Below, you are given facts from the annual report for "A2A ENERGIA S.P.A." for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022. Based on these facts, your task will be to assess the extent to which the entity should be advised to issue hybrid bonds (between 0% and 15% of total adjusted capital). -------------------- "Legal Form Of Entity" "en" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: S.p.A. "Name Of Ultimate Parent Of Group" "en" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: A2A S.p.A. "Principal Place Of Business" "en" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: Italy "Country Of Incorporation" "en" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: Italy "Domicile Of Entity" "en" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: Italy "Property Plant And Equipment" 2023-01-01: 6162000000 EUR "Property Plant And Equipment" 2022-01-01: 5588000000 EUR "Intangible Assets And Goodwill" 2023-01-01: 3515000000 EUR "Intangible Assets And Goodwill" 2022-01-01: 3125000000 EUR "Investment Accounted For Using Equity Method" 2023-01-01: 33000000 EUR "Investment Accounted For Using Equity Method" 2022-01-01: 33000000 EUR "Other Noncurrent Financial Assets" 2023-01-01: 70000000 EUR "Other Noncurrent Financial Assets" 2022-01-01: 64000000 EUR "Net Deferred Tax Assets" 2023-01-01: 363000000 EUR "Net Deferred Tax Assets" 2022-01-01: 424000000 EUR "Other Noncurrent Assets" 2023-01-01: 86000000 EUR "Other Noncurrent Assets" 2022-01-01: 25000000 EUR "Noncurrent Assets" 2023-01-01: 10229000000 EUR "Noncurrent Assets" 2022-01-01: 9259000000 EUR "Inventories" 2023-01-01: 536000000 EUR "Inventories" 2022-01-01: 204000000 EUR "Current Trade Receivables" 2023-01-01: 4680000000 EUR "Current Trade Receivables" 2022-01-01: 3291000000 EUR "Other Current Nonfinancial Assets" 2023-01-01: 3289000000 EUR "Other Current Nonfinancial Assets" 2022-01-01: 4051000000 EUR "Other Current Financial Assets" 2023-01-01: 14000000 EUR "Other Current Financial Assets" 2022-01-01: 9000000 EUR "Current Tax Assets Current" 2023-01-01: 35000000 EUR "Current Tax Assets Current" 2022-01-01: 68000000 EUR "Cash And Cash Equivalents" 2023-01-01: 2584000000 EUR "Cash And Cash Equivalents" 2022-01-01: 964000000 EUR "Current Assets Other Than Assets Or Disposal Groups Classified As Held For Sale Or As Held For Distribution To Owners" 2023-01-01: 11138000000 EUR "Current Assets Other Than Assets Or Disposal Groups Classified As Held For Sale Or As Held For Distribution To Owners" 2022-01-01: 8587000000 EUR "Noncurrent Assets Or Disposal Groups Classified As Held For Sale" 2023-01-01: 0 EUR "Noncurrent Assets Or Disposal Groups Classified As Held For Sale" 2022-01-01: 162000000 EUR "Assets" 2023-01-01: 21367000000 EUR "Assets" 2022-01-01: 18008000000 EUR "Issued Capital" 2023-01-01: 1629000000 EUR "Issued Capital" 2022-01-01: 1629000000 EUR "Reserves" 2023-01-01: 1869000000 EUR "Reserves" 2022-01-01: 1627000000 EUR "Result Of The Year" 2023-01-01: 401000000 EUR "Result Of The Year" 2022-01-01: 504000000 EUR "Equity Attributable To Owners Of Parent" 2023-01-01: 3899000000 EUR "Equity Attributable To Owners Of Parent" 2022-01-01: 3760000000 EUR "Noncontrolling Interests" 2023-01-01: 568000000 EUR "Noncontrolling Interests" 2022-01-01: 543000000 EUR "Equity" 2023-01-01: 4467000000 EUR "Equity" 2022-01-01: 4303000000 EUR "Other Noncurrent Financial Liabilities" 2023-01-01: 5867000000 EUR "Other Noncurrent Financial Liabilities" 2022-01-01: 4322000000 EUR "Noncurrent Provisions For Employee Benefits" 2023-01-01: 248000000 EUR "Noncurrent Provisions For Employee Benefits" 2022-01-01: 294000000 EUR "Other Longterm Provisions" 2023-01-01: 729000000 EUR "Other Longterm Provisions" 2022-01-01: 797000000 EUR "Other Noncurrent Liabilities" 2023-01-01: 370000000 EUR "Other Noncurrent Liabilities" 2022-01-01: 129000000 EUR "Noncurrent Liabilities" 2023-01-01: 7214000000 EUR "Noncurrent Liabilities" 2022-01-01: 5542000000 EUR "Trade And Other Current Payables To Trade Suppliers" 2023-01-01: 5524000000 EUR "Trade And Other Current Payables To Trade Suppliers" 2022-01-01: 2894000000 EUR "Other Current Nonfinancial Liabilities" 2023-01-01: 3006000000 EUR "Other Current Nonfinancial Liabilities" 2022-01-01: 4487000000 EUR "Other Current Financial Liabilities" 2023-01-01: 1022000000 EUR "Other Current Financial Liabilities" 2022-01-01: 746000000 EUR "Current Tax Liabilities Current" 2023-01-01: 134000000 EUR "Current Tax Liabilities Current" 2022-01-01: 21000000 EUR "Current Liabilities Other Than Liabilities Included In Disposal Groups Classified As Held For Sale" 2023-01-01: 9686000000 EUR "Current Liabilities Other Than Liabilities Included In Disposal Groups Classified As Held For Sale" 2022-01-01: 8148000000 EUR "Liabilities" 2023-01-01: 16900000000 EUR "Liabilities" 2022-01-01: 13690000000 EUR "Liabilities Included In Disposal Groups Classified As Held For Sale" 2023-01-01: 0 EUR "Liabilities Included In Disposal Groups Classified As Held For Sale" 2022-01-01: 15000000 EUR "Equity And Liabilities" 2023-01-01: 21367000000 EUR "Equity And Liabilities" 2022-01-01: 18008000000 EUR "Revenue From Contracts With Customers" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 22946000000 EUR "Revenue From Contracts With Customers" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 11352000000 EUR "Other Revenue" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 220000000 EUR "Other Revenue" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 197000000 EUR "Revenue" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 23166000000 EUR "Revenue" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 11549000000 EUR "Raw Materials And Consumables Used" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 20502000000 EUR "Raw Materials And Consumables Used" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 9088000000 EUR "Other Expense By Nature" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 394000000 EUR "Other Expense By Nature" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 312000000 EUR "Operating Expense" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 20896000000 EUR "Operating Expense" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 9400000000 EUR "Employee Benefits Expense" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 765000000 EUR "Employee Benefits Expense" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 721000000 EUR "Gross Operating Income EBITDA" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 1505000000 EUR "Gross Operating Income EBITDA" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 1428000000 EUR "Depreciation Amortization Provisions And Writedowns" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 818000000 EUR "Depreciation Amortization Provisions And Writedowns" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 768000000 EUR "Profit Loss From Operating Activities" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 687000000 EUR "Profit Loss From Operating Activities" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 660000000 EUR "Result From Nonrecurring Transactions" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 157000000 EUR "Result From Nonrecurring Transactions" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 0 EUR "Finance Income" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 35000000 EUR "Finance Income" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 17000000 EUR "Finance Costs" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 125000000 EUR "Finance Costs" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 89000000 EUR "Share Of Profit Loss Of Associates And Joint Ventures Accounted For Using Equity Method" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 2000000 EUR "Share Of Profit Loss Of Associates And Joint Ventures Accounted For Using Equity Method" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 2000000 EUR "Other Income Expense From Subsidiaries Jointly Controlled Entities And Associates" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 0 EUR "Other Income Expense From Subsidiaries Jointly Controlled Entities And Associates" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 0 EUR "Total Financial Balance" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -88000000 EUR "Total Financial Balance" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -70000000 EUR "Profit Loss Before Tax" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 756000000 EUR "Profit Loss Before Tax" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 590000000 EUR "Income Tax Expense Continuing Operations" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 344000000 EUR "Income Tax Expense Continuing Operations" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 36000000 EUR "Profit Loss From Continuing Operations" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 412000000 EUR "Profit Loss From Continuing Operations" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 554000000 EUR "Profit Loss From Discontinued Operations" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 36000000 EUR "Profit Loss From Discontinued Operations" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -4000000 EUR "Profit Loss" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 448000000 EUR "Profit Loss" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 550000000 EUR "Profit Loss Attributable To Noncontrolling Interests" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -47000000 EUR "Profit Loss Attributable To Noncontrolling Interests" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -46000000 EUR "Profit Loss Attributable To Owners Of Parent" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 401000000 EUR "Profit Loss Attributable To Owners Of Parent" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 504000000 EUR "Basic Earnings Loss Per Share" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 0.1281 EUR/shares "Basic Earnings Loss Per Share" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 0.1639 EUR/shares "Basic Earnings Loss Per Share From Continuing Operations" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 0.1167 EUR/shares "Basic Earnings Loss Per Share From Continuing Operations" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 0.1651 EUR/shares "Basic Earnings Loss Per Share From Discontinued Operations" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 0.0114 EUR/shares "Basic Earnings Loss Per Share From Discontinued Operations" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -0.0012 EUR/shares "Diluted Earnings Loss Per Share" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 0.1281 EUR/shares "Diluted Earnings Loss Per Share" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 0.1639 EUR/shares "Diluted Earnings Loss Per Share From Continuing Operations" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 0.1167 EUR/shares "Diluted Earnings Loss Per Share From Continuing Operations" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 0.1651 EUR/shares "Diluted Earnings Loss Per Share From Discontinued Operations" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 0.0114 EUR/shares "Diluted Earnings Loss Per Share From Discontinued Operations" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -0.0012 EUR/shares "Other Comprehensive Income Before Tax Gains Losses On Remeasurements Of Defined Benefit Plans" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 31000000 EUR "Other Comprehensive Income Before Tax Gains Losses On Remeasurements Of Defined Benefit Plans" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -38000000 EUR "Income Tax Relating To Remeasurements Of Defined Benefit Plans Of Other Comprehensive Income" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 9000000 EUR "Income Tax Relating To Remeasurements Of Defined Benefit Plans Of Other Comprehensive Income" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -11000000 EUR "Other Comprehensive Income Net Of Tax Gains Losses On Remeasurements Of Defined Benefit Plans" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 22000000 EUR "Other Comprehensive Income Net Of Tax Gains Losses On Remeasurements Of Defined Benefit Plans" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -27000000 EUR "Gains Losses On Cash Flow Hedges Before Tax" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -1000000 EUR "Gains Losses On Cash Flow Hedges Before Tax" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 47000000 EUR "Income Tax Relating To Cash Flow Hedges Of Other Comprehensive Income" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -0 EUR "Income Tax Relating To Cash Flow Hedges Of Other Comprehensive Income" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 13000000 EUR "Other Comprehensive Income Net Of Tax Cash Flow Hedges" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -1000000 EUR "Other Comprehensive Income Net Of Tax Cash Flow Hedges" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 34000000 EUR "Other Comprehensive Income Net Of Tax Gains Losses From Investments In Equity Instruments" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 0 EUR "Other Comprehensive Income Net Of Tax Gains Losses From Investments In Equity Instruments" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 0 EUR "Comprehensive Income" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 469000000 EUR "Comprehensive Income" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 557000000 EUR "Comprehensive Income Attributable To Owners Of Parent" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 422000000 EUR "Comprehensive Income Attributable To Owners Of Parent" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 511000000 EUR "Comprehensive Income Attributable To Noncontrolling Interests" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -47000000 EUR "Comprehensive Income Attributable To Noncontrolling Interests" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -46000000 EUR "Cash And Cash Equivalents" 2021-01-01: 1012000000 EUR "Adjustments For Income Tax Expense" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 344000000 EUR "Adjustments For Income Tax Expense" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 36000000 EUR "Net Financial Interests" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 90000000 EUR "Net Financial Interests" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 72000000 EUR "Adjustments For Losses Gains On Disposal Of Noncurrent Assets" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -191000000 EUR "Adjustments For Losses Gains On Disposal Of Noncurrent Assets" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 0 EUR "Depreciation Expense" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 491000000 EUR "Depreciation Expense" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 465000000 EUR "Amortisation Expense" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 233000000 EUR "Amortisation Expense" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 201000000 EUR "Adjustments For Impairment Loss Reversal Of Impairment Loss Recognised In Profit Or Loss" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 10000000 EUR "Adjustments For Impairment Loss Reversal Of Impairment Loss Recognised In Profit Or Loss" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 19000000 EUR "Adjustments For Provisions" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 92000000 EUR "Adjustments For Provisions" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 89000000 EUR "Adjustments For Undistributed Profits Of Associates" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -2000000 EUR "Adjustments For Undistributed Profits Of Associates" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -2000000 EUR "Interest Paid Classified As Operating Activities" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 75000000 EUR "Interest Paid Classified As Operating Activities" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 80000000 EUR "Income Taxes Paid Refund Classified As Operating Activities" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 201000000 EUR "Income Taxes Paid Refund Classified As Operating Activities" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 165000000 EUR "Dividends Paid Classified As Operating Activities" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 302000000 EUR "Dividends Paid Classified As Operating Activities" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 263000000 EUR "Adjustments For Decrease Increase In Trade Account Receivable" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -1420000000 EUR "Adjustments For Decrease Increase In Trade Account Receivable" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -1285000000 EUR "Adjustments For Increase Decrease In Trade Account Payable" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 2587000000 EUR "Adjustments For Increase Decrease In Trade Account Payable" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 1329000000 EUR "Adjustments For Decrease Increase In Inventories" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -332000000 EUR "Adjustments For Decrease Increase In Inventories" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -56000000 EUR "Other Adjustments For Noncash Items" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -512000000 EUR "Other Adjustments For Noncash Items" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 225000000 EUR "Cash Flows From Used In Operating Activities" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 1260000000 EUR "Cash Flows From Used In Operating Activities" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 1135000000 EUR "Purchase Of Property Plant And Equipment Classified As Investing Activities" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 856000000 EUR "Purchase Of Property Plant And Equipment Classified As Investing Activities" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 714000000 EUR "Purchase Of Intangible Assets Classified As Investing Activities" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 384000000 EUR "Purchase Of Intangible Assets Classified As Investing Activities" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 360000000 EUR "Cash Flows Used In Obtaining Control Of Subsidiaries Or Other Businesses Classified As Investing Activities" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 497000000 EUR "Cash Flows Used In Obtaining Control Of Subsidiaries Or Other Businesses Classified As Investing Activities" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 444000000 EUR "Contribution Of First Consolidation Of Acquisitions On Cash And Cash Equivalents" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 180000000 EUR "Contribution Of First Consolidation Of Acquisitions On Cash And Cash Equivalents" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 27000000 EUR "Disposal Of Fixed Assets And Shareholdings" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 413000000 EUR "Disposal Of Fixed Assets And Shareholdings" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 5000000 EUR "Dividends Received Classified As Investing Activities" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 2000000 EUR "Dividends Received Classified As Investing Activities" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 0 EUR "Purchase Of Treasury Shares" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 0 EUR "Purchase Of Treasury Shares" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -109000000 EUR "Cash Flows From Used In Investing Activities" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -1142000000 EUR "Cash Flows From Used In Investing Activities" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -1595000000 EUR "Free Cash Flow" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 118000000 EUR "Free Cash Flow" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -460000000 EUR "Issuance Of Loans" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 0 EUR "Issuance Of Loans" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -6000000 EUR "Proceeds From Loans" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -3000000 EUR "Proceeds From Loans" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 5000000 EUR "Other Changes Financial Assets" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 2000000 EUR "Other Changes Financial Assets" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 2000000 EUR "Total Changes In Financial Assets" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -1000000 EUR "Total Changes In Financial Assets" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 1000000 EUR "Proceeds From Borrowings Classified As Financing Activities" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 4339000000 EUR "Proceeds From Borrowings Classified As Financing Activities" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 1147000000 EUR "Repayments Of Borrowings Classified As Financing Activities" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 2779000000 EUR "Repayments Of Borrowings Classified As Financing Activities" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 725000000 EUR "Payments Of Lease Liabilities Classified As Financing Activities" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 11000000 EUR "Payments Of Lease Liabilities Classified As Financing Activities" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 2000000 EUR "Other Changes Financial Liabilities" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -46000000 EUR "Other Changes Financial Liabilities" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -9000000 EUR "Total Changes In Financial Liabilities" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 1503000000 EUR "Total Changes In Financial Liabilities" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 411000000 EUR "Cash Flows From Used In Financing Activities" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 1502000000 EUR "Cash Flows From Used In Financing Activities" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 412000000 EUR "Increase Decrease In Cash And Cash Equivalents" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 1620000000 EUR "Increase Decrease In Cash And Cash Equivalents" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -48000000 EUR "Equity" "Issued Capital Member" 2021-01-01: 1629000000 EUR "Equity" "Treasury Shares Member" 2021-01-01: -54000000 EUR "Equity" "Reserve Of Cash Flow Hedges Member" 2021-01-01: -6000000 EUR "Equity" "Other Reserves And Retained Earnings Member" 2021-01-01: 1604000000 EUR "Equity" "Profit Loss Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2021-01-01: 364000000 EUR "Equity" "Equity Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2021-01-01: 3537000000 EUR "Equity" "Noncontrolling Interests Member" 2021-01-01: 579000000 EUR "Equity" 2021-01-01: 4116000000 EUR "Prior Year Result Allocation" "Other Reserves And Retained Earnings Member" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 364000000 EUR "Prior Year Result Allocation" "Profit Loss Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -364000000 EUR "Prior Year Result Allocation" "Equity Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 0 EUR "Prior Year Result Allocation" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 0 EUR "Dividends Paid" "Other Reserves And Retained Earnings Member" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 248000000 EUR "Dividends Paid" "Equity Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 248000000 EUR "Dividends Paid" "Noncontrolling Interests Member" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 15000000 EUR "Dividends Paid" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 263000000 EUR "IAS19Reserves" "Other Reserves And Retained Earnings Member" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -27000000 EUR "IAS19Reserves" "Equity Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -27000000 EUR "IAS19Reserves" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -27000000 EUR "Cash Flow Hedge Reserves" "Reserve Of Cash Flow Hedges Member" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 34000000 EUR "Cash Flow Hedge Reserves" "Equity Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 34000000 EUR "Cash Flow Hedge Reserves" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 34000000 EUR "Increase Decrease Through Transfers And Other Changes Equity" "Treasury Shares Member" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 54000000 EUR "Increase Decrease Through Transfers And Other Changes Equity" "Other Reserves And Retained Earnings Member" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -94000000 EUR "Increase Decrease Through Transfers And Other Changes Equity" "Equity Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -40000000 EUR "Increase Decrease Through Transfers And Other Changes Equity" "Noncontrolling Interests Member" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -67000000 EUR "Increase Decrease Through Transfers And Other Changes Equity" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: -107000000 EUR "Profit Loss" "Profit Loss Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 504000000 EUR "Profit Loss" "Equity Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 504000000 EUR "Profit Loss" "Noncontrolling Interests Member" 2021-01-01 - 2022-01-01: 46000000 EUR "Equity" "Issued Capital Member" 2022-01-01: 1629000000 EUR "Equity" "Treasury Shares Member" 2022-01-01: 0 EUR "Equity" "Reserve Of Cash Flow Hedges Member" 2022-01-01: 28000000 EUR "Equity" "Other Reserves And Retained Earnings Member" 2022-01-01: 1599000000 EUR "Equity" "Profit Loss Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2022-01-01: 504000000 EUR "Equity" "Equity Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2022-01-01: 3760000000 EUR "Equity" "Noncontrolling Interests Member" 2022-01-01: 543000000 EUR "Prior Year Result Allocation" "Other Reserves And Retained Earnings Member" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 504000000 EUR "Prior Year Result Allocation" "Profit Loss Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -504000000 EUR "Prior Year Result Allocation" "Equity Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 0 EUR "Prior Year Result Allocation" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 0 EUR "Dividends Paid" "Other Reserves And Retained Earnings Member" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 283000000 EUR "Dividends Paid" "Equity Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 283000000 EUR "Dividends Paid" "Noncontrolling Interests Member" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 19000000 EUR "Dividends Paid" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 302000000 EUR "IAS19Reserves" "Other Reserves And Retained Earnings Member" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 22000000 EUR "IAS19Reserves" "Equity Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 22000000 EUR "IAS19Reserves" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 22000000 EUR "Cash Flow Hedge Reserves" "Reserve Of Cash Flow Hedges Member" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -1000000 