1

CONTRIBUTION OF MICROFINANCE TOWARDS

INCLUSIVE GROWTH
Mr. Maurya Rambali R.
M.COM., M.PHIL., LLB., NET(COMMERCE)
rammaurya28@gmail.com
9769539813
c/109. Kunal kutir A,
Navghar Road, Bhayandar(E),
Mumbai-401105
ABSTRACT
Growth is inclusive when it creates economic opportunities along with ensuring equal
access to them. There are supply side and demand side factors driving Inclusive
Growth. Banks and other financial services players largely are expected to mitigate the
access to the financial system. Microfinance institutions are the significant contributors
in economic development of a country.
The aim of this paper is to enrich the growth and regulation of Microfinance
Institutions (MFI) in India. It also highlights the components of assets and liabilities of
these institutions. This is also an attempt to judge the financial and operational
performance of these institutions from the year 2008 -2012. In the present study
statistical tools like, trend analysis, ratios, percentages, mean, standard deviation will be
used for descriptive analysis. To accomplish the research objectives, data has been
mined from MIX market (www.mixmarket.org) a (Non- Profit Organization), NABARD,
Sa-Dhan, CGAP. Data regarding financial performance various ratios and variables are
taken into consideration. This work concludes that the performance of MFIs in the
period under the study is significant and MFIs contributes significantly for inclusive
2

growth in India. The study considers selected variables and ratios, there are scope to
expand the study by considering remained variables and ratios for analyzing financial
performances. Here only financial performances of MFIs are studied. More research is
needed on the performances of MFI by considering other variable and ratios and
analysis of social performance is also required. This paper will be useful for financial
institutions, portfolio managers, wealth managers and other investors as well as
regulators who wish to have better understanding of MFIs and this will assist MFIs to
improve their financial performance.
Key words: Microfinance Institutions, Financial performance, Ratio, Inclusive Growth
Paper type: Research paper
















3

1. INTRODUCTION
Inclusive growth is a concept which advances equitable opportunities for economic participants
during the process of economic growth with benefits incurred by every section of society. The
definition of inclusive growth implies direct links between the macroeconomic and
microeconomic determinants of the economy and economic growth. The inclusive growth
approach takes a longer-term perspective, as the focus is on productive employment as a means
of increasing the incomes of poor and excluded groups and raising their standards of living.
Inclusive growth focuses on economic growth which is a necessary and crucial condition for
poverty reduction. It should also be inclusive of the large part of the countrys labor force, where
inclusiveness refers to equality of opportunity in terms of access to markets, resources and
unbiased regulatory environment for businesses and individuals. Inclusive growth focuses on
productive employment rather than income redistribution. Hence the focus is not only on
employment growth but also on productivity growth. Inclusive growth is not defined in terms of
specific targets such as employment generation or income distribution. These are potential
outcomes, not specific goals.
The term "microfinance," once associated almost exclusively with small-value loans to
the poor, is now increasingly used to refer to a broad array of products (including payments,
savings, and insurance) tailored to meet the particular needs of low-income individuals. People
living in poverty, like everyone else, need a diverse range of financial services to run their
businesses, build assets, smooth consumption, and manage risks. Microfinance is a source of
financial services for entrepreneurs and small businesses lacking access to banking and related
services. The two main mechanisms for the delivery of financial services to such clients are: (1)
relationship-based banking for individual entrepreneurs and small businesses; and (2) group-
based models, where several entrepreneurs come together to apply for loans and other services as
a group.
A microfinance institution acquires permission to lend through registration. Each legal
structure has different formation requirements and privileges. Microfinance institutions in India
are registered as one of the following five entities:
4

on Government Organizations engaged in microfinance (NGO-MFIs), comprised of
Societies and Trusts
-level cooperative acts, the national level
multi-state cooperative legislation Act (MSCA 2002 ), or under the new state-level mutually
aided cooperative acts (MACS Act)
-for-profit)
-profit Non-Banking Financial Companies (NBFCs)
-MFIs
For some, microfinance is a movement whose object is "a world in which as many poor
and near-poor households as possible have permanent access to an appropriate range of high
quality financial services, including not just credit but also savings, insurance, and fund
transfers."
[1]
Many of those who promote microfinance generally believe that such access will
help poor people out of poverty, including participants in the Microcredit Summit Campaign. For
others, microfinance is a way to promote economic development, employment and growth
through the support of micro-entrepreneurs and small businesses. Microfinance is a broad
category of services, which includes microcredit. Microcredit is provision of credit services to
poor clients.
The inclusive growth approach takes a longer term perspective as the focus is on
productive employment rather than on direct income redistribution, as a means of increasing
incomes for excluded groups. Inclusive growth is, therefore, supposed to be inherently
sustainable as distinct from income distribution schemes which can in the short run reduce the
disparities, between the poorest and the rest..Growth is inclusive when it creates economic
opportunities along with ensuring equal access to them. Apart from addressing the issue of
inequality, the inclusive growth may also make the poverty reduction efforts more effective by
explicitly creating productive economic opportunities for the poor and vulnerable sections of the
society. The inclusive growth by encompassing the hitherto excluded population can bring in
several other benefits as well to the economy.
There are supply side and demand side factors driving Inclusive Growth. Banks and other
financial services players largely are expected to mitigate the supply side processes that prevent
5

