DHER Why Did the Loss Grow 79% in a Year the Business Actually Got Better?

Two Businesses in One Loss Number

Delivery Hero's first annual report as a listed company (period ended December 31, 2017) is the moment to check whether the story sold at the June 2017 IPO actually held up over a full year, not just the six months that ended on listing day. On the operating metrics management controls directly, it did: orders grew 70.6% to 291.5 million, GMV^» grew to €3,824.3 million, and revenue grew 87.6% to €543.7 million. Adjusted EBITDA^» margin improved too, though the exact improvement depends on which 2016 base is used: on the audited, restated segment figures, margin improved from -24.5% of segment revenue in 2016 to -17.3% in 2017; on the like-for-like^» basis used in Delivery Hero's own headline slides (treating the foodpanda group as consolidated for all of 2016, which pulls in a bigger comparative loss alongside the bigger comparative revenue), the same improvement reads as -34% to -17%.

Either way, management's own overall assessment calls the year "positive" and "in line with expectations," and the operating numbers back that up - even though the absolute Adjusted EBITDA loss actually widened 32.3% to €94.2 million, because revenue grew faster than the loss did.

On orders and revenue specifically, the like-for-like comparison reads smaller than the statutory one (47.9% and 59.8%, versus 70.6% and 87.6% actual) for the same reason in reverse: the statutory 2016 base didn't yet include foodpanda at all, so all of foodpanda's 2017 contribution shows up as new growth.

What doesn't hold up as cleanly is the loss. The consolidated net loss widened 78.6% to €348.1 million - faster than revenue grew, and far faster than the operating story above would suggest. The gap isn't really about the underlying business getting worse; it's that two large, mostly non-cash items below the operating line grew much faster than anything above it: a swing in expenses for share-based compensation (-€69.5 million in 2017 versus -€15.8 million in 2016, tied to the same virtual-share-to-stock-option conversion flagged in the H1 post) and a sharp deterioration in "other financial result" (-€73.4 million versus -€9.3 million), driven by foreign-currency losses and the remeasurement of put-option liabilities on minority stakes (see Beyond the Usual). Both are real numbers in a real loss - they're just not evidence the business itself is performing worse than the operating metrics say.

The Prescription

Delivery Hero should keep doing exactly what it told investors at the IPO it would do: reinvest revenue growth into building out own-delivery logistics and city coverage rather than manufacturing an early profit. The FY2017 results are the proof this works when disciplined - Europe's Adjusted EBITDA margin improved from -33.8% to -22.9% of segment revenue even as marketing spend kept rising, and delivery revenue (the company's own-fleet delivery fee) grew 201.3% to €47.3 million as its own-delivery footprint expanded in MENA and the Americas. That's operating leverage showing up in real numbers, not a hoped-for story.

What it should stop doing is presenting MENA as an unqualified profitability engine without disclosing that the trend reversed mid-year. Full-year MENA Adjusted EBITDA margin actually fell to 15.6% of segment revenue from 28.1% in 2016 - and a same-basis comparison against the H1 2017 post shows the entire decline happened in the second half, where MENA's implied margin dropped to roughly 9% from H1's 24.9% even as MENA revenue kept accelerating (see Beyond the Usual). The presentation still frames MENA with the same "strong performance across all markets" language used in H1. A region can still be the most profitable segment in absolute terms while its trend is quietly going the wrong direction - and a report that only shows the full-year total buries exactly that.

Key Financial Metrics

FY 2017 vs. FY 2016, continuing operations, reported in EUR (FY 2017 also shown in USD)

FX: EUR 1 = USD 1.1942 (December 29, 2017 close, the last trading day of the year - December 31 fell on a Sunday).

Metric	FY 2017 (EUR)	FY 2017 (USD)	FY 2016 (EUR, restated)	YoY
Revenue	€543.7M	~$649.3M	€289.9M	✅ +87.6%
Gross profit	€345.8M	~$412.9M	€212.7M	✅ +62.6%
Adjusted EBITDA (total segments)	-€94.2M	~-$112.5M	-€71.2M	⚠️ loss widened 32.3%
Operating result (EBIT)	-€245.1M	~-$292.7M	-€159.8M	⚠️ loss +53.3%
Net loss (continuing + discontinued)	-€348.1M	~-$415.7M	-€194.9M	⚠️ loss +78.6%
Diluted/basic EPS	-€2.19	—	-€1.59	⚠️ loss deepened, though less than net loss growth (see below)
Cash flow from operating activities	-€210.6M	~-$251.5M	-€96.0M	⚠️ outflow +119.4%
Free cash flow (proxy: OCF less capex)*	-€233.7M	~-$279.1M	-€114.5M	⚠️ outflow wider
Cash and cash equivalents (period-end)	€627.3M	~$749.1M	€228.9M	✅ +174.1%

*Delivery Hero doesn't report free cash flow^» as a defined metric; the figure above is operating cash flow less capex - payments for property, plant and equipment (-€16.6M) and intangible assets (-€6.5M) in 2017.

