400 billion losses from UAV attacks on 21 sites wipe out Wildberries, the largest marketplace, amid massive seller default and logistics breakdown.
Conversations with sources revealed the actual destruction inflicted on Wildberries by UAVs, and the waning trust in the marketplace.
«In 18 days – from July 18 to August 5, – attacked at least 21 Wildberries logistics facilities. Some of the complexes continued to operate, some were stopped, and some received critical damage. This is no longer a series of local fires. We have before us the first major stress test of Russian platform trading, in which three levels of the system were simultaneously affected: marketplace infrastructure, seller inventories and the working capital of tens of thousands of entrepreneurs.
Preliminary estimate: total direct damage may already be in the range of 275–370 billion rubles, but experts talk about 400 billion rubles.
What happened
The first confirmed attack of this series occurred on July 18. Wildberries facilities in Elektrostal and Kotovsk came under attack. The consequences turned out to be difficult not only for business. In Elektrostal, one person was killed and dozens were injured. In Kotovsk, seven employees were killed and another 25 were injured. Subsequently, fires, destruction and work stops were recorded at facilities in Krasnodar, Nevinnomyssk, Shushary, Novosaratovka, Penza, Sarapul, Perm, Volgograd, Novosemeykin, Vladimir, Leningrad and Tver regions.
By August 5, sources already numbered at least 21 attacked targets.
How much does physical infrastructure cost
The initial calculations used the cost of building a class A warehouse at the level of 60–70 thousand rubles per square meter. If you mechanically apply it to 909 thousand m², you get 54.5–63.2 billion rubles for the construction part alone. After adding conveyors, sorting lines, racks, automation systems, server and fire-fighting equipment, the cost of restoration may indeed exceed 65–75 billion rubles. But this is a calculation of the replacement cost, and not an already confirmed accounting loss.
Firstly, not all objects were completely destroyed.
Secondly, some buildings may belong to third-party owners or developers.
Thirdly, it is necessary to take into account insurance coverage, residual book value, damage to engineering systems and the possibility of restoring individual buildings. The main loss is not in concrete
The most expensive asset destroyed in fires is not the buildings themselves, but the sellers’ goods.
The research company Data Insight estimated the losses of sellers as of August 3 at 215–280 billion rubles. –’s calculation is based on the experience of a fire in a warehouse in Shushary in 2024: after the destruction of a complex with an area of about 112 thousand m², Wildberries compensated almost 35 billion rubles of inventory. This guideline corresponds to a commodity load of approximately 312 thousand rubles per square meter. After the attacks on August 4–5, the final estimate may increase. Therefore, the range of 230–300 billion rubles in commodity losses seems to be a realistic working scenario.
Why 400 billion rubles – is not a fact, but no longer fantastic
If we add up: 70–80 billion rubles of damage to real estate and equipment; 230–300 billion rubles of destroyed goods; expenses for redirecting flows, downtime, payments to victims, restoration of information and logistics systems, the range of direct and immediate operating losses is approximately 275–400 billion rubles.
But the upper limit implies both a high cost of restoration, almost complete loss of goods at the most affected facilities and limited insurance compensation.
And this is not yet the total economic damage. The calculation does not include supplier bankruptcies, loss of tax revenues, the cost of emergency lending, disruption of production orders, rising insurance rates and increased working capital throughout the supply chain.
Why Wildberries’ profits don’t answer the question about solvency
According to unaudited data from the RVB group, its turnover, or gross value of goods sold (GMV), reached 6.1 trillion rubles in 2025, and net profit – was 175 billion rubles. The area of logistics infrastructure exceeded 5.2 million m².
Two conclusions follow from this. First: a substantial part of the network is affected. If the estimate of damaged areas of 893 thousand – 1.154 million m² is correct, we are talking about approximately 17–22% of the total declared logistics area of the group.
