← Writing

2026 · 30 min

Did Jahez Diversify From Strength or From Fear?

Saudi Arabia's first tech IPO is caught between a profitable giant and a bottomless one. What its diversification really admits, read against the rivals' own filings.

There are two doors. From the outside they are identical: same frame, same brushed handle, same weight when you lean into them. One is marked “strength.” The other is marked “fear.” A company that builds a holding company out of a single profitable product walks through one of them. The trouble is that the press release, the investor deck, and the founder’s interviews all describe the same door, and you cannot tell from the words which one was actually opened. Jahez, the first homegrown Saudi tech company to list publicly, walked through one of these doors sometime between 2020 and 2025. This is an attempt to figure out which.

The Perfect Game

Start at the apex, because you cannot measure a fall without first measuring the height.

On 5 January 2022, Jahez International became the first homegrown Saudi technology company to go public. The shares priced at SAR 850, the very top of the 750-850 range, valuing the company at SAR 8.9bn, roughly USD 2.4bn. The institutional book was oversubscribed 38.8 times (43.0x excluding the over-allotment), the retail tranche 5.9 times, and the total order book exceeded SAR 69bn against an offering of SAR 1.8bn. The float had been upsized from 13% to 18% to absorb demand. Hassana Investment Company, the asset manager of Saudi Arabia’s giant pension fund, took a 4.99% stake as a cornerstone investor, the first-ever cornerstone in a Saudi IPO. The Capital Market Authority had approved the prospectus on 29 September 2021; HSBC led; the listing went on to win “Best IPO” at the 2022 Saudi Exchange Awards. This was not a quiet debut. It was a coronation.

And the coronation was earned. Jahez was not a growth-at-all-costs story dressed up for public markets. It had been profitable since 2020. By its own telling, its market position looked commanding: per data the company cited from the Transport General Authority, Jahez held roughly 32% of platform order volume before the war began, and more than 35% by GMV, a claim we will have reason to revisit. In 2024 it would handle an estimated 91 million of a market RedSeer puts near 290 million platform orders (no audited total exists). By any measure a fintech operator would recognize, this was a category leader with real unit economics, a rare thing in food delivery, a business that has incinerated capital from London to São Paulo.

The years after the IPO only sharpened the picture. Net revenue climbed from SAR 1.22bn in 2021 to SAR 1.60bn in 2022, SAR 1.78bn in 2023, and SAR 2.22bn in 2024, a 24.3% jump that year alone. Gross profit reached SAR 541.2m in 2024 at a 24.4% margin. And the profit line hit a record: net profit attributable to shareholders of SAR 188.0m in FY2024, up 50% year-on-year, for earnings per share of 89.58 halala. GMV reached SAR 6.54bn across 106 million orders. In December 2024, Jahez migrated from the Nomu parallel market to the main Tadawul index under ticker 6017, graduation day. For a company founded with less than SAR 1m and seven restaurants, FY2024 was a perfect game.

Then look at the scoreboard eighteen months later. By June 2026 the stock trades near SAR 14, a market capitalization of roughly SAR 2.85bn, down about 62% over the trailing twelve months from a 2024 high of SAR 22.20. Trailing-twelve-month net income, dragged down by weak early-2026 quarters, has fallen to SAR 28.5m, down 86.5%, a figure below even the full-year FY2025 result and one that pushes the price-to-earnings ratio to around 102x. FY2025 net profit itself came in at SAR 73.0m, down 61% from the record set just a year earlier.

The company did not stop being profitable. It did not run out of cash. It is not, by any honest accounting, collapsing. But the profit engine that justified that 38.8x order book has lost most of its torque, and the question that hangs over everything Jahez did in the intervening years is the one this piece exists to ask. Between the perfect game and the broken profit line, Jahez transformed itself from a focused, dominant, asset-light marketplace into a sprawling holding company, logistics, cloud kitchens, POS software, payments, quick commerce, sports retail, and a USD 245m acquisition of a Qatari rival. The company calls this far-sighted moat-building. The skeptic calls it a margin-diluting hedge that quietly admits the core was never defensible.

Figure 1: Revenue kept climbing while net profit collapsed 61% in FY2025: the 'perfect game' and the broken profit line in a single picture.
Figure 1: Revenue kept climbing while net profit collapsed 61% in FY2025: the "perfect game" and the broken profit line in a single picture.

A Quarter-Century Wait

The most revealing fact about Jahez’s founder is that he waited almost his entire career to become one.

