I came across the news of Comet raising close to ₹100 Cr and, frankly, the first thing that caught my attention wasn't the fundraise.
It was the valuation! A sneaker brand founded in 2023, doing around ₹29 Cr of revenue in FY25 and still loss-making, is now valued at roughly ₹535 Cr post-money.
That's around 18x FY25 revenue. Wow!!
Now, I am not saying the valuation is wrong. But it immediately made me wonder:
What exactly are investors buying?
Because they certainly aren't buying the business as it exists today. And I think that's where the interesting part of this story begins.
Let's look at the numbers first
Comet did around ₹7.3 Cr in FY24.
That went up to roughly ₹29 Cr in FY25.
That's fantastic growth.
But FY25 loss was around ₹4.4 Cr.
So this isn't a story of a highly profitable business raising capital to accelerate an already proven model. It is a growth bet. And quite a big one.
The investors — Verlinvest, Elevation Capital and Nexus Venture Partners — are effectively saying that the business we see today is only the beginning. That is what I find interesting.
Because Comet isn't really raising ₹100 Cr to sell more sneakers
At least, I don't think that's the real thesis. The company wants to expand its physical retail footprint, increase the number of products, invest in product development and technology, and build proprietary tooling and sole moulds.
The plan is to get to around 20 stores by FY27. So the ambition seems to be:
D2C sneaker brand → omnichannel brand → Indian footwear brand.
And perhaps eventually something much bigger. That makes the valuation easier to understand.
Not necessarily cheap. But easier to understand.
The part I like
I actually like the fact that they are putting money into the product. There are plenty of D2C companies where the answer to growth is simply:
more marketing → more customers → more revenue.
That can work. But it doesn't necessarily create a great company.
Comet seems to be trying to build something more difficult. Own more of the product. Build the brand. Build physical distribution. Create a community. And hopefully, over time, create some product-level differentiation.
If that works, the company could become much more valuable than the ₹29 Cr revenue business that exists today.
But here's where I get cautious
₹535 Cr is a lot of money for a business doing ₹29 Cr of revenue. There is no point pretending otherwise.
At roughly 18x revenue, a lot of the future is already sitting in today's valuation. So, Comet now has to deliver. Not just revenue. The stores need to work. The products need to work. Margins need to work. Customers need to come back.
And, perhaps most importantly, the company needs to demonstrate that it can grow without continuously consuming disproportionate amounts of capital.
Because opening stores is not difficult. Opening stores that generate attractive returns is.
That's the number I'd want to see.
And something else caught my attention
The eventual round was ₹98.75 Cr. Interestingly, that's lower than the ₹140–150 Cr fundraise that Moneycontrol had reported in March that Comet was in talks to raise.
That is worth noting.
Because sometimes we look at a ₹100 Cr fundraise and conclude:
“Money is back for consumer startups.”
I'm not sure that's the right conclusion.
Investors are still selective.
But when they find a company, they believe can become a category leader, they are willing to write very large cheques.
That's a very different thing.
Which brings me to the question I was really thinking about
Why does one consumer business get valued at 15–18x revenue while another perfectly good business might struggle to get 3–4x?
Is it the current business?
Probably not entirely.
Is it growth? Yes.
Brand? Definitely.
Category? Of course.
But I think there is something else.
The investor is buying a future. And the quality of that future matters enormously.
Take a company doing ₹30 Cr ARR today
If someone values it at ₹100 Cr, that's around 3.3x ARR.
Seems reasonable.
Now imagine another company doing roughly the same revenue being valued at ₹500+ Cr.
Suddenly you're looking at 15–18x revenue.
Why?
Because the second company has convinced investors that it can become something much bigger.
And that is where venture investing gets interesting.
The question isn't simply:
“How much revenue do you have?”
It is:
“What can this become?”
And I think this is where founders sometimes get frustrated
You hear:
“Company X is doing ₹20 Cr and raised at ₹200 Cr.”
And then:
“We're doing ₹50 Cr. Why can't we get the same multiple?”
Fair question.
But investors aren't necessarily comparing the ₹20 Cr and ₹50 Cr.
They're comparing the possible ₹500 Cr businesses that sit behind those numbers.
That's a subtle difference. And sometimes the smaller company genuinely deserves the higher valuation.
Sometimes it doesn't. That's the bet.
For Comet, the next two years will tell us a lot
If the company can take the ₹100 Cr and build:
a strong retail network, a differentiated product portfolio, a meaningful brand, good repeat behaviour, and eventually attractive economics, then today's ₹535 Cr valuation may look completely reasonable in hindsight.
If not, it will look expensive. Simple.
I don't think we know the answer yet. And that's okay.
What I find more interesting than the valuation
The bigger shift happening in Indian consumer businesses. The D2C model was initially:
Instagram → Website → Performance Marketing → Customer
I think we're moving toward something else.
D2C → Brand → Community → Offline → Marketplaces → Proprietary Products → Omnichannel Scale
D2C may not be the destination anymore. It may simply be the first step.
And Comet is an interesting company to watch because it is trying to make that transition.
One final thought
I started this piece by asking:
What are investors really buying?
I think the answer is:
They're not buying ₹29 Cr of revenue.
They're buying the possibility that Comet becomes one of India's important homegrown consumer brands.
Whether they are paying the right price for that possibility is another question.
And that is what makes this fundraise interesting to me.
Comments
Post a Comment