**Reasoning**

| Issuer | Business profile | Investment‑grade & rating outlook | Existing hybrid‑capital (refinancing need) | Credit‑metric trend | Leverage impact of new hybrid | Cost of hybrid vs. debt | Overall suitability |
|--------|------------------|----------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|----------------------|------------------------------|------------------------|----------------------|
| **A – EDP, S.A.** | Integrated utility (generation, distribution, supply) with regulated‑like cash flows; energy‑infrastructure type. | BBB‑area, stable outlook but rising net debt (≈ 3.8× Net Debt/EBITDA) creates some rating pressure. | No existing hybrid to refinance. | Net debt grew from 2022 to 2023; profit growth modest – a moderate deteriorating trend. | A hybrid would increase equity‑like treatment, reducing adjusted leverage and improving rating headroom. | Likely marginally higher than senior debt but still competitive for a utility. | **Strongly Suitable** – regulated energy infrastructure, investment‑grade, strong capital‑market access, and a hybrid would materially improve leverage/rating headroom. |
| **B – A2A Energia S.p.A.** | Partially regulated Italian energy utility; more industrial than fully regulated. | Investment‑grade (BBB) but profit fell in 2022; leverage is low (≈ 2.6× Net Debt/EBITDA). | No existing hybrid. | Metrics are stable, no clear downgrade risk. | Low leverage; a hybrid would only marginally improve ratios and would be opportunistic rather than essential. | Pricing would be more sensitive to sector/volatility; cost advantage vs. senior debt is limited. | **Marginally Suitable** – opportunistic issuance, moderate rating benefit, not a core funding tool. |
| **C – TenneT Holding B.V.** | Regulated transmission‑system operator (quasi‑infrastructure) with highly visible cash flows. | BBB‑area rating (likely BBB+), but high net‑debt (≈ 13 bn) and negative net profit create rating pressure; cash‑flow metrics are key for S&P. | **Has hybrid capital (€ 2.125 bn)** – likely a hybrid bond with a call date within the next 18 months, giving a clear refinancing motive. | Net‑debt/FFO ≈ 11×; negative net profit signals deteriorating metrics – a hybrid is needed to preserve rating. | Issuing a new hybrid would be treated as equity, materially improving adjusted leverage and providing rating headroom. | Cost of hybrid is marginal relative to its senior debt (government‑backed, low cost of debt). | **Strongly Suitable** – regulated, high credibility, existing hybrid requiring refinancing, deteriorating metrics, and a hybrid would markedly improve leverage/rating outlook. |

**Priority ranking**

1. **TenneT (C)** – Clear refinancing need for an existing hybrid, deteriorating credit metrics, and a hybrid would materially improve adjusted leverage and rating headroom.  
2. **EDP (A)** – Strongly suitable utility with investment‑grade profile, rising leverage, and a hybrid would give meaningful rating support; only lacks an existing hybrid to refinance.  
3. **A2A (B)** – Marginally suitable; stable metrics, low leverage, and any hybrid issuance would be opportunistic rather than necessary.

<answer>C,A,B</answer>