Moneyview Limited IPO Analysis, 117-Checkpoint Due Diligence & Valuation Dossier

Issue Size ₹750.00 Cr Fresh + OFS 100.49M Shs

Price Band TBA (Pending Band Declaration)

Lot Size / Min Inv. TBA shares

Estimated Market Cap TBA (Book-Building Valuation)

Anchor Allocation Up to 30.0% of Issue Size

Offering Dates Q4 2026 Scheduled

FAST-ORIENTATION TRIAGE

At a Glance: Fast-Orientation Triage

Mainboard or SME issue?

OK

Mainboard public issue listed on NSE and BSE under SEBI ICDR Reg 6(1).

Designated Stock Exchange is NSE; also listing on BSE. Meets net tangible assets and operating profit criteria under Reg 6(1). Cover Page, p.1; Offer Structure, p.468

Can you explain what the company does in one plain sentence?

OK

Leading digital credit platform providing personal loans and financial products to Middle India through 48 Financial Partners and its own NBFC.

Two-sided fintech ecosystem combining digital distribution (LSP) and own-book NBFC lending (WFPL) across 140M+ registered users. Our Business, p.208-210

Total issue size and post-issue market cap?

OK

Fresh issue of ₹7,500.00 mn (₹750 cr) + OFS of up to 100,494,200 equity shares; post-issue mcap pending final price band.

Pre-offer capital is 1,539,643,033 equity shares of ₹1 face value; total post-issue equity base ~1.6B shares. Cover Page, p.1; The Offer, p.87

Fresh issue vs OFS - what's the split?

OK

Fresh Issue ₹7,500.00 mn vs OFS of up to 100,494,200 equity shares (exact split ratio pending final Offer Price).

At an illustrative price of ₹100/share, OFS would be ~₹1,005 cr vs Fresh ₹750 cr (~43% Fresh : 57% OFS). Objects of the Offer, p.134

Who is selling in the OFS - promoter, PE, or both?

OK

Both: Promoters Puneet Agarwal & Sanjay Aggarwal selling 27.10M shares, and institutional VCs selling 71.46M shares.

Institutional selling shareholders include Accel (24.39M shares across 2 funds), Tiger Global (15.36M), Ribbit Capital (11.36M), Crimson Winter (10.00M). The Offer, p.87-88

Is the company profitable, or loss-making?

OK

Highly profitable: Restated PAT of ₹2,427.05 mn in FY26 (and ₹3,973.44 mn before exceptional items).

3-year PAT trend: FY24 ₹1,711.47 mn → FY25 ₹2,402.75 mn → FY26 ₹2,427.05 mn (Q1 FY27 PAT was ₹1,737.96 mn). Summary Financials, p.91

Any headline red flag in the first 10 risk factors?

FLAG

High dependence on Financial Partners (top 10 contribute 37.4% of revenue), rising Gross Stage 3 loans (2.74%), and negative cash flow from loan book expansion.

Also highlights credit default risks and DLG liabilities up to 5% of facilitated portfolio. Risk Factors #2, #5, #6, #10, p.27-38

Auditor qualification or 'emphasis of matter'?

OK

No financial qualifications; statutory auditor S.R. Batliboi & Associates LLP issued an unmodified report.

Routine CARO 2020 remarks for FY26 and IT audit trail / electronic server backup notes for FY24 without restatement impact. Auditor Report, p.313-314

Any criminal case / SEBI-RBI action against promoters?

FLAG

Nil criminal cases or SEBI/RBI actions against Company or Promoters.

WFPL has a pending suo moto SEBI settlement application for a past NCD private placement downsold to 254 holders (fully redeemed). Outstanding Litigation, p.429-432

IPO P/E vs the peers listed in 'Basis for Offer Price'?

OK

P/E pending price band notification; peer composite average is 82.41x (OnEMI 16.6x, Bajaj Finance 33.7x, PB Fintech 120.3x, Paytm 213.5x).

Moneyview FY26 diluted EPS was ₹1.57 (₹2.57 before exceptional items); industry peers show wide multiple dispersion. Basis for Offer Price, p.144, 146

Is the use of fresh-issue money clearly growth-oriented?

OK

100% growth-oriented: ₹3,250 mn (43.3%) for DLG loan disbursal growth and ₹2,500 mn (33.3%) for NBFC subsidiary WFPL capitalization.

Zero funds allocated to debt repayment or plant capex; directly fuels loan book and partnership scaling. Objects of the Offer, p.134-135

Is this within your circle of competence to judge?

OK

Yes, digital consumer lending, fintech platform economics, NBFC capital adequacy, and credit underwriting metrics are transparent and assessable.

Key valuation drivers are Managed AUM growth, credit costs (Gross Stage 3), take rates, DLG loss provisions, and operating cost leverage.

LAYER 1 • STORY & POSITIONING

What The Company Does: Operational & Strategic Architecture

Moneyview operates a digital financial services platform connecting over 140 million registered users to 48 Financial Partners for unsecured personal loans, credit cards, and financial products. It combines Lending Service Provider (LSP) tech distribution with own-book lending through its RBI-registered Middle Layer NBFC subsidiary, Whizdm Finance (WFPL), primarily serving Middle India households across Tier 2+ cities.

#

Checkpoint

Your Finding (Prospectus Data)

Status

Page Ref

1

What does the company do, in one plain sentence?

Moneyview Limited operates a consumer-focused, digital-only, credit-led financial services platform catering to 'Middle India' consumers, providing digital unsecured personal loans, credit cards, and broader financial products through a two-sided network of 48 Financial Partners and its NBFC subsidiary WFPL.

OK

Our Business, p.208

2

Operating history & year of incorporation

Incorporated on August 11, 2014 as Whizdm Innovations Private Limited; converted to public company Moneyview Limited on June 10, 2025 (~12 years of corporate history; digital personal loans launched in 2017).

OK

History and Certain Corporate Matters, p.273; Our Business, p.209

3

Industry / sub-sector & position in the value chain

Digital consumer fintech lending; operates as a Lending Service Provider (LSP) and credit distribution platform connecting retail borrowers to regulated financial institutions, while also underwriting own-book credit via NBFC subsidiary WFPL.

OK

Industry Overview, p.168; Our Business, p.208-210

4

Stated competitive strengths - real or generic?

Proprietary AI/ML underwriting evaluating 100k+ variables, massive digital reach (140.28M registered users, 11.90M monetized users), diversified two-sided network (48 Financial Partners, 22 lending partners), high-margin unit economics, and experienced founder leadership.

OK

Our Strengths, p.212-227

5

Stated growth strategy - concrete or aspirational?

Concrete multi-pronged expansion: scaling core personal loan disbursals, expanding product suites across 'Borrow, Transact, Invest and Protect', deepening corporate B2B employee access via Zeo Fin ('Jify'), and augmenting DLG partnerships and NBFC capital.

OK

Our Strategies, p.228-233

6

Industry tailwinds vs headwinds

Tailwinds: Rapid expansion of Indian retail credit TAM (₹138-151T by FY31), digital personal loan CAGR of 26-27%, rising middle-income households. Headwinds: Tightening RBI regulatory scrutiny on digital lending / LSPs, credit delinquency risks in unsecured consumer lending, and rising borrowing costs.

OK

Industry Overview, p.168-171, 196-200

7

Who commissioned the industry report?

Commissioned and paid for exclusively by the Company: the 'Redseer Report' dated September 2026.

Watch

Industry Overview, p.168; Risk Factor #49, p.69

8

Is the TAM / market-size claim credible?

Credible but expansive: Indian retail lending TAM projected at ₹138-151 trillion by FY31 (from ₹76.6 trillion in FY26, 13-15% CAGR); unsecured personal loans projected to grow at 17-19% CAGR to ₹33-36 trillion by FY31 with digital personal loan sanctions growing at 26-27% CAGR.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY31	FY26	FY31
(from ₹76	, 13-15% CAGR)	with digital personal loan sanctions growing at 26-27% CAGR

OK

Industry Overview, p.169, 196-197

9

Market share and its trend

Moneyview accounted for approximately 10.5% of total digital unsecured personal loan sanctions and ~1.6% of overall unsecured personal loan sanctions in India in FY26. Reported highest AUM among digital lending platform peers as of FY25.

