FINTECH REPORT

COLLECTION MANAGEMENT
 Collection Management for FinTechs

“FinTech NBFCs, that leverage technology and digital

channels heavily, have been instrumental in easing
and accelerating lending in India by making it
convenient and faster for end-consumers to access
credit. They have made the overall borrowing
experience more personalised, spontaneous and
seamless and have been able to provide access to
credit opportunities for new-to-credit consumers. The
Fintech segment has contributed significantly in
driving financial inclusion across our country and we
are committed to supporting this segment with
insights and solutions for sustained business growth.
With the launch of this report in association with DLAI
we reaffirm our commitment to the development of
the Fintech sector.”
Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Managing Director and CEO,
TransUnion CIBIL

“With the onset of the pandemic and the increase in

people migrating to their home towns, collections has
become a stressful and challenging activity. Since a
majority of FinTech lending has been from digital
platforms, they have been remotely connected to their
borrowers. FinTechs need to increase focus on
collections and build analytics driven models which
will help them collect profitably. DLAI has partnered
with TransUnion CIBIL on this Fintech collections
management report in order to foster insights-based
innovation for driving collections efficiency, and guide
Fintech players to manage risks better while
continuing to drive access to finance for many more
deserving consumers.”

Mr. Anurag Jain, President of DLAI and Founder and

Executive Director, KredX
Contents

Executive Summary

Why do FinTechs need to focus on collections?

Industry view of personal loan roll rates with emphasis on FinTechs

Collection behaviour across various consumer dimensions

Benefits of an enhanced collection management framework

Prototype collection prioritisation model

Collection management framework

Conclusion
Research methodology

This research study aims to identify the current state of collections

efficiencies for the top 35 lending FinTech NBFCs (or FinTechs) for personal
loans, and how these have evolved over time compared to other lender
segments. We analysed credit data over the past two years — submitted to
Transunion CIBIL by various financial institutions (FI) — looking at
originations, portfolio balances, delinquencies and collection flow rates for
public sector banks (PSU Banks), private banks (PVT Banks), non-banking
financial company (NBFCs) and FinTech NBFCs (FinTechs). The study also
covers the impacts of consumer demographics on behaviour. Our prototype
model was built for collection prioritisation based on CreditVision®
variables (created internally by Transunion CIBIL) gathered from consumer
credit information from various financial institutions.
Executive Summary

FinTech NBFCs that leverage technology and digital channels heavily have been
instrumental in easing and accelerating lending in India. By making it more
straightforward and convenient for end-consumers to access credit, the overall
borrowing experience has become more personalised, spontaneous and
seamless. Challenging the very core of traditional lending practices, FinTechs
have made access to credit easier, faster and cheaper — enhancing the
customer journey from offer to loan application, to approval, disbursement and
repayment. FinTechs play a significant role in increasing financial inclusion,
driving automated credit underwriting, transforming the KYC process through
the adoption of data analytics, artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning and
API-based platforms for a seamless banking experience.

Over the past few years, India has seen a shift in culture and perception around
availing credit with the advent of EMIs on almost anything they want to
purchase at the click of a button — driven primarily by Millennials and Gen Z
consumers. Changing attitudes are supported by smartphone and Internet
penetration, along with various digitisation initiatives by the Government of
India (GoI). Access to credit beyond the metro population has increased as a
result, with guaranteed incomes to urban and rural areas — geographies in
which it was previously more difficult to extend credit. Technology, which was
always a facilitator for traditional banks and financial institutions (FIs), is now
being leveraged by FinTechs to create new business propositions and cater to
new customer segments.

FinTechs have changed the way consumers acquire credit — shifting away from
from brick-and-mortar branches to anywhere with smart phone access.
Millennials prefer minimum interaction — whether it’s ordering their favourite
food on Swiggy or Zomato or purchasing a television or refrigerator on Amazon.
FinTechs have extended that power and accessibility to credit application and
disbursals. Their AI-driven, low-cost, digital models have helped reach larger
and more diverse audiences.

