressure.

And yet, India’s IPO market had one of its busiest months ever.

34 IPOs raised ₹39,339.55 crore in September alone.

The NSE IPO contributed more than half of that, at approximately ₹22,563 crore.

So here’s the puzzle:

If the market is weak, where is all this capital coming from?

The answer reveals something important about how India’s capital markets are changing.

The market isn't one single transaction

When we say “the market is weak”, we’re usually talking about the secondary market — investors buying and selling shares that already exist.

But an IPO happens in the primary market — where new shares are offered to investors, or existing shareholders sell their holdings.

These are different transactions, with different participants and different dynamics.

And that distinction explains how the market can be falling while companies are still raising record amounts.

The strange part

September gave us a particularly interesting picture.

Foreign investors were net sellers of about ₹44,013 crore in the cash market.

Domestic institutional investors were net buyers of about ₹76,030 crore.

So domestic institutions were buying. Foreign investors were selling.

And the Nifty still fell 6.1%.

This tells us something: Knowing who is buying and selling isn’t enough.

We also need to understand what they are buying, what they are selling, and where the capital is flowing.

Meanwhile, the IPO machine kept running

September wasn’t just busy. It was extraordinary.

₹39,339 crore was raised through 34 IPOs in one month.

And the queue behind them is even larger.

As of September 25, Prime Database estimated that 237 companies were in the IPO pipeline, with potential issues worth ₹4.48 lakh crore. Of these, 120 had valid SEBI approvals, while 117 were awaiting approval.

The exact amount that will eventually be raised will depend on market conditions, valuations and whether individual companies proceed.

But the message is clear:

India has an enormous queue of companies waiting to access public capital.

And one of the biggest names in that queue is Jio Platforms.

Jio Platforms has received SEBI approval for its proposed IPO, with Prime Database estimating an issue size of around ₹37,700 crore.

Current reports suggest the IPO could open around October 21, although the timing remains subject to market conditions.

And this isn’t just another large IPO. It could become the next major test of how much capital India’s primary market can absorb after September’s record activity.

But not all money raised is the same

This is where the headline numbers need some unpacking.

When a company raises money through a fresh issue, new shares are created and the company receives the proceeds.

In an Offer for Sale (OFS), existing shareholders sell their shares. The company doesn’t receive that money.

In the first half of FY27, fresh capital accounted for about ₹1.14 lakh crore, only 47% of the total ₹2.43 lakh crore public-equity mobilization. The remaining ₹1.29 lakh crore came through offers for sale.

Mainboard IPOs provide a closer look at this distinction. Of the ₹94,205 crore raised, only ₹38,510 crore — 41% — represented fresh capital. The remainder came through offers for sale by existing shareholders. Private promoters sold ₹26,048 crore, while PE/VC investors sold another ₹9,313 crore.

So, when we hear: “India raised a record amount through equity markets.”

We shouldn’t automatically interpret that as the same amount of fresh capital flowing into businesses.

Some of it is. Some of it is simply capital changing hands.

That distinction becomes important when trying to understand where liquidity is actually going.

So why are investors still buying IPOs?

There isn’t one simple answer. But several things are happening simultaneously.

Domestic liquidity has become deeper.

India now has a much larger domestic pool of capital flowing through mutual funds, SIPs, insurance and institutional investors.

That doesn’t make India immune to foreign selling. But it does mean the market isn’t entirely dependent on foreign capital.

Investors can be selective. Selling an existing stock doesn’t necessarily mean abandoning India.

An eligible foreign portfolio investor can participate in India’s primary market as well as the secondary market under the applicable regulatory framework.

In the first half of FY27, FPIs sold ₹1.64 lakh crore in the secondary market, while still investing ₹44,960 crore in the primary market.

That doesn’t mean every FPI selling listed stocks was simultaneously buying IPOs. But it does show that foreign investors were not treating India’s primary and secondary markets as the same trade.

The decision isn’t necessarily: “India or no India?”

It can be: “Which Indian opportunity, at what price?”

That’s an important distinction.

And there is another force at work

A lot of the current IPO activity isn’t simply new companies suddenly deciding to go public.

There is a backlog.

Several offerings were delayed amid geopolitical uncertainty and later returned to the market. Strong domestic liquidity, large transactions and deferred issues helped drive the first-half fundraising record.

At the same time, companies that have spent years building scale are reaching the point where public markets become a natural source of capital or liquidity.

That helps explain why the primary market can remain strong even when the broader market is under pressure.

But here's where it gets interesting

If hundreds of companies are looking to raise capital, there is an obvious question:

Where does all that capital come from?

Investors don’t have an infinite pool of money. Every new issue creates another choice.

Do I buy an existing listed company?
Do I participate in an IPO?
Do I hold bonds?
Do I keep cash?
Do I wait?

This doesn’t mean IPOs are causing the market weakness.

The evidence points to much larger forces behind September’s sell-off — including higher oil prices, elevated global rates, geopolitical tensions and foreign investor outflows.

But the scale of the primary market adds another layer to the story:

There is more capital being raised, more capital being reallocated, and more decisions being made about where money should sit.

But raising capital is not the end of the story

An IPO, QIP or fundraise tells us how much capital has been raised.

It doesn’t tell us what happens next.

A company that raises ₹1,000 crore doesn’t necessarily deploy ₹1,000 crore the next morning.

Capital may sit on the balance sheet while the company waits for an acquisition, a new facility, an expansion plan, or simply the right time to deploy it.

And that creates a less visible part of the capital cycle:

What happens to the money between raising it and deploying it?

Because capital has a waiting period

That waiting period can be months or even years.

During that time, the money still needs to remain liquid enough when required, protected from unnecessary risk, and allocated across appropriate instruments.

It also needs to be tracked across accounts and entities, while being properly reported and governed.

The fundraise may be the headline.

But what happens to the money afterwards is a treasury decision.

See you next Sunday for another shot of insights!

Disclaimer: This update is for informational purposes only. Please consult a SEBI-registered advisor before investing.

Enjoyed this week’s Sunday Shots? Share it across WhatsApp, LinkedIn, or X — and invite someone else into the conversation.
Subscribe to Sunday Shots for a fresh perspective delivered every week.

Recent Blogs

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

3 Oct 2026

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

10 Oct 2026

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

17 Oct 2026

Banking & Finance, Indian Economy, Uncategorized

24 Oct 2026

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

Journie WealthTech Private Limited | AMFI Registered Mutual Fund & SIF Distributor (ARN: 318048)

India Had Too Much Money. Now the Price of Money Is Rising.

Something important is happening to money across markets.

India’s banking system had accumulated an unusually large liquidity surplus. Earlier this month, that surplus touched approximately ₹11.16 lakh crore. By September 22, it had fallen to around ₹4.45 lakh crore.

