Quick Demo

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Blogs
<<
Fintech

NBFC vs MFI vs Fintech: What Actually Separates Them, and Why It Decides Your Software

An NBFC is a company registered with the RBI to carry on lending as its principal business. An NBFC-MFI is one specific type of NBFC, defined by the kind of loans it makes and the share of its balance sheet those loans occupy. A fintech is not a regulatory category at all.

‍

That third point is the one worth sitting with, because it causes more confusion in this market than anything else. There is no fintech licence in India. A company describing itself as a lending fintech is either a regulated entity holding a licence, or a technology provider working alongside one. Which of those it is changes everything about who is accountable and what the software has to do.

‍

What is an NBFC?

‍

A Non-Banking Financial Company is a company registered under the Companies Act and with the RBI, whose principal business is lending, investment or acquisition of financial assets. The test applied is commonly called the fifty-fifty test: more than half of total assets must be financial assets, and more than half of gross income must come from those assets.

‍

NBFCs cannot accept demand deposits the way a bank does, and they are not part of the payment and settlement system. What they can do is lend, and the absence of a deposit base is why the loan book is the entire business rather than one product line among several.

‍

Under Scale Based Regulation, every NBFC sits in one of four layers. The Base Layer holds smaller non-deposit-taking companies along with certain specialised categories. The Middle Layer holds all deposit-taking NBFCs regardless of size, non-deposit-taking companies above the asset threshold, housing finance companies and a few other types. The Upper Layer holds companies the RBI identifies as systemically significant. The Top Layer exists in the framework and is currently empty.

‍

Beyond the layers there are registration categories defined by activity: investment and credit companies, infrastructure finance companies, housing finance companies, account aggregators, peer-to-peer lending platforms, and microfinance institutions. The last of those is the one most often confused with being a separate species of lender.

‍

What is an NBFC-MFI, and how is it different?

‍

An NBFC-MFI is an NBFC whose business is built around microfinance loans, and it is defined by two things: what counts as a microfinance loan, and how much of the balance sheet those loans must represent.

‍

What counts as a microfinance loan

‍

Under the RBI’s microfinance framework, a microfinance loan is a collateral-free loan to a household with annual household income up to three lakh rupees. Household here means the family unit, husband, wife and unmarried children. The end use does not matter, which was a change from the earlier rules that required a share of lending to be for income generation.

‍

Two further conditions apply. The household’s total monthly loan repayment obligations, across microfinance and non-microfinance borrowing together, cannot exceed fifty per cent of monthly household income. And every regulated entity making these loans must have a board-approved policy for assessing household income, because the income figure that drives eligibility is largely self-declared and has to be corroborated.

‍

How much of the balance sheet

‍

To be an NBFC-MFI, microfinance loans must make up at least sixty per cent of total assets net of intangible assets, measured on an ongoing basis. That threshold was reduced from seventy-five per cent in June 2025, which gave existing NBFC-MFIs meaningful room to diversify into other products without losing their registration.

‍

A great deal of published material still quotes seventy-five per cent, which is worth knowing if you are reading around this topic.

‍

The rule works in the other direction too. An NBFC that is not registered as an NBFC-MFI can still make microfinance loans, up to twenty-five per cent of its total assets. Above that, the registration question arises. This matters commercially, because it is the provision that lets a mainstream NBFC run a microfinance line without restructuring itself.

‍

What this means operationally

‍

Microfinance lending is a different business from secured retail lending, and the differences show up in the system rather than in the loan agreement.

‍

  • Lending is often to groups with joint liability, so the system has to model a centre, a group and an individual borrower at the same time, and apply repayment and default logic across all three
  • Household income assessment is a recorded, auditable step with a policy behind it, not a field someone types a number into
  • The fifty per cent repayment obligation check has to run against the household’s total borrowing, which means bureau data at household level, not just applicant level
  • Collections happen in cash, in person, often weekly or fortnightly rather than monthly, which multiplies transaction volume by an order of magnitude
  • Field staff work in places with poor connectivity, so the collection app has to function offline and reconcile later

‍

The group structure is the part most often underestimated. In joint liability lending, a repayment is collected at a centre meeting, allocated across the members of a group, and recorded against individual loan accounts, all in one transaction. If one member does not pay, the group may cover the shortfall, and the system has to record who actually paid what while keeping each member’s individual credit history accurate, because that history is what gets reported to the bureau. Modelling this as a set of unrelated individual loans produces a ledger that is right in total and wrong in every line.

