I need to analyze ENI S.P.A. and calculate the S&P-adjusted debt-to-EBITDA ratio for 2022.

## Step 1: Identify the Relevant Industry

ENI S.P.A. is a major integrated oil and gas company. Based on the provided methodologies, ENI falls primarily under the **Oil and Gas Exploration and Production (E&P)** sector, though as an integrated company it also has downstream and other operations. The E&P methodology is most relevant for the core business assessment.

For integrated companies in the E&P sector, S&P notes: "We assess competitive advantage for an integrated company in the E&P sector based on..." various factors including extent of vertical integration.

## Step 2: Estimate Adjusted_Debt

Following the baseline formula and E&P industry guidelines:
- Adjusted_Debt = (reported_debt + leases + pension_deficit + guarantees + hybrid_debt_portion + other_debt_like_items) - eligible_cash

### Reported Debt Components (from balance sheet as of 2023-01-01, which is end of 2022):

**Short-term borrowings:**
- Short-term borrowings: 4,446,000,000 EUR
- Short-term borrowings related parties: 307,000,000 EUR
- Current portion of long-term borrowings: 3,097,000,000 EUR
- Current portion of long-term borrowings related parties: 36,000,000 EUR

**Long-term borrowings:**
- Long-term borrowings: 19,374,000,000 EUR
- Long-term borrowings related parties: 26,000,000 EUR

**Total Reported Debt:**
- Short-term: 4,446 + 307 + 3,097 + 36 = 7,886,000,000 EUR
- Long-term: 19,374 + 26 = 19,400,000,000 EUR
- **Total reported debt = 27,286,000,000 EUR**

### Leases (debt-like):
- Current lease liabilities: 884,000,000 EUR (including 35M related parties)
- Noncurrent lease liabilities: 4,067,000,000 EUR (including 28M related parties)
- **Total leases = 4,951,000,000 EUR**

### Pension/Employee Benefits:
- Noncurrent provisions for employee benefits: 786,000,000 EUR
- This is a pension-like obligation, so include: **786,000,000 EUR**

### Hybrid Debt Portion:
Looking at equity section for perpetual subordinated bonds (hybrid equity treated as part debt):
- From equity movements: "Increase Decrease Through Net Issue Reimbursement Of Perpetual Subordinated Bonds Equity" was 2,000,000,000 EUR in 2021-2022 and there are coupon payments on these.
- The "Other Reserves Member" shows these as equity instruments, but for S&P purposes, typically 50% of hybrid equity is treated as debt.
- However, looking at the equity structure: "Other Reserves" includes perpetual subordinated bonds. The 2023-01-01 balance is 8,785,000,000 EUR vs 6,289,000,000 EUR at 2022-01-01. The increase includes 2,000,000,000 EUR from new issues in 2021-2022.
- From the 2022-01-01 equity: Other Reserves = 6,289,000,000 EUR. From 2021-01-01: 4,688,000,000 EUR. The increase of 1,601,000,000 includes 2,000,000,000 from perpetual bonds plus other items.
- Looking at cash flows: "Proceeds From Issuing Other Equity Instruments" = 1,985,000,000 EUR in 2021-2022 and 2,975,000,000 in 2020-2021. "Payments Of Other Equity Instruments" = 138M in 2022-2023 and 61M in 2021-2022.
- The perpetual subordinated bonds outstanding appear to be around **2,000,000,000 EUR** or more. Given S&P typically treats 50% of hybrid equity as debt: **1,000,000,000 EUR** as hybrid debt portion.

Actually, let me check more carefully. The "Increase Decrease Through Net Issue Reimbursement Of Perpetual Subordinated Bonds Equity" for 2021-2022 is 2,000,000,000 EUR and for 2020-2021 is 3,000,000,000 EUR. The "Payments Of Other Equity Instruments" (coupon payments) are 138M and 61M. The equity section shows these in Other Reserves.

For S&P, perpetual subordinated bonds are typically treated as 50% debt. Let's estimate roughly **2,500,000,000 EUR** as hybrid equity, so **1,250,000,000 EUR** as hybrid debt portion. But this is uncertain. Let me be more conservative and check if there's clearer evidence.

Given the complexity, and that ENI is an integrated oil major, let me focus on the clearer items and note that hybrid treatment may vary. For this exercise, I'll include a reasonable estimate based on typical S&P treatment.

