Swiggy shares fell as much as 17% on Friday to hit a 52-week low of ₹174.90 on the BSE, recovering slightly to trade around ₹181 by afternoon. The selloff followed Q2 FY27 results published Thursday — and the market’s reaction was less about what Swiggy reported and more about what the numbers revealed when placed next to Blinkit’s.
Revenue from operations rose 36% year-on-year to ₹7,571 crore. The consolidated net loss narrowed 15.6% from ₹1,092 crore a year ago to ₹922 crore. Food delivery and out-of-home consumption both improved profitability. In any other context, those would be defensible numbers for a company still scaling.
The problem is Instamart. Swiggy’s quick-commerce arm posted an adjusted EBITDA loss of ₹895 crore for the quarter — up from ₹778 crore in Q1 FY27 and ₹849 crore in Q2 FY26. Instamart added 69 dark stores in the quarter, bringing its total network to 1,240 stores across 5.2 million square feet, and net order value grew 31.4% year-on-year to ₹6,954 crore. The growth is real. The cost of it is the issue: contribution margin deteriorated to -1.4% from -0.3% in Q1, driven by customer incentivisation and higher fixed costs from the store expansion.
The Blinkit comparison is the one that stings. While Instamart burned ₹895 crore at the adjusted EBITDA level in Q2, Blinkit — Eternal’s quick-commerce arm — posted positive adjusted EBITDA of ₹184 crore in the same period. That’s a swing of more than ₹1,000 crore between the two leading quick-commerce platforms in a single quarter. Eternal also reported a net profit of ₹125 crore for Q2 against revenue of ₹24,138 crore, a figure that makes Swiggy’s consolidated numbers look like a different category of business.
Goldman Sachs, HSBC, CLSA, Bernstein, JPMorgan, and Citi have all cut their target prices following the results. Jefferies noted that at current price levels, the stock doesn’t even reflect the standalone value of the food delivery business and cash holdings — meaning the market is effectively ascribing negative value to Instamart.
The broader quick-commerce context makes Swiggy’s position harder to read. Amazon committed $3 billion to the Indian quick-commerce market last month, targeting 1,300 dark stores by April 2027. Zepto continues to scale aggressively. Blinkit is profitable and expanding. In that environment, Instamart’s losses aren’t just an operational drag — they represent the cost of holding ground in a market where the competition has either found profitability or has the balance sheet to keep bleeding indefinitely.
Swiggy has called the dark store expansion a necessary investment. Six consecutive quarters of widening quick-commerce losses haven’t changed that position. However, friday’s stock move suggests investors have a different read.