OnEMI Technology: ₹281 Cr Profit on ₹7,066 Cr AUM—Lender in a Hurry to Grow, Yet Slowing Its Loans

General information and entertainment, not investment advice. The author is not a SEBI-registered adviser or research analyst. No recommendation, no promised returns. Markets carry risk including loss of capital. Figures may not be current. Consult a registered adviser before acting.

1 — At a Glance

OnEMI, trading as Kissht, is a Delhi-born, Mumbai-roofed, pan-India digital lender—a fintech trying to capture the mass-market credit gap. It has built a lending machine on AI and algorithms, approving loans in under 10 minutes via an app, then chasing down collections with 7,000 field agents.

The headline: AUM touched ₹7,066 Cr by March 2026, up 73% year-on-year. Profit swelled 75% to ₹281 Cr. The company listed in May 2026 at ₹191–₹171 band, priced at ₹171 per share.

But the clock is ticking in reverse. Management is deliberately cutting loan yields—from ~31% in Q4 to ~30-31%—to chase “higher quality” borrowers. And it has paused lending in ~450 pin codes based on early-warning triggers.

Scale, profitability, deliberate caution. A company writing its own narrative about what matters more—speed or sense.

2 — Introduction

OnEMI Technology Solutions was incorporated in 2016. For its first six years it stayed private, running a subsidiary called Si Creva Capital as the actual lender. In May 2026, the parent went public, raising ₹926 Cr through an IPO (₹850 Cr fresh, ₹76 Cr offer for sale). The stock listed at ₹191 on May 8, 2026—an 11.7% pop to the price band.

The brand, Kissht (a pun on the Hindi word for “luck” or “fate”), markets itself as a “technology company that does lending, not the other way around.”

Management has two co-founders at the helm. Ranvir Singh, CEO, comes from 20+ years in retail lending and fintech across India and Southeast Asia. Krishnan Vishwanathan, CFO and co-founder, brings 22+ years in finance, governance, and controls. Both sit on the board.

The IPO proceeds were split: 75% to bolster on-book capital (mostly the ₹630 Cr that landed in Si Creva as a subsidiary infusion), and 25% for “general corporate purposes”—tech, AI, brand, customer acquisition.

3 — Business Model: WTF Do They Even Do?

Kissht runs a digital personal loan and secured lending shop.

Personal Loans (Core): ₹6,548 Cr of the ₹7,066 Cr AUM, or 92.7%. Ticket size up to ₹5 lakh, tenure up to 5 years. Borrowers apply via the app, get an offer in minutes, fund hits their account almost instantly. The customer is young (median age 32), salaried or self-employed, median CIBIL 746, monthly income ₹25K–₹75K. The 81% of customers in the top 100 cities tells you it is not serving the unbanked—it is serving the underserved middle class.

Loans Against Property (Growing): ₹518 Cr, 7.3% of AUM, added in FY24. Ticket size up to ₹15 lakh, tenure up to 10 years. LTV around 48%. The company runs 98 branches across 8 states and one UT (Mar 2026 count; plan says +80 more by FY27 end). This is the “stickier, lower-risk” play, but it’s asset-heavy and branch-dependent.

Non-lending: Health insurance distribution, savings products, mutual fund distribution (new wholly-owned subsidiary created May 2026). Still marginal to the P&L.

How it funds lending:

• On-book (~50% of AUM, ₹3,556 Cr): The company borrows from 45+ lending partners—banks, NBFCs, fund houses. Cost of borrowing ranges 11.5%–14.25%; as of Mar 2026, it was 14.16% average. The company holds this loan on its books and pockets interest margin.
• Off-book (~50%, ₹3,510 Cr): Loans are originated, underwritten, and sometimes booked entirely by partner banks/NBFCs, or co-lent, or assigned post-disbursement. The company takes a fee, not interest. Almost 100% is covered by FLDG (first-loss default guarantee, capped at 5%). This is capital-light but fee-light.

Why the split? Because on-book generates higher ROA (Return on Average Assets—5.05% in FY26), but ties up capital. Off-book scales faster with less capital but lower ROA. The company is trying to hit a steady-state ROA of 4.5–5% overall while ramping off-book.

Pricing and yield: Portfolio yield was ~30–31% in Q4 FY26 and has been trending down 50–75 bps per quarter. The company is passing this benefit to customers (lower rates) to recruit higher CIBIL, lower-leverage borrowers. This is a deliberate trade: less yield, better customers, lower impairment.

4 — Financials Overview

Figures are consolidated, in ₹ crore.

FY26 P&L Narrative:

Total income rose 63% to ₹2,209 Cr (from ₹1,353 Cr). Finance costs (interest on borrowings) jumped 72% to ₹282 Cr as AUM and leverage grew. Operating expenses climbed 69% to ₹1,091 Cr—mostly collections (7,000 field agents, 1,000+ tele-callers), underwriting tech, and customer acquisition.

Impairment cost (provisions for loan losses) came in at ₹459 Cr, up 40% YoY. This is the number that reveals the credit story. Despite “controlled” asset quality (Gross NPA 2.12% in Mar 2026, down from 2.89% a year prior), the company is building buffers: it nearly doubled Stage-2 provision coverage to 75.6% and maintains 86% overall provision coverage ratio.

Q4 Specifics:

Q4 FY26 (Jan–Mar 2026) saw sales of ₹619 Cr, net profit of ₹82 Cr. YoY, profit rose 52%; QoQ it edged up 7%. The slowdown in QoQ growth (vs. Q3’s ₹77 Cr) hints at either seasonal softness or deliberate moderation. Management’s concall guided for “north of 40%” AUM growth in FY27 with “disciplined risk selection”—a euphemism for not chasing every borrower.

From the Concall (May 29, 2026):

Management explicitly stated “discipline, adaptability, and risk adjustment matter far more than the speed of growth.” It confirmed yield moderation will continue. Portfolio ROA is guided