OPINION | Beyond the Numbers: Why India’s financial inclusion score tells only half the story

Trust, usability, and empowerment are increasingly recognised as the real drivers of sustained participation in financial systems.

The Reserve Bank of India’s latest Financial Inclusion Index (FI-Index) score of 67 for FY 2025 has been rightly welcomed as a sign of progress. The steady rise from 64.2 in FY 2024 reflects continuing momentum towards broader and deeper access to formal finance. Among its three pillars—access, usage, and quality—the sharpest gain has come in access, which jumped from 61.7 to 73.3. This underlines how far the reach of banking infrastructure and digital services has expanded in recent years.

India has travelled a long distance from the days when opening a bank account meant queuing outside a branch with multiple documents. Today, the scale is unmatched: 886 million internet users, of which 488 million are rural; UPI processing 185.8 billion transactions worth ₹261 lakh crore in FY 2025, up 41% year-on-year; more than 51 crore Jan Dhan accounts opened since inception. By almost any measure, the scaffolding of inclusion has been built.

Yet these achievements leave one question unanswered: does the index capture the lived experience of financial inclusion—or just its infrastructure?

Access is often the easiest milestone to achieve, and understandably, the most celebrated. But opening a bank account is not the same as using one. A downloaded app that never becomes habit does not change financial behaviour. Engagement—frequency, ease, trust, and adaptability—is the true litmus test of inclusion. For millions of first-time users, inclusion is as much about perception as infrastructure.

This is why the conversation must move beyond structural measures to experiential ones. Globally, trust, usability, and empowerment are increasingly recognised as the real drivers of sustained participation in financial systems. A first-time borrower, a domestic worker, or a gig-economy earner may technically have access to formal finance, but experiences of loan rejection, complex paperwork, or poor customer support can erode confidence. For these segments, financial inclusion is not only about availability, but whether the system feels reliable, approachable, and designed for them.

A complementary 'Sentiment Index' could help bridge this gap. By measuring trust, ease of use, and confidence, such an index would ensure that access translates into meaningful engagement. It is not without challenges—surveys are costly and subjective—but the benefits would be significant. Policymaking would become more responsive to user realities, and product innovations could be shaped by what people feel, not just what they can access.

Even within the RBI’s emphasis on usage, volumes alone can sometimes paint an incomplete picture. If the majority of UPI transactions are concentrated in a handful of cities, it tells us little about rural adoption. Similarly, tracking only payments volumes does not reveal whether families are insured, whether women are saving consistently, or whether senior citizens can easily navigate digital interfaces. Usage should be understood through diversity and depth—across regions, genders, and product categories. That kind of granularity would transform the index from a scoreboard into a genuine diagnostic tool.

The purpose of such a tool should be to guide strategy. Where female participation is low, the response might include women-focused savings products or mentorship networks. Where rural belts show low insurance penetration, micro-insurance or bundled health cover could make a difference. Where senior citizens face barriers, voice-enabled banking and assisted models could ease the cognitive load. When numbers are tied to targeted interventions, inclusion metrics stop being abstract and start shaping real-world change.

Ultimately, the aspiration should go beyond inclusion to equity—ensuring that financial systems foster resilience, trust, and independence. A street vendor paying GST online, a domestic worker saving for her child’s education, or a farmer accessing credit in a drought are not just statistical entries. They are active participants in the economy, each carrying unique vulnerabilities and aspirations that must be reflected in our frameworks.

A score of 67 is worth celebrating, but it should also make us pause. Kenya’s M-Pesa shows us that transformation does not come from infrastructure alone. It comes from embedding finance into everyday life—expanding into savings, credit, and insurance by listening to users. India can follow a similar path, blending access with engagement, usage with perception, and presence with participation.

The promise of financial inclusion lies not in aggregate numbers but in everyday empowerment—when tools of finance become tools of resilience, dignity, and trust. That is when India’s inclusion journey will move from being a milestone on paper to a foundation for shared prosperity.

(Amit Majumdar, Group CSO, Angel One.)

Views are personal, and do not represent the stance of this publication.