OK

Industry Overview, p.200; Our Business, p.212

10

Key competitors named

Digital lending platforms: KrazyBee (KreditBee), Navi Limited, Fibe (Social Worth), OnEMI (Kissht / RING); Fintech platforms: PB Fintech, Paytm (One97); Diversified NBFCs: Bajaj Finance, SBI Cards.

OK

Industry Overview, p.201; Basis for Offer Price, p.146

LAYER 2 • ISSUE STRUCTURE & OBJECTS

The IPO Itself: Capital Allocation & Objects Rupee Breakdown

The offer comprises a Fresh Issue of ₹7,500.00 mn (₹750 cr) and an OFS of up to 100,494,200 equity shares by promoters Puneet Agarwal and Sanjay Aggarwal (27.1M shares) and institutional investors (Accel, Tiger Global, Ribbit). Crucially, 100% of fresh proceeds are earmarked for business expansion - ₹3,250 mn to scale DLG loan partnerships and ₹2,500 mn to capitalize subsidiary WFPL - with zero allocated to debt bailout.

Offering Structure & Tranche Breakup

Offering Parameter / Tranche	Mandate & Allocation	Value & Scale	Strategic Context & Terms
Fresh Issue (Primary Capital)	Growth capital directly reaching balance sheet	₹750.00 Cr Fresh + OFS 100.49M Shs	Primary equity expansion funding capex, working capital & debt
Offer for Sale (OFS Liquidations)	Secondary liquidity for existing promoters & early funds	OFS Dilution Tranche	Proceeds go entirely to selling shareholders; zero reaches company
Gross Total Issue Size	Aggregate offering scale at upper price band	₹750.00 Cr Fresh + OFS 100.49M Shs	Total book-building size
Anchor Investor Allocation	Reserved institutional QIB tranche	Up to 30.0% of Issue Size	Anchor lock-in: 50% for 30 days, 50% for 90 days post-listing
Pre-IPO WACA Benchmark	Weighted average cost of acquisition for promoters	Disclosed in Basis for Issue Price	Benchmark for pricing fairness and insider multiple markup

Capital Allocation & Objects of the Issue

Object of Offer / Purpose	Allocated Amount	% Share	Execution Timeline
Augmentation of Capital Base for DLG Guarantee Deposits	₹325.00 Cr	43.3%	FY2027 - FY2028 Deployment
Capitalization of NBFC Subsidiary (WFPL) for Loan Book Expansion	₹250.00 Cr	33.3%	FY2027 - FY2028 Deployment
General Corporate Purposes (GCP)	₹175.00 Cr	23.4%	Within Statutory 25% Cap

#	Checkpoint	Your Finding (Prospectus Data)	Status	Page Ref
11	Mainboard or SME issue?	Mainboard public issue listed on NSE (Designated Stock Exchange) and BSE under SEBI ICDR Regulation 6(1).	OK	Cover page, p.1; Offer Structure, p.468
Where in DRHP: Cover page Why It Matters: SME = thinner disclosure, lower liquidity, higher risk. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: SME = extra caution Exact Citation: Cover page, p.1; Offer Structure, p.468
12	Total issue size (Rs cr)	Fresh Issue of ₹7,500.00 mn (₹750.00 cr) + OFS of up to 100,494,200 Equity Shares of face value ₹1 each; total offer amount pending final price band.	OK	The Offer, p.87; Objects of the Offer, p.134
Where in DRHP: Cover page / 'The Offer' Why It Matters: Basic sizing of the raise. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: The Offer, p.87; Objects of the Offer, p.134
13	Fresh issue amount (Rs cr)	₹7,500.00 million (aggregating ₹750.00 crore).	OK	The Offer, p.87; Objects of the Offer, p.134
Where in DRHP: 'The Offer' Why It Matters: Only the fresh issue brings new money into the company. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: The Offer, p.87; Objects of the Offer, p.134
14	OFS amount (Rs cr)	Up to 100,494,200 Equity Shares of face value ₹1 each aggregating up to ₹[●] mn (split pending price band; at illustrative ₹100-150, OFS = ₹1,005 - 1,507 cr).	OK	The Offer, p.87; Details of the Offer, p.87-88
Where in DRHP: 'The Offer' Why It Matters: OFS proceeds go to selling shareholders, not the business. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: The Offer, p.87; Details of the Offer, p.87-88
15	Fresh : OFS ratio	Fresh Issue ₹7,500.00 mn vs OFS of 100,494,200 shares. At an illustrative ₹100/share price, OFS would be ~₹1,005 cr vs Fresh ₹750 cr (~43% Fresh : 57% OFS); at ₹150, ~33% Fresh : 67% OFS.	OK	Objects of the Offer, p.134; The Offer, p.87
Where in DRHP: 'The Offer' Why It Matters: A heavy OFS tilt means the IPO is mostly an exit. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: OFS >70% + tiny fresh = flag Exact Citation: Objects of the Offer, p.134; The Offer, p.87
16	Who is selling in the OFS?	Both: Promoters Puneet Agarwal & Sanjay Aggarwal selling 27.10M shares (13.55M each), Chitra Agarwal selling 1.94M shares, and institutional VCs selling 71.46M shares (Accel 24.39M across 2 funds, Tiger Global 15.36M, Ribbit 11.36M, Crimson Winter 10.00M, NLI 4.27M, TI JPNIN 3.75M, DI Investment 2.35M).	Watch	Details of the Offer, p.87-88
Where in DRHP: 'The Offer' / Selling Shareholders Why It Matters: Promoter exit and PE exit carry very different signals. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Large promoter sell-down = flag Exact Citation: Details of the Offer, p.87-88
17	How much does the COMPANY actually receive?	Net Proceeds = Gross Fresh Issue of ₹7,500.00 mn minus Company's share of Offer expenses (final net proceeds to be determined post price band).	OK	Objects of the Offer, p.134
Where in DRHP: Fresh issue minus issue expenses Why It Matters: This is the real fuel for growth - often far less than the headline. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Objects of the Offer, p.134
18	Objects: capex - amount & specificity	₹0.00 mn allocated for manufacturing/plant capex. Pure digital financial services model with negligible physical asset requirements.	OK	Objects of the Offer, p.134-135
Where in DRHP: 'Objects of the Offer' Why It Matters: Specific, costed capex is genuine growth spending. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Vague/uncosted capex = flag Exact Citation: Objects of the Offer, p.134-135
19	Objects: debt repayment amount	₹0.00 mn. No fresh issue proceeds are allocated for debt repayment.	OK	Objects of the Offer, p.134-135
Where in DRHP: 'Objects of the Offer' Why It Matters: Deleveraging is healthy but it is balance-sheet repair, not growth. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: High % to debt = repair, not growth Exact Citation: Objects of the Offer, p.134-135
20	Objects: working capital amount	₹0.00 mn direct standalone working capital allocation; however, ₹3,250 mn DLG investment and ₹2,500 mn NBFC capitalization function as financial business capital.	OK	Objects of the Offer, p.134-137
Where in DRHP: 'Objects of the Offer' Why It Matters: Normal for a growing WC-intensive business; large amounts can signal a stretched cycle. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Objects of the Offer, p.134-137
21	Objects: acquisition - named target or 'future M&A'?	₹0.00 mn allocated for acquisitions; past acquisition of Zeo Fin ('Jify') was completed in FY25 for ₹595.67 mn via internal accruals/equity.	OK	Objects of the Offer, p.134; Note 50, p.374
Where in DRHP: 'Objects of the Offer' Why It Matters: A named, costed target beats a blank cheque for 'inorganic growth'. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Unspecified M&A = flag Exact Citation: Objects of the Offer, p.134; Note 50, p.374
22	General Corporate Purposes (GCP) as % of fresh issue	General Corporate Purposes capped at maximum 25% of Gross Proceeds (up to ₹1,875.00 million) under Regulation 7(2) of SEBI ICDR Regulations.	OK	Objects of the Offer, p.134-135
Where in DRHP: 'Objects of the Offer' Why It Matters: SEBI caps GCP (and unidentified objects). High GCP = undefined use of your money. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Maxed-out / high GCP = flag Exact Citation: Objects of the Offer, p.134-135
23	Issue expenses as % of the issue	Offer expenses shared proportionately between the Company and Selling Shareholders based on shares sold; estimated amounts [●] pending final price band.	OK	Objects of the Offer, p.138
Where in DRHP: 'Objects of the Offer' Why It Matters: Fees eat into the proceeds that reach the company. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Unusually high = flag Exact Citation: Objects of the Offer, p.138
24	Overall read: growth / debt-repair / exit / mixed?	Growth-oriented capital infusion combined with institutional/promoter liquidity: 100% of company proceeds fund business expansion (₹3,250 mn for DLG credit expansion + ₹2,500 mn for NBFC subsidiary capitalization + GCP), while OFS enables early VC/PE and founder rebalancing.	OK	Objects of the Offer, p.134-137
Where in DRHP: Synthesise the objects Why It Matters: The single most important interpretation of the whole issue. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Pure exit or repair = low enthusiasm Exact Citation: Objects of the Offer, p.134-137
25	Pre-IPO placement done - at what price vs the IPO band?	No Pre-IPO placement was undertaken in connection with the Offer.	N/A	Capital Structure, p.107-133; Basis for Offer Price, p.156
Where in DRHP: 'Capital Structure' Why It Matters: A recent placement far below the IPO price signals aggressive pricing. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Big gap below IPO price = flag Exact Citation: Capital Structure, p.107-133; Basis for Offer Price, p.156
26	WACA - weighted avg cost of acquisition of promoter/investor shares vs IPO price	Primary issuances WACA (last 3 years) is ₹64.15 per share (or ₹5.69 if ₹1 ESOP trust shares are included); Secondary WACA is ₹0.27 per share. Offer price multiple pending price band.	Watch	Basis for Offer Price, p.154-156
Where in DRHP: 'Basis for Offer Price' Why It Matters: SEBI-mandated. Shows the markup at which insiders are selling to you. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: IPO price >> WACA = priced for insiders Exact Citation: Basis for Offer Price, p.154-156

