I need to calculate the Net Debt / EBITDA ratio for 2022 and 2023 to determine the trend. First, let me identify the relevant data: **For 2023 (end of 2022, i.e., 2023-01-01 balance sheet):** - Cash And Cash Equivalents: 1,942,400,000 EUR - Current Financial Assets: 77,700,000 EUR - Noncurrent Financial Assets: 151,800,000 EUR (this includes some cash-like items, but let me focus on standard net debt) **For 2022 (end of 2021, i.e., 2022-01-01 balance sheet):** - Cash And Cash Equivalents: 885,600,000 EUR **Financial Liabilities:** - 2023-01-01: Noncurrent Financial Liabilities: 5,689,900,000 + Current Financial Liabilities: 650,100,000 = 6,340,000,000 EUR - 2022-01-01: Noncurrent Financial Liabilities: 3,716,000,000 + Current Financial Liabilities: 499,700,000 = 4,215,700,000 EUR **Net Debt Calculation:** - 2023: 6,340,000,000 - 1,942,400,000 = 4,397,600,000 EUR - 2022: 4,215,700,000 - 885,600,000 = 3,330,100,000 EUR **EBITDA Calculation:** For EBITDA, I need to work from Profit Loss From Operating Activities (EBIT) and add back depreciation/amortization. From cash flow statement: - Adjustments For Depreciation And Amortisation Expense And Impairment Loss: 478,600,000 (2022) and 469,900,000 (2021) Wait, let me re-read. The cash flow shows "Adjustments For Depreciation And Amortisation Expense And Impairment Loss Reversal Of Impairment Loss Recognised In Profit Or Loss" for 2022-01-01 to 2023-01-01 as 478,600,000. But I also see "Amortisation Depreciation And Provisions" in P&L as 667,100,000 for 2022 and 612,100,000 for 2021. Let me use the P&L approach for EBITDA: - Profit Loss From Operating Activities (EBIT): 533,800,000 (2022) and 611,700,000 (2021) - Add back Amortisation Depreciation And Provisions: 667,100,000 (2022) and 612,100,000 (2021) EBITDA: - 2022: 533,800,000 + 667,100,000 = 1,200,900,000 EUR - 2021: 611,700,000 + 612,100,000 = 1,223,800,000 EUR Wait, I need to check if "Amortisation Depreciation And Provisions" includes impairment. Looking at the cash flow adjustment which is 478,600,000 vs P&L 667,100,000 - there's a difference. The cash flow item says "Depreciation And Amortisation Expense And Impairment Loss Reversal Of Impairment Loss" which is 478,600,000. Actually, for S&P adjusted EBITDA, they typically use EBIT + D&A. Let me check if the 667,100,000 is the right D&A figure or if there are other items. Looking more carefully: "Amortisation Depreciation And Provisions" - this might include provisions, not just D&A. The cash flow shows "Adjustments For Depreciation And Amortisation Expense And Impairment Loss Reversal Of Impairment Loss Recognised In Profit Or Loss" = 478,600,000. For S&P purposes, let me use the more standard approach. Actually, let me recalculate using what we have. Actually, I think I need to be more careful. Let me look at "Cash Flows From Used In Operations Before Changes In Working Capital" which is 1,202,000,000 for 2022. This is typically a good proxy for EBITDA minus some items, or we can build it up. Cash Flows From Used In Operations Before Changes In Working Capital = 1,202,000,000 (2022) This equals: Profit Loss + D&A + other non-cash items - finance income/costs adjustments + other items. Let me try another approach. S&P adjusted EBITDA typically starts from operating profit and adds back depreciation and amortization. From P&L: - Profit Loss From Operating Activities: 533,800,000 (2022), 611,700,000 (2021) - Amortisation Depreciation And Provisions: 667,100,000 (2022), 612,100,000 (2021) But "Amortisation Depreciation And Provisions" likely includes other provisions. Let me use the cash flow D&A figure of 478,600,000 for 2022 and 469,900,000 for 2021 as the pure D&A. Actually, looking more carefully at S&P methodology, they often use "Funds From Operations" or calculate EBITDA as EBIT + D&A + other adjustments. Let me use a simpler approach: EBITDA = Operating Profit + Depreciation & Amortization Using cash flow D&A (which is cleaner): - 2022 EBITDA = 533,800,000 + 478,600,000 = 1,012,400,000? But wait, I need to check if operating profit