poor and disadvantaged social groups from gaining access to the financial system. Access to
financial products is constrained by several factors which include: lack of awareness about the
financial products, unaffordable products, high transaction costs, and products which are not
convenient, inflexible, not customized and of low quality. Financial Inclusion promotes thrift and
develops culture of saving and also enables efficient payment mechanism strengthening the
resource base of the financial institution which benefits the economy as resources become
available for efficient payment mechanism and allocation. If we are talking of financial stability,
economic stability and inclusive growth with stability, it is not possible without achieving
Financial Inclusion. Thus financial inclusion is no longer a policy choice but is a policy
compulsion today. And banking is a key driver for inclusive growth. However, we must bear in
mind that apart from the supply side factors, demand side factors, such as lower income and /or
asset holdings also have a significant bearing on inclusive growth. Owing to difficulties in
accessing formal sources of credit, poor individuals and small and macro enterprises usually rely
on their personal savings or internal sources to invest in health, education, housing, and
entrepreneurial activities to make use of growth opportunities.
2 PROBLEMS OF THE STUDY

The problem of this research paper is to enrich the growth and contribution of
Microfinance Institutions (MFI) in inclusive growth of India, during the year 2008 to 2012.
3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The objectives of the present study are as follows:
1) To analyze the financial performance and growth of MFIs in India.
2) To examine contribution of MFIs towards Inclusive Growth in India.
4. HYPOTHESIS OF THE STUDY
The following are hypotheses related to present study.
Hypothesis 1
H
0
: There is no significance difference between the ratios of MFI from the year 2008 to
2012 in India.
H
0
: There is significance difference between the ratios of MFI from the year 2008 to
2012 in India.
6

5. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY
The research methodology of the study consists of:
a) Sample frame
b) Selection of the sample
c) Data required
d) Sources of Data
e) Research Variables for analysis
f) Statistical tools

a) SAMPLE FRAME:
The sample frame is the list of target population. The sample frame in this study is
all Micro financial institutions in India.
b) SELECTION OF THE SAMPLE:
For the purpose of the study researcher has taken 17 MFI working in India. For
the present study researcher has obtained the names of the MFI from Mixmarket
website, an organisation which has reliable and authentic source of information
relating to MFIs of different countries.
c) DATA REQUIRED:
Study is empirical in nature because it depends upon the collected data, therefore
researcher require such data which shows the financial performance like financial
statements, Balance Sheet, Profit and Loss Account, financial reports etc. of the
sample MFIs.
d) SOURCES OF DATA:
Secondary source: Studies of overall composition of MFIs are based on:-
i. Mixmarket website, Sa-Dhan website
ii. Annual reports of NABARD (National Bank for Agriculture and
Rural Development)
iii. Report on Status of microfinance in India from 2007-08 to 2012-13
published by NABARD.
iv. Magazines- Bank Quest, IIBF vision, Yojana etc.
7

v. Research papers related to microfinance and inclusive growth.
vi. Reference books related to MFI and inclusive growth.
vii. Newspaper articles.
e) RESEARCH VARIABLES AND ANALYSIS:
Research variables: Variables are the objects of the research that can be
measured. There are some variables which will be used for analysis to measure
financial performance and growth of MFIs by the researcher. Those variables are
as follows:
01
Capital Asset Ratio (CA)
02
Debt to Equity Ratio (DE)
03
Gross Profit Margin (PM)
04
Number of active borrowers (NOAB)
05
Return on Asset Ratio (ROA)
06
Return on Equity Ratio (ROE)
07
Operating Expenses / Loan Portfolio Ratio (OELP)

