The Indian Digital Credit Market Research report: A refusal does not always end the conversation

• Among refused profiles that state a response, 37% ask for a reason and 35.4% warn others.
• 25% report retrying the same app; 6.5% report trying another app.
• Responses overlap and are self-reported; they do not form a measured conversion funnel.

Asking for a reason appears in 37% of refused borrower profiles that state a response in Relvo’s digital-credit research (n=308), snapshot dated 2 October 2026. Retrying the same app appears in 25%. A refusal does not always end the borrower’s engagement with that lender.

How to read the numbers: Shares describe sampled accounts or opinions, with their bases shown. Reviews were sampled across star ratings, which over-represents critical voices. Separate evidence sets can come from the same accounts. Small bases are indicative; bases below 10 are reported directionally.

Warnings also appear frequently, in 35.4% of this profile set. Trying another app appears in 6.5%, and giving up in 4.5%. One profile can contain more than one response. Someone might ask why, retry and warn others, so the percentages should not be added into a journey.

The India digital credit market research records responses only where they are stated. It does not track every refused applicant afterwards. Quietly leaving, applying elsewhere without describing it or resolving an issue privately may be missed. The chart therefore cannot measure switching rates across lenders.

For a product team, asking for an explanation and retrying deserve separate attention. The first concerns understanding. The second concerns whether another attempt has a purpose. Checking repeat applications against the messages shown would help establish whether applicants know what, if anything, has changed.

Relvo’s consumer behavior evidence also shows why a refusal should be examined beyond the initial screen. Support contacts, repeated attempts and public warnings can follow the same outcome. Their presence in the research identifies questions for further study; it does not establish that one message causes any of these responses.

Questions about the research

Can these percentages be added to describe all refused applicants? No. The base includes only profiles with a stated response, and responses overlap. The research does not observe every refused applicant’s next step.

Is this based on lender transaction data? No. It uses coded borrower accounts and opinions. It is not loan transaction data and not a representative survey.

Related research: The India Digital Credit Market Report, 2026 on NBW Brain examines borrower decisions, experiences and behavioural patterns, with evidence available through its Market Brain.

Methodology

Source: Relvo digital-credit research, snapshot dated 2 October 2026. Borrower accounts and opinions are coded to a fixed codebook with evidence and coding checks. Accounts span October 2025–October 2026. Reviews were sampled across star ratings; critical voices are over-represented. Each share refers to the event, profile or opinion set named alongside it. A profile is a coded account, not a verified unique borrower or credit file. Opinion and action layers may overlap. Bases of 10–29 are indicative; bases below 10 are reported directionally. Findings do not establish population prevalence, loan approval rates, legal breaches or causal effects.