Actually, re-reading: S&P for oil & gas companies typically focuses on standard debt items. Let me check if there are specific industry adjustments.

For E&P companies, S&P notes: "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."

Let me proceed with core adjustments and be explicit about hybrids.

### Cash and Equivalents to Deduct (eligible cash):
- Cash and cash equivalents: 10,155,000,000 EUR
- Cash and cash equivalents related parties: 10,000,000 EUR
- Current financial assets at FVTPL: 8,251,000,000 EUR (liquid investments)
- Other current financial assets: 1,504,000,000 EUR (of which 16M related parties)

For S&P purposes, "eligible cash" typically includes cash and highly liquid investments. Let me include:
- Cash and cash equivalents: 10,165,000,000 EUR
- Current financial assets at FVTPL (liquid securities): 8,251,000,000 EUR
- Other current financial assets (likely short-term deposits/loans): 1,504,000,000 EUR

But S&P typically only deducts "available cash" not all financial assets. Standard practice is cash and near-cash. Let me use:
- **Eligible cash = 10,165,000,000 EUR** (cash and equivalents only, being conservative)
- Or perhaps include liquid investments: 10,165 + 8,251 = 18,416,000,000 EUR

For oil & gas companies with volatile commodity prices, S&P may be more conservative with cash deductions. Let me use **10,165,000,000 EUR** as baseline, or perhaps add some portion of liquid assets.

Actually, looking at typical S&P methodology for corporate issuers, they deduct "cash and liquid investments" but may haircut or exclude if needed for operations. For integrated oil companies, working capital needs can be substantial.

Let me use a balanced approach: cash and equivalents plus a portion of liquid financial assets.

**Eligible cash = 10,155 + 10 (related parties) + 8,251 (FVTPL) = 18,416,000,000 EUR**

But this seems high relative to debt. Let me check if FVTPL assets are truly liquid or include equity investments. For ENI, these likely include marketable securities and trading positions.

For conservatism in this exercise, I'll use **10,165,000,000 EUR** (cash and cash equivalents only).

### Calculating Adjusted Debt:

| Component | Amount (EUR) |
|-----------|-------------|
| Short-term borrowings (total) | 7,886,000,000 |
| Long-term borrowings (total) | 19,400,000,000 |
| **Reported debt** | **27,286,000,000** |
| Lease liabilities (current + noncurrent) | 4,951,000,000 |
| Pension/employee benefits provision | 786,000,000 |
| Hybrid debt portion (estimate) | 1,000,000,000 |
| **Gross adjusted debt items** | **34,023,000,000** |
| Less: Eligible cash | (10,165,000,000) |
| **Adjusted_Debt** | **23,858,000,000** |

Wait - let me reconsider the hybrid. Looking more carefully at equity: "Other Reserves" at 2023-01-01 is 8,785,000,000 and at 2022-01-01 is 6,289,000,000. The increase of 2,496,000,000 includes various items. The perpetual bonds issued were 2,000,000,000 in 2021-2022 per cash flow, and there were payments of 138M in 2022-2023. 

The total perpetual subordinated bonds outstanding might be around 3,000,000,000 EUR or more. S&P typically treats 50% as debt, so **1,500,000,000 EUR** as hybrid debt.

Let me refine:
- Hybrid debt portion: **1,500,000,000 EUR**

Revised Adjusted_Debt = 27,286 + 4,951 + 786 + 1,500 - 10,165 = **24,358,000,000 EUR**

Or with more eligible cash (including FVTPL):
= 27,286 + 4,951 + 786 + 1,500 - 18,416 = **16,107,000,000 EUR**

Given the uncertainty, let me use a moderate approach. For oil & gas companies, S&P may not fully deduct all liquid investments if they're needed for working capital or margin requirements.

I'll use **eligible cash = 12,000,000,000 EUR** (roughly cash plus some liquid assets, conservative haircut)

Adjusted_Debt = 27,286 + 4,951 + 786 + 1,500 - 12,000 = **22,523,000,000 EUR**

Actually, let me step back and be more systematic. For S&P corporate ratings, the standard cash deduction is typically "cash and cash equivalents" less any restricted cash. The FVTPL assets may include trading inventory or working capital needs.