Research variables are analyzed in order to accomplish the objectives of the
study. Various statistical tools are used to test the hypothesis framed. In order to
examine the contribution of MFI to Inclusive growth it will be seen that if the
ratios are significantly differs during the period of study that is 2008to 2012 then
it can be understood that MFIs contribution is significant in Inclusive growth in
India. Since the ratios which are selected are indictor of financial viability and
shows the performance of MFIs in India, therefore if these ratios are significantly
differ during the period of study it means they are financial viable and helps to
increase financial inclusion which is one of the factor for inclusive growth.
f) STATISTICAL TOOLS:
For the purpose of analysis, for various ratios mentioned below, average of five
years ratio i.e. 2008 to 2012 is found for each group separately. To examine
whether these ratios differ significantly between different years, One way
8

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) is applied. In addition of this Krushkal- Wallies
test is also applied in order to overcome the precondition of normal distribution in
case of ANOVA.
6. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY:
The present study is significant because of the following reasons:
1) This study and its outcomes will be a tool for the MFIs.
a) To have a clear view about its current performance and risk (strength and
weaknesses).
b) To motivate the entire institutions towards performance improvement.
c) To follow up its development, assess progress in achieve sustainability.
d) To present itself to potential funders.
2) It might be a tool for investor:
a) To identify potential investment.
b) To follow up the MFIs they are investing into.
3) It might be a tool for the government while framing regulation regarding operation of
MFIs.
7. SCOPE OF THE STUDY
The scope of the present study is restricted to India. Under the present study few MFIs
are considered for the accomplishment of research objectives. For the purpose to analyses
and examining financial performance and growth of MFI, selected variables are taken
into consideration.
8 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY:
Despite all sincere efforts in order to collect relevant information and data there will be some
limitations such as:
1. Due to limitation of time and money, study covers only 17 MFI in India.
9

2. The study reveals only financial performances of MFI and social performances of MFIs
are excluded.
3. Under the study researcher has taken only 6 (six) of the ratios of sample MFIs.
9. ANALYSIS
Inferential Analysis:
With a view to accomplish the stipulated set of hypothesis of the study parametric test ANOVA
and non parametric test Kruskal-Wallis Testis used. The ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests do
not identify specific significant comparisons. The statistical tests indicate whether at least one
group mean is statistically significantly different from the mean for the other group(s). If the F-
value (or Chi-square) is significant, then we utilize statistical comparison tests to identify
individual significant differences. We test the differences among the five years (2008, 2009
2010, 2011 AND 2012) using ANOVA as well as Kruskal-Wallis tests. Both the tests applied for
each parameter separately. The results are presented in Tables 2 and 3.

Table 2

ANOVA Test Results

Capital
/asset
ratio
Debt to
equity
ratio
Number of
active
borrowers
Return
on
assets
Return
on
equity
Profit
margin
Operating
expense/ loan
portfolio
F-value
0.866 0.99 0.37 0.54 0.99 0.62 0.50
P value
0.4879 0.4195 0.8903 0.7109 0.4213 0.6471 0.7353
Difference
Insignif
icant
Insignifi
cant
Insignificant
Insignifi
cant
Insignific
ant
Insignif
icant
Insignificant
(Working note is given in appendix)

10

Table 3
Kruskal-Wallis Test Results

Capital
/asset
ratio
Debt to
equity
ratio
Number
of active
borrowers
Return
on
assets
Return
on
equity
Profit
margin
Operating
expense/ loan
portfolio
H
0.645 2.894 3.138 2.790 2.261 1.812 0.682
P -value
0.9580 0.5757 0.5350 0.5936 0.6879 0.7703 0.9535
Difference
Insignif
icant
Insignific
ant
Insignifica
nt
Insignifi
cant
Insignif
icant
Insignif
icant
Insignificant
(Working note is given in appendix)
10. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS:
In table 2 we report the ANOVA test result for each parameter. From the table 2 it is found that p
value for each parameter is greater than the level of significance at 0.05. This indicates that all
the selected ratios for this study differ insignificantly between various categories. Hence we
failed reject the null hypothesis for each parameter.
To overcome the assumption of normal distribution in case of ANOVA, Kruskal Wallis
test is also applied. In table 3 we report the Kruskal-Wallis test result for each parameter. It is
interesting to note that by applying both the techniques all ratios null hypothesis is accepted.
From the above discussion it follows that for different categories; there exists insignificant
difference in various ratios.
On the basis of the study, it can be concluded that there exists an insignificant difference
in the ratios of MFIs when all categories are taken together; null hypothesis is accepted for all
the selected ratios indicating thereby that there does not exist a significant difference. We
conclude that group means are statistically insignificant. Hence there is no significance difference
between the mean values of ratios of MFI from the year 2008 to 2012 in India.
From this it follows that the ratios for all categories of MFIs are generally indifferent
during the study period. On the basis of selected sample MFIs and selected ratios, It is
concluded that contribution of MFIs in Inclusive growth is not significant during the period
2008 to 2012
11