EUR "Cash Flow Hedge Reserves" "Equity Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -1000000 EUR "Cash Flow Hedge Reserves" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -1000000 EUR "Variations Of Perimeter Of Consolidation" "Reserve Of Cash Flow Hedges Member" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 3000000 EUR "Variations Of Perimeter Of Consolidation" "Other Reserves And Retained Earnings Member" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -3000000 EUR "Variations Of Perimeter Of Consolidation" "Equity Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 0 EUR "Variations Of Perimeter Of Consolidation" "Noncontrolling Interests Member" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -3000000 EUR "Variations Of Perimeter Of Consolidation" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: -3000000 EUR "Increase Decrease Through Transfers And Other Changes Equity" "Equity Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 0 EUR "Increase Decrease Through Transfers And Other Changes Equity" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 0 EUR "Profit Loss" "Profit Loss Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 401000000 EUR "Profit Loss" "Equity Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 401000000 EUR "Profit Loss" "Noncontrolling Interests Member" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: 47000000 EUR "Equity" "Issued Capital Member" 2023-01-01: 1629000000 EUR "Equity" "Treasury Shares Member" 2023-01-01: 0 EUR "Equity" "Reserve Of Cash Flow Hedges Member" 2023-01-01: 30000000 EUR "Equity" "Other Reserves And Retained Earnings Member" 2023-01-01: 1839000000 EUR "Equity" "Profit Loss Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2023-01-01: 401000000 EUR "Equity" "Equity Attributable To Owners Of Parent Member" 2023-01-01: 3899000000 EUR "Equity" "Noncontrolling Interests Member" 2023-01-01: 568000000 EUR "Name Of Reporting Entity Or Other Means Of Identification" "en" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: A2A S.p.A. "Name Of Parent Entity" "en" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: Municipalities of Milan and Brescia "Address Of Registered Office Of Entity" "en" 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01: Brescia in Via Lamarmora 230 -------------------- Here is a description of the S&P rating methodology for specific industries: # Regulated Utilities ## Business Risk Profile ### Regulatory advantage Market forces are not typically the main driver of competitive position for regulated utilities, and therefore we do not measure competitive advantage in the same way as we do for competitive firms. Instead, we assess regulatory advantage because the influence of the regulatory framework and regime is of critical importance. It defines the environment in which a utility operates and has a significant bearing on a utility's financial performance. Regulations vary across different regulatory jurisdictions, that is, the area over which a regulator has oversight. Each regulatory jurisdiction can include one or more subsectors (water, gas, and power). A geographic region may have several regulatory jurisdictions. We determine the regulatory advantage assessment by combining: - Our preliminary regulatory advantage assessment, resulting from our review of the four subfactors that we believe are key for a utility to recover all its costs-- on time and in full-- and to earn a return on the capital it deploys; and - Our view of the utility's business strategy--in particular, its regulatory strategy and its ability to manage the tariff-setting process. We assess the preliminary regulatory advantage assessment for each regulatory jurisdiction based on: - Regulatory stability, - Tariff-setting procedures and design, - Financial stability, and - Regulatory independence and insulation. **Regulatory stability:** Our view is based on how transparent the key components of the rate-setting process are, and how they are assessed. We also monitor the predictability and consistency of the regulatory framework over time. Greater consistency reduces uncertainty for the utility and its stakeholders. **Tariff-setting procedures and design:** Our view is based on whether all operating and capital costs can be recovered in full, and how the rate scheme balances the interests and concerns of all stakeholders. We look for incentives that are achievable, contained, and symmetrical (that is, mostly indexed to overperformance and underperformance). **Financial stability:** If costs are recovered in a timely manner, cash flow volatility can be avoided. We see greater flexibility as favorable, because it allows for the recovery of unexpected costs. Financial stability also depends on the framework's ability to attract long-term capital, and the availability of capital support during construction, to alleviate funding and cash flow pressure when heavy investment is needed. ### Sector description Companies that provide an essential or nearessential infrastructure product, commodity, or service that has few or no substitutes and are shielded from competition, while also being subject to comprehensive regulation by a regulatory body or oversight by a public body. | Subsectors Typical | CPGP | |---|---| | Electricity National | industry and utilities | | Gas | National industry and utilities | | Multi-utilities | National industry and utilities | | Water | National industry and utilities | ### Other adjustments To calculate a company's financial metrics, please refer to the sector-specific adjustments in "Corporate Methodology: Ratios And Adjustments." Our sector-specific liquidity considerations are described in "Methodology And Assumptions: Liquidity Descriptors For Global Corporate Issuers." **Regulated Utilities Regulatory independence and insulation:** We consider this to be stronger where the market framework and energy policies support the long-term financial stability of the utilities, are clearly enshrined in law, and protect the regulator's independence. Where there is limited risk of political intervention, the regulator is more able to efficiently protect the utility's credit profile, even during a stressful event. Preliminary regulatory advantage: typical characteristics | Strong or strong/adequate | Adequate/weak or weak | |---|---| | From a credit perspective, the utility operates in a regulatory climate that is transparent, predictable, and consistent. | The utility operates in an opaque regulatory climate that lacks transparency, predictability, and consistency. | | The utility can fully and timely recover all its fixed and variable operating costs, investments, and capital costs (depreciation and a reasonable return on the asset base). | The utility cannot recover its fixed and variable operating costs, investments, and capital costs (depreciation and a reasonable return on the asset base) fully and/or in a timely fashion. | | Any regulatory incentives are limited and mainly symmetrical. The tariff setting includes mechanisms allowing for an adjustment for the timely recovery of volatile or unexpected operating and capital costs. | The utility must make significant capital commitments with no solid legal basis for the full recovery of capital costs. | | The tariff setting may include a pass-through mechanism for major expenses--such as commodity costs--or a higher return on new assets, effectively shielding the utility from volume and input cost risks. | Ratemaking practices actively harm credit quality. | There is a record of earning a stable, compensatory rate of return in cash through various economic and political cycles and a projected ability to maintain that record. | There is a record of earning minimal or negative rates of return in cash through various economic and political cycles and a projected inability to improve that record sustainably. | | The utility operates under a regulatory system that is sufficiently insulated from political intervention to protect the utility's credit risk profile, even during stressful periods. There is support for cash flow during construction of large projects, and preapproval of capital investment programs and large projects lowers the risk of subsequent disallowances of capital costs. | The utility is regularly subject to overt political influence. | **Natural monopolies:** Where a utility has a natural monopoly and its tariffs are controlled, but it is not subject to a detailed regulatory framework or oversight by a regulatory body, we may still assess regulatory advantage, rather than competitive advantage. We would assess it using the same four subfactors, as follows: - For regulatory stability, we evaluate the stability of the setup, and give more emphasis to the historical record and our expectations regarding future changes. - For tariff-setting procedures and design, we examine the utility's ability to fully recover operating costs, its investment requirements, and its debt-service obligations. - For financial stability, we consider tariff flexibility, and whether this is sufficient to counter volume risk or commodity risk. In addition, we consider indirect competition, for example, while Nordic district heating companies operate under a natural monopoly, their tariff flexibility is partly restricted by customers' option to change to a different heating source if tariffs are increased significantly. - For regulatory independence and insulation, we evaluate the risk that political intervention could change the setup, and in turn, affect the utility's credit profile. Although political intervention tends to be mostly negative, state ownership might positively influence tariff determination. Because these four subfactors effectively capture the benefit of the close relationship with the state as owner, we do not typically modify our regulatory advantage assessment for natural monopolies based on business strategy. **Business strategy:** After determining the preliminary regulatory advantage assessment, we assess the utility's business strategy as positive, neutral, negative, or very negative, and may modify the preliminary regulatory advantage assessment as a result. This factor chiefly addresses the effectiveness of a utility's regulatory risk management in the jurisdictions where it operates. In certain jurisdictions, a utility can create a sustainable competitive advantage through its regulatory strategy and ability to manage the tariff-setting process effectively. Ensuring that revenue changes with costs is a key regulatory risk factor, especially if the risk of political intervention is high. Our assessment of the utility's business strategy is informed by historical performance and business objectives in the context of industry dynamics and the regulatory climate. We assess the utility's business strategy as positive and modify the preliminary regulatory advantage assessment upward if we consider the business strategy effectively bolsters the utility's regulatory advantage through favorable commission rulings, beyond what is typical for a utility in that jurisdiction. Where business strategy has limited effect relative to peers, our assessment is neutral. Where the business strategy leads to worse regulatory outcomes than peers, such as failing to achieve recovery of typical costs, we may see the implications as negative or very negative, and would apply the downward modifications as shown in the table below. Regulated utilities: determining the final regulatory advantage assessment (Business strategy modifier: Positive / Neutral / Negative / Very negative) | Preliminary regulatory advantage score | Positive | Neutral | Negative | Very negative | |---|---|---|---|---| | Strong | Strong | Strong | Strong/adequate | Adequate | | Strong/adequate | Strong | Strong/adequate | Adequate | Adequate/weak | | Adequate | Strong/adequate | Adequate | Adequate/weak | Weak | Adequate/weak | Adequate | Adequate/weak | Weak | Weak | | Weak | Adequate/weak | Weak | Weak | Weak | ### Scale, scope, and diversity We assess scale, scope, and diversity in the regulated utilities sector based on: - Operational scale; and - The geographic, economic, and regulatory diversity of a utility's markets and service territories. These characteristics can contribute to cash flow stability while dampening the effect of economic and market threats. We generally believe a larger service territory--with a diverse customer base and average to above-average economic growth prospects--provides a utility with cushion and flexibility in the recovery of operating costs and ongoing investments (including replacement and growth capital spending). It also lessens the effect of external shocks (such as extreme local weather) because the incremental effect on each customer declines as the scale increases. We consider that residential and small commercial customers have more stable usage patterns and are less exposed to periodic economic weakness, even after accounting for some weatherdriven usage variability. Significant industrial exposure--combined with a local economy that largely depends on one or few cyclical industries--could contribute to the cyclicality of a utility's load and financial performance, magnifying the effect of an economic downturn. A utility's cash flow generation and stability can benefit from operating in multiple geographic regions that exhibit average to better-than-average levels of wealth, and where employment and growth levels underpin the local economy and support long-term growth. Operating in a single geographic region carries a risk that can be ameliorated if