No edtech company is ready for an IPO today: Ronnie Screwvala

Last year, India's startup ecosystem celebrated a milestone with 13 companies—including Swiggy, Ola Electric, and FirstCry—making their debut on the stock market. Yet one sector remained noticeably absent from this wave of public listings—edtech.

That is why all eyes are now on PhysicsWallah as it prepares to make history as the first pure-play edtech company to list on the stock market this year. Its IPO will be closely watched by industry peers Eruditus and upGrad, potentially setting the stage for their own public market journeys.

However, the edtech sector isn't primed for an IPO surge just yet, according to Ronnie Screwvala, Co-founder and Chairman of higher education and upskilling platform upGrad.

The seasoned entrepreneur speaks frankly: the edtech industry hasn't reached true maturity, and no company is genuinely ready for public markets today.

"We have already been through this massive corruption of excess capital that flowed into the sector, making everyone think 'sales first'. It is going to take one to two years for this DNA of the people in the sector to change," he notes.

"Then you start again throwing money back and saying, 'IPO,' and everyone will go back to that brief. I don't think anyone today is ready to go IPO."

"Without profits, launching an IPO is ridiculous," he states without mincing words.

Profitability remains a key hurdle for many edtech companies. Even those that achieved profitability, such as edtech unicorn PhysicsWallah which was profitable until FY22, have since faced losses.

In an open conversation with YourStory, Screwvala shares his perspective on the sudden IPO interest among edtech firms and the future of the sector.

He also reflects on upGrad’s journey—from being “corrupted” initially with a sales-first mindset to maturing over the years to create a unique integrated model. 

Edited excerpts from the interview:

YourStory (YS): We have seen a wave of IPOs among new-age companies, but edtech firms have largely stayed away, given the burden of its challenges. Do you think good, successful IPOs in the edtech sector can help shift the narrative?

Ronnie Screwvala (RS): I don’t think any company should rush into an IPO right now—there’s no real maturity in the business yet. And what’s good today can turn bad overnight.

An IPO isn't a true marker of success; it just means a banker sees an opportunity to make a fee by taking you public. Ideally, they should advise waiting, building predictability first. But today, bankers push IPOs based on market sentiment.

It’s terrible that people are doing these kinds of high secondaries right now (where existing investors or employees sell shares at possibly inflated prices on the secondary market). What is the message we are sending to people? That you are firstly not ready as a company, then you are getting into a sector (such as edtech, which requires a certain level of maturity and stability to succeed), then you are doing these high secondaries. 

YS: When do you see this sector realistically reaching a stage where companies can consider going public? Also, how important is profitability for an edtech company when thinking about an IPO?

RS: Without profits, launching an IPO is ridiculous. You are just throwing good money. If you are in this sector and not making money, it makes no sense. Edtech needs profitability for reinvestment, not for blowing up money.

As for when, the sector needs maturity first. We must shift from sales-driven growth to outcome-based results. Look at Aakash and Allen—they built strong businesses over time. Even Haldiram’s, a cash cow, wouldn’t rush into an IPO. The industry needs time, maybe two to three years, before it’s ready.

An issue with premature IPOs is forced consolidation. Instead of shutting down weak businesses, they get acquired, slowing down stronger players who now have to clean up the mess. What edtech truly needs is contraction, not consolidation—they are very different.

Money (the need to raise money via IPO) will push for consolidation. If we don’t get this, there’s 10 more BYJU’S waiting to happen, even with integrity and the best intent.

YS: Is two to three years the minimum timeframe the edtech industry should ideally consider before going for an IPO?

RS: If you can mature in two to three years, yes. If you are at a certain level, can demonstrate steady growth, and have predictability—go for it. I don’t think today anyone can say with a hand to their heart they have predictability. If they have grown too fast, they are even less predictable.

YS: What growth trajectory is upGrad following?

RS: Money corrupted this sector—especially K-12—creating a sales-first mindset. We had to hire a fair bit from outside because most (most people in the edtech sector) were conditioned to chase sales over learning. Edtech must be built on pedagogy, outcomes, and real impact. 

I’d like us to grow at 40% compounded for the next 10-20 years, and profitably. Profitable because this sector is going to require a lot more money to be ploughed back in.

This is not a sector that’s going to give out dividends. The dividends will be how well you plough your profits back into the business for higher ROI. 

This is not like food delivery where we grow at 100% a year for 2-3 years. And this is not a sector where we should get to such exciting, exhilarating growth, where when it happens, the correction will drop the whole standard of everything else. This is the maturity with which upGrad is approaching this (growth).

