Let’s go through the key elements step by step.

**1. Current hybrid capital position**  
At the end of 2022, Ørsted already has hybrid capital of DKK 19,793 million. Total equity is DKK 95,532 million, and total adjusted capital (equity + adjusted debt) would be significantly larger when including net debt.  
The question limits the amount to up to 3 billion euros in new hybrids per year. The current share is already significant, and the company has been an active issuer since 2005.

**2. Business profile and regulation**  
Ørsted is an unregulated power and gas company, with a large share of renewables supported by long-term CfDs and PPAs. This provides earnings stability but still leaves some merchant exposure.  
The competitive advantage is strong/adequate due to market position, asset mix, and favorable contractual protections.

**3. Financial metrics and leverage**  
S&P Net Debt / EBITDA for 2022 is 2.5x, and FFO / Net Debt is 0.3124 (about 31%).  
These metrics are comfortably investment-grade, with moderate leverage.  
Moody’s notes an improving adjusted leverage trend.

**4. Funding needs**  
Ørsted has high capex for offshore wind build-out, but cash flow from operations (DKK 11.9 billion) and available liquidity (DKK 16.2 billion cash) plus financing capacity provide a solid base.  
There’s no sign of acute refinancing stress or a large M&A program that would drastically increase leverage.

**5. Interest rate environment and cost of hybrid**  
Rates have risen sharply in 2022 (5Y swap from -0.26% to 1.73%), making new hybrid issuance materially more expensive compared to the existing debt cost structure.  
Subordinated debt spreads have also widened, so the cost of hybrid would notably increase the weighted average cost of debt.

**6. Guidance alignment**  
The company’s current position fits most closely with **3.75%–7.5%** rationale:  
- Moderate funding needs  
- Mild leverage optimization possible  
- Hybrid issuance would offer some rating flexibility  
- But higher cost of hybrid compared to existing debt  

Given the sharp rise in rates and the already sizeable hybrid proportion, pushing toward 11.25% or 15% would be expensive and unnecessary for credit preservation. The prior issuance pattern suggests comfort with hybrids, but not at an aggressive upper limit in a high-rate environment.

**Conclusion:** A modest new issuance within the lower half of the permitted range is advisable—specifically **7.5%**, to maintain financial flexibility without materially increasing the cost of capital.

<answer>7.5%</answer>