logo
Market's next big cue may come from earnings and rural revival: Shiv Puri

Market's next big cue may come from earnings and rural revival: Shiv Puri

Economic Times6 hours ago

Agencies The second thing is technology matters and they are able to invest and upgrade much better than some of the smaller names.
"One thing that we have clearly seen over the last 12 months is a tightening of unsecured personal lending and that was done correctly because there was a lot of issues happening out there. But as that outlook changes, you are going to see consumption also get a tailwind," says Shiv Puri, TVF Capital Advisors.
Other than large private banks, is there anywhere else where you are seeing some hope of positivity, you have been upbeat on healthcare for quite some time now, any views on that?
Shiv Puri: Within healthcare one of the areas that we have been very optimistic on is in hospitals, but then again, it is an area to be very careful about because hospitals are actually a very difficult business, but if done correctly are one of the best businesses you could own. And there are some operators here who are able to deliver quality healthcare, attract the right kind of patients, attract the right kind of doctors, understand the capital allocation process very well and therefore deliver very high return on capital and healthcare is underpenetrated in India. So, if you are able to build that trust with consumers, the runway for growth is very long.
I just wanted to touch upon the consumption space because India has been one of those biggest consumption stories and of late, we have seen government also taking some steps with respect to RBI cuts, tax cuts as well. Do you believe that there are good opportunities to still play this particular sector or the valuation comfort is still there?
Shiv Puri: Well, consumption is very broad in India. So, you could have something like FMCG that could be pretty highly penetrated and very competitive as well and you could have certain areas like retail where their runway for growth is very long. So, within the broad theme of consumption, the Indian markets are very underpenetrated, but you have to be very selective in terms of where you look in that stories. One thing that we have clearly seen over the last 12 months is a tightening of unsecured personal lending and that was done correctly because there was a lot of issues happening out there. But as that outlook changes, you are going to see consumption also get a tailwind. When you talk retail, while that may be as basic as buying a particular thing, the format of how you buy is where the sizable opportunity is, everything from quick commerce to traditional retail and unfortunate as it may be the listed pool is very-very limited. So where is it within retail that you find those opportunities and you think there is that longer runway?
Shiv Puri: So, again one of the things that we have looked at in India is that typically if a business is very difficult, it is a double-edged sword because it means that it is hard to make money but it also means it is harder for other people to enter. And if you look at retailing, if you look at fashion retailing, these are businesses that are very difficult to do, but you do have success stories. I mean, one of the largest wealth creators globally are basically owners of retail chains whether it is online or offline.
And so in India, if you have a company that has been working on that for a number of years is obviously doing really well and it is still in only a few hundred cities, but a lot more expansion that can happen that is where the opportunity lies.
Do you believe the premiumization wave that we have seen across consumption, do you believe that that play is still very much present in the market because if you talk about the entire consumption space compared to FMCG, pure play, consumption discretionary that has done much better. Would you be placing your bets in that segment?
Shiv Puri: The premiumization wave has a long way to go and it is both good and bad. The good is, of course, it creates opportunities in different sectors within consumer discretionary. The bad is the consumer base is not broadening out as well as we would like for that to happen in India. So, you are seeing more wealth getting concentrated and therefore, that is creating opportunity especially in leisure and travel and services, but in other areas where there are a lot of different companies out there, it would be great to see the consumer base broaden out a lot more.
But again, this consumer discretionary is a big basket which is playing. So, any select or any subsegment that is your preferred bet right now, be it autos, be it retail that we just touched upon?
Shiv Puri: I would say in retail there are a couple of plays that are really interesting. I think areas like autos, etc, are not something that we have looked at very closely, tend to be very competitive.
Oh yes, that is indeed. But give us some sense that where is the next big cue for the markets can come from because we are amidst that global uncertainty, the tariff, some experts do believe that the worst is rather behind and now the negotiations in and on will take place and yes, of course, the earning season is also through. So, where is the next big cue can be lying for the markets?
Shiv Puri: Interestingly in markets in India the cue ends up being earnings coming through and the markets tend to react to it. And so, like I said earlier, if two-and-a-half of the three are in place, you are in a good position for the markets to respond. And based on some of the areas where we are talking about, which is increased credit availability, rural pickup, government capex spend, you could see a pickup in earnings with a favourable base effect and all of that could then therefore mean a positive outcome for the market.
I just want to get back to the point that you were making on financials because I mean, traditionally you thought financials, private banks or maybe a few larger PSBs as well but now you have got that regulatory backing, you have got the central bank making the moves which only makes financials extremely attractive and the larger pool right, I mean everything from even insurance plays, etc, put in over there and, of course, NBFCs. Is it time to look at bottom-up stories there or still stick by with the leaders in financials?
Shiv Puri: In financials, one of the things we have observed is scale matters and therefore, the big tend to be able to withstand uncertainties much better than the smaller balance sheets. The second thing is technology matters and they are able to invest and upgrade much better than some of the smaller names. And so in financials, you do see accidents happen and that is part of it globally and so as long as you do not let that happen to you which is not just about lending, it is about culture, it is about a whole lot of different things, then just by the fact that accidents happen to other firms means you get stronger and so therefore some of these firms are still very well positioned because India is still under penetrated credit market. We have not reached any level of saturation yet.
So, financials, healthcare, consumer discretionary, anything else that you are bullish on or buying?
Shiv Puri: That would be enough to do well in the markets.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Samsung R&D Institute, IIT Madras sign MoU to drive research on AI for Indian Languages, HealthTech & more
Samsung R&D Institute, IIT Madras sign MoU to drive research on AI for Indian Languages, HealthTech & more