LAYER 3 • BUSINESS QUALITY

Business Quality: Concentration, Retention & Durability

Business durability is anchored by customer stickiness, recurring volume growth, and disciplined operational execution.

Revenue Breakdown & Product Segment Mix

Product / Operating Segment	% Share	Revenue Value
Fees and Commission Income (Platform Origination & Collection)	56.7%	₹1,899.46 Cr
Interest Income on Own NBFC (WFPL) Loans	39.2%	₹1,312.70 Cr
Gain on Derecognition (Direct Assignment / Securitisation)	2.9%	₹97.02 Cr
Other Operating Income (Lien & Ancillary Services)	1.2%	₹41.98 Cr

Customer & Geographic Concentration Matrix

Counterparty / Customer Tier	Revenue Share (%)	Rupee Amount	Strategic Exposure Note
Top 1 Financial Partner (Leading Bank/NBFC)	13.4%	₹449.48 Cr	Co-lending distribution; diversified across 48 partners
Top 5 Financial Partners Combined	32.6%	₹1,092.48 Cr	Multi-partner marketplace eliminates single-funder risk
Top 10 Financial Partners Combined	37.4%	₹1,253.33 Cr	Long-term institutional credit relationships
Retail Borrowers (Middle India)	100.0%	₹23,098.52 Cr Disbursed	140M+ registered users across 19,000+ pin codes

#

Checkpoint

Your Finding (Prospectus Data)

Status

Page Ref

27

Revenue breakdown by segment / product

FY26 Total Revenue ₹33,511.58 mn: Fees and commission income ₹18,994.55 mn (56.68%), Interest income ₹13,127.00 mn (39.17%), Gain on derecognition (direct assignment) ₹970.24 mn (2.90%), Other operating income (lien interest) ₹419.79 mn (1.25%). Balanced fee/interest mix.

OK

Restated Consolidated P&L, p.91; MD&A, p.390-393

28

Top customer as % of revenue

Top Financial Partner accounted for ₹4,494.77 mn in FY26 (13.41% of revenue from operations; 10.74% in FY25, 9.92% in FY24, and 10.53% in Q1 FY27). Well below the 25-30% red-flag threshold. Retail borrowers are completely diversified.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY26	FY25	FY24	Q1 FY27
(13	, 9	, and 10	)

OK

Risk Factor #2, p.27; Note 49(B), p.373

29

Top 5 customers as % of revenue

Top 5 Financial Partners accounted for ₹10,106.37 mn in FY26 (30.16% of revenue from operations; 34.68% in FY25, 39.44% in FY24, and 30.92% in Q1 FY27). Well below the 50% red-flag threshold.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY26	FY25	FY24	Q1 FY27
(30	, 39	, and 30	)

OK

Risk Factor #2, p.27

30

Are customer relationships recurring/contracted or order-by-order?

Recurring & multi-product: Long-term institutional contracts with 48 Financial Partners (average vintage 3+ years); retail borrower lifecycle features repeat loans, tenure extensions, and cross-selling into credit cards, insurance, and bill payments.

OK

Our Business, p.211-213, 227

31

Recurring / repeat revenue %

Substantial repeat usage: 11.90M monetized users out of 140.28M registered users; repeat loans and multi-year partner contracts drive steady recurring fees, with loan disbursals growing from ₹145.3B (FY24) to ₹231.0B (FY26).

OK

Basis for Offer Price, p.147; Our Business, p.212-214

32

Supplier concentration (top / top-5)

Lenders/capital providers act as key 'suppliers': partnered with 22 RE lending partners (including NBFC subsidiary WFPL) and 50 debt partners (17 banks + 100+ debt holders). Top 10 partners provide 37.36% of revenue in FY26.

OK

Our Business, p.227; Risk Factor #2, p.27

33

Single-source or single raw-material dependency?

Not applicable to digital fintech; however, relies on credit bureaus (CIBIL, Experian, CRIF), AWS/cloud infrastructure, and banking partner APIs for disbursals and collections.

Watch

Risk Factors #14, #17, p.41-44

34

Manufacturing footprint - single-plant dependency?

Not applicable. Fully cloud-native digital infrastructure operating on AWS cloud servers; registered office in Bengaluru, Karnataka.

N/A

Our Business, p.207, 246

35

Current capacity utilisation

Platform scalability: Processed ₹230,985.19 mn in loan disbursals and ₹213,801.37 mn in Managed AUM in FY26 across 140M+ registered users with minimal marginal operating cost.

OK

Basis for Offer Price, p.147; MD&A, p.385

36

Geographic concentration of revenue

Broadly diversified across Middle India: 79.54% of monetized users reside in Tier 2 and beyond cities, serving users across 19 states and 19,000+ pincodes. Low metropolitan single-city concentration.

OK

Our Business, p.209, 213, 236

37

Asset-heavy or asset-light?

Hybrid model: Technology platform / LSP distribution is ultra asset-light (PPE is just ₹102.87 mn, 0.12% of total assets); own-book NBFC lending via WFPL is capital-intensive requiring debt leverage and equity capital for loan assets (₹53,076.55 mn gross loans).

OK

Balance Sheet, p.90; Our Business, p.227

38

Working-capital intensity

Working capital is driven by financial loan book growth and DLG lien-marked deposits. Trade receivables are modest (₹4,566.10 mn, 13.6% of revenue). Operating cash flow absorbed by loan book expansion.

OK

Balance Sheet, p.90; Cash Flow, p.92

39

Distribution model (direct / dealer / online)

100% digital, mobile-first D2C distribution via the Moneyview mobile app (4.8-star app rating), augmented by B2B corporate partnerships via Zeo Fin ('Jify') for earned wage access.

OK

Our Business, p.208-210, 228

40

Order book / backlog (if relevant)

Managed AUM represents the live loan portfolio serviced: ₹128,848.26 mn (FY24) → ₹167,151.41 mn (FY25) → ₹213,801.37 mn (FY26) → ₹225,201.65 mn (Q1 FY27), reflecting 28.8% CAGR.

OK

Basis for Offer Price, p.147

41

Cyclicality of the business

Moderately cyclical: Driven by macro consumer credit cycles, interest rates, and retail borrower disposable income; Middle India small-ticket consumption needs provide relatively resilient all-weather demand.

Watch

Industry Overview, p.168-171; MD&A, p.384

42

Entry barriers / moat - real or weak?

Strong multi-layered moat: Proprietary AI/ML credit underwriting trained on 100k+ variables, massive 140M+ user dataset, deep two-sided network effects (48 partners), NBFC Middle Layer regulatory license, and DLG infrastructure.

OK

Our Strengths, p.212-227

43

Key licences / regulatory approvals the business depends on

RBI NBFC-Middle Layer license held by WFPL, RBI Digital Lending Guidelines compliance, DLG compliance under RBI 2025 directions, and corporate agent licenses.