APPENDIX
1)
Capital/asset ratio
NAME OF THE MFI 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 AVERAGE

AROHAN FINANCE 0.2044 0.1293 0.266 0.2877 0.3922 0.25592
ASHIRWAD MICROFINANCE 0.3596 0.2406 0.2243 0.323 0.208 0.2711
BANDHAN 0.061 0.1045 0.1382 0.1651 0.1687 0.1275
BASIX 0.1136 0.1415 0.1344 -1.0369 0.0345 -0.12258
BWDA FINANCE LTD 0.1332 0.1348 0.1738 0.2632 0.2467 0.19034
EQUITAS MICROFINANCE 0.3613 0.3645 0.3166 0.252 0.1914 0.29716
IDF FINANCE 0.0963 0.2402 0.2148 0.2806 0.2734 0.22106
IMPACT WORLD VISION
FINANCE 0.4225 0.4106 0.4409 0.4506 0.4058 0.42608
JANLAKSHMI FINANCE 0.1963 0.3948 0.2223 0.2285 0.1794 0.24426
MADURA MICROFINANCE 0.2836 0.2731 0.2728 0.3795 0.3358 0.30896
SAHARA UTSARG 0.1675 0.1296 0.1806 0.203 0.2922 0.19458
SAIIJA FINANCE 0.4241 0.501 0.2055 0.1169 0.8675 0.423
SONATA FINANCE 0.1991 0.4094 0.3319 0.3403 0.3121 0.31856
SURYODAY MICROFINANCE 0.9541 0.3186 0.4713 0.3866 0.3174 0.4896
SV CREDITLINE 0.803 0.7709 0.3026 0.3169 0.1696 0.4726
SWADHAR FINSERVE 0.8711 0.4237 0.3967 0.5066 0.3155 0.50272
UTKARSH MICROFINANCE 0.4553 0.6501 0.3897 0.3369 0.2465 0.4157
AVERAGE 0.359176 0.3316 0.2754353 0.223559 0.291571 0.29626824

2)
Debt to equity
NAME OF THE MFI 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 AVERAGE

AROHAN FINANCE 3.89 6.73 2.76 2.48 1.55 3.482
ASHIRWAD MICROFINANCE 1.78 3.16 3.46 2.1 3.81 2.862
BANDHAN 15.39 8.57 6.24 5.06 4.93 8.038
BASIX 7.81 6.07 6.44 -1.96 28.02 9.276
BWDA FINANCE LTD 6.51 6.42 4.76 2.8 3.05 4.708
EQUITAS MICROFINANCE 1.77 1.74 2.16 2.97 4.23 2.574
IDF FINANCE 9.38 3.16 3.66 2.56 2.66 4.284
IMPACT WORLD VISION
FINANCE 1.37 - 1.27 1.22 1.46 1.33
JANLAKSHMI FINANCE 4.09 1.53 3.5 3.38 4.57 3.414
MADURA MICROFINANCE 2.53 2.66 2.67 1.63 1.98 2.294
12

SAHARA UTSARG 4.97 6.71 4.54 3.93 2.42 4.514
SAIIJA FINANCE - 1 3.87 7.56 0.15 3.145
SONATA FINANCE 4.02 1.44 2.01 1.94 2.2 2.322
SURYODAY MICROFINANCE 0.05 2.14 1.12 1.59 2.15 1.41
SV CREDITLINE 0.25 0.3 2.3 2.16 4.9 1.982
SWADHAR FINSERVE 0.15 1.36 1.52 0.97 2.17 1.234
UTKARSH MICROFINANCE 1.2 0.54 1.57 1.97 3.06 1.668
AVERAGE 4.0725 3.345625 3.167647 2.491765 4.312353 3.443353

3)
Number of active borrowers
NAME OF THE MFI 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 AVERAGE

AROHAN FINANCE 86237 187754 214059 107612 113665 141865.4
ASHIRWAD MICROFINANCE 48425 126483 219043 173109 113416 136095.2
BANDHAN 1454834 2301433 3254913 3617641 4433885 3012541
BASIX 498681 1114468 1526150 570520 377421 817448
BWDA FINANCE LTD 263968 220645 216655 152682 106696 192129.2
EQUITAS MICROFINANCE 339158 888600 1303339 1193247 1344361 1013741
IDF FINANCE 82416 129600 164235 143470 89430 121830.2
IMPACT WORLD VISION
FINANCE 7021 8094 6654 6926 8863 7511.6
JANLAKSHMI FINANCE 43157 82161 193014 300847 695974 263030.6
MADURA MICROFINANCE 169700 250208 292634 212753 173029 219664.8
SAHARA UTSARG 84641 102094 134470 93318 67194 96343.4
SAIIJA FINANCE 382 7905 16270 5702 30489 12149.6
SONATA FINANCE 76632 85897 132328 132760 191675 123858.4
SURYODAY MICROFINANCE - 24678 87063 104571 156204 93129
SV CREDITLINE 0 9729 63062 80583 118217 54318.2
SWADHAR FINSERVE 8234 27391 56727 80201 96600 53830.6
UTKARSH MICROFINANCE - 10840 55506 106371 198181 92724.5
AVERAGE 210899.1 328116.5 466830.7 416606.6 489135.3 379541.8

