List of Abbreviations

Glossary

ABCO

ABCO is an acronym for Active Borrower per Credit Officer. It is a key operational metric in microfinance that measures the client-to- credit officer ratio, indicating the average number of active borrowers managed by each credit officer. It is also commonly referred to as the Case Load. This will also indicate the efficiency of operation, which can impact the operational expenses

Active Borrowers

The individuals whose loan accounts are current have an outstanding loan balance with the MFI, and are under repayment obligation. Individuals who have multiple loans with an MFI should be counted as a single borrower.

Assets Under Management (AUM)

Assets Under Management (AUM) refers to the total value of client loan portfolios that an institution actively manages, including both on- book and off-balance sheet (off-BS) portfolios. This includes all outstanding principal from current, delinquent, and renegotiated loans, but excludes loans that have been written off, on the own book, as well as those securitized or direct assignment assets resting on the securitization partners. AUM reflects the overall scale of financial assets the institution is responsible for, regardless of ownership.

Average Loan Size

Average Loan size represents the client-per- capita loan amount. It is calculated as the Loan portfolio divided by the number of clients of an MFI. It is a key indicator used to assess the scale and depth of credit outreach.

Average Ticket Size (ATS)

Average Ticket Size (ATS) refers to the average loan amount disbursed per loan during a specific period of time. This metric is typically calculated for a defined time period such as monthly, quarterly, or annually, depending on the reporting or analysis needs. It is calculated as the Total Loan Amount Disbursed divided by the Total Number of Loans Disbursed.

Borrowing Cost

The cost of borrowing refers to the total charge incurred for taking a debt obligation, which includes interest payments as well as any additional financial fees (such as processing fees, service charges, insurance premiums, or administrative costs). A percentage of such cost over the total amount borrowed indicates the rate of such cost.

Capital Adequacy Ratio

Capital Adequacy is a key financial indicator used to measure the solvency and risk-bearing capacity of Microfinance Institutions (MFIs). It reflects the institution’s ability to absorb potential losses and protect depositors and creditors. It is the proportion of the equity capital and free reserves or own funds held by an MFI against its total risk-weighted assets. A higher Capital Adequacy Ratio indicates stronger financial health and a greater ability to withstand credit or operational shocks. A minimum requirement of an NBFC-MFI is 15%.

Capital to Total Assets

The Capital to Total Assets ratio is a measure of an institution’s financial strength and stability. It indicates the proportion of an institution’s own capital (or net worth) relative to its total assets.

Co-lending

Co-lending is a financial arrangement in which two or more regulated entities join hands to extend a loan, by taking a fixed share by each entity. It will reflect on the books of all the partnering institutions. Typically, a bank and a non-bank financial institution (NBFC or NBFC-MFI) or HFC can join together to extend credit to a borrower and a prefixed ratio at a weighted average interest rate. The partnership combines the strengths of both entities.

Debt-Equity Ratio

The Debt-Equity Ratio is a key financial metric that indicates the proportion of total debt to total equity held by an institution at a given point in time. It reflects the degree to which an organization is financing its operations through borrowed funds versus own funds or free capital. It also indicates the leverage of capital of an entity

Debt Funding

Debt Funding refers to the portion of a financial institution’s loan portfolio that is financed through external borrowings, rather than from internal accruals or equity capital. It reflects the extent to which an institution relies on borrowed funds, such as loans from banks, financial institutions, or capital markets, to support its lending activities.

External Cost

External Cost refers to the finance cost incurred by Microfinance Institutions (MFIs) on the borrowed funds from external sources, primarily banks and financial institutions. This cost is largely determined by the prevailing lending rates of banks, and as such, it is beyond the direct control of MFIs.

Finance Cost

Finance Cost refers to the actual interest and other financial expenses incurred by a Microfinance Institution (MFI) on the average borrowed funds that remain outstanding during a given period. This metric is crucial for evaluating the cost-efficiency and funding strategy of MFIs, and plays a key role in determining their lending rates and financial sustainability.

Financial Inclusion

Financial Inclusion refers to the delivery of affordable, accessible, and appropriate financial services to disadvantaged and low-income segments of society who are traditionally excluded from the formal financial system. These services include savings, credit, insurance, remittances, pensions, banking services, etc.