Ghassab Al-Mandeel graduated in computer science from King Saud University around 1996 and then did something that almost no founder mythology celebrates: he spent roughly 22 to 25 years inside the Saudi state’s technology apparatus. The Red Crescent. Command-and-control systems for the Royal Saudi Air Force. The Ministry of Interior. These are not the incubators of Silicon Valley lore; they are institutions where systems must not fail, where the cost of a bug is measured in something other than churn. “I didn’t dare enter entrepreneurship until acquiring the necessary experience, which helped me tremendously,” he told Al Rajol. Read that sentence twice. The defining instinct of the man who built Jahez was not boldness. It was preparation, a refusal to move before the ground was solid.

He founded Jahez in 2015, with four co-founders who remain unnamed across every available source, and launched in late 2016 in Riyadh. The starting position was almost comically modest: about seven restaurants, a budget under SAR 1m. What separated Jahez from a hundred other delivery apps was not capital but a logistics hack born of constraint. Saudi Arabia’s National Distribution Company employed roughly 1,200 drivers to deliver newspapers in the mornings. By the afternoon, those drivers and their routes sat idle. Jahez reused them, turning a sunk-cost fleet into a delivery network without buying a single vehicle. This is the asset-light instinct in its purest, earliest form: don’t build the expensive thing if someone has already built it and isn’t using it. By 2017, the platform had crossed one million deliveries.

The company turned profitable in 2020, the same year it raised its Series A: SAR 137m, about USD 36.5m, led by Impact46. Impact46’s Abdulaziz Al-Omran, who would become vice-chairman, said the team “is something special.” The cap table that carried Jahez to its IPO reflected this confidence: Alamat International held roughly 48-60%, the Impact46 fund roughly 31-40%, with the founder holding around 20% of Alamat. The chairman was HRH Prince Mishal bin Sultan Al Saud. This was a well-connected, well-capitalized, profitable category leader, the rare emerging-market startup that had its house in order before it ever rang the bell.

Now here is the fact that makes the “strength or fear” question genuinely hard, the single most important piece of evidence on the “strength” side of the ledger, and the reason this piece refuses to deliver a tidy panic narrative: the diversification began before the IPO, and years before any foreign giant appeared.

Jahez took a 60% stake in the cloud-kitchen operator Co in 2020. It launched PIK, a quick-commerce vertical, in 2020. It built out Logi, its logistics arm, and Red Color in 2021. By the time Al-Mandeel pitched investors in December 2021, the growth strategy was explicitly “focused on our four verticals… leveraging the network effects, changing consumer behavior.” The verticals were not a reaction to a competitive threat. They were the thesis Jahez sold at IPO. When Meituan’s Keeta would eventually arrive in September 2024 to detonate the Saudi market, Jahez had already been a multi-vertical company for three to four years.

That timeline is fatal to the lazy story. You cannot say Jahez panicked and diversified in response to Keeta when the diversification predated Keeta by roughly four years. The instinct to build adjacent infrastructure was native to this founder, the same man who reused newspaper drivers, who waited 25 years to feel ready. But predating a threat and being driven by a threat are not the same as being good business. The question is not when Jahez diversified. It is whether the diversification ever made money, and whether it was built from a position of confidence in the core, or quiet doubt about it.

Figure 2: The ten-year arc: from reusing idle newspaper drivers to defending a subsidy war it did not start.
Figure 2: The ten-year arc: from reusing idle newspaper drivers to defending a subsidy war it did not start.

The Asset-Light Engine

To judge the verticals, you first have to understand the thing they were built around, and why that thing, for all its dominance, was never as safe as it looked.

The core of Jahez is a marketplace, and the marketplace is elegant on paper. The technology is built in-house. The model is asset-light: Jahez does not, at its heart, own the restaurants or the food or, historically, even most of the delivery fleet. It connects hungry users to merchants and takes a cut. And that cut has been rising, which is the single cleanest sign of pricing power. The take rate went from 13.5% in 2023 to 14.6% in 2024 to 15.5% in the first nine months of 2025. Average order value climbed too: SAR 61.7 in 2024 to SAR 64.9 in 2025, a premium basket relative to most of the market.

The volume metrics underneath are the kind that make an operator lean forward. Orders rose from 51.6 million in 2021 to 69.0 million, 84.8 million, 106.0 million, and 111.6 million across the years through 2025. GMV marched from SAR 3.3bn to SAR 4.3bn, SAR 5.1bn, SAR 6.54bn, and SAR 7.245bn. This is a flywheel: more users attract more merchants attract more users, and each turn lets Jahez charge a slightly higher take rate on a slightly larger basket. (Note that order counts shift with scope, the FY2024 platform-order figure of 91 million Jahez cited against the total market is narrower than the 106 million group orders the company reports, a reminder that no two of these counts measure quite the same thing.)

