Indian Startup IPO Tracker 2026: Issue Prices vs October Quotes

ESDS Software is 252.5% above its IPO price; Turtlemint is 55.3% below. The delayed share-price snapshots retrieved on 16 October 2026 show how far outcomes have split.^[1][2] This tracker follows 15 new-age listings, compares issue prices with those snapshots, and separates completed IPOs from two offers still open.^[3]

The 2026 listings: issue price versus the delayed snapshot

The cohort covers digital platforms, software, technology-led financial services, logistics, education and specialised engineering businesses that listed during 2026. The 15-name scope was cross-checked against published startup coverage, then matched to legal entities in the IPO feed.^[3] It is an editorial cohort, not a count of every Indian IPO or every registered startup.

Rows run by listing date; companies sharing a date have the same chronological position. The date is the first trading day, not the day bidding opened. That distinction matters for Fractal Analytics and Aye Finance: both listed on 16 February 2026. Their addition to the exchange’s IPO index came two days later.^[8]

Prices use NSE where a snapshot exists, and BSE for Klassroom. These are delayed prices retrieved on 16 October 2026, not live quotes or closing prices. The stored company records were updated between 1 pm and 1.23 pm IST that day; those are record-update times, not certified trade timestamps.

The change column is calculated as snapshot price divided by issue price, minus one. It excludes dividends, taxes and transaction costs, and is not an annualised return. No corporate-action adjustment has been applied. Treat it as a comparison of quoted prices, not a complete measure of shareholder returns.

Adding the issue-size column gives ₹18,739.51 crore. That is the gross size of the recorded offerings, including offers for sale. An offer for sale, or OFS, transfers existing shares and pays the selling holders. A fresh issue creates shares and brings capital into the company. The two should not be labelled interchangeably as startup funding.

The largest offering in this cohort is Fractal’s ₹2,833.90 crore issue, followed by LEAP India at ₹2,480 crore. Klassroom’s ₹39.04 crore issue is the smallest and the only SME-platform listing in this table.^{[13][22][20][21]} SME means small and medium enterprise; its inclusion is explicit so readers can separate it from the mainboard cohort.

Four stocks have more than doubled their issue prices

ESDS, SEDEMAC, Shadowfax and Kissht are above twice their issue prices in the retrieved snapshots. Their price changes are 252.5%, 140.3%, 132.3% and 104.2%, respectively.^{[1][15][11][17]} These are the four largest increases within this cohort, ranked on the same calculation. The comparison does not establish why buyers repriced them.

The entry price changes the story. ESDS began trading at ₹757 on its listing day, against an issue price of ₹429.^[26] At the retrieved ₹1,512.10, it is 252.5% above the issue price but 99.7% above that opening trade.^[1] Those percentages describe different starting points, even though both end at the same quote.

Shiprocket illustrates the reverse. Its shares opened at ₹131, above the ₹97 issue price.^[25] The retrieved ₹128.18 is still 32.1% above the issue price, but 2.2% below the opening trade.^[24] A successful allotment and a purchase at the debut price therefore produce different price comparisons.

Here is the ESDS calculation in rupees. One hundred shares at the ₹429 issue price cost ₹42,900. At the delayed ₹1,512.10 snapshot, the same share count is worth ₹1,51,210: a difference of ₹1,08,310 before costs.^[1] This is an arithmetic illustration using actual prices, not a claim about an allotted lot or an executed trade.

Losses also need a consistent denominator. Turtlemint’s decline from ₹152 to ₹68.01 is 55.3% of the issue price. A return from ₹68.01 to ₹152 would require a 123.5% increase from the lower price.^[2] Equal percentage falls and gains do not cancel each other out. The second move starts from a smaller base.

Filed accounts put the price moves in context

A price table answers what happened to the quotation. It does not establish whether the operating business improved. The following comparison uses consolidated accounts, which combine the parent and its subsidiaries. Standalone accounts cover the parent alone. Mixing the two can make a change in reporting scope look like growth.

The FY2024-25 figures below come from detailed filed-account records. FY2025-26 figures come from the later reporting cited in each row. Revenue means revenue from operations, excluding other income. Both periods are shown explicitly because a fresher market quote does not make an older financial record current.

Fractal’s consolidated FY2025-26 operating revenue was ₹3,299.7 crore and net profit ₹286.8 crore.^[35] Yet its delayed share price is 18.7% below the issue price.^[13] Profit growth and a positive return from the offer price are separate tests. The accounts alone cannot explain the market’s valuation at a particular moment.

