Co-branded credit-card fintechs
Three-way audit
Company A
CautionKiwi
Fintech / Credit Card / UPI Payments
FY2025 'other expenses', 13x revenue
₹50.66 Cr
FY2025 net loss
₹64.18 Cr
Company B
WatchScapia
Fintech / Travel Credit Cards
Total income FY2025
₹40.42 Cr
Net loss FY2025
₹83.05 Cr
Company C
WatchOneCard
Fintech / Credit Cards
FY2025 Revenue
₹1,878 Cr
FY2025 Net Loss
-₹298 Cr
The 30-Second Summary
Three Indian co-branded credit-card fintechs. Same FY2025 audit period. Three different scale points.
- Kiwi (GoKiwi Tech Pvt Ltd): revenue ₹3.83 Cr; loss ₹64.18 Cr; cost-to-income 7.66x; runway ~13 months.
- Scapia (Scapia Technology Pvt Ltd): total income ₹40.42 Cr; loss ₹83.05 Cr; cost-to-income 3.05x; runway ~59 months.
- OneCard (FPL Technologies Pvt Ltd): revenue ₹1,877.75 Cr; loss ₹297.57 Cr; cost-to-income ~1.16x; cumulative losses ₹1,330.58 Cr; runway ~27 months.
The reported cost-per-rupee-earned compresses with scale across these filings, though exact comparability depends on revenue recognition and bank-partner share treatment (see the bank-partner section below). The loss trajectories diverged in FY25: Kiwi widened, Scapia held approximately flat, OneCard narrowed 26%.
What Each Audit Captures
Kiwi
GoKiwi Tech Private Limited (CIN U67100MH2022PTC393679), Mumbai-incorporated November 2022.
Operating P&L of a young fintech. RuPay credit card via UPI scan, co-issued with partner banks. Revenue classified under 'payment gateways and similar allied services'.
What sits outside
Partner-bank balance sheet (credit risk, AUM, interest earnings). Network economics with RuPay (interchange share).
Scapia
Scapia Technology Private Limited, incorporated January 2022. Operating brand: Scapia.
Operating P&L of a travel-focused credit-card fintech. Federal Bank partnership. No annual fees; revenue primarily from interchange share. ₹304.65 Cr in cash and current investments providing material runway.
What sits outside
Partner-bank balance sheet (Federal Bank carries credit risk). Treasury earnings on Scapia's own cash buffer are in other income.
OneCard
FPL Technologies Private Limited (CIN U74999PN2019PTC206053), incorporated 2019.
Operating P&L of a scaled co-branded credit-card platform. Multiple partner banks; cards issued in partnership with SBI, IDFC First, and others. Revenue ₹1,877.75 Cr; ₹724.82 Cr explicitly disclosed as Credit Management Fees paid to bank partners.
What sits outside
Bank partners' credit-risk balance sheets. Network economics with Visa/Mastercard (₹138.52 Cr received as network incentives, classified as foreign exchange earnings).
The core insight
Three co-branded credit-card fintechs at three different scales. Same broad category, three product variants, three different reported cost-per-rupee-earned outcomes.
The Cost-Per-Rupee-Earned Compresses With Scale
Cost-to-income ratio (total expenses ÷ total income)
Kiwi (₹3.83 Cr revenue)
7.66x
₹766 spent per ₹100 earned; up from 5.61x in FY24
Scapia (₹40.42 Cr total income)
3.05x
₹305 spent per ₹100 earned; down from 4.63x in FY24
Cost-to-income ratio (OneCard, for context against the smaller two)
OneCard (₹1,878 Cr revenue)
~1.16x
₹116 spent per ₹100 earned; total expenses ~₹2,176 Cr against total income ~₹1,920 Cr
Direction across the three
7.66x → 3.05x → 1.16x
ratio compresses ~85% from smallest to largest
Scale appears to be the most visible variable in the reported ratios, though other drivers contribute
The cost base of a co-branded credit-card fintech contains several largely-fixed elements (technology infrastructure, compliance and regulatory overhead, partner-bank operating teams, customer-support build-out, brand and trust investments) and several variable elements (customer acquisition spend per active card, transaction-cost and reward outflows per transaction, partner-bank revenue share per rupee of interchange).