‍

An NBFC platform built for monthly EMI collection through bank mandates will technically run a microfinance book. It will also generate a reconciliation problem every week.

So what is a fintech?

‍

In regulatory terms, nothing. There is no fintech registration with the RBI. A company using the label is doing one of three things.

‍

It holds a licence of its own

‍

Many well-known lending fintechs acquired or applied for an NBFC licence, which makes them an NBFC that happens to have a good app. Everything in the NBFC section above applies to them in full. The technology is a differentiator in the market, not in the rulebook.

‍

It operates as a Lending Service Provider

‍

Under the Digital Lending Directions, 2025, a Lending Service Provider is an agent of a regulated entity that performs one or more parts of the lending process: customer acquisition, underwriting support, pricing support, servicing, or recovery. A Digital Lending App is the interface through which that happens.

‍

An LSP is not a lender. It cannot lend on its own book, and the loan sits with the regulated entity behind it. What has changed since 2025 is that the regulated entity is now unambiguously accountable for what its LSP does, including consent handling, fee disclosure and recovery conduct. Regulated entities must publish details of their LSPs and report their digital lending apps to the RBI.

‍

The practical consequence is that outsourcing the customer journey does not outsource the obligation. An NBFC working with three fintech partners needs visibility into all three, inside its own systems, in a form it can show a supervisor.

‍

It provides technology without touching the loan

‍

Core lending software, bureau integrations, KYC providers, bank statement analysers and collection tools are supplied by companies that never participate in the loan itself. These are vendors, not LSPs, and the distinction turns on whether the company performs a part of the lending process on behalf of the lender or simply supplies the tooling the lender uses.

‍

Getting that classification wrong in either direction is a compliance problem. A vendor treated as an LSP triggers obligations that do not apply. An LSP treated as a vendor leaves obligations unmet.

‍

Side by side

‍

NBFC NBFC-MFI Fintech
Regulatory status RBI-registered lender A type of NBFC, registered as such Not a category. Either an RE, an LSP, or a technology vendor
Lends on own book Yes Yes Only if it holds a licence
Defining constraint Financial assets and income majority test Microfinance loans at a minimum of 60 per cent of total assets net of intangibles Scope of the agreement with the regulated entity
Typical borrower Retail, MSME, vehicle, gold, housing Household with annual income up to three lakh rupees Whoever the partner lender targets
Security Secured or unsecured by product Collateral-free by definition Set by the lender
Collection pattern Monthly, largely through mandates Weekly or fortnightly, substantially in cash and in the field Digital, through the partner's rails
Who answers to the regulator The NBFC The NBFC-MFI The regulated entity behind it, in every case

Why the category decides the software

‍

These are not three flavours of the same lending platform. Each category puts weight on a different part of the system.

‍

An NBFC needs breadth

‍

A mid-sized NBFC typically runs several products with nothing operationally in common. Gold loans need valuation and vault custody. Vehicle finance needs dealer payouts and hypothecation. MSME lending needs financial statement analysis. The platform has to model different repayment structures, different security types and different approval paths without a separate system for each. Breadth is the requirement.

‍

An NBFC-MFI needs depth in one pattern

‍

An MFI runs one product at enormous transaction volume. Group structures, weekly collection cycles, offline field capture, household-level eligibility checks and centre-level reporting. Breadth is less useful than getting a single operating pattern exactly right at scale. A platform that handles twelve product types but cannot model joint liability is the wrong tool.

‍

A fintech partnership needs partition and visibility

‍

Where an NBFC lends through partners, the platform has to keep each partner’s portfolio separately identifiable while rolling all of it into one regulatory view. Which loans came through which LSP, what each borrower consented to, which fees were disclosed on which Key Facts Statement. None of that is useful as a monthly report. It has to be queryable the day a question is asked.

