Uber Eats Adds Nearly 2,000 Grocery Stores with Ahold Delhaize Expansion

What happened

Uber has expanded its partnership with Ahold Delhaize USA, adding nearly 2,000 stores to Uber Eats for on-demand grocery delivery across the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic. This bolsters Uber's Delivery segment, which already posted strong Q4'25 gross bookings of $54.1B (+22% YoY), but the incremental store count is marginal relative to the platform's overall scale. The DeepValue master report maintains a WAIT rating on UBER, emphasizing that the stock's valuation hinges on repeatable free cash flow, which remains threatened by potential cash tax step-ups from CAMT/OECD rules and capital commitments tied to autonomous vehicle partnerships. While this news supports the bull-case narrative of sustained demand and marketplace expansion, it does not resolve the core uncertainties around cash taxes or AV disintermediation that keep conviction at 3.5 out of 5. Investors should view this as a positive operational data point that reinforces the base case, but not a catalyst to change the risk-adjusted stance ahead of clearer tax and AV capex disclosures.

Implication

The partnership is a positive for near-term Delivery revenue and reinforces Uber's ability to scale its grocery vertical, but it does not alter the key valuation drivers identified in the master report. Investors should remain focused on upcoming filings for evidence of cash tax outflows and AV-related capital commitments. Until those are resolved, the stock's risk/reward is unattractive, with attractive entry at $70 and a trim above $95. The news modestly increases confidence in the base case but does not warrant upgrading from WAIT.

Thesis delta

The news confirms that Uber's Delivery segment continues to gain traction with major grocers, supporting the base case of steady FCF generation. However, the thesis remains centered on the sustainability of that FCF given looming cash tax obligations and the potential for AV partnerships to turn capital-intensive. This expansion does not move the needle on those key issues, so no material shift in the investment thesis is warranted.