And critically, this is the part too many narratives get wrong, so let us nail it down before it can be misread later, the core makes real money. In FY2025, even in the teeth of the war, the KSA Platforms segment delivered SAR 214.8m in net profit at roughly a 12.2% net margin, with adjusted EBITDA of SAR 208.8m at 11.9%. The core is not a thin-margin commodity. It is a genuinely profitable, genuinely dominant business. And through FY2023, Jahez reinvested everything: zero dividends from FY2019 through 2023, every riyal plowed back into the machine. That is a company that believed in its own compounding.

So where is the fragility? It is not in the P&L. It is in the structure of the product itself, and you have to squint to see it during the good years.

Food-delivery marketplaces have a dirty secret: they have almost no consumer lock-in. A user has three apps on their phone. They open whichever one is cheapest tonight. There is no data moat, no network that the user personally belongs to, no switching cost beyond the thirty seconds it takes to tap a different icon. The merchants multi-home too, a restaurant lists on every platform that sends it orders. This is a business where dominance is real but rented, where a 35% share is a fact about this quarter, not a property of the company. The flywheel spins on momentum and habit, and habit, in food delivery, is exactly one aggressive discount deep.

A founder as careful as Al-Mandeel, a man who spent a quarter-century making sure systems do not fail, would have understood this. And here the strength-or-fear question splits in a new and specific way. You can read the pre-IPO verticals as a confident leader extending a winning platform into adjacent value. Or you can read them as a careful operator who looked at his elegant, profitable, undefendable core and concluded that he needed somewhere durable to put a moat the marketplace itself could never hold. The same building program supports both readings, because confidence in a platform and quiet doubt about its defensibility produce the identical action: build adjacencies, fast, before you have to. What we can do is watch what happened when someone finally tested the lock.

The Rising Tide

Before the test, the tide, because the macro story is what built Jahez, and it is also what baited the giant that came to break it.

Saudi Arabia in the 2020s is, for a digital consumer business, almost suspiciously good ground. The population is 37.2 million, with roughly 71% under the age of 35 and a median age around 29. Internet penetration is near 99%, smartphone penetration around 92%. This is a young, connected, urban, high-income population that adopted digital habits at a speed that embarrassed older markets, and a government, through Vision 2030, actively engineering that adoption as policy.

The food-delivery numbers ride directly on this. RedSeer estimates the Saudi online food-delivery market at roughly SAR 16bn GMV in 2023, projected to reach about SAR 37bn by 2030. The deeper opportunity is in penetration: aggregators captured only about 16% of food-service spend in 2023, projected to exceed 20% by 2030. Most Saudis still eat without an app in the loop. One caveat governs every number in this paragraph and the next: no audited total-market GMV exists, the SAR 16bn anchor is a RedSeer estimate, and the broader TAM has been pegged anywhere from USD 3bn to USD 10bn, a spread that reflects whether you are counting GMV or platform revenue, and should be read as a methodology range, never a single figure. What is firmer is the growth rate: the market expanded roughly 23% in 2024, processing around 290 million platform orders.

The payments tide rose just as fast, and it is the part that makes the adjacent verticals (payments, POS) plausible in the first place. E-payments reached 79% of retail transactions in 2024, up from 70% in 2023; SAMA had targeted 70% by 2025 and hit it two years early. COVID was the accelerant. When the pandemic hit in March 2020, SAMA raised the contactless payment limit from SAR 100 to SAR 300 overnight, and mobile-pay’s share of point-of-sale transactions went from 8% in September 2019 to 25% a year later, three years of behavior change compressed into twelve months. This is the wave Jahez surfed from seven restaurants to a SAR 8.9bn IPO.

But here is the structural fact that turns the tailwind into a trap, and it is the whole point of this section: a rising tide is non-rivalrous. The same SAR 37bn-by-2030 projection that justified Jahez’s valuation was visible to everyone. A young, connected, high-spending, under-penetrated market with a government paving the digital road is not a secret weapon. It is a billboard. It says, to anyone with a balance sheet large enough to read it: come in, the water is deep, and the incumbents have only captured a sixth of the spend. Jahez’s greatest asset, its market, was also the bait on the hook. The better the macro story, the more certain it was that someone with deeper pockets would eventually swim over to drink from it.

In September 2024, someone did.

The Giant Arrives

On 9-10 September 2024, Keeta launched in Saudi Arabia. Keeta is the international arm of Meituan, the Chinese super-app that runs one of the largest food-delivery operations on earth. It did not arrive to compete. It arrived to take.