Let me use: **Eligible cash = 10,165,000,000 EUR** (just cash and equivalents)

And for hybrid, let me check if there are specific hybrid securities. The "Proceeds From Issuing Other Equity Instruments" of 1,985M in 2021-2022 and 2,975M in 2020-2021, minus "Payments Of Other Equity Instruments" of 138M and 61M, suggest outstanding hybrid equity of roughly 4,000M-5,000M EUR. At 50% treatment: **2,000,000,000 EUR** to **2,500,000,000 EUR** as debt portion.

Let me use **2,000,000,000 EUR** as hybrid debt portion.

Revised:
Adjusted_Debt = 27,286 + 4,951 + 786 + 2,000 - 10,165 = **24,858,000,000 EUR**

Hmm, but this seems quite high. Let me reconsider whether to include the full lease amount. Under IFRS 16, leases are already on balance sheet, so they're already in reported debt effectively. Wait - looking at the balance sheet, lease liabilities are separate line items, not included in borrowings. So yes, add them.

Actually, re-checking: "Current Lease Liabilities" and "Noncurrent Lease Liabilities" are separate from borrowings. So they should be added to get total debt-like obligations.

But wait - S&P's standard approach for post-IFRS 16 is to already include leases in debt. The question is whether the "reported debt" figure from the company includes leases. Looking at ENI's structure, leases are separate line items, not in borrowings.

So: Adjusted_Debt = 27,286 (borrowings) + 4,951 (leases) + 786 (pension) + 2,000 (hybrid) - 10,165 (cash) = **24,858,000,000 EUR**

Let me round to **24,900,000,000 EUR** or about **25 billion EUR**.

## Step 3: Estimate Adjusted_EBITDA

Baseline formula:
Adjusted_EBITDA = EBITDA (reported or reconstructed) + adjustment_leases (if any) + nonrecurring_losses - nonrecurring_gains ± pension_adjustments ± joint_venture_proportional_EBITDA ± other_normalization_adjustments

### Reconstructing EBITDA from available data:

From the income statement for 2022 (2022-01-01 to 2023-01-01):

- Profit/Loss from Operating Activities (Operating Profit): **17,510,000,000 EUR**
- Depreciation and Amortisation Expense: **7,205,000,000 EUR**
- Impairment loss/reversal: **1,140,000,000 EUR** (positive = loss)
- Write off of tangible and intangible assets: **599,000,000 EUR**

EBITDA can be reconstructed as:
EBITDA = Operating Profit + Depreciation and Amortisation + Impairment losses + Write-offs
= 17,510 + 7,205 + 1,140 + 599 = **26,454,000,000 EUR**

Or more standard: EBITDA = EBIT + D&A
Where EBIT = Operating Profit (which may already exclude D&A)

Actually, "Profit Loss From Operating Activities" typically IS EBIT (earnings before interest and taxes), not operating profit before D&A. In IFRS terminology, this is typically after D&A.

So: EBIT = 17,510,000,000 EUR
Add back D&A: 7,205,000,000 EUR
Add back impairments and write-offs (if not already in operating profit): need to check

Looking at the P&L structure: The items listed after "Total Purchases Services And Other Costs" include various adjustments down to "Profit Loss From Operating Activities". 

Standard reconstruction:
EBITDA = Revenue and Other Income - Total Purchases Services and Other Costs - Employee Benefits Expense + Other Operating Income

Or: Start from Operating Profit and add back D&A:
- If "Profit Loss From Operating Activities" = EBIT (after D&A), then:
EBITDA = 17,510 + 7,205 = **24,715,000,000 EUR**

But we also have impairments of 1,140 and write-offs of 599. Are these included in operating profit? Typically yes, they're part of operating activities. But S&P may adjust for nonrecurring items.

Let me verify with another approach:
- Revenue and Other Income: 133,687,000,000
- Total Purchases Services and Other Costs: (102,529,000,000)
- Employee Benefits Expense: (3,015,000,000)
- Other Operating Income Expense: (1,736,000,000) [negative = expense]
- D&A: (7,205,000,000) [would be in purchases/services or separate]
- Impairment: (1,140,000,000)
- Write-offs: (599,000,000)

Hmm, this doesn't cleanly reconcile. Let me just use the standard approach.

Standard S&P approach: Start with Operating Profit (EBIT) and add back D&A.

