Business · Companies · 2 hrs ago
Swiggy’s Toing draws questions over growth and profitability
Swiggy launched Toing as a lower-cost way to reach people in India who may not order through its main food-delivery app.
The company says two-thirds of Toing users were new or returning customers who had been inactive for a long time.
It also says customers using both apps ordered more often overall, but that does not show how much demand Toing adds to Swiggy as a whole.
Analysts question whether Toing can grow demand profitably, because it uses the same restaurant and delivery-partner networks as Swiggy’s main app and may shift orders between the two.
Swiggy’s experimental initiatives, including Toing, recorded an adjusted Ebitda loss of ₹162 crore in the September quarter, and the company does not publish Toing’s separate financial results.
Swiggy says repeat users in some launch cities have positive unit economics, while noting that monetization and costs still need to improve.
It expects greater clarity on whether the model can scale over the next one to two quarters.
Swiggy’s affordable-meal app Toing is drawing questions about whether it can grow the customer base without weakening the profitability of the core food-delivery business.
Swiggy says two out of every three Toing users were first-time users or had been inactive for an extended period.
JM Financial argued that Toing has “zero rationale” as a separate business and recommended discontinuing it.
Swiggy reported a ₹162 crore adjusted Ebitda loss for its Platform Innovations segment in the September quarter, but does not disclose Toing’s standalone financials.
The company said repeat users in the first-launch cities had positive unit economics, while monetization and cost structures still needed to improve.
- Who
- Swiggy Ltd and its affordable-meal app, Toing. Analysts, including JM Financial, are questioning the business.
- What
- Toing aims to attract price-sensitive consumers, but analysts question whether it can add demand without increasing costs or cannibalizing orders on Swiggy’s main app.
- When
- The article was published on 31 October 2026. JM Financial’s note was dated 23 October.
- Where
- Not stated
- Why
- Swiggy says Toing may attract new or returning customers and support growth. Analysts question its incremental value, costs and effect on the core business.
Swiggy
JM Financial
Business rationale
Swiggy
Swiggy says Toing is showing early signs of business-market fit and attracting new or returning users.
JM Financial
JM Financial said there was “zero rationale” for running Toing separately from the core platform.
Growth and costs
Swiggy
Swiggy says combined food-delivery marketplace growth could reach 25-30%, while noting that monetization and costs still need to improve.
JM Financial
JM Financial raised concerns about cannibalization, cash burn and incremental value, and recommended discontinuing Toing.
JM Financial issued a note arguing against operating Toing as a separate business and recommending that Swiggy discontinue it.
Swiggy reported a ₹162 crore adjusted Ebitda loss for its Platform Innovations segment, which includes Toing.
Mint published an article on questions over Toing’s growth and profitability.
- Toing users
- Two out of every three were first-time Swiggy users or had been inactive for an extended period.
- Order frequency
- Customers ordering through both apps had combined order frequency about 25% higher than their individual frequency on either platform.
- Marketplace growth
- Swiggy said the combined food-delivery marketplace could grow 25-30%, compared with 18-20% guidance for the core business excluding Toing.
- Platform Innovations loss
- ₹162 crore adjusted Ebitda loss in the September quarter, up from ₹131 crore in the June quarter.
- JM Financial note
- Dated 23 October; recommended discontinuing Toing.
What people are saying
The question for Swiggy is whether Toing can bring in incremental demand without putting further pressure on the economics of its core platform,
zero rationale
There was some interplay of demand levers on one platform versus the other, which was hard to predict as we built out both the offerings,
early green shoots of business-market fit