The opening move was a stated SAR 1bn, roughly USD 267m, committed to the Saudi market. The tactics were textbook demand-side warfare: free delivery, roughly 50% off first orders, SAR 100 vouchers. The point of these offers is not to make money. It is to buy habit at a loss, betting that habit, once bought, stays bought. And in a market with zero switching cost, the buying was fast. Keeta drew 3.6 million downloads between October 2024 and January 2025, becoming the number-one free app in the Kingdom. Within fifteen months it would report more than 150 million Saudi orders across 23 cities, 50,000-plus restaurants, and 38,000-plus riders, with a basket around SAR 53 and delivery times near 30 minutes, hitting a peak of 315,000 orders in a single Ramadan day.

But read those 3.6 million downloads correctly. That is not loyalty. That is churn-on-discount, the predictable response of a market where every user already has three apps and no reason not to add a fourth that is paying them to try it. The same lack of switching cost that made Jahez’s dominance rented made Keeta’s entry frictionless. Keeta did not have to beat Jahez’s product. It only had to out-spend Jahez’s marketing budget, and it had brought a budget Jahez could not match.

The share trajectory tells the story, and it must be read as a time series, not a single number, because the figures measure different things at different moments. RedSeer put Keeta at roughly 10% of order volume about four months in, and around 8% of GMV after two quarters, the GMV figure lagging order share, likely because discounted orders carry smaller baskets. By November 2025, the market had reorganized into what observers called the “432” pattern: HungerStation at roughly 40% share-of-orders, Keeta at roughly 33%, and Jahez at 20%-plus. In barely over a year, a foreign entrant had gone from zero to challenging for the lead, and the incumbent that once held 32% of orders had been pushed toward the bottom of a three-way race it used to co-dominate.

The asymmetry underneath is the thing that should give a Jahez shareholder pause, and it has to be stated carefully because the precise figure is not knowable. Keeta’s Saudi-only subsidy burn is undisclosed; nobody outside Meituan knows how much it is actually spending to buy those orders. But the scale comparison is illustrative even if it is not a cash-runway fact: Keeta’s stated SAR 1bn commitment to a single market is the kind of number Jahez funds an entire company on. Set those side by side and the structural problem is plain. One side treats Saudi Arabia as a single front in a global war it funds from a much larger treasury. The other side has its whole future riding on this one market. You do not have to know Keeta’s exact burn to understand that a war of attrition between these two balance sheets does not favor the smaller one.

Figure 3: Saudi order share: the pre-Keeta duopoly reorganises into the '432,' squeezing Jahez from second place to third.
Figure 3: Saudi order share: the pre-Keeta duopoly reorganises into the "432," squeezing Jahez from second place to third.

And the treasury behind Keeta is not an abstraction. Meituan sits on roughly USD 23bn of cash, about thirty times Jahez’s entire market value, and in FY2025 its New Initiatives unit, the bucket that houses Keeta among its other young bets, posted an operating loss of around USD 1.4bn. That single line of red ink is larger than all of Jahez. The giant has also been explicit that it is not trying to make money in the Kingdom yet: it has guided that Keeta will not break even in Saudi Arabia until the end of 2026. Notice, too, how it took its share, 23 cities against Jahez’s roughly one hundred. Keeta did not win by being everywhere. It won by going deep where the orders are and paying for them, a luxury available only to a balance sheet that treats Saudi losses as a line item in a global budget.

This is the moment someone finally put a key in the lock and turned it. And what happened to the core (the profitable, rented core) is the subject of the next section.

The Margin Bleeds

Here is where the thesis has to prove its central claim: that the core itself, not just some peripheral metric, came under direct attack. Because if the core was untouched, the diversification was vanity. If the core bled, the diversification was either prescient insurance or a desperate scramble, and we still have to figure out which.

The core bled. The clearest evidence is in the order growth. Jahez’s Saudi order volume fell 6.8% year-on-year in Q3 2025. That minus sign is the whole war in one figure: the incumbent’s order volume actually shrank. And it shrank specifically because of competition, not a market contraction, because in that same period, HungerStation grew orders more than 14%.

It is worth being precise about who HungerStation is, because the market mythology gets it wrong. It is not the glittering Talabat that pulled off 2024’s largest global tech IPO at roughly USD 10bn, Talabat exited Saudi Arabia years ago, and its books hold not a single riyal of Kingdom revenue. HungerStation is the rival Delivery Hero quietly took full ownership of in 2023, buying out the final 37% for around USD 297m, and it is the Saudi market leader, running, on Delivery Hero’s own Q3 2025 disclosure, on the order of fifty million orders a quarter, comfortably more than Jahez. Here is the uncomfortable truth buried inside Jahez’s own “32% share”: the figure was always flattered by its premium basket. By raw order count, HungerStation already led before Keeta arrived. Jahez did not fall from first to wounded. It went from a strong second to a squeezed third, and the tide was still rising the entire time. It was simply losing its share of the water to two better-funded swimmers.