Joint Liability Groups

Groups of 4 to 8 borrowers come together to borrow from a financial institution under a joint liability concept, as per which there is an inter se agreement between the members whereby each borrower is liable to repay the loan of each member of the group.

Margin

Margin refers to the difference between the total yield on the loan portfolio and the finance cost incurred to fund that portfolio. It represents the net earnings a Microfinance Institution (MFI) makes from its lending activities before operating expenses and provisions.

Managed Loan Portfolio

Managed Loan Portfolio refers to the loan assets originally originated by Microfinance Institutions (MFIs) but subsequently sold or assigned to a third party, such as a bank, to improve liquidity. Despite the sale, MFIs continue to manage these loans, including activities like collection of repayments and servicing the accounts on behalf of the purchasing institution. This arrangement helps MFIs free up capital while maintaining their relationship with borrowers and ensuring ongoing portfolio management.

Non-Performing Assets (NPA)

A Non-Performing Asset (NPA) is a debt obligation where the borrower has failed to honour repayment commitments, either interest, principal, or both, to the designated lender for a specified period, typically 90 days or more. As a result, the NPA ceases to generate income for the lender in the form of interest or principal repayments. NPAs represent credit risk and affect the financial health and asset quality of lending institutions.

On-book Portfolio (Net Loan Portfolio)

On-book Portfolio (Net Loan Portfolio) refers to the total outstanding principal of all active client loans recorded on the institution’s balance sheet. This includes current, delinquent, and renegotiated loans, but excludes loans that have been written off. Interest receivable is not included, except for Microfinance Institutions (MFIs) that report under Ind-AS, where such interest is recognized as part of the outstanding amount.

Operating Self Sufficiency (OSS)

Operating Self Sufficiency (OSS) measures the extent to which a Microfinance Institution’s (MFI’s) income from operations and investments is sufficient to cover its operating expenses, like operating costs, loan loss provisions, and finance costs (cost of borrowed funds) incurred for conducting the operations. An OSS ratio of 100% or above indicates that the MFI is generating enough income to sustain its operations without requiring subsidies or external support, reflecting financial viability and sustainability.

Outstanding Borrowings

Outstanding Borrowings refer to the total amount of funds that an entity has borrowed and has not yet repaid as of a specific reporting date. This includes all short-term and long- term debt obligations, such as loans, credit lines, bonds, and other forms of financing, net of any repayments made.

Portfolio Quality

Portfolio Quality refers to the level of credit risk present in a loan portfolio, indicating the likelihood of default by borrowers. A high- quality portfolio contains a lower amount of risk, characterized by timely repayments and minimal defaults. Maintaining good portfolio quality is crucial for the financial health and sustainability of lending institutions.

Portfolio at Risk (PAR)

Portfolio at Risk (PAR) indicates the proportion of outstanding amounts of all loan accounts having past due/arrears to the total outstanding loan. In general, PAR 30 refers to the percentage of the loan portfolio that remains unpaid 30 days or more beyond the due date, which would be used as a measure to assess the portfolio quality. Loans with dues overdue by 90 days or more (PAR 90) are generally classified as Non-Performing Assets (NPAs).

Qualifying Assets

Qualifying Assets are loan portfolios created by MFIs adhering to certain conditions as prescribed by RBI, to make the MFIs eligible to be called as MFIs and to raise loans from banks under the Priority Sector Advances Scheme (as per recent RBI norms). For an MFI, 60% of the total ass ets need to be under this category

Return on Assets (RoA)

Return on Assets (RoA) is the universally accepted profitability measure, which, in essence, is the percentage net income earned out of total average assets deployed by MFIs during a given period, typically one financial year. It is a widely used profitability metric that measures how efficiently an institution utilizes its total assets to generate net income.

Return on Equity (RoE)

Return on Equity (RoE) is a key profitability indicator that measures the net income earned by a Microfinance Institution (MFI) relative to its average equity during a given period, typically one financial year. RoE reflects how efficiently an MFI is using its own capital (equity) to generate profits.