At the same time, the 10-year US Treasury yield crossed 5.2%, Brent crude moved above $100 a barrel and India’s 10-year government bond yield rose above 7.1%.

These are not isolated market moves.

Together, they tell a bigger story: the price of money is changing.

First, India had too much liquidity

To understand what is happening now, we need to go back a few weeks.

India’s banking system suddenly found itself with an extraordinary amount of cash. A major source was the mobilisation of FCNR(B) deposits.

When banks brought the foreign currency raised through these deposits to the RBI’s swap facility, they received rupee liquidity. That increased the amount of cash available in the banking system. Government spending also contributed to the surplus.

By September 6, surplus liquidity had reached approximately ₹11.16 lakh crore — nearly 4% of banking-system deposits.

When banks have that much excess cash, overnight money is easy to find.

Short-term rates tend to remain soft. There is little urgency to pay up for liquidity.

But this was an unusually large surplus, and the RBI did not want all of it to remain in the system indefinitely.

So, it began absorbing the excess.

Then the RBI started absorbing the excess

The RBI announced ₹1 lakh crore of Open Market Operation (OMO) sales in three tranches.

₹50,000 crore on September 17, 2026.
₹25,000 crore on September 21, 2026.
₹25,000 crore scheduled for September 28, 2026.

In simple terms, the RBI sells government securities to the market.

Investors pay for those bonds. Cash moves out of the banking system. Liquidity falls.

The RBI has also been using Variable Rate Reverse Repo (VRRR) auctions to absorb surplus cash.

On September 23 alone, it absorbed ₹75,026 crore through an overnight VRRR operation at a weighted average rate of 5.24%.

The impact has been significant.

Surplus liquidity fell from approximately ₹11.16 lakh crore on September 6 to around ₹4.45 lakh crore by September 22 — a decline of roughly 60%.

That does not mean the RBI alone directly removed 60% of the money. The surplus also changes with government cash flows, foreign-exchange operations and other movements in the banking system.

Still, the direction is clear: Extraordinary liquidity is being normalised.

The first signal appeared in the money market

For weeks, abundant liquidity had kept overnight money relatively easy.

Now, as the surplus shrinks, the RBI is having to actively manage the overnight market within its operating corridor of 5.00% to 5.50%.

The Weighted Average Call Rate — the weighted-average rate in the unsecured overnight call-money market — recently moved above the RBI’s 5.25% repo rate, reaching 5.31% on September 22.

That is an early sign that liquidity is beginning to influence the price at which money changes hands.

And when the price of short-term money starts moving, the impact does not necessarily stop there.

It can travel into bonds, currencies, borrowing costs and eventually the broader economy.

Then bonds started telling a bigger story

By September 24, the benchmark 10-year Indian government bond yield had risen 6 basis points to 7.11%, its highest level since May 21. It opened around 7.13% on September 25 and later settled at approximately 7.12%.

Indian government bonds were also on course for their sixth consecutive weekly loss.

Part of this pressure is coming from the RBI’s liquidity operations.

Think about the mechanics.

When the RBI sells government bonds, investors pay for those securities. That can reduce rupee liquidity in the banking system and put pressure on bond prices.

And when bond prices fall, yields rise.

But liquidity isn’t the whole story.

Oil prices have risen. Inflation concerns have returned. The rupee is under pressure. And expectations around the RBI’s future interest-rate path have changed.

So, the more accurate conclusion is not: Bond yields are rising because the RBI is draining liquidity.

It is: RBI’s liquidity withdrawal is one part of a broader tightening in financial conditions.

And that brings us to the other side of the world.

The world is repricing money too

India’s liquidity story is domestic. But the pressure on the price of money is global too.

The 10-year US Treasury yield crossed 5.2% this week, its highest level since 2007.

The rise reflected concerns around inflation, interest rates and the outlook for longer-term borrowing costs. The 30-year Treasury yield also moved sharply higher, adding to the pressure across global bond markets.

One of the biggest factors has been oil.

Brent crude moved above $100 a barrel as fears of supply disruptions in the Middle East intensified. Prices were volatile, with Brent crude settled at approximately $106.60 a barrel on September 24 and remained around $105 on September 25, as markets continued to assess Middle East supply risks.

A sustained oil shock can lift headline inflation and inflation expectations. That can make central banks less comfortable easing policy aggressively.

When investors expect rates to remain higher for longer, bond yields tend to rise.

US Treasury yields matter far beyond America because they are a key reference point for global borrowing costs, dollar funding conditions and asset valuations.

India feels that pressure

On September 24 and 25, several pressures arrived together:

US 10-year Treasury yield: around 5.2%.
Brent crude: around $105–106 a barrel.
Indian rupee: ₹95.96 per US dollar at the September 24 close.
Indian 10-year government bond yield: 7.11% on September 24 and ~7.12% on September 25.
Nifty: down 1.64% on September 24.
Sensex: down 1.67% on September 24.

Indian equities fell sharply on September 24, while bonds and the rupee also came under pressure. On September 25, equities stabilized somewhat, but crude and global bond yields remained elevated.

It would be tempting to blame all of this on India’s liquidity withdrawal.

But that would be too simple.

The equity sell-off was also driven by higher crude, rising US yields, rupee weakness and sector-specific pressures, particularly in financials following proposed changes to insurance commission rules.

So, the market move reflected several forces arriving at the same time, not one single trigger.

India’s financial markets are being affected by both domestic liquidity conditions and the global price of money.

The Lesson Markets Often Miss

That may be the most important takeaway.

A few weeks ago, the question was: Why does India have so much liquidity?

Now the question is becoming: What happens when that excess liquidity is removed while the global cost of money is rising?

The answer is beginning to show up across markets.

Overnight rates are moving closer to the policy rate. Government bond yields are rising. The rupee is feeling pressure. Equities are becoming more sensitive to global rates and crude.

None of these moves happens in isolation. Several prices of money are being repriced at the same time.

Money moves across markets.

And when the benchmark price of money changes in one part of the world, it can eventually change the economics of capital somewhere else.

Until next Sunday!

Disclaimer: This update is for informational purposes only. Please consult a SEBI-registered advisor before investing.

Enjoyed this week’s Sunday Shots? Share it across WhatsApp, LinkedIn, or X — and invite someone else into the conversation.
Subscribe to Sunday Shots for a fresh perspective delivered every week.

Recent Blogs

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

3 Oct 2026

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

10 Oct 2026

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

17 Oct 2026

Banking & Finance, Indian Economy, Uncategorized

24 Oct 2026

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

Journie WealthTech Private Limited | AMFI Registered Mutual Fund & SIF Distributor (ARN: 318048)

Demat 2.0: The Next Chapter of India’s Bond Market

India has been testing a new way to move financial assets for nearly a year.

In 2025, the RBI began testing the tokenization of Certificates of Deposit (CDs) through its Unified Markets Interface, with settlement using wholesale Central Bank Digital Currency.