ESDS offers a different combination. Consolidated operating revenue rose from ₹361.34 crore in FY2024-25 to ₹472.2 crore in FY2025-26. Consolidated profit rose from ₹55.61 crore to ₹120.8 crore over those years.^[1][26] Its FY2025-26 net margin, calculated as profit divided by operating revenue, was about 25.6%. The prior-year margin was about 15.4%.

Shiprocket’s consolidated operating revenue increased from ₹1,632.01 crore in FY2024-25 to ₹2,024.1 crore in FY2025-26. Its consolidated loss widened from ₹74.45 crore to ₹79.2 crore.^[24][37] However, loss as a share of operating revenue narrowed from about 4.6% to 3.9%. The absolute loss and the margin moved in different directions.

The latest disclosed figures also help distinguish businesses beyond those four rows. Moneyview reported consolidated FY2025-26 operating revenue of ₹3,351.2 crore and profit of ₹242.7 crore.^[32] Purple Style Labs reported consolidated FY2025-26 operating revenue of ₹557.8 crore and a loss of ₹285.4 crore.^[28] Their price performances should not be treated as interchangeable evidence about the health of digital businesses.

These examples are not a profitability ranking of all 15 listings. A complete ranking would need a common period and verified accounting basis for every company. The financial comparison here stays narrower than the price tracker, rather than treating gaps in detailed accounts as zero revenue or zero profit.

Zetwerk and Tonbo are offers, not completed listings

Zetwerk’s bidding runs from 15 to 19 October 2026 at ₹143–151 a share. The ₹5,012.33 crore issue size recorded in the IPO feed includes a ₹2,830 crore fresh issue.^[4][6] Tonbo’s recorded offer runs over the same dates, at ₹665–700, with an issue size of ₹852.18 crore.^[5][7]

Neither company has a listed-market price in the retrieved records. Their expected listing date is 23 October 2026; it remains a scheduled event, not an accomplished listing.^[4][5] Adding both offers to completed IPOs today would overstate completed issuance by ₹5,864.51 crore. A price band is also not a final issue price.

The use of money differs sharply. Zetwerk plans to allocate ₹2,160 crore to repayment or prepayment of borrowings, about 76.3% of its ₹2,830 crore fresh issue.^[6] Tonbo’s offer contains no fresh issue; proceeds go to selling shareholders.^[7] Similar calendar dates therefore tell little about the effect on the companies’ balance sheets.

Tonbo’s filed consolidated accounts show FY2025-26 operating revenue of ₹362.65 crore and profit of ₹50.88 crore. The FY2024-25 consolidated figures were ₹469.08 crore and ₹72.76 crore, respectively.^[5] Revenue fell about 22.7% and profit about 30.1%. Those declines deserve attention alongside the offer size and proposed price.

Zetwerk’s consolidated FY2025-26 revenue from continuing operations was about ₹15,913 crore, while its consolidated net loss was about ₹1,606 crore.^[38] The October offer report gives the loss, including discontinued operations, as ₹1,606.2 crore.^[6] Continuing-operations revenue and a loss including discontinued operations cover different scopes. They should not be combined into a like-for-like operating margin.

What to check before using the tracker

Start with the legal entity, the date and the price denominator. Kissht trades through OnEMI Technology Solutions; Klassroom’s listed entity is Fusion Klassroom Edutech.^[18][21] A brand search and an exchange search can therefore show different names for the same business. Use the linked company record to make that match before comparing figures.

Next, identify who received the IPO proceeds. ESDS raised its ₹720 crore issue entirely through new shares.^[26] RentoMojo’s issue included ₹150 crore of fresh capital and about ₹1,105.6 crore of shareholder sales.^[30] A larger offer does not necessarily give a company more money to fund its next stage.

Finally, separate the task from the table. For a price check, refresh the quote and retain its timestamp. For an operating comparison, use the same financial year and accounting basis. For an open issue, confirm that bidding has closed and trading has actually begun before moving it into the completed cohort.

Keep the retrieved snapshot with any calculation quoted from it. Recheck corporate actions before describing the price change as an investment return. Record whether a figure comes from filed accounts, later results or offer reporting. Those small distinctions make the tracker reproducible when a price, company name or offer timetable changes.