- Published on
- · 12 min read
Why Pakistan Has So Few Retail Investors — and What India Can Teach Us
- Authors
-
-
- Name
- Abdul Rauf
- @armujahid
-
For a country of more than 250 million people, Pakistan has a surprisingly small retail investment ecosystem. We talk about the KSE-100’s returns and the performance of individual stocks, but I think a more fundamental question deserves attention: why do so few Pakistanis invest in regulated capital-market products at all?
I started thinking about this while comparing Pakistan with India. The more I looked into mutual funds, account opening, systematic investment plans (SIPs), and fund charges, the clearer one thing became: low participation is not just a financial-literacy problem. It is also a product-design, payment-infrastructure, regulatory and trust problem.
The opportunity is substantial, but the numbers require careful interpretation.
NOTE
Data cut-off: October 25, 2026. This article distinguishes accounts, funded accounts, unique investors, and SIP mandates. They are not interchangeable. Figures also refer to different reporting dates. Views on regulatory changes are proposals, not statements of current law or personalized investment advice.
An industry with trillions in assets and surprisingly few accounts
According to SECP’s February 2026 release, Pakistan’s mutual funds managed approximately PKR 4.5 trillion at the end of December 2025, while the number of mutual-fund investor accounts reached 845,000. The same release said 44% of mutual-fund investment was allocated to money-market funds, 23% to income funds and 14% to equity funds.
That is meaningful capital, but it does not imply broad household participation.
The SECP’s September 2025 non-bank financial institutions report adds an especially useful distinction:
| Open-end mutual-fund account measure | September 30, 2025 |
|---|---|
| Accounts with a positive balance | 756,722 |
| Accounts with a zero balance | 701,625 |
| Total registered accounts | 1,458,347 |
In other words, about 48% of those registered accounts had no balance at that reporting date. And SECP explicitly cautions that these figures are accounts rather than unique people: one person with accounts at three asset managers can appear three times.
The 845,000 figure from December 2025 should not be casually compared with September’s 1.46 million total registered accounts. The reporting definitions need reconciling before anyone uses them to claim a precise growth rate in unique investors.
Another distinction matters for stock-market enthusiasts: more mutual-fund investors do not necessarily translate into equivalent inflows into equities. A large portion of Pakistan’s mutual-fund assets currently sits in money-market and fixed-income categories.
What India’s scale actually tells us
India has an enormous retail investment ecosystem, though even there we need to separate people from account identifiers.
| Measure | India | Pakistan |
|---|---|---|
| Mutual-fund accounts / folios | 286.2 million, September 2026 | 1.46 million registered open-end accounts, September 2025 |
| Registered stock-market investor identifiers | 130 million unique NSE investor PANs, April 2026 | 656,218 NCCPL UINs linked to active trading accounts, September 2026 |
| Mutual-fund accounts with positive balances | No directly comparable industry-wide figure verified here | 756,722 open-end mutual-fund accounts, September 2025 |
| Recurring-investment measure | 108.89 million outstanding SIP accounts, September 2026 | No equivalent industry-wide SIP mandate figure verified for this article |
Sources: AMFI September 2026 monthly report (folios, p. 1), AMFI September 2026 monthly note (SIPs, p. 16), NSE’s April 2026 unique-investor release, NCCPL’s September 2026 UIN breakdown, and SECP’s September 2025 fund-account statistics.
NCCPL’s total comprises 605,810 Pakistani individual UINs, 20,402 foreign individual UINs, 26,213 Roshan Digital Account (RDA) UINs, and 3,793 UINs for companies, brokers, funds and others. A UIN (Unique Identification Number) is a centrally issued investor identifier, different from the separate client/account code assigned by a broker or a CDC custody account.
Do not read the table as a perfectly apples-to-apples count of active people investing. NSE’s figure is based on unique PAN registrations, whereas NCCPL’s figure is for UINs with an active trading-account status and also includes institutional categories. Neither figure establishes that every identifier currently holds stock or traded during the reporting month. Mutual-fund folios and funded accounts are likewise not necessarily unique people, and SIP mandates are not unique investors.
Even with those qualifications, the difference in scale is unmistakable.
What interests me most is not simply India’s larger population. It is the infrastructure and habits that let households invest regularly without treating every contribution as a new administrative exercise.
The onboarding experience still feels unnecessarily manual
Pakistan already has substantial digital infrastructure: identity records with NADRA, biometric verification, regulated banking relationships, and electronic payments. Yet an individual opening investment accounts with multiple intermediaries may still be asked to provide overlapping personal details and documentation.