Translate that into the financials and the damage is unambiguous. FY2025 net profit fell to SAR 73.0m, down 61% from the SAR 188.0m record. Gross margin compressed from 24.4% to 22.8%, a 1.6-percentage-point erosion that, on a SAR 2.3bn revenue base, is the cost of defending share with discounts. Adjusted EBITDA fell from SAR 250.0m (an 11.3% margin) to SAR 193.0m (8.3%). Drill into a single quarter and it gets sharper: Q3 2025 net profit dropped 21.9% to SAR 62.6m on revenue down 11.3% to SAR 533.3m, and operating income had already fallen 45.8% in Q2. The profit engine did not break, but it lost roughly half its output in a single year.

And the bleeding looks starker still set beside the companies that own Jahez’s rivals. Delivery Hero’s MENA segment, the one that houses HungerStation, threw off roughly EUR 473m of adjusted EBITDA in FY2024, its single most profitable region anywhere on earth, ahead of even its much larger Asia business and worth something like twenty-five times Jahez’s entire net profit. Jahez’s Saudi core is genuinely well run, generating about SAR 215m at a healthy double-digit margin. But that profit is being spent down at the group level to defend share against opponents who do not need this market to pay for itself. The margin is not bleeding because the business is broken. It is bleeding because the price of staying in the game went up, and Jahez pays it out of its own pocket while its rivals pay it out of a parent’s treasury.

Even the metrics that still grew tell a story of relative defeat. Jahez GMV rose 10.8% in FY2025 to SAR 7.245bn. In any normal year that is healthy growth. In a market expanding around 23%, growing at 10.8% means losing share, running hard and going backward relative to the field. Revenue growth decelerated to 4.7% in FY2025, the slowest in the company’s public life, down from 24.3% the year before. The take rate kept rising and the basket stayed premium, which is why the core remained profitable at all, but volume, the lifeblood of a marketplace flywheel, stalled and then reversed.

Jahez’s own characterization is worth quoting because it is the company stepping up to one of the two doors and telling us, in its own words, which one it thinks it walked through. Management described the margin compression as a “deliberate and measured decision to invest in customer retention and market share defence.” That is the language of strength: we chose this, we are defending the castle, the lower profit is an investment, not a wound. And it is at least partly true. A company with zero switching cost has no choice but to match discounts or watch its users walk; spending to defend share in a land grab is rational, not panicked.

But notice what the quote also concedes. “Market share defence” is the admission underneath the confidence. You only defend what is being taken. The phrase confirms that the core (the profitable, dominant, asset-light engine that justified the entire equity story) turned out to be exactly as defensible as its structure suggested: not very, and only at the cost of half its profit. The fragility flagged three sections ago was not theoretical. It was a price tag, and in FY2025 the bill came due: roughly SAR 115m of vanished net profit to hold a share that was slipping anyway.

So the core is under genuine attack, and the core is still, even wounded, the entire profit engine. But to understand why Jahez kept building anyway, and why it had little real choice, you have to step back from Jahez itself and look at what was happening to everyone else in the market.

Backing Is Destiny

While the two giants fought at the top, the bottom of the Saudi market simply caved in, and fast. In a single RedSeer snapshot from the first quarter of 2025, four local players (ToYou, Mrsool, Mr Mandoob, and Shgardi) were all marked in “sharp decline” at once. Within months the obituaries were written. Mrsool, once a flagship Saudi startup backed by STV and Raed, sold a majority stake to NOMW Capital in April 2025, unable to stay independent. Shgardi shut down entirely that October after seven million lifetime orders, its founders naming “capital asymmetry”, alongside price dumping and the Transport General Authority’s tightening driver-compliance costs, as the cause of death. Even pedigree could not save the grocery-adjacent names: Nana, backed by more than USD 200m including a USD 133m round led by Alwaleed’s Kingdom Holding, entered court-supervised restructuring in April 2026 with its branch count cut from 36 to 16. And Careem, owned not by Uber but by Abu Dhabi’s e& since 2023, paused its entire Saudi food, grocery, and quick-commerce stack after barely a year, keeping only rides. A global giant looked at Saudi food economics and walked away.

Figure 4: Backing is destiny: every survivor has a giant behind it, except Jahez, which answered by allying with Noon rather than fighting.
Figure 4: Backing is destiny: every survivor has a giant behind it, except Jahez, which answered by allying with Noon rather than fighting.

