Shareholders score big after record Capitec earnings
Capitec, South Africa's biggest retail bank by customers, is increasing its payout to shareholders after record annual earnings.
The group's return on equity increased to 29% during the year under review, paving the way for the dividend payout to 55% from 50%.
Capitec reported a 30% jump in headline earnings to R13.6bn from R10.6bn a year ago with financial highlights including a 54% increase in net interest income after credit impairments to R11.9bn. The group reported a 7.5% credit loss ratio, a 61% increase in value added services and Capitec Connect to R4.4bn and a 44% jump in funeral and life income to R1.9bn.
The bank said more than 11-million clients now used the Capitec app to purchase airtime, data, electricity, vouchers and to pay bills.
'The bank captures more than 40% of South Africa's airtime and data transactions and one in five digital vehicle licence renewals now occur on its platform.'
Capitec CEO Gerrie Fourie said: 'Through our high-volume, low-margin business model, we are enabling everyone to access solutions that allow them to take control of their finances, protect their families, manage businesses and unlock opportunities. Our purpose-driven strategy is helping us scale sustainably and, most importantly, it is assisting 24-million South Africans to grow every day.'
Capitec, which was previously predominantly a credit lender, said its diversification strategy had paid off as personal banking now contributes 45% of total earnings, insurance accounts for 25%, strategic initiatives contribute 23% and business banking makes up 5%.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
21 hours ago
- IOL News
The ethical blind spots in SA's unemployment stats
South Africa's high unemployment also stands out globally. The writer says South Africa's metrics function as biopolitical instruments that perpetuate apartheid-era exclusion by rendering Black economic agency statistically non-existent. Image: File THIS opinion piece responds to former Statistician-General Pali Lehohla's article Debating the Labour Force Survey – A Response to Fourie's Critique. It serves as a rebuttal to his critique of my earlier article, Why Capitec's CEO Is Forcing SA to Rethink Its Unemployment Narrative, in which I argued that South Africa's unemployment figures fail to reflect the lived economic realities of the majority Black population. Lehohla claims that my article has 'amplified the debate' and insists on setting the record straight before it spirals into misinformation and speculation. However, my article did not reject StatsSA data outright. Instead, I argued that South Africa's high unemployment statistics are shaped by a biopolitical statistical system that invisibly erases informal economic activity and Black labour. This is largely due to restrictive measurement methodologies and the active suppression of the informal sector, unlike in other developing countries. I proposed the adoption of hybrid metrics and structural reforms to more accurately capture and support this vital, yet uncounted, segment of the economy. My stance aligns with UCT economist Haroon Bhorat, who engages constructively with Fourie's arguments rather than dismissing them entirely. Lehohla, however, dismisses Fourie's estimate of a 10% unemployment rate — based on informal economic activity — as 'abracadabra', 'lying', and the rant of a 'random businessman who profits from Black communities'. His anger masks a deeper crisis: South Africa's economic measurement system, though methodologically sound, is philosophically ill-equipped to account for the informal, digital, and survivalist nature of the majority-Black workforce. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Next Stay Close ✕ Lehohla defends StatsSA's unemployment figures based on their adherence to International Labour Organisation (ILO) standards and the Quarterly Labour Force Survey (QLFS). Yet, I argue that this technical rigour obscures vast swaths of economic activity. For instance, a township hairdresser or street vendor without formal records becomes statistically invisible. This creates a profound ethical issue: stark racial disparities in unemployment, with Black South Africans facing an expanded unemployment rate of 40%, compared to just 7% for white South Africans. South Africa's high unemployment also stands out globally. Countries like Mexico (55% informal, 4.5% unemployment) and Nigeria (85% informal, 3.34% unemployment) include self-reported informal work in their statistics. In contrast, South Africa's metrics function as biopolitical instruments that perpetuate apartheid-era exclusion by rendering Black economic agency statistically non-existent. Bhorat notes that UCT's Development Policy Research Unit (DPRU) consistently shows South Africa having one of the highest unemployment rates globally (33.6%), but also one of the lowest informality rates (about 16.3%). He highlights how most emerging economies address unemployment not by creating more formal jobs, but by allowing informal work to flourish. DPRU research further