Ladies and gentlemen, good day, and welcome to Swiggy Limited Q3 FY 2026 earnings conference call. As a reminder, all participant lines will be in the listen-only mode, and there will be an opportunity for you to ask questions after the presentation concludes. Should you need assistance during this conference call, please signal an operator by pressing star then zero on your touchtone phone. Please note that this conference is being recorded. I now hand the conference over to Mr. Abhishek Agarwal, Head of Investor Relations. Thank you, and over to you, sir. Thanks, operator. Hello, everyone, and welcome to the first quarter FY 2026 earnings conference call for Swiggy. Our financial results and shareholders' letters have been published on the exchanges, and the information pack has been placed in the investor relations section of our website, www.swiggy.com. We would like to inform you that the management may make certain comments on this call that one could deem forward-looking statements. Specifically, the financial guidance and pro forma information that we will provide on this call are management estimates, are based on certain assumptions and have not been subjected to any audit, review, or examination procedures. Swiggy does not guarantee these statements and is not obliged to update them at any time. Joining me on the call today are Sriharsha Majety, MD and Group CEO, Rahul Bothra, our CFO, Rohit Kapoor, CEO of Food Marketplace, and Amitesh Jha, CEO of Instamart. With this brief preamble, let us start the Q&A. Operator, you can please go ahead. Thank you very much. We'll now begin with the question and answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star and one on their touchtone telephone. If you wish to remove yourself from the question queue, you may press star and two. Participants are requested to use handsets while asking a question. Ladies and gentlemen, we will wait for a moment while the question queue assembles. Participants, you may press star and one to ask a question. First question is from the line of Vijit Jain from Citi. Please go ahead. Yeah, hi. Thank you for the opportunity. My first question, you know, so, you know, as you scale up the business, can you talk a little bit about, you know, the sourcing advantages that could unlock at scale? You know, could you unlock additional margins as you could do better price negotiations with brands and sellers? And broadly speaking, you know, your views on, how your scale can drive better input costs into your, quick commerce operations would be helpful. That's my first question. Thank you. Sure. Yeah. Hi, Amitesh here. See, the scale of operations, which effectively is, is measured in either, GOV per store or, the number of orders per store, will have an impact on, on the better utilization of our infra. So that's the first part that comes in. Now, the scale of, the movement for all the items that we sell, there is a bigger opportunity of, of monetization with the brands, that we exploit, and we have also seen that over the last year as well, where the monetization opportunity has moved up as and when our scale of, of revenue with the brands has, has really increased. So yes, you know, these are the two parts in which we see that scale coming up, and it actually comes almost every, essentially almost every quarter. Correct. Sorry, I don't know. So, I couldn't hear that very clearly, but I'll check the transcript side. I'm not sure this is my sound quality side. My second question is, you know, now that you have, you know, from a balance sheet point of view, you now have cash balance of almost $2 billion. My question is, and I know that, you know, the working capital intensity of the business continues to rise. So in general, you know, could you utilize the cash balance for better terms from brand and sellers as well? Is that a fair assessment to make? That's my second question. And then finally, if you could give me your views now on seeking IOCC. Thank you. Yeah, sure. Hi, Rahul here. So in terms of your question around, you know, your ability to pay, you know, faster to, vendors and therefore get a higher margin, I think it's a combination of, optimizing both on credit days as well as, getting better margin structures. And it's a overall terms of trade that we agree with these brand partners of ours. So it's a continuum. I don't think, you know, necessarily that because we have a, you know, a higher cash balance, we will end up paying faster. At the same time, I think, there's both the, top line in terms of the overall margin structure that has to improve, as well as trade days that has to continue improving. On your question on IOCC, I think we continue to get closer, you know, with every passing quarter. The QIP also helped. Our overall allocation to the domestic investors was significantly higher compared to the foreign investors. We are currently at around roughly 47% in terms of our overall domestic shareholder base. When we hit the majority mark, which, as we had said in the past, will be an eventuality, we do expect to convert into an IOCC structure. Got it. Thanks, Rahul. Lastly, on the food delivery side, congratulations on solid, you know, all around great results on the food delivery as well. My question is, now, food delivery in this quarter has grown above your guidance, marginally above, but still 21% YoY, and you've had a pretty solid growth in MTUs here as well. Good to see that both contribution and adjusted EBITDA margins also expanded. My question is, you've kept your guidance unchanged, though, on the growth rate at 18%-20%, and I'm wondering, given the, you know, MTU growth is strong, et cetera, and some of these will improve in engagement, is, you know, do you feel more confident that, you know, you would probably comfortably exceed the lower end of the guidance? Thank you. Hi, this is Rohit here. I think you're right. We've grown 21% on GOV, 20.5% on GOV and 22% on MTU. The guidance remains at 18%-20%. I think the momentum is definitely there in terms of growth, and we like to watch it another quarter, maybe, before we become more sanguine in terms of which shape, what shape it is taking. But you're right, at least the input level, we are feeling more confident about hovering near the upper end of the range than the lower end of the range. Yeah. Got it. Thank you, Rohit. Those are my questions. I'll jump back into the queue. Thank you. Next question is from line of Jignanshu Gor from Bernstein. Please go ahead. Hi. Thank you for the opportunity. I wanted to check on the quick commerce business, and the reiteration of the guidance for the contribution margin. So just wanted to check whether, and you've talked about the competitive, scenario changing a lot. So is this guidance sort of, completely or largely dependent on what we do internally as a company, or do you incorporate any change in competitive dynamics for this guidance to materialize? Yeah. Hi, Amitesh here. No, we don't see any change in the guidance of the competitive environment. Whatever we have factored in is assuming the competitive environment remains the same, which is already extremely high. So just to give you an assessment on how we are looking at our approach on making sure that we hit our contribution margin guidance. One of the things that there are structural