The fixed elements do not scale linearly with revenue. As revenue grows, the fixed-cost layer becomes a smaller percentage of each rupee earned. At Kiwi's ₹3.83 Cr of revenue, the fixed-cost layer dominates the reported P&L; the cost-to-income ratio is high. At Scapia's ₹40 Cr, fixed costs are diluted across more revenue; the ratio is materially lower. At OneCard's ₹1,878 Cr, the ratio is just above 1.0x, indicating the reported cost base is now approximately matched by the reported revenue base.
Other variables beyond scale also contribute to the divergence in reported ratios: revenue recognition treatment (gross vs net of bank-partner share), product mix (UPI-on-card vs travel-led vs general-purpose), reward intensity and customer-acquisition channel mix, partner-bank economics, and portfolio vintage. The audits do not standardise these across the three entities, so the ratios are not perfectly comparable.
The forensic read: reported cost-to-income improves sharply with scale across these filings, but the exact economic comparison depends on bank-share treatment and product mix. The audits report current ratios. They do not disclose active cards, average spend per card, customer-acquisition cost, interchange split, rewards cost per transaction, or cohort-level contribution margin. Whether Kiwi can reach Scapia's scale, and whether Scapia can reach OneCard's, is the operating thesis each entity is funded against; the audit reports the current ratio without forecasting the next.
Where the Loss Trajectories Diverged in FY25
Kiwi
-₹24.80 → -₹64.18 Cr
loss widened ~2.6x; expenses tripled while revenue grew 5.5%
Scapia
-₹87.97 → -₹83.05 Cr
loss narrowed slightly; revenue +67% while other expenses fell ₹15 Cr
OneCard
-₹401.15 → -₹297.57 Cr
loss compressed 26%; branding spend cut 85%, revenue +32%
The three trajectories show three different operating responses during the same year:
-
Kiwi expanded spending materially while revenue grew only 5.5% (₹3.63 Cr to ₹3.83 Cr). The "other expenses" line grew from ₹17.48 Cr to ₹50.66 Cr (+190%). The cost-to-income ratio moved in the wrong direction (5.61x to 7.66x).
-
Scapia held the absolute loss approximately flat while revenue grew 67%. The "other expenses" line fell from ₹76.32 Cr to ₹61.65 Cr (-19%). Three consecutive years of cost-to-income compression (9.82x to 4.63x to 3.05x).
-
OneCard cut branding and advertisement spend 85% (₹175.01 Cr to ₹26.71 Cr) while growing revenue 32%. Loss compressed ₹104 Cr (₹401.15 Cr to ₹297.57 Cr). Sales promotion (customer rewards/cashbacks) held at ₹267.45 Cr, indicating customer-facing economics still depend on subsidies.
Capital Structure, Runway, and Cumulative Loss
Capital raised cumulatively (approximate, derived from filings)
Kiwi
~₹163 Cr
three-year cumulative; seed ₹47 Cr + Series A ₹110 Cr + minor
Scapia
~₹350-400 Cr
implied from net worth + cumulative losses; cash buffer ₹305 Cr at FY25 close
Cumulative loss to date
Kiwi
₹91.84 Cr
across three years since incorporation
OneCard
₹1,330.58 Cr
accumulated retained-earnings deficit; net worth ₹664.87 Cr
Liquid assets and runway
Kiwi
₹73 Cr / ~13 months
₹11.30 Cr cash + ₹61.79 Cr current investments at FY25 close
Scapia
₹305 Cr / ~59 months
largest cash buffer relative to burn in the cohort
OneCard liquid assets and recent capital action
OneCard liquid
₹397.78 Cr / ~27 months
₹321.40 Cr cash + ₹76.39 Cr current investments
OneCard fresh capital
₹214.20 Cr CCPS in FY25
funded the FY25 operating cash burn of ₹206 Cr
Kiwi
Tight.
