Main summary
According to BTU researchers’ calculations, demand deposits accounted for approximately 68% of the increase in Georgia’s bank deposits during September. Growing account balances expand financing possibilities, but their conversion into long-term business credit also depends on maturity, currency and the borrower’s capacity-not simply the amount of money in the system.
Three key takeaways
- Georgia’s National Bank reported on 26 October that demand deposits rose by GEL 1.23 billion in September 2026 and term deposits by GEL 590.18 million; BTU calculates that demand balances represented approximately 68% of their combined increase.
- Exchange-rate-adjusted annual deposit growth was 20.45%, compared with 16.91% for loans in September; BTU calculates a 3.54-percentage-point difference, which is a comparison of growth rates rather than a measure of unused money.
- For a Georgian enterprise, improved financing means a repayment period and currency aligned with its income; aggregate deposit growth alone guarantees neither cheaper credit nor approval of an application.
The composition of growth tells a richer story
The National Bank of Georgia published new September lending and deposit figures on 26 October. Deposits stood at GEL 77.44 billion at month-end, while loans reached GEL 78.14 billion. Both totals exclude interbank transactions. Expansion is important, but businesses gain more from asking what kind of funds are entering the system and under what conditions they can support economic financing. [1–3]
BTU’s calculation isolates that distinction. Demand-deposit balances increased by approximately GEL 1.23 billion during September, against GEL 590.18 million for term deposits. Demand balances represented approximately 68% of the combined increase. Put simply, around sixty-eight of each additional hundred lari accumulated in accounts distinguished by access on demand, rather than an agreed extended period of commitment.
The calculation measures a monthly change in balances. Funds arrive, are spent and transferred throughout the month; comparing two month-end balances reveals the net result. Approximately 68% therefore describes the composition of September’s additional balances, rounded to reflect the precision of the published inputs.
Deposit increases: September 2026 versus end-August
| Category | Increase, GEL million | Share of combined increase |
|---|---|---|
| Demand | Approximately 1,230 | Approximately 68% |
| Term | 590.18 | Approximately 32% |
| Sum of components | Approximately 1,820.18 | 100% |
Source: NBG [3]. Shares and component sum are BTU calculations. The demand increase is rounded; the published aggregate increase is approximately GEL 1,820m. These are nominal monthly stock changes, not exchange-rate-adjusted annual growth rates.
Accessibility and stability are different concepts
A demand account preserves flexibility for a household or enterprise. Salaries, daily purchases, taxes and inventory payments fall on different dates. Access to money when needed is an economic service, not evidence of funds lying idle. The growth of these accounts may be consistent with that function becoming more important, although a single month’s statistics cannot identify depositors’ motives.
For a bank, a long-term loan creates an asset that the borrower repays over several years. Financing it requires attention not only to today’s balances but to the predictability of retained funding, alternative funding sources and the ability to meet unexpected withdrawals. Managing this distinction is part of normal financial intermediation. Its existence does not itself indicate a problem.
Many small accounts can together form a persistent aggregate balance. The Basel international framework therefore considers customer characteristics and behavioural stability alongside maturity. The essential boundary is simple: demand funding is not automatically unstable, and term funding is not necessarily long-dated. This article measures the composition of an increase, not the financial resilience of any bank. [4]
BTU researchers’ interpretation is narrower: the resources held in bank accounts increased, and a large part of the increase occurred in products compatible with retaining immediate access. That creates possibilities for payment services and financing. Determining how far those possibilities translate into longer-term credit requires additional information. A positive story about volume should not automatically become a conclusion about maturity.
Faster growth does not promise cheaper loans
The annual comparison also shows expansion. With exchange-rate effects removed, September deposits grew by 20.45% and loans by 16.91%. BTU calculates a difference of 3.54 percentage points. Removing exchange-rate valuation effects makes the annual expansion rates more comparable.
The gap shows that comparable annual deposit expansion was faster. The two growth rates apply to different starting stocks, while banks hold assets beyond loans and funding beyond deposits, including capital. Neither the growth-rate gap nor the difference between headline loan and deposit totals can establish unused money or a funding deficit. Assessing financing conditions requires the broader balance sheet.
The price of a loan is not determined by abundant deposits alone. The reliability of the borrower’s income, repayment period, collateral and competition affect pricing in different ways. Deposit expansion may make funding easier to obtain, but one month’s national figures cannot identify whose interest rate will fall or when. The release supports better financial planning rather than a promise of cheaper credit.
