By Brazil Stock Guide — The rivalry among Brazil’s main food delivery platforms — iFood, 99Food and Keeta — is no longer being fought only through discounts, marketing campaigns and geographic expansion. Increasingly, the battle is unfolding inside the offices of Brazil’s antitrust authority, the Administrative Council for Economic Defense (Cade), which has become a central referee in the sector’s competitive dynamics.
Since 2023, the regulator has been closely monitoring iFood following the signing of a cease-and-desist agreement after investigating the company’s use of exclusivity contracts with restaurants — clauses that authorities feared could limit competitors’ access to the market.
The scrutiny has gained new relevance as rivals attempt to challenge iFood’s long-standing dominance in Brazil’s fast-growing delivery sector.
The return of 99Food, the delivery arm of Chinese mobility company DiDi, and the arrival of Keeta, the international delivery brand of Chinese technology group Meituan, have intensified competition and drawn greater attention from regulators.
Over the past decade, iFood has consolidated its position as Brazil’s dominant delivery platform, building a vast network of restaurants, couriers and urban consumers. Industry estimates suggest the company still accounts for the majority of online food delivery orders in the country. BTG Pactual estimates that the company holds more than 70% of the restaurant delivery market.
“The antitrust authority plays a central role in ensuring fair competition in the delivery market,” said Nathalie Frias, a competition lawyer at Almeida Prado and Hoffmann Advogados who does not represent any of the companies involved.
According to Frias, the sector is shaped by powerful network effects — a dynamic in which more restaurants attract more consumers, and more consumers attract additional restaurants.
“In markets like this, regulators tend to pay close attention to practices that could lock competitors out, such as exclusivity contracts or strategies that make it harder for restaurants to operate across multiple platforms,” she said.
Regulatory scrutiny
Cade’s monitoring also follows complaints from restaurants and industry associations.
In February 2026, the regulator sent a formal request for information to iFood asking about allegations of anticompetitive and retaliatory practices toward restaurants that began operating on competing platforms, particularly 99Food.
The inquiry also references a civil lawsuit filed by the restaurant association Sindibares in the city of Goiânia, which claims that some restaurants suffered negative consequences after joining rival delivery apps.
Exclusivity under review
As part of its oversight of the agreement with iFood, Cade also sent questionnaires to several of the country’s largest fast-food operators to better understand how restaurants interact with delivery platforms.
Companies consulted included operators of major global and Brazilian brands such as McDonald’s, Burger King, Pizza Hut, KFC, Habib’s, Giraffas and Spoleto.
According to responses reviewed by Brazil Stock Guide, none of the companies reported exclusivity clauses in their contracts with iFood.
In practice, that means restaurants can operate simultaneously on multiple delivery apps — a key issue in the investigation that led to the 2023 agreement.
The matter is particularly sensitive because the delivery sector relies heavily on network effects. The more restaurants a platform attracts, the more consumers tend to use it — and the larger the consumer base, the stronger the incentive for additional restaurants to join.
Price parity concerns
While the companies said they had no contractual exclusivity with iFood, some responses mentioned cases in which representatives of the platform allegedly asked restaurants to keep similar prices across different apps.
The practice, known in the industry as price parity, seeks to prevent restaurants from offering lower prices on competing platforms.
Documents submitted to Cade suggest these requests were informal rather than contractual. Some restaurant groups reported being approached about the issue, while others said they had never received such guidance.
The accounts suggest that although parity obligations may not be written into contracts, the topic occasionally arises in commercial discussions between platforms and restaurants.
A retaliation claim
Among the responses submitted to the regulator, the Brazilian restaurant group Habib’s said it noticed signs of retaliation after partnering with a rival delivery platform.
The documents do not detail the nature of the alleged retaliation or its impact on the company’s operations.
Habib’s did not respond to requests for comment from Brazil Stock Guide.
Other restaurant groups said they had not experienced similar situations.
How Fast-Food Chains Responded to Cade
Responses from major restaurant chains to Cade’s questionnaire on exclusivity, pricing practices and possible retaliation in Brazil’s food-delivery market.
| Corporate Group | Brands | Exclusivity | Price Parity Requests | Retaliation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zamp | Burger King, Starbucks, Subway | No | Yes | No |
| Arcos Dourados | McDonald’s | No | No | – |
| Habib’s Group | Habib’s, Ragazzo | No | Yes | Yes |
| IMC (Pimenta Verde) | Pizza Hut | No | No | No |
| BFFC | Pizza Hut, KFC, Bob’s, Yoggi | No | Yes | No |
| Giraffas | Giraffas | No | No | No |
| SPT Franchising | Spoleto | No | No | No |
| DP1 Restaurantes | Domino’s | No | Yes | No |
Challenge to iFood’s dominance
The regulatory oversight comes as competition in Brazil’s delivery market intensifies and new entrants seek to challenge iFood’s dominant position.
99Food, DiDi’s delivery service, has recently resumed expansion in Brazil. The company had previously exited the food delivery market in 2023 after struggling to achieve sufficient scale to compete with iFood.
Its return now comes in a more complex competitive environment — one shaped by the arrival of Keeta and the increased regulatory attention from Cade.
99Food did not respond to requests for comment before publication.
Keeta’s expansion strategy
Keeta, meanwhile, says it is rapidly building its presence in Brazil. The company briefly postponed a planned launch in Rio de Janeiro earlier this year while reviewing what it described as “structural issues” in the country’s delivery market.
The company said it currently operates in 11 Brazilian cities, including São Paulo, Santos and São Vicente, as well as several municipalities in the São Paulo metropolitan area.
According to Keeta, its app has about 2.8 million downloads since launching in Brazil and the platform already works with nearly 40,000 restaurants and about 115,000 delivery couriers.
The company also argues that Brazil’s delivery market still faces structural distortions linked to exclusivity arrangements between platforms and restaurants, which it says may limit competition and reduce choices for consumers and businesses.
iFood’s response
iFood, for its part, says it is fully complying with the commitments agreed with regulators.
In a statement sent to Brazil Stock Guide, the company said Cade’s monitoring of the cease-and-desist agreement is part of routine regulatory oversight.
Since 2023, iFood has been prohibited from signing exclusivity agreements with large restaurant chains and cannot have more than 8% of exclusive restaurants in cities with more than 500,000 inhabitants. In addition, only 25% of the platform’s total gross merchandise value (GMV) can be tied to exclusive partners.
The company also said it does not interfere in restaurants’ pricing decisions or business strategies. According to iFood, all restaurants start with visibility on the platform and access to a base of roughly 60 million users, while prominence within the app depends on factors such as consumer behavior, service quality and the level of investment made by restaurants on the platform.
Cade as the market referee
As competition heats up, Cade is increasingly positioned as the key referee in Brazil’s delivery market.
In recent years, the regulator has adopted a strategy of continuous monitoring, allowing intense competition between companies while intervening when it identifies risks to market openness.
According to Frias, the goal is to ensure that new entrants can compete on fair terms.
“As large platforms like iFood, 99 and Keeta expand investments and compete for restaurants, couriers and consumers, regulatory oversight becomes essential to ensure that the market remains open,” she said.
As new apps enter the race, the battle for Brazil’s food delivery market is being fought not only through promotions and logistics — but increasingly under the watchful eye of the country’s antitrust regulator.
Leave a Reply