OK

Key Regulations and Policies, p.253-272; Government Approvals, p.434-436

44

Technology / obsolescence risk

High tech dependence: Platform requires continuous cybersecurity protection against API exploits, automated fraud detection, and uptime maintenance. (August 2025 API incident caused ₹466.53 mn net loss).

Watch

Risk Factors #14, #15, p.41-43; Note 39, p.356

LAYER 4 • FINANCIAL QUALITY

Are The Numbers Real? Multi-Year Forensic Quality Audit

While statutory CFO was negative (-₹9,509.02 mn in FY26) due to Ind AS classification of loan disbursements, underlying cash generation is strong: operating profit before working capital changes was ₹9,358.60 mn in FY26 and ₹4,230.09 mn in Q1 FY27. Receivables days shortened impressively from 97.4 to 49.7 days, and cash & liquid balances exceeded ₹13,423 mn with no aggressive revenue recognition.

Revenue from Operations

+58.0% CAGR

₹3,351.16 Cr

₹1,342.37 Cr

FY2024

₹2,339.15 Cr

FY2025

₹3,351.16 Cr

FY2026

EBITDA & Operating Profit

+71.7% CAGR

₹968.92 Cr (28.9%)

₹328.70 Cr (24.5%)

FY2024

₹697.98 Cr (29.8%)

FY2025

₹968.92 Cr (28.9%)

FY2026

Profit After Tax (PAT)

+19.1% CAGR

₹242.71 Cr (7.1%)

₹171.14 Cr (12.3%)

FY2024

₹240.23 Cr (10.1%)

FY2025

₹242.71 Cr (7.1%)

FY2026

Cash Flow from Operations (CFO)

Loan Book Scaling

-₹950.90 Cr

-₹612.44 Cr

FY2024

-₹1,784.81 Cr

FY2025

-₹950.90 Cr

FY2026

3-Year Audited Financial Performance Summary

Financial Parameter / Metric	FY2024	FY2025	FY2026	3-Yr Trend / CAGR
Revenue from Operations	₹1,342.37 Cr	₹2,339.15 Cr	₹3,351.16 Cr	+58.0% CAGR
Total Income (incl. Other Income)	₹1,389.24 Cr	₹2,378.53 Cr	₹3,404.27 Cr	+56.5% CAGR
EBITDA (Operating Profit)	₹328.70 Cr (24.5%)	₹697.98 Cr (29.8%)	₹968.92 Cr (28.9%)	+71.7% CAGR
Consolidated PAT (Net Profit)	₹171.14 Cr (12.3%)	₹240.23 Cr (10.1%)	₹242.71 Cr (7.1%)	+19.1% CAGR
Operating Cash Flow (CFO)	-₹612.44 Cr	-₹1,784.81 Cr	-₹950.90 Cr	Loan Book Scaling
Return on Net Worth (RoNW)	17.3%	18.5%	17.9%	High Return Profile
Gross Stage 3 NPA / CRAR	0.94% / 22.1%	1.82% / 23.4%	2.74% / 24.3%	Capital Ratio Stable

#

Checkpoint

Your Finding (Prospectus Data)

Status

Page Ref

45

Revenue (3 yrs) and CAGR

Revenue from Operations: FY24 ₹13,423.70 mn → FY25 ₹23,391.46 mn → FY26 ₹33,511.58 mn. 2-year CAGR = 57.99% (~58.0%). Total Income grew at 56.54% CAGR to ₹34,042.74 mn.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY24	FY25	FY26
₹13,423	₹23,391	₹33,511

OK

Restated Consolidated Financials, p.91; Industry Overview, p.201

46

Is growth organic or acquisition-driven?

Overwhelmingly organic (>98%): Driven by registered user additions (83M → 134M) and loan disbursals scaling (₹145B → ₹231B). Sole acquisition was Zeo Fin (Jify) in Sept 2024 for ₹595.67 mn.

OK

MD&A, p.385; Note 50, p.374

47

Gross margin trend (3 yrs)

Net credit spread/contribution margin after direct credit costs (finance costs + impairment): FY24 ₹9,641.15 mn (71.82% of revenue) → FY25 ₹13,015.95 mn (55.64%) → FY26 ₹17,359.40 mn (51.80%). Spread compressed as own-book lending scaled up finance costs and provisions.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY24	FY25	FY26
₹9,641	₹13,015	₹17,359

Watch

Restated P&L, p.91; MD&A, p.390-393

48

EBITDA and EBITDA-margin trend

EBITDA: FY24 ₹3,287.01 mn (24.49% of revenue) → FY25 ₹6,979.83 mn (29.84%) → FY26 ₹9,689.23 mn (28.91%) → Q1 FY27 ₹4,242.82 mn (40.75%). Strong operating leverage expanding EBITDA by ~3x in 2 years.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY24	FY25	FY26	Q1 FY27
₹3,287	₹6,979	₹9,689	₹4,242

OK

Other Financial Information, p.378; MD&A, p.402

49

Sudden margin spike right before the IPO?

No artificial spike: EBITDA margins hovered stably at 24.5% (FY24), 29.8% (FY25), and 28.9% (FY26); Q1 FY27 jumped to 40.8% driven by operating expenses dropping from 56.4% to 34.1% of income.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY24	FY25	FY26	Q1 FY27
), 29	), and 28	)	jumped to 40

OK

MD&A, p.401-402

50

PAT and PAT-margin trend

Restated PAT: FY24 ₹1,711.47 mn (12.75% of revenue) → FY25 ₹2,402.75 mn (10.27%) → FY26 ₹2,427.05 mn (7.24%). Note: FY26 PAT before exceptional items was ₹3,973.44 mn (11.86% margin), impacted by ₹1,197.28 mn net CEO incentive and ₹349.11 mn net cyber incident loss.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY24	FY25	FY26	FY26
₹1,711	₹2,402	₹2,427	PAT before exceptional items was ₹3,973

Watch

Restated P&L, p.91; Basis for Offer Price, p.147

51

Other income as % of PAT

Other Income: FY24 ₹468.71 mn (27.39% of PAT) → FY25 ₹393.83 mn (16.39% of PAT) → FY26 ₹531.16 mn (21.88% of PAT, or 13.37% of PAT before exceptional). Primarily interest on bank deposits and mutual fund gains.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY24	FY25	FY26
₹468	₹393	₹531

OK

Restated P&L, p.91; Note 33, p.352

52

CFO (operating cash flow) trend

CFO: FY24 -₹16,327.36 mn → FY25 -₹14,207.05 mn → FY26 -₹9,509.02 mn → Q1 FY27 +₹1,171.15 mn. Negative CFO in full years reflects standard NBFC accounting where portfolio loan disbursement growth is classified as operating cash outflow.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY24	FY25	FY26	Q1 FY27
₹16,327	₹14,207	₹9,509	+₹1,171

Watch

Summary Statement of Cash Flows, p.92; Risk Factor #10, p.38

53

CFO / PAT (cash conversion), multi-year

Negative in FY24 (-9.54x), FY25 (-5.91x), and FY26 (-3.92x) due to NBFC loan book disbursements (-₹20,304 mn in FY26); however, operating profit before working capital changes was strongly positive: FY24 ₹2,751.99 mn → FY25 ₹7,054.65 mn → FY26 ₹9,358.60 mn.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY24	FY25	FY26	FY26	FY24	FY25	FY26
(-9	(-5	(-3	)	₹2,751	₹7,054	₹9,358

Watch

Summary Statement of Cash Flows, p.92

54

Was CFO negative in any year?

Yes. CFO was negative in FY24 (-₹16,327.36 mn), FY25 (-₹14,207.05 mn), and FY26 (-₹9,509.02 mn) due to NBFC loan asset disbursements, before turning positive in Q1 FY27 (+₹1,171.15 mn). Meets flag benchmark trigger.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY24	FY25	FY26	Q1 FY27
(-₹16,327	(-₹14,207	(-₹9,509	(+₹1,171

Flag

Summary Statement of Cash Flows, p.92; Risk Factor #10, p.38

55

Free cash flow (CFO minus capex)

FCF was negative: FY24 -₹16,359.71 mn → FY25 -₹14,313.88 mn → FY26 -₹9,567.20 mn, turning positive to +₹1,132.83 mn in Q1 FY27. Physical PPE capex is tiny (₹58.18 mn in FY26); cash deficit is entirely financial asset deployment funded via borrowings.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY24	FY25	FY26	Q1 FY27	FY26
₹16,359	₹14,313	₹9,567	. Physical PPE capex is tiny (₹58	)

Watch

Summary Statement of Cash Flows, p.92

56

Total debt and net debt

As of March 31, 2026: Total Borrowings ₹51,570.38 mn (Non-current ₹20,196.41 mn + Current ₹31,373.97 mn) + Lease liabilities ₹258.76 mn = Total Debt ₹51,829.14 mn. Liquid Cash & Investments ₹10,916.94 mn; Net Debt = ₹40,912.20 mn.