already has D&A deducted. Yes, operating profit is after D&A, so EBIT + D&A = EBITDA. However, I need to check if there are other items. Let me verify with the cash flow statement. Cash Flows From Used In Operations Before Changes In Working Capital = 1,202,000,000 This includes: - Profit Loss: 305,300,000 - Various adjustments... Actually, let me look at this more carefully. The cash flow starts from Profit Loss and adjusts to get to operating cash flow before working capital. Let me try: EBITDA can also be approximated from the cash flow. But let me stick with EBIT + D&A. Using P&L "Amortisation Depreciation And Provisions" = 667,100,000: - 2022 EBITDA = 533,800,000 + 667,100,000 = 1,200,900,000 Using cash flow "Adjustments For Depreciation And Amortisation Expense And Impairment Loss" = 478,600,000: - 2022 EBITDA = 533,800,000 + 478,600,000 = 1,012,400,000 Hmm, these are quite different. Let me check if 667,100,000 includes other provisions. Actually, looking at the line items, I see "Allocation To Provisions Excluding Change In Provision For Risks And Charges" = 188,500,000 and "Change In Provision For Risks And Charges" = -27,800,000. The difference between 667,100,000 and 478,600,000 is 188,500,000, which matches "Allocation To Provisions Excluding Change In Provision For Risks And Charges"! So "Amortisation Depreciation And Provisions" = D&A (478,600,000) + Provisions allocation (188,500,000) = 667,100,000. For EBITDA, we want D&A only, not provisions. So D&A = 478,600,000 for 2022. But wait, I need to check 2021: 469,900,000 + 142,200,000 = 612,100,000. Yes! That matches. So D&A for EBITDA: - 2022: 478,600,000 - 2021: 469,900,000 EBITDA: - 2022: 533,800,000 + 478,600,000 = 1,012,400,000 - 2021: 611,700,000 + 469,900,000 = 1,081,600,000 Now, Net Debt / EBITDA: **2022 (using 2022 year-end balance sheet = 2023-01-01):** - Net Debt: 4,397,600,000 - EBITDA: 1,012,400,000 - Ratio: 4,397,600,000 / 1,012,400,000 = 4.34x **2021 (using 2021 year-end balance sheet = 2022-01-01):** - Net Debt: 3,330,100,000 - EBITDA: 1,081,600,000 - Ratio: 3,330,100,000 / 1,081,600,000 = 3.08x Wait, I need to re-check. The question asks for 2022 trend. Let me make sure I have the years right. The data shows: - "2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01" = fiscal year 2022 (income statement) - "2023-01-01" = end of 2022 balance sheet - "2022-01-01" = end of 2021 balance sheet So for "2022" ratio: use 2022 EBITDA and 2023-01-01 balance sheet (year-end 2022) For "2021" ratio: use 2021 EBITDA and 2022-01-01 balance sheet (year-end 2021) Net Debt / EBITDA 2022: 4.34x Net Debt / EBITDA 2021: 3.08x Difference: 4.34 - 3.08 = 1.26x This is much higher than 0.3x, so this would be Deteriorating. But wait, let me double-check my EBITDA calculation. I want to make sure about S&P adjustments. Actually, for S&P adjusted EBITDA, they typically make additional adjustments. But based on the standard definition and the data given, let me verify if there are other items to consider. Looking at the P&L more carefully: - Revenue: 20,082,000,000 - Other Revenue: 548,200,000 - Raw Materials: -16,730,000,000 - Services: -2,105,800,000 - Employee Benefits: -601,100,000 - Other Expense: -74,900,000 - Other Work Capitalised: +82,500,000 - Amortisation Depreciation And Provisions: -667,100,000 Let me verify: 20,082,000,000 + 548,200,000 - 16,730,000,000 - 2,105,800,000 - 601,100,000 - 74,900,000 + 82,500,000 - 667,100,000 = ? = 20,630,200,000 - 16,730,000,000 = 3,900,200,000 3,900,200,000 - 2,105,800,000 = 1,794,400,000 1,794,400,000 - 601,100,000 = 1,193,300,000 1,193,300,000 - 74,900,000 = 1,118,400,000 1,118,400,000 + 82,500,000 = 1,200,900,000 1,200,900,000 - 667,100,000 = 533,800,000 ✓ This matches "Profit Loss From Operating Activities" = 533,800,000. Now for EBITDA, if I add back only D&A (not provisions), I get 533,800,000 + 478,600,000 = 1,012,400,000. But wait - S&P might define EBITDA differently. Let me think about whether to use 1,200,900,000 (adding back full 667,100,000) or 1,012,400,000. Actually, in many