{"id":41482,"date":"2026-07-10T17:29:05","date_gmt":"2026-07-10T11:59:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kuvera.in\/blog\/?p=41482"},"modified":"2026-07-10T17:29:05","modified_gmt":"2026-07-10T11:59:05","slug":"the-wellness-question","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/kuvera.in\/blog\/the-wellness-question\/","title":{"rendered":"The Wellness Question"},"content":{"rendered":"

It\u2019s simple, if it jiggles, it\u2019s fat \u2013<\/span><\/i> Arnold Schwarzenegger<\/span><\/p>\n

For someone with as long and complicated a surname and career as the former bodybuilding-champion-turned-actor-turned-politician\u2014Schwarzenegger\u2019s short statement perfectly sums up the reason why millions of people worldwide take up gym memberships and why thousands of entrepreneurs and companies operate in this business.<\/span><\/p>\n

But taking or selling a gym membership is relatively easy. Renewing it\u2014or convincing someone to renew it\u2014year after year is much harder. That, in many ways, captures the challenge facing India\u2019s organised wellness industry.<\/span><\/p>\n

Over the past decade, fitness has become part of everyday life for many urban Indians. Morning parks are busier, weekend running events attract hundreds of participants, protein supplements have become mainstream and smartwatches quietly track everything from heart rate to sleep. Staying healthy is increasingly becoming something people spend on regularly rather than only after illness strikes.<\/span><\/p>\n

India\u2019s consumers appear to have embraced wellness. The harder question is whether wellness companies can build businesses around those habits.<\/span><\/p>\n

That question has come back into focus after Cult.fit Ltd filed draft papers with the Securities and Exchange Board of India for an initial public offering. The company plans to raise Rs 950 crore through a fresh issue of shares while some of its existing venture capital and private equity investors will partially exit through an offer for sale. While it hasn\u2019t yet disclosed its IPO price, media reports say the total IPO size could be around Rs 3,000-4,000 crore and that it could target a valuation of around Rs 15,000 crore.<\/span><\/p>\n

The question is important also because Cult.fit, which operates gyms under its eponymous brand as well as Gold\u2019s Gym and Fitness First chains, has no listed peers in India. The only other example is that of Talwalkars, which went public in 2010 and went bankrupt a decade later.<\/span><\/p>\n

So, Cult.fit\u2019s IPO offers a chance to examine how the economics of organised wellness have evolved in recent years.<\/span><\/p>\n

For years, the industry\u2019s biggest task was creating demand. Rising incomes, greater awareness of preventive healthcare and changing lifestyles have steadily expanded the market for organised fitness. What was once largely confined to neighbourhood gyms has grown into a wider ecosystem that includes sports, nutrition products, digital coaching and wellness subscriptions.<\/span><\/p>\n

That part of the story is becoming easier to understand. The next phase may prove more demanding.<\/span><\/p>\n

Cult.fit has continued to grow its revenue while working to narrow its losses. Its revenue rose from over Rs 1,000 crore in FY24 to Rs 1,800 crore in FY26 while net loss shrank from Rs 888 crore to Rs 252 crore.<\/span><\/p>\n

A deeper look into its business shows services remain the largest contributor to its business, but products have become an increasingly important source of revenue. The company has also expanded beyond fitness centres into nutrition, sports and other wellness offerings. Viewed separately, these look like natural extensions of the brand. Viewed together, they suggest something more fundamental. The business of wellness is slowly becoming the business of habit.<\/span><\/p>\n

Selling access to a gym is only one part of the relationship. Encouraging customers to keep returning, use additional services and remain engaged over longer periods may ultimately matter just as much. Nutrition products, sports programmes and digital services are not simply adjacent businesses; they are ways of strengthening that relationship.<\/span><\/p>\n

That reflects the economics of the sector itself.<\/span><\/p>\n

Unlike software companies, wellness businesses cannot scale simply by adding users. Every additional member eventually requires physical space, trainers, equipment and consistent service. Growth therefore depends not only on attracting customers but also on building relationships that last long enough to improve the economics of each member.<\/span><\/p>\n