4)
Return on assets
NAME OF THE MFI 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 AVERAGE

AROHAN FINANCE 0.0353 0.0202 0.0032 -0.1605 -0.0027 -0.0209
ASHIRWAD MICROFINANCE 0.0521 0.074 0.0422 0.0154 0.0243 0.0416
BANDHAN 0.0866 0.0352 0.0532 0.0644 0.0473 0.05734
13

BASIX 0.018 0.0312 0.0066 -0.6354 -0.352 -0.18632
BWDA FINANCE LTD 0.0103 0.0097 0.0112 0.006 -0.0575 -0.00406
EQUITAS MICROFINANCE 0.0152 0.045 0.0363 0.0228 0.0274 0.02934
IDF FINANCE 0.003 0.0293 0.0044 0.0076 0.0093 0.01072
IMPACT WORLD VISION
FINANCE 0.0344 - 0.0101 0.0024 0.013 0.014975
JANLAKSHMI FINANCE - -0.0305 -0.0138 0.0046 0.0197 -0.005
MADURA MICROFINANCE 0.0147 0.0542 0.0441 0.0429 0.0186 0.0349
SAHARA UTSARG - 0.0586 0.0506 0.0351 0.0275 0.04295
SAIIJA FINANCE - -0.1516 -0.0703 -0.1911 -0.0157 -0.10718
SONATA FINANCE 0.0736 0.0112 0.0494 0.0364 0.0161 0.03734
SURYODAY MICROFINANCE - -0.0539 0.0257 0.0071 0.015 -0.00153
SV CREDITLINE - -0.6068 -0.1404 0.0078 0.0086 -0.1827
SWADHAR FINSERVE -0.4491 -0.2075 -0.0589 0.0092 0.0115 -0.13896
UTKARSH MICROFINANCE - -0.1635 0.0163 0.0241 0.0218 -0.02533
AVERAGE
-
0.00963
-
0.05283 0.004112
-
0.04125
-
0.00987 -0.02369

5)
Return on equity
NAME OF THE MFI 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 AVERAGE

AROHAN FINANCE 0.1493 0.1356 0.0163 -0.6512 -0.0062 -0.07124
ASHIRWAD MICROFINANCE 0.1183 0.282 0.1832 0.0528 0.0814 0.14354
BANDHAN 1.2562 0.3821 0.4112 0.3762 0.2608 0.5373
BASIX 0.1563 0.2329 0.0473 276.9735 0.2927 55.54054
BWDA FINANCE LTD 0.081 0.072 0.0745 0.0316 -0.1967 0.01248
EQUITAS MICROFINANCE 0.0402 0.1238 0.1077 0.0815 0.1262 0.09588
IDF FINANCE 0.0233 0.1576 0.0193 0.0313 0.0328 0.05286
IMPACT WORLD VISION
FINANCE 0.089 - 0.0237 0.0054 0.0299 0.037
JANLAKSHMI FINANCE - -0.0874 -0.0483 0.016 0.0864 -0.00833
MADURA MICROFINANCE 0.1793 0.265 0.1589 0.1572 0.1322 0.17852
SAHARA UTSARG - 0.411 0.3466 0.183 0.1154 0.264
SAIIJA FINANCE - -0.3089 -0.2301 -0.7098 -0.0167 -0.31638
SONATA FINANCE 0.3624 0.0328 0.1397 0.0983 0.042 0.13504
SURYODAY MICROFINANCE - -0.1436 0.0595 0.0164 0.0394 -0.00708
SV CREDITLINE - -0.7848 -0.3322 0.0211 0.0294 -0.26663
SWADHAR FINSERVE -0.6185 -0.3873 -0.1146 0.0172 0.0258 -0.21548
UTKARSH MICROFINANCE - -0.2576 0.0359 0.0506 0.076 -0.02378
AVERAGE 0.166982 0.007825 0.052859 16.27948 0.067694 3.29931

14

6)
Profit margin
NAME OF THE MFI 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 AVERAGE

