Swiggy Q3 loss widens to ₹1,065 crore despite surge in food, quick commerce growth

Swiggy Q3 loss widens to ₹1,065 crore despite surge in food, quick commerce growth

Q3 results:Swiggy's food delivery business reported a 20.5% year-on-year (YoY) increase in Gross Order Value (GOV), reaching ₹8,959 crore. Monthly transacting users grew 22% YoY to 18.1 million, while adjusted EBITDA margins improved to 3.0% of GOV — the highest in two years.

Advertisement
Despite strong topline growth, the company acknowledged that recent consumer-focused investments aimed at boosting order volume — particularly in low average order value (AOV) segments — have not yielded the desired results.Despite strong topline growth, the company acknowledged that recent consumer-focused investments aimed at boosting order volume — particularly in low average order value (AOV) segments — have not yielded the desired results.
Business Today Desk
  • Jan 29, 2026,
  • Updated Jan 29, 2026 8:31 PM IST

Food delivery and quick commerce major Swiggy, which owns Instamart, on January 29 reported a widening of its consolidated losses for the quarter ended December 31, 2025, to ₹1,065 crore. This marks a sharp rise from ₹799 crore in the corresponding period a year earlier, driven by continued losses in its quick commerce segment and increased advertising and sales expenditure.

Advertisement

Related Articles

Despite strong topline growth, the company acknowledged that recent consumer-focused investments aimed at boosting order volume — particularly in low average order value (AOV) segments — have not yielded the desired results.

“We have consciously chosen not to participate in deep-discount-driven, purely-volume-focused growth that sacrifices AOVs and margins,” said Swiggy co-founder and Group CEO Sriharsha Majety in a letter to shareholders.

During the third quarter, Swiggy’s revenue from operations jumped to ₹6,148 crore, compared to ₹3,993 crore a year ago. However, total expenses rose to ₹7,298 crore from ₹4,898 crore in the same period last fiscal.

Swiggy's food delivery business reported a 20.5% year-on-year (YoY) increase in Gross Order Value (GOV), reaching ₹8,959 crore. Monthly transacting users grew 22% YoY to 18.1 million, while adjusted EBITDA margins improved to 3.0% of GOV — the highest in two years.

Advertisement

Meanwhile, Instamart’s GOV more than doubled, rising 103% YoY to ₹7,938 crore, with average order value climbing 39.7% to ₹746. The business reported a ₹908 crore loss for the quarter, though adjusted EBITDA margin improved to -11.4% from -12.1% in Q2. The company added 34 dark stores, taking the network to 1,136 across 131 cities, covering 4.8 million sq. ft.

Addressing the ongoing debate around delivery timelines and gig worker conditions, Swiggy clarified that delivery partners are not pressured or penalised for timelines. Instead, the platform’s model aims to shrink last-mile distances through dense dark store placement, which allows partners to complete more orders within the same timeframe. “As a result, earnings per hour for our delivery partners have consistently continued to increase,” the company said, attributing this to order batching, geographic densification, and seasonal incentives.

Advertisement

Over the last four quarters, Swiggy said it had reallocated some consumer-facing investments to support long-term structural improvements, even amid what it described as “irrational competition.” These investments are now under review in light of underwhelming returns on lower consumer-side monetisation, particularly at the lower end of the AOV pyramid.

Food delivery and quick commerce major Swiggy, which owns Instamart, on January 29 reported a widening of its consolidated losses for the quarter ended December 31, 2025, to ₹1,065 crore. This marks a sharp rise from ₹799 crore in the corresponding period a year earlier, driven by continued losses in its quick commerce segment and increased advertising and sales expenditure.

Advertisement

Related Articles

Despite strong topline growth, the company acknowledged that recent consumer-focused investments aimed at boosting order volume — particularly in low average order value (AOV) segments — have not yielded the desired results.

“We have consciously chosen not to participate in deep-discount-driven, purely-volume-focused growth that sacrifices AOVs and margins,” said Swiggy co-founder and Group CEO Sriharsha Majety in a letter to shareholders.

During the third quarter, Swiggy’s revenue from operations jumped to ₹6,148 crore, compared to ₹3,993 crore a year ago. However, total expenses rose to ₹7,298 crore from ₹4,898 crore in the same period last fiscal.

Swiggy's food delivery business reported a 20.5% year-on-year (YoY) increase in Gross Order Value (GOV), reaching ₹8,959 crore. Monthly transacting users grew 22% YoY to 18.1 million, while adjusted EBITDA margins improved to 3.0% of GOV — the highest in two years.

Advertisement

Meanwhile, Instamart’s GOV more than doubled, rising 103% YoY to ₹7,938 crore, with average order value climbing 39.7% to ₹746. The business reported a ₹908 crore loss for the quarter, though adjusted EBITDA margin improved to -11.4% from -12.1% in Q2. The company added 34 dark stores, taking the network to 1,136 across 131 cities, covering 4.8 million sq. ft.

Addressing the ongoing debate around delivery timelines and gig worker conditions, Swiggy clarified that delivery partners are not pressured or penalised for timelines. Instead, the platform’s model aims to shrink last-mile distances through dense dark store placement, which allows partners to complete more orders within the same timeframe. “As a result, earnings per hour for our delivery partners have consistently continued to increase,” the company said, attributing this to order batching, geographic densification, and seasonal incentives.

Advertisement

Over the last four quarters, Swiggy said it had reallocated some consumer-facing investments to support long-term structural improvements, even amid what it described as “irrational competition.” These investments are now under review in light of underwhelming returns on lower consumer-side monetisation, particularly at the lower end of the AOV pyramid.

Read more!
Advertisement