Self Help Groups (SHGs)

SHGs refer to groups of 10-20 persons coming together to form an informal community-based institution to meet their common financial and social needs. Most of the SHGs are formed by women from a homogeneous background. SHGs collect regular savings from members and use them for internal lending, before accessing higher amounts from banks.

SHG Bank Linkage Programme (SBLP)

SHGs are linked to mainstream banks for keeping their surplus savings and also to obtain loans. The loan is often given as a multiplier of the total internal savings accrued in a group. It is considered to be an effective strategy to ensure financial inclusion for the unbanked poor people.

Surplus

Surplus refers to the excess of income over expenses. It is calculated as the difference between the yield (i.e., income earned from the loan portfolio) and the total cost (including finance cost, operating expenses, and provisions). It can also be referred to as net margin.

Yield on Portfolio

Yield represents total income from microcredit operation - interest income, processing fee/ service charge – earned out of the average loan portfolio outstanding for a specific period. It does not include investment income. It is a good proxy/surrogate for loan interest rates. It serves as a useful proxy for the effective loan interest rate charged to clients and is often used to assess the pricing structure and earning capacity of the loan portfolio.

Financial Inclusion and Business Correspondent Model

6.1 Introduction

The Business Correspondent (BC) model has emerged as an important channel for extending formal financial services and credit to underserved households, small enterprises and remote communities. By combining the capital base, regulatory oversight and product capabilities of banks and other regulated lending institutions with the local presence and customer relationships of field-based entities, the model helps address the last-mile constraints of conventional branch-led banking.

The BC model was introduced as part of India’s financial-inclusion efforts, with banks engaging intermediaries to provide basic banking and financial services in underserved areas. The Deepak Mohanty Committee¹ on Medium-Term Path to Financial Inclusion, constituted by the Reserve Bank of India in 2015, provided a more structured vision for the BC model and for technology-enabled, affordable and customer-centric financial inclusion. The Committee emphasised convenient access to a basket of formal financial products and services - including savings, remittance, credit, insurance and pension products - for low-income households, small farmers and marginal enterprises.

Initially developed to facilitate basic banking services such as account opening, deposits, withdrawals, remittances and government-benefit payments, the BC model has gradually expanded into credit-related activities. BC partners increasingly support customer sourcing, digital onboarding, KYC verification, borrower assessment, loan documentation, repayment collection, customer servicing and post-disbursement follow-up. For Micro Lending Institutions (MLIs), the model has become an important means of sustaining outreach while reducing reliance on own-balance-sheet funding.

The relevance of the BC model is reinforced by the National Strategy for Financial Inclusion 2025-30², which envisages universal and affordable access to a broad range of formal financial services, supported by technology, customer protection, financial literacy and strong last-mile delivery systems. The strategy recognises the importance of accessible banking touchpoints, including Business Correspondents, in deepening financial inclusion across geographies and population segments. The BC ecosystem is also undergoing rapid digitisation. At the same time, the increasing use of digital processes requires stronger safeguards against fraud, data misuse, customer exclusion, cyber risks and unsuitable lending.

This chapter reviews the progress of BC-led credit operations among MLIs during FY 2025-26. It examines trends in BC portfolio, borrower outreach, lender partnerships, and co-lending arrangements.

¹ https://m.rbi.org.in/scripts/PublicationReportDetails.aspx?ID=836

² https://www.rbi.org.in/commonman/Upload/English/Content/PDFs/English12052026.pdf

