The competition between Swiggy vs Zomato in India’s online food delivery market continues to intensify. Both companies have released their results for Q2 FY27—the quarter spanning July to September 2026. These results highlight the significant differences between the two companies in terms of business growth and profitability.Swiggy recorded a revenue from operations of ₹7,571 crore for this quarter, which is approximately 36% higher than the same quarter last year. However, the company incurred a net loss of ₹922 crore. On the other hand, Zomato’s parent company, Eternal, reported a revenue of ₹24,138 crore, while its net profit rose to ₹125 crore.
But does higher revenue mean that Zomato is ahead of Swiggy in every respect? To answer this, it is essential to examine the performance of their core food delivery businesses, as well as compare Swiggy Instamart and Blinkit. In this article, we will break down the revenue, profit and loss, business growth, and the quick commerce competition between the two companies in simple terms, to determine which one is performing better following the Q2 FY27 results.
Swiggy vs Zomato Q2 Results FY27 Key Highlights
1. Increase in revenue , Swiggy’s revenue from operations for the July–September 2026 quarter rose to ₹7,571 crore, an increase of approximately 36% compared to the same quarter of the previous year. Meanwhile, Eternal’s revenue climbed to ₹24,138 crore, marking a year-on-year growth of approximately 78%.
2. Difference between profit and loss: Swiggy reported a consolidated net loss of ₹922 crore for this quarter. However, in the same quarter last year, its loss stood at ₹1,092 crore. On the other hand, Eternal recorded a consolidated net profit of ₹125 crore, which was approximately 92% higher than in the corresponding quarter of the previous year.
3. The crucial role of quick commerce: It is a key component of the growth strategy for both Blinkit and Instamart. However, while expanding rapidly in this sector, it is also essential to manage delivery costs, discounts, and profitability.
Overall, in Q2 FY27, Eternal reported stronger consolidated figures in terms of revenue and net profit, while Swiggy saw revenue growth alongside a reduction in its annual net loss. To make a meaningful comparison between the two companies, it is also necessary to examine the data for their respective food delivery and quick commerce segments.
Swiggy vs Zomato Revenue Comparison
In terms of total revenue and year-on-year growth for Q2 FY27, Eternal outperformed Swiggy. However, a company cannot be considered a better investment option based solely on its revenue; one must also examine its profits, expenses, cash flow, and the performance of its various business segments.
| Metric | Swiggy | Eternal(zomato) |
|---|---|---|
| Q2 FY27 revenue from operations | ₹7,571 crore | ₹24,138 crore |
| Net profit / loss | ₹922 crore loss | ₹125 crore profit |
| Revenue growth YoY | Aprox 36% | Aprox 78% |
| Food delivery adjusted EBITDA | ₹341 crore | ₹627 crore |
| Quick commerce adjusted EBITDA | Instamart: ₹895 crore loss | Blinkit: ₹184 crore profit |
Who ahead Food Delivery Business ?
In India’s food delivery business, both Swiggy vs Zomato have large restaurant networks. According to available company information, Zomato has a higher number of restaurant partners.
| Comparison | Swiggy | Zomato |
|---|---|---|
| Restaurant partners | 2.7 Lakh More than | 3 Lakh more than |
| Presence in cities | 720+ City | Extensive network across India |
| Main Business | Online Food Delivery | Online Food Delivery |
Zomato appears to be ahead in terms of the number of restaurant partners. Swiggy is also providing strong competition, with over 2.7 lakh restaurants on its platform. However, having a larger number of restaurant partners does not necessarily mean that a platform will see higher order volumes or offer better service in every city. To assess this, one must also consider factors such as order volume, customer growth, and delivery performance.
Blinkit and Instamart’s Role in Swiggy vs Zomato Q2 Results
Blinkit and Instamart have played a significant role in the competition between Swiggy and Zomato. In Q2 FY27, Blinkit—the quick-commerce arm of Eternal—showed signs of strong growth and profitability, whereas Swiggy’s Instamart faced rising expenses and losses.
| Description(Q2 FY27) | Blinkit | Instamart |
|---|---|---|
| Net Order Value (NOV) | ₹20,940 crore | ₹6,594 crore |
| YearlyNOV Growth | Apromax 79% | Apromax 35% |
| Dark Stores | 2,751 | 1,240 |
| Adjusted EBITDA | ₹184 crore profit | ₹895 crore |
Blinkit’s Net Order Value was significantly higher than that of Instamart. Furthermore, Blinkit recorded a profit of ₹184 crore in adjusted EBITDA, whereas Instamart incurred a loss of ₹895 crore. While Instamart’s business also grew, the expenses incurred on opening new stores and acquiring customers continued to exert pressure on its profitability.
At The End
The parent company of Swiggy vs Zomato—indicate that both firms are striving to strengthen their positions within the rapidly growing online food delivery and quick commerce markets. Eternal delivered a stronger performance in terms of total revenue and profitability, while Swiggy also saw an increase in revenue alongside a reduction in its annual losses. Within the quick commerce segment, Blinkit outperformed Instamart, particularly in terms of business growth and adjusted EBITDA. However, it would be premature to forecast a company’s future based on the results of a single quarter.Investors should also pay attention to aspects such as revenue growth, profits, expenses, cash flow, and competition. In the coming quarters, the profitability and business expansion of both companies will play a crucial role in determining which one is able to further strengthen its position.