India\u2019s consumers have already embraced wellness. Public markets are now likely to ask a different question: can wellness companies build habits strong enough to become durable businesses?<\/span><\/p>\n

Cult.fit\u2019s IPO will not answer that question on its own. But it marks a moment when the conversation around India’s wellness industry is beginning to shift from how quickly it can grow to how sustainably it can grow.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"SIP_Kuvera\"<\/b><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Changing Gears<\/b><\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

Every time someone fills up a petrol tank today, they are taking part in one of India\u2019s biggest energy transitions\u2014whether they realise it or not.<\/span><\/p>\n

For most motorists, that isn\u2019t the point. They expect the fuel to get them where they need to go. For policymakers, however, that same litre of petrol is expected to do something more: reduce India\u2019s dependence on imported crude oil, lower emissions and create a larger market for crops such as sugarcane and maize.<\/span><\/p>\n

Few policies illustrate the gap between national priorities and everyday experience as clearly as India\u2019s ethanol-blending programme.<\/span><\/p>\n

In April, India made E20 (petrol blended with 20% ethanol) the standard fuel available at petrol stations across the country, achieving its target five years ahead of schedule.<\/span><\/p>\n

For years, the discussions around ethanol-blended petrol focused largely on national objectives. But, over the past few days, the conversation has shifted to fuel efficiency, servicing costs and whether older vehicles are fully compatible with the higher ethanol blend.<\/span><\/p>\n

Consumer complaints spilled into the public domain, with motorists protesting in Delhi. Opposition leaders called on automakers to clarify the compatibility of older vehicles with E20. The government dismissed many of the concerns as misinformation, saying the fuel had been introduced only after extensive testing.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In an unusual show of unity, representatives of several automakers publicly defended the programme, saying years of testing and service records had found no evidence of widespread engine damage. They did, however, acknowledge that E20 typically results in a fuel-efficiency loss of around 3% to 3.5% because ethanol contains less energy than petrol.<\/span><\/p>\n

The debate has also highlighted another question: how quickly should a transition unfold?<\/span><\/p>\n

Brazil, often cited by Indian policymakers as the benchmark for ethanol adoption, spent decades building an ethanol-compatible vehicle fleet before moving to higher blends. India compressed a similar shift into roughly three years, moving from E10 to E20 well ahead of its original timeline.<\/span><\/p>\n

Critics argue that many vehicles currently on Indian roads were designed for lower ethanol blends and that consumers have had limited time to adapt. The government maintains that the faster rollout reflects years of testing and the country\u2019s strategic need to reduce dependence on imported fuel.<\/span><\/p>\n

What remains uncertain is how consumers will experience the policy over longer periods.<\/span><\/p>\n

Publicly available long-term scientific evidence that conclusively settles the debate remains limited, leaving room for competing claims and continuing uncertainty. That uncertainty is, in many ways, the story.<\/span><\/p>\n

The broader objectives of ethanol blending have not fundamentally changed. India still wants to reduce oil imports, improve energy security and encourage cleaner fuels. What has changed is the conversation around implementation.<\/span><\/p>\n

Policymakers tend to measure the programme in terms of barrels of oil imports avoided and ethanol-blending targets achieved. Motorists experience it through kilometres per litre, servicing bills and the performance of their own vehicles.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Both perspectives are valid. They simply operate at different levels.<\/span><\/p>\n

That is often the nature of large economic transitions.<\/span><\/p>\n

The benefits are usually spread across the economy. The costs, at least initially, are often experienced one household at a time. Whether the transition involves cleaner fuels, renewable energy or new technologies, public acceptance depends not only on where the policy is headed but also on how people experience the journey.<\/span><\/p>\n

For investors, that distinction is worth remembering. Markets often focus on the destination. Over time, however, implementation shapes outcomes just as much as ambition. Every transition is judged twice: first by the goals it sets, and later by how those goals are experienced in everyday life.<\/span><\/p>\n