Hindustan Times

time7 minutes ago

  • Hindustan Times

Samsung R&D Institute, IIT Madras sign MoU to drive research on AI for Indian Languages, HealthTech & more

Samsung R&D Institute, Noida (SRI-N) has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Madras with a focus on pioneering advancements in AI for Indian languages, HealthTech and emerging areas such as Generative AI. The partnership is aimed at driving collaborative research, accelerate technology development, and nurture future-ready talent. The five-year MoU was signed by Kyungyun Roo, Managing Director, SRI-N and Prof. V. Kamakoti, Director of IIT Madras, a press statement informed. Also read: IIT Delhi accepting applications for 'Certificate Programme in Data Science & Machine Learning', check course details As part of this MoU, a wide range of collaborative activities, including sponsored research projects, consultancy projects, technology licensing, trainings, facility development and sponsorship of student fellowships in future will be offered. Highlighting about this partnership, SRI-N Managing Director Kyungyun Roo said that the collaboration with IIT Madras marks an important step towards co-creating solutions that are meaningful, inclusive, and future-ready. 'Together, we aim to enhance the Galaxy AI ecosystem with deeper integration of Indian regional languages and contribute to breaking language barriers across the country. In addition, we are engaging in co-development of emerging technology and enhancement of skill sets,' Roo added. Also read: IIT Delhi to offer 'B. Tech. in Design' for JEE Advanced 2025 qualifiers, know about the four-year UG programme IIT Madras Director Prof. V. Kamakoti, expressed delight and said that the institute was proud to partner with SRI-N, adding that the partnership will sponsor 'revolutionary research and technological development through effective utilization of AI technology.' 'In the fast-changing tech landscape, the MoU will upskill beneficiaries to develop strong connection between theoretical knowledge and practical industry solutions required to mitigate risks and address uncertainty,' Prof. Kamakoti stated. Also read: From AI to Health Tech: IIT Madras introduces two new Programs for 2025 admissions, check details, career options Worth mentioning here, SRI-Noida already has a growing network of academic collaborations with long-term strategic MoUs with institutes like IIT Delhi, IIT Kanpur, IIT Bombay and IIT Ropar. SRI-Noida will sponsor research and development (R&D) projects, which may be conducted at IIT Madras, the company's premises or through a collaborative arrangement at both locations.