By September 2026, the experiment had already processed around 249 transactions — roughly two-thirds of them in the secondary market.

Then, last week, the experiment moved into a much bigger arena: Corporate bonds.

At Global Fintech Fest in Mumbai, we were there when SEBI and the RBI jointly announced Demat 2.0 — a pilot designed to test the tokenization of corporate bonds within India’s regulated financial-market infrastructure.

Just days earlier, REC had raised ₹500 crore through India’s first pilot issuance of a tokenized corporate bond.

Then came L&T. Then IIFL Finance.

Within days, ₹1,025 crore of corporate bonds had been issued through the new infrastructure.

So, this isn’t really a story about India discovering tokenization. It is a story about India testing whether the technology can move from a controlled experiment into the core of its capital markets.

And that raises the bigger question: Can tokenization make India’s bond market deeper, or will it simply make the existing market faster?

India’s Export Numbers Look Impressive

But The Full Story Is Far More Complicated.

India’s total exports touched a record USD 825.3 billion in FY25, while services exports alone crossed USD 387.6 billion.

On paper, that looks like the rise of a serious export economy. But behind those numbers lies another reality.

India’s merchandise imports surged to nearly USD 721.2 billion during the same period. And that reveals something important.

India still depends heavily on imported crude oil, electronics, semiconductor components, industrial machinery, chemicals and pharmaceutical raw materials.

Which means India’s export story is far more intertwined with imports than most headlines suggest.

Oil becomes costlier. Electronic components become more expensive. Manufacturing inputs rise. Imported APIs for pharma become pricier.

So, while India may earn more from exports, it also pays more for the very inputs required to produce them. The benefit of currency depreciation starts getting partially offset by rising import dependency.

That is the hidden vulnerability simplified export narratives often ignore.

First, what exactly is a tokenized bond?

Imagine a conventional corporate bond.

A company borrows money from investors. The investor receives a security that promises a fixed coupon, repayment at maturity, defined investor rights, and protection through existing regulatory and legal frameworks.

Now imagine representing that security as a digital token on a distributed ledger. That’s broadly what the new infrastructure is testing.

The ledger is maintained by market infrastructure institutions and owned by the depositories.

The tokenized bond continues to have the same legal characteristics as a conventional dematerialized bond — including its ISIN, issuer obligations, coupon, maturity, rating and investor rights.

So this isn’t a new asset class. It is a new way of moving an existing asset through the financial system.

And this isn’t a public blockchain experiment either. The pilot uses a permissioned distributed ledger within regulated market infrastructure.

And that’s where things get interesting.

The first corporate bond

On September 7, REC became the first issuer.

It raised ₹500 crore through a 7.30% bond with a maturity of 1 year and 9 months. The issue was structured with a ₹100 crore base issue and a ₹400 crore green-shoe option.

It received ₹796 crore of bids and ultimately accepted ₹500 crore. REC says the issue was approximately eight times subscribed on the basis of the base issue size.

But the amount raised isn’t the most interesting part. The interesting part is how the transaction was processed.

The tokenized security was recorded on a distributed ledger. The cash leg was connected to the RBI’s wholesale Central Bank Digital Currency — the digital rupee — through the Unified Market Interface.

That enables what is called atomic settlement.

In simple terms: The bond moves and the money moves, at the same time. And hence bypass the traditional clearing settlement and the delays linked with it.

For this pilot, that means the securities and cash legs can settle together rather than relying on the traditional separation between the two settlement processes.

And REC demonstrated something that matters operationally: pay-in, allotment and listing were completed on the same day.

Why does that matter?

Today’s financial markets are built from multiple interconnected systems.

One system knows who owns the security. Another handles the money. Another handles settlement.

Others handle reconciliation, reporting and corporate actions.

It works. But every additional handoff introduces operational complexity.

Demat 2.0 is attempting to bring more of those processes together.

SEBI says the pilot is designed to test a new way of issuing, holding, trading and settling corporate bonds, with the tokenized bond connected to RBI’s wholesale CBDC infrastructure.

The potential benefits include: faster settlement, lower reconciliation and manual processing, reduce settlement risk, efficient movement of money and securities, and automated asset servicing.

Plus, interest and redemption payments can potentially be automated through smart-contract infrastructure.

The technology is essentially trying to make the financial transaction behave more like a single event rather than a chain of separate events.

Then came L&T and IIFL

This is where the story gets more interesting.

REC could have been dismissed as a one-off regulatory experiment. It wasn’t.

L&T raised ₹500 crore through a tokenized bond at a 7.4% coupon with a three-year maturity. It became the first private-sector corporate to enter the pilot.

IIFL Finance subsequently raised ₹25 crore through a tokenized bond at 9.1% with a two-year maturity, becoming the first non-PSU NBFC in the segment.

Three issuers. ₹1,025 crore.

And the experiment is already moving beyond a single government-backed issuer.

From Demat 1.0 to Demat 2.0

There is a reason the regulator calls this Demat 2.0.

Think about what dematerialisation did.

Before demat, securities existed as physical certificates. Ownership required paper. Transfers required paperwork. Settlement took days.

Dematerialisation changed the model: Paper → Digital

India then kept improving the system.

Faster settlement. Electronic records. Central depositories. Online trading.

Now the next transition is potentially: Digital → Programmable

That is a bigger idea.

Because once an asset exists as a digital token inside regulated infrastructure, the financial system can potentially encode rules around how that asset behaves.

Coupon payments. Redemptions. Ownership. Settlement. Eligibility. Transfer. Corporate actions.

The opportunity isn’t simply to make a bond digital. It is to make the financial infrastructure around the bond more automated.

But here's the part nobody should overlook

There is a temptation to look at all this and say: “Tokenization will revolutionize the bond market.”

Maybe.

But the first question isn’t whether India can issue a tokenized bond. We’ve already established that it can.

The harder question is: Can this work beyond a pilot?

RBI has already had an early glimpse of the answer.

Its tokenized Certificate of Deposit pilot has processed around 249 transactions, with roughly two-thirds taking place in the secondary market.

So secondary trading is no longer purely theoretical.

The question now is whether the same infrastructure can support a much larger, more diverse and more complex market for corporate bonds.

Because faster settlement doesn’t automatically create liquidity. A tokenized bond can move from one wallet to another in seconds. But if there is no buyer on the other side, it is still illiquid.

And that is why the secondary market will remain one of the biggest tests.

The initial corporate-bond pilot focuses on issuance and settlement, with broader secondary-market trading and wider participation expected to develop in later phases.

That distinction matters.

Technology can make a transaction faster. It cannot manufacture demand.

What tokenization doesn't fix

A tokenized bond still carries the same fundamental risks as the underlying bond.

The issuer can still default. Interest rates can still move against you. The bond can still have duration risk. Credit spreads can still widen. And liquidity can still disappear.