6.2 BC Model in Financial Inclusion and Credit Delivery

The evolution of the Business Correspondent model in India can be understood as a progression from a basic branchless-banking channel to a technology-enabled and risk-conscious credit-delivery ecosystem. The Traditional BC Model focuses on assisted banking services such as deposits, withdrawals, remittances, small-value credit support, insurance and pension services, with local presence and customer trust as key attributes (RBI, 2006³; RBI Working Group, 2006⁴). The Credit Facilitation Model extends the BC role to borrower sourcing, preliminary loan processing, documentation, customer awareness, repayment follow-up and collections, helping reduce information asymmetry between lenders and borrowers (Sinharay, 2024⁵). The Digital BC Model uses mobile applications, e-KYC, Aadhaar-enabled authentication, digital documentation, bureau checks, e-signatures, UPI-enabled payments and digital collections to improve speed, traceability and efficiency. However, it requires reliable connectivity, customer literacy, fraud controls and data protection (Kumar, Manickaraj and Kulkarni, 2022⁶). The Hybrid BC Model combines field-level customer engagement and assisted service delivery with digital sourcing, collections, supervision and audit, making it particularly relevant for rural and low-income customers who require both trust-based interaction and technology-enabled convenience (SIDBI, 2005⁷). The Resilient BC Model represents the next stage of the BC ecosystem, which combines outreach with governance, agent capability, lender oversight, customer protection, fraud prevention, data security, grievance redressal and business continuity. Its effectiveness should be assessed not only through portfolio growth, but also through customer outcomes, operational reliability and social impact (Goel, Bandara and Gable, 2023⁸).

Figure 6.1: Evolution of the BC model in micro-lending

³ RBI, 2006

⁴ RBI Working Group, 2006

⁵ EPW, 2024

⁶ Kumar, N., Manickaraj, M., & Kulkarni, S. Advancing Digital Financial Inclusion by Leveraging Business Correspondent Model. India Banking and Finance Report, 159

⁷ SIDBI, 2005

⁸ Springer, 2023

6.3 Progress of BC-led Financial Inclusion

The BC channel has contributed to the expansion of banking access, digital payments and formal credit outreach across rural and semi-urban India. BC outlets complement bank branches by enabling customers to access financial services nearer to their homes, workplaces and communities.

The financial-inclusion landscape has also been shaped by UPI, Aadhaar-enabled payment services, digital identity infrastructure, Direct Benefit Transfer, mobile banking and assisted digital services. These developments create opportunities for BCs to help customers use formal accounts actively, access government benefits and develop digital financial capability.

The Reserve Bank of India’s composite Financial Inclusion Index⁹ (FI-Index), developed in consultation with key stakeholders including the Government of India, tracks the extent of financial inclusion across the country. Introduced in August 2021 for the financial year ending March 2021, the Index captures progress across three dimensions: Access, Usage and Quality. The FI-Index increased to 70.0 in March 2026, from 67.0 in March 2025, indicating continued improvement in the reach and usage of formal financial services, as well as the quality of service delivery. The improvement reinforces the need to strengthen the role of BCs as accessible and trusted last-mile service points, particularly for low-income households, women, small enterprises and customers in remote areas.

However, access to an account or a BC outlet alone does not ensure meaningful financial inclusion. The quality of inclusion depends on whether customers can use accounts regularly, receive timely financial services, understand product terms, access grievance redressal and avoid fraud or unsuitable borrowing.

Table 6.1: Monitoring Progress of Financial Inclusion

Source: RBI Annual Report 2025-26

* Data are for banking outlet manned by bank’s own staff (i.e., branches) in villages

⁹ https://www.rbi.org.in/scripts/BS_PressReleaseDisplay.aspx?prid=63164

6.4 MLIs as Business Correspondents: Trends in Credit Operations

MLIs have increasingly used BC arrangements to diversify funding sources, preserve last-mile credit outreach and leverage their field infrastructure. Under this arrangement, the regulated lender provides funding and retains responsibility for the credit exposure, while the MLI undertakes agreed sourcing, servicing and collection activities.

The BC model offers several potential benefits to lenders and MLIs:

• Expansion of credit outreach without proportionate branch expansion
• Access to trained field teams and established borrower relationships
• Lower customer-acquisition and servicing costs
• Improved availability of local information for underwriting and monitoring
• Diversification of funding channels for MLIs
• Opportunity for banks and NBFCs to serve priority and underserved segments
• Digital collection trails and more timely portfolio monitoring

At the same time, growth in BC-led lending must be accompanied by appropriate lender oversight, customer-protection safeguards, field-staff capability, technology controls and clear accountability for each stage of the lending journey.

Table 6.2: Trend in MLIs operating as Business Correspondents

The Business Correspondent model recorded strong growth between FY 2021-22 and FY 2023-24, with the BC portfolio as well as the number of MLIs operating through the BC model increasing, indicating the growing importance of BC arrangements as a funding-diversification and last-mile credit-delivery mechanism for MLIs.