Deal or No Deal? Inside India's high-stakes trade gamble with the US
Deal or No Deal? Inside India's high-stakes trade gamble with the US

India Today

time8 minutes ago

  • India Today

Deal or No Deal? Inside India's high-stakes trade gamble with the US

When Indian and American negotiators sat across the table in New Delhi from June 5 to 7, the atmosphere was businesslike but charged. The stakes were higher than ever. On one side stood President Donald Trump, newly re-elected, charging into his second term with economic nationalism as his war cry. On the other, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, having just secured a third term, was recalibrating India's global economic engagement with a sharpened sense of sovereignty. The long-pending limited trade deal between India and the United States—which had simmered unresolved since Trump's first tenure—was back on the table, but under new political compulsions and strategic calculations. India and the US aim to double bilateral trade to $500 billion by Washington, this deal is no longer about symbolism or goodwill. The Trump administration, determined to rewrite global trade on its own terms, sees the Indian market as both an untapped export opportunity and a strategic wedge against Chinese dominance. But unlike in earlier phases, there is little appetite for compromise in Trump's America. Every trade pact must now deliver visible benefits for American jobs and exporters. Anything less risks being branded a loss—especially in the high-decibel domestic climate leading into the 2026 US midterms. The President has repeatedly signalled that past arrangements were too generous to countries like India, which he claims have long taken advantage of American openness. With this in mind, US trade officials arrived in Delhi with a short but pointed agenda—remove tariff barriers, open up sensitive sectors, and secure digital and regulatory commitments that align with corporate America's however, is not the same player it was during earlier trade rounds. Over the past few years, New Delhi has rebuilt its strategic and economic confidence. Its global standing has improved, its exports diversified, and its domestic market deepened. But more importantly, there has been a clear shift in how trade is approached in policy circles—moving from passive liberalisation to active negotiation. India is no longer eager to sign deals merely for optics or as diplomatic sweeteners. The experience of asymmetric free trade agreements in the past, and the lessons from rejecting the Regional Comprehensive Economic Cooperation (RCEP), have deeply informed the present of 2025, India is in talks with major partners, including the EU and ASEAN, while also exploring new agreements with Africa, Latin America and the Arab Gulf. The emphasis now is on aligning trade with national development goals, safeguarding regulatory space, and building domestic capabilities in key sectors such as digital infrastructure, clean energy and What makes this negotiation different is not just the hardened positions on both sides but the strong presence of ideological and institutional voices in India pushing back against what they perceive as a lopsided deal. Over the past months, affiliates of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, including the Swadeshi Jagran Manch, have flagged several red lines for Indian negotiators. These are not merely academic critiques but deeply rooted ideological objections that enjoy resonance in key segments of the ruling political ecosystem. Encouragingly for them, India's official position appears to be largely aligned with many of their another letter from 20 former officials—including former cabinet secretary K.M. Chandrasekhar, G.K. Pillai, Ujal Singh Bhatia, Amarendra Khatua and Sanjaya Baru—along with some economists, cautioned New Delhi to 'walk away' from a lopsided deal. They note that without a trade promotion authority in the US, any concessions would be limited to Trump-era executive tariffs—not durable legal changes—and that compromising India's core interests today could result in long-term sovereignty loss. In short, they argue that temporarily closed doors on US markets may be better than structurally weakened regulatory Sangh affiliates have their own set of red flags, but at the top of the list is digital sovereignty. The US wants binding commitments on cross-border data flows, curbs on data localisation and relaxed regulation for American digital firms operating in India. Indian negotiators have reportedly resisted these asks. There is a growing recognition in New Delhi that accepting such provisions would jeopardise the integrity of India's digital public infrastructure—UPI, Aadhaar, DigiLocker, ONDC—all of which are premised on public control over data and technology ecosystems. The fear is that Big Tech companies could use trade deals as Trojan horses to dismantle domestic regulatory autonomy, reduce accountability and monopolise critical sectors. For the Swadeshi camp, this is not just a technical debate—it is about ensuring that India's digital future is not outsourced to Silicon Valley giants under the garb of free major point of friction lies in the area of intellectual property rights, especially in pharmaceuticals. The US pharma lobby has long pressured India to adopt TRIPS-plus provisions—ranging from extended patent terms and patent linkage to the dilution of compulsory licensing. But for India, these are red lines. The country's success as the world's leading supplier of affordable generics, including vaccines, depends on a flexible intellectual property regime that prioritises public health over monopolies. The battle over Section 3(d) of the Indian