Signal
E-commerce still underpenetrated
E-commerce is growing +13.4% but remains only +6.9% of the company.
What is driving this change?
What changed
E-commerce is growing +13.4% but remains only +6.9% of the company.
- Previous
- +12.0%
- Current
- +6.9%
- Change
- −5.1 pts
- Slice revenue
- ₹28.4 Cr
Business implication
The channel is working, but it is still too small to matter in a ₹5,500 Cr beverage business.
Volume +11.7 pts. Price/mix +1.8 pts.
Evidence
| Fact | Value | Note |
|---|---|---|
| E-commerce mix | +6.9% | — |
| E-commerce growth | +13.4% | — |
| Portfolio growth | +5.1% | — |
Interpretation
The channel is working, but it is still too small to matter in a ₹5,500 Cr beverage business.
Recommended next step
Build a focused online assortment rather than mirroring the full GT book.
Why am I seeing this?
Metric. Mix: Share of parent revenue represented by the slice. Formula: slice_revenue / parent_revenue.
Comparison. +6.9% versus +12.0%
Calculation. Latest month versus the same month last year, using the semantic metric definition.
Major contributors
- Pulse Energy 250 ml Can: +0.9 pts (+10.3% of explained movement)
- NOVA Cola 250 ml PET: +0.8 pts (+9.7% of explained movement)
- Tamil Nadu: +0.7 pts (+25.3% of explained movement)
- Maharashtra: +0.7 pts (+24.0% of explained movement)
- Hydra Water 500 ml Water PET: +0.6 pts (+7.1% of explained movement)
Assumptions
- Year-ago month is the comparison base.
- Expected growth for a slowdown is the prior-window YoY, held constant.
- Child contributions are additive on the parent year-ago revenue base.
- Realization is a residual of revenue and volume — it includes price, pack mix and discounting.
Data limitations
- Outlet counts are numeric distribution points, not unique outlets.
- Promotion and category-share facts exist in the NOVA warehouse; this diagnosis still explains the parent movement from volume and mix first.
- SKU and channel cuts overlap. They explain the same movement from different angles.