EBIT = 17,510,000,000 EUR
D&A = 7,205,000,000 EUR
**Base EBITDA = 24,715,000,000 EUR**

### Adjustments:

**Lease adjustments:** Under IFRS 16, leases are already capitalized. For EBITDA, S&P typically adds back lease expense (which is now depreciation + interest on leases). But since we're using reported numbers post-IFRS 16, the D&A includes lease depreciation. 

For pre-IFRS 16 comparability, S&P sometimes adjusts EBITDA to include operating lease expense. But with IFRS 16 adopted, the standard approach is to use reported EBITDA and include lease debt in total debt.

Actually, for post-IFRS 16, the standard S&P approach is:
- Debt includes lease liabilities
- EBITDA includes lease depreciation in D&A (so no further adjustment needed for EBITDA)

So no lease EBITDA adjustment needed if we're consistent.

**Nonrecurring items:**
- Impairment losses: 1,140,000,000 EUR - these are typically recurring in oil & gas due to asset reviews, but S&P may treat large impairments as nonrecurring
- Write-offs: 599,000,000 EUR - asset write-offs, potentially nonrecurring
- Other adjustments to reconcile profit/loss: -2,773,000,000 EUR (negative = gain or adjustment?)

Looking at "Other Adjustments To Reconcile Profit Loss" = -2,773,000,000 EUR. This is negative, suggesting a gain or favorable adjustment.

For S&P purposes, we typically:
- Add back nonrecurring losses (impairments, write-offs if unusual)
- Subtract nonrecurring gains

The impairments of 1,140M and write-offs of 599M are somewhat routine for oil & gas. But let's see if they're truly nonrecurring. In 2021-2022, impairments were 167M and write-offs 387M. In 2020-2021, impairments were 3,183M and write-offs 329M. So they vary significantly.

S&P typically normalizes by adding back large impairments and write-offs if they're not expected to recur. Given 2022 was a high oil price year with relatively low impairments (compared to 2020), these might be considered somewhat normalized. But let's add them back as they're non-cash charges.

Actually, wait - EBITDA already excludes impairments and write-offs if they're below operating profit line? No, impairments and write-offs are typically operating items.

Let me re-check: In standard IFRS, impairment losses and write-offs are part of operating profit/loss. So EBIT of 17,510M already includes these. To get to a "clean" EBITDA, we'd add back D&A, impairments, and write-offs.

But that would double count if D&A already includes depreciation that leads to write-offs.

Standard approach: 
EBITDA = EBIT + D&A (where D&A is depreciation and amortization only, not impairments)

If "Depreciation And Amortisation Expense" of 7,205M is pure D&A, and impairments/write-offs are separate:
Then EBIT = Revenue - Costs - D&A - Impairments - Write-offs - Other operating items

So: EBITDA = EBIT + D&A = 17,510 + 7,205 = 24,715M

And impairments (1,140M) and write-offs (599M) are already deducted to get EBIT. If we want to normalize, we add them back:
Normalized EBITDA = 24,715 + 1,140 + 599 = 26,454M

But S&P typically doesn't add back all impairments as "nonrecurring" if they're part of normal business. For oil & gas, asset impairments are somewhat cyclical.

Let me use the base EBITDA of 24,715M and consider adjustments.

**Joint venture proportional EBITDA:**
- Share of profit of equity accounted investments: 1,841,000,000 EUR (positive)
- This is already in EBIT? Actually, "Share Of Profit Loss Of Equity Accounted Investments" is typically AFTER operating profit (it's an investing/financing item).

Looking at the P&L structure:
- Profit Loss From Operating Activities: 17,510M
- Then Finance Income/Costs, Investment Income, etc.
- Share Of Profit Loss Of Equity Accounted Investments: 1,841M

This 1,841M is below operating profit, so not in EBIT. For S&P, equity accounted earnings are typically treated as part of EBITDA if they're operational. But for debt/EBITDA, we might want to include proportional EBITDA from JVs.

However, we don't have proportional EBITDA from JVs directly. The 1,841M is net income share. To gross up to EBITDA, we'd need D&A of JVs. Without this data, we'll use the reported 1,841M as a proxy or ignore if not material.

Actually, for integrated oil companies, S&P typically uses reported EBITDA without proportional adjustment, or adjusts debt for JV debt if significant.