The middle of the market was hollowed out in roughly eighteen months, leaving a “Big Three” (HungerStation, Keeta, and Jahez) holding more than 90% of orders. And the line dividing who survived from who died was almost embarrassingly simple. It was not product. It was the cap table. Every survivor is sovereign- or strategically-capitalized: Keeta has Meituan, HungerStation has Delivery Hero, Noon has the Public Investment Fund and Mohamed Alabbar behind a roughly USD 10bn valuation, and the quick-commerce upstart Ninja reached unicorn status on Saudi institutional money. Everyone who died was thinly funded. In this market, backing is destiny, and that is the most uncomfortable fact in the entire Jahez story. Jahez is a survivor, but it is the only one of the Big Three without a deep-pocketed parent: an independent, founder-led, Tadawul-listed company funding its defense out of a single profitable Saudi segment, standing between a rival owned by one of the only profitable delivery companies on earth and a rival owned by a giant whose quarterly losses can exceed Jahez’s entire market value.

Figure 5: Financial firepower on a log scale: Meituan's annual New-Initiatives loss alone exceeds the entire value of Jahez.
Figure 5: Financial firepower on a log scale: Meituan's annual New-Initiatives loss alone exceeds the entire value of Jahez.

There is a sobering benchmark sitting one market over. Talabat, the Delivery Hero entity that kept its Gulf business, is the rare profitable delivery company, net income of roughly USD 464m in 2025, and the market still cut its shares about 56% below an IPO that valued it near USD 10bn, then watched management guide next year’s profit down. If a scaled, profitable, GCC-leading delivery business gets repriced that hard, an independent number three watching its own profit fall 61% has nowhere to hide. Which is exactly why what Jahez did next matters.

Because Jahez’s most revealing recent decision was a refusal to fight. It did not try to out-burn Meituan, and it did not pour capital into dark stores to build quick-commerce from scratch, the precise move that broke Nana’s balance sheet and that Careem just abandoned. Instead, in October 2025, it struck a capital-light partnership with Noon, the PIF-and-Alabbar-backed group freshly topped up with USD 500m. Jahez brings its tens of thousands of restaurants across more than a hundred cities; Noon brings the dark-store network. Noon Minutes now rides inside the Jahez app, and Jahez’s food rides inside Noon’s. Two of the few survivors chose to ally rather than bleed each other. It is the rational move for a company that has correctly diagnosed its own position: in a market where backing is destiny, the player without a sovereign parent must win on partnerships, not on price. It is also, tellingly, the same instinct that built the company, the founder who once rented idle newspaper drivers rather than buy a fleet, now renting a sovereign-backed dark-store network rather than build one. Which brings us, finally, to the verticals Jahez did decide to own, and to the one deal that forces the strength-or-fear question to a head.

Jahez Needed Snoonu

In July 2025, Jahez announced it would pay USD 245m for 76.56% of Snoonu, a Qatari delivery platform valued at roughly USD 320m. The deal closed around October 2025. Founder Hamad Al-Hajri kept his remaining 23.44% and stayed on as CEO. At USD 245m it was comfortably the largest acquisition in Jahez’s history, roughly 1.4 times the USD 172.9m it paid for The Chefz, and several times any other deal it had done. And an analyst at Termsheet gave the transaction a headline that names the tension at the heart of this entire piece: “Jahez needed Snoonu.”

Needed. Not “wanted,” not “opportunistically acquired.” Needed. That single word is the hinge, so let us pull it apart.

First, the strength reading, because Snoonu is the one vertical that genuinely, unambiguously works. On a standalone basis, Snoonu is the kind of asset a strong acquirer covets: its GMV reached SAR 2.36bn, up 66%; orders hit 27.1 million, up 64%; its average order value of SAR 87 runs higher than Jahez’s own premium basket; and, rarest of all in this industry, it makes money, with positive EBITDA of SAR 53.7m. Only the post-close stub consolidates into Jahez’s FY2025, Snoonu shut around October, but even that partial quarter helped drive Jahez’s non-KSA revenue up 118.3% to SAR 462.4m for the year. This is not a money pit bolted on in a panic. It is a profitable, fast-growing, well-run platform in an adjacent geography, acquired with the founder retained, exactly the kind of disciplined, value-creating M&A that a strong company executes from a position of strength. If you want evidence that Jahez walked through the “strength” door, Snoonu is your single best exhibit.

Now the fear reading, which lives in the rest of the portfolio. Look at the segment numbers, because this is where the holding-company story stops being a slogan and becomes a P&L. In the first nine months of 2025, the KSA Delivery core earned SAR 183.4m in net profit. The group earned SAR 121.5m. Do that subtraction: the core out-earned the entire company by roughly SAR 62m, which means the rest of the empire, everything Jahez built and bought in the name of moat, lost money on net. Non-KSA operations were down SAR 21.5m. Logi was down SAR 17.2m. The “Others” bucket (Marn, Blu, Co, Sol, PIK) was down SAR 23.1m. For the full year, Logi posted a net loss of SAR 25.5m and “Other Activities” a net loss of SAR 82.5m. The core earned SAR 214.8m; the diversification gave a meaningful chunk of it back.