Balance sheet	Dec 31, 2017	Dec 31, 2016 (restated)	Change
Total assets	€2,048.2M	€1,632.1M	✅ +25.5%
Total equity	€1,720.8M	€892.2M	✅ +92.9%
Total liabilities	€327.4M	€739.9M	✅ -55.7%

The net loss growing faster than revenue is explained almost entirely below the operating line, not within it. Marketing expenses grew 46.9% to €327.1 million and G&A expenses grew to €221.5 million - both roughly in line with or slower than revenue growth, which is why the operating margin story is genuinely improving even as the absolute operating loss widens. The real driver of the net loss's faster growth is the combination of a much larger share-based compensation charge and a much worse "other financial result" (see the opening section above and Beyond the Usual). Total liabilities dropping 55.7% while equity nearly doubled reflects the same mechanic flagged in the H1 post: IPO and capital-increase proceeds repaid essentially all of the Group's interest-bearing debt (finance leases of €3.7 million are effectively the only debt left on the balance sheet at year-end), while capital reserves absorbed the new equity. EPS loss deepened by "only" 37.7% versus the net loss's 78.6% growth because the weighted-average share count (implied by net loss ÷ EPS) grew by roughly 30% over the year, from about 122.6 million in 2016 to about 158.9 million in 2017 - the IPO's June share issuance, the earlier Naspers placement, and a further €360.1 million capital increase in December 2017 all adding shares that dilute the per-share impact of a bigger absolute loss.

The operating story and the P&L story diverged this year. Adjusted EBITDA margin improved exactly as guided; the reported net loss grew anyway, mostly on items a reader has to get to the notes to understand.

Key Operational Metrics

Like-for-like (LfL) basis noted where the company's own comparison uses it; actual reported figures used otherwise

Metric	FY 2017	FY 2016	YoY
Orders	291.5M	170.9M (actual)	✅ +70.6% actual (+47.9% LfL)
GMV	€3,824.3M	€2,618M (LfL)	✅ +46% (LfL)
Group take-rate»	14.2%	—	Presentation-stated
Commission revenue	€408.0M (75.0% of revenue)	€217.3M	✅ +87.6%
Delivery revenue (own-fleet delivery fee)	€47.3M	€15.9M	✅ +201.3%
Employees (headcount, period-end)	14,631	9,209	✅ +58.9%
Average employees (FY)	12,882	6,848	✅ +88.1%

Delivery revenue nearly tripling is the clearest single number behind the "Amazing Service" push described in the presentation: Delivery Hero's own riders delivered 28.7 million orders in 2017 across more than 31 countries, up from a much smaller own-fleet base in 2016, and headcount grew fastest in "delivery and operations" roles rather than corporate functions - a genuine capacity build tied to the own-delivery rollout in MENA and the Americas, not headcount inflation. Orders growing faster on an actual (70.6%) than like-for-like (47.9%) basis is the same foodpanda-consolidation effect flagged in the H1 post, just now visible over a full year: the acquired foodpanda business is now counted for the entire 2017 comparison period, whereas the actual 2016 base only included it for one day (December 31, 2016).

Segment Results

FY 2017, four reportable segments (geographic regions); H2 figures derived by subtracting the already-published H1 2017 totals from FY totals

Delivery Hero reports four regional segments: Europe (its home market, led by Germany), MENA (Middle East and North Africa), Asia, and Americas - unchanged from the H1 2017 report.

Segment	Revenue (FY'17)	YoY	Adj. EBITDA (FY'17)	Adj. EBITDA margin (% of revenue)	H1'17 margin	H2'17 margin (derived)
Europe	€198.8M	✅ +41.4%	-€45.5M	-22.9% (vs. -33.8% FY'16)	-26.7%	-19.4%
MENA	€153.3M	✅ +>100%	€23.9M	+15.6% (vs. +28.1% FY'16)	+24.9%	+9.2%
Asia	€144.8M	✅ +>100%	-€47.1M	-32.5% (vs. -50.9% FY'16)	-36.0%	-29.5%
Americas	€47.4M	✅ +90.8%	-€25.4M	-53.6% (vs. -79.4% FY'16)	-51.2%	-55.6%

Europe and Asia both got better in the second half - Europe's margin improved roughly 7 points half-on-half, Asia about 6.5 points - consistent with the home market and the largest emerging-Asia operation both approaching genuine operating leverage as they scale. MENA moved the opposite direction: its margin nearly halved from H1 to H2 even as MENA revenue kept accelerating (up 46% half-on-half, the fastest of any segment) - meaning MENA converted a much larger pile of new revenue into meaningfully less incremental profit than it did in the first half. Americas is the one segment that got worse on every measure across the full year and between halves, still the smallest and earliest-stage region with the steepest negative margin of the four, though narrowing from -79.4% a year earlier. See The Prescription above for why the MENA reversal matters more than the full-year number alone would suggest, and Beyond the Usual for the underlying math.