The changing economic downturn raised questions about managing the

portfolios FinTechs built over the past few years. Non-banking financial
companies (NBFCs) found the previous year difficult, encountering multiple
funding challenges and rising bad loans due to a lack in new sourcing and
existing loans entering delinquency buckets. Many FinTechs that neither focused
on risk management nor reached a breakeven point face further losses if unable
to manage their portfolio. With the onset of the pandemic, and more people
migrating to their home towns, collections has become a stressful and
challenging process. The non-asset-backed, small-ticket, small-tenure personal
loans extended to borrowers are even more difficult to collect. Since most
FinTech lending takes place on digital platforms, they’re remotely connected to
borrowers. This means FinTechs need to increase their focus on collections and
build analytics-driven models to help them collect profitably.
FinTech expansion in the personal loan space

FinTechs have grown at a rapid pace over the past three years. As major
contributors to growth in the personal loan market, they’ve been instrumental
and successful in making personal loan finance simpler, quicker and convenient.
The digital savvy Indian audience tends to choose FinTechs over other lenders to
escape lengthy applications and longer approval durations for unsecured credit.
Personal loan origination volumes grew at 150% YoY during 2019, while FinTechs
grew at 650% YoY in the same period. FinTechs were focused on a consumer
segment untapped by traditional lenders which aided this rapid growth. Their
streamlined loan decision process, combined with alternate data and reliance on
latest analytics techniques, helped achieve faster disbursals.

Personal Loan Origination Volumes Growth Rate

Overall Fin Techs
1000%
766% 822%
800%
YoY Growth Rate

657% 614%
600%
407% 441%
400% 312%

200%
161% 158% 188%
116% 166% -70% -39%
0% 82% 68%
-42%
-200% -94%
Aug-18 Nov-18 Feb-19 May-19 Aug-19 Nov-19 Feb-20 May-20 Aug-20
Origination Month
FinTechs grew their
market share to 50% (from
10%) in the personal loan
origination space over the past two
years — during which time household
income and consumption levels rose. This,
coupled with various government initiatives to
push digitisation in banking — ‘Jan Dhan Yojana’,
Aadhaar, UPI, GSTN etc., led to FinTech lender growth.
The earlier untapped Tier 2 and Tier 3 cities also provided
space for all lenders to grow. Increased Internet penetration due
to low-cost or free providers like Reliance Jio in non-metro cities also
helped drive acceptance of digital financial services.

Personal Loan Origination Volumes by Lender Type

PSU PVT NBFC Fin Tech
100% 44
Origination Volumes (’000)

111
253
462 713
80% 1,024 186 625
1,805 2,500
% of Accounts

414
60% 404 48
574 266
806
40% 1,042
257 726 266
261 944
266 343
20% 304
322 623
256 258 486 422
286 255 254 286 343
0%
Aug-18 Nov-18 Feb-19 May-19 Aug-19 Nov-19 Feb-20 May-20 Aug-20
Origination Month
Need for FinTechs to focus on collections

Compared to peer members, the huge volumes sourced by FinTechs were largely
small-ticket loans and from riskier segments. Banks have generally been lending
to consumers in prime and above risk tiers, and those with a relatively stable
flow of income, and leveraging their liability base to acquire personal loans. At
the same time, FinTechs have onboarded consumers with low credit scores and
leveraged more alternative data.

Personal Loan Originations from Below Prime Risk Tier

60% 54%
49% Aug-20
50%
% of Consumers

40% 37% 38% May-20

30% 27% 25%

22%
Feb-20
19%
20%
Nov-19
10%
0% Aug-19
PSU PVT NBFC Fin Tech
Member Type

The onboarding of a riskier consumer base translated into a more delinquent

portfolio compared to peer lenders. Although interest rates charged by FinTechs
are comparatively high, portfolio quality has deteriorated over the past year —
seeing a huge spike in delinquent accounts after the onset of the pandemic.
FinTech portfolios have 8x more delinquent accounts compared to Private (PVT)
banks (43% vs. 5% for August 2020). The rise in delinquent accounts calls for a
closer look at portfolios and emphasises the need for better collection
strategies.

Personal Loan Live Accounts in + DPD Bucket

50%
43% Aug-20
% of Accounts

40%
May-20
30%
22%
18%
Feb-20
20%
8% 9% Nov-19
10% 7%
5%
3%
0% Aug-19
PSU PVT NBFC Fin Tech
Member Type
The upsurge in delinquent accounts (post-Feb. 2020) is attributed to accounts
flowing to a higher delinquency bucket each month — bloating the 90+ DPD (Days
Past Due) bucket. To avoid high NPAs, FinTechs need to manage delinquent
accounts in early collections buckets.