OK

Balance Sheet, p.90; MD&A, p.402

57

Debt / Equity

Total Borrowings / Equity was 1.06x (FY24) → 1.78x (FY25) → 2.32x (FY26) and 2.27x as of June 30, 2026. Highly conservative leverage for an NBFC (peer NBFCs operate at 3.5x to 5.5x).

OK

MD&A, p.402

58

Interest coverage (EBIT / interest)

EBIT / Finance costs: FY24 3,238.41 / 1,255.38 = 2.58x; FY25 6,890.32 / 3,698.21 = 1.86x; FY26 9,590.44 / 6,316.90 = 1.52x (or 1.85x before exceptional items); Q1 FY27 4,211.08 / 1,881.27 = 2.24x. Below 2-3x threshold, warranting monitoring.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY24	FY25	FY26	Q1 FY27
3,238	6,890	9,590	4,211

Watch

MD&A, p.402

59

ROE and trend

Return on Net Worth (RoNW): FY24 10.65% → FY25 12.52% → FY26 17.85% (average equity RoE was 19.18% in FY26 and 29.93% annualised in Q1 FY27). Steady multi-year upward trajectory.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY24	FY25	FY26	FY26	Q1 FY27
10	12	17	and 29	)

OK

Basis for Offer Price, p.145; MD&A, p.400

60

ROCE and trend

ROCE (EBIT before exceptional / Capital Employed): FY24: 3,238.41 / 20,290.19 = 15.96% → FY25: 6,890.32 / 53,320.31 = 12.92% → FY26: 11,656.97 / 73,824.61 = 15.79%. Healthy capital efficiency.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY24	FY25	FY26
3,238	6,890	11,656

OK

Restated P&L, p.91; Balance Sheet, p.90; MD&A, p.402

61

ROCE vs cost of capital

FY26 ROCE of 15.79% comfortably exceeds average cost of borrowings of 14.74% (and blended WACC of ~12-13%), creating positive economic value spread.

OK

MD&A, p.401-402

62

Debtor (receivable) days and trend

Trade Receivables: FY24 ₹3,581.73 mn (97.4 days) → FY25 ₹3,644.61 mn (56.9 days) → FY26 ₹4,566.10 mn (49.7 days). Debtor days improved drastically by ~48 days over two years.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY24	FY25	FY26
₹3,581	₹3,644	₹4,566

OK

Restated Balance Sheet, p.90; Restated P&L, p.91

63

Inventory days and trend

Inventory = ₹0.00 mn. Digital fintech and financial services platform holds zero physical inventory. Inventory days = 0.0 days.

OK

Restated Balance Sheet, p.90

64

Payable days and trend

Trade Payables: FY24 ₹910.95 mn (51.1 days of operating expenses) → FY25 ₹1,164.60 mn (43.2 days) → FY26 ₹1,691.10 mn (52.1 days). Stable payable cycle.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY24	FY25	FY26
₹910	₹1,164	₹1,691

OK

Restated Balance Sheet, p.90; Restated P&L, p.91

65

Cash conversion cycle

CCC = Debtor days (49.7) + Inventory days (0.0) - Payable days (52.1) = -2.4 days in FY26 (down from +46.3 days in FY24). Favourable negative working capital float.

OK

Restated Balance Sheet, p.90; Restated P&L, p.91

66

Contingent liabilities vs net worth

Contingent liabilities = ₹9,203.48 mn in FY26 (41.36% of Net Worth of ₹22,254.23 mn) and ₹10,607.80 mn in Q1 FY27 (43.92% of Net Worth). Consists entirely of contractual DLG credit loss guarantees (capped at 5% of portfolio), with zero tax/legal claims. High % of net worth triggers flag benchmark.

Flag

Summary Contingent Liabilities, p.93; Note 49(A), p.373

67

Capex history vs proposed capex

Historical PPE capex: FY24 ₹32.35 mn, FY25 ₹106.83 mn, FY26 ₹58.18 mn. Proposed IPO capex is ₹0.00 mn; proceeds fund financial capital (DLG guarantees ₹3,250 mn and NBFC equity ₹2,500 mn). Zero execution risk on plant/machinery.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY24	FY25	FY26
₹32	₹106	₹58

OK

Cash Flow Statement, p.92; Objects of the Offer, p.134-135

68

Dividend history

No dividends declared or paid in Fiscals 2024, 2025, or 2026, or during Q1 FY27. All earnings reinvested to fund loan book growth and capital adequacy.

OK

Dividend Policy, p.308

69

Standalone vs consolidated divergence

Only Consolidated statements are presented in RHP per SEBI regulations. Standalone parent operates as LSP/technology distributor, while material subsidiary WFPL operates the licensed NBFC loan book (accounting for ~28% of net assets in FY24 and the bulk of own-book borrowings/interest income).

OK

Note 47, p.373; Other Financial Information, p.379

70

Material restatement adjustments?

Nil adjustments to Net Worth or Total Comprehensive Income across all reported years in Annexure VII Note 54. Only non-adjusting presentation regroupings (DLG provisions reclassified to other financial liabilities, EPS restated for vested ESOPs).

OK

Annexure VII, Note 54, p.376-377

71

Auditor qualifications / emphasis of matter

S.R. Batliboi & Associates LLP issued an unmodified examination report on restated financials. Group financial statements included standard CARO 2020 qualifications in FY26 and IT audit trail / electronic server backup notes in FY24, none requiring financial restatement adjustments.

OK

Auditor Examination Report, p.313-314

72

Aggressive revenue-recognition policy?

Conservative and standard: Ind AS 115 point-of-service recognition for fee and commission income; Ind AS 109 EIR method for interest income on loans; bounce and penal charges recognized on cash/realization basis.

OK

Annexure V, Summary of Accounting Policies, p.324-325

LAYERS 5 & 6 • GOVERNANCE & RPT

Governance Architecture & Related Party Transactions

Promoters Puneet Agarwal and Sanjay Aggarwal are IIT Delhi graduates with over two decades of tech leadership and zero share pledge. The Board is 50% independent with distinguished directors from Nestlé India, Whirlpool, and Morgan Stanley, and audit is conducted by Big-4 firm S.R. Batliboi. Related party transactions are clean and strictly confined to managerial compensation.

Pre & Post-Issue Shareholding Structure

Shareholder Category / Promoter	Pre-IPO %	Post-IPO %	Pledge Status	Statutory Lock-in
-	-	-	Nil	Standard
-	-	-	Nil	Standard
-	-	-	Nil	Standard
-	-	-	Nil	Standard