The growth momentum, however, moderated in FY 2024-25 and reversed in FY 2025-26. The BC portfolio declined marginally by 2% in FY 2024-25, from ₹54,416 crore to ₹53,287 crore, before declining further by 4% to ₹51,004 crore in FY 2025-26. The BC portfolio as a proportion of the total MLI portfolio also reduced from 22% in FY 2024-25 to 21% in FY 2025-26. The decline in the BC portfolio should be viewed in the context of the wider microfinance-sector correction during FY 2025-26. Over the preceding quarters, lenders adopted more cautious growth strategies in response to elevated repayment stress, increased delinquency, borrower over-leverage concerns and the need to strengthen underwriting and collection practices. Loan portfolios were rationalised, fresh disbursements were moderated in certain geographies and lenders focused on improving the quality of their existing portfolios rather than pursuing rapid expansion.

At the sectoral level, the microfinance sector experienced a significant contraction during FY 2025-26. The borrower base under the BC model also declined from 129.61 lakh borrowers in FY 2024-25 to 102.43 lakh borrowers in FY 2025-26. This represents a reduction of 27.18 lakh borrowers, or around 21%. The sharper decline in borrower numbers relative to the decline in portfolio suggests that lenders and BC partners may have reduced lower-ticket or marginal borrower exposures, tightened borrower-selection criteria, curtailed lending in higher-risk geographies, and focused on servicing relatively stronger or more established customer segments.

As against 203 MLIs reported their data in FY 2024-25, only 178 MLIs have reported their data in FY 2025-26. As a result, there has been reduction in the number of MLIs with BC operation, the number declining from 90 to 84. Therefore, the year-on-year movement in BC portfolio reflects both the sector-wide moderation in lending activity and the change in the reporting universe. Notwithstanding the decline, BC arrangements continued to account for a substantial share of managed credit operations. As of 31 March 2026, the BC portfolio of 84 MLIs engaged in BC operations stood at ₹51,004 crore. This represented approximately 70% of the total reported off-balance-sheet portfolio of ₹73,027 crore across 178 reporting MLIs. This indicates that BC-led lending remained the predominant off-balance-sheet portfolio model for reporting MLIs, despite the broader slowdown in microfinance lending.

Figure 6.2: Trend in BC portfolio

Figure 6.3: Trend of BC portfolio as a share of total MLI portfolio

The FY 2025-26 trend therefore reflects a transition from expansion-led BC growth towards a more cautious and risk-sensitive operating environment. Going forward, the BC model is likely to remain important for banks, NBFCs and MLIs seeking to maintain last-mile outreach. However, future growth will depend on stronger borrower assessment, responsible lending practices, effective collection and servicing systems, improved lender oversight, digital controls, field-staff capacity and robust customer-protection mechanisms.

6.5 Composition of BC Portfolio and Portfolio Concentration

The composition of the BC portfolio provides insight into the institutional structure, concentration and partnership dynamics of BC-led credit operations. While the aggregate portfolio indicates the overall scale of the model, a legal-form-wise analysis helps identify the types of MLIs participating in BC arrangements and the relative size of their managed portfolios. It also indicates whether BC-led lending is dispersed across a broad set of institutions or concentrated among a limited number of large MLIs.

Table 6.3: Legal Form-wise distribution of BC portfolio as of 31 March 2026

* Cumulative MLI-lender relationships and not unique Banks/FIs

As of 31 March 2026, the BC portfolio of 84 reporting MLIs stood at ₹51,004 crore. Trusts and societies accounted for the largest share of the portfolio at ₹28,647 crore, representing 56% of the total BC portfolio, despite comprising only eight MLIs. However, this category-level share is substantially influenced by one trust, whose entire GLP of ₹28,551 crore is reported under the BC model. Therefore, the high share of trusts and societies should not be interpreted as reflecting broad-based BC operations across institutions under this legal form.