Distribution of Accounts in Delinquency Buckets for Fin Techs

Pre-COVID Post-COVID
100%
373 433
Live Accounts (’000)

546 648
806
% of Accounts

80% 486 496

535
947 1,014 938 90+ DPD
483
60% 360
194 128 109 1-89 DPD
40% 2,326 2,497 2,262
1,635 1,436 1,367 1,303 1,219 Standard
20%

0%
Jan-20 Feb-20 Mar-20 Apr-20 May-20 Jun-20 Jul-20 Aug-20
Month

In the current situation, as the moratorium has ended, more consumers will
enter delinquency buckets and make the collection process even more
challenging. Traditional collection strategies work well for banks due to their
superior physical reach, larger team sizes, and multitude and size of loans.
FinTech lenders need a different approach. They require policies to implement
loan restructuring for consumers based on certain criteria — encouraging
consumers to at least partially repay their debts. With credit for demand
expected to climb during and after the festive season, partial repayments will
help lenders manage their balance sheets. Most pressing is the need for a robust
and cost-effective collection mechanism to maintain overall profitability.
Overview of personal loan roll rates

Due to their unsecured nature, personal loan roll forward rates are usually
higher than other products. Yet FinTechs have the highest roll forward rates —
where non-branch operations have made collections a difficult activity. And
considering their loan sizes, traditional collection agencies aren’t an optimal
solution either. For accounts in the 30-59 DPD bucket, FinTechs operate at
improvement rates as low as 2%. What’s interesting is the upswing in
improvement rates after the beginning of the pandemic.

Personal Loan Improvement Rates for 30-59 DPD Bucket by Member Type
Jul-Aug 2019 Jul-Aug 2020
% Accounts Cured or Rolled

40%
31.8% 31.2%
30% 28.6%
24.2%
22.9%
Back

20%
12.1%
9.4%
10%
2.4%
0%
PSU PVT NBFC Fin Tech
Member Type

FinTechs reduced new loan originations and sourcing of customers drastically

just after the pandemic hit, resulting in fewer fresh accounts. This, coupled with
higher run-offs due to short-tenure loans, led to a drop in the number of
accounts in the standard (0 DPD) bucket. With fewer accounts in lower
delinquency buckets, collections teams had fewer accounts to manage. At the
same time, the consumer cash crunch caused older accounts to roll forward to
higher delinquency buckets — driving a rise in 90+ DPD buckets and impacting
collections efficiency.

We looked at improvement rates for different buckets and the number of

accounts delinquent in each. As an example, if 100 accounts were delinquent in
July 2020, what percentage of those accounts rolled back or cured in Aug. 2020?
Lower delinquency buckets (1–14 DPD, 15–29 DPD, 30–59 DPD) had fewer
accounts to be managed by collections which led to better improvement rates.
 Personal Loan Improvement Rates for 1-14 DPD Bucket for Fin Techs
% Accounts Cured or Rolled

Improvement Rate Delinquent Accounts

20% 140
120
16%

# Accounts (’000)
100
Back

12% 80
8% 60
40
4%
20
0% 0
Aug-19 Nov-19 Feb-20 May-20 Aug-20
Status Month (t+1)

Personal Loan Improvement Rates for 15-29 DPD Bucket for Fin Techs
Improvement Rate Delinquent Accounts
% Accounts Cured or Rolled

24% 120
20% 100

# of Accounts (’000)
16% 80
Back

12% 60
8% 40
4% 20
0% 0
Aug-19 Nov-19 Feb-20 May-20 Aug-20
Status Month (t+1)

Personal Loan Improvement Rates for 30-59 DPD Bucket for Fin Techs
Improvement Rate Delinquent Accounts
% Accounts Cured or Rolled

12% 250
# of Accounts (’000)

10% 200
8%
150
Back

6%
100
4%
2% 50

0% 0
Aug-19 Nov-19 Feb-20 May-20 Aug-20
Status Month (t+1)
In TransUnion CIBIL’s
conversations and
engagements with various
FinTech lenders, we discovered
when FinTechs stopped disbursing new
loans at the start of the pandemic, they
had the ability to repurpose sales and credit
resources to assist with collections
management. Reduced new loan originations also
helped manage delinquencies in the lower buckets.
While these initiatives show a clear improvement in cure
and roll-back rates during the pandemic, it begs the question
whether these are sustainable approaches in the long run. As
and when the ecosystem rebounds and origination volumes pick up,
FinTechs need better, more sustainable strategies to manage their
portfolio collections efficiencies.

