Eternal (Zomato): From IPO Losses to Profit, the Blinkit Bet, and FY26

Last updated 30 Oct 2026, with FY26 annual results and Q2 FY27 highlights. Figures are taken from the company's annual reports, exchange filings and the news reports listed under Sources. This is an educational case study, not investment advice.

Why this case matters

Few Indian companies have been watched as closely on the question "can a loss-making internet company become profitable?" as Zomato. It listed in July 2021 while still making losses. It paid for a struggling quick-commerce business mostly in its own shares a year later. By FY24 it reported its first full-year consolidated profit. In March 2025 the listed company changed its name to Eternal Ltd, to separate the group from the Zomato app.

For finance teams the story is useful because it shows three things clearly: the gap between headline "order value" and accounting revenue, how an acquisition changes consolidated numbers, and why profit can lag operating improvement.

The business model

Eternal describes itself as four businesses:

• Zomato (food delivery): a marketplace connecting customers, restaurants and delivery partners. Revenue is mainly commission and fees, not the full value of the food.
• Blinkit (quick commerce): delivery of groceries and other products in minutes from a network of small "dark stores" close to customers.
• District (going-out): dining-out, movie and event ticketing. This grew after the purchase of Paytm's ticketing businesses in 2024.
• Hyperpure: supplies to restaurants (a B2B business that sells goods, so its revenue is closer to the gross value).

The mix matters for the accounts. A marketplace books its take rate as revenue. A business that buys and sells inventory books the full sale. As Hyperpure and quick commerce grew, revenue grew faster than the commission businesses alone would suggest, and costs such as purchases of stock-in-trade rose with it.

The IPO: listing before profit

Zomato's IPO in July 2021 raised ₹9,375 crore at ₹76 a share. The shares listed on 23 July 2021 at about a 53% premium, as reported by Mint and other outlets. At that time the company was loss-making, so investors were pricing growth and the expected path to profit, not current earnings.

That set the frame for the next three years: every quarter was judged on whether losses were narrowing.

The Blinkit acquisition

In June 2022 Zomato agreed to buy Blink Commerce Pvt Ltd (formerly Grofers India), which ran Blinkit. As reported by Business Standard:

• the equity of Blinkit was acquired for about ₹4,447 crore, paid through roughly 629 million Zomato shares at ₹70.76 each,
• a small related warehousing business was bought for about ₹60.7 crore in cash, and
• analysts at the time warned that the deal could push out Zomato's path to profitability. The stock fell 6.4% on the day.

The deal closed on 10 August 2022. Zomato's FY24 annual report notes that FY24 was Blinkit's first full year as a wholly owned subsidiary, which is why FY23 and FY24 consolidated figures are not directly comparable.

Key financials

From the FY24 and FY26 annual reports and the FY25 audited results:

The company also reports non-GAAP measures. For FY24 it reported B2C gross order value (GOV) of ₹47,918 crore and Adjusted EBITDA of ₹372 crore. For FY25 it reported B2C net order value (NOV) of ₹61,852 crore and Adjusted EBITDA of ₹1,079 crore.

Blinkit's own scale in FY24, per the annual report: GOV of ₹12,469 crore (up 93%), 203 million orders and 526 stores at March 2024.

FY26 update

FY26 (year ended 31 March 2026) changed how Eternal's income statement looks. From Q1 FY26 the quick-commerce business moved to owning inventory, so revenue now includes the full value of goods sold, not just a marketplace commission. The FY26 annual report gives these headline figures:

By business, per the same report:

• Quick commerce (Blinkit): NOV up 117% to ₹48,567 crore, overtaking food delivery. The store network reached 2,243 stores in 250+ cities by March 2026.
• Food delivery (Zomato): NOV up 16% to ₹37,993 crore.
• Going-out (District): NOV up 42% to ₹9,399 crore.
• Hyperpure (B2B): revenue down 13% to ₹5,366 crore, as the non-restaurant business was scaled down.

The company reports NOV (net order value) rather than the older GOV measure, so FY26 order-value figures should not be compared directly with the FY24 GOV numbers earlier in this case study.

PAT fell even though Adjusted EBITDA rose. The report attributes this mainly to higher depreciation and amortisation in quick commerce as the store network expanded.

Early FY27

The Q2 FY27 shareholders' letter (quarter ended 30 September 2026) reported B2C NOV of ₹35,644 crore (up 54%), Adjusted EBITDA of ₹666 crore (up 197%) and 2,751 Blinkit stores after 308 net additions in the quarter. Business Standard reported revenue from operations of ₹24,138 crore and net profit of ₹125 crore for the quarter. These are unaudited quarterly figures.

