Britannia Industries shares slide 3% after Q1 PAT edges up by just 2% YoY

Shares of Britannia Industries slid 3% to their day’s low of Rs 5,465.75 on the BSE on Wednesday after the FMCG major reported a modest 2% year-on-year (YoY) growth in profit after tax (PAT) for the first quarter of FY26. The company posted a consolidated net profit of Rs 521 crore, up from Rs 506 crore in Q1 FY25.

Total revenue from operations during the quarter came in at Rs 4,622 crore, registering a 9% YoY growth as against Rs 4,250 crore in the same quarter last year.

On a sequential basis, however, PAT was down 7% from Rs 560 crore in Q4 FY25, despite a 4% QoQ rise in revenue from Rs 4,432 crore in the preceding quarter.


Commenting on the performance, Executive Vice-Chairman and CEO Varun Berry highlighted the success of Britannia’s focused execution strategy, which involved extracting greater value from existing retail outlets, agile servicing of key stores, and efficiency improvements across the distribution network. These measures, Berry said, contributed to a 10% sales growth.

The company witnessed double-digit growth across its four key focus states and in bakery categories like rusk, wafers, and croissants. A marginal improvement in consumption, both in urban and rural markets, supported by moderating inflation, also contributed to the company’s return to double-digit growth after a few muted quarters.

On the expense front, total costs surged to Rs 3,973 crore, up from Rs 3,600 crore in Q1 FY25 and Rs 3,739 crore in Q4 FY25. The cost of materials consumed was Rs 2,551 crore, marking a 15% YoY and 4.5% QoQ increase.

Finance costs fell slightly to Rs 26 crore, while profit before tax stood at Rs 701 crore, compared to Rs 681 crore in Q1 FY25 and Rs 752 crore in Q4 FY25.

Britannia shares, on Tuesday, closed 2.7% lower at Rs 5,631.35 on the BSE.

Also read: Jane Street guys are brilliant mathematicians, but we can have PhDs too: Sebi chief

(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of The Economic Times)