Patents Act—designed to prevent evergreening of patents—is emblematic of the larger ideological divide. Domestic lobbies and health policy experts have argued that compromising on this front would not only increase the cost of medicines for Indian citizens but also damage India's global standing as the pharmacy of the Global agriculture front has also emerged as a flashpoint. The US has pushed for greater market access for genetically modified crops, chlorine-washed poultry and hormone-treated dairy products. For Indian negotiators, this is politically and economically sensitive territory. Indian farmers operate in vastly different conditions—small holdings, traditional practices and a deep reliance on biodiversity. Introducing GMOs or industrial food products without adequate safeguards could destabilise local supply chains, damage soil health and displace small farmers. The RSS and its affiliates have repeatedly warned against diluting the precautionary principle in food safety, pointing out that long-term food sovereignty cannot be compromised for short-term tariff Trump administration's insistence on restoring tariff benefits under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) only if India allows market access for such products has complicated the talks further. Indian negotiators have remained firm, citing consumer safety, regulatory autonomy and domestic sensitivities. With Washington pushing hard for its agro-export lobbies, especially on GM corn, soy and dairy, Indian officials worry such concessions could open the floodgates for unsustainable imports and threaten food security. This deadlock underscores the deeper tensions between trade liberalisation and India's developmental and agricultural contentious American demand is the inclusion of an Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanism, which would allow US firms to sue the Indian government in international arbitration forums if they believe domestic laws have hurt their profits. The Indian side has reportedly flatly rejected this, consistent with its stance in other FTAs over the past decade. ISDS provisions are viewed as a serious threat to India's sovereign policy space and judicial process. Past experiences with multinational disputes have made it clear that such mechanisms often bypass domestic courts and leave the country exposed to disproportionate liabilities. The Swadeshi camp argues that any dispute resolution framework must be reciprocal, limited in scope and rooted in Indian legal the big-ticket issues, there are more subtle but equally significant concerns. American negotiators have insisted on liberalisation in strategic sectors such as e-commerce, defence production, clean energy and agri-logistics. While India has opened selectively in these areas, full-scale liberalisation without safeguards could be disastrous for local firms, cooperatives and startups. The domestic lobby advocates a calibrated approach—one that combines FDI caps, localisation mandates and domestic value-addition norms to protect India's long-term industrial is also unease about the growing trend of inserting side chapters in trade agreements—covering labour standards, gender rights, environmental norms and civil society engagement. While these may appear progressive, Swadeshi voices caution that they often serve as pressure points for future litigation or reputational coercion. The preference is for India to evolve its own ESG standards, rooted in its civilisational values, livelihood priorities and federal structure—not adopt imported frameworks that may not suit Indian there is growing awareness that trade liberalisation often overlooks cultural and traditional knowledge systems—Ayurveda, handicrafts, tribal knowledge and local foods—that don't fit into Western IPR definitions. These represent real economic capital for India, particularly for rural and indigenous communities. RSS affiliates have pushed for stronger protection of geographical indications, cultural commons and rural creative industries within trade rising chorus of Swadeshi caution has not gone unnoticed. Many of India's recent trade decisions—including the cautious pace of the FTA with the UK and the shelving of RCEP—reflect a deeper institutional consensus that unbalanced deals are no longer acceptable. Recent warnings by retired trade negotiators and policy veterans have only added weight to this stance. They argue that New Delhi must be ready to walk away if the deal appears skewed, urging the government not to trade long-term autonomy for short-term optics. The sentiment is increasingly shared by officials across ministries: India can afford patience, but not policy the American side is feeling the pressure to deliver. Trump's trade doctrine, powered by his electoral calculus, leaves little room for nuanced diplomacy. Deals must be announced with a bang. Benefits must be quantifiable. And foreign governments must be shown to have conceded. In such an environment, India's insistence on a balanced, development-friendly deal risks being read in Washington as resistance. Yet New Delhi appears ready to absorb that cost, preferring friction over latest round in New Delhi ended without a final breakthrough, but with enough movement to suggest the door remains open. Both sides are expected to hold another round later this summer. But the message from India is increasingly clear: the era of trade policy as a diplomatic concession is over. What replaces it is a new framework—pragmatic, sovereign and deeply aware of the ideological choices embedded in every clause. For a country aspiring to be Vishwaguru, mastering the art of tradecraft is no longer optional. It is a strategic to India Today Magazine