Most FinTechs started investing in their in-house collection technology stack to

improve collection efficiencies and automate processes. By recording and
analysing consumer interactions, they’re better able to understand whether or not
consumers intended to repay debts. They also invested in outsourced agency
tracking of collections cases. Managing and controlling those costs is important in
ensuring the collections process continues to deliver a positive return on investment.
Simple activities like not allocating the same account to the same agency for two or
three consecutive buckets usually helps save costs as collection agencies charge
more price premiums for collecting on cases from higher delinquency seasoning
buckets. Few FinTechs extended their moratorium facility to all consumers without
bifurcation which led consumers to pay back debts as soon as it was feasible —
boosting some confidence in future economic expectations.

FinTechs must have industry benchmarks for roll rates to measure collection
efficiency. Curing an account seems almost impossible once the consumer crosses
30 DPD, which means FinTechs need to act early on delinquent accounts. As volumes
of delinquent accounts increase post-moratorium — and considering the contraction
in the economy expected over the next few quarters — FinTechs need to focus on
rapidly curing accounts to maintain profitability.
Collection behaviour across consumer dimensions

At the time of disbursement of a loan, consumer dimensions play an important

role in decisioning. Lenders usually incorporate such information in their
application scorecards and have designed separate processes based on
dimensions, including age, risk band, loan size, existing relationships with other
lenders, etc. But do any of these variables help explain collections behaviours?
To answer this question, we looked at improvement rates for FinTechs across
these consumer dimensions for the 30-59 DPD delinquency bucket.

Historically, it’s been difficult for FinTechs to collect from rural locations due to
the absence of branches, and lower financial literacy. But in the most recent
quarters, the gap between metro and rural improvement rates has reduced. GoI
has adopted special initiatives to grow financial participation by low-income
groups and credit-deterrent MSMEs by encouraging saving and investments —
driving increased credit access while generating jobs and reducing inequalities.
That’s why geographic location of consumers does not seem to be an important
factor in measuring collections efficiency.

Personal Loan by Fin Techs - Improvement Rates for

30-59 DPD Bucket by City Tier
% Accounts Cured or Rolled

15%
Pre-COVID Post-COVID Metro

10% Urban
Back

Semi-urban
5%
Rural
0%
Aug-19 Nov-19 Feb-20 May-20 Aug-20
Status Month (t+1)

Consumer age is another important demographic — greatly impacting

consumer willingness and their ability to pay. Younger consumers may have a
strong willingness to repay debts but less savings due to their jobs being
impacted by an economic downturn — thus impacting their ability to pay. Older
consumers may have the ability to repay — if lower willingness to pay is solved
at the time of acquisition through credit policy filtering. Older consumers
usually show higher improvement rates compared to younger consumers.
 Personal Loan by Fin Techs - Improvement Rates for
30-59 DPD Bucket by Consumer Age
% Accounts Cured or Rolled

15%
Pre-COVID Post-COVID 18-25

10% 25-30
Back

30-35
5%

35-45
0%
Aug-19 Nov-19 Feb-20 May-20 Aug-20
Status Month (t+1)

Looking at loan size, we observed historically larger-ticket size loans had higher
improvement rates. This is because FinTechs see less marginal utility after initial
collections calls for lower-ticket sizes, as the cost of collections exceeds
possible returns and results in increased efforts to prioritise higher-ticket sizes
first. Post-COVID, efforts have grown across all ticket sizes leading to higher
collections across all ticket sizes.

Personal Loan by Fin Techs - Improvement Rates for

30-59 DPD Bucket by Trade Size
% Accounts Cured or Rolled

15%
Pre-COVID Post-COVID
0-2.5K

10% 2.5-5K
Back

5-10K

5% 10-20K
20+K

0%
Aug-19 Nov-19 Feb-20 May-20 Aug-20
Status Month (t+1)
FinTechs usually charge higher interest rates compared to banks, catering to a
consumer segment that’s neither accessible or eligible to traditional banks or
NBFC lenders. We wanted to see if consumers with multiple FinTech loans have
a higher affinity for repaying FinTech loans. Results show consumers with
multiple FinTech loans had better improvement rates compared to those with a
single FinTech loan, reflecting a higher tendency to repay. This is because of
increased consumer stickiness/loyalty and familiarity with FinTech brands
which offer greater convenience and availability. But this trend did not hold
true in 2020.

