&w=3840&q=100)
NSE reliance on top 10 brokers falls to 48.3% in FY25, says Sebi report
According to the Securities and Exchange Board of India's (Sebi's) annual report, the share of clients contributed by the top 10 brokers on NSE fell to 48.3 per cent in 2024-25 (FY25), from 63.7 per cent in FY24.
Market experts attribute this trend to NSE's expanded investor outreach in non-metro areas.
'NSE's awareness programmes in smaller cities have encouraged more individuals to invest. Many of these new accounts are coming through local brokers in tier-2 and tier-3 centres. At the same time, we are also seeing fresh entrants among brokers,' said K Suresh, president of the Association of National Exchanges Members of India (Anmi).
Interestingly, while client concentration has eased, the turnover share of top 10 brokers has inched up — rising from 38.6 per cent to 41.5 per cent over the same period.
The trend is visible on the BSE as well. The share of its top 10 brokers in gross turnover jumped to 54.3 per cent in FY25 from 47.6 per cent in FY24.
In terms of client base, the share of the top 10 brokers of the BSE nearly doubled to 32.6 per cent, from 17.7 per cent.
At a broader level, market concentration remains high. The top 100 brokers still account for 90.6 per cent of the cash market turnover.
Meanwhile, Sebi's data shows the top 100 scrips contributed 50.5 per cent of cash market turnover in FY25, lower than 52.7 per cent in the previous year, suggesting a marginal widening of trading activity beyond the most liquid stocks.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
44 minutes ago
- Time of India
B L Kashyap & Sons' net profit declines 46.39% Q1 FY26
NEW DELHI: B.L. Kashyap and Sons has reported a decline of 46.39 per cent in its net consolidated profit during the quarter ended June 30, 2025. Its profit after tax stood at ₹10.85 crore in Q1 FY26 as against ₹20.24 crore in the corresponding quarter of the previous fiscal, the company said in a BSE filing. The company's net consolidated total income stood at ₹339.13 crore in Q1 FY26, a dip of 3.85 per cent from ₹352.71 crore it recorded in the similar quarter last year. Vineet Kashyap , managing director of the company said, "The sharp improvement in EBITDA quarter-on-quarter is a direct outcome of our strategic focus on high-margin projects, operational efficiencies, and technology adoption. With a robust order book, significant new wins, and a healthy project pipeline, we are confident of sustaining our growth trajectory and creating long-term value for our stakeholders." The order book stood at ₹3,215.54 crore as on June 30, 2025. It secured new orders worth ₹1,219 crore in July 2025.
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
Taxman hunts for clues on 'control' of Jane St India
As the taxman cobbles together a case against the US investor Jane Street , it has summoned EY , the auditor of Jane's Indian arm. The tax office has also taken sworn statements from two employees and a director of the Jane local entity. The income tax (I-T) department, it is believed, is trying to fish out details from the auditor and Jane's employees here following a six-day survey which did not result in accessing adequate information locked in offshore servers. Details Sought The tax office wants to figure out the location of traders of Jane's Indian firm and who called the shots, according to the information sought by the department in its communications to Jane that followed the survey, sources told ET. "From the line of questioning so far, it appears that the department's focus is to know where Jane Street's Indian subsidiary received its instructions from," said a person familiar with the matter. "In this context, they could question EY on the details of its letter of engagement, who all it deals with, and from where it received data. This could indicate where the people taking decisions on behalf of Jane India are based, even though this may not be enough," said the person. An EY spokesperson declined to comment on the matter. Live Events If tax officials can establish that the Jane's proprietary trading arm in India was only a shadow of the foreign entity, and was simply carrying on the business of the parent group which was giving all the instructions, then it can disallow the losses of the local company. This would mean Jane India can't carry forward the losses and would have to pay tax on its future profits. "However, for the tax office this would be a comparatively smaller scoring point. In claiming tax on Jane's profits, it must weave this point to raise the larger issue-i.e, putting a question mark on the treaty benefits enjoyed by Jane Singapore and Hong Kong," said another person. In building a bigger case, the regular must convince that the different Jane outfits, located in India, Singapore, and Hong Kong, were all acting in collusion to escape tax and this posed an 'impermissible avoidance arrangement'-a plan whose main purpose is to obtain tax benefit. Treaty benefits can be claimed only for bona-fide transactions. According to the allegations by the regulator, Jane used its Indian outfits to take positions in cash and stock futures while the Singapore and Hong Kong entities, which are Sebi-registered foreign portfolio investors (FPIs), took large bets in equity options. The trades in India influenced the prices, enabling FPIs to make huge profits-the bulk of which was booked by the Singapore FPI that paid no tax on the derivative profits, thanks to the India-Singapore tax treaty. "Establishing that Jane's India operations were an extension of its overseas business may be comparatively easier than denying treaty benefits and imposing tax on Jane Singapore. However, proving Jane India was a sham would certainly help Sebi ," said a senior lawyer. Tax Angle It is widely believed that the probe into possible tax violations by Jane Street may have been partly at the instance of Sebi which has senior IRS officer Kamlesh Varshney as a whole-time member. Sources said that the New York law firm Sullivan & Cromwell is understood to be advising Jane Street. "When it comes to information and data sharing with other governments, foreign investors hire top legal help to choose what to share. If it decides not to part with some data, maybe on grounds of the privacy law of that country, it must give a proper justification," said a legal expert. Only at a later stage, the tax department could consider approaching Singapore and Hong Kong authorities to seek data on Jane's operations there under the information sharing agreements.