‍

Three confusions worth clearing up

‍

An NBFC-MFI is not a smaller NBFC

‍

The categories are not arranged by size. An NBFC-MFI can be large, and plenty of NBFC-MFIs are bigger than mainstream NBFCs operating in the same districts. What defines the category is the composition of the loan book, not the scale of it. Size is dealt with separately, through the Scale Based Regulation layers, and an NBFC-MFI sits in one of those layers like any other NBFC.

‍

A digital lender is not automatically a fintech arrangement

‍

An NBFC that builds its own app, underwrites on its own models and lends on its own book is simply an NBFC that has digitised. The Digital Lending Directions still apply to the journey, because they attach to digital lending rather than to a type of company. What does not apply is the Lending Service Provider framework, because there is no third party acting as agent. The relevant question is never how modern the interface looks. It is whether anyone outside the regulated entity is performing part of the lending process.

‍

Peer-to-peer platforms are their own category, not fintechs

‍

NBFC-P2P is a distinct registration with its own rules. A P2P platform does not lend on its own book either, but unlike an LSP it is itself a regulated entity, matching lenders to borrowers under conditions the RBI sets. Account aggregators are a separate registration again, handling consented data flows rather than credit. Both get casually filed under fintech in ordinary conversation, and neither belongs there in a regulatory discussion.

‍

What happens when a lender changes shape

‍

The categories are not permanent, and most of the interesting software problems arise at the boundaries.

‍

An NBFC-MFI diversifying into secured lending now has room to do it, with the qualifying assets threshold at sixty per cent rather than seventy-five. But the new products behave differently from everything the platform was configured for. Monthly EMIs instead of weekly collections, security interests to track, individual borrowers instead of groups. Systems configured narrowly for microfinance tend to need significant work here.

‍

An NBFC adding a microfinance line can lend up to twenty-five per cent of total assets without changing registration, which makes it an attractive expansion. The platform then has to support group lending, offline field collection and household income assessment alongside everything it already does, and has to track the twenty-five per cent ratio continuously rather than discovering a breach at quarter end.

‍

A fintech acquiring an NBFC licence inherits the full compliance stack overnight: asset classification, bureau reporting on the RBI’s calendar, regulatory returns, provisioning. A customer acquisition platform is not a lending platform, and the gap between the two is usually larger than expected.

‍

If any of those transitions is on your roadmap, it belongs in the software evaluation now rather than later. Replacing a core lending system because the business changed shape is the most expensive way to find out your platform was built for one category.

‍

Frequently asked questions

‍

What is the difference between an NBFC and an MFI?

‍

An MFI, specifically an NBFC-MFI, is a type of NBFC. All NBFC-MFIs are NBFCs; most NBFCs are not NBFC-MFIs. The distinction is that an NBFC-MFI must hold at least sixty per cent of its total assets net of intangibles as microfinance loans, which are collateral-free loans to households with annual income up to three lakh rupees.

‍

Is a fintech the same as an NBFC?

‍

No. Fintech is not a regulatory category in India and there is no fintech licence. A lending fintech is either an NBFC that uses technology as a differentiator, a Lending Service Provider acting as an agent of a regulated entity, or a technology vendor that supplies software without participating in the loan.

‍

What is a microfinance loan under RBI rules?

‍

A collateral-free loan to a household with annual household income up to three lakh rupees, where the household’s total monthly loan repayment obligations do not exceed fifty per cent of monthly household income. The end use of the loan is not restricted.

‍

Can a regular NBFC give microfinance loans?

‍

Yes, up to twenty-five per cent of its total assets. Beyond that threshold the NBFC-MFI registration requirements come into play.

‍

What is a Lending Service Provider?

‍

Under the Digital Lending Directions, 2025, an LSP is an agent of a regulated entity that carries out one or more parts of the lending process, such as customer acquisition, underwriting support, servicing or recovery. The LSP does not lend on its own book, and the regulated entity remains accountable for the LSP’s conduct.

‍

Which type of software does each need?

‍

An NBFC needs breadth across multiple loan products and repayment structures. An NBFC-MFI needs depth in group lending, high-frequency collections and offline field capture. A lender working with fintech partners needs partner-level partitioning of the portfolio with a single consolidated regulatory view.

‍

Where to start

‍

If you are not certain which category you are in, that is usually a sign you are near a boundary, and the boundaries are where software decisions get expensive. The question to answer before evaluating any platform is not what you are today. It is what share of your book, two years out, will sit in a product your current system was never configured for.