#	Checkpoint	Your Finding (Prospectus Data)	Status	Page Ref
73	Promoter background and track record	Co-founders Puneet Agarwal (MD & CEO, B.Tech IIT Delhi, MS Purdue, ex-Capital One, Google, McKinsey) and Sanjay Aggarwal (ED & CTO, B.Tech IIT Delhi, ex-Yahoo). 23+ and 19+ years experience. Clean track record, zero past fraud or default.	OK	Our Management, p.289; Our Promoters, p.305
Where in DRHP: 'Our Promoters', 'Management' Why It Matters: The quality and integrity of stewardship. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Prior failure/fraud = flag Exact Citation: Our Management, p.289; Our Promoters, p.305
74	Promoter holding pre-IPO	Promoters hold 300,899,776 shares = 19.55% of fully diluted pre-offer equity share capital (Promoter + Promoter Group holds 368,875,776 shares = 23.96%).	Watch	Capital Structure, p.116, 123
Where in DRHP: 'Capital Structure' Why It Matters: Skin in the game today. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Capital Structure, p.116, 123
75	Promoter holding post-IPO	Post-IPO promoter holding will decline below 19.55% due to OFS sale of 27.09M shares by Puneet Agarwal and Sanjay Aggarwal plus dilution from ₹7,500 mn fresh issue. Shortfall in 20% MPC met by Specified Shareholders (Accel, Tiger Global, Ribbit).	Watch	Capital Structure, p.116, 120
Where in DRHP: 'Capital Structure' Why It Matters: Alignment going forward. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Very low post-IPO = misalignment Exact Citation: Capital Structure, p.116, 120
76	Promoter share pledge	0.00% of promoter shareholding is pledged or encumbered.	OK	Capital Structure, p.116, 123
Where in DRHP: 'Capital Structure', Risk Factors Why It Matters: Pledging signals financial stress. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Any meaningful pledge = flag Exact Citation: Capital Structure, p.116, 123
77	Promoter / KMP remuneration vs PAT and peers	In FY26, MD & CEO Puneet Agarwal received a one-time performance-based incentive of ₹1,600.00 million (₹160 cr, net tax ₹1,197.28 mn), which impacted FY26 PAT by 30.13%. ED Sanjay Aggarwal received ₹30.00 mn. CPO Sushma Abburi granted ₹150.00 mn retention bonus over 3 years. Substantial payout meeting high pay vs PAT flag trigger.	Flag	Risk Factor #15, p.42; Our Management, p.301, 304; Note 39, p.356
Where in DRHP: 'Management' Why It Matters: Cash extraction relative to profits. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: High pay vs PAT = flag Exact Citation: Risk Factor #15, p.42; Our Management, p.301, 304; Note 39, p.356
78	Group structure - complex / circular / many entities?	Clean corporate structure: Parent company Moneyview Limited + 2 operating wholly-owned subsidiaries (Whizdm Finance Pvt Ltd - NBFC, and Zeo Fin Technology Pvt Ltd - EWA) + 1 employee trust. (Whizdm Fintech and Moneyview Solutions struck off).	OK	History and Corporate Matters, p.278; Group Companies, p.437
Where in DRHP: 'Our Group Companies' Why It Matters: Complexity is where value and leakage hide. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Complex web = flag Exact Citation: History and Corporate Matters, p.278; Group Companies, p.437
79	Auditor - reputable? Recent change or resignation?	Statutory Auditor is Big-4 network firm S.R. Batliboi & Associates LLP (member firm of Ernst & Young Global). No auditor resignation or adverse change in the last three years.	OK	General Information, p.99; Auditor Examination Report, p.316
Where in DRHP: 'Auditors', history Why It Matters: Audit credibility and any pre-IPO churn. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Resignation before IPO = flag Exact Citation: General Information, p.99; Auditor Examination Report, p.316
80	CFO / KMP churn before the IPO	Stable management: CFO Saurav Goyal has been with the company since September 2018 (designated CFO in Sept 2025); CS Ankit Kumar Jain joined July 2023. Zero pre-IPO KMP exits.	OK	Our Management, p.302-304
Where in DRHP: 'Management', history Why It Matters: Instability in key finance roles before listing. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: CFO exit pre-IPO = flag Exact Citation: Our Management, p.302-304
81	Board: proportion of independent directors	3 Independent Directors out of 6 Board members (50.0%), meeting SEBI Listing Regulations and Companies Act requirements. Includes 1 woman independent director (Alpana Parida).	OK	Our Management, p.287-290
Where in DRHP: 'Management' Why It Matters: Strength of independent oversight. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Below norms = flag Exact Citation: Our Management, p.287-290
82	Independent-director credentials - real or token?	High-calibre independent directors: Alpana Parida (IIM-A, ID on Nestlé India), Anil Berera (FCA, ex-CFO Whirlpool of India, ID on Vodafone Idea), and Sameer Kumar Baisiwala (ex-Morgan Stanley financial analyst).	OK	Our Management, p.288-290
Where in DRHP: Director bios Why It Matters: Whether oversight is actually effective. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Token / related IDs = flag Exact Citation: Our Management, p.288-290
83	ESOP / outstanding options - dilution overhang	Moneyview Employees Stock Option Plan - 2015: 12,327,664 shares held by Employee Trust (0.80% of pre-offer capital); weighted average unvested options represent ~1.6% dilution effect. Minimal dilution overhang.	OK	Capital Structure, p.123, 126; Note 40, p.356
Where in DRHP: 'Capital Structure' Why It Matters: Future dilution of your stake. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Large unvested pool = caution Exact Citation: Capital Structure, p.123, 126; Note 40, p.356
84	Lock-in: promoter and anchor / pre-IPO investors	Minimum Promoter Contribution (20%) locked in for 18 months; balance pre-IPO equity locked in for 6 months; Anchor investors locked in 50% for 30 days and 50% for 90 days.	OK	Capital Structure, p.120-122
Where in DRHP: 'Capital Structure' Why It Matters: Share supply that hits the market post-listing. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Big near-term unlocks = caution Exact Citation: Capital Structure, p.120-122
85	Past corporate-governance issues / regulatory strictures	No corporate governance issues or strictures by SEBI/RBI against promoters. WFPL filed suo moto SEBI settlement application regarding past private NCD issue downsold to >200 investors (fully redeemed).	OK	Risk Factor #12, p.40; Outstanding Litigation, p.432
Where in DRHP: Risk Factors, Litigation Why It Matters: A pattern of past behaviour. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Any history = flag Exact Citation: Risk Factor #12, p.40; Outstanding Litigation, p.432

#	Checkpoint	Your Finding (Prospectus Data)	Status	Page Ref
86	Sales to related parties (% of revenue)	₹0.00 mn (0.00% of revenue). Outside of intra-group consolidation eliminations between parent and subsidiaries, there are zero sales to related parties.	OK	Summary RPT, p.94-96
Where in DRHP: RPT note Why It Matters: Revenue propped up by group entities? Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: High % = flag Exact Citation: Summary RPT, p.94-96
87	Purchases from related parties (% of costs)	0.00% of total costs. Zero procurement from promoter-owned entities.	OK	Summary RPT, p.94-96
Where in DRHP: RPT note Why It Matters: A channel to manipulate margins. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: High % = flag Exact Citation: Summary RPT, p.94-96
88	Loans / advances to promoter or related entities	₹0.00. No loans or advances extended to promoters, directors, or their relatives.	OK	Summary RPT, p.95; Note 46, p.368
Where in DRHP: RPT note Why It Matters: Company cash diverted to insiders. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Any sizeable loan out = flag Exact Citation: Summary RPT, p.95; Note 46, p.368
89	Rent / royalty / brand fees paid to related parties	₹0.00. Nil brand fees, royalties, or office rent paid to promoters or relatives.	OK	Summary RPT, p.95
Where in DRHP: RPT note Why It Matters: Recurring cash extraction from the company. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Royalty to promoter = flag Exact Citation: Summary RPT, p.95
90	Outstanding RPT balances (receivable / payable)	Routine year-end remuneration and expense reimbursements payable to KMP (~₹2.5-3.0 mn). Zero related-party trade receivables.	OK	Summary RPT, p.95; Note 46, p.369
Where in DRHP: RPT note Why It Matters: Money stuck with related parties. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Large outstanding = flag Exact Citation: Summary RPT, p.95; Note 46, p.369
91	RPT trend over 3 years	Stable and confined strictly to executive compensation (salaries, bonus, and the one-time ₹1,600 mn incentive in FY26) and relative remuneration (₹16.59 mn in FY26 to Sushma Abburi / Chitra Agarwal).	OK	Summary RPT, p.95
Where in DRHP: RPT note Why It Matters: Rising reliance on related-party dealings. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Increasing trend = flag Exact Citation: Summary RPT, p.95
92	Disclosed at arm's length? Pricing basis?	All RPTs certified as conducted on an arm’s length basis and in the ordinary course of business.	OK	Summary RPT, p.95; Note 46, p.362
Where in DRHP: RPT note Why It Matters: Whether terms are fair to minority shareholders. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: 'At cost'/unclear basis = scrutinise Exact Citation: Summary RPT, p.95; Note 46, p.362
93	Overall RPT concern level (Low / Medium / High)	Watch: Operational RPTs are non-existent; however, the ₹1,600.00 mn one-time incentive paid to CEO Puneet Agarwal in FY26 represents an extraordinary KMP payout that investors will scrutinize.	Watch	Summary RPT, p.95; Risk Factor #15, p.42
Where in DRHP: Synthesise this layer Why It Matters: Your single judgment on related-party risk. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Summary RPT, p.95; Risk Factor #15, p.42

LAYER 7 • LITIGATION & REGULATORY

Litigation, Tax Disputes & Materiality Sizing

Outstanding legal proceedings represent standard commercial and tax disputes with low aggregate materiality relative to net worth.

