Occupancy · 04
Centre drill down
A centre open nine months and a centre open six years should never appear in the same average. Growth centres are shown against their own fill trajectory, not against portfolio occupancy.
Centres in scope
24
The full national portfolio
Growth centres
8
Open 24 months or less
Beds below target in growth centres
39
Carrying full lease and fit-out cost
Mature centre occupancy
86.1%
The number the ramp is diluting
Growth centre occupancy
80.9%
▲ 19.5%8-month climb
Notices outstanding
45
▼ 30%vs 8 months ago
Committed move-ins
218
Signed and dated, all centres
Portfolio-wide NPS
77
148 notices served, trailing period
All centres
Sorted by city, with ramp status separated
| Centre | City | Micro-market | Beds | Occupancy | Months open | On notice | Committed in | Rate | NPS | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cadabam's Kanakapura Road | Bengaluru | Kanakapura Road | 200 | 87.7% | 63 | 7 | 9 | ₹13,500 | 88 | Mature · on target |
| Cadabam’s Jayanagar | Bengaluru | Jayanagar | 240 | 81.3% | 60 | 4 | 5 | ₹13,300 | 73 | Mature · below target |
| Cadabam's Whitefield | Bengaluru | Whitefield | 180 | 88.6% | 39 | 4 | 4 | ₹11,700 | 74 | Mature · on target |
| Cadabam’s GBB Kanakapura | Bengaluru | Kanakapura | 320 | 91.7% | 57 | 3 | 6 | ₹10,500 | 78 | Mature · full |
| Cadabam's Indiranagar | Bengaluru | Indiranagar | 105 | 85.1% | 22 | 3 | 9 | ₹11,200 | 87 | Ramp · 0 mo to target |
| Cadabam’s Hebbal | Bengaluru | Hebbal | 105 | 87.3% | 55 | 7 | 4 | ₹10,100 | 82 | Mature · on target |
| Cadabam's Sarjapura | Bengaluru | Sarjapura | 160 | 89.0% | 70 | 6 | 14 | ₹9,600 | 84 | Mature · on target |
| Cadabam’s Bannerghatta | Bengaluru | Bannerghatta | 230 | 87.6% | 71 | 12 | 8 | ₹11,300 | 77 | Mature · on target |
| Cadabam's Rajajinagar | Bengaluru | Rajajinagar | 190 | 85.9% | 24 | 9 | 15 | ₹9,400 | 74 | Ramp · 0 mo to target |
| Cadabam’s Electronic City | Bengaluru | Electronic City | 185 | 90.3% | 68 | 11 | 11 | ₹8,200 | 82 | Mature · full |
| Cadabam's Gachibowli | Hyderabad | Gachibowli | 160 | 82.7% | 76 | 5 | 8 | ₹17,500 | 74 | Mature · below target |
| Cadabam’s Banjara Hills | Hyderabad | Banjara Hills | 125 | 79.7% | 23 | 3 | 9 | ₹15,800 | 69 | Ramp · 2 mo to target |
| Cadabam's Vijayanagar | Mysuru | Vijayanagar | 175 | 83.7% | 14 | 9 | 10 | ₹10,400 | 79 | Ramp · 1 mo to target |
| Cadabam’s Kuvempunagar | Mysuru | Kuvempunagar | 205 | 84.9% | 71 | 6 | 13 | ₹9,400 | 71 | Mature · below target |
| Cadabam's Anna Nagar | Chennai | Anna Nagar | 225 | 85.5% | 66 | 10 | 9 | ₹16,100 | 79 | Mature · on target |
| Cadabam’s T Nagar | Chennai | T Nagar | 120 | 75.9% | 9 | 3 | 6 | ₹15,900 | 76 | Ramp · 4 mo to target |
| Cadabam's Vidyanagar | Hubballi | Vidyanagar | 150 | 87.5% | 48 | 3 | 15 | ₹17,300 | 81 | Mature · on target |
| Cadabam’s Gokul Road | Hubballi | Gokul Road | 160 | 83.5% | 42 | 4 | 13 | ₹14,200 | 73 | Mature · below target |
| Cadabam's Kadri | Mangaluru | Kadri | 200 | 84.2% | 66 | 12 | 9 | ₹11,400 | 83 | Mature · below target |
| Cadabam’s Bejai | Mangaluru | Bejai | 160 | 87.7% | 24 | 6 | 14 | ₹10,700 | 84 | Ramp · 0 mo to target |
| Cadabam's Kakkanad | Kochi | Kakkanad | 130 | 75.9% | 24 | 7 | 7 | ₹10,300 | 73 | Ramp · 4 mo to target |
| Cadabam’s Panampilly | Kochi | Panampilly | 90 | 77.2% | 14 | 4 | 4 | ₹10,300 | 75 | Ramp · 3 mo to target |
| Cadabam's Benz Circle | Vijayawada | Benz Circle | 125 | 74.4% | 36 | 3 | 9 | ₹10,700 | 77 | Mature · below target |
| Cadabam’s Gunadala | Vijayawada | Gunadala | 120 | 84.0% | 49 | 7 | 7 | ₹8,900 | 61 | Mature · below target |
Occupancy by city and age band
Average occupancy, cross-tabbed against months open
| ≤24 mo | 25–48 mo | 49–72 mo | 72 mo+ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bengaluru | 86% | 89% | 88% | 0% |
| Hyderabad | 80% | 0% | 0% | 83% |
| Mysuru | 84% | 0% | 85% | 0% |
| Chennai | 76% | 0% | 86% | 0% |
| Hubballi | 0% | 86% | 0% | 0% |
| Mangaluru | 88% | 0% | 84% | 0% |
| Kochi | 77% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| Vijayawada | 0% | 74% | 84% | 0% |
Highest NPS centres
Top six, portfolio-wide
A worked example
Sort by months open and the two problems separate
Sort this table by months open and the ramp problem separates itself from the performance problem. A centre fourteen months old sitting eight hundred basis points below target is on schedule. A centre six years old sitting at the same number is not, and the two are indistinguishable in any portfolio average. Every growth centre in the table carries beds at full lease, fit-out and community cost with no revenue against them, and the honest question is never why they are behind, it is whether the current fill rate is the fastest available given the unserved demand logged in the same micro-market.
Why ramp is separated
Arithmetic, not failure
Front-loaded expansion depresses the occupancy ratio by arithmetic, not by failure: beds enter the denominator on the day the centre opens and enter the numerator over the following two years. Blending them into one portfolio number makes a good quarter look flat and hides a genuinely underperforming mature centre behind a well-ramping new one. Two numbers, always reported separately, is the only honest way to read this.
What the drill-down shows
Cross-referencing ramp trend, notices and the heat grid
Growth centre occupancy is up 19.5 points in eight months
RampThe ramp cohort is filling faster than the portfolio average implies once it is read on its own trajectory.
Notices outstanding down 30% over the same window
RetentionFewer centres are losing beds faster than growth centres are filling them, which is the direction that matters more than the level.
Older centres in thinner cities lag the age-band average
Heat gridThe heat grid shows occupancy dropping off in the 49–72 month band for smaller cities, worth a closer look before it is mistaken for a ramp issue.
Demo dataFigures on this screen are illustrative, from a deterministic model, for walkthrough purposes only.