suggests that South Africa's unusually high unemployment is not primarily due to poor job growth or strict labour laws, but because our economy actively suppresses the informal sector. My advice to DPRU is not to shy away from confronting the moral failures or societal consequences that their data may obscure. Lehohla's refusal to engage meaningfully illustrates the difficulty of escaping the grip of orthodox economics and its limitations. Orthodox economics treats the economy — and by extension, social life — as a predictable machine operating in equilibrium. When official statistics diverge from lived experiences, the social contract built on citizens sharing data begins to erode, revealing a deep crisis within the discipline of economics. Unlike Adam Smith — who grounded market value in ethics and social relations in The Theory of Moral Sentiments — modern economics has severed this moral root, prioritising abstract mathematical models over real-world complexity. Joseph Stiglitz warns that GDP-centric metrics obscure true well-being. Persistent youth unemployment amidst trillions of rands in township transactions is not merely an error — it reflects a flawed measurement paradigm. Kenneth Boulding adds that modern economics builds on classical works like The Wealth of Nations and Das Kapital, which contain unrealised 'evolutionary potential' absent in contemporary models. He cautions that excluding economic history from graduate education produces 'idiots savant' — technically proficient economists who lack institutional understanding and historical insight. A balanced synthesis of modern analytical tools and classical wisdom can help bridge this divide, fostering critical engagement with economics as both a technical and humanistic discipline. Lehohla's defence rests on rigid positivism — the belief in the 'holy' authority of statistical processes — yet this glosses over the ethical roots of economic thought. For Smith, wealth was defined by the ability to command others' labour — a social relationship, not a cold data point. Modern economics, however, has decoupled itself from these normative foundations. As Stiglitz points out, most metrics conceal inequality and human suffering, reducing development to arithmetic rather than justice. This philosophical drift is evident in South Africa: while StatsSA reports rising unemployment, Capitec Bank documents over R2 trillion in township transactions — a vibrant economic reality invisible to official instruments. This disconnect signals a deeper crisis in economics. Equilibrium models and optimisation problems eclipse historical nuance, cultural dynamics, and power relations. Boulding warned of this technocratic drift, describing modern economists as technicians fluent in calculus but blind to social texture. In a direct response to me, Lehohla stated: 'There is no legacy to protect on my part, Bhungane (my totem), nor language to polish. When a lie is told, there is no reason to give it a different word. It is simply a 'lie,' and when an argument does not make sense, it is called nonsense in the English language, and when nonsense is given wheels and wings to fly, it is called 'rubbish.' Those who wish to opine should do so from research rather than from a hailer.' While I may not use his hyperbolic or confrontational language, I am neither uninformed nor inexperienced in public discourse. I have an academic and policy track record that makes me far more than 'a hailer.' As many have rightly pointed out, shouting or using aggressive language does not strengthen an argument. We must allow space for multiple viewpoints to ensure inclusive policymaking around poverty, inequality, land reform, and unemployment. Finally, Lehohla attributes South Africa's unique unemployment situation to two key factors: agricultural activity tied to land ownership and high levels of economic concentration. He argues that these factors challenge simplistic international comparisons and emphasise the centrality of the land question in shaping employment outcomes. No. Lehohla is deliberately conflating issues to obscure the fact that his revered unemployment metrics miss the ethical forest for the numerical trees. Siyayibanga le economy! * Siyabonga Hadebe is an independent commentator based in Geneva on socio-economic, political and global matters. ** The views expressed here do not reflect those of the Sunday Independent, Independent Media, or IOL. Get the real story on the go: Follow the Sunday Independent on WhatsApp.
TimesLIVE
5 days ago
- TimesLIVE
To allow ignorance about Stats SA to run supreme should not be allowed
I had hoped the forthcoming title And December Came: The Odyssey of Leadership —Navigating in Silence and Building Audaciously would hit the shelves in another six months, but a glimpse and preview had to come earlier. It was prompted by the unwelcome and vulgar articulations of Gerrie Fourie ( the CEO of Capitec, and trade and industry minister Parks Tau ( who decided to echo Fourie, and then ANC choristers were unleashed to lampoon the national numbers. Baas Fourie had spoken. ..