India\u2019s ethanol programme has entered that second phase.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The debate this week suggests that the next stage of the transition may depend less on setting new targets and more on building confidence that the road to those targets is as carefully managed as the destination itself.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Beyond the Grey<\/b><\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

Just like ethanol blending, another area that is increasingly attracting policymakers\u2019 attention is cryptocurrency.<\/span><\/p>\n

For several years, the sector has operated in a regulatory grey area. Trading in cryptocurrencies has remained legal, but India has not introduced a comprehensive regulatory framework. The government imposed a tax on virtual digital assets in 2022 while maintaining that any broader policy would have to consider international developments. During that period, millions of Indians continued to buy and sell cryptocurrencies despite the absence of dedicated regulation.<\/span><\/p>\n

This week\u2019s developments illustrate why that ambiguity is becoming harder to maintain.<\/span><\/p>\n

According to a report by Reuters news agency citing internal government documents, different parts of the government continue to view cryptocurrencies through different lenses. It said that the Reserve Bank of India has reiterated its long-standing concerns that crypto assets could pose risks to monetary and financial stability while the tax department has warned that offshore exchanges and digital assets create challenges for tax compliance and enforcement. Other departments are examining issues such as accounting treatment and the broader regulatory framework.<\/span><\/p>\n

Taken together, the discussions point to a broader shift. The debate is becoming less about whether cryptocurrencies should exist and more about how a growing market should be governed. That marks a different phase in India\u2019s relationship with crypto.<\/span><\/p>\n

The concerns raised by different agencies are not identical, but they are increasingly converging. The RBI is focused on financial stability. Tax authorities are concerned about transparency, under-reporting of income and transactions routed through overseas platforms. Together, they reflect a growing recognition that a market of this size cannot be viewed only as a technological curiosity.<\/span><\/p>\n

That doesn\u2019t necessarily make the policy choice any simpler.<\/span><\/p>\n

Regulating a new technology often involves balancing competing risks rather than eliminating them. A clearer framework could improve transparency, consumer protection and tax compliance. At the same time, regulators remain wary that formal regulation could be interpreted as official acceptance of an asset class they continue to view with caution.<\/span><\/p>\n

India is not alone in confronting that dilemma. Around the world, governments have gradually shifted from debating whether cryptocurrencies should exist to deciding how exchanges should be licensed, how digital assets should be taxed and what safeguards consumers require.<\/span><\/p>\n

For investors, that shift is significant. Markets generally adapt more easily to clear rules than to prolonged uncertainty. Regulation does not remove risk, but it often makes those risks easier to identify and assess. The question facing policymakers is therefore no longer simply whether cryptocurrencies deserve regulation, but what kind of regulation best balances innovation, financial stability and consumer protection.<\/span><\/p>\n

The outcome remains uncertain. India may ultimately choose tighter restrictions, a more comprehensive regulatory framework or a combination of the two. But this week’s developments suggest that cryptocurrencies have entered a different stage of their evolution. They are no longer simply testing the limits of technology. They are testing how financial systems respond when innovation outgrows the rules written for an earlier era.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Trust by Design<\/b><\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

Like cryptocurrencies, another digital market that has exploded in recent years is online shopping. A large number of startups as well as multinational giants have entered the market and millions of dollars in investments have flowed into it. Competition has intensified and businesses are experimenting with different tactics to lure and retain consumers.<\/span><\/p>\n

One such tactic is increasingly coming into focus and almost everyone who shops online has encountered it.<\/span><\/p>\n

The subscription that takes one click to start but several screens to cancel. The countdown timer that seems to reset every time a page is refreshed. The extra charge that appears only at the final stage of payment. Individually, these moments may seem trivial. Together, they reveal how digital design can influence the choices consumers make.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Such practices are known as \u201cdark patterns\u201d. The issue received fresh attention this week after a study by consumer community platform LocalCircles found that 95% of India\u2019s leading listed digital companies used at least one dark pattern. The study, based on an assessment of more than 300 digital platforms, is not a regulatory audit. Even so, it has reignited a debate that regulators have been gradually taking more seriously.<\/span><\/p>\n

