25 Mainboard IPOs: GMP vs Actual Listing Performance – A Data Study

GMP does not guarantee listing gains.

It is just an indicator. Yet many investors apply for IPOs mainly based on Grey Market Premium (GMP).

But how accurate is it really?

In this analysis, we have studied 25 Mainboard IPOs in the Indian markets and compared their Grey Market Premium with their actual listing performance to understand how closely GMP predictions matched the final listing prices.

This GMP vs Actual Listing Price data clears many doubts for investors who rely heavily on GMP before applying for an IPO subscription.

So, let us move ahead and begin with a basic understanding of GMP.

You can track GMP of all live IPOs on our GMP Today hub page, which is updated regularly. You may also find our article “10 IPOs with Highest GMP” useful if you want to understand GMP behaviour more closely.

What is GMP? 

GMP or Grey Market Premium is an unofficial price which is often quoted or traded in the grey market before listing. It comes from unofficial or unregulated markets, and that is why it is called Grey Market Premium.

GMP is unregulated, which means no government authority or government-approved agency controls or officially publishes it.

It is usually based on sentiment in the grey market about the issue price. It fluctuates. On any given day, it may go up, come down, or stay neutral. It may also see sudden spikes or sharp falls.

It can also be different from different sources for the same issue.

For example, in an IPO of Fractal Analytics, the GMP was ₹180, then it went as high as ₹197, and later turned negative at ₹–28. Whether it will go up or down from here, nobody can actually predict it precisely.

So GMP in one line is: highly unpredictable, sentiment-based, unregulated, unofficial grey market premium of an IPO. You can track all the upcoming and live IPOs at our IPO Calendar which is updated regularly.

How this GMP Analysis is Done: Methodology 

In this analysis:

1. Only Mainboard IPOs are included.

2. The last GMP available before listing is considered.

3. Based on the last GMP, we calculated the expected listing price.

4. Then the GMP-based expected price and the actual listing price are compared.

5. IPOs are categorised into:

• IPOs where listing price beat GMP

• IPOs that underperformed GMP

• IPOs that listed in line with or very close to GMP

GMP data is taken from publicly available sources and from the GMP data on our hub page.

GMP vs Listing Performance: Data Overview

Now is the time to break down what the numbers of the table reveal.

Snapshot of the GMP Performance of the IPOs

Total IPOs analysed: 25 IPOs that beat GMP: 10 IPOs that underperformed GMP: 14 IPOs listed in line with GMP: 1

IPOs that beat GMP expectations: 40% IPOs that underperformed GMP expectations: 56% IPOs that listed in line with GMP expectations: 4%

So, only 40% of IPOs beat GMP expectations, while 56% underperformed GMP expectations. 

Just one IPO, or 4%, listed in line with GMP, and that too when the GMP sentiment was almost neutral.

GMP Accuracy Distribution Across 25 Mainboard IPOs – Majority of IPOs Underperformed GMP Expectations

Pattern Analysis: What These GMP Numbers Narrate

1. GMP Percentage-Based Analysis

A) Performance of High GMP IPOs (≥10%)

For this analysis, we first need to define what qualifies as a high GMP. Let us define high GMP as 10% or more of the issue price.

So, how many IPOs had GMP above or equal to 10%? Total: 8 IPOs.

Out of these 8 IPOs:

• 5 IPOs beat GMP expectations.

• 3 IPOs underperformed GMP.

• 0 IPOs listed inline with GMP.

This means that among IPOs where GMP was 10% or higher:

• 62.5% beat GMP expectations.

• 37.5% underperformed GMP expectations.

• None listed exactly in line with GMP.

In this dataset, IPOs with high GMP did not disappoint more frequently. In fact, a higher number of IPOs outperformed on listing day.

However, the presence of underperformers shows that even high GMP does not eliminate risk. Strong pre-listing sentiment does not guarantee stronger listing performance.

IPO Listing Results Categorised by GMP Range (≥10%, 5–10%, 0–5%) (25 IPO Study)

B) Performance of Moderate GMP IPOs (5–10%)

For moderate GMP, let us consider those IPOs where the GMP range was >5% but <10%.

Total IPOs in this range: 5

IPOs which beat GMP expectations: 0 IPOs which underperformed GMP: 5 IPOs inline with GMP: 0

So,

100% underperformed 0% beat 0% inline

In the moderate GMP range, all IPOs underperformed in this dataset. This indicates that when GMP was between 5% and 10%, the expected listing gains were not sustained, and GMP overestimated the actual listing performance in these cases.

However, since the number of IPOs in this range is limited, this observation should be interpreted cautiously.

C) Performance of Low / Neutral GMP IPOs (0–5%)

For low or neutral GMP, let us consider IPOs where the expected GMP gain was between 0% and 5%.

Total IPOs in this range: 9

IPOs which beat GMP expectations: 4 IPOs which underperformed GMP: 4 IPOs inline with GMP: 1

So,

44.4% beat GMP 44.4% underperformed 11.1% listed inline

In the 0–5% GMP range, the performance was almost evenly distributed. The number of IPOs that beat GMP expectations and those that underperformed were the same.