‍

AllCloud builds lending software for NBFCs, microfinance institutions and partnership-led lending programmes on one platform. If you are weighing a move across one of these boundaries, that is a useful conversation to have before the platform decision rather than after it.

‍

Sources

‍

Checked October 2026. Confirm against the current RBI master directions before relying on any figure below.

‍

  • Master Direction, Reserve Bank of India (Regulatory Framework for Microfinance Loans) Directions, 2022, 14 March 2022, and the June 2025 amendment to paragraph 8.1 reducing the qualifying assets threshold to 60 per cent
  • Master Direction on Scale Based Regulation for NBFCs, 19 October 2023
  • Reserve Bank of India (Digital Lending) Directions, 2025, 8 May 2025

Latest

NBFC vs MFI vs Fintech: What Actually Separates Them, and Why It Decides Your Software

Get In Touch
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
blog/nbfc-vs-mfi-vs-fintech

Heading 1

Heading 2

Heading 3

Heading 4

Heading 5
Heading 6

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.

Block quote

Ordered list

  1. Item 1
  2. Item 2
  3. Item 3

Unordered list

  • Item A
  • Item B
  • Item C
Text link

Bold text

Emphasis

Superscript

Subscript

An NBFC is a company registered with the RBI to carry on lending as its principal business. An NBFC-MFI is one specific type of NBFC, defined by the kind of loans it makes and the share of its balance sheet those loans occupy. A fintech is not a regulatory category at all.

‍

That third point is the one worth sitting with, because it causes more confusion in this market than anything else. There is no fintech licence in India. A company describing itself as a lending fintech is either a regulated entity holding a licence, or a technology provider working alongside one. Which of those it is changes everything about who is accountable and what the software has to do.

‍

What is an NBFC?

‍

A Non-Banking Financial Company is a company registered under the Companies Act and with the RBI, whose principal business is lending, investment or acquisition of financial assets. The test applied is commonly called the fifty-fifty test: more than half of total assets must be financial assets, and more than half of gross income must come from those assets.

‍

NBFCs cannot accept demand deposits the way a bank does, and they are not part of the payment and settlement system. What they can do is lend, and the absence of a deposit base is why the loan book is the entire business rather than one product line among several.

‍

Under Scale Based Regulation, every NBFC sits in one of four layers. The Base Layer holds smaller non-deposit-taking companies along with certain specialised categories. The Middle Layer holds all deposit-taking NBFCs regardless of size, non-deposit-taking companies above the asset threshold, housing finance companies and a few other types. The Upper Layer holds companies the RBI identifies as systemically significant. The Top Layer exists in the framework and is currently empty.

‍

Beyond the layers there are registration categories defined by activity: investment and credit companies, infrastructure finance companies, housing finance companies, account aggregators, peer-to-peer lending platforms, and microfinance institutions. The last of those is the one most often confused with being a separate species of lender.

‍

What is an NBFC-MFI, and how is it different?

‍

An NBFC-MFI is an NBFC whose business is built around microfinance loans, and it is defined by two things: what counts as a microfinance loan, and how much of the balance sheet those loans must represent.

‍

What counts as a microfinance loan

‍

Under the RBI’s microfinance framework, a microfinance loan is a collateral-free loan to a household with annual household income up to three lakh rupees. Household here means the family unit, husband, wife and unmarried children. The end use does not matter, which was a change from the earlier rules that required a share of lending to be for income generation.

‍

Two further conditions apply. The household’s total monthly loan repayment obligations, across microfinance and non-microfinance borrowing together, cannot exceed fifty per cent of monthly household income. And every regulated entity making these loans must have a board-approved policy for assessing household income, because the income figure that drives eligibility is largely self-declared and has to be corroborated.

‍

How much of the balance sheet

‍

To be an NBFC-MFI, microfinance loans must make up at least sixty per cent of total assets net of intangible assets, measured on an ongoing basis. That threshold was reduced from seventy-five per cent in June 2025, which gave existing NBFC-MFIs meaningful room to diversify into other products without losing their registration.

‍

A great deal of published material still quotes seventy-five per cent, which is worth knowing if you are reading around this topic.

