Hero, TVS and Bajaj outshine carmakers with record profit growth amid West Asia blues

Motorcycle makers delivered much stronger earnings than passenger-vehicle manufacturers during the quarter. TVS Motor and Hero MotoCorp reported large profit increases, joining Bajaj Auto in showing robust growth. By contrast, Maruti Suzuki and Hyundai Motor India reported falling profits.

Hero MotoCorp’s profit rose 41% to ₹1,861 crore, while TVS Motor’s increased 47% to ₹1,219 crore. Their results were supported by exports, domestic sales and scooters. Price increases also helped offset higher commodity costs. Maruti and Hyundai faced weaker demand and margin pressure. Both also suffered from higher input costs, while Maruti reported higher logistics costs and Hyundai cited raw-material inflation.

The results show how vehicle mix and market reach shaped profitability. Two-wheeler makers benefited from overseas demand in Latin America, Africa and Southeast Asia. Carmakers remained more exposed to slowing passenger-vehicle demand and rising costs. The article does not provide Bajaj Auto’s profit figure, only noting its robust growth.

Hero MotoCorp reported a 41% profit increase to ₹1,861 crore in the July–September quarter. Revenue grew 23% to ₹14,971 crore, while two-wheeler sales increased 10% to 1.87 million units. Its EBITDA margin held at 13.4%, despite higher raw-material prices.

TVS Motor’s profit rose 47% to ₹1,219 crore. Revenue increased 39% to ₹19,474 crore. Combined two-wheeler and three-wheeler sales grew 27%, from 1.5 million to 1.9 million units. Two-wheeler sales climbed 27% to 1.84 million, while three-wheeler sales rose 47% to 78,000 units.

The different growth rates reflect more than profit expansion. TVS benefited from higher domestic and international sales, exports and price increases. Hero’s growth included stronger scooter demand and overseas support. These figures show both companies expanded sales while protecting profitability during commodity-cost pressure.

EBITDA margin is EBITDA expressed as a percentage of revenue. EBITDA means earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization. The margin helps show how profitable a company’s core operations are before financing costs, taxes and certain non-cash charges are considered.

TVS Motor’s EBITDA margin rose 30 basis points to 13% during the quarter. In simple terms, it retained about ₹13 of EBITDA for every ₹100 of revenue. Hero MotoCorp’s margin held steady at 13.4%, despite a surge in raw-material prices. That stability indicates Hero largely protected its operating profitability.

The two margins are close, but they should not be treated as identical measures of total profit. TVS expanded its margin while raising prices and benefiting from exports. Hero maintained its margin as scooter demand and sales supported results. Both figures show resilience under cost pressure, not final net-profit margins.

Exports gave Hero, TVS and Bajaj access to demand beyond their domestic markets. Sales rose in regions including Latin America, Africa and Southeast Asia. Healthy scooter demand also lifted two-wheeler volumes, especially for Hero. More units sold can spread fixed costs across a larger revenue base and support profit growth.

Timely price increases provided another buffer. TVS raised prices to counter higher commodity costs, helping its EBITDA margin reach 13%, up 30 basis points. Hero’s scooter portfolio gained share, with domestic ICE scooter dispatches up 35% year-on-year. These volume and pricing benefits helped protect earnings.

Maruti Suzuki and Hyundai Motor India faced a less supportive combination. Passenger-vehicle demand slowed, while raw-material costs rose. Maruti also reported higher logistics costs, and Hyundai said raw-material inflation significantly affected profit. Their revenue and margins therefore faced pressure without the same reported export and scooter momentum.

Revenue measures money received from sales, but profit also depends on costs. Automakers buy metals and other inputs, then pay to move vehicles and components. When commodity prices or logistics expenses rise, the cost attached to each vehicle increases. If selling prices stay unchanged, less money remains after those costs.

For example, a company may sell more vehicles and report higher revenue, yet earn less per vehicle. Its gross or operating margin can fall because materials and transport consume a larger share of sales. Hyundai said raw-material inflation significantly affected its profit. Maruti Suzuki also faced higher logistics costs, while both reported profit declines.

Companies can respond with price increases, cost controls or higher volumes. TVS raised prices and kept its EBITDA margin at 13%, while Hero held its margin at 13.4%. But customers may resist higher prices, so offsetting inflation is not automatic.

The article does not directly compare vehicle affordability. As established market knowledge, motorcycles and scooters generally require a smaller purchase budget and lower everyday costs than cars. That can make them a practical transport choice when consumers become cautious about large expenses.

The article’s evidence supports part of this explanation. Hero reported a 35% rise in domestic internal-combustion scooter dispatches, and scooters increased to 13% of its volume mix from 10% a year earlier. TVS also reported strong two-wheeler growth. These results suggest scooter demand remained supportive even as car demand slowed.

Affordability alone did not explain the earnings gap. Two-wheeler makers also benefited from exports and price increases that offset commodity inflation. Carmakers faced slower passenger-vehicle demand, raw-material pressure and logistics costs. The companies’ results therefore reflect both consumer sensitivity and better sales diversification.

Selling overseas spreads demand across several markets. If customers at home delay purchases, stronger demand abroad can support factory utilisation, revenue and profits. The article identifies Latin America, Africa and Southeast Asia as important markets where demand supported Hero, TVS and Bajaj.

Local conditions determine whether this protection works. Healthy overseas demand can lift volumes, while weak demand in a particular country can reduce sales. Exchange rates also matter. This is established financial knowledge not detailed in the article: a stronger foreign currency against the company’s home currency can raise the reported value of export revenue, while an adverse movement can reduce it. Hedging and local costs can also affect the final benefit.

TVS specifically cited higher international sales as a contributor to profit growth. Exports therefore complemented domestic sales and price increases. They reduced reliance on one market, but did not remove exposure to commodity costs, currencies or changing overseas demand.