The M-Kopa vs Lipa Later paradox is more than a business case study—it’s a wake-up call.
As MD at Aspira, Kenya’s second-largest BNPL provider, I’ve seen this play out up close. The truth? It’s not BNPL vs Asset Financing. It’s about whether your model understands the economics of hustle.
📌 Kenya’s informal economy employs over 80% of the workforce
📌 Over 70% of BNPL defaults stem from misaligned affordability assumptions
📌 9 in 10 Kenyan consumers still prioritize value over variety—BNPL must fund what matters “Needs not flimsy wants”
Some models win because they’re embedded in value chains: solar, smartphones, mobility—things that unlock income or solve critical pain points for Mwananchi.
Others falter by lifting frameworks from formal economies and pasting them into markets built on trust, grit, and mobile money.
At Aspira, we’ve rebuilt BNPL to fit this hustler context:
✅ Flexible repayments
✅ Credit scoring from internal behavioral data, not just payslips and bank statements
✅ Merchant partnerships for high-utility goods—furniture, electronics, education and tools
This isn’t about financing “wants.” It’s about enabling moves.
Africa doesn’t need cloned models. It needs courageous localized designs. So if you’re building in African fintech, the key question to ask is
Are you funding lifestyle—or unlocking livelihood?
Because one of my observations is that consumers tend to prioritize livelihood repayments over lifestyle payments.
However, there is a significant omission from your analysis, which is M-Pesa's Fuliza service. According to their numbers, this is the single largest digital loan service in Kenya. Fuliza serves everyday earners ("Type B" target market), with consumption financing ("Type A" core proposition).
If you agree, how do you think they've made this work?
The M-Kopa vs Lipa Later paradox is more than a business case study—it’s a wake-up call.
As MD at Aspira, Kenya’s second-largest BNPL provider, I’ve seen this play out up close. The truth? It’s not BNPL vs Asset Financing. It’s about whether your model understands the economics of hustle.
📌 Kenya’s informal economy employs over 80% of the workforce
📌 Over 70% of BNPL defaults stem from misaligned affordability assumptions
📌 9 in 10 Kenyan consumers still prioritize value over variety—BNPL must fund what matters “Needs not flimsy wants”
Some models win because they’re embedded in value chains: solar, smartphones, mobility—things that unlock income or solve critical pain points for Mwananchi.
Others falter by lifting frameworks from formal economies and pasting them into markets built on trust, grit, and mobile money.
At Aspira, we’ve rebuilt BNPL to fit this hustler context:
✅ Flexible repayments
✅ Credit scoring from internal behavioral data, not just payslips and bank statements
✅ Merchant partnerships for high-utility goods—furniture, electronics, education and tools
This isn’t about financing “wants.” It’s about enabling moves.
Africa doesn’t need cloned models. It needs courageous localized designs. So if you’re building in African fintech, the key question to ask is
Are you funding lifestyle—or unlocking livelihood?
Because one of my observations is that consumers tend to prioritize livelihood repayments over lifestyle payments.
Great insights Kris. Great to see Aspira modifying the BNPL model to fit into Kenya's unique circumstances.
Great framework, Samora.
However, there is a significant omission from your analysis, which is M-Pesa's Fuliza service. According to their numbers, this is the single largest digital loan service in Kenya. Fuliza serves everyday earners ("Type B" target market), with consumption financing ("Type A" core proposition).
If you agree, how do you think they've made this work?
You're right. Watch this episode for details about Fuliza, how they came about and how they've made this work https://youtu.be/gi55U4lcNt0?si=d7Kt5pzGjxRssPzc