← Writing / India Markets
The pitch is hard to ignore: lend money to individuals or small businesses through a platform, earn 11 to 13 percent annual returns, all regulated by RBI. In a country where FDs return 6 to 7 percent, that spread sounds like a genuine opportunity. The question is what you’re actually signing up for when you chase that extra 5 percent.
How P2P Lending Platforms Work
Peer-to-peer lending platforms are Non-Banking Financial Companies (NBFCs) registered with the Reserve Bank of India under a specific P2P NBFC licence. They act as intermediaries, they don’t lend their own money. What they do is connect lenders (you, putting in your savings) with borrowers (individuals or small businesses who couldn’t or didn’t go to a bank).
The platform does the credit scoring, determines interest rates based on borrower risk, handles repayment collection, and takes a fee from both sides. When it works, you earn monthly interest on your deployed capital. When a borrower defaults, you absorb the loss, not the platform.
This is the fundamental structure you need to understand before anything else. The platform earns its fees regardless of whether borrowers repay. Your capital is at risk; theirs generally isn’t.
The 12 Percent Claim
Platforms advertise gross yields of 11 to 14 percent. This is before defaults. If you lend to 200 borrowers at 13 percent average interest but 5 percent of them default, your net return drops to around 7 to 8 percent, roughly what a good debt mutual fund or corporate FD offers, but with far less liquidity and far more credit risk.
The key variable is the default rate, and that’s where the honest answer gets complicated. Default rates on P2P platforms in India are not consistently disclosed in a standardised format. Each platform presents its numbers differently. “NPA rate”, “default rate”, “delinquency rate”, these terms are used loosely and the methodology behind each varies. During the COVID period, some platforms saw borrower stress spike significantly. Several lenders who had put significant sums in found their portfolios frozen or recovering slowly.
This is not a reason to write off the asset class entirely, but it’s a reason to be clear-eyed about what 12 percent actually means in practice.
Diversification Helps, But Doesn’t Eliminate Risk
The standard advice for P2P lending is to spread your money across as many borrowers as possible, 100 borrowers at ₹500 each rather than 5 borrowers at ₹10,000. This way, a single default doesn’t wipe you out.
The logic is sound. But diversification in P2P lending faces a ceiling that doesn’t exist in equity markets. In equity, the underlying assets (company revenues, global trade) are genuinely uncorrelated across sectors and geographies. In P2P lending, you’re lending to Indian individuals with similar income profiles, similar geographic exposure, and similar vulnerability to the same economic shocks. When a recession hits or incomes fall across the board, defaults don’t arrive one at a time, they cluster. Diversification smooths out idiosyncratic risk but doesn’t protect against systemic stress, which is exactly when you most need protection.
What Changed in 2024: RBI Tightens the Rules
In August 2024, the RBI issued updated directions for P2P NBFCs that significantly tightened how these platforms operate. Key changes included a ban on promoting P2P lending as an investment product with assured returns, platforms can no longer use language implying fixed or guaranteed yields. The RBI also clarified that P2P platforms cannot offer credit guarantees or credit enhancement, which some had been structuring as a selling point to make the product feel more like a fixed return instrument.
These changes were driven by complaints about misleading marketing and opacity in how defaults were being reported and handled. Some platforms were using pooled accounts in ways that obscured individual loan performance. The new rules push toward more direct lender-to-borrower disclosure and less platform intermediation of the economic outcomes.
The net effect: P2P lending is now more honestly structured, but the regulatory changes also confirmed that some practices in the industry had been misleading. That should inform how you think about older marketing claims from these platforms.
Liquidity: The Hidden Cost
P2P loans are typically 12 to 36 month tenures. You can’t redeem your money mid-loan in most cases. Some platforms offer a secondary market where you can sell your loan book to another lender, but this comes at a discount and requires a willing buyer. In stressed market conditions, liquidity can vanish entirely.
Compare this to a bank FD, which can be broken any time with a small penalty. Or to a liquid mutual fund, where you can redeem in one business day. The illiquidity premium in P2P lending exists for a reason, you’re giving up optionality. The question is whether the extra return after defaults justifies that.
When I think about money I might need in two or three years, for a property transaction, a family expense, anything with a date attached, I keep it in instruments I can access. The philosophy behind farming and money is partly about understanding different time horizons for different pools of capital. P2P capital should only come from a pool you genuinely do not need for the loan tenure.
Who This Is Actually For
P2P lending is not a replacement for your FD, your emergency fund, or your debt mutual fund allocation. It is a higher-risk, higher-return slice of a portfolio, appropriate for someone who already has the basics in place and wants to allocate a small portion, say 5 to 10 percent of their fixed income allocation, to a different risk-return profile.
The investor it fits is someone who understands credit risk, has patience for a 24+ month lockup, can absorb partial defaults without it affecting their financial plan, and is genuinely curious about the asset class rather than chasing yield to compensate for a savings gap.
It does not fit someone who is using it as a substitute for FD because the interest rates are better. That framing misses the risk. An FD at 6.5 percent is a near-riskless return. P2P at 12 percent gross is not twice as good, it carries a fundamentally different risk of capital loss.
Questions to Ask Before Investing
If you’re still interested after understanding the above, here are the questions that matter. What is the platform’s 90-day past due rate and how is it calculated? Is the platform NBFC-P2P registered with RBI, you can verify on the RBI website? Does the platform disclose individual loan-level data or only aggregate portfolio stats? What happens to your money if the platform shuts down? These aren’t trick questions. A good platform will answer them clearly.
I don’t have a personal allocation in P2P lending. That’s not a recommendation against it, it reflects my own portfolio structure and the fact that I get my higher-risk return exposure from equity. But I understand why some sophisticated investors include it, particularly those who want credit risk exposure without equity market volatility. The key word is sophisticated, meaning they’ve done the analysis above, not that they have a large net worth.
The same caution I’d apply here applies to anything that gets attention because of returns, the envy post says this better than I could in a paragraph. When your friend tells you he’s earning 14 percent on his P2P portfolio, find out what his gross lending rate is, what his default rate is, and how long he’s been doing it. The headline number rarely survives that conversation intact.
Frequently Asked Questions
Practical takeaway: if you want to try P2P lending, treat it as a small, ring-fenced allocation you can afford to lose partially, not as a fixed deposit substitute. Start with a small amount, track actual net returns after defaults for a full year, and then decide whether to increase exposure.
This post is for educational purposes only. It is not financial advice. Mohit Mehra is not a SEBI registered investment advisor. Please consult a qualified financial advisor before making investment decisions.