FREE

JUMBO | Jumbonomics v2026: The anatomy of margins

Margins under scrutiny: competition capping upside rather than driving margin debasement – We have received a growing number of questions on whether Jumbo’s gross margin model is structurally at risk as competition intensifies, with Romania in focus following Action’s entry and against a broader backdrop of rising online price transparency. Competitive concerns, however, are not new. Similar fears surfaced in the early 2010s (Amazon threat), yet Jumbo has repeatedly confounded them, delivering gross margins consistently >51.5% since 2016 and >55% since 2021. In this note, we run through the pillars underpinning Jumbo’s margins, while seeking to bridge 2018-2025e EBIT margins (from 26% to 33%). Our take-away is that c5pps of EBIT margin uplift is structural, driven by a sustained shift into higher-margin home/seasonal categories, a more scalable operating platform, and a higher owned-store mix (now c70%) that internalises economics previously ceded to landlords. Cyclical swing factors, namely FX and freight, still matter, but they drive fluctuations around a higher base (c31%) rather than resetting the floor.

Putting the competition narrative to the test – We ran a hard, online-only price screen in Romania to assess whether the intensifying competition narrative is borne out by evidence. We constructed a multi-category basket across toys, household, stationery and seasonal items, pulled posted prices directly from Action Romania and Jumbo Romania’s e-shops, and mapped each Action SKU to the closest Jumbo equivalent using tight criteria on size, pack and intended use. The results are not one-sided, as one would expect. Action is indeed cheaper on a subset of highly visible staples and bundle-led propositions, but Jumbo appears cheaper on several items, with a large share of the basket pricing broadly in line. Notably, the largest price gaps tend to coincide with weaker match quality, pointing to specification or bundle differences rather than pure price aggression. Overall, the evidence suggests selective pressure, not a forced, across-the-board reset. From a margin standpoint, this supports our view that competition creates targeted friction points rather than dismantling Jumbo’s blended margin model.

Overall: we expect a gentle margin fade but not a reset – With these in mind, after flattish gross margins in H2 (with FX being a tailwind in H2’25 and H1’26e, given Jumbo’s procurement phasing), we model 30bps gross margin accretion in 2026e followed by 90/70bps contraction over 2027-28e, which would still leave Jumbo’s margins above the 54% mark. We expect this to correspond to EBIT margin of 33% in 2026e (10bps higher) and 32.2% in 2027e (-1pp), coalescing to EBIT growth 7% in 2026e and 3% in 2027e.

Valuation: overly punitive – At the current price, Jumbo trades at a mere