Blinkit Made ₹184 Crore on 399 Million Orders. Instamart Lost ₹895 Crore on 130 Million
Startups / news
Blinkit Made ₹184 Crore on 399 Million Orders. Instamart Lost ₹895 Crore on 130 Million
Eternal and Swiggy reported the same quarter on the same day. The gap between their quick-commerce units is now a matter of scale per dark store, and both are changing how revenue is counted.
Blinkit reported an EBITDA of ₹184 crore for the September quarter, against an adjusted EBITDA loss of ₹156 crore a year earlier. Swiggy's Instamart, in the same quarter, reported an adjusted EBITDA loss of ₹895 crore, up from ₹849 crore. Eternal, Blinkit's parent, posted a consolidated profit of ₹125 crore, per MediaNama's reading of its Q2 FY27 results, while Swiggy's net loss narrowed to ₹922 crore, Entrackr reported.
Both companies published on Thursday, October 22. The two businesses are now different enough in size that the comparison has to start with volume.
The volume gap
Blinkit handled 398.9 million orders, up from 222.7 million in Q2 FY26 and 331 million in Q1 FY27. Net average order value was ₹525, flat against ₹524 a year ago. It ended the quarter with 2,751 dark stores after adding 308.
Instamart handled 130.3 million orders, up 29%, at a net average order value of ₹506, up 4%. It has 1,240 dark stores across 133 cities after adding 69, according to Inc42's account of Swiggy's shareholder letter.
| Metric, Q2 FY27 | Blinkit | Instamart |
|---|---|---|
| Orders | 398.9 million | 130.3 million |
| Net average order value | ₹525 | ₹506 |
| Dark stores | 2,751 | 1,240 |
| EBITDA | ₹184 crore | adjusted loss ₹895 crore |
Blinkit does 3.1 times Instamart's orders from 2.2 times its stores. Dividing quarterly orders by closing store count, our own arithmetic and an approximation because stores opened during the quarter, gives roughly 145,000 orders per Blinkit store and 105,000 per Instamart store.
On the same rough basis, Blinkit earned about ₹4.6 per order and Instamart lost about ₹69. The labels differ, so treat that as indicative: MediaNama gives Blinkit's figure as EBITDA and the prior-year comparator as an adjusted loss, while Inc42 gives Instamart's as adjusted EBITDA.
- Blinkit398.9 million
- Instamart130.3 million
Source: MediaNama (Blinkit) and Inc42 (Instamart), accessed 2026-10-22
Revenue is not comparable this quarter
Eternal's consolidated revenue from operations rose 78% to ₹24,138 crore from ₹13,590 crore. MediaNama attributes the jump mainly to a shift to an inventory-led model in quick commerce, in which the platform books the sale of goods rather than a commission. Blinkit revenue was ₹19,152 crore, up 94%.
Swiggy's Instamart revenue was ₹1,306 crore, up 33%, on gross order value of ₹9,230 crore, up 31%. Swiggy said it plans to move Instamart to an inventory-led model by mid-Q3. That shift should lift its reported revenue and shrink the visible growth gap on paper without changing a single order. Swiggy says the change has the potential to add 80 basis points to Instamart's contribution margin when fully rolled out.
The measure that survives the accounting change is orders. By that count Blinkit grew 79% year on year and Instamart 29%.
What Swiggy says about the loss
Instamart's contribution margin was minus 1% of gross order value, down 82 basis points from the previous quarter, as Swiggy cut prices to win back dormant users. Its adjusted EBITDA margin was minus 9.7% of order value, against minus 9.8% a year earlier. Swiggy believes Instamart's adjusted EBITDA losses peaked in Q2, per Inc42.
Swiggy's consolidated adjusted EBITDA loss was ₹760 crore, against ₹695 crore a year earlier and ₹651 crore in Q1. Food delivery earned an operating profit of ₹349 crore, up 39%, which is the segment carrying the group. Chief executive Sriharsha Majety said the food delivery business "delivered its highest ever profits and margins."
At Thursday's close Swiggy shares were ₹211.30 and its market capitalisation was ₹61,403 crore, per Entrackr. Total expenditure was ₹8,703 crore, up 29.7%, with advertising and sales promotion at ₹1,298 crore.
One inconsistency to flag: Inc42's summary line gives an Instamart loss of ₹764 crore, while its body gives an adjusted EBITDA loss of ₹895 crore. This article uses the body figure and has not seen Swiggy's own filing.
Related coverage: the MyGate and Adonmo merger and, for the funding climate, Legora's $8.8 billion round.
The next checkpoint is Swiggy's Q3, the first full quarter in which Instamart's inventory-led model is expected to be live. If Swiggy's claim that losses peaked holds, the adjusted EBITDA loss should fall below ₹895 crore.
Sources
More in Startups
- 01Zetwerk's IPO Paid Kae 38.3x and Peak XV 23.9x. One Peak XV Fund Got 3.3xThe ₹5,012 crore offering priced at ₹151, and the seller list shows which cheques did the work: early money made 38 times, later growth money made three.
- 02Blacksmith Raises $66 Million at $1 Billion, Up From $550 Million Two Months AgoSequoia led the Series C for the CI-runner company, whose weekly jobs went from 5 million in January to more than 90 million. It has not disclosed revenue.
- 03Mygate and Adonmo Plan Merger, Giving Eternal 4.4% Worth ₹156 Crore Against ₹112 Crore InvestedEternal swaps its entire Adonmo holding for Mygate shares. The stake is up 39.3% on cost after almost four years, and neither company's valuation has been published.
- 04YC Alum Mach9 Raises $34 Million After Dropping Survey Hardware for AI CAD SoftwareFirst Round and Bessemer co-led the Series A. The company has nearly 100 private-beta customers and discloses neither revenue nor valuation.