Zomato vs Swiggy: Quick commerce and food delivery giants Zomato and Swiggy have released their financial performances for the September quarter of fiscal 2025-26 (FY26). And what’s common between the two? Lower profitability, but a quick growth in the quick commerce space.
While Swiggy continued to see widening of losses on a yearly basis, Zomato-parent Eternal also witnessed a steep dent to its bottom line amid higher marketing spends. ₹1,092 crore”>Swiggy’s loss in Q2 stood at ₹1,092 crore, significantly higher than the ₹626 crore loss posted a year ago. Meanwhile, Zomato saw a sharp 63% year-on-year drawdown in profit to ₹65 crore.
Yet, the revenue expansion remained strong for both players: Swiggy recorded 54% YoY growth to ₹5561 crore and Zomato 2.72x to ₹13,590 crore.
Bottomline — Both companies are chasing higher market share, compromising margins for faster growth. Food tech giants are vying for a bigger share in the quick commerce space, where Zomato’s Blinkit currently holds dominance.
Quick commerce performance holds the key
In the case of Eternal, while the core food-delivery segment showed stability, its share of total revenue is gradually giving way to Blinkit, which now anchors the group’s growth narrative. Blinkit contributed ₹9,891 crore, or nearly three-fourths of Zomato’s total revenue. Swiggy’s revenue also expanded robustly, with Instamart doubling its contribution year-on-year. This was the third straight quarter in which Instamart has consistently clocked over 100% GOV growth.
Both companies are aggressively investing in faster delivery times, deeper category expansion, and dark-store infrastructure — a playbook that prioritises market dominance over short-term profitability.
“Amid the two, Eternal’s Blinkit saw noteworthy growth in net order value (NOV) of 137% and further improvements in profitability metrics at the EBITDA level, due to better unit economics. While Swiggy’s Instamart saw strong growth, it found itself lagging far behind in terms of new stores opened, with only 40 new stores, versus 272 for Blinkit in Q2 alone,” noted Vishnu Kant Upadhyay, AVP- Research & Advisory, Master Capital Services.
Regardless of profitability, the margin pressure at both players is a result of aggressive pricing, user acquisition, and expansion habits, but Eternal is showing operational leverage and a path to profitability with its larger size of operations, added Kant.
Food delivery business steady
The food delivery business showed early signs of recovery after five quarters of slowing growth for Eternal. Net order value rose 14% year-on-year in the September quarter, while profitability improved to a record high of 5.3% of NOV, up from 5% in the previous quarter.
As for Swiggy, the food delivery business saw a steady 18.8% YoY GOV growth to ₹8,542 crore even amidst volatile macro-consumption trends and higher-than-usual rainfall.
Harshal Dasani, Business Head, INVAsset PMS, said that the overarching message from both earnings is that India’s food-tech sector is evolving into a quick-commerce duopoly, where scale and speed are being bought at the expense of near-term margins. “The pivot from restaurant delivery to groceries and convenience retail is working, but investors must accept that sustained profitability will depend on execution discipline, operating leverage, and rational competition in this high-capex phase,” Dasani added.
Swiggy vs Zomato: Which stock to buy?
Given Zomato’s scale and profitability, analysts prefer it over Swiggy as their pick from the food delivery and quick commerce space. Its quick-commerce integration with Blinkit is already yielding operating leverage and higher transaction density, placing it closer to breakeven. Swiggy’s growth is commendable but more cash-intensive, with a slower path to profitability, according to Dasani.
Kant, echoing similar views, said that Eternal is looking like a better pick from a sustainability and conviction point of view. Eternal is already making money with positive margins, strong growth, and overall expansion, while Swiggy’s quick commerce arm is still burning cash heavily, he said. “The Eternal story offers a better outlook, comparing the risk-to-reward ratio and execution risk, which can’t be ignored given the competitive environment of aggressive pricing, user acquisition, and expansion habits, but Eternal is showing operational leverage and path to profitability with its larger size of operations,” according to the analyst.
In the last year, Eternal share price has rallied 27%, even though it has shed 5% in the last month amid steady gains. Meanwhile, Swiggy shares, set to complete one year of listing on November 13, have fallen 25% year-to-date (YTD), highlighting investor preference for Eternal.
Disclaimer: This story is for educational purposes only. The views and recommendations expressed are those of individual analysts or broking firms, not Mint. We advise investors to consult with certified experts before making any investment decisions, as market conditions can change rapidly and circumstances may vary.