YS: upGrad has been around for a decade. How has the company evolved over the years?

RS: The first five years were formative—I’d almost discount them entirely. Could we have accelerated back then? Maybe. I see us as a cup half full and half empty. Always pushing forward, never getting comfortable. A steady state is boring. Growth means constant change, and we embrace that dynamism.

In reality, we are a four-to-five-year-old company, incorporated 10 years ago. During this period, we have built a mature organisation—focusing on learning experience, pedagogy, and platforms.

We also got corrupted with sales first. No question about that. Because sometimes you can’t completely be idealistic in one place when everyone’s running away. And you don’t know whether that running away is going to be (for) five years, two years, or something else entirely.

Our maturity has allowed us to build a unique, integrated model. We operate across formal degrees (undergraduate & postgraduate), study abroad, boot camps, and certifications. Alongside we have B2B.

We have built a good foundation for us to take it forward. 

We have kept an eye internationally also, not just because we want to flirt with international, but because we think it’s meaningful. India is a massive market, but there’s a lot to learn globally. At the core, we remain output-focused.

YS: Do you see investor confidence reviving in the sector? 

RS: Investors have been investing even in the worst situations, where they felt these are long-term genuine parties. The money didn’t dry up two or even three years ago. But if you raise five to seven billion in two years for a sector that never needed that much, you are bound to see the graph trend downward. But if there wasn’t a BYJU’S, the curve would be one way only. It would not be down, and (would be) up.

YS: How do you balance running a profit-driven venture while also being involved in a social impact initiative like Swades Foundation?

RS: Swades Foundation balances me. It keeps me grounded in many ways. I may not have gone into the education sector if it wasn’t for our not-for-profit. Because, around the time, when one was looking at what one wanted to do as a second innings, we were working with almost 600 anganwadis and 1,200 schools in Maharashtra. And one could see that this is not a system that you can crack. So you have to disrupt it from the outside.

YS: Do you think a public-private partnership could benefit the K-12 ecosystem, given the large number of government schools in the country?

RS: Yes, it will definitely benefit. But there are key factors to consider. Working with anganwadis, zilla parishad schools, Akanksha, and Teach for India, I’ve seen firsthand that you can’t completely disrupt the cultural foundation of education. It’s not about teachers being good or bad—they come from a different system and structure.

Private enterprise could bring innovation, but the real shift might come when schools are allowed to be for-profit, much like hospitals. Initially, medical aid wasn’t meant to be a profit-driven sector, yet today, for-profit healthcare has fuelled technological advancements without corrupting its core. Similarly, the belief that education must remain strictly non-profit limits ambition and progress in the sector.

YS: Recently, upGrad signed a memorandum of understanding with the Government of Maharashtra to build AI excellence centres across the state. How do you see AI, ML, and other emerging technologies transforming workforce training and skill development in the future?

RS: At the core, we must enhance our talent pool. If India wants to be a global hub for manufacturing, technology, or innovation, we need skilled talent. Investment follows talent. 

This is why our agreement with Maharashtra focuses on building a robust talent base. AI gets attention, but the real game-changer is skilling. Maharashtra’s plan to create an Innovation City aligns with our vision—we are here to build a future-ready workforce.

AI, like digital marketing once was, isn’t just for specialists—it’s foundational. Early on, we saw finance professionals taking digital marketing courses—not to become marketers, but to make smarter budget decisions. The same will happen with AI. Everyone needs a base level of understanding to overcome intimidation.

YS: How can edtech platforms forge meaningful partnerships with industries and organisations to enhance skilling and education?

RS: It’s already happening—but credibility is key. Certifications can’t just be a branding exercise; they need depth and measurable outcomes. The challenge with university programmes is grading parameters; standalone certifications risk losing value if they are just a stamp with no real learning. If outcomes aren’t tracked, people lose faith.

I see a stark contrast (between urban and rural areas)—when we run skilling programmes in rural India, where we have trained 68,000 youth through the not-for-profit (model), on full scholarships; their commitment is unmatched. No missed classes, full participation, and complete dedication. In Vietnam, where we offer courses, the work ethic is incredible. They are driven by a hunger to progress.

People focus too much on ROI without realising that growth isn’t just about switching jobs (many people view education or skill-building primarily as a way to get a new job or advance in their career); it’s about levelling up (improving skills, gaining knowledge, and overall personal development). 

And that’s the biggest shift we need to drive—getting people (learners) to move from ‘haan, karna padega’ (I have to do it) to ‘I will genuinely benefit from this.’

(Cover image designed by Nihar Apte)