The paper presents a randomized evaluation of a group-lending microcredit program in Hyderabad, India. The study found that while microcredit increased take-up in treatment areas, it did not significantly affect consumption, health, education, or women's empowerment. Small business investment and profits increased, but durable goods expenditure rose while "temptation goods" expenditure declined. Two years later, the differences between treatment and control areas were minimal. The study highlights that microcredit may help some households make different intertemporal consumption choices, but does not lead to the miraculous social transformation some proponents claim. Its primary impact seems to be allowing some households to sacrifice immediate utility to finance lumpy purchases or establish businesses. The results suggest that microcredit is not for every household and does not lead to significant social transformation. The study also notes that microcredit may help the most profitable businesses the most, but average consumption remains unchanged. The results are robust across different contexts and suggest that microcredit's impact is limited. The study also finds that microcredit does not significantly affect women's empowerment or human development outcomes. The results are important for understanding the effectiveness of microcredit programs and their impact on households and businesses. The study is part of a broader set of evaluations of microfinance programs in different contexts, which show similar results. The study also notes that microcredit may help some households make different intertemporal consumption choices, but does not lead to significant social transformation. The results suggest that microcredit is not for every household and does not lead to significant social transformation. The study also finds that microcredit may help the most profitable businesses the most, but average consumption remains unchanged. The results are robust across different contexts and suggest that microcredit's impact is limited. The study also notes that microcredit does not significantly affect women's empowerment or human development outcomes. The results are important for understanding the effectiveness of microcredit programs and their impact on households and businesses. The study is part of a broader set of evaluations of microfinance programs in different contexts, which show similar results.The paper presents a randomized evaluation of a group-lending microcredit program in Hyderabad, India. The study found that while microcredit increased take-up in treatment areas, it did not significantly affect consumption, health, education, or women's empowerment. Small business investment and profits increased, but durable goods expenditure rose while "temptation goods" expenditure declined. Two years later, the differences between treatment and control areas were minimal. The study highlights that microcredit may help some households make different intertemporal consumption choices, but does not lead to the miraculous social transformation some proponents claim. Its primary impact seems to be allowing some households to sacrifice immediate utility to finance lumpy purchases or establish businesses. The results suggest that microcredit is not for every household and does not lead to significant social transformation. The study also notes that microcredit may help the most profitable businesses the most, but average consumption remains unchanged. The results are robust across different contexts and suggest that microcredit's impact is limited. The study also finds that microcredit does not significantly affect women's empowerment or human development outcomes. The results are important for understanding the effectiveness of microcredit programs and their impact on households and businesses. The study is part of a broader set of evaluations of microfinance programs in different contexts, which show similar results. The study also notes that microcredit may help some households make different intertemporal consumption choices, but does not lead to significant social transformation. The results suggest that microcredit is not for every household and does not lead to significant social transformation. The study also finds that microcredit may help the most profitable businesses the most, but average consumption remains unchanged. The results are robust across different contexts and suggest that microcredit's impact is limited. The study also notes that microcredit does not significantly affect women's empowerment or human development outcomes. The results are important for understanding the effectiveness of microcredit programs and their impact on households and businesses. The study is part of a broader set of evaluations of microfinance programs in different contexts, which show similar results.