Maturity transformation is one of banking’s important economic functions. Accounts accessible to different customers can help finance investments over a longer horizon when funding persistence and possible withdrawals are appropriately managed. Liquid assets, diverse funding sources and capital help support that process. The difference between flexible deposits and longer business loans is a task for productive intermediation, not a predetermined contradiction.
Better cash planning by businesses helps make the connection. A sale, a profit and receipt of money in an account may occur at different times. A supplier can require payment before revenue arrives, while equipment generates benefits across several periods. When a company makes that sequence clear, the financing discussion becomes more specific: when is the money needed, and which cash flow will repay it? September’s national figures describe the wider setting; the enterprise’s own accounts give the discussion its substance.
Currency is the second question for Georgian businesses
Maturity is not the only relevant characteristic. At the end of September, banks’ lari loans to resident legal entities totalled GEL 11.32 billion. Their foreign-currency loans had a lari equivalent of GEL 22.35 billion. BTU calculates that foreign currency represented approximately 66% of these two categories combined. This is a share of outstanding credit to a specified sector, not the percentage of enterprises borrowing in foreign currency. [2]
Foreign-currency loans do not all create the same risk. An enterprise earning revenue in the borrowing currency differs from one selling primarily in lari. The national total does not reveal whether those incomes and obligations match. Nevertheless, the share helps explain why asking how much money banks hold is insufficient: a borrower also needs to know whether available financing matches the currency and timing of its own receipts.
That question matters to a manufacturer buying equipment, a hotel with seasonal revenue and a wholesaler whose funds circulate through inventory and receivables. All may be growing, yet a single repayment schedule will not suit them equally. Aggregate September credit expansion cannot establish that any particular sector’s demand for finance has been met. The analytical conclusion concerns suitability of terms, not measured access to credit.
The release also distinguishes funding prices by currency. September’s weighted average annual market rate on term deposits was 8.66% for lari and 2.40% for foreign currency. These are official market averages, not an individual bank’s offer. They underline that bank funding is not a homogeneous product: its cost differs by currency, while an enterprise’s financing needs depend on the currency in which it can service obligations. [3]
This reading is useful on both sides of the relationship. Depositors need to align accessibility and income with their payment needs; borrowers need to align investment horizons and repayment with their own receipts. The intermediary connects these different needs so that daily payments can continue while longer projects obtain suitable financing. The economic opportunity lies in the quality of that connection, not only in the quantity of money accumulated in accounts.
What should change in business decisions
BTU researchers see the most useful application of these figures in improving how firms frame financing choices. When planning expansion, an enterprise should distinguish funding for everyday turnover from investment that earns revenue gradually. Flexibility is often essential for the first; the second needs a repayment horizon aligned with the asset’s economic life and actual cash generation. Describing both as a generic need for a loan conceals an important distinction.
Companies placing their own available funds face the other side of the relationship. Balances needed for daily payments serve a different purpose from resources reserved for later use. Selecting a product requires considering access, conditions and the payment calendar, not only the headline interest rate. This is a general planning principle, not a recommendation of a particular bank product or investment decision.
The next useful observation is whether demand balances continue growing, how term funding changes and what happens to lending conditions. One September cannot establish a persistent trend or prove a seasonal cause. A combined view of maturities, depositor groups and currencies would be especially valuable: another increase in the aggregate balance would not, by itself, answer the underlying question.
Conclusion
Georgia’s September banking story is about more than additional money. BTU’s decomposition indicates that approximately two-thirds of the deposit increase came through demand accounts, expanding accessible resources for businesses and households without automatically establishing an equivalent rise in long-term finance. The opportunity lies in productive intermediation; the interpretive risk is reading the total without considering maturity, currency and the conditions facing an actual borrower.
Questions and answers
Is approximately 68% the share of all deposits?
It is the demand-deposit share of September’s additional balances, calculated from the combined increases in demand and term deposits.
Are demand deposits always unstable?
Access on demand and behavioural stability are different characteristics. Customer groups, relationships and other conditions also influence persistence.
Why does faster deposit growth not establish cheaper credit?
Loan terms reflect maturity, borrower income, risk and competition as well as funding. Aggregate deposit growth cannot determine the price of an individual offer.
Which further data would strengthen the assessment?
Comparable information on remaining deposit maturities, depositor groups and currencies, alongside actual terms on new loans and changes in those terms.