- Curefoods has filed for an IPO. Cult.fit hasn’t—even after raising more, spending more, and building a flashier brand
- Curefoods scaled by acquiring cloud kitchens and sticking to food. Cult.fit kept pivoting—from gyms to franchises to fitness gear
- Bansal says he’s still involved and focused on long-term strategy, but Cult is struggling to find its footing in a market where few pay for gyms and fewer stick around
- Bansal chased vision. Nagori chased throughput. And now, public markets seem to prefer butter chicken over burpees
Enter your email address to receive a daily summary of all our stories.
“I continue to remain involved,” wrote Mukesh Bansal in an email to The Ken when asked why he stepped down as CEO of Cult.fit—a move that, according to former executives, reflected his reduced role in day-to-day operations.
Reasonable enough. Bansal is still executive chairman of a fitness company that is worth $1.5 billion, and he still shows up on the org chart. Involvement, after all, is a spectrum—sometimes it means steering the company to an IPO.
That’s exactly what his former co-founder, Ankit Nagori, is working on. An actual public listing.
Nagori’s Curefoods—originally Curefit Healthcare’s (from which both Cult and Curefoods spun out) in-house health-food startup, Eat.fit—has become less an ode to quinoa and more a paean to scalability. Today, Eat.fit is just one of over 20 brands under the Curefoods umbrella, which now
The numbers got the memo. Curefoods went from Rs 2 crore in revenue in FY21 to Rs 775 crore in FY25, per its draft IPO documents filed in June. Losses are still up there—Rs 172 crore in FY25—but no longer expanding. Marketing spend, too, fell by 20% to Rs 87 crore in the past two years. The model is tidy: acquire local cloud kitchens, run them through a central ops engine, and generate unit economics that look vaguely Rebel Foods-ish, with a hint of quick service restaurant (QSR) aggregation.
Over at Cult.fit, by contrast, the model is harder to explain—and harder to scale. Revenue crossed Rs 1,000 crore in FY24. But so did the losses: Rs 850 crore that year, after Rs 600 crore the year before.
Bansal, however, claims a corner has been turned. In his email, he said FY25 losses are down, growth is steady, and profitability is somewhere on the calendar. Cult, he added, halved both EBITDA and PAT losses in FY25. And if you subtract a non-cash Rs 319 crore impairment charge from FY24, the trendline looks better. Ish.
Share this article with your network
Send the article link to friends or colleagues who might find this story interesting or insightful.
Send the article link to friends or colleagues who might find this story interesting or insightful.