Figure 6: The KSA core is the entire profit engine; every diversification vertical loses money. The group earns less than its core alone.
Figure 6: The KSA core is the entire profit engine; every diversification vertical loses money. The group earns less than its core alone.

This is the spine of the whole thesis, and it must be stated precisely because it is so easy to get backwards: the Saudi core is not the weak link. It is the only profitable thing Jahez owns at scale. The diversification, the cloud kitchens, the logistics arm, the quick commerce, the POS software, the international expansion, is, in aggregate and at the net level, a drag. Non-food GMV is still only about 7% of the total, up from roughly 2%. After five-plus years of building verticals and a string of acquisitions, Marn for SAR 60m in 2023, The Chefz for SAR 650m (USD 172.9m), a 51% Blu joint venture with Al Hilal, a 35% stake in Sol, a USD 15m lead in Grubtech’s Series B, a USD 25m minority in Doos, the empire outside the core still does not pay for itself.

So now hold both readings at once, because that is the honest position. The verticals predate Keeta, strength. Every vertical except Snoonu loses money at the net level, and the core under attack is still carrying the whole company, fear, or at least expensive hedging. And Snoonu, the one acquisition made after the war began, is the one that actually works, complication.

What does “Jahez needed Snoonu” actually mean, then? It means that in the year the core lost half its profit, Jahez reached outside Saudi Arabia and bought a second profitable engine, because the home engine alone was no longer enough to power the growth story, and because none of the home-built verticals had grown into one. That is not the behavior of a company confidently extending a moat. It is the behavior of a company that needed a working second cylinder and, unable to build one, paid USD 245m to buy one. Snoonu is simultaneously the best evidence of strength (disciplined, accretive M&A) and the clearest evidence of fear, because it was needed. The arithmetic is the verdict: a core out-earning the whole company by SAR 62m is a company whose every other bet, save the one it bought last, is still costing it money.

The Referee’s Whistle

There is one asymmetry in this fight that Keeta’s balance sheet cannot match, but it has not happened yet, and that caveat has to come first, before the elegance, or the elegance will read as a promise it cannot keep.

In November 2025, Jahez filed a predatory-pricing complaint with the General Authority for Competition. The GAC responded by requesting five years of data from all players. This did not come from nowhere: in April 2025, the GAC had published draft guidelines explicitly targeting below-cost selling, discrimination against restaurants, exclusive contracts, and self-preferencing, the exact playbook of a deep-pocketed entrant buying share with subsidies. But the process is at the consultation stage. The guidelines are drafts. There is no enacted subsidy cap. The five-year data request is an inquiry, not a verdict. Everything that follows is a bet that the referee will blow the whistle, and blow it in Jahez’s favor, and blow it before the core erodes past recovery. Regulators move slowly; markets move fast; and a complaint filed in November 2025 may not produce a binding rule until the share war is already settled.

With that held firmly in view, the strategic logic is genuinely elegant. The thing that makes Keeta dangerous, its willingness and ability to burn capital to buy habit at a loss, is precisely the thing a competition regulator exists to scrutinize when it tips into below-cost selling. Jahez cannot out-spend Meituan. But it can ask a referee whether Meituan is allowed to spend the way it is spending. The Big Three are estimated to control more than 90% of platform orders (per RedSeer and observer estimates, against a market with no audited total) and concentrated markets in a subsidy war invite exactly this kind of attention. RedSeer has suggested the regulatory turn could mean “ending the subsidy era”, shifting competition away from who can burn the most cash and toward discovery, speed, and multi-vertical breadth. Notice who that terrain favors: a diversified local incumbent with a logistics arm, a payments business, and an ad product. If, and it remains unproven that it will, the war moves from the discount counter to the product, the holding-company structure stops being a drag and starts being a weapon.

There is precedent that the regulator acts. The GAC previously blocked Delivery Hero’s attempt to acquire The Chefz, a reminder that this authority intervenes in delivery-market structure, not just in theory. And the market has already produced a casualty that illustrates the stakes: Shgardi, a homegrown platform with roughly 7 million lifetime orders and 3 million customers, shut down in 2025. The lesson observers drew was blunt, large platforms can burn millions; startups cannot. A subsidy war is a sieve that filters out everyone without a giant’s treasury, and a regulator that caps the burn is the only mechanism that can stop the filtering.