Outstanding Legal & Tax Dispute Summary

Litigation / Regulatory Category	Case Count	Quantifiable Exposure	Materiality & Balance Sheet Risk
Direct & Indirect Tax Proceedings (Company & Subsidiaries)	1	₹0.00 Cr	Evaluated
Regulatory & Disciplinary Actions (RBI / SEBI)	1	₹0.00 Cr	Evaluated
Independent Director Personal Tax Matter	1	Unquantified (Personal)	Evaluated

#	Checkpoint	Your Finding (Prospectus Data)	Status	Page Ref
94	Criminal cases against promoters / directors	Nil criminal proceedings against the Company, its Promoters, or Directors. (WFPL is the complainant/victim in an FIR regarding the August 2025 cyber fraud).	OK	Outstanding Litigation, p.429-432
Where in DRHP: 'Outstanding Litigation' Why It Matters: An integrity red flag that can override the numbers. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Any = serious flag Exact Citation: Outstanding Litigation, p.429-432
95	Material civil / commercial cases - company	Nil material civil or commercial litigation against the Company, its Subsidiaries, or Promoters.	OK	Outstanding Litigation, p.429-432
Where in DRHP: 'Outstanding Litigation' Why It Matters: Direct business and financial risk. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Outstanding Litigation, p.429-432
96	Direct + indirect tax disputes and amounts	Nil tax proceedings against the Company, Subsidiaries, or Promoters. Only 1 routine direct tax proceeding involving Independent Director Alpana Parida in personal capacity (amount unquantified).	OK	Outstanding Litigation, p.429-431
Where in DRHP: 'Outstanding Litigation' Why It Matters: Contingent cash outflows. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Large vs PAT = flag Exact Citation: Outstanding Litigation, p.429-431
97	Regulatory / statutory actions (SEBI, RBI, environmental, labour)	Nil actions by SEBI, RBI, or stock exchanges against Company or Promoters. WFPL has a pending suo moto SEBI settlement application for past NCD downsold to 254 holders (exceeding 200-holder limit; NCDs fully redeemed). Nominee director Subrata Mitra has a legacy FEMA notice relating to Flipkart/Accel from 2021 (no company impact).	Watch	Outstanding Litigation, p.430, 432; Risk Factor #12, p.40
Where in DRHP: 'Outstanding Litigation' Why It Matters: Signals compliance culture. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Active actions = flag Exact Citation: Outstanding Litigation, p.430, 432; Risk Factor #12, p.40
98	Total quantifiable amount involved	Quantifiable legal disputes = ₹0.00 against the company. Cyber fraud loss suffered by WFPL was ₹483.20 mn (₹23.45 mn recovered, net loss ₹466.53 mn already expensed).	OK	Outstanding Litigation, p.429-433
Where in DRHP: Litigation summary Why It Matters: Sizing the aggregate exposure. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Outstanding Litigation, p.429-433
99	Materiality vs PAT and net worth	Negligible legal liability exposure (<0.01% of PAT / Net Worth). Litigation risk profile is exceptionally clean.	OK	Outstanding Litigation, p.428-433
Where in DRHP: Compare Why It Matters: Whether the exposure is survivable. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Multiple of PAT / net worth = flag Exact Citation: Outstanding Litigation, p.428-433
100	Any case threatening a key licence or the business model?	No. Zero litigation threatening RBI NBFC registration, LSP operations, digital platforms, or core business continuity.	OK	Outstanding Litigation, p.428-433
Where in DRHP: Litigation, Risk Factors Why It Matters: Existential risk to operations. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Yes = serious flag Exact Citation: Outstanding Litigation, p.428-433

LAYER 8 • VALUATION & PEER BENCHMARK

Valuation: Peer Comparison & Multiples Benchmark

Valuation benchmark indicates competitive pricing relative to listed industry peers and forward earnings power.

Listed Industry Peer Valuation Benchmark

Company Name / Peer Benchmark	P/E (x)	EV/EBITDA	P/S (x)	ROE (%)	ROCE (%)	YoY Growth	PAT Margin
Moneyview Limited	TBA (Est. ~25-30x)	TBA	-	-	15.8%	+58.0%	-
PB Fintech (Policybazaar)	120.3x	94.5x	-	-	10.4%	+34.4%	-
Bajaj Finance Limited	33.7x	N/A	-	-	14.8%	+26.1%	-
One97 Communications (Paytm)	213.5x	Negative	-	-	Negative	+25.0%	-

#	Checkpoint	Your Finding (Prospectus Data)	Status	Page Ref
101	IPO P/E (post-issue, upper band)	Pending final price band advertisement. On FY26 Diluted EPS of ₹1.57 (or ₹2.57 before exceptional items), at an illustrative ₹60 price, P/E = 38.2x (or 23.3x pre-exceptional); at ₹80, P/E = 51.0x (or 31.1x pre-exceptional).	OK	Basis for Offer Price, p.144
Where in DRHP: Basis for Offer Price / compute Why It Matters: The headline earnings multiple you're paying. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Basis for Offer Price, p.144
102	Peer P/E - and is the peer set fair or cherry-picked?	Listed peer set in RHP shows wide dispersion: OnEMI (Kissht) 16.62x, PB Fintech 120.33x, One97 (Paytm) 213.45x, Bajaj Finance 33.66x, SBI Cards 27.98x. Composite peer average is 82.41x (skewed by fintech platform multiples).	OK	Basis for Offer Price, p.144, 146
Where in DRHP: 'Basis for Offer Price' Why It Matters: Companies pick flattering peers; rebuild the set yourself. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Cherry-picked rich peers = flag Exact Citation: Basis for Offer Price, p.144, 146
103	EV / EBITDA vs peers	FY26 EBITDA is ₹9,689.23 mn. Final EV/EBITDA will depend on Offer Price. At illustrative ₹10,000-12,000 cr market cap, EV/EBITDA is ~14-16x, comparing favourably to digital fintech platform peers (PB Fintech >70x).	OK	Basis for Offer Price, p.146; MD&A, p.402
Where in DRHP: Compute / peers Why It Matters: A capital-structure-neutral comparison. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Basis for Offer Price, p.146; MD&A, p.402
104	Price / Sales (especially if loss-making)	Company is highly profitable (FY26 revenue ₹33,511.58 mn; total income ₹34,042.74 mn). Implied P/S will depend on final price band (at illustrative ₹10,000 cr mcap, P/S = ~3.0x vs PB Fintech ~12x and One97 ~8x).	OK	Basis for Offer Price, p.146; Restated P&L, p.91
Where in DRHP: Compute Why It Matters: The relevant lens for unprofitable companies. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Aggressive P/S on losses = flag Exact Citation: Basis for Offer Price, p.146; Restated P&L, p.91
105	Price / Book	Pre-offer NAV per share is ₹14.57 as of March 31, 2026 (and ₹15.73 as of June 30, 2026). Implied P/B is Offer Price / ₹14.57 (post-issue NAV will expand with ₹7,500 mn fresh issue).	OK	Basis for Offer Price, p.145
Where in DRHP: Compute Why It Matters: Relevant for asset-heavy and financial businesses. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Basis for Offer Price, p.145
106	Implied market cap at IPO	Pre-offer equity base of 1,539.64 mn shares plus ~50-80 mn fresh issue shares (~1,600 mn post-offer shares). Total market capitalization will be finalized upon price band notification.	OK	The Offer, p.87; Capital Structure, p.107
Where in DRHP: Compute Why It Matters: The absolute size of what you're buying. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: The Offer, p.87; Capital Structure, p.107
107	ROE vs peers	Moneyview FY26 RoNW is 17.85% (average equity RoE 19.18%, Q1 FY27 annualised 29.93%), which matches or beats Bajaj Finance (17.19%), SBI Cards (13.72%), PB Fintech (9.17%), and One97 (4.61%), trailing only OnEMI (20.96%).	OK	Basis for Offer Price, p.146; MD&A, p.400
Where in DRHP: Compare Why It Matters: Does quality justify any premium? Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Premium + lower ROE = flag Exact Citation: Basis for Offer Price, p.146; MD&A, p.400
108	ROCE vs peers	Moneyview FY26 ROCE of 15.79% demonstrates solid capital efficiency across a hybrid LSP distribution + NBFC balance sheet model, generating substantial economic spread over borrowing costs.	OK	Restated Financials, p.90-91; MD&A, p.402
Where in DRHP: Compare Why It Matters: Capital efficiency relative to price. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Restated Financials, p.90-91; MD&A, p.402
109	Growth vs peers	Industry-leading growth: Moneyview delivered 56.54% CAGR in Total Income (FY24-26), ranking highest among all listed and unlisted peers (PB Fintech 37.0%, Bajaj Finance 22.1%, OnEMI 14.0%, SBI Cards 8.8%, Paytm -6.0%).	OK	Industry Overview, p.201
Where in DRHP: Compare Why It Matters: Does faster growth justify the premium? Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Premium + slower growth = flag Exact Citation: Industry Overview, p.201
110	Margins vs peers	EBITDA margin of 28.91% in FY26 (and 40.75% in Q1 FY27) and PAT margin before exceptional of 11.86% reflect superior profitability compared to loss-making or thin-margin fintech platform peers.	OK	Other Financial Information, p.378; Restated P&L, p.91
Where in DRHP: Compare Why It Matters: Quality of earnings relative to price. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Other Financial Information, p.378; Restated P&L, p.91
111	IPO price vs WACA / pre-IPO placement (the markup)	Primary issuances WACA over the last 3 years is ₹64.15 per share (or ₹5.69 if ₹1 ESOP trust shares are included); secondary WACA is ₹0.27 per share. Offer price multiple pending price band.	Watch	Basis for Offer Price, p.154-156
Where in DRHP: Basis for Offer Price Why It Matters: What insiders paid versus what you're paying. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Large multiple over WACA = flag Exact Citation: Basis for Offer Price, p.154-156
112	Is the premium justified by ROCE / ROE / growth / margins?	Justified by operational fundamentals: 58.0% revenue CAGR, 17.85% RoNW, 28.9% EBITDA margin, 10.5% market share in digital personal loans, and strong operating leverage (operating expenses declining from 56.4% to 34.1% of income).	OK	Analyst Synthesis; Industry Overview, p.200-201
Where in DRHP: Synthesise Why It Matters: The core valuation verdict. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Premium unsupported by quality = flag Exact Citation: Analyst Synthesis; Industry Overview, p.200-201
113	What growth does the price implicitly assume?	Assumes continued 25-30% growth in Managed AUM, successful scaling of DLG lending partnerships, expansion of credit card / non-lending products, and maintaining credit cost / Gross Stage 3 loans below 3.0%.	OK	Analyst Synthesis; MD&A, p.385-386
Where in DRHP: Reverse the multiple / judgment Why It Matters: Are the embedded expectations realistic? Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Heroic assumptions = flag Exact Citation: Analyst Synthesis; MD&A, p.385-386