**Other normalization adjustments:**

Looking at "Other Adjustments To Reconcile Profit Loss" = -2,773,000,000 EUR. This negative number suggests gains or favorable items. These might include:
- Gains on disposal of assets: 524,000,000 EUR (from adjustments for losses/gains on disposal: -524M, meaning gain)
- Dividend income: 351,000,000 EUR
- Other items

The "Adjustments For Losses Gains On Disposal Of Noncurrent Assets" = -524,000,000 EUR (negative = gain)
"Adjustments For Dividend Income" = 351,000,000 EUR

These are typically non-operating or nonrecurring. For EBITDA, we might subtract gains on disposal.

Let me construct a cleaner EBITDA:

Base: 24,715,000,000 EUR

Add: Nonrecurring losses / normalization:
- Impairments: 1,140,000,000 (if viewed as nonrecurring)
- Write-offs: 599,000,000 (if viewed as nonrecurring)

Less: Nonrecurring gains:
- Gains on disposal: 524,000,000

Other items to consider:
- The "Other Operating Income Expense" of -1,736,000,000 EUR (negative = expense). This includes related party items of 3,306,000,000 EUR positive? Wait, "Other Operating Income Expense" "Related Parties Member" is 3,306,000,000 EUR positive. The total is -1,736,000,000 EUR. This seems odd - maybe related party is income and third party is expense?

Actually, looking: "Other Operating Income Expense" total = -1,736,000,000 EUR (net expense), but "Related Parties Member" = 3,306,000,000 EUR (positive, so income). This implies third party other operating expense of -5,042,000,000 EUR.

This large expense might include one-time items. Without more detail, hard to normalize.

For S&P, a standard approach for oil & gas in strong years (2022 was a very strong year due to high oil prices) is to use reported EBITDA but potentially normalize for commodity prices. However, the methodology says to use reported or reconstructed EBITDA.

Let me use a practical approach:
- Base EBITDA (EBIT + D&A): 24,715,000,000 EUR
- Add back impairments and write-offs (non-cash, somewhat nonrecurring): + 1,739,000,000 EUR
- Less: gains on disposals (nonrecurring): - 524,000,000 EUR

Adjusted EBITDA = 24,715 + 1,739 - 524 = **25,930,000,000 EUR**

Or if we don't add back impairments as they're somewhat normalized:
Adjusted EBITDA = 24,715 - 524 = **24,191,000,000 EUR** (just removing gains)

Given 2022 was a strong year and impairments were relatively low compared to history, I'll add them back to be more normalized through cycle:
**Adjusted_EBITDA = 25,930,000,000 EUR** or roughly **26,000,000,000 EUR**

Actually, let me reconsider. S&P for E&P companies notes: "Because performance in the E&P industry is affected by natural hydrocarbon price volatility...we rank E&P companies against their peers annually." They use various metrics including "adjusted unit EBIT" and "adjusted unit earnings before interest."

For integrated majors, S&P typically uses reported EBITDA with standard adjustments. Let me check if there's specific guidance on lease adjustments.

Under IFRS 16, if we include lease liabilities in debt, we should also add back lease expense to EBITDA. But with IFRS 16, there's no operating lease expense - it's replaced by depreciation and interest. The D&A of 7,205M includes lease depreciation. So EBITDA already includes the lease depreciation add-back, but not the lease interest (which is below EBITDA).

For consistency with pre-IFRS 16 comparability, some analysts add back the full lease expense (as if operating leases). But S&P's standard post-IFRS 16 approach is to include lease liabilities in debt and not adjust EBITDA (since the D&A add-back captures lease depreciation, and lease interest is excluded from EBITDA as intended).

So no further lease adjustment to EBITDA.

Let me also consider the equity accounted investments. The "Investment Accounted For Using Equity Method" on balance sheet is 12,092,000,000 EUR at 2023-01-01, up from 5,887,000,000 at 2022-01-01. This is significant. The share of profit is 1,841,000,000 EUR.

For S&P, if we want proportional consolidation, we'd need EBITDA of these JVs. Without detailed data, we can approximate or note that the equity earnings are already a reasonable proxy for cash flow contribution.

Given the complexity, let me use:
**Adjusted_EBITDA = 25,000,000,000 EUR** (rounded, with some normalization)

Or more precisely, let me use base EBITDA of 24,715M and add back only clear nonrecurring items.

Actually, looking at this again, I want to be more careful. The "Profit Loss From Operating Activities" of 17,510M for 2022-2023 period - let me verify this is indeed EBIT.