Tokenization doesn’t eliminate those risks.

It changes the infrastructure through which the asset is issued, held and settled.

That may sound like a small distinction. It isn’t.

Financial markets are ultimately built on infrastructure. And infrastructure determines how efficiently capital can move.

India's interesting bet

What makes India’s experiment particularly interesting is that it isn’t creating a parallel financial system.

It is doing almost the opposite.

SEBI regulates the securities. Depositories maintain the digital securities infrastructure. RBI provides central-bank money through wholesale CBDC. The Unified Market Interface connects the two.

And existing requirements around credit ratings, debenture trustees, listing and disclosures continue to apply.

In other words: Blockchain-like infrastructure is being absorbed into regulated financial markets rather than replacing them.

And this is where the story gets bigger

Today, we’re talking about corporate bonds. But the underlying idea is much broader.

If financial assets can become digital, programmable and interoperable with digital money, the same architecture could eventually extend across other parts of capital markets.

Bonds are simply a logical place to start. They are large-ticket instruments and involve institutional investors. Plus require extensive settlement and servicing infrastructure.

And corporate bonds have historically been less liquid and less frequently traded than equities.

If tokenization can make that infrastructure meaningfully better, the implications could extend well beyond this ₹1,025 crore pilot.

The next test

For now, Demat 2.0 is still an experiment.

The first phase is demonstrating that the infrastructure works.

The next questions are harder:

Can secondary trading become more efficient? Can liquidity improve? Can more issuers participate?

Can the system work seamlessly with existing market infrastructure? Can retail investors eventually participate?

And perhaps the biggest question:

Can better technology actually create a deeper corporate bond market?

Because that is ultimately what matters. Not whether a bond is on a blockchain. Not whether settlement happens in seconds.

But whether capital can move more efficiently, more transparently and with less friction between the people who have it and the businesses that need it.

From Demat to Digital Capital Markets

India's first demat revolution made securities electronic. Demat 2.0 is testing whether they can become programmable.

That could change much more than the way a bond is settled. It could change how financial assets are issued, serviced, transferred and eventually traded.

But the real test has only just begun.

Moving a bond instantly is a technology problem.

Finding someone willing to buy it is a market problem.

And the future of India's tokenized bond market will depend on solving both. See you next Sunday for another shot of insights.

See you next Sunday for another shot of insights!

Disclaimer: This update is for informational purposes only. Please consult a SEBI-registered advisor before investing.

Enjoyed this week’s Sunday Shots? Share it across WhatsApp, LinkedIn, or X — and invite someone else into the conversation.
Subscribe to Sunday Shots for a fresh perspective delivered every week.

Recent Blogs

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

3 Oct 2026

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

10 Oct 2026

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

17 Oct 2026

Banking & Finance, Indian Economy, Uncategorized

24 Oct 2026

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

Journie WealthTech Private Limited | AMFI Registered Mutual Fund & SIF Distributor (ARN: 318048)

India's $136 Billion Dollar Surprise: The Dollar-Rupee Paradox

India wanted dollars. So, it built a window to bring them home.

The response was enormous. $136.4 billion flowed in.

And now, just a few months later, the Reserve Bank of India is dealing with the other side of that success: too many rupees.

More than ₹10 lakh crore of surplus liquidity is sitting in India’s banking system.

So, the RBI is now trying to pull some of that money back.

It sounds strange.

But how did India go from wanting dollars to having too many rupees?

Let’s start at the beginning.

The problem was dollars

Earlier this year, the global environment wasn’t particularly kind to emerging markets.

Oil prices were rising. Geopolitical tensions were creating uncertainty. And for India, an expensive oil bill is always a concern because a large share of its crude requirement is imported.

More dollars leaving the country to pay for imports can put pressure on the rupee.

So, the RBI had a familiar objective: Get more dollars into India.

In June, it introduced a special swap facility aimed at encouraging banks to raise foreign-currency funds through instruments including FCNR(B) deposits, external commercial borrowings and overseas foreign-currency borrowings.

The bet on foreign currency

The mechanism was fairly simple.

Banks could raise foreign-currency funds — particularly through deposits from Indians living overseas — and swap those dollars with the RBI.

The banks received rupees. The RBI received dollars.
In return, banks got rupee liquidity while India got foreign exchange.

And for a country that imports a large amount of its energy and other goods, having a large pool of dollars is valuable.

The RBI initially planned the facility for a limited period.

But then something happened. The money came in much faster than expected.

The dollar flood

By August 31, the special facility had attracted $136.38 billion.

And the overwhelming majority came from one source – $127.23 billion through FCNR(B) deposits.

The rest came through overseas foreign-currency borrowings and external commercial borrowings.

The response was so strong that the RBI closed the FCNR(B) window earlier than originally planned.

At the same time, India’s foreign-exchange reserves climbed to a record $740.8 billion by August 28.

And the rupee was responding too.

On September 1, it touched a two-month high, closing at ₹94.95 against the dollar.

By the end of the week, the rupee had gained 0.9%, its strongest weekly performance in five weeks, closing at around ₹94.49/$.

The flood of foreign currency, along with RBI intervention in the foreign-exchange market, was helping support the rupee.

More dollars. More reserves. A stronger rupee.

On the surface, the policy looked like a clear success. But there was something happening on the other side of the transaction.

Because when those dollars came into the RBI…

rupees went out.

The rupee problem

Imagine a bank brings $1 billion to the RBI.

The RBI takes the dollars. The bank receives rupees in return. And the country now has more foreign exchange.

But the banking system also has more domestic currency.

Now imagine that happening at a scale of $136 billion. The numbers start becoming difficult to ignore.

The foreign currency sits with the RBI. The rupees circulate through the financial system. And eventually, there is a lot of cash looking for somewhere to go.

By September 3, surplus liquidity in India’s banking system had climbed to around ₹9.7 lakh crore, according to Reuters, surpassing the previous post-Covid peak.

By the RBI’s September 4 announcement, the figure was around ₹10.3 lakh crore.

That is roughly ₹10 trillion of surplus liquidity. And that changes the behaviour of the banking system.

When banks have more money than they immediately need, they have less reason to pay high rates to obtain funds.

Short-term rates can fall. Money becomes cheaper. Credit conditions can loosen.

And if enough liquidity stays in the system for long enough, it can start influencing the broader economy as inflation starts mounting up.

This is where the RBI steps in.

The RBI wants some of it back

On September 4, the RBI announced a ₹7 lakh crore, 30-day Variable Rate Reverse Repo auction, scheduled for September 7, to suck the excess liquidity from the banking system.

The terminology sounds complicated. The concept isn’t.

Banks have excess cash. The RBI offers them an opportunity to park some of that cash with the central bank for a period.

The banks earn a return. The RBI temporarily takes that money out of circulation.

It’s essentially a liquidity drain. And it wasn’t the only one.