There is an obvious policy direction: consent-based, reusable KYC, rather than requiring each institution to collect the same evidence from scratch.
This idea is not new. In April 2023, SECP approved a Centralized Gateway Portal, tasking CDC with developing a one-time KYC experience. In August 2026, SECP also published Circular 19 of 2026, a consolidated framework for investor onboarding.
These are encouraging regulatory steps. Their publication alone, however, does not prove that opening and funding an account has become frictionless across providers. That must be measured in the actual customer journey.
A better experience would let a customer:
- Authorize reuse of verified identity and address information from a regulated source.
- Review any additional investment-specific information needed by the AMC or broker.
- Open the account without repeatedly uploading the same documents.
- Fund it, receive units, and set up an automated recurring contribution.
- See all one-time and ongoing fees before confirming.
NADRA could help provide authoritative identity verification, but it should not become a centralized store of everyone’s complete financial activity. Institutions still need appropriate AML, sanctions, suitability and source-of-funds controls; reusable KYC should be consent-based, purpose-limited and auditable.
A number I’d love regulators to publish is median time from starting an application to the first successful funded investment, with rejection reasons and completion rates by channel. Announcing how many accounts were opened is not enough.
A SIP should be something you configure once
Investing a fixed amount monthly is often called a systematic investment plan or SIP. Many Pakistani investors already follow this discipline manually. But a recurring reminder to transfer money is different from an authorized automatic debit.
India has mature recurring-payment rails. The National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI) explicitly documents eMandates for recurring SIP collections and UPI AutoPay for recurring payments as a recurring-payment option for mutual funds. AMFI’s September 2026 monthly note and published SIP table report 108.89 million outstanding SIP accounts and ₹32,490 crore in SIP contributions in September 2026. Those are SIP accounts, not 108.89 million unique investors, and they do not tell us how many use a particular payment method.
Pakistan does have automatic SIP products. For example, Al Meezan’s SIP service says eligible customers can give a one-time instruction for monthly or quarterly debits. Its published facility is currently tied to Meezan Bank account holders.
That is useful, but not the same as a universal, cross-bank experience.
The State Bank of Pakistan’s Raast infrastructure already supports important digital-payment services. However, the existence of Raast P2P or P2M payments does not by itself establish a universal SIP-capable pull-payment mandate. Recurring, revocable bank-account debits need their own authorization, dispute-handling and interoperability rules.
My preferred experience would be simple: choose an AMC, fund, amount, and monthly date; approve a bank-agnostic mandate; pause, change or cancel it transparently.
The fee puzzle: FEL, BEL, TER and switching between funds
Another complication is the sales-load structure. Pakistan’s mutual funds may levy a front-end load (FEL) when units are purchased and/or a back-end load (BEL) on redemption, according to the scheme’s terms. Those are different from the recurring total expense ratio (TER), which is borne by the fund over time.
The distinction matters particularly to someone investing every month:
- FEL reduces the amount of each contribution that is actually invested.
- BEL or an exit/contingent load may reduce what an investor receives on redemption or conversion, depending on the fund and holding period.
- TER continuously reduces the returns reflected in the fund’s NAV, whether or not a one-time load applies.
- Taxes and other transaction charges can apply separately.
Historically, Pakistan actually experimented with a strong direct-investor protection: SECP’s July 2015 announcement of Circular 26 required zero sales load for direct and online investments. Later rules allowed some sales loads again. The 2024 master circular described limits and disclosure requirements; for current binding rules, investors should check SECP’s June 2026 master circular and the relevant scheme’s latest offering documents. A historical maximum is not a promise that every fund or channel charges it.
An odd consequence of uneven fee schedules is the cash-fund-to-equity-fund conversion workaround: some investors first deposit into a money-market fund with zero FEL, then switch after several days.
I understand why people try this, but a conversion is not automatically free. It can trigger a contingent load, a destination-fund charge, tax effects, valuation timing differences or simply time out of the intended market. I would not treat this as an industry-wide loophole or recommend it without checking the exact documents for both funds.
The long-term cost of an entry load
The following calculator is deliberately illustrative, not a model of any particular AMC’s actual pricing. It assumes the FEL is charged as a percentage of NAV on each contribution (so the amount invested is the contribution divided by 1 + FEL), contributions occur at the end of each month, and both scenarios earn the same hypothetical return before other costs.
SIP front-end-load cost calculator
Compare identical recurring investments with and without a front-end load on each contribution. Values are illustrative, not predictions.