improvements that we have that is that has no bearing at all to what the competition is doing. Some of them are scale rate, as you as we already spoke about, and then some of them are ad rate, which is essentially dependent on something that we are we are already seeing. The remaining part, which is more discretionary, which has led to, you know, cart-level discounting, as well as, the investment that we do to, to make sure that, we are being, more, how to say, competitive in the overall environment, is quite discretionary. And what we are doing right now, what we have done as well as well, whenever it is required, we will be investing. But on the balance of it, what we see is that there are clear opportunities for us to, pull back investments from where we believe that it were, it were inefficient, and we will continue to do that as well. That's the reason we are choosing this as an opportunity of not to go after the investment, which is non-conducive for our long-term growth, and we'll essentially continue to be at that particular path. Okay, that's very helpful, Amitesh. Thanks. My second question is on the balance sheet. I'm trying to sort of understand two numbers. One is the CapEx seems high, despite you've not added a lot of stores, right? So that's one. How do I square that circle? And second is working capital, so infusion into the business also seems a little volatile. So how do we think of this number in the context of a three-tier business model? So those two are my last questions. Thanks. Sure. Rahul here. So in terms of the overall CapEx investments, it is in a twofold. One is in our dark store, you know, infra expansion, and the second is in our warehousing capacity expansion. In the recent time, as you observed the last couple of quarters, while the overall, you know, growth has been lower on the dark store addition, on a four-quarter basis, we have also substantially increased our footprint on the dark store network. Now, talking about the quarter on hand, if you look at our overall warehousing capacity, and a lot of this warehousing capacity is also coming into tier two, tier three towns where we expanded. You know, putting in the infrastructure on warehousing helps us to reduce our middle mile, also helps us to replenish our stores faster and get closer to consumers. So overall, you know, if you look at the last four quarters, we have more than doubled our warehousing capacity, which has been a key component of the CapEx spending. We do expect to, you know, have a little bit more spending on the CapEx side, especially on the warehousing piece. This is to structurally improve our supply chain, you know, efficiencies. In terms of the working capital, again, you know, as you rightly said, over the last couple of quarters, we've added roughly INR 130 crore. This is again in line with our guidance, where we had said that overall, on a DOH basis, this is not going to go up. If you kind of accumulate over the last couple of quarters, it's only been a INR 130 crore addition, while our overall, say, net order value on the consumer businesses have gone up by close to 18%. So this is again in line with our top-line growth. We will continue to find efficiencies and, you know, work towards bettering our overall net working capital base, which you should see in the subsequent quarters. Okay. So this working capital, just for my understanding and just small follow-up, sorry for my... How does that work? As in, you need working capital at the dark stores, right? So more network needs more capital, despite the inventory not being on our books. Yeah, that's it. See, as I said, it's also, you know, in the past I've mentioned this, that a lot of this gets stuck around, you know, the brand, you know, investments that they make in our platform, including advertising, including, you know, trade support or consumer discounts that are funded by the brands, and some of it is also in our B2B business. Understood. Okay. All right, cool. Thank you. Thank you. We will circle back. Yeah. Thank you. Next question is from line of Aditya Soman from CLSA. Please go ahead. Yeah, hi, good evening. So two questions largely on quick commerce. So firstly, in terms of the guidance on contribution, how sacrosanct is that? In a sense, at what level of growth would you accept for the break-even to happen? Because we've seen growth decelerate both sort of at least sequentially in this quarter. And it is actually meaningfully lower than your other competitor that reported numbers. So from that perspective, with the cash balance that you have from your-- how do you decide the balance between sort of growth and achieving that contribution breakeven? And then the second question on the same lines. We've seen, sort of, prices of late on Max Saver not being very different from just the standard app. Does that mean that you're sort of, that at least that initiative on Max Saver seems to be a little bit on the back burner now, as the focus on contribution margin improves? Yeah. See, the way to think about it is that growth and contribution margin are separate paths, at least in our head. The way that we are looking at our businesses, growth has many reasons for not happening. One of them, primary, is obviously the irrationality in the market and which has impacted both the listed players in this particular space. We believe that irrationality will continue and will have a headwind on our growth, and something that we have already factored in when we gave the contribution margin kind of guidance as well. The other thing is what I told about. There are two aspects of our contribution margin story. First thing will be about the structural margin improvement that we keep on going. And the second part is that how much of the discretionary investment that we want to earn. One of the things that we have taken up as a very clear output of all of this is that, we are not going to throw good money at bad growth, and that is something that we are fully committed to. And that, for us, is the reason why we will never compromise good growth for any good margin. Yes, we may compromise bad growth and something that we are willing to do it as well, because we don't believe that is going to be a sustainable advantage in the future. That's the reason we believe that, yes, we'll have the right growth, that we should be having for our ultimate goal of being the market leader is essentially addressed, and also make sure that we are at the right contribution margin. On the Max Saver, bit... Yeah, sorry, go ahead. You have a follow-up? Yeah, yeah. Just to follow up on that, I mean, for me, where I'm struggling a little bit is, I mean, obviously, your growth compared with, let's say, Blinkit, is a lot lower, and at the same time, we see the other competitors discount heavily. So in this sort of environment, when you say that you want—I mean, your target is obviously becoming market leader, how do you make that balance, right, between contribution? I understand that there are structural elements to that improvement in margin, which you explained, which I'm cognizant of, but obviously a large part is also sort of discounting. So, what I want to understand is, at what point does that take a backseat in a sense that you'll say that, "Look, it's fine if we even do it in two quarters later, but for