A Quiet Compounder in Co-living
When we first met the GetSetHome team 6 years ago, co-living was hailed as the next big thing in Indian real estate. Startups were raising large rounds, locking in thousands of beds, and chasing blitz scale expansion. The logic seemed straightforward: rent large real estate blocks, standardize them, scale fast, and monetize the millennial migration to Indian cities. But amidst the noise, GetSetHome (GSH) chose a different path. Not just in how they operated, but in what they believed.
Their belief was simple: the Indian urban rental experience is broken — for both tenants and landlords. GSH saw an opportunity to solve this with a tech-enabled, decentralized, and asset-light model that prioritizes habitability, affordability, and operational excellence.
Co-living was often considered the WeWork of housing — take large blocks of real estate, standardize, and scale. Millions of young professionals and students migrate every year to urban centers, looking for safe, flexible, and affordable housing. Traditional rental options are fragmented, brokers are unaccountable, and the experience often lacks basic convenience.
Most startups entering the space borrowed playbooks from global models — centralizing inventory, locking into long leases, and pushing for rapid scale. What followed was a string of high-growth but low-margin ventures — with high Capex, heavy marketing spends, and significant occupancy risk.
This centralized thesis playbook led to massive Capex, high churn, and uneven quality of experience. Many VC-funded players ended up with low occupancy, high burn, and eroding margins. Several well-funded players have raised upwards of ₹750 Cr each, yet continue to burn capital heavily.
India’s real estate dynamics are however different:
GSH inverted the global model:
We invested in GetSetHome based on three core convictions:
GetSetHome aligned perfectly with this thinking. From day one, they focused on building a tech-enabled, decentralized rental platform that served both supply and demand — with discipline. While others focused on scale-first, GSH focused on profit-first — and that has made all the difference.
What stood out to us back then (and continues to compound today) – while funded peers chased scale with >₹100 Cr+ burn – GSH quietly delivered:
With less than ₹6 Cr in capital raised, GSH is one of the rare startups that chose discipline over dazzle — and has delivered sustainable, profitable growth in a sector known for cash burn. Today, with operations across Mumbai, Pune, Navi Mumbai, Chennai, and Indore, GetSetHome is one of the most capital-efficient players in the space, and staying profitable in a sector where that's rare.
Urban migration is accelerating, and Tier-2 cities like Coimbatore, Indore, Jaipur are emerging as major demand hubs — driven by IT, education, and the rise of younger, mobile workforces.
GSH’s tech-led, decentralized model is uniquely positioned to expand profitably into these micro-markets — without the heavy baggage of fixed infrastructure.
This is a category that will need staying power, not just blitz. As more working professionals and students move to cities, the demand for safe, affordable, and flexible urban housing will only rise — especially in Tier 2 cities.
We’re proud to have partnered early with Junaid, Muddassar, and Shabnam — a founding team that embodies sharp execution, exemplifies capital-efficient execution in a category where that’s rare, and a quiet hunger to build long-term.
In a space where most chased valuation, GetSetHome built value. And that — for us — is what long-term venture investing is really about.
| Metric | GetSetHome | Competitor 1 | Competitor 2 | Competitor 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Funding Raised | ₹60 Mn | ₹8,800 Mn | ₹9,800 Mn | ₹15,000 Mn |
| Revenue | ₹195 Mn (FY25 ARR) |
₹327.7 Mn (FY24) |
₹955.3 Mn |
₹4,420.5 Mn (FY23) |
| Capital Productivity | 9.6 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.8 |
| EBITDA (₹ Mn) | 14.5 | -167.3 | -533.8 | -893.0 |
| Beds Managed | ~1,800 | 70,000 | 40,000 | 70,000 |
| Occupancy Rate | ~90% | ~60–70%* | ~65–75%* | ~75–80%* |
| Gross Margin | ~35% | ~10–15%* | ~20–25%* | ~15–20%* |
| Operating Model | Decentralized | Centralized | Centralized | Centralized |
| Time to Setup Property that is rentable | ~10 days | Weeks | Weeks | Weeks |
| Revenue per ₹1 in Marketing | ₹112 | ₹6.1 | ₹23.6 | ₹18.9 |
