The Capital Stack, Cheapest to Most Commercial
Founders raise a round. Capital actually comes in layers, ordered by how much return it wants back. Each layer should buy the de-risking that makes the next one cheaper, and taking them out of order is expensive.
Summary
- Capital in the impact lane comes in layers, ordered by how much return each one wants back and how much risk it will absorb, from grants at the base to senior debt at the top.
- First-loss capital is the hinge. A small slice that agrees to be wiped out before anyone else changes the risk position of everything stacked above it, which is blended finance in one paragraph.
- The art is the order. Each layer should buy a specific piece of de-risking that makes the next one cheaper, and taking them out of sequence is usually paid for in dilution.
Ask a founder what they're raising and you'll almost always get an amount and a round. Two crore, . Fifteen crore, .
Ask what the money is for and the answer gets interesting, because it's usually four or five different things. Working capital. A new facility. Hiring. Proving a model in a district nobody has served before. Maybe a buffer.
Those are four or five different kinds of money. Funding all of them out of one instrument is the most expensive habit in early-stage fundraising, and it's nearly universal, because most founders were only ever shown one lane, and in that lane the only question is how big the round is.
The impact and blended lane works differently. Capital comes in layers, ordered by how much return it wants back and how much risk it will absorb. What follows is the stack, from the most patient at the bottom to the most commercial at the top. Not every business needs every layer. But you should know what's on the shelf before you decide what to buy.
Grants, philanthropy and CSR
The bottom of the stack. Non-dilutive, non-repayable, and the cheapest capital you will ever touch.
It funds the things a commercial investor won't pay for and shouldn't have to: proving a concept, running a pilot, building a model in a segment where nobody knows yet whether it works, market-building that benefits you and three competitors equally.
Founders under-use this, and I think it's a framing problem. Grant money gets filed mentally under charity, so a real business assumes it isn't for them. India's mandatory CSR pool sits right here too, a structurally large source of money that most founders think of as something corporates give to NGOs, not as capital that can de-risk an enterprise.
What it costs you is reporting. That's not nothing. But it isn't .
Catalytic and first-loss capital
This is the hinge of the whole lane, and the layer worth understanding properly.
First-loss capital is a slice of money that agrees to be wiped out before anyone else takes a rupee of loss. It's usually small. Its job isn't to fund the business, it's to change the risk position of everything stacked above it.
Say a lender looks at a portfolio and decides the likely loss rate is too high to price. Put a first-loss slice underneath, and the senior lender's exposure starts only after that slice is exhausted. Same portfolio, same borrowers, completely different decision. The money that was a no is now a yes.
That's the mechanism behind blended finance in one paragraph. A small amount of patient money, placed correctly, changes the price and availability of all the capital above it.
Guarantees and risk-sharing
Related idea, different form. Instead of putting money in, a guarantor promises to cover a share of the loss if the borrower defaults.
The founder-facing point: a guarantee costs a fee, not equity. It doesn't sit on your and it doesn't dilute anyone. What it does is make a lender willing to lend, or willing to lend at a rate that actually works.
India has more of this infrastructure than most founders realise, particularly around MSME credit. It tends to be accessed through your lender rather than directly, which is part of why it stays invisible.
Concessional and soft debt
Debt priced below the market, or with tenor longer than commercial lenders will offer.
The tenor point matters more than the rate, and it's the one I'd flag. A seven-year facility on working capital is often simply unavailable commercially in Indian sectors at any price. That's not a discount, it's a different instrument, and for some businesses it's the difference between scaling and not.
This layer wants repayment capacity and an impact case. It doesn't want your equity.
Technical assistance grants
These ride alongside an investment rather than standing on their own. A funder puts money in, and attaches a grant to build the capability the investment needs: systems, measurement infrastructure, governance, sometimes the environmental and social management system a larger institution will later require.
Founders rarely ask for it. Funders quite often have it available. Worth asking.
Commercial impact equity
Now we're in familiar territory. Dilutive, expecting a real return, and interrogating your commercial case as hard as any venture fund.
The difference is that the impact gets interrogated too, not as a story, but as something you manage and evidence. And these funds want impact that grows with revenue rather than thinning out as you scale.
Senior debt
Market-rate, senior in the stack, from development institutions or banks. This is what everything below has been quietly setting up.
If the concessional layers have done their job, the model is proven, there's repayment history, the risk is legible, and this capital becomes available at a price it would never have been available at three years earlier. That's the whole point of sequencing.
Outcome-based funding
Paid on verified results. A programme-level instrument rather than a company-level one, and most businesses aren't structured for it. Included because it exists, and because it tells you how seriously this market takes verification.
The art is the order
Here's what I'd want a founder to take from all of this.
Each layer of capital should buy a specific piece of de-risking that makes the next layer cheaper. Grant money buys proof that the model works, which is what makes a first-loss provider willing to sit underneath you. First-loss and guarantees make a lender comfortable. Repayment history on that first facility is what makes commercial debt available. Every step removes a reason for the next investor to say no.
Take them out of order and you pay for it, usually in . The classic version I see is a company funding working capital with equity because equity was the only instrument anyone showed them. Three rounds later the founder works out that they gave away a meaningful slice of the company for something that should have cost them interest, or a guarantee fee.
There's a number the blended finance world uses to judge whether this is working, the mobilisation ratio. How many rupees of commercial capital does each rupee of concessional capital pull in? India's flagship health facility has reported somewhere around eight to ten. That's the leverage when the layering is done well.
You don't need to care about that number. But the funders do, and knowing it exists tells you how they're evaluating the structure you're asking them to join.
Start from what the money does
The practical move is simpler than the stack makes it look.
Break your requirement into what each rupee is actually doing. Working capital. Capex. Growth spend. Proving something unproven. Then match each one to the cheapest layer that will fund it, rather than raising a single number and letting one instrument cover everything.
Most founders, doing this for the first time, find that at least one line in their raise belongs somewhere other than where they'd put it. Sometimes it's a large line. Which layer is open to you depends on whether you clear the four gates, and who provides it depends on which family of funder you are talking to.
If you want to know which of these layers are open to you, and in what order, start with the Capital Roadmap Diagnostic.
How useful was this article?
One tap. It tells us what to write more of.
About the author
Lead - Growth & Partnerships, Impact Consulting
Everything Sanskriti has writtenLinkedInThe next one
Get what we publish next, by email.
Working notes on raising, borrowing, protecting, growing and structuring capital in India. One email a week at most, and you can leave any time.
We use your address only to send this. See our privacy policy.
We store your address to send you these emails and nothing else. See our privacy policy.
Related reading