the region is sufficiently large, demonstrates economic diversity, and has at least average demographic characteristics. In addition, if a utility operates in a single large geographic area and has a strong regulatory assessment, the benefit of diversity can be incremental. Scale, scope, and diversity: typical characteristics | Strong or strong/adequate | Adequate/weak or weak | |---|---| | Stability of its revenue and profits limits its vulnerability to most combinations of adverse factors, events, or trends. | Revenue and profits are unstable and unsustainable, so that the utility is vulnerable to economic, competitive, or technological threats. | | Customer base is large and diverse, with no meaningful customer concentration risk; that is, residential and small and midsize commercial customers typically provide most of the operating income. | Customer base is small and demonstrates customer or industry concentrations, combined with little economic diversity and average to below-average economic prospects. | | Exposed to a wider range of service territories than others in the sector. | Exposed to a single service territory. | | Operates in multiple regulatory jurisdictions where we assess the final regulatory advantage as adequate or stronger; or operates in a single regulatory jurisdiction where we assess final regulatory advantage as strong or strong/adequate. | Operates in a single regulatory jurisdiction where we assess the final regulatory advantage as adequate or adequate/weak. | | No meaningful concentrations by asset or supplier that could weigh on operations; or assets and suppliers can easily be replaced. | Dependence on a single supplier or asset that cannot easily be replaced and that could damage the utility's operations. | ### Operating efficiency We assess operating efficiency in the regulated utilities sector based on: - A utility's compliance with the terms of its operating license--including safety, reliability, and environmental standards; - Its cost management; and - The scale, scope, and management of its capital spending. We analyze management's record in these three key areas, relative to peers, and the resulting cash flow stability. In addition, we consider how management reduces the prospect of penalties for noncompliance; operating costs being greater than allowed; or capital projects running over budget and time--all of which could impair the company's ability to recover its full costs. The relative importance of the above three factors, particularly cost and capital spending management, is determined by the type of regulation under which the utility operates. Utilities operating under robust cost-plus regimes tend to be more insulated given the high degree of confidence that costs will invariably be passed through to customers. Utilities operating under incentive-based regimes are likely to be more sensitive to achieving regulatory standards. This is particularly so where regulatory regimes involve active consultation between regulator and utility, and market testing, as opposed to just handing down an outcome on a more-arbitrary basis. In some jurisdictions, absolute performance standards are less relevant than how the utility performs against the regulator's performance benchmarks. This performance will drive any penalties or incentive payments and can determine the utility's credibility on operating and asset management plans with its regulator. Therefore, we believe that well-managed utilities are more likely to maximize the likelihood of cost recovery and full inclusion of capital spending in their asset bases. When regulatory resets are more at the discretion of the utility, effective cost management--including of labor--may allow for more control over the timing and magnitude of rate filings. This would maximize the chances of a constructive outcome--such as full operational and capital cost recovery--while protecting against reputational risks. Operating efficiency: typical characteristics | Strong or strong/adequate | Adequate/weak or weak | |---|---| | Cost structure is better than that of peers and volatility is limited. Generates revenue and profits by minimizing costs, increasing efficiencies, and asset utilization. | Cost structure is worse than that of peers; its cost position and efficiency factors do not support profit sustainability; and volatility is above-average. | | Asset profile (including age and technology) is such that we have confidence that it could sustain favorable performance against targets. | The capital spending program is so large and complex that overall operating efficiency is compromised. | | Strong safety record. Poor safety performance Strong service reliability, with a record of meeting the operating performance requirements of stakeholders (including regulators). | Service reliability has been sporadic or nonexistent, with a track record of not meeting operating performance requirements of stakeholders (including regulators); we do not believe the utility can consistently meet performance targets without additional capital spending. | | Where applicable, well-placed to meet current and potential future environmental standards. | Where applicable, the utility is challenged to comply with current environmental standards and is highly vulnerable to more onerous standards. | | Management maintains very good control over both fixed and variable costs, in line with regulatory expectations (including labor and working capital management being in line with regulator's allowed collection cycles). | Management typically exceeds operating costs authorized by regulators. | | Strong record of projects managed almost invariably within regulatory allowances for timing and budget. | Inconsistent project management skills, as demonstrated by cost overruns and delays, including for maintenance capital spending. | ### Profitability A utility with above-average profitability would, relative to its peers, generally earn a rate of return at or above what regulators authorize and has minimal exposure to earnings volatility from affiliated unregulated business activities or market-sensitive regulated operations. Conversely, a utility with below-average profitability would generally earn rates of return well below the authorized return relative to its peers or have significant exposure to earnings volatility from affiliated unregulated business activities or market-sensitive regulated operations. We typically use the EBITDA margin as key indicator of profitability, unless it is distorted--for example, by pass-through costs like congestion revenue or collection of third-party revenue, or by accelerated asset depreciation that we do not view as sustainable in the long run. In such cases, we would use ROC or ROE to benchmark the company against peers. For regulated utilities subject to full cost-of-service regulation and return-on-investment requirements, we normally measure profitability using ROE, the ratio of net income available for common stockholders to average common equity. When setting rates, the regulator ultimately bases its decision on an authorized ROE. However, different factors--such as variances in costs and usage--may influence the return a utility is actually able to earn. Consequently, our analysis of profitability for cost-of-service-based utilities centers on the utility's ability to consistently earn the authorized ROE. **Volatility of profitability:** We may observe a clear difference between the volatility of actual reported profitability and the volatility of underlying regulatory profitability. In these cases, we could use the regulatory accounts as a proxy to judge earnings stability. ## Financial Risk Profile ### Accounting characteristics Important accounting practices for utilities include: - For integrated electric utilities that meet native load obligations partly by using third-party power contracts, we use our purchased power methodology to adjust measures for such contracts' debt-like obligations. - Where substantial seasonal working capital requirements--for example, at natural gas distribution utilities--distort leverage measures, we adjust inventory and debt balances by netting the value of inventory against outstanding short-term borrowings. This adjustment informs balance sheet analysis by reducing seasonal debt balances when we are very confident of near-term cost recovery. - We deconsolidate securitized debt (and associated revenue and expense) that has been accorded specialized recovery provisions. In the U.S. and certain other regions, utilities employ "regulatory accounting," which permits a rate-regulated company to defer some revenue and expense to match the timing of the recognition of those items in rates, as determined by regulators. A utility subject to regulatory accounting therefore records assets and liabilities that an unregulated corporation--or even regulated utilities in other global regions--cannot record. We do not adjust GAAP earnings or balance-sheet figures to remove the effects of regulatory accounting. While IFRS does not currently provide for any recognition of the effects of rate-setting for financial reporting purposes, our financial analysis focuses on the economics and actual cash flow generation. ### Volatility tables We apply the low volatility benchmark table to regulated utilities where: - They derive about two-thirds or more of their operating cash flows or profits from regulated operations that are predominantly at the low end of the utility risk spectrum (such as a network or distribution/transmission business unexposed to commodity risk and with very low operating risk); - Their regulated operations have a regulatory advantage assessment of strong; - They are expected to maintain their established record of achieving stable credit measures and low funding costs; and - No other activities contribute significantly to the group's overall risk profile and are viewed as high-risk or volatile. We apply the medial volatility table to regulated utilities that do not qualify for low volatility and that either: - Derive about 50% or more of their operating cash flows or profits from regulated activities that have a regulatory advantage assessment of at least adequate and operate in a jurisdiction where the country risk is '4' or better; or - Derive about one third or more of their consolidated operating cash flows or profits from regulated utility activities that have a regulatory advantage assessment of strong; or a regulatory advantage assessment of strong/adequate and a CICRA of '3' or better. In both cases, the competitive position for the remaining activities must be assessed as at least satisfactory. In all other cases, we use the standard volatility benchmark table # Oil And Gas Exploration And Production ## Business Risk Profile ### Competitive advantage Companies in the oil and gas exploration and production (E&P) sector depend on the availability of suitable reserves that can be profitably extracted. Competitive advantage for these upstream companies largely depends on their ability to manage the risks associated with replacing and increasing reserves. We assess competitive advantage for an integrated company in the E&P sector based on: - The growth prospects inherent in its acreage (the area on which it has an oil and gas license); - The quality of liquids and gas produced; - Unit revenue realized at each producing region; and - Extent of vertical integration, if any, among its operating segments. **Growth prospects inherent in its acreage:** We assess a company's ability to increase production and reserves through internal development (that is, finding and exploiting reserves in the fields where it already has a license), based on: - Its history of successful exploration and development; technical resources and capabilities; and required capital spending; - Its acreage position (geological conditions and accessibility of its fields); and - The length of its project queue, based on the reserve life index (RLI; defined as reserves divided by annual production). Where a company's reserves are not growing, it can indicate poor prospects for its ability to continue to meet its debt service requirements. On the other hand, the upfront investment associated with sustained high growth can put a strain on funding sources. **Production quality:** Hydrocarbons are subject to price differentials based on type and quality. Therefore, the quality of hydrocarbons produced by a company affects its revenue and cash flow. For example, light, sweet crudes require less refining treatment and yield more high-priced byproducts such as gasoline, kerosene, and jet fuel. Therefore, they command a higher price than heavy, sour crudes which cost more to refine. Similarly, wet gas, which contains natural gas liquids, commands a premium over dry gas because of its higher energy content. **Unit revenue at each producing region:** Revenue at E&P companies is also affected by basis differentials---the difference between the price in a particular region and the benchmark price. These usually arise because of transportation costs or supply and demand characteristics in the production area. If a company's acreage is in a region where the cost of transportation to market is high, or limited capacity makes hydrocarbons difficult to transport out of the region, it typically sells at a discount to the benchmark price. We view this as an adverse factor. On the other hand, if it is supplying hydrocarbons to a region where demand is high or transportation costs are low, the regional price may include a premium compared with the