now, competing for that customer is more relevant." Or that's not- Yeah, absolutely. No, I think let's, I think one of the thing is, one of the thing is very, very clear. Market leader, and if the ambition is real, real market leadership, it's never going to happen by spending, you know, tons of good money on honestly buying growth. We believe that the irrationality of that growth is so high, that it is leading to customers switching from one platform to the other without having any kind of loyalty. What we look forward as good growth is a customer that who is sticky to the platform, that who are going to, to come back again and again, compared to whatever the, the other people are essentially giving. What, and what works in this case is the, is the value prop that you are essentially giving to the end consumer. We believe that our assortment, our, our way of approaching on what customers really require and making sure that we give that assortment, is the way to essentially market leadership. If the question is: Can we do more numbers just because we want to show higher OPD? Yes, it can be easily done by actually putting money into what we call as growth. We don't believe it is actually structural growth. The right structural growth is putting investment into area that is sustainable over the long run, and that will really give you an opportunity to be the market leader, rather than just, you know, saying that, "Okay, let me buy growth because it allows me to say that I have done a higher OPD." We believe that is the right path. That is the path that we have always committed to, and we are essentially reiterating that commitment by saying that we'll be at CM Zero in the quarter of MJ. All right, understand. Yeah. Yeah. On the Max Saver bit, I think that was another, you know, question. Actually, Max Saver is, that habit building is actually quite successful. The OND quarter was also kind of, you know, different because it is paid by a lot of, what you call as, non-grocery item sales as well. So the Max Saver slightly becomes irrelevant in this particular, quarter. Essentially, that said, we always keep on doing slight changes in the way our investment goes between Max Saver and non-Max. A part of that is also because what we saw happening in this particular quarter, we reiterate our commitment to Max Saver to make sure that the people who are already used to buying, a higher basket, you know, giving the overall, platform better profitability in terms of revenue per order, we are fully committed to that, and you will see that essentially happening in this quarter mix as well. Just to follow up on that Max Saver point, I understand where you're coming from. But does this in some ways encourage sort of cart building behavior, which in effect takes away that advantage sort of quick delivery? In a sense that then people are building cart over a period of time to make that order, so that the relevance of quick delivery may not be so important. And then some of the sort of slotted delivery players also become competitors. See, the way to think about, and this is something that we have spoken in multiple forums, the way to think about it is there is a customer mission when they said that they want to build a bigger basket. You have to make sure that the proposition that you give is appealing to them. That is the path that we have always followed in this particular thing. Speed is important because I think one of the things that has happened because of quick advent of quick commerce, a lot of baskets that were earlier a part of what you would call as planned purchases, are moving towards smaller baskets, though relatively still larger compared to the, you know, discretionary purchases that we have, that will still essentially remain. So we believe that, the behavior shift from having month-long planned purchase to week-long planned purchase will essentially keep on happening, and MaxSaver actually addresses that. There is no way going out of it. At some point of time, as I said earlier, everyone have to address that, and that is a way of making sure that all wallets of the consumers comes to us. So we are fully committed to it. And the other thing on MaxSaver is also that the retention of MaxSaver is actually similar or higher than what we see for not, non-MaxSaver customers. So the belief on that is also very strong. Totally hear. Thank you so much. Thank you. Next question is from line of Sudheer Guntupalli from Kotak Mahindra. Please go ahead. Yeah, hi, Harshant. Thanks for the opportunity. A few questions. Your AOV, both on gross and net basis, has seen a strong increase QoQ, despite you actually experimenting with this cart breaking behavior of no fee above INR 299. So how much of this AOV increase is structural? Is there any element of seasonality or mix shift which has also contributed to this strong AOV increase, especially in this quarter? Yeah, this quarter it will, because of the seasonality, or the nature of the business, yes, it is a lot that. That said, structurally, we are still moving up, is the headline that I would still want to keep. But obviously, the amount of movement that you see in this quarter is heavily moved, because of seasonality. Sure, Amitesh. Our second question is on the OPD metric. In this business, if we believe that OPD is a vanity metric anyways, why are we even responding to competition from unlisted players, especially on the cart downsizing or breaking behavior? E specially in the backdrop of other listed players choosing not to respond, so why not just focus on MaxSaver and other initiatives where we seem to be doing well and that seem to be working for us? Yeah. So I'll focus on, maybe trying to address how does it impact our consumer base and why at some point of time people respond and some point of time people don't respond. There are two kind of consumers that you can think of in, in any portfolio. One consumer is a sticky customer. You don't want that customer to go away for sure. Thankfully, that doesn't get impacted because of this, and that is where MaxSaver comes in play, all the other propositions. There are early users who are very important for us, who are in the path towards becoming matured user and frequent user for us. It is important for us to make sure that the value prop to them is not getting, you know, diluted by irrationality in the market. That is done by everyone. Everyone, and if you look the way people have responded, either it could be because of the no-fee construct that we took, either it could be because of lowering the minimum order value. All of that is something that essentially happens. Now, even in this thing, the way we approached our no-fee construct was always to make sure what we spoke about is to make sure that the right consumer behavior is being addressed. That's the reason we didn't go to the INR 99, which would have been the easiest OPD vanity metric to go after. We didn't go that because we changed we wanted to change the behavior, and it is reflecting that. It is reflecting on the consumers who are more matured, actually growing faster than actually any other, you know, cohort. Which basically shows that customers are becoming, becoming more sticky to our platform. We believe such kind of interventions now and then will always be required, and that is the reason