Earlier that day, the RBI had already absorbed around ₹6.02 lakh crore through two shorter-duration VRRR operations.

So, within days, the RBI went from encouraging banks to bring foreign currency into India to encouraging banks to park excess rupees back with the central bank.

The dollars came in. The rupees went out. And now, some of those rupees are coming back.

But why did so much money come in?

This is perhaps the most interesting question. And the answer lies partly in the incentives.

The special facility made it attractive for banks to raise foreign-currency funds.

For NRIs, FCNR(B) deposits offered an opportunity to earn returns on foreign-currency deposits without taking the same direct currency exposure as converting everything into rupees.

For banks, the RBI swap provided access to rupee liquidity.

For India, the result was a huge increase in foreign-currency inflows.

Everyone had a reason to participate. And when incentives line up across three sides of a transaction, money can move very quickly.

The scale surprised the market. Reuters reported that the inflows were much larger than the RBI had initially anticipated.

That’s why the facility was wound down early.

The RBI didn’t need to keep offering the same incentive once the objective had effectively been achieved.

And then comes the irony

India has spent years trying to attract foreign capital.

It wants foreign investors, NRI deposits, and global companies to invest.

Large foreign-exchange reserves give the RBI a stronger buffer against external shocks and more room to manage periods of currency volatility.

But capital doesn’t disappear once it enters the country. It has consequences.

The $136 billion didn’t simply sit in a vault.

The dollars strengthened India’s external position. But the rupees they released were now circulating through the domestic financial system.

And suddenly, the central bank had another problem to manage.

This is the part of monetary policy that rarely makes the headline. One policy decision can solve one problem while creating another.

The RBI wanted more foreign currency. It got it.

That created more rupee liquidity. Now it has to manage that.

India's financial system is getting bigger

And this episode is a useful snapshot of how large India’s financial system has become.

Money can move across borders. NRIs can move billions through deposit programs.

Banks can access overseas funding. The RBI can exchange currencies through large-scale swaps.

Foreign-exchange reserves can move by tens of billions. And liquidity can shift by several lakh crore in a matter of weeks.

The numbers are enormous. But the underlying idea is surprisingly simple.

Money moves.

And whenever money moves at scale, something else moves with it: exchange rates, interest rates, credit, asset prices, and ultimately, economic activity.

That’s why central banks spend so much time watching something most people never think about: liquidity.

Not because ₹10 lakh crore is inherently good or bad.

But because where money sits can matter almost as much as how much money exists.

The Real Balancing Act

India's foreign-exchange reserves are now around $740.8 billion.

That's an extraordinary buffer. It gives India greater protection against external shocks, particularly when the global environment turns volatile.

But reserves aren't the end of the story.

The RBI still has to balance them against domestic liquidity, interest rates, inflation, credit growth and the value of the rupee.

And that balancing act is likely to become increasingly important as India's financial system gets deeper and more connected to global capital.

Because the challenge for a large economy isn't simply: “How do we get money?”

It's also: “What happens after it arrives?”

Sometimes, the most interesting financial stories aren't about a shortage of money. They're about what happens when there is too much of it.

Until Next Sunday!

Disclaimer: This update is for informational purposes only. Please consult a SEBI-registered advisor before investing.

Enjoyed this week’s Sunday Shots? Share it across WhatsApp, LinkedIn, or X — and invite someone else into the conversation.
Subscribe to Sunday Shots for a fresh perspective delivered every week.

Recent Blogs

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

3 Oct 2026

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

10 Oct 2026

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

17 Oct 2026

Banking & Finance, Indian Economy, Uncategorized

24 Oct 2026

Journie WealthTech Private Limited | AMFI Registered Mutual Fund & SIF Distributor (ARN: 318048)

From Skyline to Portfolio: A New Phase in India’s Real Estate Story

India is not just building more real estate. It is changing how that real estate gets owned.

For decades, owning Indian real estate usually meant buying a property: a building, an office or a piece of land.

Large capital. Low liquidity. One location. One set of tenants.

But there is another model emerging: Build → lease → stabilize → list.

That building can now become part of a REIT — and suddenly, an asset worth thousands of crores can be owned through small, tradable units.

This is the financialization of India’s skyline. At the centre of this shift is the growing REIT market in India.

From buildings to financial assets

A Real Estate Investment Trust, or REIT, allows investors to own a share of income-generating real estate without having to buy the property themselves.

Tenants pay rent. The properties generate cash flow. The REIT distributes a large portion of that cash flow to its investors.

India’s regulations require at least 80% of a REIT’s asset value to be invested in completed, revenue-generating properties, while at least 90% of its net distributable cash flow must be distributed to unitholders, subject to applicable regulations.

So unlike speculative land, the underlying asset is designed to generate recurring income.

India doesn’t have a small real estate market. It has a relatively young listed real estate market.

The first Indian REIT was listed only in 2019. Today, there are six listed REITs with roughly ₹3.1 lakh crore of real estate assets and a combined market capitalization of more than ₹2.1 lakh crore.

Yet only a relatively small share of India’s Grade-A office stock is currently REIT-listed.

That leaves a much bigger question: What happens when more of India’s institutional real estate becomes investable?

The next REIT may already be standing

There is an interesting capital cycle happening underneath this.

A developer builds an office park. It leases the property.

Once the asset matures and generates steady rental cash flows, it can potentially be transferred to a REIT.

The developer gets capital back. That capital can fund the next project.

The REIT gets a mature, income-generating asset. Investors get access to the rental economics.

So the cycle becomes:

Developers build → REITs acquire → capital gets recycled → developers build again.

This is important because future REIT growth doesn’t necessarily have to come from existing properties becoming more valuable. It can also come from more properties entering the listed ecosystem.

JLL, a global commercial real estate services and investment management firm, estimates the opportunity across REIT-worthy office and retail assets in India’s top seven cities at around ₹10.8 trillion.

And India's economic growth is feeding the machine

Consider the humble office building.

It doesn’t look particularly exciting. But behind it could be a GCC employing thousands of engineers, analysts and technology professionals.

As India’s economy becomes more corporate, urban and institutional, demand for high-quality commercial real estate grows with it.

GCCs are becoming an increasingly important source of Grade-A office demand. Colliers, a global real estate services and investment management firm, expects GCCs to account for nearly half of India’s office demand in 2026 and 2027.

The thesis isn’t simply: “Property prices will go up.”

It is: India’s economic growth requires more institutional real estate — and that real estate can increasingly become a financial asset.

But how do REIT investors actually make money?

There are three engines.

Rent
The underlying offices and retail assets generate rental income.

Rental growth
Leases can have built-in escalations, while new leases can be signed at higher market rentals. Higher occupancy and higher rents can increase the cash generated by the portfolio.

Valuation
REIT units trade on the stock exchange.

So, their prices can rise or fall depending on interest rates, property values, growth expectations and investor sentiment.