Layer on the Transport General Authority’s 2024 rules, six order-delivery regulations covering facial-recognition driver onboarding, uniforms, and the requirement that non-Saudi riders operate only through licensed light-transport companies, and you get a regulatory environment where local ownership and regulatory alignment are themselves a moat. This is the one asymmetry Keeta cannot replicate by writing a check. A foreign giant can match any discount and out-build any logistics network, but it cannot be more Saudi than the company that reused Saudi newspaper drivers in 2016 and listed on Tadawul in 2022. It is the most Keeta-proof card in Jahez’s hand. It is also a card held by an official who has not yet decided to pick it up.

Strength or Fear

So. Two doors, identical from the outside. We have walked the cap table, the timeline, the segment P&L, and the regulatory chessboard. It is time to stand in front of the doors and admit what we can and cannot say.

First, the damage in full, because the verdict has to sit on top of honest numbers. The stock is down roughly 62% over the trailing year to a market cap near SAR 2.85bn, around SAR 14 a share against a 2024 high of SAR 22.20 and a market cap then of SAR 4.66bn. The 52-week range runs from SAR 10.72 to SAR 28.46. Trailing-twelve-month net income is SAR 28.5m, down 86.5%, for a price-to-earnings ratio around 102x, a multiple that prices in either a recovery the market only half-believes or a floor under a company it cannot quite kill. The market itself will not pick a door: too scared to value Jahez as a wounded incumbent, too unconvinced to value it as a thriving platform.

Now the survival math, which is genuinely two-sided. Jahez cannot out-burn Meituan; that arithmetic was settled the day Keeta arrived with a global treasury. But Jahez stayed profitable through the worst of it, SAR 73m of net profit in a year it was supposedly being routed is not the income statement of a company that is dying. And the asymmetry runs both ways: Keeta’s MENA monthly losses are reportedly widening at the regional level, the Saudi-only burn is not disclosed, even as it processes some 700,000 orders a day across MENA at a monthly GMV around RMB 2.7bn (roughly USD 400m). The giant is not bleeding-proof either. A war of attrition punishes both sides; the question is only who flinches, or who the referee stops, first.

The forward bet, stripped to its core, is whether Jahez’s quality flywheels reach profitable scale before the marketplace erodes past the point of recovery. There are exactly three engines worth watching, and they are the ones a fintech operator would have circled from the start: Logi, payments, and advertising. Logi targets 60% of Saudi deliveries by 2026, with 4,000-plus sponsored drivers at the end of 2024, a path to controlling the fulfillment layer rather than renting it. Online payments grew 39.6% in 2024. Advertising grew 20% in 2024 and 31.9% in the first nine months of 2025, and “other revenue” (the high-margin, platform-leverage line) grew 227.7% in 2024 off a near-zero base and 48.1% in 9M2025. These are the verticals that could turn the holding company from a margin drag into a margin engine, payments and ads especially, because they monetize the existing traffic without buying a single discounted order. Snoonu proves Jahez can own a profitable second platform; the open question is whether the rest can become Snoonu before the core becomes Shgardi.

Which returns us to the founding question. Did Jahez diversify from strength or from fear? The honest answer is that the company walked through both doors at once, and the evidence does not let you separate them. The verticals predated Keeta, real, and a sign of strength; this was not a panic. But every vertical except one loses money, and the besieged core still carries the entire enterprise, equally real, and the signature of a company hedging against a fragility it understood before anyone forced the issue, and against a capital asymmetry it could never hope to close. Snoonu, the USD 245m bet the title asks about, does not break the tie; it is the most disciplined acquisition in the company’s history and the one the company most plainly needed, both truths in the same deal. Strength and fear were never opposite doors. They were the same door, and a careful founder who waited twenty-five years to feel ready walked through it for both reasons at the same time.

So does the USD 245m bet on Snoonu prove which? No, it proves the question was malformed. A profitable, dominant, fundamentally rented marketplace had no choice but to become something else, and whether you call that becoming “strength” or “fear” tells you more about your priors than about Jahez. What it built is real. What it bought is profitable. What it defends is slipping. The only verdict left is the one the company cannot render for itself, and the market is still refusing to render for it: in business, as at any threshold, the door you walk through for courage and the door you walk through for fear are, more often than anyone admits, carved from the same wood.

Sources

Company filings & financials

Market share, competition & macro

Deals, founder & regulation

Competitive landscape (rivals’ own filings)

Note: the “Jahez needed Snoonu” framing references a paywalled Termsheet analyst note (2026), cited secondhand and not independently verified. No competitor discloses a clean Saudi-only GMV; cross-currency figures use indicative spot rates (~SAR/USD 3.75).