Patanjali Foods shares in focus on reporting 71% YoY surge in Q3 PAT

The shares of Patanjali Foods will remain in focus on Tuesday, February 11 after the company reported a 71% YoY jump in its net profit for the third quarter of FY25. The Q3 profit after tax (PAT) stood at Rs 370.93 crore.

This is compared to Rs 216.54 crore reported in the same period of the last financial year.

This represents a notable jump in profitability, with the PAT margin expanding to 4.06% during the quarter, up from 2.72% in Q3FY24.

Further, the revenue from operations also showed healthy growth, climbing to Rs 9,103.13 crore in Q3FY25, a 15.07% year-on-year increase from Rs 7,910.70 crore in Q3FY24.

The total income, which includes other income, also increased, reaching Rs 9,143.78 crore, compared to Rs 7,957.30 crore in the corresponding period of the previous year.

The company’s operating profitability as measured by EBITDA (Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, and Amortization) also improved. EBITDA reached Rs 581.24 crore in Q3FY25, compared to Rs 390.63 crore in Q3FY24.The EBITDA margin was 6.4% during Q3FY25, slightly higher than 6.0% in the previous year.In Q3FY25, the FMCG segment recorded a revenue of Rs 2,037.61 crore vis-à-vis Rs 2,498.62 crore in Q3FY24. This decline is largely in line with sluggish demand at the industry level.

Also read: Vodafone Idea Q3 Results Preview: Losses to shrink QoQ, driven by tariffs and ARPU uptick

“During the quarter, the FMCG industry has reported decline in demand. This decline was primarily driven by overall subdued demand, especially due to the ongoing pressure on urban consumption,” the company said in a regulatory filing.

For the quarter, the company’s edible oils segment recorded revenues of Rs 6,717.47 Ccrore as compared to Rs 5,482.64 crore in Q3FY24, observing a 22.5% YoY growth.

The shares of Patanjali Foods closed flat on Monday at Rs 1,853.30 on the BSE.

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