In a slow primary market, a pipeline of niche financial sector initial public offerings (IPOs) worth around ₹3,700 crore is stuck in extended marketing due to ongoing investor education efforts before their share sales can proceed, according to multiple people aware of the matter.
Asset Reconstruction Co. (India) Ltd, alternatives investment company EAAA India Alternatives Ltd, and private equity firm Gaja Alternative Asset Management Ltd have not launched their share sales despite obtaining regulatory clearance months ago. For context, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) cleared Arcil’s and Gaja’s IPOs in October 2025. Gaja subsequently filed updated draft papers in December 2025. Meanwhile, EAAA’s offer was the last among the three to be approved, in April 2026.
Beyond the obvious market strain affecting all currently trying to list on Dalal Street, the delays for these firms are also partly due to the multiple rounds of meetings merchant bankers are holding to explain their business models to a base of institutional investors accustomed to commercial banking and non-banking financial companies, Mint has learnt.
“The challenge is the absence of listed domestic peers,” said a merchant banker working on one of the transactions, who asked not to be identified as the discussions are confidential. “A portion of the roadshows is dedicated to baseline education rather than financial performance or valuation metrics. Institutional investors require details on cash flow structures that differ from existing listings on the Indian public market.”
Arcil and EAAA are looking at IPOs of up to ₹1,500 crore each, while Gaja is looking at an IPO of around ₹700 crore.
The Fractal warning
The root of the caution can be traced to , whose IPO earlier this year was cut in size and drew modest demand, partly because investors had no way to value the AI-services company, which had no public Indian equivalent. “We do not want a Fractal Analytics type of situation repeating itself,” one banker involved in preparations told Mint.
All three companies are financially comfortable enough to wait, according to the people familiar with the transactions, and no launch timelines have been fixed. Bankers are focused on building a core of committed domestic mutual fund demand first, an approach that mirrors a shift in the IPO market, where institutional pricing indicators are increasingly dictating deal timing and valuation.
“Our investors can assess Gaja’s AMC structure, business economics, return on equity, and EPS growth history from the offer document. Over the long term, an alternatives AMC is best understood through fund economics, fund performance, and AMC structure,” Gopal Jain, managing director and CEO of Gaja Alternative said in response to an emailed questionnaire from Mint.
Jain did not comment on pricing, valuation, demand, or subscription expectations for Gaja’s IPO.
Arcil, and EAAA did not respond to questions mailed to them on Tuesday.
According to Arcil’s draft document, no asset reconstruction company is listed in India as of now. The same goes for EAAA, whose offer document adds a standard risk factor: “The absence of directly comparable Indian listed peers may present challenges in terms of how investors perceive and value our company.”
While Gaja has a flagship private equity strategy, its DRHP positions it against asset management companies that operate with similar fee-based, asset-light business models.
“If we bring these transactions to the market immediately, the retail and high-net-worth individual segments will likely deliver muted subscription numbers,” said a second merchant banker familiar with the marketing strategy. “The tail of the market does not participate in an offering without a benchmark. Launching without building that comprehension risks under-subscription, which impacts the pricing of the sector for future listings.”
No urgency, but the clock is ticking
Under Sebi capital issuance regulations, companies have a 12-month window to launch an initial public offering once the regulator issues its observation letter. While the approvals remain valid, the decision to extend investor outreach reflects concerns about market reception.
Investor scrutiny of sector-first IPOs can also affect company valuation when there are no listed peers. “The best thing that has happened to Indian IPOs is mutual funds and insurance companies pricing them,” Ramesh Srinivasan, managing director and chief executive of Kotak Investment Banking, told Mint in an interview on 1 June, noting the growing influence of mutual funds over company promoters. “They are disciplined, they have a set process, and they have an idea how to model future growth.”
The marketing syndicates for the three financial firms are continuing institutional roadshows, though some are more sporadic than others, and are focusing mostly on domestic .
Meanwhile, the widening gap between private-market valuations and public-market realities has already forced some of India’s prominent IPO-bound firms to retreat from the listing queue.
A Moneycontrol report from 16 March said a steep valuation mismatch with domestic institutional investors was the reason that digital payments giant PhonePe deferred its highly anticipated $1.3 billion IPO. Separately, Mint had reported on 9 March that Zepto’s valuation target for its proposed IPO had come under review in preliminary talks with domestic mutual funds.
Market data analysed by Mint indicates that capital raising through IPOs has maintained volumes similar to last year, despite smaller offer sizes. However, the majority of listings have occurred in sectors with established public comparables, such as manufacturing, consumer goods, and technology.