A REIT is not an FD with a property underneath it. You can have a well-occupied building and still see the REIT’s market price fall.

Interest rates are particularly important.

When rates rise, competing fixed-income yields become more attractive and REIT valuations can come under pressure. Higher borrowing costs can also affect acquisition economics.

When rates fall, the opposite can happen.

So the return isn’t simply: rent = return.

It is: rent + rental growth + valuation movement.

Six REITs. Six different businesses.

India’s listed REIT market isn’t one homogeneous asset.

Embassy and Mindspace are heavily exposed to office parks. Nexus brings a significant retail component. Others have different geographic footprints, tenant mixes, leverage and acquisition strategies.

For example, the six REITs currently show occupancy levels ranging from roughly 90% to 99%, while loan-to-value ratios range from about 4% to 31%.

So simply looking at the headline yield doesn’t tell the whole story.

You need to look at: occupancy + rental growth + leverage + tenants + geography + sponsor + acquisition pipeline.

Which creates another problem.

How do you own the opportunity without having to pick the winner?

Real estate enters the mutual fund world

This is where the recent evolution matters.

Edelweiss has launched the Edelweiss Nifty REITs & Realty Index Fund, tracking the Nifty REITs & Realty Total Return Index.

Today, the index is roughly: 60% REITs + 40% realty stocks.

It holds up to 15 securities, uses free-float market capitalization for weighting, and is rebalanced quarterly. The REIT allocation can increase as more eligible REITs are listed.

But the interesting part isn’t really the fund itself. It’s what the fund represents.

Real estate is moving another step away from being something you simply buy physically.

It can now move through a chain:
Property → REIT → Stock Exchange → Equity Index → Mutual Fund

And the regulatory system is moving in the same direction.

From January 2026, SEBI reclassified REITs as equity-related instruments for mutual funds and specialized investment funds, helping open the asset class to a broader pool of institutional capital.

REITs also became eligible for inclusion in equity indices from July 2026.

The building hasn’t changed. The pool of capital that can own it has.

But this isn't a one-way bet

REITs still carry market risk.

Interest rates can hurt valuations. Economic slowdowns can affect leasing. Tenants can leave. Occupancy can fall. Debt can become more expensive. And a portfolio of commercial properties is still exposed to the fortunes of the underlying cities, sectors and tenants.

The Edelweiss fund itself is classified Very High Risk.

So, the opportunity isn’t about replacing FDs or bonds.

It’s about understanding where REITs sit in a broader portfolio.

From Property to Portfolio

Perhaps the most interesting thing about India's REIT story isn't the distribution yield.

It is who gets to own India's commercial economy.

For years, the answer was largely: developers, institutions and large property owners.

Now that ownership can increasingly be fragmented across thousands of investors.

You don't need to own the office tower. You can own a piece of the cash flows generated by it.

And as more of India's physical infrastructure moves into listed structures, that distinction becomes increasingly important.

From owning property to owning a portfolio of properties. From owning one building to owning a piece of India's property economy.

India is building the skyline. REITs may determine how widely that skyline gets owned.

See you next Sunday for another shot of insights!

Disclaimer: This update is for informational purposes only. Please consult a SEBI-registered advisor before investing.

Enjoyed this week’s Sunday Shots? Share it across WhatsApp, LinkedIn, or X — and invite someone else into the conversation.
Subscribe to Sunday Shots for a fresh perspective delivered every week.

Recent Blogs

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

3 Oct 2026

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

10 Oct 2026

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

17 Oct 2026

Banking & Finance, Indian Economy, Uncategorized

24 Oct 2026

Journie WealthTech Private Limited | AMFI Registered Mutual Fund & SIF Distributor (ARN: 318048)

India Makes the Medicines. Who Owns the Value?

Imagine a vast hospital whose shelves are stocked from one country.

The medicines are manufactured there. The supply chains run through there. The scientists and engineers who make those medicines possible are there.

But the laboratories, patents and brands behind some of the world’s most valuable drugs sit thousands of miles away.

That is the paradox at the heart of Indian pharmaceuticals.

India has become indispensable to the global supply of medicines. But it still captures a smaller share of the economics created by the most valuable drugs.

And that distinction may define the next chapter of Indian pharma.

India's Pharmaceutical Scale

India’s reputation as the “Pharmacy of the World” is not just a slogan.

In FY2025, India’s pharmaceutical exports reached approximately $30.5 billion, up 9.4% from the previous year. Indian medicines reached 191 countries, with roughly half of exports going to highly regulated markets such as the United States and Europe.

The country’s manufacturing footprint is enormous.

More than 3,000 pharmaceutical companies and around 10,500 manufacturing units operate across India. The country accounts for roughly 20% of global generic medicine supply and is one of the world’s largest vaccine suppliers.

Then there is the United States.

In 2022, Indian pharmaceutical companies supplied 47% of generic prescriptions filled in the US.

Those medicines didn’t just create revenue for Indian companies. According to IQVIA, they generated an estimated $219 billion in savings for the US healthcare system in 2022, and $1.3 trillion over 2013–2022.

Think about what that means.

India isn’t merely participating in the global pharmaceutical system. It is one of the reasons the system remains affordable.

But there is a subtle distinction hidden underneath all these impressive numbers. Industrial importance is not the same as economic capture.

India can manufacture a medicine at extraordinary scale. That does not necessarily mean it owns the intellectual property, controls the pricing power or captures the largest share of the value created by that medicine.

And that is where the story gets interesting.

The Patent That Changed Everything

This wasn’t an accident. It was partly the result of history.

India’s pharmaceutical industry developed under a very different patent regime from the one that exists today.

The Patents Act of 1970 did not provide product-patent protection for pharmaceuticals in the way modern regimes do. Instead, the system allowed Indian companies to develop alternative manufacturing processes for products whose underlying molecules had been developed elsewhere.

That changed the economics of the industry.

Indian companies became exceptionally good at figuring out how to make a molecule differently, cheaply and at scale.

It was not simply imitation. It was a form of technological capability built around the rules of the market. And it worked.

The industry developed deep expertise in chemistry, APIs, formulations, manufacturing and regulatory approvals.

But in 2005, the rules changed.

India amended its patent law to introduce product-patent protection across fields including pharmaceuticals, aligning the country with its TRIPS obligations.

Suddenly, the opportunity was different.

The question was no longer only: Can India make someone else’s molecule better and cheaper?

It became: Can India discover and own the next molecule?

The Money Sits Higher Up the Value Chain

A generic manufacturer typically enters the market after a drug’s exclusivity has expired. Its competitive advantage comes from something India has become exceptionally good at:

Process chemistry. Manufacturing efficiency. Regulatory execution. Scale. Distribution.

Once multiple companies can manufacture the same molecule, however, competition naturally pushes prices down.