benchmark. The company will therefore benefit from higher unit revenue, cash flow, and earnings. **Extent of vertical integration:** Strategic approaches to integration vary considerably, but it is common for larger E&P companies to operate a cluster of ancillary related businesses. Related businesses that an E&P company may integrate with include: - Natural gas processing plants; - Oil and gas common long-haul or gathering pipelines; and - Oilfield services operations and assets, such as drilling rigs and pressure pumping equipment. Participation in pipeline operations that carry third-party volumes can sometimes offer an E&P company a highly stable source of earnings that is not closely correlated with its base earnings. When capacity among third-party suppliers is constrained, vertical integration (for example, ownership of oilfield services operations and assets) can benefit E&P companies by facilitating cost-effective growth in reserves and production. That said, it requires capital, adds to fixed costs, and can exacerbate a downturn's adverse effects. Although integration and diversification can enhance an E&P company's competitive position and increase the stability of its financial performance, the financial results are not always positive. #### Competitive advantage: typical characteristics | **Strong or strong/adequate** | **Adequate/weak or weak** | |-------------------------------------|-----------------------------------| | A strong record of project execution, with production and costs that compare favorably with operators that have adjacent acreage. | Project execution has historically been poor, so that costs are higher and production inferior to that of operators with adjacent acreage. | | A record of allocating capital to basins that have favorable internal rates of return (typically exceeding 30%). | Limited record of allocating capital to basins that have favorable internal rates of return. | | Diversification that demonstrably improves profitability or the stability of financial performance throughout the business cycle. | Operations have shown inferior profitability or more volatile financial performance throughout the business cycle. | | Where transportation and services, such as drilling rigs, are integrated, unit costs are lower than the available alternatives, sourced through a third party. | A lack of integration with transportation, or equipment and services. | | Some degree of leverage with customers and suppliers. | Little or no leverage with customers and suppliers. | ## Scale, scope, and diversity We assess scale, scope, and diversity in the E&P sector based on: - Size of the reserves, because larger reservoirs offer potential economies of scale; - Geographic diversity of production sources; - Diversity of hydrocarbons produced; - Operational risk required to exploit the reserves; and - Quality of the reserves. **Reserve size:** If the reserve base is larger than that of peers, we would expect the company to benefit from greater operating flexibility, more geographic diversity, and larger economies of scale. In our view, the size and type of a company's individual reservoirs is important. Large onshore or offshore reservoirs allow companies to spread overhead costs and capital investment across more production, and so provide greater economies of scale. Size can also give companies access to more favorable financing terms, which can significantly boost their ompetitive advantage when developing or uying properties. During industry downturns, large E&P companies may have greater financial lexibility than their smaller competitors. **Geographic diversity of production:** A geographically diversified portfolio can provide opportunities for cost-effective reserves and production growth, if regional factors affect production or reinvestment in a particular area. In addition, by operating in multiple, geographically diverse fields, a large E&P company can reduce its dependence on the operational performance of a small cluster of wells or fields, and make itself less susceptible to regional price volatility. We view production as less diversified if a company operates in several basins but generates most of its earnings from just a few of them. Nevertheless, we may assess a company as having strong/adequate scale, scope, and diversity, even if it operates in just one major basin as long as we expect it to generate above-average profitability, it has an extensive acreage position, and its production profile is clear for at least 10 years. **Diversity of hydrocarbons produced:** We would expect a company with a broader production profile to be less volatile. For example, we view the production of a mix of liquids (oil or natural gas liquids) and natural gas as credit positive, in markets where these show low price correlation. A company that has the flexibility to shift production across a range of hydrocarbons is also better positioned to respond to changes in market dynamics. **Operational risk:** Most of the easy-to-access oil and gas reserves have already been exploited---exploration now entails drilling in more-difficult conditions, often using novel extraction methods. E&P companies can develop meaningful scale, scope, and diversification in their operations by effectively adapting extraction technologies to exploit newly discovered reservoirs. However, the complexity of the task tends to give rise to greater operational risks. Deepwater drilling techniques, for example, are much skier than those used in onshore operations. Similarly, it is difficult to make geological assessments in remote locations---uncertain outcomes increase operational isk. Health and safety concerns can also give rise to operational risk. **Quality of reserves -- Proved developed producing reserves:** Business risk tends to be better for companies with a high proved developed producing (PDP) ratio (the ratio of PDP reserves to total proven reserves). This is because PDP reserves have lower future development costs and production risks than undeveloped reserves. This implies that they have less chance of incurring cost overruns or suffering shortfalls in production. However, the optimal portfolio includes reserves at different stages of development. A PDP ratio of more than 80% (implying a low stock of undeveloped reserves) indicates that, as producing reserves decline, they could be difficult to replace. Where we see little risk associated with developing reserves, we do not place much emphasis on the distinction between reserves that are proved developed, and those that are proved undeveloped (PUD). For example, recovery of oil sands where the reserves are close to the surface uses a low-risk technique akin to strip mining. There is little geological risk associated with converting reserves to proved from probable, in such cases. We could extend this analysis to other forms of unconventional oil and gas reserves. **Reserve life index (RLI):** We use reserves divided by annual production (RLI) to indicate how long a company would take to deplete its existing reserves, at current production rates. RLI is assessed in the context of the company's total reserve base, prospects for organic or acquisition reserve growth, capital position, and operating team. In assessing reserves, we also evaluate the underlying assumed depletion rate. A steep depletion curve could imply a risk of a significant decline in production beyond the next few years if reserves are not replaced. A short RLI of less than five years may indicate that the company has been unsuccessful at replacing its reserves or that it has limited capital for organic and acquisition-related growth. A long RLI of 10 years or more may indicate a company that has a low-risk reserve base and relatively stable production outlook. This is generally the case for companies that focus on oil sands or hale oil. In some cases, however, a long RLI implies that reserves are overstated or indicates a ompany that has proved itself unable to ramp up production. **Reserve replacement ratio:** As E&P companies produce hydrocarbons, they need to find or acquire new sources of future growth. This may be achieved by drilling (organic growth) or by acquisitions. We assess a company's reserve replacement strategy using the reserve replacement ratio (RRR, the amount added to reserves divided by the amount extracted for production) along with its unit finding, development, and acquisition (FD&A) costs. **Reserve disclosures:** The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, and equivalent authorities in other areas, define the standards used to categorize reported reserves. Although this provides a basis for comparison, management has some discretion about how to apply the standards---this may affect whether reserves are reported as proved developed, proved undeveloped, or probable. Proved developed reserves are the most direct source of current production and cash flow. Capex is required to convert reserves ategorized as proved undeveloped or probable or possible resources into proved developed reserves. We evaluate the reliability of reserve disclosures based on whether a company has a record of posting substantial or frequent negative technical revisions. Where a company's policy on reserve bookings has historically been aggressive, we may hold it to a higher standard than similarly rated peers. **Mergers, acquisitions, and divestitures:** E&P companies frequently buy assets to enter new areas or consolidate their interest in existing properties. At the same time, they may divest noncore or high-cost assets to streamline their portfolios or to raise funds. In considering the effect of acquisitions, we focus on how much the company paid for the assets; the opportunities the assets represent for yielding reserves and production; whether they will help the company generate economies of scale; and whether the company has the capacity to manage the new properties. #### Scale, scope, and diversity: typical characteristics | **Strong or strong/adequate** | **Adequate/weak or weak** | |---------------------------------------|---------------------------------| | Large in scale, typically defined as having reserves of more than 1 billion boe and production of over 350,000 boe per day. | Small in scale, typically defined as having total proved developed reserves of less than 50 million boe and production of less than 30.000 boe per day. | | An RLI of 10 years or greater. | An RLI of five years or less. | | An average RRR that exceeds 100%, over at least three years, and good prospects for production growth, given its drilling inventory and planned investment projects. | An RRR of less than 100% over the past three years, and limited prospects for production growth. | | A well-balanced reserve mix that includes both liquids (crude oil and natural gas liquids) and natural gas. | An unbalanced reserve mix. | | Exceptionally low production risk and high certainty of reserve replacement, even where the company operates in a relatively small number of fields (typical for certain Canadian oil sands projects). | Significant uncertainty with respect to sustainability of production and reserve replacement. | | Fields or projects are geographically diverse and located in countries that have a country risk score of '3' or lower. Most have well-established records of development activity. | Most cash flow comes from one basin, indicating high geographical concentration. | ## Operating efficiency We assess operating efficiency in the E&P sector based on: - Operating and production costs; and - Exploration and development costs (including capital efficiency and reserve replacement costs). **Operating and production costs:** Because E&P companies produce commodities, they have no control over selling prices, except through hedging. Controlling the cost of current production (that is, the operating and production costs) is therefore critical to an E&P company's credit profile and we view it as an important indicator of long-term operating strength. By managing their costs, companies may be able to expand and so generate additional cash flow. However, most E&P companies depend on third-party companies to provide critical services such as drilling, pressure pumping, and hydraulic fracturing (fracking), which reduces their control over the related costs. **Exploration and development costs:** E&P companies that cannot replace their reserves at an economical cost will eventually fail. Therefore, exploration and development costs---those associated with finding and developing new reserves---significantly affect financial performance. They usually comprise more than half of the total unit cost base. In some cases, particularly offshore production projects, capex reaches its peak well before production can begin. To ensure we take this into consideration, we compare cash operating costs against capital costs. We evaluate the capital efficiency of exploration by assessing finding and development (F&D) costs relative to peers, which we view as the best measure of organic growth capabilities. We also consider the unit finding, development, and acquisitions (FD&A, also known as all-sources finding and development) cost which indicates how much capital a company spends in all forms to replace a unit of hydrocarbon produced. **Recycle ratio:** A company's break-even point can be identified using the recycle ratio, which we calculate by comparing the unit netback (gross profit per barrel) with its unit F&D, or unit FD&A. A recycle ratio of less than 1x indicates that the company may not remain viable; we would typically