FEL paid: PKR 58,824
Paid load plus hypothetical lost growth
Model: monthly contributions at month-end; the selected annual return is converted to a compounded monthly rate; FEL is added to NAV/offer price, so units are purchased with monthly contribution divided by (1 + FEL rate). It excludes TER, back-end/contingent loads, taxes, inflation, transaction costs and timing differences. Actual funds may compute sales loads differently. A constant positive return is not guaranteed, and losses are possible.
An upfront fee does more than reduce the first month’s contribution. It also removes the potential future growth that money could otherwise have earned. The effect grows with time and regular contributions.
This is why I favor zero FEL for direct, self-directed investments and automated SIPs. If an investor chooses personalized advice or a distributor, the compensation should be explicit and comparable. India removed mutual-fund entry loads in 2009 and distinguishes between direct and regular plans, with different ongoing expense structures.
Would I also ban every exit load? Not necessarily. A short-term redemption charge that is justified by portfolio transaction costs and credited back to remaining investors serves a different purpose from a deferred sales commission. The legal design and recipient of the charge matter more than its label.
Investors do not just distrust the app — they distrust the system
Technology is only part of the story. The Karandaaz Financial Inclusion Survey 2024 findings reported that among financially excluded adults, only 9% said they trusted banks and 8% trusted mobile-money providers. The survey also reported that only 36% of adults felt comfortable using a financial service.
Those are not measurements of trust in mutual funds or the PSX specifically. Nevertheless, they show why reducing forms and making an app faster may not, by itself, create demand.
Gold and property can feel more tangible. That does not make them risk-free: property has title, development, legal and liquidity risks; gold has pricing and custody risks. But the holder may perceive fewer layers of institutions between themselves and their savings.
Mutual funds require trust in the asset manager, custodian/trustee, payments, regulator, disclosures, and dispute-resolution system. The protections matter, but so does whether people understand and believe in them.
Religious concerns could be relevant too. Pakistan has established Shariah-compliant investment products, yet I have not found a nationally representative statistic that measures the share of non-investors who avoid mutual funds specifically for religious reasons. It would be a mistake to invent that number or treat all non-participation as a matter of religious belief.
For a Shariah-conscious first-time investor, the right education is not simply “mutual funds are halal” or “mutual funds are haram.” It is an explanation of the particular fund’s mandate, Shariah governance, holdings, fees, and risks.
What I would change
These are policy proposals, not claims about today’s SECP requirements.
| Priority | Proposal | How to measure success |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Reusable onboarding | Consent-based KYC reuse with NADRA-backed identity checks and interoperable verification | Application completion rate; median time to first investment |
| 2. Bank-agnostic SIPs | Revocable cross-bank recurring debit mandates usable by regulated AMCs | Active, successfully funded mandates; monthly failures |
| 3. Zero-load direct plans | No FEL or sales-commission BEL on self-directed transactions, with transparently priced advice elsewhere | Weighted average investor-paid loads by channel |
| 4. Clearer fee disclosure | Show load, TER, taxes, and expected net invested amount before confirmation | Actual cost paid by median small investor |
| 5. Reliable investor protections | Faster complaint resolution, accessible trustee/custody explanations, standardized reporting | Resolution time; substantiated complaints |
| 6. Better participation data | Publish deduplicated investor counts and funded, active accounts across AMCs | Unique funded investors and retention after 12 months |
I would also like SECP and MUFAP to publish a standardized breakdown of how much of each PKR 10,000 direct SIP contribution actually becomes invested units for representative funds. That is more tangible to most people than a list of industry acronyms.
Why this matters beyond mutual funds
A broader investment culture could eventually deepen local capital markets and make equity financing more attractive to growing Pakistani businesses. More retail investors might help liquidity and valuation, but more accounts do not guarantee higher stock returns. Money can move into fixed income rather than equities, and valuations without corresponding earnings can become speculative.
The long-term story is therefore not simply “Pakistan has fewer investors than India, so Pakistani stocks must rise.” It is that Pakistan has room to make formal saving and investing easier, cheaper and more trustworthy. That would be valuable even if a new investor never buys an individual stock.
For me, the first test is modest: can an ordinary salaried person open a regulated investment account, understand all costs, and automatically invest a few thousand rupees every month—without paperwork workarounds or hidden fees?
If we cannot make that simple, headline market returns alone are unlikely to bring the missing millions into the system.
This is an educational and policy-analysis article, not a recommendation to buy, sell, or switch any fund. Fund loads, eligibility, tax rules and payment integrations change. Confirm the latest offering documents and regulations before acting.