Excluding this single trust, the BC portfolio of the remaining 83 reporting MLIs stands at ₹22,453 crore. Within this adjusted portfolio, private limited companies account for the largest share at ₹14,690 crore, or around 65%, followed by NBFC-MFIs at ₹6,949 crore, or around 31%. Thus, excluding the exceptionally large trust, the BC ecosystem is primarily driven by private limited companies and NBFC-MFIs, which together account for around 96% of the adjusted BC portfolio. NBFC-MFIs demonstrate the widest participation in the BC ecosystem, with 44 NBFC-MFIs reporting 111 lender engagements. Their relatively lower portfolio share, despite their larger number, indicates that BC operations among NBFC-MFIs are more dispersed across institutions and lender partnerships. The 233 lender engagements reported in the Table 6.3 represent cumulative MLI-lender BC relationships and should not be construed as the number of unique Banks/FIs. The same lender may have BC arrangements with multiple MLIs and is therefore counted separately for each such engagement. Table 6.4 presents the Bank/Financial Institution-wise distribution of lending partners engaged with MLIs under BC arrangements.

Table 6.4: Banks/Financial Institutions-wise data on lending partners in BC Engagement with MLIs as of 31 March 2026

Table 6.5: Distribution of MLIs by number of BC lending partners

* The BC portfolio under the six-to-ten lender category is substantially influenced by one trust with six lending partners and a BC portfolio of ₹28,551 crore.

As of 31 March 2026, 84 reporting MLIs were engaged in BC arrangements with one or more lending partners. Of these, 37 MLIs, representing 44% of the total, had an exclusive BC arrangement with one lender. These entities managed a combined BC portfolio of ₹9,284 crore, accounting for 18% of the total BC portfolio. A further eight MLIs were associated with two lenders, while 32 MLIs, or 38% of reporting MLIs, had partnerships with three to five lenders and managed a BC portfolio of ₹7,774 crore.

Overall, 47 MLIs, representing 56% of reporting MLIs, had BC arrangements with more than one lender. These multi-lender or hybrid BC entities accounted for ₹41,720 crore, or 82% of the aggregate BC portfolio, indicating the importance of diversified lender partnerships in BC-led credit delivery and reflecting their greater role in diversified, large-scale BC operations.

6.6 Portfolio under Co-Lending Model

Co-lending has emerged as an important partnership model through which banks and NBFCs can jointly fund loans while leveraging the sourcing, underwriting and servicing capabilities of partner institutions. In the microfinance ecosystem, co-lending may help improve access to lower-cost funding while ensuring that both partners retain a financial interest in the loan.

The RBI’s Co-Lending Arrangements Directions, 2025 became applicable from 1 January 2026 require each regulated entity to retain at least 10% of each loan under a co-lending arrangement, require a blended interest rate for the borrower, and require the respective loan shares to be reflected in both lenders’ books no later than 15 calendar days after disbursement.

Table 6.6: Co-lending portfolio of MLIs

The co-lending portfolio reported as of 31 March 2026 stood at ₹1,792 crore, involving 11 MLIs - nine NBFC-MFIs and two NBFCs. Of the total co-lending portfolio, NBFC-MFIs accounted for ₹1,367 crore, or about 76%, while the two NBFCs accounted for ₹426 crore, or about 24%. The arrangement involved a mix of public-sector banks, private-sector banks, SIDBI and NBFCs. Banks/FIs funded ₹1,431 crore, representing nearly 80% of the total co-lending portfolio, while the participating MLIs retained ₹361 crore, or about 20%, on their own books. The portfolio reflects the growing role of co-lending as a mechanism through which MLIs can access larger and relatively lower-cost funding pools while retaining a meaningful share of credit risk and responsibility for last-mile customer servicing.

Conclusion

The Business Correspondent model remains a critical bridge between regulated financial institutions and underserved customers. Its relevance has increased as lenders seek efficient and resilient means of providing last-mile credit while MLIs seek diversified partnership and funding models. The FY 2025-26 experience demonstrates that the BC model must evolve beyond a narrow focus on sourcing and collection towards a more accountable framework of responsible credit delivery, customer support, digital security and risk management.

A sustainable BC ecosystem will require collaboration among banks, Small Finance Banks, NBFCs, MLIs, technology partners, regulators and industry associations. The next phase of progress should be measured not only by the size of the BC portfolio or the number of partnerships, but also by the quality of customer outcomes, transparency of lending practices, operational resilience and contribution to inclusive financial development.