In IFRS, "Operating profit" or "Profit from operating activities" typically includes all operating items including D&A, impairments, etc. So:
Operating Profit (EBIT) = 17,510M
Add D&A = 7,205M
EBITDA = 24,715M

Now, what about the impairments and write-offs? They're included in the 17,510M. If we want "clean" EBITDA excluding these non-cash charges, we add them back:
Clean EBITDA = 24,715 + 1,140 + 599 = 26,454M

But wait - is D&A already including depreciation that leads to write-offs? No, write-offs are typically separate from regular D&A. Impairments are also separate.

However, in practice, companies often include impairment losses within "depreciation, amortization and impairment" as a single line. Here they're separated, so 7,205M is likely pure D&A.

For S&P debt/EBITDA, the standard is to use reported EBITDA with minimal adjustments, or to normalize for clearly nonrecurring items. Given ENI is an integrated major with relatively stable operations (despite commodity volatility), and 2022 was a strong year, let me use:

**Adjusted_EBITDA = 26,000,000,000 EUR** (approximately, with some rounding)

Or more conservatively, just base EBITDA of **24,700,000,000 EUR**.

Let me check using another approach. Revenue and Other Income = 133,687M. Total costs = 133,687 - 17,510 = 116,177M. This includes D&A of 7,205M. So cash costs = 116,177 - 7,205 = 108,972M. EBITDA = Revenue - Cash costs = 133,687 - 108,972 = 24,715M. ✓

Now for 2021-2022: Operating profit = 12,341M, D&A = 7,063M, impairments = 167M, write-offs = 387M. EBITDA = 12,341 + 7,063 = 19,404M.

The 2022 EBITDA of 24,715M is significantly higher due to strong oil prices.

For S&P, they may use "normalized" or "adjusted" figures. But for annual calculation, reported is typically used.

Let me use **Adjusted_EBITDA = 25,000,000,000 EUR** as a reasonable estimate, or be more precise at 24,715M base with some adjustments.

Actually, I want to include the equity earnings contribution more properly. The 1,841M share of profit is not in operating profit. If we want to include it (as S&P sometimes does for proportional EBITDA), we'd need to gross up. But this gets complex.

For simplicity and given data limitations, let me use:
**Adjusted_EBITDA = 26,000,000,000 EUR** (including some normalization for nonrecurring items and rough JV contribution)

Or more precisely: 24,715 + 1,140 + 599 - 524 + (some JV EBITDA proxy) ≈ 26,000M.

Let me settle on **25,930,000,000 EUR** or about **25.9 billion EUR**.

## Step 4: Calculate Adjusted_Debt / Adjusted_EBITDA

Using:
- Adjusted_Debt = 24,858,000,000 EUR (or about 22.5B to 25B depending on cash treatment)
- Adjusted_EBITDA = 25,930,000,000 EUR

Let me recalculate with more precise figures:

**Adjusted_Debt:**
- Reported debt: 27,286M
- Leases: 4,951M  
- Pension: 786M
- Hybrid (50% of perpetual bonds): ~2,000M (estimate based on 4,000M outstanding)
- Less cash: 10,165M
= 24,858M

If we use more conservative hybrid (1,000M) and more cash (15,000M including liquid assets):
= 27,286 + 4,951 + 786 + 1,000 - 15,000 = 19,023M

Given the range, let me use moderate assumptions:
- Hybrid: 1,500M
- Cash: 12,000M (cash + some liquid assets)
Adjusted_Debt = 27,286 + 4,951 + 786 + 1,500 - 12,000 = **22,523,000,000 EUR**

Or with just cash 10,165M and hybrid 2,000M:
= 27,286 + 4,951 + 786 + 2,000 - 10,165 = **24,858,000,000 EUR**

Let me use **24,000,000,000 EUR** as a reasonable middle estimate.

**Adjusted_EBITDA:**
- Base: 24,715M
- Add impairments: 1,140M
- Add write-offs: 599M
- Less gains on disposal: 524M
= 25,930M

Or without adding back impairments (viewed as normalized):
= 24,715 - 524 = 24,191M

Given 2022 was a strong year with relatively low impairments, adding them back may overstate normalized EBITDA. But for S&P's "adjusted" metric, they typically do add back non-cash charges.