The originator plays a different game. It discovers the molecule, funds the clinical trials, builds the evidence, develops the brand and secures intellectual property.

And, for a period of time, it can sell the medicine with far less direct competition.

That creates something much more valuable than manufacturing scale: Pricing power.

You can see these economics play out in India right now.

In March 2026, the Indian patent covering semaglutide expired.

Within days, Indian pharmaceutical companies moved in with their own versions of the molecule behind Ozempic and Wegovy.

Natco launched a multidose version starting at around ₹1,290 a month. Other Indian manufacturers followed with lower-priced versions. Sun Pharma launched its own semaglutide products the following day.

Novo Nordisk responded by cutting prices of Ozempic and Wegovy in India by as much as 36% and 48%, respectively, on certain doses.

What changed was exclusivity.

Same molecule. Very different economics.

The science hadn’t suddenly become cheaper. The factories hadn’t suddenly become ten times more efficient.

Making the Medicine Is Only Half the Story

Look at the companies operating at the top of this model.

Pfizer generated $62.6 billion of revenue in 2025 and spent $10.4 billion on internal R&D. Eli Lilly generated approximately $65.2 billion of revenue. Roche reported CHF61.5 billion of group sales and invested CHF12.2 billion in R&D.

Now look at India’s largest pharmaceutical companies.

Sun Pharma generated around ₹52,578 crore in FY2025 and spent approximately ₹3,250 crore on R&D. Dr. Reddy’s generated ₹32,554 crore and spent ₹2,738 crore on R&D. Cipla generated ₹27,548 crore.

The comparison isn’t perfectly apples-to-apples. Roche and Pfizer, for example, operate global originator businesses, while Indian companies have historically had much greater exposure to generics and other businesses.

But the underlying difference is important.

The companies that own differentiated medicines can capture economics that are difficult to replicate through manufacturing alone.

This is the difference between creating value and capturing value.

India has become exceptionally good at the first. The next challenge is to capture more of the second.

Because Innovation Needs a Different Kind of Capital

Manufacturing rewards operational excellence.

Drug discovery rewards something else: patience.

A generic manufacturing program can be built around relatively visible demand, known molecules and established regulatory pathways.

A novel drug program begins with uncertainty. You can spend years developing a molecule and still end up with nothing.

That changes the economics of capital. And India’s broader R&D ecosystem shows the scale of the challenge.

India is increasing its investment in R&D, but it still remains below the intensity seen in many major innovation economies. The latest government data puts India’s gross expenditure on R&D at 0.84% of GDP in 2023–24, with preliminary estimates of 0.87% for 2024–25 and 0.90% for 2025–26.

And this is where the gap becomes important.

The world’s largest pharmaceutical innovators aren’t just spending more on laboratories. They are continuously acquiring, licensing and partnering for intellectual property. They are effectively buying years of scientific risk.

That’s a very different capital model from manufacturing an established molecule.

Science needs capital that can survive failure. It needs investors willing to fund ten experiments knowing that nine may fail.

It needs clinical-trial infrastructure, specialist talent, biotech companies and commercial networks capable of turning a discovery into a global product.

Laboratories are only the beginning.

India Is Already Moving

This is where the story becomes more interesting.

It would be wrong to conclude that Indian pharma is simply stuck in the generic era. It isn’t.

Indian companies are moving into biosimilars, specialty medicines, complex generics, injectables, contract research and novel therapies.

Biocon has built a global biosimilars business. Sun Pharma has expanded aggressively into specialty medicines. Zydus has invested in vaccines and biologics. Companies such as Syngene have built businesses around the global drug-discovery ecosystem.

And now there is an even bigger signal.

In April 2026, Sun Pharma agreed to acquire Organon for an enterprise value of approximately $11.75 billion — one of the largest overseas acquisitions by an Indian pharmaceutical company. Organon brings a global portfolio of more than 70 products across Women’s Health and General Medicines, including biosimilars, commercialized across 140 countries.

That transaction is bigger than a single acquisition. It signals something about where Indian pharma wants to go.

If building every piece of intellectual property organically is slow, expensive and uncertain, another route is to buy, license and partner for global assets.

That is how industries climb value chains.

Not necessarily by abandoning what made them successful. But by using those strengths to buy their way into the next layer.

The Next Prescription Is Different

India does not need to become the next Pfizer. It doesn’t need to discover every blockbuster drug. And it certainly shouldn’t abandon the manufacturing capabilities that made it globally important.

The opportunity is more targeted.

Take the capabilities India already possesses:

manufacturing scale + chemistry + regulatory expertise + cost efficiency + global distribution.

Now combine them with:

proprietary IP + biotechnology + clinical research + patient capital + global commercialisation.

That combination could create something much more powerful than a larger generic industry.

It could create Indian companies that don’t just manufacture the world’s medicines.

They own more of the economics behind them.

Getting there won’t be easy.

It will require deeper biotech ecosystems, more university-industry collaboration, better clinical-trial infrastructure, more patient capital, and greater use of licensing and M&A.

And perhaps most importantly, a willingness to accept that some of the most valuable investments may fail.

Because that is the uncomfortable reality of moving up the pharmaceutical value chain.

You cannot discover the next blockbuster without funding the molecules that don’t become one.

From Volume to Value

For decades, India solved one of the world's biggest pharmaceutical problems: How do you make good medicines affordable at enormous scale?

It built an extraordinary answer.

Now the question is changing: How do you create the medicine in the first place — and own more of what it is worth?

That is not simply a pharmaceutical question. It is a capital-allocation question.

India has spent decades becoming extraordinarily good at what happens after a patent expires. The bigger opportunity is to become better at what happens before it does.

Because the next leap in Indian pharma may not come from making more medicines. It may come from owning more of them.

India has mastered volume. The next challenge is to turn that volume into value.

See you next Sunday for another shot of insights!

Disclaimer: This update is for informational purposes only. Please consult a SEBI-registered advisor before investing.

Enjoyed this week’s Sunday Shots? Share it across WhatsApp, LinkedIn, or X — and invite someone else into the conversation.
Subscribe to Sunday Shots for a fresh perspective delivered every week.

Recent Blogs

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

3 Oct 2026

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

10 Oct 2026

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

17 Oct 2026

Banking & Finance, Indian Economy, Uncategorized

24 Oct 2026

Journie WealthTech Private Limited | AMFI Registered Mutual Fund & SIF Distributor (ARN: 318048)

India’s Defence Startup Boom Is Real. Cash Could Decide Who Survives It.

Wishing everyone a Happy Independence Day 🇮🇳

Independence was never only about political freedom. It was also about building the ability to determine our own future.

And 79 years later, one part of that story is unfolding in a rather unexpected place:

India’s defence startups.

A Special Independence Day Edition

This week’s Sunday Shots is a special edition.

As we celebrate Independence Day, let’s also celebrate the spirit of building — businesses, ideas, communities and dreams that shape the India we are becoming.