Mint
4 hours ago
- Mint
Sebi mulls relaxing minimum public offer size for large cos; retains retail quota of 35% in IPO
New Delhi, Aug 18 (PTI) Capital markets regulator Sebi on Monday proposed relaxing the minimum public offer requirements for very large companies, while also extending the timelines for them to meet minimum public shareholding norms. The proposed framework, if implemented, aims to ease the immediate dilution burden on issuers, while still ensuring gradual compliance with public shareholding requirements. As part of this approach, Sebi has suggested retaining the retail quota at 35 per cent, in line with the existing regulations. Instead of reducing retail participation, the regulator is looking to address issuer concerns by amending rules related to minimum public offer thresholds. This marks a shift from its earlier consultation paper, issued on July 31, which had proposed cutting the retail quota for IPOs above ₹ 5,000 crore from 35 per cent to 25 per cent, citing difficulties faced by issuers in managing large issues. In its consultation paper, Sebi noted that very large issuers often struggle to dilute substantial stakes through an IPO, as the market may not be able to absorb such a large supply of shares. The proposed framework, therefore, is aimed at making Indian listings more feasible for such companies. Currently, large companies are required to offer a higher percentage of their shareholding to the public upfront, which often results in massive IPO sizes. These can be difficult for the market to absorb and may discourage companies from coming to the domestic market. Under the proposed rules, however, instead of adhering to a fixed high percentage, large issuers will have the flexibility to start with smaller IPOs and gradually meet shareholding requirements over a longer period. For instance, companies with a market capitalisation between ₹ 50,000 crore and ₹ 1 lakh crore will need to make a minimum public offer (MPO) of at least ₹ 1,000 crore and 8 per cent of post-issue capital, with the 25 per cent minimum public shareholding (MPS) target to be achieved within five years. For those with a market capitalisation between ₹ 1 lakh crore and ₹ 5 lakh crore, the MPO will be ₹ 6,250 crore and at least 2.75 per cent of post-issue capital. In such cases, if public shareholding at the time of listing is below 15 per cent, it should be raised to 15 per cent within five years and 25 per cent within 10 years. However, if public shareholding is already 15 per cent or more at listing, the 25 per cent threshold should be met within five years. In the case of companies valued at over ₹ 5 lakh crore, the proposed MPO will be ₹ 15,000 crore and at least 1 per cent of post-issue capital, subject to a minimum dilution of 2.5 per cent. In this case too, issuers with less than 15 per cent public shareholding at listing will be given up to 10 years to reach the 25 per cent mark, while those already above 15 per cent will need to achieve the same within five years. Sebi pointed out that this staggered approach would reduce the pressure of large-scale dilution immediately after listing. It would also prevent an "oversupply of shares in the market". This anticipation of further dilution may impact the share prices, despite strong company fundamentals, and may adversely impact existing public shareholders. In recent years, entities such as Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) and Hyundai Motor India have undertaken large IPOs. At the same time, IPO sizes have been growing steadily, with the average mainboard issue rising to ₹ 2,057 crore in 2024-25 from ₹ 1,488 crore in 2019-20. Currently, firms with a market capitalisation of up to ₹ 1,600 crore must list with 25 per cent public shareholding at the time of IPO. Medium-sized companies, valued between ₹ 1,600 crore and ₹ 1,00,000 crore, are allowed a lower MPO of 10-25 per cent, with a timeline of three to five years to achieve the 25 per cent MPS. In contrast, very large companies with a market capitalisation above ₹ 1 lakh crore are presently required to make an MPO of ₹ 5,000 crore or at least 5 per cent, and then raise their public shareholding to 10 per cent within two years and 25 per cent within five years. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) has sought public comments on the proposals till September 8.