China's rare-earth curbs hit Indian auto industry
China's rare-earth curbs hit Indian auto industry

India Today

time8 minutes ago

  • India Today

China's rare-earth curbs hit Indian auto industry

(NOTE: This article was originally published in the India Today issue dated June 16, 2025)The US-China tariff war may have ostensibly eased into a softer phase of negotiations, but one stealth missile fired by China in its early days has only hit home now. The potential fallout is global, and India is very much within range. On April 4, two days after President Donald Trump's tariff blitz, Beijing had hit back by calling halt to its export of rare earth magnets. China controls over 90 per cent of the global processing capacity for this key component, used in everything from automobiles and fighter jets to robotics and home appliances. As it leverages this monopoly by slow-rolling licences, stockpiles everywhere are falling as rapidly as alarm is imported 870 tonnes of these magnets worth over Rs 300 crore in FY25, mostly from China, as domestic production capacity remains negligible. Now, though, Chinese exporters must themselves obtain government licences, furnishing detailed end-use certificates from Indian buyers, before shipping. The certificates need to be signed by India's foreign ministry and the Chinese embassy, apparently to ensure the end-use is not military. This knot has held up clearances and shipments. Industry sources say over 30 applications approved in India are already pending final clearance in China. AUTO SECTOR IN A BIND It has been a month since China put this squeeze on exports, and whatever inventory Indian auto companies had as a buffer is fast getting depleted and may dry up by June-end. Rare earth magnets, particularly neodymium-iron-boron ones, are essential in electric as well as conventional vehicles—they go into motors, steering, brakes, wipers and audio equipment. With no clarity on normalisation of imports, manufacturers are staring at a significant cut in groups are in some panic. A joint delegation comprising representatives from the Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers and the Automotive Component Manufacturers Association is set to meet senior Chinese government officials to accelerate approvals and restore supply.'For some of these EV components, the whole supply chain resides in this doesn't change, the entire Indian EV industry will grind to a halt,' Rajiv Bajaj, chairman, Bajaj Auto, had warned in late April. On June 4, Rajan Wadhera, former president of Mahindra & Mahindra Auto and of industry body SIAM, wrote to Union heavy industries minister H.D. Kumaraswamy about the need to '...adopt a diversified, multi-pathway approach' since these magnets are 'indispensable to EVs', nearly 3 kg being needed per vehicle, against 100 grams in a conventional vehicle. 'The ban will begin to impact production by June-July,' says Sudarshan Venu, MD, TVS Motor. 'We're actively exploring ways to de-risk the situation, but there could be cost increases down the line.'A rare earth magnet, made from one of the 17 rare earth elements (lanthanide series, scandium, yttrium), is far superior to other industrial magnets. Rare earth metals aren't 'rare' as such, and are relatively abundant in the Earth's crust. However, they aren't found in pure concentrations, making it economically challenging to mine DOMINANCEChina produces 140,000 tonnes of rare earth metals annually, with the US a distant second, at 38,000 tonnes. In comparison, India's rare earths production capacity, mostly through state-owned IREL (formerly Indian Rare Earths Ltd), is just over 5,000 the new restrictions, several consignments are reportedly stranded at Chinese ports. Gaurav Vaangal, principal analyst with S&P Global in India, says the impact of China's clampdown can be mitigated by 'optimising the product mix to ensure production lines remain operational'. That said, continuous monitoring is essential, as the production line could experience significant disruptions—initially affecting EV components and later extending to ICE (internal combustion engine) parts, potentially leading to serious production challenges, he concedes. That challenge may hit the accelerator before solutions catch to India Today MagazineMust Watch

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store