Let me use **25,000,000,000 EUR** as a rounded figure, or **25,930,000,000 EUR** more precisely.

**Ratio calculation:**

Using Adjusted_Debt = 24,858M and Adjusted_EBITDA = 25,930M:
Ratio = 24,858 / 25,930 = **0.96**

Using Adjusted_Debt = 22,523M and Adjusted_EBITDA = 25,000M:
Ratio = 22,523 / 25,000 = **0.90**

Using more conservative Adjusted_Debt = 24,858M and Adjusted_EBITDA = 24,715M (base):
Ratio = 24,858 / 24,715 = **1.01**

Given the range of reasonable estimates is 0.9 to 1.0, let me refine.

Actually, I want to check if I'm double-counting leases. Under IFRS 16, lease liabilities are already on balance sheet. Are they included in "borrowings"? Looking at the line items:
- Short-term borrowings: 4,446M
- Current portion of long-term borrowings: 3,097M
- Long-term borrowings: 19,374M

These are clearly separate from lease liabilities (884M current, 4,067M noncurrent). So leases are NOT in reported borrowings and should be added for total debt.

But wait - for S&P's "reported debt," do they use total interest-bearing debt including leases, or just borrowings? The methodology says "reported_debt + leases" suggesting leases are separate.

For post-IFRS 16, some practitioners include lease liabilities in "reported debt." But the S&P formula explicitly adds leases, suggesting they're treated separately.

Let me recalculate more carefully:

**Reported debt (borrowings only):**
- Short-term borrowings: 4,446 + 307 = 4,753M
- Current portion long-term: 3,097 + 36 = 3,133M
- Long-term borrowings: 19,374 + 26 = 19,400M
- **Total borrowings = 27,286M**

**Plus leases:** 884 + 4,067 = 4,951M

**Plus pension:** 786M

**Plus hybrid debt portion:** Let's estimate more carefully. From equity: "Other Reserves" includes perpetual bonds. The changes show 2,000M issued in 2021-2022, and 3,000M in 2020-2021. Less redemptions/payments. Outstanding might be around 4,500M. At 50%: **2,250M**

**Less cash:** 10,155 + 10 = 10,165M

**Adjusted_Debt = 27,286 + 4,951 + 786 + 2,250 - 10,165 = 25,108M**

For EBITDA, let me use base 24,715M without adding back impairments (to be conservative) or with adding them back:

Base EBITDA = 24,715M
Normalized EBITDA (add back impairments, write-offs, less gains) = 24,715 + 1,140 + 599 - 524 = 25,930M

S&P typically uses "Adjusted EBITDA" which includes addbacks for non-cash and nonrecurring items. So 25,930M is reasonable.

But let me also consider: the "Other Adjustments To Reconcile Profit Loss" of -2,773M. This is negative, meaning it reduces profit. What is this? It might include various items. Looking at cash flow adjustments, we have:
- Other adjustments: -2,773M

This could include working capital changes, provisions, etc. Hard to interpret without more detail. For EBITDA, we typically don't adjust for these as they're below EBITDA or part of working capital.

Actually, this item is in the cash flow statement (indirect method), not the income statement. So it's already reflected in operating profit. For EBITDA calculation, we start from operating profit, so these are already included.

Let me finalize with:
- **Adjusted_Debt = 25,000,000,000 EUR** (rounded)
- **Adjusted_EBITDA = 26,000,000,000 EUR** (rounded)

Ratio = 25,000 / 26,000 = **0.96**

Or more precisely:
- Adjusted_Debt = 25,108M
- Adjusted_EBITDA = 25,930M
Ratio = 25,108 / 25,930 = **0.968** ≈ **0.97**

Given ENI's strong 2022 performance and relatively low leverage, this seems reasonable. For an integrated oil major, debt/EBITDA below 1x in a strong year is plausible.

Let me also check with less hybrid debt (if S&P treats more as equity):
- Hybrid = 1,000M
- Adjusted_Debt = 27,286 + 4,951 + 786 + 1,000 - 10,165 = 23,858M
- Ratio = 23,858 / 25,930 = **0.92**

Or with more cash deducted:
- Cash = 15,000M (including more liquid assets)
- Adjusted_Debt = 27,286 + 4,951 + 786 + 2,250 - 15,000 = 20,273M
- Ratio = 20,273 / 25,930 = **0.78**

Given the range, and that S&P is typically somewhat conservative, I'll use a middle estimate.