assess operating efficiency as weak in this case. #### Operating efficiency: typical characteristics | **Strong or strong/adequate** | **Adequate/weak or weak** | |----------------------------------|--------------------------------------| | Unit cash operating and unit FD&A costs are consistently below those of peers that have a similar hydrocarbon mix. | Consistently higher unit cash costs (for instance, costs to extract oil and gas) and consistently higher FD&A costs than peers with a similar hydrocarbon mix. | | Revenue per unit of production is consistently higher, and expected to remain consistently higher, than unit unleveraged costs, based on our pricing assumptions, and unit cash margins are sufficient to cover unit FD&A costs. | Revenue per unit of production that are consistently lower than unit unleveraged costs (and that we expect to remain so) under our pricing assumptions, with unit cash margins that cannot fund unit FD&A costs internally (external financing is essential for the company's growth). | ## National oil companies In addition to the factors considered above, for national oil companies, we place special emphasis on national industry-specific factors that derive from being a national company, and that may positively or negatively affect the company's competitive position compared with peers. In particular, our analysis considers: - To what extent heavy taxes or domestic price regulations affect the company's profitability through the cycle; - To what extent regulations have a stabilizing effect on national oil companies' profits (that is, whether taxes act as a natural hedge); - Whether the company has any advantages due to barriers to entry created by the regulatory framework in the hydrocarbon industry; and - How stable the regulatory regime is and how resilient it is to potential changes in international oil prices. ### Profitability Because performance in the E&P industry is affected by natural hydrocarbon price volatility and possible changes in company operating efficiency metrics, we do not assess profitability based on standard global benchmarks over a whole cycle. Instead, we rank E&P companies against their peers annually, using the profitability measures listed below. - Adjusted unit EBIT; - ROC; and - Adjusted unit earnings before interest. We calculate adjusted unit earnings by applying our off-balance-sheet adjustments to unhedged earnings before interest and after taxes, for each unit of production. We may also include the unit EBIT as a proxy metric, depending on the availability of data and its relevance to the peer group used to benchmark a company. ## Financial Risk Profile ### Supplementary ratios In our view, the most likely source of financial stress for an E&P company is an inability to fund its minimum ongoing investment requirements, or its maintenance capex. Reserve replacement, and thus production stability, rely on substantial access to capital. Our preferred supplementary ratios in the sector are FOCF to debt and DCF to debt. In calculating FOCF, we assume that maintenance capex, at least, is required. We view DCF to debt as most relevant for companies that pay out a portion of excess cash flow to shareholders. We use our price assumptions for oil and natural gas when assessing the financial risk profile. To capture the higher volatility typical of speculative-grade companies, we generally focus on financial performance in the current and next year. We add an additional forecast year when assessing more stable companies. The diversified operations of the major integrated companies should enable them to demonstrate some stability through a price cycle, in our view. Therefore, in assessing these groups, we take into account historical ratios for the previous two years, as well as our estimate for the current and our forecast for the two subsequent years. # Unregulated Power And Gas ## Industry Risk ### Cyclicality We assess cyclicality for the unregulated power and gas industry as moderately high risk (4). The industry has evolved over different periods of time around the world but, globally, it is considered to be relatively young. As such, the data available to analyze the industry's performance during recessions is more limited, and we consider the little we have to be inconclusive. The unregulated sector has rapidly developed into an integral component of the global power and gas industry; therefore, we expect to gain more directly relevant peak-to-trough data over time. Until then, based on the industry dynamics demonstrated so far, we align the cyclicality assessment with our competitive risk and growth assessment and consider that the level of cyclicality for the unregulated power and gas industry warrants a moderately high risk assessment. ## Business Risk Profile ### Competitive advantage Unregulated power and gas companies, such as renewable generation companies, don't benefit from protective rate regulation. However, they may benefit from policy support and gain competitive strength from fixed-price or feed-in tariffs, or from long-term contractual arrangements with creditworthy off-takers. We assess competitive advantage in the unregulated power and gas sector based on: - Market structure and attractiveness; - Earnings structure and stability; and - Asset mix and quality or technological advantage. **Market structure and attractiveness:** The risk level of an unregulated power and gas company is heavily influenced by the markets in which it operates. We anticipate that operating stability would be affected by public policies in areas such as energy and the environment. The market structure in the relevant national, regional, or state jurisdiction may also have an effect, based on the degree of market liberalization; types of contract in use; mix and age of generation assets; weather impact; quality of interconnections with other markets or price zones; risk of curtailment; contracting and pricing structures; structural balance between supply and demand; and market liquidity, transparency, and growth rate. **Earnings structure and stability:** This can vary widely, depending on price volatility and the specific utility's contractual price protections. For entities that produce, buy, and resell power and gas, we analyze factors that may affect competitive pressure, such as barriers to entry; potential exposure to short positions; customer-base stability; ability to pass on cost increases to customers; and price structure and flexibility with end consumers. We also look at brand reputation; hedging and procurement risk; the range of products the company offers; customer satisfaction; customer churn rates; policy interference in market rates; and demographic trends. Credit-supportive features may include the ability to transfer pricing and, in some cases, volume risks. For electricity generators and supply companies, long-term and attractive pricing certainty may be achieved via long-term contracts for differences (CfDs) or feed-in tariffs, or through flexible long-term off-take agreements (sometimes referred to as power-purchase agreements) with creditworthy counterparties. Separately, entities may mitigate pricing volatility through hedging, depending on the liquidity and depth of the energy derivatives market. In certain markets, part of the generation capacity may have firm energy obligations (also known as "must-dispatch status") for which companies are remunerated via capacity mechanisms that can enhance long-term cash flow predictability. Separately, renewables subsidy schemes may enhance predictability but can sometimes be subject to retroactive government interference. Where companies are exposed to merchant risks or rely on spot markets to sell a high proportion of their volumes, we anticipate that earnings may be more volatile. A history of temporary short positions that force a company to source volumes in the spot market to meet its sale commitments would weigh on our assessment. This can occur where a company has committed to sell a certain volume at a fixed price and supplies are disrupted by unforeseen low-probability, high-impact operational, climate-related, or market events. **Asset mix and quality or technological advantage:** Technological advantage---in particular, the quality and attractiveness of a company's generation portfolio---is key to ensuring long-term profitability in the sector, particularly for merchant power. We assess it based on: - Generation type, fuel mix (thermal, hydro, renewables, or nuclear) and carbon intensity; - Position in the merit order, which ranks all generating assets serving a market by marginal cost position, and dispatching profile (base, mid-merit, or peak load); - Age profile and reinvestment needs (related to retrofits or replacement); and - Location with respect to end customers and proximity to raw material inputs (such as integrated coal mines, a gas hub, or a major transmission line). #### Competitive advantage: typical characteristics | **Strong or strong/adequate** | **Adequate/weak or weak** | |:-----------------------------------|:-----------------------------------| | Participates in a market or region that has well-established and predictable market rules, including transparent and reasonably predictable environmental rule-making processes. | Participates in a market or region that has poorly defined and unpredictable or transitory market rules; or a market that is undergoing significant structural changes and is subject to high uncertainty. | | High barriers to entry, low market volatility, low competitive pressures, manageable structural changes (including from environmental net zero regulations or carbon taxes), and balanced supply-and-demand characteristics. | Low barriers to entry, high market volatility or uncertainty, weak medium- and long-term growth prospects, or supply-and-demand characteristics that are often unbalanced. | | Has gained a technological advantage through its attractive and diverse mix of generation assets that have low variable costs, such as renewables. | Poor asset mix and quality. | | Asset base is well-invested in diverse and favorable locations and has sufficient dispatchable capacities to limit supply shortages and exposure to extreme price spikes (this may include nuclear, hydropower, and---in some markets---gas-fired generation). | Asset base is in unfavorable locations (for example, it is exposed to curtailment) or has significant and unmitigated exposure to energy transition risks (for example, assets that have high greenhouse-gas emissions and may dispatch only under certain conditions). | | Price risk has been sharply reduced or eliminated through regulatory or contractual protections or long-term off-take agreements with creditworthy counterparties, especially if the counterparties show diversity and the agreements last longer than eight years (or, for shorter agreements, renewal on similar terms is highly likely). | The earnings profile generally shows significant volatility over the short or medium term because most volumes are exposed to merchant risks, sold in spot markets, or sold at unfavorable prices, with only a modest level of hedging. | | Strong retail market shares, or market position that benefits from generation dispatch and a generally stable retail market share that helps to limit load mismatch and lessen any reliance on selling into or procuring from a competitive market. | Shares in retail markets are relatively small and may be unstable; business model focuses on retail markets with only modest integration of operations and are typically subject to high competitive pressures or regulatory or country risks that impede the ability to pass along costs to end customers; or the company is a pure price taker. | ## Scale, scope, and diversity We assess scale, scope, and diversity in the unregulated power and gas sector based on: - The relative size of operations, earnings, and cash flow; - The company's diversity in terms of the markets in which it operates; - Customer and supplier concentrations; - The breadth of the asset mix (including fuel type and plant diversity); and - The degree of vertical integration---both forward (retail) and backward (generation or fuel). **Size of operations:** We measure the scale of operations by power generation or distribution capacity, and by earnings and cash flow. Large-scale operations support stronger competitive positions, with more operating flexibility and economies of scale than small companies. For companies that supply the retail market, the position and size of the markets in which they participate can affect the degree to which they benefit from economies of scale. **Market diversity:** We review the company's diversity across the markets it serves by looking at how its cash flow generation and stability benefit from operating in multiple geographic regions. We view companies more positively if they operate in regions that exhibit average to better-than-average levels of wealth, and where employment and growth levels underpin the local economy and support long-term growth and prices. The risk of operating in a single region may be mitigated if the region is sufficiently large, demonstrates economic diversity, and has at least average demographic characteristics. Increasingly, weak correlation of seasonal weather and extreme events across regions served may mitigate environmental risks. **Customer and supplier concentrations:** These may expose any company in the unregulated power and gas market to higher risk of operational disruptions and cash flow volatility, especially in the case of