AROHAN FINANCE 0.1692 0.1294 0.0176 -0.848 -0.0079 -0.10794
ASHIRWAD MICROFINANCE 0.2467 0.363 0.1863 0.0809 0.1539 0.20616
BANDHAN 0.4047 0.3683 0.3611 0.3853 0.3378 0.37144
BASIX 0.1237 0.2083 0.0413 -5.8387 -2.3271 -1.5585
BWDA FINANCE LTD 0.1471 0.1013 0.1155 0.0482 -0.4161 -0.0008
EQUITAS MICROFINANCE 0.082 0.3101 0.2095 0.147 0.181 0.18592
IDF FINANCE 0.0212 0.2016 0.0406 0.0623 0.0823 0.0816
IMPACT WORLD VISION
FINANCE 0.2388 - 0.049 0.011 0.0599 0.089675
JANLAKSHMI FINANCE -0.4476 -0.1566 -0.0457 0.0172 0.1146 -0.10362
MADURA MICROFINANCE 0.3071 0.2457 0.3835 0.2783 0.1079 0.2645
SAHARA UTSARG 0.3933 0.2631 0.2108 0.1366 0.1081 0.22238
SAIIJA FINANCE - -0.794 -0.2609 -1.044 -0.0748 -0.54343
SONATA FINANCE 0.3076 0.077 0.2762 0.22 0.1361 0.20338
SURYODAY MICROFINANCE -8.0627 -0.2338 0.08 0.0355 0.1062 -1.61496
SV CREDITLINE - 12.6247 -0.446 0.0265 0.0418 -3.2506
SWADHAR FINSERVE -2.2077 -1.0307 -0.2599 0.0176 0.056 -0.68494
UTKARSH MICROFINANCE 0.2917 -2.0498 0.0568 0.167 0.1771 -0.27144
AVERAGE
-
0.53233
-
0.91386 0.059747
-
0.35866
-
0.06842 -0.38301

7)
Operating expense/ loan portfolio
NAME OF THE MFI 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 AVERAGE

AROHAN FINANCE 0.1442 0.1225 0.1635 0.2266 0.1733 0.16602
ASHIRWAD MICROFINANCE 0.1928 0.1159 0.1242 0.1374 0.1066 0.13538
BANDHAN 0.0878 0.0543 0.0612 0.0588 0.0447 0.06136
BASIX 0.1776 0.1588 0.1431 0.1762 0.2672 0.18458
BWDA FINANCE LTD 0.0598 0.0548 0.0541 0.0778 0.0909 0.06748
EQUITAS MICROFINANCE 0.1223 0.0807 0.103 0.1186 0.092 0.10332
IDF FINANCE 0.0706 0.0658 0.0735 0.084 0.0743 0.07364
IMPACT WORLD VISION
FINANCE 0.0543 - 0.11 0.148 0.1216 0.108475
JANLAKSHMI FINANCE - 0.2467 0.2819 0.1897 0.1238 0.210525
MADURA MICROFINANCE 0.0085 0.0504 0.0253 0.0417 0.0881 0.0428
SAHARA UTSARG

0.1165 0.1148 0.1473 0.1798 0.1396
15

SAIIJA FINANCE - 0.4318 0.3394 0.4453 0.2321 0.36215
SONATA FINANCE 0.1226 0.1568 0.1393 0.1293 0.1027 0.13014
SURYODAY MICROFINANCE - 0.3374 0.2527 0.1678 0.11 0.216975
SV CREDITLINE - 1.1543 0.3863 0.206 0.1116 0.46455
SWADHAR FINSERVE 1.1579 0.5583 0.3646 0.2206 0.1633 0.49294
UTKARSH MICROFINANCE - 0.3762 0.259 0.1384 0.0999 0.218375
AVERAGE 0.199855 0.255075 0.176229 0.159618 0.128347 0.186959

8)
Capital/asset ratio


One factor ANOVA


Mean n Std. Dev YEAR


0.35918 17 0.275952 2008


0.33160 17 0.189963 2009


0.27544 17 0.103463 2010


0.22356 17 0.339244 2011


0.29157 17 0.174736 2012

0.29627 85 0.231019 Total



ANOVA
table

Source SS df MS F
p-
value
Treatment 0.186125 4 0.0465312 0.87 .4879
Error 4.296946 80 0.0537118

Total 4.483071 84


Kruskal-Wallis Test


Median N Avg. Rank YEAR


0.28 17 43.88 2008


0.32 17 46.24 2009


0.27 17 40.82 2010


0.29 17 43.65 2011


0.27 17 40.41 2012

0.28 85 Total



0.645 H


4 d.f.