Daily Maverick
5 days ago
- Daily Maverick
Unemployment, poverty and inequality
Capitec's CEO argues that SA's jobless rate is as low as 10% and not 32,9% as stated by StatsSA — he's right, and the numbers are equally as wrong regarding poverty and inequality. Capitec CEO Gerrit Fourie argues SA's jobless rate is as low as 10% and not 32,9% as stated by Stats SA – is he right? Dineo Faku of the ST reports that many don't think so. Stats SA argues their quarterly labour force survey includes the self-employed. Peter Bruce warns that 'you ignore the gut of Fourie at your peril, with 24 million customers he knows a lot more that Stats SA does'. Clearly few have read the work of GG Alcock 'Kasinomics Revolution' who has made a career out of studying informal entrepreneurial endeavour across the townships of SA. His finding are that 'real' as opposed to 'official' unemployment does not exceed 12%. For 30 years our unemployment, poverty and inequality conventional wisdoms, trotted out by all and sundry, have remained the same: SA's unemployment is amongst the highest in the world 55% of South Africans live in poverty South Africa is the most unequal society in the world. There is no question that over the past 30 years many of the unemployment, poverty and inequality numbers have changed significantly. I am going to argue that Gerrit Fourie is more right than wrong and that the 'official stats' are more wrong than right. 1. Conventional Wisdom: SA has the highest unemployment in the world at 32,9% with youth unemployment at 45.5%: GG. Alcock, his book Kasinomics Revolution has comprehensively researched the size of the informal sector. Here are some numbers: Spaza shops account for R190-billion across 100,000 outlets. The fast food sector accounts for R90-billion across 50,000 outlets. The beauty sector accounts for R10-billion annually. The taxi sector accounts for R50-billion a year across 250,000 vehicles. The multi-sector is worth around R18-billion per year. Savings stokvels are worth R44-billion per year. The backroom rental sector in townships is worth R20-billion annually. The spaza shop rental economy is around R25-billion per year. And there are a multitude of other businesses in these sectors including: Kasi building, renovations, gates, burglar guards, chrome gutters etc. Services — plumbing, electricians, catering and event suppliers tent, toilet and chair hire. Alcohol — taverns and shebeens. Cultural — muti, livestock, sangoma, inyanga, unveilings, funeral. Financial — mashonisa, stokvel, masicwabisane. Youth unemployment at 45.5% Mamapudi Nkgadima of Africa Response Survey writes 'To solve South Africa's dismaying youth unemployment challenge we must end the pervasive narrative that South Africans, and particularly young unemployed South Africans, are reliant on the government. It's quite simply not true, as a recent African Response survey has revealed. Among the respondents who classified themselves as unemployed and looking for work, 41% are earning up to R15 000 a month through income-generating activities such as baking, building and hairdressing. What this shows is that many of our young people are resilient and inventive about making ends meet. We need to reinforce that and build their confidence so that that attitude catches on.' The EY Global Shadow Economy Report 2025 confirms ours is at 26% amongst the highest globally. Based on these numbers alone it would seem that the informal sector could be approaching R1 trillion (25% of GDP) per annum where +/- 8 million people are involved in income generating activities. Reality Check: If these numbers are representative real unemployment is somewhere between 10 and 15% Conventional Wisdom: 55% of South Africans live in poverty There are three categories of poverty (The Economist): Abject poverty: defined as 'a wretched life where people lack education, healthcare, proper clothing, hygiene, access to fresh water and shelter, and enough food for physical and mental health.' Moderate poverty: A measure of being poor, 'poor' being defined as between a lower-bound and upper-bound poverty line, Relative poverty: A measure of inequality, what the GINI co-efficient sets out to do. The World Bank ranks poverty on the basis of income. In South Africa (SA), the national poverty lines are measured as the minimum amount of money you need to afford basic necessities like food and other essentials. The poverty lines are categorised as follows: the food poverty line (FPL) is R796 per month, the lower-bound poverty line (LBPL) is R1,109 per month (R4,436 for a family of four) and the upper-bound poverty line (UBPL) is R1,634 per month (R6,536 for a family of four). In 2024, it was estimated that 13.2 million people in South