₹73 Cr of liquid against ₹64 Cr annual burn equals approximately 13 months. Kiwi likely needs fresh capital in FY26 unless burn compresses materially. The cost-to-income ratio moved in the wrong direction in FY25; the case for a follow-on round rests on the underlying user-acquisition metrics that the audit does not disclose.
What sits outside
₹73 Cr liquid / ~13 months / cost-to-income 7.66x
Scapia
Material cushion.
₹305 Cr of liquid against ₹83 Cr burn equals approximately 59 months at current rates. Three consecutive years of cost-to-income compression provide the cleaner trajectory. Whether interchange-led economics can close a ₹83 Cr annual loss is the remaining question; the runway buys time to answer it.
What sits outside
₹305 Cr liquid / ~59 months / cost-to-income 3.05x
OneCard
Scale-funded.
₹398 Cr of liquid (₹321 Cr cash + ₹77 Cr current investments) against ₹206 Cr operating cash burn equals approximately 27 months at current rates. A ₹214 Cr CCPS round closed during FY25, broadly matching the year's operating cash absorption; this indicates continued investor appetite at scale. Cumulative loss to date sits at ₹1,331 Cr against net worth of ₹665 Cr.
What sits outside
₹398 Cr liquid / ~27 months / cost-to-income 1.16x / cumulative loss ₹1,331 Cr
The core insight
Same broad category. Three different funding positions. The smaller two have to demonstrate cost-discipline outcomes that improve their reported cost-to-income ratios; the largest has demonstrated 26% loss compression at scale and continues to fund the residual through equity rounds.
The Forensic Distinction: Bank-Partner Revenue Share
OneCard's audit explicitly discloses ₹724.82 Cr (38.6% of revenue) paid to bank partners as "credit management fees." This is the share of co-branded card economics that the issuing bank retains. Net of this, the operating residual that OneCard captures is approximately ₹1,153 Cr.
The Scapia and Kiwi audits do not break out an equivalent line at the same level of granularity. The economics likely exist (every co-branded card has an issuing-bank revenue share); whether the audited statements present it as a netted-revenue figure (so the disclosed revenue is already post-share to the bank) or as a separate expense line varies by entity. Without OneCard-equivalent disclosure, a direct gross-revenue comparison across the three is not fully like-for-like.
The Category-Level Read
What the three FY25 audits show at category level
Reported cost-to-income improves sharply with scale: 7.66x → 3.05x → 1.16x as reported revenue grows from ₹3.83 Cr → ₹40.42 Cr → ₹1,877.75 Cr. The fixed-cost layer of running a co-branded card platform (technology, compliance, partner-bank ops, brand) does not scale linearly with reported revenue.
What the three FY25 audits do not show
The filings do not disclose active cards, average spend per card, customer-acquisition cost, interchange split, rewards cost per transaction, or cohort-level contribution margin. The audits report current cost-to-income ratios; they do not evaluate the per-card economics that determine whether scale leads to profitability or to a structurally loss-making category. Revenue recognition treatment and bank-partner-share disclosure also vary across the three audits, limiting exact like-for-like comparability.
“Same broad category. ₹4 Cr, ₹40 Cr, ₹1,878 Cr in revenue. ₹766, ₹305, ₹116 spent per ₹100 earned, on reported numbers. The audits report current ratios; they do not show per-card economics.”
UnpopularVoice editorial read
Read Each Audit
The filing-by-filing breakdown for each company sits in its individual analysis. Kiwi's article covers the ₹50.66 Cr "other expenses" line and the runway compression. Scapia's article covers the three-year cost-to-income improvement and the ₹304 Cr cash buffer. OneCard's article covers the ₹724.82 Cr credit management fees disclosure, the 85% branding cut, and the ₹214 Cr CCPS round.