How to Read a P2P Lending Factsheet (Before You Invest)

P2P (peer-to-peer) lending platforms often lead with an attractive headline return figure, and that number is usually the least useful thing on the page — not because it's fabricated, but because "return" can mean several genuinely different things depending on how it's measured. This page is about the four questions worth asking of any P2P return figure, on any platform, before deciding whether to lend.

What P2P lending actually is

An NBFC-P2P platform is a regulated marketplace that connects individual lenders directly with individual or small-business borrowers, without a bank sitting in between as the lender of record. The platform earns a fee for running the marketplace, matching and servicing loans; it doesn't lend its own money, and — this is the part worth being direct about — it does not guarantee that lenders get their principal or interest back. RBI's own Master Directions for NBFC-P2P platforms specifically bar these platforms from offering any credit enhancement or guarantee. The credit risk of every loan sits with the individual lender who funded it, in full.

The four questions to ask about any P2P return figure

Before treating a platform's headline return number as comparable to a fixed deposit rate or a mutual fund's stated return, ask:

1. Absolute, or annualised? A return quoted over a 5-month or 7-month lending tenure is not the same figure as an annual percentage — a 6% return over 5 months, annualised, is roughly 15%, not 6%. Platforms sometimes show tenure-specific absolute returns alongside annual figures on the same page without flagging which is which; always ask which one you're looking at.
2. Gross, or net of defaults and fees? A headline "average return" figure calculated across all loans, including ones that eventually default, is a different (higher) number than what a lender actually receives after losses and platform fees are deducted. Ask specifically whether the published figure is before or after accounting for defaults.
3. Realised, or projected? A return on loans that have already matured and been fully repaid is a real, historical number. A return that's "accrued" or "projected" on loans still outstanding assumes the rest of the tenure goes to plan — which, by definition, not every loan will.
4. What's the denominator? A return figure calculated only over currently-performing loans looks better than one calculated over all loans originated, defaults included. Ask what population of loans the percentage is actually calculated against.

If a platform's marketing materials or your relationship manager can't answer these four questions clearly, that's meaningful information in itself.

Reading the NPA (default) number the same way

Alongside the headline return, most platforms publish an overall NPA (non-performing asset) percentage — the share of loans that have gone bad. Two things are worth checking before taking that number at face value: how fast the loan book is growing, and how short the average loan tenure is. A rapidly growing book of short-tenure loans has a structural quirk — a large share of the outstanding book at any given moment is simply too young to have defaulted yet, even if it eventually will, so the reported NPA percentage (measured against an inflated, fast-growing denominator) tends to understate the eventual loss rate on any specific cohort of loans. This isn't an accusation against any one platform — it's arithmetic that applies to any fast-growing lender, on any platform, in any country. Ask how the NPA figure is calculated, and over what population, before treating it as an expected loss rate for your own money.

The RBI limits every P2P lender should know

RBI's NBFC-P2P directions cap an individual lender's exposure in two specific ways, and both are worth knowing before you start:

• ₹50,000 maximum to any single borrower — a limit that exists specifically to force diversification across many small loans rather than concentration in a few.
• ₹50 lakh maximum in aggregate, across all P2P platforms combined, not per platform.
• Lending beyond ₹10 lakh in aggregate requires a certificate from a practising Chartered Accountant confirming your net worth, obtained within the preceding financial year.

These caps exist because P2P lending is, by regulatory design, meant to be a diversified, capped exposure — not a concentrated one.

Where P2P lending fits, if it fits at all

The comparison that misleads people most is treating P2P lending as an alternative to a fixed deposit. It isn't — an FD carries deposit protection and a near-certain contractual payout; a P2P loan carries direct, uninsured credit risk to an individual borrower, however diversified across many small loans. A more honest way to think about it: P2P lending is a satellite allocation, worth considering only after an adequate emergency fund, sufficient insurance cover, and a core portfolio suited to your actual goals are already in place — not a first investment, and not a place for money you can't afford to see partially impaired.

About our own P2P lending partnership

We have a distribution relationship with a P2P lending platform (LenDenClub) and intend to publish a fully sourced, dated worked example here — using their published factsheet, with figures attributed and the answers to the four questions above stated plainly — once we've confirmed the basis of those figures with the platform in writing. One of those four questions is answered already: LenDenClub has confirmed in writing that its headline returns are quoted as XIRR, which is itself an annualised figure — so question 1 (absolute vs annualised) is settled. Questions 2–4 (gross vs net of defaults and fees, realised vs projected, and the denominator) are still open, and we'd rather publish a number we can stand behind on all four than a partly-verified one, so this section will be updated once the rest is in hand rather than before.

The platform's own risk disclosure

Every NBFC-P2P platform is required to disclose, in substance: it is an RBI-registered NBFC-P2P entity; RBI does not accept responsibility for the platform's statements or provide any assurance of repayment; the lending decision is entirely the lender's own; and the platform does not guarantee recovery of principal or interest, in part or in full — the risk of loss sits entirely with the lender. (This is a plain-language summary of the substance of what platforms typically disclose; we'll replace it with our specific partner's own approved verbatim wording once we have it on file.)

If you'd rather talk it through

Whether a P2P allocation makes sense given your existing portfolio, emergency fund, and insurance cover is easier as a real conversation than a solo decision. We're happy to walk through it with you — book a consultation or reach out over WhatsApp/call.

---

Tushar Paturde — AMFI-registered Mutual Fund Distributor (ARN-129322) · APMI-registered PMS Distributor (APRN01448) · CFP® professional. Meta Investment is not a SEBI-registered Investment Adviser. Content on this page is for information only and is not investment advice or a recommendation to lend on any specific platform. P2P lending carries direct credit risk to individual borrowers, with no guarantee of principal or interest from the platform, RBI, or Meta Investment.

Related Posts

• ArticlePeer-to-Peer Lending: A New Era for Indian Investors?
• ArticleImpact Investing with P2P Lending
• ArticleP2P Association Pauses Liquid Funds in India: What You Need to Know
• ArticleExploring Alternative Investment Options in India