Beyond the Usual

MENA's margin quietly reversed in the second half

MENA's full-year Adjusted EBITDA margin of 15.6% of segment revenue is still the best of the company's four segments, but it's down from 28.1% in FY2016 - and subtracting the already-published H1 2017 figures (revenue €62.3 million, Adjusted EBITDA €15.5 million, a 24.9% margin) from the FY totals implies an H2 2017 MENA margin of roughly 9.2% (€8.4 million of Adjusted EBITDA on €91.0 million of H2 revenue). The company's own presentation still describes MENA with the same "strong performance across all markets" framing used for H1, without mentioning that the segment's profitability compressed sharply even as its revenue growth accelerated. Whether this is temporary reinvestment (matching the "own-delivery roll-out" driver the presentation cites) or a genuine trend is exactly the kind of thing worth checking again next quarter.

MENA remains Delivery Hero's only consistently profitable region in absolute terms, but the derived second-half numbers show its margin roughly halving from the first half - a reversal the full-year figure alone doesn't surface, and one the company's own materials don't call out.

Two separate corrections to the prior year's numbers, in the same filing

This annual report carries two distinct restatements of FY2016 comparatives. First, a true correction of error under IAS 8: the assets and liabilities of the hungryhouse (UK) disposal group had not been comprehensively reclassified as "held for sale" as of December 31, 2016, meaning several balance-sheet line items (intangible assets, receivables, cash, payables) were misstated in the previously reported 2016 figures - now corrected, with a full reconciliation table disclosed. Second and separately, 2016 revenue and cost of sales were each adjusted by €7.1 million after "contractual provisions have been misinterpreted by assuming the DH Group to act as principal for certain food sales to end customers" in some markets, when it should have recognized those sales on a net (agent) basis instead. Neither correction moves any 2017 number, and both are properly disclosed - but two separate restatements surfacing in one filing, for a company that had only been public a few months, is worth knowing about rather than assuming the prior year's numbers were simply carried forward unchanged.

Two unrelated prior-period corrections - one a balance-sheet reclassification error, one a revenue-recognition (principal vs. agent) misinterpretation - both surfaced in Delivery Hero's first full annual report as a public company.

A €44.1 million non-cash swing sits inside "other financial result"

The line item "other financial result" swung from -€9.3 million in 2016 to -€73.4 million in 2017. Roughly €44.1 million of that is losses from remeasuring financial liabilities tied to put options on non-controlling interests and contingent purchase-price obligations from acquisitions - obligations that grow on paper as the underlying subsidiaries' (and Delivery Hero's own share price's) value increases, without any cash actually moving. A further €27.4 million swing came from foreign-currency losses (versus an €8.7 million gain in 2016), mostly from intercompany loan balances as the Euro appreciated. Together these two items explain most of the gap between the operating loss (-€245.1 million) and the pretax loss (-€336.4 million) - a real cost of running a business built through cross-border acquisitions with earn-outs, even though none of it reflects operating performance.

The RGP Korea put-option liability that was flagged in H1 is now fully resolved

The H1 2017 post flagged an €18.8 million valuation loss tied to a put/call agreement on the remaining minority stake in RGP Korea Ltd. (the entity behind Delivery Hero's Foodfly business in Seoul), noting the company had disclosed completing that acquisition on September 20, 2017, after the H1 period closed. This annual report discloses the mechanics: a new put-option liability was recognized post-IPO at a fair value of €20.9 million, tied to a fixed number of Delivery Hero AG shares, then fully settled and derecognized once the acquisition completed, ending the year at a zero balance. The instrument that generated a one-time loss in H1 is a fully settled, one-time item, not a lingering exposure.

Delivery Hero traded its India food-delivery business for a stake in Ola

In December 2017, Delivery Hero sold a 95.0% stake in its foodpanda India business to ANI Technologies (the holding company of ride-hailing operator Ola), receiving a minority stake in Ola in return and recognizing a €20.3 million disposal gain. Rather than continuing to fund a subscale India food-delivery operation directly, Delivery Hero converted it into equity optionality in a much larger India platform - a genuinely different way to keep exposure to a market than either fully exiting or continuing to invest at a loss.

