#3: A Thought I Can’t Shake Off: Young Portfolios Look Healthier Than They Really Are

-

There’s a thought that has been sitting with me for a while, and the more portfolios I look at, the harder it is to ignore.

Keeping portfolio delinquency low is not just about credit quality.
It’s also about keeping the portfolio young.

By young, I don’t mean new as in inexperienced teams or reckless growth. I mean average age of the loan book, measured in months on book.

Let me explain where this comes from.

Delinquency doesn’t show up evenly over time

Almost every lending product behaves the same way if you track it long enough.

Early months are usually clean.
Then delinquencies start appearing.
There’s a phase where defaults peak.
Eventually, things stabilize or run off.

This is not theory. You see it in microfinance, MSME, LAP, unsecured personal loans. The timeline differs, but the shape doesn’t.

So when I see a portfolio with very low delinquency, one of my first silent questions is not “how great is underwriting?” but:

How old is this book?

Why a young book automatically looks clean

Here’s the simple math behind the intuition.

If a large chunk of your AUM is sitting in:

  • MOB 0–3

  • MOB 4–6

then those loans haven’t even had enough time to go bad.

At the same time, yes, your older loans might be throwing up delinquencies. But their impact gets overshadowed by the sheer weight of the newer book.

So portfolio-level numbers like:

  • 30+

  • 90+

  • GNPA

stay low.

Not because risk disappeared.
But because it hasn’t fully arrived yet.

Growth acts like a natural dilution

As long as disbursements are strong:

  • New loans keep coming in

  • Average MOB stays flat or even falls

  • The “risky age band” never dominates the portfolio

This is why fast-growing lenders often look remarkably healthy in their early years.

And to be clear, this is not manipulation. It’s just how arithmetic works.

But here’s the uncomfortable part

This only works as long as growth continues.

The moment growth slows:

  • Average MOB starts rising

  • The dilution effect fades

  • Older cohorts begin to dominate AUM

That’s when delinquencies don’t creep up slowly.
They jump.

I’ve seen this enough times to say this confidently:
many GNPA spikes are growth slowdowns in disguise.

The real balancing act nobody talks about enough

You can’t keep a portfolio young for free.

To maintain low average age, you need:

  • Continuous disbursement (must, at least, offset natural amortization)

  • Capital to support that growth

  • Liquidity discipline

  • Willingness to accept lower short-term ROE sometimes

So there’s always a trade-off:

  • Push growth to keep optics clean

  • Or slow down and let true portfolio quality reveal itself

Neither choice is “right” or “wrong”. But pretending delinquency is purely a credit outcome is misleading.

What I personally look at now

Whenever I see a clean book, I instinctively ask:

  • What is the weighted average MOB?

  • How much AUM sits in peak-risk ages?

  • What happens to GNPA if disbursements slow for two quarters?

Those answers tell me more than headline ratios ever will.

The takeaway (not a conclusion)

A young portfolio is not a bad thing.
Growth is not a sin.

But low delinquency driven by youth is fragile.

It depends on capital, confidence, and continuity.

And the moment one of those breaks, the portfolio tells a very different story.

This isn’t a warning.
It’s just an observation I’ve come to trust.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

#1: What Expected Credit Loss (ECL) Really Means — Through My Journey in Credit

-
I didn’t start my career in risk modelling. I’m an accountant by training. My early years were spent in accounting and finance roles, working on things like OPEX and CAPEX planning, budgets, and variance tracking. Numbers, yes. But not credit models. Statistically, my toolkit was basic. Mean, median, standard deviation. Some idea of correlation, regression, and probability from textbooks. Nothing fancy. No machine learning. No advanced econometrics. So when I say this, I mean it honestly: If I could understand ECL and work with it comfortably, almost anyone in finance can. ECL looks complex mainly because of how it’s presented, not because of what it’s trying to do. At its core, ECL is built around one very practical question: If this borrower fails to pay in the future, how much will I realistically lose? Everything else exists only to answer this question in a structured, regulator-acceptable way. Before we talk about ECL, let’s talk about provisioning When I was in core fi...
Read more

#8: Credit Cost in Loan Pricing: A Practical, End-to-End Explanation

-
Image
At a high level, loan pricing looks like this: We have fair idea about all the components except for credit cost. Let’s assume everything except credit cost  is already known. This article is only about how to think about, estimate, and sanity-check credit cost — in a way that actually works in real lending. What credit cost really represents Credit cost answers one very boring but very important question: “Out of all the money I lend, how much will I not get back?” It is not : GNPA, write-offs, stress loss, worst-case loss. It is the average, expected loss baked into pricing. If you don’t price this correctly, everything else in loan pricing becomes meaningless. The irreducible formula (don’t fight it) Credit cost has only two moving parts: Credit Cost = PD × LGD Where: PD (Probability of Default) Out of 100 similar loans, how many will default at least once? LGD (Loss Given Default) If a loan defaults, what % of the outstanding amount will I ultimate...
Read more