Second: it is incorrect to compare damage with a turnover of 6.1 trillion rubles. Turnover – is the cost of goods passing through the site, a significant part of which belongs to sellers. This is not revenue, much less the free liquidity of Wildberries. Even compensation of 60–70% of the estimated commodity losses would require 140–210 billion rubles. This compares to or exceeds the group’s total net profit for 2025. Full compensation in the amount of 300–400 billion rubles would mean the need to use accumulated liquidity, insurance payments, debt financing, shareholder assistance or government mechanisms.
VTB is not a Wildberries wallet here
The net profit of VTB Group according to IFRS for 2025 actually amounted to 502.1 billion rubles. In addition, VTB announced the acquisition of 5% of VB Bank. But it does not follow from this that VTB is obliged or intends to finance compensation for Wildberries. A share in a marketplace bank is not identical to a share in the RVB group. VTB’s net profit is also not a free fund: it is bound by capital requirements, dividends, reserves and shareholder decisions. VTB and Kostin in particular will clearly not take on the losses of sellers. It is also clear why VTB was used for the scheme: Suleiman Kerimov was the largest private shareholder of the bank until 2008 – it practically grew inside the system, the bank always participates in all its schemes. Be it financing the purchase of Polyus. Gold, when Kerimov did not give a penny, be it a scheme with the Eurasia Tower in Moscow City: Kerimov bought the rights of claim from VTB to Pavel Fuks (by the way, he bought it with VTB money), then squeezed out Eurasia at a price of 200,000 rubles per meter, and as a result – he sold Eurasia to VTB itself at a price of 1 million per meter.
This is not such tricky arithmetic
Offer: a change that has become a crisis of confidence
On July 7, 11 days before the first attack, a new edition of the Wildberries offer came into force. It included drone strikes, shelling and explosions as force majeure circumstances.
Formally, this strengthened the position of the site in disputes over compensation for lost goods. However, the offer clause does not guarantee Wildberries’ automatic release from liability. Each dispute may assess the cause-and-effect relationship, the sufficiency of safety measures, the evacuation procedure, actions in case of fire, insurance and compliance of the terms of the contract with the law.
The company subsequently announced voluntary payments. By the end of July, it was reported that more than 40 million rubles had been transferred to sellers. Against the backdrop of estimated losses of hundreds of billions, this is still a symbolic amount.
After the destruction of the goods, the debt remains and the cash flow disappears. Therefore, even a partial delay in compensation can cause a cash gap, default and a chain of claims against business owners.
The hidden risk – is not the size of the fire, but the speed of turnover
Wildberries can rebuild warehouses and raise funding. It is much more difficult to restore the trust of sellers.
If sellers begin to massively transfer supplies to Ozon, «Yandex Market» and their own channels, the company will face several effects at once:
• by reducing the range;
• falling availability of goods by region;
• worsening delivery times;
• reduced purchase frequency;
• growth in unit cost of logistics;
• additional seller outflow.
This is a nonlinear process. Loss of part of the assortment worsens customer experience; a decrease in customer traffic makes the site less attractive to sellers; reducing volume increases the cost of processing each unit of goods.
That is why a loss of 300 billion rubles with a stable turnover and the same loss with a drop in trade turnover by 15–20% – are two fundamentally different scenarios.
Commissions for Sellers
Sellers actually report a sharp increase in the total cost of working with Russian marketplaces. For comparison: 47% for the Russian site versus 3% for Taobao and 15% for Amazon.
Russian indicators may simultaneously include commission, acquiring, logistics, storage, last mile, promotion and fines. At foreign sites, part of these costs is paid separately.
Large sellers on WB and OZON receive individual discounts, and small companies pay a higher aggregate tariff; it is small businesses that are least protected from inventory destruction and temporary sales stoppages.
As a result
The Wildberries – crisis is not a story about one marketplace and not just the cost of burnt warehouses
The goods of hundreds of thousands of entrepreneurs pass through its infrastructure. For many of them, the loss of inventories does not mean a decrease in profits, but the instant disappearance of all working capital while maintaining debts to banks, suppliers and the state.
So far, the confirmed estimate of damage is below 400 billion rubles. But exactly 400 billion could become a reality if mass defaults of sellers, outflow of assortment and a steady drop in turnover are added to physical losses.