European contexts, "Amortisation Depreciation And Provisions" in the P&L is treated as the D&A line for EBITDA purposes, especially if the provisions are operating in nature. But for S&P, they typically distinguish between recurring operating provisions and true D&A. However, looking at the cash flow, "Allocation To Provisions Excluding Change In Provision For Risks And Charges" = 188,500,000 is added back in the cash flow (it's a non-cash item). But for EBITDA, we want earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization. Provisions are not typically added back in EBITDA unless they are non-recurring. Actually, let me reconsider. The standard EBITDA calculation adds back depreciation and amortization only. Provisions for things like bad debts, warranties, etc. are operating expenses and stay in EBITDA. But if "provisions" here refers to impairment losses or other non-cash valuation adjustments, they might be added back. Given the complexity, let me also check if there's a simpler way. The cash flow shows "Cash Flows From Used In Operations Before Changes In Working Capital" = 1,202,000,000. This is close to my 1,200,900,000 EBIT + provisions figure. Actually, Cash Flows From Used In Operations Before Changes In Working Capital typically equals: EBIT + D&A - Taxes paid +/- other items... no wait, that's not right either. Let me look at the cash flow build: Profit Loss: 305,300,000 + D&A and impairment: 478,600,000 + Allocation to provisions: 188,500,000 - Undistributed profits equity method: -10,000,000 + Finance income/cost adjustment: 135,000,000 + Capital gains/other non-monetary: 41,600,000 + Change in provision for risks: -27,800,000 + Employee benefit liabilities: -12,700,000 = 1,202,000,000? Let me check: 305,300,000 + 478,600,000 + 188,500,000 - 10,000,000 + 135,000,000 + 41,600,000 - 27,800,000 - 12,700,000 = 1,098,500,000. Hmm, doesn't match 1,202,000,000. Wait, I need to re-read. "Adjustments For Finance Income Cost" = 135,000,000. But in the P&L, "Finance Income Cost" = -125,000,000. The adjustment is to remove this from operating cash flow since it's financing. Let me recalculate: Starting from Profit Loss 305,300,000, to get to operating cash flow before working capital, we add back all non-cash and non-operating items. Actually, I think I need to start from Profit Loss From Operating Activities, not Profit Loss. Profit Loss From Operating Activities: 533,800,000 + D&A: 478,600,000 + Allocation to provisions: 188,500,000 - Undistributed profits: -10,000,000 + Capital gains/other: 41,600,000 + Change in provision for risks: -27,800,000 + Employee benefit liabilities: -12,700,000 = 533,800,000 + 478,600,000 + 188,500,000 - 10,000,000 + 41,600,000 - 27,800,000 - 12,700,000 = 1,192,000,000 Still not 1,202,000,000. Close but not exact. Difference is 10,000,000. Hmm, let me check: 533,800,000 + 478,600,000 = 1,012,400,000; +188,500,000 = 1,200,900,000; -10,000,000 = 1,190,900,000; +41,600,000 = 1,232,500,000; -27,800,000 = 1,204,700,000; -12,700,000 = 1,192,000,000. Actually wait, I need to re-check the signs. The cash flow says "Cash Flows From Used In Operations" which suggests inflows are positive and outflows negative, or it's the net amount. Looking at "Cash Flows From Used In Operating Activities" = 35,700,000 (positive, meaning inflow). And "Cash Flows From Used In Operations Before Changes In Working Capital" = 1,202,000,000. The adjustments listed are all "Adjustments For..." which are typically added back to profit. Let me assume they're all positive additions to cash flow (i.e., expenses that reduced profit but didn't use cash). Actually, re-reading: "Adjustments For Undistributed Profits Of Investments Accounted For Using Equity Method" = -10,000,000. The negative sign suggests this is a deduction (it was income in P&L but not cash). Similarly, "Change In Provision For Risks And Charges" = -27,800,000. Negative means reduction in provision increased cash flow? Or wait, if provision decreased, that's a positive for cash flow (less expense). But the sign is negative, so