why we want the flexibility in where we spend. That said, of course, I completely agree with you. OPD vanity metrics, that just goes on how much I can get from the same customer at INR 99 or, or even slightly higher or lower than that, is absolutely not conducive to the way we are building our platform. Okay, fair enough. And in the investor letter, you mentioned that almost 90 basis points of contribution margin expansion was reinvested into this no fee above INR 299 campaign. So is it fair to assume that in the absence of this, the reported revenue and EBITDA would have been higher by around INR 70 crore-INR 80 crore? And an extension of this question, now that you are saying that this campaign has found a limited success so far, are we sort of pulling back on this scheme? Hey, hi, Rahul here. See, I think, yes, we have also guided that we are going to improve it by 250 basis points over the, you know, three quarters. And towards that, there are structural improvements that we absolutely banked. So 100 basis points improvement is something that we got in the previous quarter. Some of it got reinvested, actually, more than 100 basis got reinvested in some of these campaigns, which was also an experiment to test, you know, how are these new users being acquired? Are they going to be remain sticky on the platform? And when we saw limited, you know, adoption and retention, we have decided to change some of these constructs. Now, we do retain the flexibility to continue to, you know, invest behind the right experiment. I don't think we are going to give up the growth ambition that we have. At the same time, going after any kind of growth is something which is not on the playbook anymore, at least not for us. So, we want to remain, you know, focused, and, over the next two quarters, getting 250 basis points, with some of these reversals, as well as some of the investment choices that we are going to make, we think, the commitment is, very high to be able to do that. Sure, Rahul. Just on the math, so the INR 80 crore-INR 90 crore hit at both reported revenue line and EBITDA line would have been a fair assessment, right? If we, if we were to contextualize that 100 bits of reversal. That's right. As I said, we don't want to give specific numbers on how much that initiative cost, but, broadly, you're right that the, because we didn't show any, you know, you know, high improvement, in the CM, most of the gains got reinvested, and it would be in the zip code of the numbers that you're mentioning. Just a last question. GOV to NOV conversion, that has come down by around 100 basis points from last quarter to this quarter. Is this a function of higher discounting from our balance sheet, or is this because of the shift of mix away from grocery into consumer durables, et cetera, which also ties up with the seasonality thing that Amitesh was mentioning earlier? So a large part of the, you know, shift is the seasonality one. Because being a festive quarter, there are a lot more, you know, non-grocery selection that gets added. We do believe that, you know, it should not go significantly further from here, and, you know, with some of the initiatives on us being able to monetize better, this should start inching up. Because also- Fair enough. As you've seen, our non-grocery has now crossed 30%. So we also, you know, don't see a significant headroom to continue expanding. We do believe that it will expand, but not at the same pace anymore, and some of the monetization initiatives will mean that the NOV-GOV ratio will start converging, you know, on the higher side. Fair enough, Rahul. Just one clarification. So this is basically the shift of mix towards non-grocery. Basically, it's the difference between MRP prices and the actual sale prices that the brand might be doing. So it might not necessarily be because we are discounting on our end. Oh, no, no, that's right. That's right. It's the list price versus what the customer ultimately pays, and therefore, some of these have higher, you know, market operating prices, lower market operating prices compared to the list prices. Fair enough, Rahul. Thank you so much, and all the very best. Thank you. Next question is from line of Gaurav Rateria from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Hi, am I audible? Yes, go ahead, Gaurav. Yeah, my first question is on your CM at the quick commerce business. It was really heartening to see 100 basis points of margin improvement. Is it the same pace at which one should assume organic margin expansion because of network operating leverage in the next quarters? And along with that, there will be some benefit of reversal of some of the campaigns, which will lead you to break even, and what it really means in terms of percentage of stores that will be CM positive, which is 25% as of now. Yeah. So Gaurav, you know, on a reported basis, we haven't, you know, shown that improvement. As we have talked about it, there are structural levers that continue to, you know, move northward, and therefore, our ability to therefore navigate, to this CM Zero and then, you know, get into a positive territory, remains high. Got it. My second question is on your expansion. If you see your space expansion was almost 100% YoY, which also coincides very much with the GOV growth. And the current pace of expansion is implying that the overall space will grow at 20%-25% if this is the pace that continues over the next few quarters. So my question is: How much improvement in throughput can really happen from a 12-month point of view? I know that you have mentioned that you can go to 2x of GOV per, you know, from throughput perspective over a period of time. That is the kind of headroom that you have. But from a 12-month perspective, if the space is gonna grow at 20%-25%, how much throughput really can improve, which will be the key driver behind the GOV growth? Thank you. Sure. Yeah, see, we don't—we'll not give specific guidance, but over the last couple of quarters, you may have seen that our, you know, utilization has gone up, above 5%. So we do believe that there's significant headroom, in the, you know, near term, you know, getting a 25%-30% increase in our throughput per store is a near-term target. And now, how quickly can we get there? Again, there's a combination of both AOV-led growth as well as volume growth. Again, within volume, there are certain cohorts that we are currently not participating in or not willing to participate in. So depending on how the market overall plays out, we do believe and our overall store strategy, the network is well laid out, in terms of number of cities, also in terms of densification, speed of the network. So we have all the right consumer inputs in place without having the need to necessarily add significantly more number of stores, apart from densification, which we will continue to do. So you will see a certain pace of store additions. At the same time, the headroom remains large, and our ability to therefore demonstrate operating leverage is very, very high, over the next, three to four quarters. