How Does Eternal Make Money? Zomato, Blinkit, District and Hyperpure Explained

For years, the listed company was known simply as Zomato. Today, that description is incomplete.

The listed company is now called Eternal, and it operates several businesses with very different models. Zomato delivers restaurant food, Blinkit sells groceries and everyday products, District focuses on dining and entertainment, while Hyperpure supplies products to restaurants.

Together, Eternal's consumer businesses processed ₹95,959 crore of net order value in FY26.

However, these businesses cannot be understood simply by comparing their reported revenue. Zomato operates largely like a marketplace, while Blinkit increasingly operates like a retailer that owns inventory. Hyperpure sells physical goods to businesses, and District earns from bookings and experiences.

That difference is the key to understanding Eternal.

Zomato earns from transactions without owning the food

Zomato's food-delivery model connects customers, restaurants and delivery partners.

Restaurants pay commissions and related charges when they receive orders through the platform. Customers pay platform-related fees, while restaurants can also spend money on advertising and visibility inside the app.

Zomato therefore earns from the transaction without having to own the food being sold.

In FY26, Zomato's food-delivery NOV reached ₹37,993 crore, while revenue from operations was ₹10,159 crore. The ₹37,993 crore represents food ordered through the platform, while Zomato keeps only the portion it earns through commissions, fees and services.

Food delivery is also Eternal's most mature consumer business. It generated ₹2,017 crore of Adjusted EBITDA in FY26.

Blinkit, however, has developed in a very different direction.

Blinkit is becoming more like a retailer

Blinkit originally operated more heavily as a marketplace where third-party sellers owned much of the inventory being sold. That structure changed significantly during FY26.

Blinkit moved towards an inventory-ownership model, meaning the company increasingly buys products itself and then sells those products to customers.

This creates a major accounting difference. Suppose Blinkit sells a basket of groceries worth ₹500.

If a third-party seller owns those products, Blinkit may recognise only its commission and service income as revenue. If Blinkit owns the inventory, much more of that ₹500 can enter reported revenue, while the cost of purchasing those goods appears separately as an expense.

This is one reason Blinkit's reported revenue increased so sharply. Its quick-commerce NOV reached ₹48,567 crore in FY26, while reported revenue reached ₹37,779 crore.

That does not mean Blinkit suddenly became several times more valuable economically. Part of the increase comes from the change in how products are bought, sold and accounted for.

The operating model has also become much more physical. Blinkit ended FY26 with 2,243 stores across more than 250 cities. It handled around 917 million orders during the year and had 22.1 million average monthly transacting customers.

All that scale requires inventory, dark stores, warehousing, delivery capacity and working capital. Blinkit can potentially capture more retail margin by owning inventory, but it also takes on more operational responsibility.

District monetises what people do outside the home

District is Eternal's platform for dining, movies, live events and other going-out experiences.

Rather than selling groceries or delivering restaurant meals, District helps customers discover and book experiences. It can earn through commissions, convenience fees, advertising, memberships and event-related income.

District's going-out NOV increased 42% to ₹9,399 crore in FY26, while revenue rose 32% to ₹973 crore.

Eternal is still investing heavily in the business. District reported an Adjusted EBITDA loss of ₹319 crore in FY26, partly because the company was spending on customer acquisition, District Pass and live-event properties.

That means District is currently more of a growth investment than a major source of group profit.

The opportunity, however, is easy to understand. Eternal already has millions of customers using Zomato and Blinkit. District gives the company another way to monetise those customers when they leave home to eat, watch a movie or attend an event.

Hyperpure makes money from restaurants themselves

Hyperpure sits behind many restaurant operations rather than directly in front of consumers.

Restaurants need ingredients and supplies every day. They buy vegetables, dairy products, staples, packaging materials and many other items required to run their kitchens. Hyperpure tries to become a large supplier for those needs.

The model is more straightforward than food delivery or quick commerce. Hyperpure sources products and sells them to restaurant customers. It generated ₹5,366 crore of revenue in FY26.

Reported revenue declined from the previous year because Eternal reduced parts of Hyperpure's old non-restaurant business connected with Blinkit's marketplace model. However, the core restaurant-supply business grew 38%.

This distinction matters because Eternal is deliberately changing what Hyperpure is meant to become.

There is also a strategic link between Hyperpure and the rest of Eternal. A restaurant can buy ingredients from Hyperpure, receive delivery orders through Zomato and attract dining customers through District.

Eternal can therefore participate in several parts of the same restaurant's business.

Four businesses, four different ways of making money

The easiest way to understand Eternal is to separate the four engines:

• Zomato: earns commissions, fees and advertising income around restaurant orders.
• Blinkit: increasingly earns by buying products and reselling them to customers.
• District: earns from bookings, convenience fees, memberships, advertising and experiences.
• Hyperpure: buys and sells restaurant supplies.

These differences are important when looking at Eternal's financial statements.

Blinkit's reported revenue can be very large because it includes the value of inventory sold. Zomato's revenue is much smaller relative to NOV because Zomato generally earns only a portion of each restaurant transaction.

Simply comparing the revenue figures without understanding the model behind them can therefore be misleading.

What really matters for Eternal?

The old Zomato story was mainly about whether online food delivery could become a large and profitable business. Eternal now faces a much broader question.

Can one company build several large consumer businesses around food, shopping and entertainment while controlling the enormous cost of delivery, stores, inventory, marketing and customer acquisition?

The opportunity is significant because the businesses connect naturally. A customer can order dinner through Zomato, buy groceries through Blinkit and book a movie through District. A restaurant can buy supplies from Hyperpure and find customers through Zomato and District.

If Eternal can make those businesses stronger together without allowing costs to grow faster than revenue, the company can become much more than the food-delivery platform it started as.

That is now the real Eternal story.