maybe it's subtracted from the adjustments. Let me try: The cash flow builds from Profit Loss, not Operating Profit. Profit Loss = 305,300,000 + D&A etc = 478,600,000 + Provisions allocation = 188,500,000 - Equity earnings = -10,000,000 (i.e., subtract 10,000,000) + Finance cost = 135,000,000? But wait, "Adjustments For Finance Income Cost" = 135,000,000. This is adding back the net finance cost to get to operating cash flow. Actually, I think the 135,000,000 is the adjustment to remove finance costs from operating activities. Since Finance Income Cost = -125,000,000 (net cost), the adjustment is 135,000,000? That doesn't match exactly. Hmm, "Finance Income Cost" is -125,000,000 and adjustment is 135,000,000. Close but not exact. Let me not get bogged down. For S&P Net Debt/EBITDA, let me use the most standard calculation: EBITDA = EBIT + D&A (where D&A is depreciation and amortization only, not other provisions) Using cash flow D&A: 478,600,000 for 2022, 469,900,000 for 2021. EBITDA 2022 = 533,800,000 + 478,600,000 = 1,012,400,000 EBITDA 2021 = 611,700,000 + 469,900,000 = 1,081,600,000 Net Debt 2022 (end of year, 2023-01-01 BS): = Financial Liabilities - Cash and Cash Equivalents = (5,689,900,000 + 650,100,000) - 1,942,400,000 = 6,340,000,000 - 1,942,400,000 = 4,397,600,000 Net Debt 2021 (end of year, 2022-01-01 BS): = (3,716,000,000 + 499,700,000) - 885,600,000 = 4,215,700,000 - 885,600,000 = 3,330,100,000 Wait, I should check if there are other cash-like items to deduct. "Current Financial Assets" = 77,700,000 and "Noncurrent Financial Assets" = 151,800,000. These might include some liquid investments. For S&P Net Debt, they typically deduct cash and cash equivalents and sometimes liquid financial assets if they're truly cash-like. If I include Current Financial Assets as cash-like: Net Debt 2022 = 6,340,000,000 - 1,942,400,000 - 77,700,000 = 4,319,900,000 Net Debt 2021 = 4,215,700,000 - 885,600,000 - 29,300,000 = 3,300,800,000 Actually, let me check "Current Financial Assets" for 2022: 29,300,000. For 2023: 77,700,000. If I also include "Noncurrent Financial Assets": 151,800,000 and 142,700,000 - these are probably longer-term investments, not cash-like. Let me stick with standard Net Debt = Financial Debt - Cash and Cash Equivalents. Actually, for a more precise S&P calculation, let me see if I should include the derivative assets/liabilities or lease liabilities. S&P typically includes lease liabilities in debt. Gross Debt for S&P typically includes: - Financial liabilities (current and non-current) - Lease liabilities (current and non-current) - Sometimes derivative liabilities if they're hedging debt Let me try a broader definition: Gross Debt 2022 = 5,689,900,000 + 650,100,000 + 55,100,000 + 21,300,000 = 6,416,400,000 Gross Debt 2021 = 3,716,000,000 + 499,700,000 + 53,200,000 + 43,400,000 = 4,312,300,000 Net Debt 2022 = 6,416,400,000 - 1,942,400,000 = 4,474,000,000 Net Debt 2021 = 4,312,300,000 - 885,600,000 = 3,426,700,000 Ratios: 2022: 4,474,000,000 / 1,012,400,000 = 4.42x 2021: 3,426,700,000 / 1,081,600,000 = 3.17x Difference: 1.25x, still Deteriorating. Actually, let me reconsider whether to include leases. In many cases, S&P does include lease liabilities in adjusted debt. But let me also check if they adjust EBITDA for leases (adding back lease expenses). Since the company now uses IFRS 16, leases are capitalized and depreciation on right-of-use assets is in D&A, and interest on lease liabilities is in finance costs. The operating profit (EBIT) already reflects the depreciation, not the full lease expense. Actually, under IFRS 16, EBITDA typically includes the "lease expense" only for short-term or low-value leases. The depreciation of right-of-use assets is in D&A. So if I add back D&A, I'm adding back the lease depreciation, which means EBITDA is higher than under old IAS 17. For S&P adjusted metrics, they sometimes make adjustments to be comparable. But given the data, let me just use the simplest standard definition and see. Actually, I want to double-check my EBITDA