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next question is from line of Sachin Salgaonkar from Bank of America. Please go ahead. Hi, thanks for the opportunity. My first question is on quick commerce. When we look at the revenue growth, it's lower as compared to last few quarters. When we look at absolute losses, it's actually higher. Now, I do understand Amitesh's earlier comment that it's the irrational competition which is leading to headwinds of growth. So the question out there is, you know, if you're not seeing growth, does it make sense to spend so much on marketing? And how far are we away from a point where EBITDA losses have peaked, and going ahead, we should see absolute amount of losses coming down? Yeah. So, Sachin, I think we have to call this out, that, you know, with, say, the couple of quarters of guidance that we're giving on CM, there's also the marketing interventions that, you're rightly observing, that we will like to make. So we are calling out that this would be the peak of the, you know, investments. And from here on, gradually you will see that, reduction happening, both on the CM line as well as operating leverage, being driven, apart from rationalizing some of the marketing spending. So these are some of the levers that are, in our hand, and we are going to modulate this in terms of the overall, you know, aspiration on the kind of quality of growth, or the quality of underlying growth that we are going after. There is for us to be able to navigate some of these and rationalize them. The choices are will be made. It's hard for me to then tell you that, you know, we don't want to, you know, go after continued, you know, good quality growth. Wherever pockets of good quality growth will be seen, we will continue to invest, right? We are not giving up our aspirations. At the same time, choosing some of the right quality of investment, for the right kind of growth is something that we are committing ourselves to. So Rahul, basis this quarter, is it fair to conclude that revenue growth could be a bit slower as long as irrational competition remains high, but losses going ahead should start going down on EBITDA basis? Yes, yes. As you said, it's slightly, you know, in terms of absolute, you know, guidance on growth is, you know, little hard, from where we stand, considering, you know, all that's happening in the market. At the same time, our ability to navigate on the overall, say, burn profile, EBITDA, as well as contribution margin, remains high, because a lot of these are, inputs which we are in control of. I think, on terms of volume growth, some of this is market determined. At the same time, some of the, you know, cohort, adding more, you know, basket, attach rates, overall selection increase, helping us to continue to add a lot more consumer missions, that remains very high. And Sachin, on your question on, adjusted revenue growth being lower, that's mainly because of the no-fee construct. Yeah, but that's here to stay, right? That's what we are talking. As long as competition is high, that's here to stay. No, so as we have called that, we are making some choices around changing or tweaking some of these investments, so you will see more of this, as you know, with the days ahead. So that's not a permanent feature, is what we want to call out. Okay. My second question is, when I look at your GMV growth for last four quarters and compare it with revenue growth, the revenue growth is lower than GMV growth. So in effect, the implied take rate has been coming down. Is this primarily driven by mix shift, and could this continue to come down going ahead? So yes, largely it is mix, and in the, say, latest quarter, it's also to do with some of the consumer-side fees that we, you know, chose to give up. We are focused on continuing to improve the base margins, and now that we believe the mix overall will start stabilizing, you should see the, you know, take rate starting to inch up. Got it. And, lastly, any color on competition on the ground in the last few months? I understand it's irrational, but is it coming down? Is it increasing? And, you know, basis that, given the cash balance, what you have, versus a quarter back, you know, any change of strategy from you guys? The competition that we saw that we started, I think, in fact, from October itself, will essentially remain, and it has remained at a similar level. And we believe that it will also, you know, remain at the same level. There are essentially new entrants in the market who are also amping up the amount of money being spent on the consumer. And obviously, there are players who are existing in the market who are also at the same level. We believe that in general, a lot of that is not leading to an overall healthy consumer growth, as we essentially called it. The healthy consumer gives, the way we define it, is in consumers who come to quick commerce and stick to quick commerce for the right reasons, increasing their basket size and everything. Wherever we have seen a growth in orders for any of these platforms, the basket sizes have not increased. In fact, it has gone down by a lot. So yes, that's the reason we chose not to be in this, in that particular space. At the point where we believe that our proposition is working, our proposition of assortment, our proposition of availability, our proposition of making sure that we give assortment that people have not seen in other places, are the things that are structurally going to make this movement as possible, and make it also resistant in the future to any of these kind of activities that will keep on happening in a fast-growing market. Got it. You know, a quick follow-up to what you mentioned. We've seen new entrants, but when you look at the value proposition, what a new entrant is bringing or new entrants are bringing to consumers, do you see it largely a me-too kind of a value proposition, where discounting is the only weapon being used? Or are there anything structural, which some of these new guys are doing or differentiated, which, you know, allows them to be a sort of a sustainable, credible competitor in the medium term? I will be very worried if it was the case, and would have come and said that, okay, for that, we need to really defend ourselves. Thankfully, we have not seen any of the new entrant playing that game. They are going after the vanity, the metric of orders, not on the orders that really matter to the end consumer. We believe there is a cycle that everyone has to go through. They will go through, and it will come back to the same proposition, that the retention of the customers only happen where the firm or where the core value proposition is at that level, and which is what we are actually going after. So yes, I'm very less worried because of those reasons. All right. Thank you. All the best. Thank you very much. A request to all the participants, kindly restrict to two questions per participant, and rejoin the queue for a follow-up question. Next question is from Gaurav Malhotra from Axis Securities. Please go ahead. Yeah, hi, thanks for the opportunity. I had a few questions. You know, on this, you know, letting go of, say, you know, the lower quality growth, so to speak, essentially, you know, the newer users who are coming in, for whatever reason, right, for discounting or whatever, we are sort of okay to let go of that. At a time when the company is well capitalized, you know, the penetration of quick commerce is still quite low, right? You rightly pointed out. Wouldn't it become more expensive for you to get these