The timing is significant. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is currently consulting on a Common Advertisement Code for entities it regulates. Among other provisions, the draft code proposes prohibiting misleading digital practices, including dark patterns, in advertisements and investor-facing communications. Separately, the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) has issued guidelines identifying different categories of dark patterns and has stepped up scrutiny of deceptive online practices.<\/span><\/p>\n

These are separate developments. Together, however, they suggest that regulators are paying closer attention to how businesses interact with consumers in the digital world.<\/span><\/p>\n

That represents a subtle shift. For years, discussions around corporate governance have rightly focused on issues such as financial disclosures, board oversight, regulatory compliance and the protection of shareholder interests. Those questions remain fundamental. But as commerce increasingly moves online, regulators are also paying closer attention to another dimension of business quality: the choices consumers encounter every time they open an app or visit a website.<\/span><\/p>\n

Not every design feature that encourages a purchase is deceptive. Recommending products, simplifying navigation and personalising offers are standard parts of digital commerce. The concern arises when design begins to obscure information, create false urgency or make it difficult for consumers to decline, cancel or compare options.<\/span><\/p>\n

That distinction matters because trust\u2014among customers, regulators and investors alike\u2014has become one of the most valuable assets digital businesses possess.<\/span><\/p>\n

Companies often compete through user experience as much as through price or product quality. A smooth digital journey can strengthen customer relationships. A confusing or manipulative one may increase short-term conversions, but it can also invite regulatory scrutiny and gradually erode consumer confidence.<\/span><\/p>\n

For investors, this is an important development to watch. The methods companies use to generate growth have always mattered. Increasingly, regulators appear interested not only in the outcomes businesses deliver but also in the design choices through which those outcomes are achieved. Customer experience is beginning to move beyond the realm of product design and into the broader conversation around business quality.<\/span><\/p>\n

This week\u2019s developments do not suggest that governance has been redefined. The LocalCircles findings are not regulatory conclusions, and SEBI\u2019s consultation is focused specifically on advertisements by regulated entities. But taken alongside the CCPA\u2019s guidelines, they point towards a broader trend.<\/span><\/p>\n

Good governance has always depended on trust. As more commerce shifts online, that trust is likely to be shaped not only by what companies disclose to investors, but also by what they design for their customers.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"FD_Kuvera\"<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Market wrap<\/b><\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

India\u2019s stock market benchmarks ended lower this week, ending a four-week-long gaining streak, as a revival in tensions between the US and Iran as well as a spike in crude oil prices damped sentiment.<\/span><\/p>\n

Both the Nifty 50 and the Sensex lost 0.3% each, thanks mainly to a 2.1% drop on Wednesday after the US and Iran launched strikes against each other. In the broader market, the mid-caps climbed 1.4% and the small-caps rose 1.3%. As many as nine of 16 major sectors recorded weekly losses.<\/span><\/p>\n

Retailer Trent was the top Nifty loser, slumped 13.1% after its April-June revenue projection missed analysts\u2019 expectations.<\/span><\/p>\n

Drugmaker Dr Reddy\u2019s Labs sank 9.5% this week, its worst in three years, after saying supplies of \u200cits generic semaglutide for diabetes would be disrupted due to quality issues.<\/span><\/p>\n

Kotak Mahindra Bank, Max Healthcare, Maruti Suzuki, NTPC, ITC and Adani Ports were among the other major losers. IT stocks were mixed, with TCS and Wipro ending in the red but Tech Mahindra, Infosys and HCL Tech managing to close in the green.<\/span><\/p>\n

SBI Life Insurance was the top performer this week, rising more than 4%. It was followed by Bajaj Auto. ONGC, Eternal, Titan, Sun Pharma and Hindalco also ended higher. Heavyweights HDFC Bank and Reliance Industries also edged higher this week.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Other Headlines<\/b><\/h3>\n