And few stories capture that spirit better today than the rise of India’s defence startup ecosystem.

From drones and autonomous systems to AI, robotics, surveillance and advanced manufacturing, a new generation of Indian companies is beginning to build technologies that were once largely sourced from outside the country.

India is no longer just trying to buy defence equipment. It is increasingly trying to build it.

And the numbers are beginning to tell that story.

India’s defence production reached a record ₹1.78 lakh crore in FY2025–26, up 15.6% from the previous year and more than double its FY2020–21 level.

The private sector contributed around ₹42,000 crore, taking its share of India’s defence production to an all-time high of 24%.

Defence exports tell an even bigger story.

India exported ₹38,424 crore worth of defence equipment in FY2025–26, up 62.66% in a single year. And the private sector accounted for 45.16% of those exports.

The government is reinforcing this shift with capital.

The Ministry of Defence has received a ₹7.85 lakh crore allocation for FY2026–27, including ₹2.19 lakh crore under the capital head. Of that, ₹1.39 lakh crore is earmarked for procurement from domestic defence industries.

This is no longer just a story about more defence spending. It is the story of India building a defence industrial ecosystem.

And startups are increasingly sitting inside it.

The Startups Are Already Inside the Machine

One of the clearest signs is iDEX — Innovations for Defence Excellence.

Launched in 2018 to bring startups, MSMEs and innovators into defence technology development, iDEX is moving beyond simply funding ideas.

As of February 2026, approximately 676 startups, MSMEs and individual innovators had joined the ecosystem.

There had been 548 contracts signed.

More importantly, 58 prototypes had received procurement clearance worth around ₹3,853 crore, while 45 procurement contracts worth nearly ₹2,326 crore had already been signed.

The question is no longer simply: “Can you build it?”

Increasingly, the question is: “Can you build it at scale?”

And that is where the story gets interesting.
Because building one working prototype is one kind of business. Building hundreds of them is another.

Winning the Order Is Not the Same as Funding the Order

A defence contract can be one of the biggest milestones in a startup’s life.

And, paradoxically, it can also create one of its biggest cash-flow challenges.

Think about what happens between winning an order and delivering it.

The moment a defence startup moves from prototype to production, the financial problem changes.

The company may need to purchase components, build inventory, pay suppliers, hire engineers, expand production capacity, maintain testing infrastructure and commit capital to manufacturing.

And keep the business running while all of this is happening.

The customer, meanwhile, may not pay for everything when the order is signed.

Defence procurement contracts can contain specific provisions around advance payments, delivery schedules, guarantees and other commercial conditions.

So the relationship between an order and cash isn’t always straightforward.

And that creates a simple but important distinction: Revenue is not cash flow. And cash flow is not surplus cash.

A company can have a large order book while significant amounts of money are tied up in receivables, inventory, work-in-progress and operating commitments.

Which creates a peculiar problem:

Growth itself can consume cash. Not because growth is bad.

But because a company often has to spend money before it receives all the money associated with that growth.

This Is Where Treasury Stops Being a Back-Office Function

Treasury management is usually associated with large corporations.

Foreign exchange. Debt. Interest rates. Surplus cash.

But for a growing defence company, treasury starts with something much more fundamental:

Knowing when cash will arrive, when it will leave, and what could change the equation in between.

A monthly P&L doesn’t answer those questions. A serious defence startup should increasingly know:

How much cash is committed to each contract?
When will suppliers need to be paid?
When are customer milestones expected?
How much inventory is sitting on the floor?
What happens if a certification or delivery milestone moves by 60 days?
How much runway remains if the next funding round takes longer than expected?

These aren’t just accounting questions. They are liquidity questions.

And they become increasingly important as the company moves from prototype development to serial production.

Then Comes the Hidden Layer

There is another risk sitting underneath all of this: the supply chain.

Advanced defence systems can depend on specialized components and imported inputs. That means a company can have a domestic customer and still carry foreign-exchange exposure.

A weaker rupee can increase the cost of imported components. A supplier delay can push back production. A delayed customer milestone can extend the cash-conversion cycle. A larger order can require more inventory before the corresponding cash arrives.

None of these necessarily mean the business is weak.

But they make cash visibility and planning much more important.

And this is why treasury shouldn’t simply mean: “Where should we park our surplus money?”

The more important question is: “How much of our cash is actually surplus in the first place?”

The Real Transition Is From Startup to Defence Company

This may be the most important part of the story.

India isn’t simply creating more defence startups. It is creating the conditions for some of them to become industrial companies.

The country’s defence production has risen from ₹46,429 crore in FY2014–15 to ₹1.78 lakh crore today. Defence exports have risen from ₹686 crore in FY2013–14 to ₹38,424 crore in FY2025–26. The Ministry says Indian defence products are now being exported to more than 80 countries.

That is a very different environment from the one in which a startup is simply trying to prove that its technology works.

The founder who once asked: “Can we build this?”

eventually has to ask: “Can we build this at scale, deliver it on time and manage the cash cycle along the way?”

That is the transition from startup to industrial company. And it changes the financial problem completely.

The Next Defence Moat May Be Financial Discipline

Technology will remain the primary moat. But technology alone doesn’t manufacture at scale.

Industrialization requires: inventory, suppliers, production capacity, working capital, receivables management, liquidity planning and capital discipline.

A defence startup doesn’t need a sophisticated treasury department from day one.

But it does need to start asking the right questions earlier.

How much cash is committed? How much is genuinely available? What needs to remain liquid? What happens if collections are delayed? What happens if production ramps faster than expected?

And perhaps most importantly: What does every major business decision do to the company’s cash position?

Because the bank balance alone doesn’t tell you what your cash is actually doing.

India Is Building Its Defence Future

The government is creating demand. Policy is creating incentives. iDEX is creating an innovation pipeline.

Private companies are taking a larger share of production and exports.

And a new generation of Indian companies is moving from building prototypes to building products at scale.

That is a significant part of what self-reliance looks like in the next chapter of India's story.

But building a defence industry requires more than technology.

It requires companies that can survive the long journey from idea → prototype → order → production → delivery → payment.

And somewhere in that journey sits a question that rarely makes the headlines: Can you stay financially resilient long enough to get there?

Because India's defence story is no longer just about what we can build. It is about building companies capable of sustaining it.

See you next Sunday for another shot of insights!

Disclaimer: This update is for informational purposes only. Please consult a SEBI-registered advisor before investing.

Enjoyed this week’s Sunday Shots? Share it across WhatsApp, LinkedIn, or X — and invite someone else into the conversation.
Subscribe to Sunday Shots for a fresh perspective delivered every week.

Recent Blogs

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

3 Oct 2026

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

10 Oct 2026

Capital markets, Economy, Sunday Shots

17 Oct 2026

Banking & Finance, Indian Economy, Uncategorized

24 Oct 2026