16


.9580 p-value

9)
DEBT TO EQUITY RATIO


One factor ANOVA


Mean n Std. Dev YEAR


4.253 15 4.1738 2008


3.502 15 2.6614 2009


3.247 15 1.6452 2010


2.239 15 1.5434 2011


4.780 15 6.5252 2012

3.604 75 3.7981 Total



ANOVA
table

Source SS df MS F
p-
value
Treatment 57.0824 4 14.27060 0.99 .4195
Error 1,010.3876 70 14.43411

Total 1,067.4700 74


Kruskal-Wallis Test


Median n
Avg.
Rank YEAR


3.89 15 40.07 2008


2.66 15 37.23 2009


2.76 15 39.57 2010


2.16 15 30.23 2011


3.05 15 42.90 2012

2.66 75 Total



2.894
H (corrected for
ties)

4 d.f.


.5757 p-value


17

10)
NUMBER OF ACTIVE BORROWERS


One factor ANOVA


Mean N Std. Dev YEAR


225,963.3 14 381,846.62 2008


395,195.2 14 641,302.60 2009


552,177.9 14 906,531.90 2010


485,056.3 14 952,599.88 2011


560,192.7 14 1,171,020.09 2012

443,717.1 70 839,463.95 Total



ANOVA
table

Source SS df MS F
p-
value
Treatment 1,075,344,835,073.63 4 268,836,208,768.407 0.37 .8309
Error 47,548,936,594,001.90 65 731,522,101,446.183

Total 48,624,281,429,075.50 69


Kruskal-Wallis Test




Median n Avg. Rank YEAR


83,528.50 14 27.93 2008


128,041.50 14 34.93 2009


203,536.50 14 41.14 2010


148,076.00 14 37.07 2011


113,540.50 14 36.43 2012

133,615.00 70 Total




3.138 H


4 d.f.


.5350 p-value

11)
RETURN ON ASSETS



One factor ANOVA


18

Mean n Std. Dev YEAR


-0.01403 10 0.155451 2008


0.01025 10 0.078982 2009


0.01917 10 0.033841 2010


-0.05912 10 0.211552 2011


-0.02577 10 0.117841 2012

-0.01390 50 0.131733 Total



ANOVA
table

Source SS df MS F
p-
value
Treatment 0.038626 4 0.0096565 0.54 .7104
Error 0.811704 45 0.0180379

Total 0.850330 49


Kruskal-Wallis Test


Median n Avg. Rank YEAR


0.02 10 27.70 2008


0.03 10 30.35 2009


0.02 10 26.15 2010


0.01 10 22.30 2011


0.01 10 21.00 2012

0.02 50 Total



2.790
H (corrected for
ties)

4 d.f.


.5936 p-value

12)
OPERATING EXPENSE/ LOAN
PORTFOLIO


One factor ANOVA


Mean n Std. Dev YEAR


0.21441 10 0.336130 2008


0.14183 10 0.152066 2009


0.12518 10 0.095217 2010

19


0.12710 10 0.064535 2011


0.12031 10 0.064350 2012

0.14577 50 0.171595 Total




ANOVA table

Source SS

df MS F
p-
value
Treatment 0.061477 4 0.0153693 0.50 .7353
Error 1.381318 45 0.0306960

Total 1.442795 49


Kruskal-Wallis Test


Median n Avg. Rank YEAR


0.12 10 27.40 2008


0.10 10 22.80 2009


0.11 10 24.50 2010


0.12 10 27.10 2011


0.10 10 25.70 2012

0.11 50 Total



0.682 H


4 d.f.


.9535 p-value

13)
RETURN ON EQUITY



One factor ANOVA


Mean N Std. Dev YEAR


0.17478 10 0.458017 2008


0.12965 10 0.209951 2009


0.10435 10 0.138115 2010


27.71684 10 87.580248 2011


0.07910 10 0.138799 2012

5.64094 50 39.156200 Total



ANOVA
table

20

Source SS Df MS F
p-
value
Treatment 6,091.864764 4 1,522.9661911 0.99 .4213
Error 69,035.328972 45 1,534.1184216

Total 75,127.193736 49


Kruskal-Wallis Test


Median N Avg. Rank YEAR


0.13 10 27.60 2008


0.15 10 30.45 2009


0.09 10 24.20 2010


0.07 10 23.30 2011


0.06 10 21.95 2012

0.10 50 Total



2.261
H (corrected for
ties)

4 d.f.