subscribers, you know, when things settle down? Because like you said, right, competition is not, like, settling down anytime soon. So, how do we think about, you know, letting go of this growth now, but then having to possibly spend a lot more to gain these subscribers back later on? See, there are two cohorts which are very important for matured customers and new customers. Anybody who's infrequent on the platform are those who do what we call as multi-apping, you know, behavior just based on free discount. Our investment in new user will remain. Getting out, making sure that new customers come to our platform is something that we are fully committed to, and we'll keep on doing that. Our investments to make them move from new user to matured user on our platform will be based on structural aspect, and we believe that that particular path is still essentially working on. In that, there will always be some fallouts or some customers who move out, who are very discount seekers. We are absolutely okay to do that, to let that go, because we believe in the end, ultimately, when they look at, you know, the quick commerce, the only thing that will matter to them is what assortment they are getting, what availability, and how fast they get. And which is where we believe that our proposition will work better than any of the new players who are essentially coming in. So yes, acquiring customers still remains a piece of priority. Making sure that they move to a matured customer is also a piece of priority. Investing good money into bad way of making sure they move to matured customer is not a priority at all, because all of them will move out as soon as that money is actually pulled out, which everyone has to do at some point of time. Got it. And, you know, any sense on, you know, how has your market share sort of moved, say, in, say, Bangalore, or any sort of a larger region, if you're more comfortable with that, say, versus in North India? Any sense how you're seeing how the market share for you is, has been moving? Yeah, we don't comment about, you know, market share movement, but what I will talk about is that, yes, large cities are still growing. The cities that we are in are still growing extremely fast. So the headroom in growth is still at the level that we had assumed, you know, essentially earlier. So yes, that commitment to the cities that we are in will always remain. Market share movement is something that we won't be commenting on. Got it. And just last one or two questions. Sorry, I'm harping a little bit on this market share. So, you know, you know, in your shareholder letter and, and you, you have also mentioned that, you know, you are sort of rethinking about this, these, these waivers, because they don't seem to be helping as much. But, you know, obviously, one competitor is going with it. You know, the other listed player also started to be a little bit more aggressive in giving some sort of waivers, you know, starting during the January month. So what would change this current thought process of yours, if you start sort of seeing market share shifts happening? Would that become sort of a trigger point for you? See, the way to think about it is that if we are losing customers, if our funnel from new user to matured user is significantly contracting, I would have agreed to you. And that is the reason we wanted to invest in the month of November and December and in January also, to make sure that we do what is... We see if it is happening or not. It's very important to invest when we, or to see what is the behavior of the user when the market intensity is extremely high, and which is what we did. We believe that we have learned a lot, essentially a lot from that. That is the reason why our confidence on moving back and making sure that we arrive at the right, mix of where we spend and where we don't spend is there, and which is what we have done. Last few months have been, figure out what works, what actually doesn't work, and now we are being on the path to make sure that wherever we didn't want to spend, we, you know, we are not spending. That market share movement in, again, order terms, is not a consumer market share movement, and that is what I want to call it out again and again. That is what we are after. Thank you. Gaurav, I'll request you to come back for a follow-up question. I request to all the participants, kindly restrict to two questions per participant, and rejoin the queue for a follow-up question. Next question is from Manish Poddar from Invesco Asset Management. Please go ahead. Hey, I'm just trying to understand a couple of things, again, probably, which a lot of participants asked. So, you know, I'm sitting out, let's say when I look at the journey, let's say last two, three quarters, and this is primarily for QC, right? So, you know, a lot has been talked about competition, but you look at the metrics, let's say, in terms of order growth, in terms of orders per store, in terms of losses, they are, they are still, probably not there, right? So, and this guidance of contribution margin break even by, let's say, Q1, you know, like a delta swing about INR 20. You look at food and QC both, I haven't seen that in both the players in the last, you know, so many quarters happening. So I'm just trying to think about, you know, sitting out, you know, as an investor, how should one really—because there's no metric to gauge whether this is structural consumer, you know, tactical consumer, good consumer, bad consumer. There's no metric to track market share. So how should one gain confidence on what you're trying to say, whether, you know, two quarters out or let's say three, four quarters out also, you'll become contribution break even? Other than just, let's say, the broader, you know, when we look... Because there are multiple lines which you can play in the P&L, right? And it's a function of market and market adoption. So I'm just trying to gauge, you know, if one has to get some circle of confidence, there's no consumer metrics, you know, how should one draw any confidence on that? I think that's the broader message which I want to understand. So, thanks so much for this. Yeah, yeah. No, absolutely. See, if you look at our, since the peak of the earlier cycle of investment, we have moved our contribution margin by a lot. In fact, the last quarter that we had, we had significantly improved, and the path to contribution margin was also very clear at that point of time. Now, the reason why it moved was also because we were getting our structural cost, advertising revenue, and the other wasteful and, you know, expenditure in line with what our growth was essentially looking at. Now, that particular path will essentially go on, and we don't see a reason why that will essentially move. So the way to look at that, at that number is that there is an event that happened in this particular, you know, quarter, where the competition significantly increased. We invested, a part or some of that, essentially, money into understanding what is happening, in that market and how should we respond. We figured out how we should actually respond, and then we are now looking back at the rightful expenditure across the board as well. So the quarterly movement of structural improvement in CM is happening and we will and will continue to