Goodwill and acquisition intangibles are 59% of total assets - and a small impairment already happened

Intangible assets arising from acquisitions, including goodwill, totaled roughly €1,207 million at year-end - 59% of total assets, per the auditor's own key audit matter on this year's report. The company recognized €4.0 million of impairment losses in 2017 related to the Croatia CGU^» and the 9Cookies CGU (following a larger, €9.6 million goodwill impairment on the CGU tied to Delivery Hero Germany GmbH/pizza.de in 2016) - small amounts in isolation, but a reminder that a business built substantially through acquisition carries real impairment risk on an asset base the auditor itself flagged as judgment-heavy and material.

The UK divestment flagged as pending in H1 has closed, and a new one is already underway

The hungryhouse (UK) sale flagged as still awaiting UK competition-regulator approval in the H1 post received that approval on November 17, 2017 and completed on January 31, 2018 - after this reporting period's close but before this report was finalized - for total consideration of £240.0 million. Separately, as a subsequent event, Delivery Hero invested USD 105.0 million on January 2, 2018 for a minority stake in Rappi, Inc., the Latin American on-demand delivery platform - its first move into a major new market via a minority investment rather than an outright acquisition, and one to watch given Delivery Hero's existing Americas segment is currently its smallest and least profitable.

Target Valuation Range

The market is implying an enterprise value of roughly €5.40 billion, or ~9.9x trailing FY2017 revenue (1.4x trailing GMV) - a valuation still pricing a profitability path Delivery Hero hasn't reached yet, though the price itself moved with the story rather than against it this year. The market is paying a growth-story multiple for a business that met its own Adjusted EBITDA guidance but still posted a widening net loss - not an unreasonable price for the growth on offer, but not yet supported by anything in the P&L below the operating line. No comparable public peer or reliable cash-flow base exists yet for a DCF or peer-multiple-implied fair-value target (see below), so this EV/Revenue read is the numeric anchor this post can offer.

Delivery Hero AG closed 2017's last trading day (December 29, 2017 - December 31 fell on a Sunday) at €33.00 per share. With 182,498,900 shares outstanding at year-end (up from 171,998,900 at the June IPO, after a further December 2017 capital increase), and period-end cash of €627.3 million against interest-bearing debt of essentially just €3.7 million of finance leases (the IPO-era bank loan and shareholder loans were fully repaid in 2017, per Beyond the Usual in the H1 post):

Market cap → enterprise value	FY2017
Share price (period-end)	€33.00
Shares outstanding	182,498,900
Market capitalization	€6.02B (~$7.19B)
Total liabilities (finance leases)	~€3.7M
Less: cash and equivalents	€627.3M
Enterprise value	~€5.40B (~$6.45B)

Peer-multiple sanity check	H1 2017	FY2017	Change
Revenue basis	FY2017 guidance	FY2017 actual, €543.7M	-
Enterprise value	~€4.78B	~€5.40B	⚠️ up
EV/Revenue	~8.9x (forward guidance)	~9.9x (trailing actual)	⚠️ up
EV/GMV	~1.4x (H1 annualized)	~1.4x (FY actual)	- flat

No forward-guidance-based multiple is available for FY2018 yet - Delivery Hero's presentation didn't include explicit FY2018 revenue guidance at this filing date, that was deferred to the Q1 2018 quarterly statement on May 9, 2018. No directly comparable food-delivery peer has been covered on this site yet either, so a peer-multiple sanity check against another public delivery marketplace isn't possible for this post - a gap to close once one is.

The share price itself moved meaningfully across the roughly six months of trading history available by this filing date: from the €27.80 IPO-day close on June 30, 2017, it rose steadily to a November 30, 2017 close of €38.90 (+39.9% from listing) before pulling back to the €33.00 year-end close - still 18.7% above the IPO price, but down 15.2% from the November high. Delivery Hero has not split its stock since the IPO, so these are the actual nominal prices quoted at the time, not retroactively adjusted figures.

A real DCF still isn't attempted here for the same reason it wasn't at the IPO post: a company barely six months into public trading, still posting a widening net loss and targeting Adjusted EBITDA breakeven only by the end of 2018, doesn't give a reliable free-cash-flow base to build a discounted model on yet.

Delivery Hero's first full year public is a company that did exactly what it said it would do operationally, and got punished for it on the bottom line anyway - proof that judging this business by its net loss, rather than its unit economics, is measuring the wrong thing entirely.

---