LAYER 9 • STATED RISK ADMISSIONS

In The Company's Own Words: Stated Risk Admissions

Management highlights key operational sensitivities including raw material pricing, client concentration, and execution timelines.

#	Checkpoint	Your Finding (Prospectus Data)	Status	Page Ref
114	Top 5 risk factors the company itself lists	1. Ability to attract, engage and monetize new and existing users on platform (RF #1, p.26). 2. High dependence on cooperation with Financial Partners; top 10 partners contribute 37.36% of revenue (RF #2, p.27). 3. Reliance on Key Managerial Personnel and key technical talent (RF #3, p.28). 4. Ability to sustain rapid historical growth and manage expansion across new products (RF #4, p.29). 5. Borrower credit defaults on facilitated loans increasing impairment / DLG liability (RF #5, p.31).	Watch	Risk Factors #1-#5, p.26-32
Where in DRHP: 'Risk Factors' Why It Matters: Management's own stated worries - read them first. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Risk Factors #1-#5, p.26-32
115	Any genuine dealbreaker buried in boilerplate?	Two notable disclosures: (1) August 2025 cyber incident where threat actors exploited banking partner APIs causing ₹483.20 mn unauthorized withdrawals (₹466.53 mn net exceptional loss); (2) One-time performance-based incentive of ₹1,600.00 mn (₹160 cr) paid to MD & CEO Puneet Agarwal in FY26, impacting restated PAT by 30.13%.	Watch	Risk Factors #14, #15, p.41-43; Note 39, p.356
Where in DRHP: 'Risk Factors' Why It Matters: The serious risks hide among generic ones; find them. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Risk Factors #14, #15, p.41-43; Note 39, p.356
116	Quantified risks (e.g. 'X would cut revenue by Y%')	Quantified exposures: (1) Default loss guarantee (DLG) outstanding of ₹10,607.80 mn (43.92% of Net Worth) as of June 30, 2026; (2) Gross Stage 3 loans at 2.74% (₹1,524.29 mn) as of March 31, 2026; (3) Net cyber loss of ₹466.53 mn.	Watch	Risk Factors #5, #6, p.31-33; Note 49(A), p.373; Note 39, p.356
Where in DRHP: 'Risk Factors' Why It Matters: The risks management bothered to quantify are usually the real ones. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Risk Factors #5, #6, p.31-33; Note 49(A), p.373; Note 39, p.356
117	Going-concern or liquidity language anywhere?	None. Statutory auditor S.R. Batliboi & Associates LLP issued an unqualified report with zero going-concern doubts; the Group maintains strong cash & liquid balances (₹13,423.04 mn as of June 30, 2026) and comfortable capital adequacy (CRAR 24.32% vs 15% regulatory minimum at WFPL).	OK	Auditor Examination Report, p.313-316; Objects of the Offer, p.136
Where in DRHP: Risk Factors / Auditor Why It Matters: A direct signal of survival risk. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Any going-concern language = serious flag Exact Citation: Auditor Examination Report, p.313-316; Objects of the Offer, p.136

AUDIT TALLY • 117-CHECKPOINT RISK MATRIX

Red-Flag Dashboard: 117-Checkpoint Audit Tally

92

Checkpoints Clean (OK)

20

Watchlist Monitor Rows

3

High-Severity Red Flags

117

Total Forensic Checkpoints

L1 Story & Positioning

9 1 0

L2 Issue Structure & Objects

13 2 0

L3 Business Quality

14 3 0

L4 Financial Quality

20 6 2

L5 Governance

10 2 1

L6 Related Party Transactions

7 1 0

L7 Litigation & Regulatory

6 1 0

L8 Valuation

12 1 0

L9 The Company's Own Risk Factors

1 3 0

Layer 1: Story & Positioning

9 OK 1 Watch 0 Flag

Layer 2: Issue Structure & Objects

13 OK 2 Watch 0 Flag

Layer 3: Business Quality

14 OK 3 Watch 0 Flag

Layer 4: Financial Quality

20 OK 6 Watch 2 Flag

Layer 5: Governance

10 OK 2 Watch 1 Flag

Layer 6: Related Party Transactions

7 OK 1 Watch 0 Flag

Layer 7: Litigation & Regulatory

6 OK 1 Watch 0 Flag

Layer 8: Valuation

12 OK 1 Watch 0 Flag

Layer 9: The Company's Own Risk Factors

1 OK 3 Watch 0 Flag

How To Read This Risk Matrix

These tallies reflect the 117 checkpoints evaluated across the 9 analytical layers. In institutional forensic analysis, clusters matter far more than isolated totals: an amber or red flag in Layer 4 (Financial Quality) or Layer 5 (Governance) carries exponentially higher structural weight than narrative observations in Layer 1. Always evaluate flags against company peers and industry context.

Statutory Educational Compliance & Analyst Disclaimer

This research report is prepared strictly for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, legal, tax, or underwriting advice. Neither IPrOspecta nor the author (Tanish Vijayvargiya) is a SEBI-registered Research Analyst or SEBI-registered Investment Adviser under the SEBI (Research Analysts) Regulations, 2014 or SEBI (Investment Advisers) Regulations, 2013.

Nothing in this publication should be construed as an explicit or implicit recommendation, solicitation, endorsement, or offer to buy, sell, subscribe to, or hold any security, IPO application, or financial product. Prospective investors must conduct their own independent due diligence, carefully review the complete Red Herring Prospectus (RHP) / Draft Red Herring Prospectus (DRHP) filed with SEBI and the stock exchanges, and consult a qualified, SEBI-registered financial adviser before committing capital.

Position Disclosure: The author and IPrOspecta maintain zero commercial affiliation with the issuer company, book running lead managers, selling shareholders, or syndicate underwriters. All opinions expressed represent personal analytical frameworks.