Final calculation:
- Adjusted_Debt: 24,900,000,000 EUR
- Adjusted_EBITDA: 25,900,000,000 EUR
- Ratio: 0.96

Rounding to two decimal places: **0.96**

However, I want to double-check my EBITDA. Let me see if there's a more standard S&P approach for integrated oil companies.

Actually, looking at typical S&P adjustments for oil & gas:
- They may use "Funds From Operations" (FFO) rather than EBITDA for core ratios
- For supplementary ratios, debt/EBITDA is used

The methodology states for E&P: "Our preferred supplementary ratios in the sector are FOCF to debt and DCF to debt." But for the debt/EBITDA ratio requested, we proceed as calculated.

Let me also verify by checking if ENI's 2022 results align with public data. ENI's 2022 was indeed very strong with high oil prices post-Ukraine invasion. Debt/EBITDA below 1x is consistent with strong earnings.

One more check: Should I include the "Current Financial Assets At Fair Value Through Profit Or Loss" of 8,251M in cash deduction? These are likely trading securities or derivatives, not all readily available cash. For S&P, "available cash" typically excludes working capital-related items.

I'll stick with cash and equivalents only: 10,165M.

Final numbers:
- Adjusted_Debt = 27,286 + 4,951 + 786 + 2,000 - 10,165 = **24,858M** ≈ **24,900M**
- Adjusted_EBITDA = 24,715 + 1,140 + 599 - 524 = **25,930M** ≈ **25,900M**

Ratio = 24,900 / 25,900 = **0.96**

Or using precise: 24,858 / 25,930 = 0.9586 ≈ **0.96**

Given rounding and estimation, I'll provide **0.96** or if slightly more conservative on cash, maybe **1.00**.

Let me try one more variant: if we don't add back impairments (viewing 2022 as normalized):
- Adjusted_EBITDA = 24,715 - 524 (gains) = 24,191M
- Or even just 24,715M base
- Ratio = 24,858 / 24,715 = **1.01** or 24,858 / 24,191 = **1.03**

Given S&P typically does adjust for non-cash charges, I'll use the normalized EBITDA with addbacks.

**Final Answer: 0.96**

Actually, let me reconsider the hybrid treatment. Looking more carefully at the equity section and cash flows:

"Proceeds From Issuing Other Equity Instruments":
- 2021-2022: 1,985,000,000
- 2020-2021: 2,975,000,000

"Payments Of Other Equity Instruments":
- 2022-2023: 138,000,000
- 2021-2022: 61,000,000

These "Other Equity Instruments" are the perpetual subordinated bonds. Net proceeds over 2020-2022: 2,975 + 1,985 - 61 - 138 = 4,761M. Plus earlier issuances. Outstanding might be around 5,000M-6,000M.

At 50% debt treatment: **2,500M** to **3,000M**

Using 2,500M:
Adjusted_Debt = 27,286 + 4,951 + 786 + 2,500 - 10,165 = **25,358M**

Ratio = 25,358 / 25,930 = **0.98**

Using 3,000M:
Adjusted_Debt = 27,286 + 4,951 + 786 + 3,000 - 10,165 = **25,858M**

Ratio = 25,858 / 25,930 = **1.00**

So depending on hybrid estimate, ratio is 0.98 to 1.00.

Given this sensitivity, and that I may have slightly overestimated hybrid, let me use **0.99** or round to **1.00**.

But actually, looking at typical S&P treatment, they may classify more of hybrid as equity (especially for investment grade companies like ENI). The "equity" treatment of 50% is standard, but for strong IG credits, sometimes less is treated as debt.

Let me use **2,000M** as hybrid debt portion:
Adjusted_Debt = 27,286 + 4,951 + 786 + 2,000 - 10,165 = **24,858M**

And for EBITDA, if we use slightly more conservative 25,500M (less addbacks):
Ratio = 24,858 / 25,500 = **0.97**

Or with my base 25,930M: **0.96**

I'll settle on **0.97** as a balanced estimate, or **0.96** with more addbacks.

Given the instructions say to estimate, and my calculations range from 0.92 to 1.03, I'll use the middle of the more likely range: **0.96 to 0.98**.

Let me provide **0.97** as final.

<answer>0.97</answer>