Africa lived in extreme poverty, according to Statista. Additionally, approximately 55% of the South African population, or 30.3 million people, lived below the national upper-bound poverty line. But these numbers do not include government transfers, subsidies and the like — see below (using 2023 figures). If you were to estimate the monetary value of the distributed 'income and consumption' of the above for a family of two parents/or guardians, one pensioner, and two children it would be as follows: Child grant at R530 x2= R1,060 Pensioner foster care x 1 = R1,,180 Old age pension x 1= R2,080 Free schooling x 2 = R1,200* Free food at school x 2 = R1,000* Subsidised school transport x 2 = R400 Subsidised water = R300* Subsidised electricity = R300* Subsidised housing = R1,200* Total = R8,720 per month per household, before any earned income is added! * Here are my estimates of the monetary value of these benefits/subsidies as consumption. Therefore, to claim that 55% of South Africans live below the upper-bound poverty line and that 22% live in extreme poverty cannot be defended in terms of the numbers above. Reality check: If the above numbers were included in the calculation of poverty, would it change the 'stats'? I would submit that 10% of our population would be defined as living in abject poverty (Economist) with 35% living in moderate poverty (poor). Conventional wisdom: South Africa is the most unequal society in the world. The GINI co-efficient, the measure of inequality, is defined as 'measuring the extent to which the distribution of income or consumption among individuals or households within an economy deviates from a perfectly equal distribution. A Gini index of 0 represents perfect equality, while an index of 1 implies perfect inequality'. Our score, which hasn't changed over 30 years, is between .61 and .65 and states that our income inequality is among the 'worst in the world'. Definitions Would it be fair to argue that the distribution of 'income or consumption' includes all the income a household receives no matter the source, both earned and unearned; and that consumption is of all that is used by the household, whether as a result of government transfers and free services, or personal choice. SA over the past 30 years According to the 2024 South Africa Survey published by the Institute of Race Relations, expenditure on social services has risen from R63-billion (1995) to R1.27-trillion (2023), a 1,900% increase in nominal terms (at 5% inflation over 30 years R63-billion would have risen to R272-billion — a 330% increase). The number of formal houses has trebled in the last 30 years, 60% of which are owned. So do the sums! 8 million people working in the informal sector with 41% of unemployed youth hustling at R15 000 per month. Government transfers have increased from 2,046702 recipients in 1996 to 18,829716 in 2023. Child support grants increased from 0 in 1995 to 13,147937 in 2023. There are 15 372 000 formal housing structures, 90% of which have access to electricity and water (with four people to each household that would account for 61488 000 citizens with permanent shelter. A family of two kids, two guardians and a Gogo would access approximately R8,000 in government transfers. CONCLUSION So the question is, why are reputable organisations, think-thanks, research houses, political parties, NGO charities, labour unions and Stats SA constantly reminding us that we are the most unequal society in the world, that poverty remains stubbornly high at 55%, and that unemployment is on the rise at 32.9%? Is it a government agenda, aimed at justifying BBBEE, Equity legislation, grants and a welfare state – all in the pursuit of justifying the National Democratic Revolution? Is it a think-tank agenda, aimed at proving that 30 years of ANC rule has delivered nothing? Is it an NGO agenda, sticking to the 'old' numbers to justify their 'current' needs? Is it a labour union agenda, using apartheid legacy 'numbers' to defend non-CPI related wage demands? Is it a Stats SA agenda aimed at justifying the spend on government transfers and grants? I'm not for one minute suggesting that unemployment, poverty and inequality are not fundamental challenges bedeviling transformation and hampering redress in South Africa. But I am suggesting, as does Gerrit Fourie, that the numbers reflect our changing reality and that there has been positive upward movement which the official stats do not represent. We need more people like CEO Gerrit Fourie, author GG Alcock, researcher JP Landman, think-tank The Institute of Race Relations who are doing the research, digging up the facts, calling out the numbers to shout louder and change our current conventional wisdom madness. DM