What went right

Food delivery matured

The FY24 annual report attributes much of the improvement in Adjusted EBITDA to better margins in food delivery and a sharp fall in quick-commerce losses. Quick commerce turned Adjusted EBITDA positive in March 2024, according to the report.

The acquisition was paid in shares

Paying for Blinkit mostly in stock meant no large cash outflow at a time when the company was still loss-making. The cost was dilution for existing shareholders instead.

Treasury income helped

Other income of ₹847 crore in FY24 and ₹1,077 crore in FY25, largely from the cash raised earlier, was a meaningful part of pre-tax profit. In FY24, pre-tax profit of ₹291 crore was less than other income. Readers of the accounts should separate operating performance from returns on cash.

What to watch

Profit grew less than EBITDA

In FY25 Adjusted EBITDA rose by ₹707 crore but profit after tax rose by only ₹176 crore. The annual report gives two reasons: higher depreciation and amortisation in quick commerce as stores were added, and income tax on treasury income. FY25 also shows current tax of ₹231 crore against ₹1 crore in FY24.

Fast store expansion has a cost

Depreciation rose from ₹526 crore in FY24 to ₹863 crore in FY25, as per the audited results. Expanding dark stores is capital and lease intensive, so Ind AS 116 lease accounting and depreciation have become a bigger share of the cost line.

Non-GAAP measures need care

GOV, NOV and Adjusted EBITDA are management measures. The company reconciles them in its reports, but they are not audited revenue or profit. FY25 reporting moved from GOV to NOV for the B2C business, which also changes year-on-year comparisons.

Finance, accounting and audit lessons

1. A business-model change can redraw the P&L. In FY26, moving quick commerce from marketplace to inventory took revenue from ₹20,243 crore to ₹54,364 crore without a matching rise in profit. Under Ind AS 115 the principal-versus-agent judgement decides whether sales are recorded gross or net, so growth rates across that change are not like-for-like.
2. Order value is not revenue. For a marketplace, revenue is the take rate. Analyse revenue from operations and the reconciliation to order-value metrics separately.
3. Acquisitions break comparability. When a subsidiary is consolidated from mid-year (10 August 2022 for Blinkit), the next year's growth includes "first full year" effects. Read the notes on comparability before computing growth rates.
4. Share-funded deals still cost something. The purchase consideration is measured at fair value under Ind AS 103 and creates goodwill and intangibles, which then have to be tested for impairment each year.
5. Split operating profit from treasury income. A company with large cash balances can report profit before its core business is profitable.
6. Group structures and names change. A name change (Zomato Ltd to Eternal Ltd) doesn't change the legal entity, but every agreement, invoice and filing has to be updated, and readers need to map old names to new ones.
7. The auditor's opinion matters. The company's filing for FY25 states that its statutory auditor issued an unmodified opinion on the results, which is the baseline you should look for in any listed company.

Key takeaways

• Zomato listed in 2021 with losses and reported a first full-year profit of ₹351 crore in FY24, rising to ₹527 crore in FY25 and easing to ₹366 crore in FY26.
• In FY26 revenue rose 169% to ₹54,364 crore, mainly because Blinkit moved to an inventory model, and Blinkit's NOV overtook food delivery.
• The Blinkit deal (about ₹4,447 crore in shares) was seen as risky at the time and became central enough to prompt the rename to Eternal.
• Revenue growth includes a shift towards businesses that book gross sales, so revenue and order-value metrics need to be read together.
• Profit lags operating metrics when expansion adds depreciation and when tax on treasury income starts to bite.

Frequently asked questions

Sources

1. Zomato Annual Report 2023-24
2. Eternal Annual Report 2024-25
3. Eternal Annual Report 2025-26
4. Eternal: Q4 FY26 shareholders' letter and results
5. Eternal: Q2 FY27 shareholders' letter (copy hosted by MediaNama)
6. Business Standard: Eternal Q2 FY27 results (Oct 2026)
7. Zomato Annual Report 2021-22 (FY21 and FY22 figures)
8. Eternal: FY25 audited financial results filed with BSE (1 May 2025)
9. NSE intimation: change of name from Zomato Ltd to Eternal Ltd
10. Eternal: shareholder letter on the name change
11. Business Standard: Blinkit acquisition may delay road to profitability (June 2022)
12. Business Standard: Zomato Q4 FY24 results
13. Mint: Zomato lists at 53% premium (July 2021)

General information only, not professional advice. Rules change; check the current law and your facts before acting.