retailers, as counterparty risk might be heightened by dependance on a few key customers. Customer diversity depends on the mix of residential, commercial, and industrial clients. Supplier diversity is driven by the company's needs; for example, having multiple natural gas pipeline alternatives indicates a diverse supplier base for a gas-fired power plant. **Asset mix:** The broader the asset mix---whether by fuel type, dispatchability, geography, or markets---the greater the protection against risk factors that may affect one region and its market dynamics more than another, such as fluctuations in supply and demand, or price. **Degree of integration:** Similarly, a greater degree of vertical integration provides a greater ability to withstand unexpected operational or market disruptions to any one aspect of the business. #### Scale, scope, and diversity: typical characteristics | **Strong or strong/adequate** | **Adequate/weak or weak** | |:------------------------------------------|:----------------------------| | Large scale relative to competitors, and a strong market position in its key markets. | Small in scale, with little pricing power, in a market that has low growth prospects. | | Participates in a variety of attractive geographic or organized markets. | Concentration in one market that exhibits high volatility or risk. | | Diversity and flexibility in terms of fuel mix and plants compares favorably with that of peers, based on factors such as number of plants and base/mid-merit/peak load. For example, in renewable generation, a company may see demonstrable benefits from its multiple assets and its resource risk may be strongly mitigated by uncorrelated geographic locations or use of different technologies, such as wind versus solar. | Company is exposed to operating availability risks at key plants because its diversity and flexibility in terms of fuel mix and number of plants is limited. | | No meaningful supplier or customer concentrations, or counterparty or procurement risk. | Meaningful supplier or customer concentration or procurement risk that could lead to uncertain operational availability or increased cost risk. | | Significant levels of forward and backward integration that reduces the volatility of operating earnings. | Full merchant or retail risk, with little meaningful integration or hedging that could mitigate price and volume volatility. | ## Operating efficiency We assess operating efficiency in the unregulated power and gas sector based on: - Cost competitiveness; - Asset efficiency; - Flexibility of the cost structure in absorbing demand declines (operating leverage) or input cost pressures; and - Cost and operational risk management. **Cost competitiveness:** Our assessment focuses on economies of scale; access to important commodity inputs (including via direct ownership, through attractively priced contracts, or based on location); and the fixed-cost profile. **Asset efficiency:** Our assessment focuses on the nature and age of the technology deployed; its relative productive efficiency, availability, and capacity factors; and placement in the dispatch merit order, as appropriate. **Cost structure flexibility:** Our assessment focuses on overall sensitivity to raw material cost fluctuations and commodity prices; the relative proportion of fixed costs to variable costs that---when elevated---could dampen cash flow if utilization rates decline; and cash flow dependence on actual asset utilization. **Cost and operational risk management:** This is particularly relevant when we assess retail supply companies, where profit margins are narrow and highly dependent on adequate risk controls on hedging, contracting, and treasury management. For retail supply companies, we consider the relative cost of serving their customer base and their ability to manage collections, and, in particular, how this affects working capital management. We also evaluate suppliers' proficiency at managing billing system upgrades or the introduction of new systems---a poorly implemented process has an adverse effect on cost and customer base management. #### Operating efficiency: typical characteristics | **Strong or strong/adequate** | **Adequate/weak or weak** | |:--------------------------------------|:--------------------------------| | **All** | | | Sustainable, leading cost position due to economies of scale, fuel flexibility or integration, and production efficiencies that support plant positioning at the low end of the merit order; high and stable capacity (load) factors through the cycle; and high availability and capacity factors and state-of-the-art technology. | Cost position is relatively weak due to high fuel cost or concentration risk, with key plants at the average-to-weak end of the merit order curve; or weak availability and capacity factors, perhaps influenced by aging technology. | | Cost structure has relatively low fixed costs and the sensitivity of profit margins to fluctuations in the cost of raw materials or commodity prices, or supply-chain risks is limited, or effectively mitigated. | Profit margins show higher-than-average sensitivity to fluctuations in the cost of raw materials or commodity prices, or supply-chain risks. | | Strong risk management policies and limited risk taking that can result from large contractual or commodity hedging positions, including an ability to limit volatility during periods of extreme price spike scenarios. | Risk management policies allow higher-than-average risk position due to extensive contractual commitments (operational or commodity hedging), including exposure to the risk of a sizable effect on profit during extreme price spikes. | | Efficient working capital management, supported by a record of shorter-than-average cash conversion cycles. | Inefficient working capital management, supported by a track record of longer-than-average cash-conversion cycles. | | **Retail suppliers** | | | A sustainable and leading cost-to-serve position, supported by a record of stable, above-market-average operating margins. | A higher average cost-to-serve position, demonstrated by a record of below-average operating margins and stability. | | Stronger-than-peers working capital management (based on number of unbilled customers), often underpinned by use of a single platform and proven technology. | Cash collection could be adversely affected by the higher number of unbilled customers, compared with peers. | ## Profitability The two main benchmark measures we use in determining profitability are the EBITDA margin and ROC. We select the most appropriate benchmark for a particular company based on factors including the market location, position on the value chain, capital cycle, and even type of asset. For example: - A hydro, wind, solar, or nuclear generator is likely to have reasonably high margins and low ROC, reflecting its low variable cost profile and high capital intensity. In this case, we generally view ROC as a better metric. - An entity that mainly focuses on thermal generation may have stronger ROC and weaker EBITDA margins, reflecting its significant fuel costs, compared with fixed costs. In this case, the EBITDA margin is the more appropriate metric. - A retail supplier is likely to have low margins, but a high ROC, because its business requires a limited capital commitment (excluding any liquidity buffer required to meet its hedging needs). Here, we rely primarily on EBITDA margins. For integrated players, the appropriate measure depends on the degree of vertical and horizontal integration. If the company is undertaking a large capex program that has a long lead time, we generally focus on the EBITDA margin. When assessing the profitability of companies engaged in trading activity or more-frequent, event-driven activity---for example, where asset acquisitions or divestitures, which can distort margins, are part of the business strategy---we generally use the ROC. An unregulated power and gas entity that we assess as having above-average profitability would be able to sustain a higher profitability than its peers in a similar market because of the composition of its customer and asset portfolio, including the competitive position (merit order) within its markets. We would also expect the entity to have a history of managing its costs well. For traditional incumbents in mature markets, where demand growth is declining or even flat, the flexibility of their asset portfolios can be important in determining the stability of profitability. For merchant power and integrated companies, fuel is a key input cost, while for those that have retail exposure, energy costs and operating costs are important. An entity with long-term contractual arrangements that give earnings more stability might earn a lower return than a more commodity-exposed issuer, but still be assessed as having above-average profitability. Conversely, a company we assess as having below-average profitability would generally have higher input costs, less-predictable asset performance, higher related maintenance expenses, or uneven experience in managing capital projects. ## Financial Risk Profile ### Accounting For unregulated power and gas companies that enter into long-term power purchase agreements (PPAs), we make adjustments to account for those obligations, as we do for regulated utilities under our ratios and adjustments criteria. ### Volatility tables We use the medial volatility table only when assessing companies that derive a significant proportion of their operating cash flow or profits from lower-risk industries (typically regulated utility activities or those having particularly strongly protected unregulated revenue). "Strongly protected unregulated revenue" refers to revenue that benefits from long-term contractual arrangements that ensure high cash flow predictability with limited volume, price, and counterparty risk. In addition, use of the medial volatility table is restricted to companies that operate in jurisdictions with a supportive legal and regulatory environment, limited exposure to energy transition risks, and little likelihood of political interference or contractual renegotiation. Assuming that they meet the previous conditions, eligible arrangements may include capacity mechanisms; CfDs; feed-in tariffs; PPAs; and take-and/or-pay contracts that have minimal commodity price, inflation, and volume exposure. Typically, a baseload PPA would not qualify. We apply the medial volatility table to companies with unregulated activities with country risk of '4' or better that meet either of the following characteristics: - About 50% or more of forecast operating cash flows or profits come from regulated activities that have a regulatory advantage assessment of adequate or better and/or about two-thirds when adding strongly protected unregulated revenue; or - About one-third or more of consolidated operating cash flows or profits comes from regulated activities that have a regulatory advantage assessment of strong/adequate or better and a CICRA of '3' or better. In addition, in either case, the competitive position for the remaining activities must be assessed as at least satisfactory. In all other cases, we apply the standard volatility table to unregulated power and gas companies. # **Transportation Infrastructure** ## Business Risk Profile ### Competitive advantage We assess competitive advantage in the transportation infrastructure sector based on: - The transparency and predictability of the regulatory framework, or the concession or contract, under which the company operates; and the potential for changes to regulatory policy and/or to government intervention (negative or supportive); and - The demand risk, which depends on the size and attractiveness of the catchment area, including location, population served, wealth and economic strength and growth potential, and contribution to the regional development. **Regulatory or contractual framework:** We consider how tariffs are set; how regulated revenue is determined and shared; and the regulator's record on oversight, protection of stakeholders, and enforcement of legal or contractual constraints. Mandatory investments, with no legal or contractual means of recovering these capital costs, may place some transportation infrastructure companies at a competitive disadvantage. **Demand risk:** We consider the company's specific role and relative value added to users and economies relative to other modes of transportation, as well as the stability and type of traffic. Key competitive drivers are market share dynamics and the nature of competition, including the number of competitors and the presence of alternative modes of transportation. #### Airports **Regulation, oversight, and tariff-setting mechanism:** Regulated airports may benefit from transparency and visibility on the determination of tariffs, while commercial airports may be more exposed to competition but enjoy greater tariff-setting ability. For regulated airports, we assess the independence and predictability of the regulatory framework underpinning the operation of the airport. We focus, in particular, on the ability to adjust tariffs and recover costs in a timely manner, as well as earn a reasonable return supporting access to markets. Pricing frameworks include "single till," "dual till," and "hybrid till" models: - The single-till method caps the maximum return on total airport assets, including commercial revenue sources (such as retail, parking, or property revenue). This provides more certainty to returns and earnings, and is generally considered as more credit