Field composites

Composite 01 · Top-3 Private Bank · Liabilities Head

Anand 49 years · Head of Liabilities & CASA · Metro-heavy deposit book

Manages a deposit book that was 44% CASA three years ago. Today it sits at 38% — a six-percentage-point decline modelled from the publicly-disclosed CASA trajectory of top private banks across 8 quarters. Every 100-basis-point decline in CASA ratio adds approximately 8–12 basis points to cost-of-funds on a blended book, depending on the SA-rate repricing posture and the term-deposit mix that fills the gap.

Anand's team runs a quarterly rate card review. The composite-modelled friction is structural: raising SA rates to defend CASA immediately increases cost-of-funds on the ₹8–12 lakh crore SA book, while not raising SA rates accelerates attrition to competing FD programs at PSBs, SFBs, and NBFC retail-FD windows. There is no rate where both problems disappear simultaneously. The announcement layer — "we are investing in CASA-building initiatives" — is real. The liability layer — the cost of defending the ratio that is already lost — is not in the quarterly press release.

Profile: CASA defence cost · SA-rate dilemma · margin compression
Composite 02 · NBFC CFO · Bajaj Finance / L&T Finance / Shriram comparable

Priya 36 years · CFO · NBFC with ₹80,000–1,20,000 Cr AUM

Her NBFC borrows from banks at spread over MCLR/repo — and that spread has widened. When banks face their own CASA pressure and CD ratios above 80%, they reprice wholesale lending to NBFCs faster than they disclose it in the investor-facing commentary. The composite-modelled cost-of-funds for NBFC bank-borrowing has moved 40–70 basis points over the last six quarters in the direction that CD ratio pressure would predict.

The response playbook is retail FD ramp-up: issue retail FDs at 7.5–8.5% to diversify away from bank-borrowing concentration. But building a retail-FD book takes 18–24 months and ₹2,000–4,000 crore of distribution and CAC investment. During that ramp period, the spread between NBFC lending rate and cost-of-funds compresses, net interest margin contracts, and the provisioning buffer thins. The quarterly result will show AUM growth and disbursement velocity. It will not show the liability-mix trajectory that determines whether the NIM holds.

Profile: bank-channel repricing · retail-FD ramp lag · NIM compression
Composite 03 · Mumbai Retiree · FD vs SIP allocation

Suresh 58 years · Retiree depositor · ₹45–60 lakh investable savings

Suresh's household savings were 80% in FDs two years ago. Today the allocation is 65% FD, 20% equity MF SIP, 15% liquid/arbitrage. The shift is not dramatic — but it is structural, and it maps to a pattern visible in AMFI SIP flow data and RBI household savings composition commentary:

  • FD rates at top private banks: 6.5–7.25% on 1-year tenors. Post-tax real rate (30% slab, 5% CPI): +0.5% to +1.1%. Not compelling against an equity SIP that has delivered 12–14% CAGR over Suresh's 5-year history.
  • SFB and NBFC retail-FD rates: 7.5–8.75%. Post-tax real rate: +1.5% to +2.5%. But DICGC insurance covers only ₹5 lakh — Suresh's ₹30 lakh FD concentration at one institution is above the insured limit. The rate premium is real; the risk premium is structurally invisible in the product marketing.
  • ₹25K crore monthly SIP flows — at a 65%+ SIP-to-redemption ratio per AMFI data — represent persistent, low-run-off household savings that are not returning to bank deposit accounts. The redemption rate matters: if it stays above 65%, the net SIP absorption of savings stays structurally above the deposit market's ability to compete on rate alone.
Profile: real-rate erosion · FD-to-equity allocation shift · DICGC gap