Personal Loan by Fin Techs - Improvement Rates for

30-59 DPD Bucket by Number of Fin Tech Trades
% Accounts Cured or Rolled

20%
Pre-COVID Post-COVID
1 Fin Tech
15% Trade
Back

10%
1+ Fin Tech
5% Trade

0%
Aug-19 Nov-19 Feb-20 May-20 Aug-20

Status Month (t+1)

Benefits of an analytics-driven collection
prioritisation framework
The collection management process doesn’t begin when a customer turns
delinquent, but when a loan is disbursed. Today’s consumers have so many
financing options and, in light of the accelerated pace and scale of borrowing,
lenders must keep tabs on consumers as soon as they’re onboarded. Consumer
accounts need to be continuously managed by monitoring early warning risk
indicators and assigning a strategy for each consumer category. Consumer
contact information must be kept up to date to ensure probability of contact in
case of default.
Once a consumer defaults, lenders need to quickly engage with them to
maximise recoveries. At this stage, it’s essential for lenders to hold maximum
information about the consumer — their on-us and off-us borrowings and
repayment history, and any other alternative consumer information.
Collections resources should be optimised for accounts with a higher
collections probability to increase efficiencies and reduce further defaults. We
would focus on account prioritisation.

Identified Risk Missed Payment

Origination Account Management Collections

Identify vulnerable and high-risk Engage customers to maximize recoveries

customers Minimize compliance risk and increase efficiency
Goals

Identify early risk indicators to determine with high quality data

strategy Ensure resources are working the right accounts
Update contact information to increase Make the best decision to optimize resources and
probability of contact increase recoveries
Capabilities

Treatment Strategy Data Quality Inventory Compliant Account Informed

Assignment Management Segmentation Contact & Locate Prioritization Decisioning

A lender’s collection strategy usually includes on-us or internal data, such as

contact preference, payment history, loan balances and behaviour scores. This
predictive information does not provide a comprehensive view of the borrower.
Off-us data is also a key component of a borrower’s financial health and needs
to be captured and incorporated into collections strategies. Additional data on
consumers, such as new loans opened, delinquency on off-us loans,
repayments on off-us loans, credit card spends, etc., can be used to help build
advanced strategies for optimal results.

As a result of economic conditions impacted by the pandemic, there’s a growing

risk of more consumers entering collection buckets. Fortunately, consumer
behaviour that predicts collectability can be measured to develop a
prioritisation approach/model.
Collection prioritisation model using
CreditVision variables
FinTechs have largely focused on small-ticket, unsecured personal loans up to
INR 25,000 — which led to us building a prototype collections model for this
particular segment. Since consumer dimensions don’t show any definitive
trend, we used CreditVision® variables to build the model. CreditVision allows
traditional, month-on-month, static credit information on a borrower’s profile
to be analysed in real time over the past 36 months. Trended vectors that
provide more directional insights — while highlighting recent improvements or
deterioration in various credit behaviour elements — helps enable superior
decision-making by lenders.

We used two separate techniques to build models. Lenders could then choose
the one that suits their lending style and apply collection prioritisation
accordingly:
A)Scorecard methodology
B)Decision tree approach

For both approaches, we considered accounts in 30–59 DPD and measured their
performance over the next three months. We used cure-rate, or the number of
accounts that moved to lower buckets (0–29 DPD), in all three months as the
performance measurement metric.

Performance Definition
Cured: Account is not >30 DPD in ALL of the
Credit Vision
Account next 3 months
variables for
preformance in Deteriorated: Account has rolled forward to
past 36
next 3 months 60-89 DPD in ANY of the next 3 months
months

Accounts in 30-59 DPD as of

Sep-19, Oct-19 and Nov-19

We concluded certain CreditVision variables and trended credit data help

predict collectability. Some of the variables with high information value (IV)
include: credit line utilisation, months since oldest personal loan trade opened,
number of open trades currently satisfactory, etc.

Consumers with over-utilised credit lines on personal loans showed lower

collectability. This is to be expected as consumers who have taken personal
loans from different lenders (and have high balances to be repaid) will have
higher default rates.
 Ratio of Balance of open personal loan trades verified in past 12 months to
credit line
24%
Cure Rate %

20%

16%

12%

8%
<=50% 51-68% 69-78% 79-90% 91-100% >100%
Percentage

Consumers with lower vintages on personal loans also showed lower cure rates,
while consumers ahead in their personal loans journey reflected higher cure
rates. This may be a result of higher credit experience and knowledge of
maintaining a good credit history — ensuring their credit score is not impacted
when they need a loan in the future.