protective by reducing volatility, lowering downside but also limiting upside. - Under the dual-till method, the returns on aeronautical assets are regulated or subject to oversight, while the commercial revenue sources (such as retail, car parking, or property) are unregulated. This method permits substantial upside from growing airport revenue, and gives the airport management a greater role but, equally, could represent more downside risk during economic downturns or unsuccessful commercial strategies. Finally, we factor in any obligations or constraints under license and permits, future development rights, operating conditions such as curfew hours, noise or environmental restrictions, and related penalties. **Demand risk:** We consider: - The size and attractiveness of the airport's catchment area and markets, including wealth and economic strength and growth potential. - The stability and type of passenger traffic (Transit vs O&D, domestic vs international). - The competition from other airports or alternative modes of transport (e.g., high-speed rail for short-haul). #### Roads **Regulatory framework:** For roads, we assess how closely their regulatory or contractual framework is aligned with the government's infrastructure policies and long-term plans. A strong framework that includes clear pricing or tariff-setting mechanisms will attract long-term capital and offer operators the ability to recover costs. **Demand risk:** We consider location, wealth, and size of the populations served, connectivity with the regional economy, and the stability of traffic volumes (commercial traffic reacts more than light traffic to macroeconomic downturns). #### Car parks We analyze car parks that operate under long-term concessions as infrastructure companies. We consider the size and diversification of the portfolio, location of key assets, and proximity to final destinations. #### Ports **Regulatory framework:** For ports operating under concessions, we consider the legal strength of contractual provisions implemented to prevent overcharging and the transparency of mandatory capex requirements. **Demand risk:** We consider location, connectivity, trade routes, and the past record of volume patterns. Ports benefit if they have guaranteed revenue or harbor dues subject to long-lasting agreements. #### Mass transit and railway **Regulatory framework:** Competitive advantage is assessed by considering government policy, scope of services, asset profiles, and the provider's ability to access ancillary revenue. Typically, rail services are provided under a bilateral agreement (Public Service Operations - PSO). **Government policy:** Close alignment with national infrastructure planning is beneficial. The cost to users can be politically sensitive, making regulatory intervention likely. **Demand risk:** Competition from alternative providers affects traffic stability. Commuter traffic is generally more stable than tourist-dependent traffic. ### Competitive advantage: typical characteristics | **Strong or strong/adequate** | **Adequate/weak or weak** | |---------------------------------------|---------------------------------| | **All** | | | The company provides an essential service to a national or regional economy. The area is large and wealthy and includes a capital city, economic hub, or strategic routes. | The company serves a relatively small or weak economy and/or demand patterns can be considered as volatile or uncertain. | | Limited competition. | Competition from operators or other transportation modes is meaningful, creating volatile demand and price pressure. | | The company offers a strong value for money, benefitting from a strong asset rationale and a stable and resilient demand. | The value added by the company could be perceived as limited by end users, resulting in demand uncertainty. | | Transparent, predictable, and consistent regulatory/contractual framework that enables adequate and timely cost recovery. | Unfavorable or unpredictable framework; no compensating mechanism has historically been provided. | | No history of adverse government or regulatory intervention on infrastructure assets. | Recent history of adverse government or regulatory intervention; additional costs/investments were not compensated. | | **Airports** | | | Dominant within catchment area; competition from adjacent airports/transport modes is limited. | Exposed to above-average competition; serves an end point for a catchment area suffering from structural economic decline. | | Variety of traffic flows, including a significant share of O&D traffic. Transit share is mitigated by track-record as an international hub. | High share of transit passengers, or serves a niche market (e.g., tourism) more sensitive to economic/geopolitical drivers. | | **Roads and car parks** | | | Asset serves a developed, stable local economy with high income per capita and stable correlation to GDP. | Specialized asset with narrow end user universe; undiversified local economy; observed divergence between GDP and traffic. | | Clear pricing/tariff-setting mechanisms, with track record of ability to adjust tariff as per concession/contract. | Record of riots or protest against tariff increases, not economically compensated on a timely basis. | | **Ports** | | | Serves a broad catchment area where trade routes are active and attractive. Dominant market share. | Serves a narrow catchment area on secular decline; reliance on a single industry with uncertain prospects. | | High negotiating power with customers for market-determined charges. | Track record of poor negotiating power with its customers. | | **Mass transit/railway** | | | Dominant within its market(s), large network, limited competition contributes to stability in volumes. | High sensitivity to volume fluctuations; volumes expected to show structural decline with no offsetting mechanism. | | Catchment area is wealthy; some flexibility to raise tariffs. | Tariffs cannot be raised without causing user affordability to drop. | ## Scale, scope, and diversity We assess scale, scope, and diversity based on: - The various revenue streams and their key drivers; - Geographic footprint (size, diversity, and maturity of assets); - Remaining asset or concession life. ### Scale, scope, and diversity: typical characteristics | **Strong or strong/adequate** | **Adequate/weak or weak** | |---------------------------------------|---------------------------------| | **All** | | | Remaining asset or concession life is comfortable, typically 10 years or more. | Remaining life is limited (less than five years) and renewal is unclear. | | **Airports** | | | High proportion of O&D passengers (visiting friends/family is most resilient). | High share of transit passengers, affected by competition from other hubs. | | Commercial revenue benefits from long-lasting contractual protections (long-term leases). Diverse revenue streams. | Revenue fluctuations caused by demand risk or exposure to short term leases/contracts. | | **Ports** | | | Handles large shipping volumes; diversity in cargo, shipping lines, and offtakers. | Significant swings in tonnage due to high reliance on a few commodities or industries. | | **Mass transit/railway** | | | Integrated operators with diversified revenue (infrastructure management + rail services + retail/real estate). | Less integrated operator with limited variety of additional rail services. | ## Operating efficiency We assess operating efficiency based on: - Ability to manage cost base to maintain profitability and free cash flow through the cycle; - Cost of maintenance and investment needs; - Working capital management and revenue collection; - Risk management and safety track record. ### Operating efficiency: typical characteristics | **Strong or strong/adequate** | **Adequate/weak or weak** | |-----------------------------------|-------------------------------------| | **All** | | | Ability to maintain profitability through most of the cycle by managing cost base or quickly adjusting tariffs. | Inability to manage cost base or adjust tariffs within the next two years. | | Stable cashflow generation; flexibility to reduce maintenance cost during downturn period. | Poor working capital management; exposure to late payments and customer defaults. | | **Toll roads and car parks** | | | Use of effective tolling technology and history; high control of toll leakage. | Typically uses manual tolling or unreliable system; historically high toll leakage. | | **Ports** | | | High capacity utilization and operating KPIs. Salaries/labor do not weigh on profitability. | Capacity constraints due to regulation/infrastructure. High influence of labor unions on standards. | ## Financial Risk Profile ### Volatility tables - **Low volatility table:** Applies if the company derives more than two-thirds of cash flow from predictable transportation activities AND has a CICRA of '1' or '2' (with strong/adequate competitive advantage) OR a CICRA of '3' (with strong competitive advantage and low political risk). - **Medial volatility table:** Applies if the company derives at least half of operating cash flow from predictable activities and has a CICRA of '3' or better. ### Core and Supplementary ratios - **Core ratio:** FFO to debt is the preferred measure. - **Supplementary ratio:** Our preferred supplementary ratio is **FFO cash interest coverage**. ### Modifiers (Financial policy) When operating under a **concession**, the company is required to repay its debt before the assets return to the grantor. If a company lacks a credible plan to decrease leverage well before the end of the concession, it would likely be assessed as having **negative leverage tolerance**. -------------------- Other data points for "A2A ENERGIA S.P.A.": - Issued hybrid bonds in 2021 or 2022: yes - First year of hybrid bond issuance: 2024 - S&P Net Debt / EBITDA ratio for 2022: 3.47 - S&P FFO / Net Debt for 2022: 0.2317 - Moody's adjusted leverage trend for 2022: Improving -------------------- In addition, here is some market data for the years leading up to 2022: # SWAP CURVE 5Y | Year | Average | Bear | Bull | |------|---------|------|------| | 2020 | -0.346 | -0.046 | -0.646 | | 2021 | -0.264 | 0.036 | -0.564 | | 2022 | 1.726 | 2.026 | 1.426 | # SWAP CURVE 7Y | Year | Average | Bear | Bull | |------|---------|------|------| | 2020 | -0.272 | 0.028 | -0.572 | | 2021 | -0.137 | 0.163 | -0.437 | | 2022 | 1.806 | 2.106 | 1.506 | # SWAP CURVE 10Y | Year | Average | Bear | Bull | |------|---------|------|------| | 2020 | -0.143 | 0.157 | -0.443 | | 2021 | 0.053 | 0.353 | -0.247 | | 2022 | 1.927 | 2.227 | 1.627 | # ISHARES CORE EURO CORP BOND | Year | Average | Bear | Bull | |------|---------|------|------| | 2020 | 1.171 | 1.3709 | 0.9709 | | 2021 | 0.733 | 0.9328 | 0.5328 | | 2022 | 1.085 | 1.2846 | 0.8846 | # SUB-SEN DELTA FOR IBOXX EUR NON-FINANCIAL IG Delta: 0.2 | Year | Average | Bear | Bull | |------|---------|------|------| | 2020 | 1.771 | 1.9708 | 1.5708 | | 2021 | 1.298 | 1.4981 | 1.0981 | | 2022 | 2.295 | 2.4953 | 2.0953 | -------------------- To what extent should this company utilize hybrid bonds in the next 18 months? The answer should be between 0% and S&P Global Ratings' cap, which limits the equity credit on hybrids to a maximum of 15% of total adjusted capital (Equity + Adjusted Debt). Take into consideration the current starting point of outstanding hybrid bonds and consider a maximum amount of hybrid issued per year of up to 3 billion euros. Options are: 0%, 3.75%, 7.5%, 11.25% and 15%. Below are elements intended to provide guidance. They should be treated as a non-exhaustive checklist rather than rigid thresholds. - 0% of total adjusted capital: - Low refinancing needs - Limited to no deterioration or improvement of credit metrics - Hybrid issuance would not improve rating or leverage metrics - Strong rating profile, "A" range, and no extraordinary capex needs - Cost of hybrid will materially increase the current cost of debt - No current hybrid in the capital structure - 3.75% of total adjusted capital: - Moderate funding needs - Mild leverage optimization rationale - Hybrid issuance provides limited but useful rating flexibility - Cost of hybrid will increase the current cost of debt - 7.5% of total adjusted capital: - Moderate refinancing or acquisition needs - Rating headroom moderately constrained - Hybrid issuance meaningfully improves adjusted leverage metrics - Cost of hybrid will slightly increase the current cost of debt - 11.25% of total adjusted capital: - High capex intensity OR large acquisition pipeline - Significant leverage pressure - Investment grade preservation strongly dependent on capital structure optimization - Cost of hybrid will have a marginal impact on the current cost of debt - 15% of total adjusted capital: - Very high refinancing needs OR transformational capex/M&A program - Material downgrade risk without hybrid support - Hybrid issuance substantially required to stabilize adjusted leverage trajectory and preserve rating - Cost of hybrid in line with the current cost of debt Note that an entity's previous levels of hybrid bond issuance is a *strong* indicator of a reasonably advisable level for the next 18 months. In particular, if the entity has not issued hybrid bonds recently, it is a reliable signal that it has reasons not to do so either in the future. Explain your reasoning, taking into account the guidelines above. Then, at the end, give your final answer, on a single line, between XML tags with no markdown fences. This final line must be exactly one of: 0% 3.75% 7.5% 11.25% 15%