‍

The rule works in the other direction too. An NBFC that is not registered as an NBFC-MFI can still make microfinance loans, up to twenty-five per cent of its total assets. Above that, the registration question arises. This matters commercially, because it is the provision that lets a mainstream NBFC run a microfinance line without restructuring itself.

‍

What this means operationally

‍

Microfinance lending is a different business from secured retail lending, and the differences show up in the system rather than in the loan agreement.

‍

  • Lending is often to groups with joint liability, so the system has to model a centre, a group and an individual borrower at the same time, and apply repayment and default logic across all three
  • Household income assessment is a recorded, auditable step with a policy behind it, not a field someone types a number into
  • The fifty per cent repayment obligation check has to run against the household’s total borrowing, which means bureau data at household level, not just applicant level
  • Collections happen in cash, in person, often weekly or fortnightly rather than monthly, which multiplies transaction volume by an order of magnitude
  • Field staff work in places with poor connectivity, so the collection app has to function offline and reconcile later

‍

The group structure is the part most often underestimated. In joint liability lending, a repayment is collected at a centre meeting, allocated across the members of a group, and recorded against individual loan accounts, all in one transaction. If one member does not pay, the group may cover the shortfall, and the system has to record who actually paid what while keeping each member’s individual credit history accurate, because that history is what gets reported to the bureau. Modelling this as a set of unrelated individual loans produces a ledger that is right in total and wrong in every line.

‍

An NBFC platform built for monthly EMI collection through bank mandates will technically run a microfinance book. It will also generate a reconciliation problem every week.

So what is a fintech?

‍

In regulatory terms, nothing. There is no fintech registration with the RBI. A company using the label is doing one of three things.

‍

It holds a licence of its own

‍

Many well-known lending fintechs acquired or applied for an NBFC licence, which makes them an NBFC that happens to have a good app. Everything in the NBFC section above applies to them in full. The technology is a differentiator in the market, not in the rulebook.

‍

It operates as a Lending Service Provider

‍

Under the Digital Lending Directions, 2025, a Lending Service Provider is an agent of a regulated entity that performs one or more parts of the lending process: customer acquisition, underwriting support, pricing support, servicing, or recovery. A Digital Lending App is the interface through which that happens.

‍

An LSP is not a lender. It cannot lend on its own book, and the loan sits with the regulated entity behind it. What has changed since 2025 is that the regulated entity is now unambiguously accountable for what its LSP does, including consent handling, fee disclosure and recovery conduct. Regulated entities must publish details of their LSPs and report their digital lending apps to the RBI.

‍

The practical consequence is that outsourcing the customer journey does not outsource the obligation. An NBFC working with three fintech partners needs visibility into all three, inside its own systems, in a form it can show a supervisor.

‍

It provides technology without touching the loan

‍

Core lending software, bureau integrations, KYC providers, bank statement analysers and collection tools are supplied by companies that never participate in the loan itself. These are vendors, not LSPs, and the distinction turns on whether the company performs a part of the lending process on behalf of the lender or simply supplies the tooling the lender uses.

‍

Getting that classification wrong in either direction is a compliance problem. A vendor treated as an LSP triggers obligations that do not apply. An LSP treated as a vendor leaves obligations unmet.

‍

Side by side

‍

NBFC NBFC-MFI Fintech
Regulatory status RBI-registered lender A type of NBFC, registered as such Not a category. Either an RE, an LSP, or a technology vendor
Lends on own book Yes Yes Only if it holds a licence
Defining constraint Financial assets and income majority test Microfinance loans at a minimum of 60 per cent of total assets net of intangibles Scope of the agreement with the regulated entity
Typical borrower Retail, MSME, vehicle, gold, housing Household with annual income up to three lakh rupees Whoever the partner lender targets
Security Secured or unsecured by product Collateral-free by definition Set by the lender
Collection pattern Monthly, largely through mandates Weekly or fortnightly, substantially in cash and in the field Digital, through the partner's rails
Who answers to the regulator The NBFC The NBFC-MFI The regulated entity behind it, in every case
Tags
VEHICLE FINANCE
AUTO FINANCE
Great Place to Work Certified Nov 2025-Nov 2026 INDIA