This indicates that when GMP is low or close to neutral, the outcome appears more balanced compared to the moderate GMP category, where all IPOs underperformed.

In this dataset, low GMP did not strongly overestimate or underestimate listing performance, but rather showed mixed results.

2. Sector-Based Observations

Healthcare (5 IPOs)

• Beat: 3 (60%)
• Underperformed: 2 (40%)
• Inline: 0

Healthcare shows relatively stronger alignment with GMP expectations.

Financial Services (3 IPOs)

• Beat: 2 (66.7%)

• Underperformed: 1 (33.3%)

• Inline: 0

  Financial Services performed better than average in this dataset.

Industrials (6 IPOs)

• Beat: 2 (33.3%)

• Underperformed: 3 (50%)

• Inline: 1 (16.7%)

  Industrials leaned slightly toward underperformance.

IT (2 IPOs)

• Beat: 1 (50%)

• Underperformed: 1 (50%)

  Balanced.

Single-IPO Sectors

Since these sectors have only one IPO each, no broad conclusion should be drawn.

From this dataset of 25 IPOs:

• Financial Services (66.7%) and Healthcare (60%) showed relatively better GMP alignment.

• Industrials showed moderate underperformance.

• Consumer-facing sectors (Retail, Accessories, FMCG, Home Furnishing) largely underperformed in this sample.

• No sector showed complete consistency.

3. Issue Size vs Accuracy

Let us divide IPOs based on issue size.

Large IPO- Issue Size >3000 Cr

No of IPOs- 7

Out of these 7 IPOs,

4 IPOs beat GMP expectations

3 IPOs underperform GMP expectations

0 IPOs are inline with GMP

57.1% beat GMP expectations, while 42.9% underperformed.

Large IPOs showed relatively better alignment with GMP compared to mid-size and small IPOs.

Mid Size IPOs- Issue Size >1000 Cr. but less than <3000 Cr.

Total IPOs: 6 Beat GMP: 1 Underperformed: 4 Inline: 1

66.7% underperformed GMP expectations.

Mid-size IPOs showed the weakest alignment with GMP in this dataset.

Small IPOs (< ₹1,000 Cr)

Total IPOs: 12 Beat GMP: 5 IPOs Underperformed GMP: 7 IPOs IPOs in line with GMP: 041.67% of IPOs beat GMP expectations, while 58.33% underperformed GMP expectations. So, in this dataset, small IPOs showed a higher tendency to underperform GMP expectations compared to beating them.

GMP Accuracy by Issue Size Category

What This Means for Investors 

We categorised GMP performance on the basis of three parameters:

GMP value, Sector-based behaviour, And issue size-based classification.

Based on these datasets, we observed the following:

If the GMP value is high or above 10% of the issue price, in this dataset a higher number of IPOs beat GMP expectations compared to underperforming.

Sector-wise, Healthcare and Financial Services IPOs have outperformed GMP expectations more frequently in this sample.

Issue size-wise, if the issue size is more than ₹3,000 Crore or large-ticket IPOs, the listing performance has shown relatively better alignment with GMP expectations compared to mid-size IPOs.

However, since GMP is unofficial and unregulated, this analysis should only be referred to as a historical observation from this dataset. It does not mean that listings will always outperform GMP expectations in similar situations.

Therefore, this should not be treated as investment advice. GMP should be used only as a sentiment indicator and not as the sole basis for applying to an IPO.

Conclusion

GMP is unpredictable and unofficial, and IPO listings do not consistently follow GMP expectations. This is evident from the above dataset of 25 Mainboard IPOs, where more than half of the IPOs underperformed GMP estimates.

While many investors use GMP as an indicator to capture short-term listing gains, it is not a foolproof method.

Therefore, when deciding to apply for an IPO, investors should not rely solely on GMP. Instead, they should adopt a long-term perspective, study the company’s fundamentals, valuation, sector outlook, and overall market conditions before making an investment decision.

FAQ

1. Is GMP a reliable indicator of IPO listing gains?

Based on the dataset of 25 IPOs, we can see that 14 IPOs, or over 50%, have underperformed GMP expectations. So, in this dataset, GMP was not consistently reliable in predicting IPO listing performance. Therefore, we cannot say that GMP is a reliable indicator of listing gains.

2. Does high GMP mean an IPO will give strong listing gains?

In our dataset of 25 IPOs, we analysed IPOs with high GMP, defined as 10% or more of the issue price, and found that 62.5% of IPOs beat GMP expectations, while 37.5% underperformed.

This shows that although high GMP IPOs had a higher proportion of beating expectations in this dataset, it does not guarantee strong listing gains. An IPO may list above GMP, below GMP, or even inline with GMP expectations.

Therefore, high GMP should not be treated as a certainty of strong listing performance.

3. Should investors apply for IPOs only based on GMP?

No, investors should not rely solely on GMP. Our analysis of 25 IPOs shows that GMP should not be treated as the sole indicator for predicting IPO listing gains.

Investors should also consider company fundamentals, valuation, sector outlook, and overall market conditions before applying for an IPO.