happen as well. Yeah. Just to add on, Manish, Rahul here. So if you look at between the March to September quarter, you know, the previous, you know, calendar year, we added actually 300 basis points. And, as we said, you know, this, we need to solve for 250 basis points over the next two quarters, so the confidence remains pretty high a nd there are enough levers, you know, as you have also identified, for us to be able to navigate that. Rahul, actually, I'm sorry, I'm just trying to understand still, because if you look at absolute numbers and this percentage numbers, you know, when you look at absolute numbers, contribution is in the zip code of INR 200 crore still loss on quarterly basis, right? But the number is still in that INR 800 crore-INR 900 crore, you know, quarterly loss on it. So, you know, percentages, you know, and there's NOE, AOE percentages and stuff like that. So I'm just trying to look at, you know, absolute number to move is a big task. So I'm not trying to even hold you for Q1 or Q3. What I'm trying to gauge or, you know, at least trying to get some confidence, is there some metric which you all can share, let's say, which gives us, you know, in terms of customer, quality of customer, which you are talking about, or market share in key cities, you know, which at least gives, you know, some sort of confidence that, you know, if you're leaving some growth, which was not good growth, you know, how should one differentiate? Because otherwise, you know, it's possible two more quarters down the line, you know, you come... Because if you've seen the last six quarters since the listing, there have been a couple of times where you have earlier said that, you know, you'll break even or, you know, there were goalposts which got derailed. So I'm just trying to understand from metrics, not trying to hold you to any guidance. I'm just trying to hold from any metrics which can give us comfort sitting out and probably, you know, post, probably next result or, you know, I'm just trying to get some confidence on that. I think, you know, if you look at absolute numbers, they are still that, you know, INR -200 crore and INR -900 crore, quarterly numbers. So, Manish, one thing I can tell you is that when we get to zero, you will actually see. So, Manish, sorry. One thing we can tell you is that when we get to zero, your INR -200 crore of contribution will become zero. So there will be this delta movement in terms of absolute, you know, cash flow that you will definitely see. Now, whether, you know, which lines we will touch is slightly competitively sensitive, so you will obviously understand that why we can't give you that specific waterfall. But the fact that we have reiterated our guidance despite the competitive, you know, pressure which everybody's talking about, you should therefore rely on that, and obviously, the job is for us to execute on that. And so do hold us accountable to this. Manish, from an overall loss perspective, at the peak of loss, what you were talking about- Sorry, Rahul, Amitesh, it's not about the waterfall, it's more about, let's say, metrics, let's say, in terms of consumer quality or cohort of consumers or market share by regions, which probably draws us comfort, you know, let's say, in your core cities, you are doing well versus, you know, new cities. Some sort of, you know, color on that is what probably I'm talking about, not trying to triangulate a bridge or, you know, for anything. That's what I'm trying to get the broader message, that's what we looking. No, so see our, And see, we have given some specific numbers in the past, right? Our largest city, you know, is already contribution margin positive. You know, you know, a quarter of our network is already contribution margin positive, and that continues to, you know, get better and better, right? So, beyond this, it'll be honestly difficult for us to share specifics. But, we do want you to, you know, take that there are sufficient levers which are in our control, despite, you know, what's happening in the market, and therefore, the guidance hasn't changed. So despite us, say, meeting from the last quarter, I think all of us will agree that the intensity has gone up, and despite that, we are maintaining our guidance. Got it. Thanks. Thank you. Next question is from the line of Abhishek Banerjee from ICICI Securities. Please go ahead. Yeah, just, first of all, you know, great performance on food delivery. Then just wanted to understand one thing: so, on the growth part, obviously, you mentioned that you will want to, you know, watch out for another quarter before you talk on the sustainability of growth. But, as far as, you know, the margin improvement is concerned, we saw that contribution margin improved by about 30 basis points. And you've said that it has come from efficiency improvement. Now, do you see further room for improvement there, especially in the context of, you know, gig workers, you know, talking about increasing their payouts, et cetera? Sure. So I think, our, you know, effort is to continue to increase the contribution margin, and, you would have seen that despite some, say, pressure on take rates because of the overall consumer side, you know, fee coming down, we have been able to grow our contribution margin by 30 basis points in the previous quarter. So from here on, you know, our, our guidance of steady state remains solid. We will get to 4.5%-5% of gross order value, and that will happen as a combination of both CM margin as well as operating leverage, that we have demonstrated, right? So over the last four quarters, you may have observed that, we've added 70 basis points on operating leverage. You should continue to expect, you know, a large part of that to continue to happen over the next two quarters, and then the balance will come through the CM gains. In terms of the gig economy question, I think, obviously, these are still work in progress in terms of the legislation overall developing. Whatever we have seen, doesn't give us any, you know, say, any shock element. There could be a small impact, but that would be a pass-through impact, and therefore no impact on our PNL due to that. But we'll obviously know more when we, you know, get finally approved. No, so I was trying to understand whether you have managed to, you know, reduce your waiting times or whether there has been, you know, some sort of batching that you are doing. I mean, what is driving this improvement? Can you give us some idea? So, look, I think this is Rohit here. Just adding on to what Rahul said. If you look at the contribution margin, delivery cost or reduction in it is just one component of seven or eight components, which drive contribution margin, right? And there, the efficiencies will not come from reduction in earnings per hour of people, but more from ability to get the network to a higher productivity levels, which is, as you mentioned, you know, intelligent batching, right? Not in an ad hoc way, which we do to some extent already, and then that modulates as per requirement of the density of orders, regions, zones, as well as the orders per hour, right? So two messages. One, that it is not going to be driven by delivery costs only, but a combination of probably six or seven factor line items which we keep pulling northward, right? And we don't, at