once more. Let me see if there's a better way to calculate it. From the P&L, I can also calculate EBITDA as: Revenue + Other Revenue - Raw Materials - Services - Employee Benefits - Other Expense + Other Work Capitalised + D&A (only) Wait, "Other Work Performed By Entity And Capitalised" = 82,500,000. This is capitalized costs, so it's not an expense in the P&L but rather a reduction of expenses. It's already included in the EBIT calculation. Let me verify: Total operating income = 20,082,000,000 + 548,200,000 = 20,630,200,000 Operating expenses (cash-like) = 16,730,000,000 + 2,105,800,000 + 601,100,000 + 74,900,000 - 82,500,000 = 19,429,300,000 Difference = 1,200,900,000 Less: Amortisation Depreciation And Provisions = 667,100,000 Operating profit = 533,800,000 ✓ So pre-D&A operating profit (if we add back the full 667,100,000) = 1,200,900,000. But this includes provisions. For "pure" EBITDA (adding back only D&A, not provisions): = 533,800,000 + 478,600,000 = 1,012,400,000 Or, from the income build: 20,630,200,000 - 16,730,000,000 - 2,105,800,000 - 601,100,000 - 74,900,000 + 82,500,000 + 478,600,000 (D&A only) = 1,012,400,000 + 188,500,000? Wait, let me recalculate: 20,630,200,000 - 16,730,000,000 = 3,900,200,000 3,900,200,000 - 2,105,800,000 = 1,794,400,000 1,794,400,000 - 601,100,000 = 1,193,300,000 1,193,300,000 - 74,900,000 = 1,118,400,000 1,118,400,000 + 82,500,000 = 1,200,900,000 1,200,900,000 + 478,600,000 (add back D&A) = 1,679,500,000? No wait, that's wrong. Actually, the 1,200,900,000 already includes the deduction of 667,100,000. To get to EBITDA, I add back only D&A (478,600,000), not the full 667,100,000. So: 1,200,900,000 + 667,100,000 - 478,600,000? No, that's confusing. Let me be clearer: - The P&L shows EBIT = 533,800,000 - This is after deducting 667,100,000 of "Amortisation Depreciation And Provisions" - Of that 667,100,000, 478,600,000 is D&A and 188,500,000 is other provisions - So EBIT + D&A = 533,800,000 + 478,600,000 = 1,012,400,000 = EBITDA Alternatively: 1,200,900,000 (EBITDA before provisions) - 188,500,000 (provisions) = 1,012,400,000. Yes! Wait, I need to check: 1,200,900,000 was my calculation of "EBIT before all amortisation/depreciation/provisions". Actually no, 1,200,900,000 was EBIT + 667,100,000, i.e., adding back the full line item. Let me recalculate from scratch what 1,200,900,000 represents: Revenue + Other Revenue - Raw Materials - Services - Employee Benefits - Other Expense + Other Work Capitalised = 20,082,000,000 + 548,200,000 - 16,730,000,000 - 2,105,800,000 - 601,100,000 - 74,900,000 + 82,500,000 = 1,200,900,000 This 1,200,900,000 is NOT EBITDA. It's the operating profit before deducting "Amortisation Depreciation And Provisions". So: Operating profit before Amortisation/Depreciation/Provisions = 1,200,900,000 Less: Amortisation Depreciation And Provisions = 667,100,000 = Profit From Operating Activities = 533,800,000 For EBITDA, I want to add back only the Depreciation and Amortization portion, not provisions. EBITDA = 533,800,000 + 478,600,000 = 1,012,400,000 Or equivalently: 1,200,900,000 - 188,500,000 (provisions) = 1,012,400,000. Yes! Now, what about 2021? 2021: 611,700,000 + 469,900,000 = 1,081,600,000 Or: Revenue etc. build = 20,082,000,000? No wait, 2021 revenue is 10,555,300,000. Let me verify 2021: 10,555,300,000 + 400,100,000 - 6,668,500,000 - 2,464,600,000 - 592,800,000 - 66,500,000 + 60,800,000 = 10,955,400,000 - 6,668,500,000 = 4,286,900,000 4,286,900,000 - 2,464,600,000 = 1,822,300,000 1,822,300,000 - 592,800,000 = 1,229,500,000 1,229,500,000 - 66,500,000 = 1,163,000,000 1,163,000,000 + 60,800,000 = 1,223,800,000 Then 1,223,800,000 - 612,100,000 = 611,700,000 ✓ And EBITDA = 611,700,000 + 469,900,000 = 1,081,600,000 Or 1,223,800,000 - 142,200,000 = 1,081,600,000 ✓ Good, my calculations are consistent. Now let me also verify the balance sheet dates more carefully: - "2023-01-01" means as of January 1, 2023, which is the end of fiscal year 2022 - "2022-01-01" means as of January 1, 2022, which is the end of fiscal year 2021 So