Months since oldest personal loan trade opened

18%

16%
Cure Rate %

14%

12%

10%

8%
(0 - 2) (2 - 3) (3 - 4) (4 - 5) (5 - 7) (7 - 19) (19,inf)
Months

Consumers with multiple live loans (different products from different lenders)
who were not delinquent on those loans, showed a higher cure rate compared to
those with fewer non-delinquent loans.
 Number of open trades currently satisfacory
18%

16%
Cure Rate %

14%

12%

10%

8%
0 1 2 3 4-6 >6
Number of Open Trades

We built a collection score based on these variables — achieving a distinction in

cure rates from 6% to 23% — from the lowest collectability bucket to the highest
collectability bucket.

Cure Rate for STPL

Higher probability of
collection
30%
25% Lower probability of
collection Collection
Cure Rate %

20% score
15%
CV score
10%
5%
0%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Score Deciles
 We also built a decision
tree model for lenders looking for a
simpler segmentation approach to prioritising
collection efforts.

Overall, Cure rate - 11.8% Collectability Distribution Cure rate

% of accounts ever delinquent Low 36% 7.9%
>=16.5% <16.5% Medium 34% 10.8%
Pop = 53% Pop = 47% High 30% 17.7%
CR = 9.5% CR = 14.6%
% of open PL trades Months since most recent PL trade opened
>=44.5% <3.5
Pop = 47% Pop = 42%
CR = 8.6% CR = 13.9%
Months since oldest PL trade opened Total past due amount of
open instalment trades
<8K
Pop = 32%
CR = 15.0%
Number of missed payments in last 12 months
<0.5
Pop = 17%
CR = 12.6%
Months since most recent finance inquiry
<5.5 >=5.5 <44.5% >=3.5 >=8K >=0.5 >=0.5 <0.5
Pop = 36% Pop = 11% Pop = 6% Pop = 5% Pop = 10% Pop = 15% Pop = 13% Pop = 4%
CR = 7.9% CR = 10.9% CR = 16.2% CR = 20.6% CR = 10.5% CR = 17.6% CR = 11.0% CR = 17.2%

Consumers past performance (on bureau) does impact their collection

performance. These models — with deeper customer-specific insights — can help
lenders proactively work with targeted customers to optimise collections
efforts. Once lenders have a high, medium, low (HML) segmentation available on
their portfolio base, they can implement collection strategies for different
behavioural groups of consumers.
What can FinTech lenders do to enhance the bureau
collection scorecard/model?

1.FinTech lenders have much on-us consumer data and alternate data
available to them. They can customise the collection score or HML
segmentation by adding additional information to build an even more
accurate collections management framework.

2.Lenders can test the model on other DPD buckets (like 1–14 DPD or 1–29
DPD) depending on risk appetite while controlling the spill-over of delinquent
accounts to higher buckets.

3.Deploying collection resources based on probability to collect will help

lenders prioritise which consumers to target first.

4.Lenders can measure the impact of collection efforts — using the

prioritisation model — by measuring improvement (roll back and cure) rates
by prioritisation bucket.

5.Lenders can use information from previous months’ collection efforts to

see which accounts cured and which rolled forward — adding this as an input
to their prioritisation model — to plan collections activity accordingly for the
next month.

Manage collection resource Adopt collections model or customize

prioritization going forward with with further on-us consumer data to
results from last months’ cure rate MANAGE ADOPT/ improve accuracy
BUILD

COLLECTIONS
PRIORITIZATION

MEASURE MODEL
TEST

Measure the accuracy of Test the model against a sample of

cure rate achieved using the DEPLOY consumers who are 1-29 DPD
prioritization model

Prioritization score/rank available to

collectors so they can prioritize consumers
with higher likelihood to collect
TransUnion CIBIL Limited
[Formerly: Credit Information Bureau (India) Limited]
CIN: U72300MH2000PLC128359

P: 6638 4600
F: 6638 4666
W: transunioncibil.com

One Indiabulls Centre, Tower 2A, 19th Floor,

Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road,
Mumbai - 400 013.