.6879 p-value

14)
PROFIT MARGIN



One factor ANOVA


Mean n Std. Dev YEAR


-0.58741 14 2.252808 2008


-0.08594 14 0.670818 2009


0.11954 14 0.169385 2010


-0.36363 14 1.600852 2011


-0.08501 14 0.665959 2012

-0.20049 70 1.294098 Total



ANOVA
table

Source SS df MS F
p-
value
Treatment 4.272787 4 1.0681968 0.62 .6471
Error 111.280743 65 1.7120114

Total 115.553530 69
21



Kruskal-Wallis Test


Median n Avg. Rank YEAR


0.16 14 39.86 2008


0.17 14 37.93 2009


0.10 14 36.18 2010


0.07 14 31.32 2011


0.11 14 32.21 2012

0.12 70 Total



1.812
H (corrected for
ties)

4 d.f.


.7703 p-value
















22

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1) B. Sujatha, Microfinance: Providing Access to Financial Services in Rural India (Vipin
Sharma), Financial Inclusion- Concepts, The ICFAI University Press, Hyderabad (2007).
Pp.85-92
2) Katuri Nageshwar Rao, Microfinance Institutions- Delivery Model ( P.Dinakara Rao
and Swapana Chimanchodkar), Some Radical Thoughts on Microfinance (S N
Ghosal), Indian Commercial Banking The New dynamics, The ICFAI University
Press (Hyderabad) 2007, pp.91-99, 107-113.
3) Katuri Nageshwar Rao, Rural Credit and Microfinance, The ICFAI University Press,
(Hyderarbad), 2006.
4) Dr. Y.V Reddy, Governor, RBI at the micro finance conference organized by Indian
School of Business, Hyderabad on August 6, 2005.
5) Economic growth, financial deepening and financial inclusion, Dr. Rakesh Mohan at the
Annual Bankers' Conference 2006, at Hyderabad on Nov 3, 2006.
6) Jagdish kapoor, Deputy Governor, RBI at the Asia Pacific Region Micro Credit Summit
Meeting of Councils at New Delhi on Feb 03,2001, Developmental issues in Micro
credit.
7) Jonathan Morduch, Analysis of the Effects of Microfinance on Poverty Reduction,
Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service,New York University,4
Washington Square North,New York, NY 10003.
8) Basu, P. & Srivastava, P. (2005) Scaling up Microfinance for Indias Rural poor, World
Bank Policy research working paper 3646 (http://econ.worldbank.org).
9) Deubel, T.F. Banking on Culture Microcredit as incentive for cultural conservation in
Mali, In Fernado, J.L. (ed.) Microfinance Perils and Prospects, 2006, Routledge, Oxon
10) Buckley, G. (1997) Microfinance in Africa: Is it Either the problem or the solut ion?
World Development 25 (7):1081-93
11) Weiss, J., & Montgomery, H. (2004) Great Expectations : Microfinance and Poverty
reduction.
12) Dichter, T. (2006) Hype and Hope: The worrisome state of the Microcredit movement,
23

The South African Institute of International Affairs (www.saiia.org.za/.
13) Greeley, M. (2005) Microfinance impact and the MDGs:Why we need Social
Performance Management, paper for the Microfinance India conference, April 12-14,
2005, New Delhi.
14) Robinson, M. (2001) The Microfinance Revolution, Sustainable Finance for the Poor,
The World bank, Washington, DC.
15) Zeller, M., & Meyer, R.L. Improving the performance of Microfinance :Financial
Sustainability, Outreach and Impact.
16) Buckley, G. (1997) Microfinance in Africa: Is it Either the problem or the solution?
World Development 25 (7):1081-93.
17) National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) Burgess, R. & Pande,
R.(2005) Do Rural banks matter? Evidence from the Indian social banking experiment,
American Economic Review, Vol 95 (3).
18) ADB (2004) ADB Annual Report 2004, Special Theme: The Changing face of the
microfinance industry, Manila. Countdown (2005), Volume 1, Issue 4: May/June 1998,
Microcredit Summit Campaign, Washington, D.
19) Seibel, Hans D. (October 2005), Does history matter? The old and new World of
Microfinance in Europe and Asia, Paper presented at: From Moneylenders to
Microfinance: Southeast Asia's credit revolution in institutional, economic and cultural
perspective, An interdisciplinary workshop, Asia Research Institute, Department of
Economics and Department of Sociology, National University of Singapore.
20) Seibel, H.D. & Parhusip, U (1990) Financial Innovations for microenterprises linking
formaland informal institutions. In Harper, M. (Ed.) (2003) Microfinance : Evolution,
Achievement and Challenges, ITDG Publishing, London.
21) Remenyi, J. Is there a State of the Art in Microfinance. In Remenyi, J., & Quinones,
B. (Ed.) (2000) Microfinance and Poverty Alleviation Case Studies from Asia & the
Pacific, Pinter, London,CGAP (2003), Focus Note No.24, Washington, DC.