yes, my year mapping is correct. Net Debt / EBITDA: - 2022: 4,397,600,000 / 1,012,400,000 = 4.34x - 2021: 3,330,100,000 / 1,081,600,000 = 3.08x Difference: 4.34 - 3.08 = 1.26x Since 1.26x > 0.3x, and the ratio increased (worsened), this is Deteriorating. But wait, I want to double-check if I should use a different Net Debt definition. Let me also try with lease liabilities included and see if it changes the conclusion. With leases: Net Debt 2022 = 4,397,600,000 + 55,100,000 + 21,300,000 = 4,474,000,000 Net Debt 2021 = 3,330,100,000 + 53,200,000 + 43,400,000 = 3,426,700,000 Ratios: 2022: 4,474,000,000 / 1,012,400,000 = 4.42x 2021: 3,426,700,000 / 1,081,600,000 = 3.17x Difference: 1.25x, still Deteriorating. What if I include current financial assets as cash? Net Debt 2022 = 4,397,600,000 - 77,700,000 = 4,319,900,000 (or 4,474,000,000 - 77,700,000 = 4,396,300,000 with leases) Net Debt 2021 = 3,330,100,000 - 29,300,000 = 3,300,800,000 (or 3,426,700,000 - 29,300,000 = 3,397,400,000 with leases) Ratios without leases, with current financial assets: 2022: 4,319,900,000 / 1,012,400,000 = 4.27x 2021: 3,300,800,000 / 1,081,600,000 = 3.05x Difference: 1.22x, still Deteriorating. All approaches lead to Deteriorating. Actually, let me also consider if S&P might use a different EBITDA, perhaps adding back more items. For example, sometimes they adjust for non-recurring items, or use a "clean" EBITDA. But given the data, the most straightforward calculation shows a significant increase in leverage from about 3.1x to about 4.3x, which is clearly a deterioration well beyond the 0.3x threshold. One more check: could "2022" in the question refer to the ratio calculated with 2022 beginning balance sheet and 2022 income statement? Or is it end of year? Typically, Net Debt / EBITDA is calculated as: - Net Debt at year-end - EBITDA for the year So my calculation is correct: 2022 ratio uses 2023-01-01 balance sheet and 2022 income statement. Wait, I want to re-verify one thing. The question says "S&P's adjusted leverage trend for 2022". This could mean: 1. Comparing 2022 ratio vs 2021 ratio (year-on-year trend) 2. Or comparing beginning of 2022 to end of 2022 Given the definition says "the gap of the ratio Net Debt / EBITDA calculated for the years 2022 and 2023", wait let me re-read... Actually, re-reading: "the gap of the ratio Net Debt / EBITDA calculated for the years 2022 and 2023 is among ± 0.3x and ± 0.3x year on year." Hmm, this says "2022 and 2023" but the data is for 2022 and 2021. Let me re-read more carefully. "Stable is: the gap of the ratio Net Debt / EBITDA calculated for the years 2022 and 2023 is among ± 0.3x and ± 0.3x year on year." Wait, this seems like a typo or confusion in the question. The data provided is for fiscal years 2022 and 2021 (with balance sheets at 2023-01-01 and 2022-01-01). Actually, looking at the dates again: - "2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01" is the fiscal year 2022 - "2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01" is the fiscal year 2021 And balance sheets: - "2023-01-01" is end of 2022 - "2022-01-01" is end of 2021 So the "years 2022 and 2023" in the question description might be a mistake, or they might mean the balance sheet dates (2023 and 2022). The "year on year" suggests comparing consecutive years. I think the intent is clear: compare the Net Debt/EBITDA ratio for 2022 vs 2021 (or equivalently, using balance sheets at 2023-01-01 and 2022-01-01). My conclusion remains: the leverage ratio increased by approximately 1.25x, which is well above the 0.3x threshold, indicating a Deteriorating trend. Actually, let me do one more precise calculation: Net Debt 2022 = 6,340,000,000 - 1,942,400,000 = 4,397,600,000 EBITDA 2022 = 1,012,400,000 Ratio 2022 = 4.3439... Net Debt 2021 = 4,215,700,000 - 885,600,000 = 3,330,100,000 EBITDA 2021 = 1,081,600,000 Ratio 2021 = 3.0789... Difference = 4.3439 - 3.0789 = 1.265x This is > 0.3x, and since the ratio increased (higher leverage), the trend is Deteriorating. Final answer: Deteriorating Deteriorating