this point in time, see risks on PNL from delivery worker standpoint. I think we feel satisfied on that on two fronts. There is one, the legislation with the central government, the COS, is largely positive in nature. Of course, we'll wait for the final details. And second, as we see, the earnings per hour and the benefits that we are offering, there is a lot more to be done as it will continue to progress, but we don't see that as a negative pressure on the PNL so far. So, contribution margin improvement will, in the medium term, will continue. It will be guided by only one or two things, is where one is seasonality for the business. In certain quarters, you'll have seasonality. And second is when we want to make a selective, you know, investment into certain cohorts of acquiring customers, but longitudinally, as you can expect us to stay on track for the guidance we've given. Thank you. Abhishek, I'll request you to come back for a follow-up. A request to all the participants, kindly restrict to one question per participant, so the management can address questions from all the participants. Next question is from the line of Garima Mishra from Kotak Securities. Please go ahead. Hi, thanks for the opportunity. On the Instamart business, right? You added roughly 0.8 million MTUs this quarter, which is slightly lower than the Q2 additions. How do you expect this figure to move going forward? And, can this number be actually maintained at this 0.8 million level? Yeah, see the overall MTU that we are seeing is a kind of similar percentages that we were seeing essentially earlier. We don't give guidance in terms of what is the exact amount that we see, but just to give you a construct of how we are looking at it, it is a combination of how many new customers we acquire and how many we have retained. Our MTU in the RU base is actually quite healthy and increasing. Our NU retention, or the NU base, is where the headwind is, which I spoke about earlier as well, the competition headwind addresses there. We believe that competition still remains at the same place. S imilar kind of movement keeps on happening, but the RU retention is something that we are looking at maintaining and increasing, and that will mean that the overall MTU addition will keep on being in the same ballpark. Thank you. Next question is from line of Ankur Rudra from JP Morgan. Please go ahead. Hey, thank you. Just a question on the contribution margin discussion earlier. You've said that 25% of the stores are positive, and the CM per order actually worsened to INR 19 per order this time. I'm just curious of two things: one, what percentage of your stores you need to be positive to break even over the next two quarters? And related, if growth slows down, as you've alluded to earlier in the call, maybe sequentially, if your order volumes decline given competitive intensity, et cetera, you want to give away orders, won't that hurt your throughput and hence this, target? Right. Hi, Ankur, Rahul here. So, see, I think store itself is not, you know, a determinant or a unit of our PNL, right? So while we talk about in the sense of a store, what we really look at is polygons. M ore than half, roughly, of our business in terms of the polygon will have to be, you know, CM positive for that, for that to happen. Today, that number could be closer to 30%-35%. So I think, sequentially, as we continue to, you know, add the monetization layers as well as the cost, you know, coming through, with better utilization, the journey of contribution margin, and therefore the polygons themselves becoming positive, will continue to happen. Thank you. Next question is from line of Nikhil Choudhary from Nuvama Wealth Management. Please go ahead. Hey, hi. Thanks for the opportunity. Just wanted to probe your comment on cutting investment, especially on marketing. While I understand your decision to cut spend, especially on poor order quality or lower order quality, but why not redirect those investment towards new customer acquisition, especially at a time when competition is increasing and we are already sitting on engaged capacity as well as we now have reinforced balance sheet? Yeah. So our, our marketing investment will be on, acquiring the new customers as well. There are other, investments where that we do for retention that comes also into, into marketing, is where the most of the movement in the marketing investments will happen. But the fundamental of making sure that the new users are acquired at the right rate is important for the health of the business. There are, if we don't do that, the future growth actually gets hit, and that is a path that we have not taken earlier also, and we don't want to take, you know, especially in the future as well. So yeah, new user investment will not, will not get hit in this. Got it. I mean, but my question was more, why not redirect those savings, in more, towards new user acquisition, especially we have, so much capacity? When you mean new user acquisition, i f I'm assuming investments below CM? Really, we look at the marginal utility of the dollars invested and the, you know, overall user and the kind of users that we're getting, so we are optimizing on that. So the idea is not to cut our new users, you know, additional growth. The idea is to look at optimizing that expenditure, right? So if that's your question. Yes, so new user acquisition comes in marketing and investment. The overall optimization for that still remains, and we want to make sure that that is not a number that we are going to tinker with. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, due to time constraints, we'll take the last question from the line of Kunal Vora from BNP Paribas Mutual Fund. Please go ahead. Yeah, thank you. I'll make just one question. So can you talk about the path from contribution breakeven to adjusted EBITDA breakeven? How long will it take, and what will be the driver? Will we continue the expansion in contribution margin, or is there a scope to lower marketing and other things? I think, this is a question that we will, you know, won't be able to answer today. I think the journey is very clear. We want to continue to show better operating, you know, leverage while getting to CM positive. So even over the last two, three, four quarters, you may have seen that our EBITDA percentage of the value continues to go down. And I think it would be an appropriate time, maybe couple of quarters later, for us to, you know, give you some sense on that. But, for now, it's hard for us to, you know, give you specific guidance on the EBITDA break even. Would it suffice to say that, as we go from, like, INR -200 right now to break even, that will reflect in the adjusted EBITDA as well, with losses declining to at least that extent? Absolutely. Absolutely. So, you know, that is something that we have already called out, that this should be the peak of the investment. And, roughly as we get to INR 0 crore-INR 200 crore gets unlocked immediately from the CM line itself, apart from some of the interventions that we may choose to do below CM line as well. Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, that will be the last question. On behalf of Swiggy Limited, that concludes this conference. Thank you for joining us, and you may now disconnect your lines. Thank you.