Swiggy shares rose nearly 5% to ₹184.35 in morning trading on October 26, 2026, recovering part of the previous session’s near-17% decline after its Q2 FY27 results. Brokerages retained positive ratings despite cutting price targets, pointing to stronger food-delivery profitability while warning that widening Instamart losses remain a central concern.
Key Takeaways
- The rebound followed a lifetime low of ₹174.95 on October 23.
- Food delivery posted record quarterly adjusted EBITDA, while Instamart’s adjusted EBITDA loss widened.
- Jefferies and Nomura cut price targets, but continued to see value in the food-delivery business.
Table of Contents
- Swiggy shares recover only part of the selloff
- Food delivery improves as Instamart losses widen
- Why brokerages remain positive after target cuts
- Conclusion
Swiggy shares recover only part of the selloff
Monday’s advance was an intraday move, not a closing result. It followed Friday’s sharp decline as investors weighed a narrower overall net loss against deteriorating profitability at Instamart, Swiggy’s quick-commerce business.
The recovery also came after substantial losses over longer periods. A gain of nearly 5% does not reverse a near-17% decline because the rebound starts from a lower share price.
| Item | Details |
|---|---|
| One-week share performance | Down more than 20% as of the October 26 update |
| One-month share performance | Down 31% |
| 2026 year-to-date performance | Down more than 53% |
| One-year share performance | Down around 57% |
Food delivery improves as Instamart losses widen
For the second quarter of FY27, Swiggy’s overall net loss narrowed to ₹922 crore from ₹1,092 crore a year earlier. Its September-quarter corporate announcements list a shareholder letter, press release and earnings-call outcome for the quarter ended September 30, 2026.
Food-delivery gross order value increased 17.7% year on year to ₹10,054 crore. The segment generated its highest quarterly adjusted EBITDA of ₹341 crore, up 42% from ₹240 crore a year earlier.
Instamart moved in the opposite direction. Its adjusted EBITDA loss widened to ₹895 crore from ₹849 crore a year earlier and ₹778 crore in the June quarter. Swiggy increased investment to attract customers and improve order frequency, adding 69 net dark stores during the quarter.
The contrast explains why the narrower group net loss did not settle concerns about operating performance: stronger food-delivery earnings were accompanied by a larger quick-commerce deficit. Segment adjusted EBITDA and the overall net loss are different measures and should not be treated as directly interchangeable.
Why brokerages remain positive after target cuts
Jefferies lowered its price target to ₹330 while retaining its high-risk, high-reward assessment. The brokerage argued that the share price did not fully reflect the food-delivery business and existing cash, but said reducing quick-commerce losses was essential to unlocking value. It also described Swiggy’s performance as lacklustre relative to Eternal.
Nomura retained its Buy rating while cutting its target to ₹300, continuing to view food delivery as a cash-generating business. Bernstein maintained Outperform, while warning that the contrast with Blinkit’s performance was testing investor patience with Instamart’s turnaround.
Those ratings express brokerage expectations, not assured outcomes. Their continued support rests alongside lower targets and explicit concern about the pace of improvement in quick commerce.
Conclusion
Swiggy shares recovered some ground, but the operating divide remains. The next quarterly results will provide a further test of whether Instamart can reduce losses while food delivery sustains its profitability gains.
Read More News
Disclaimer
This FinanceVelix article provides general information, not personalized financial, investment, legal, or tax advice. Market prices, interest rates and economic conditions can change; investments carry a risk of loss. Facts reflect the material available when published and may change. Check important information independently and consult a qualified professional when needed. Mentioning an asset, company, or service is not an endorsement.
