To estimate the S&P-adjusted FFO-to-debt ratio for VERBUND AG for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022, we follow the workflow outlined below.

### Step 1: Identify the Relevant Industry

VERBUND AG is an Austrian electricity company. Its business model involves the generation, transmission, and sale of electricity. The provided text describes three relevant sectors: "Regulated Utilities," "Unregulated Power And Gas," and "Oil And Gas Exploration And Production."

*   **Regulated Utilities:** This sector applies to companies providing essential infrastructure services shielded from competition and subject to comprehensive regulation. VERBUND operates in Austria, where the grid business is regulated. However, a significant portion of its revenue comes from electricity generation and trading, which are often exposed to market prices (merchant risk).
*   **Unregulated Power And Gas:** This sector applies to companies that do not benefit from protective rate regulation for their generation or supply activities. The text notes that unregulated power companies may benefit from policy support but are exposed to market volatility.

Looking at VERBUND's revenue breakdown for 2022:
*   Total Revenue: 10,346,088,000 EUR
*   Revenue From Sale Of Electricity: 8,747,422,000 EUR (~84.5%)
*   Grid Revenue: 1,309,254,000 EUR (~12.7%)

While VERBUND has a regulated grid component, the majority of its revenue is from the sale of electricity, which in the European context (especially for a generator like VERBUND) is largely exposed to wholesale market prices, although often hedged or supported by long-term contracts. However, S&P typically classifies integrated utilities with significant regulated assets or strong regulatory frameworks in stable jurisdictions like Austria under **Regulated Utilities** if the regulatory advantage is strong. Alternatively, if the generation is predominantly merchant, it might fall under Unregulated Power.

Let's look at the "Volatility tables" section for Regulated Utilities. It states: "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...". VERBUND's grid revenue is only ~13%. It does not meet the "two-thirds" threshold for low volatility. It might meet the criteria for the "medial volatility table" if it derives 50% or more from regulated activities with adequate advantage, or 1/3 from strong regulated activities. Given the mix, and the fact that VERBUND is a major hydroelectric generator (low variable cost, but merchant price exposure), it often straddles the line. However, for the purpose of calculating the *ratio* itself (FFO/Debt), the industry classification primarily affects *which* volatility table is used for rating assignment, not necessarily the *definition* of FFO and Adjusted Debt, unless specific sector adjustments (like purchased power methodology or securitized debt deconsolidation) are required.

The prompt asks to estimate the ratio based on the facts. The definitions for FFO and Adjusted Debt are provided in the general workflow steps, with modifications for industry.
*   **Regulated Utilities:** Mentions adjustments for purchased power contracts (debt-like obligations) and seasonal working capital.
*   **Unregulated Power:** Mentions adjustments for long-term PPAs.

Without specific details on the nature of VERBUND's contracts (e.g., whether they are debt-like purchased power obligations), we will stick to the standard S&P Corporate Methodology definitions for FFO and Debt, using the reported financial data. VERBUND is generally considered a utility. We will calculate FFO and Adjusted Debt using the standard components available in the report.

### Step 2: Estimate Adjusted EBITDA

**Formula:** `Adjusted_EBITDA = EBITDA + adjustment_leases + nonrecurring_losses - nonrecurring_gains ± other_adjustments`

From the data for the period 2022-01-01 to 2023-01-01 (Fiscal Year 2022):
*   **EBITDA:** 3,160,679,000 EUR

**Adjustments:**
1.  **Leases:** Under IFRS 16, lease expenses are included in EBITDA (as depreciation and interest are below EBITDA). S&P typically adds back the "interest" portion of lease payments to FFO, but for Adjusted EBITDA, the reported EBITDA is usually the starting point. Sometimes, if EBITDA is reported after lease depreciation, no adjustment is needed for EBITDA itself, but FFO is adjusted. However, standard S&P FFO calculation starts with EBITDA. Let's look for specific lease data.
    *   Right-of-use Assets (2023-01-01): 146,613,000 EUR.
    *   Payments of Lease Liabilities (Financing): 11,447,000 EUR.
    *   Typically, S&P adds back the interest portion of lease payments to FFO. The principal repayment is a financing cash flow. The depreciation of ROU assets is a non-cash expense already added back to get to EBITDA (if starting from Net Income) or included in EBITDA (if starting from Operating Profit). The reported EBITDA is 3,160,679,000. We assume this is the standard IFRS EBITDA.
    *   Are there non-recurring items?
        *   Impairment Loss: 197,761,000 EUR.
        *   Reversal of Impairment Loss: 125,973,000 EUR.
        *   Net Impairment: 197,761,000 - 125,973,000 = 71,788,000 EUR (Loss).
        *   Impairments are typically considered non-recurring or restructuring costs and are added back to EBITDA for S&P Adjusted EBITDA.
        *   "Valuation And Realisation of Energy derivatives": -857,961,000 EUR. This is a significant mark-to-market loss. In utility ratings, derivative valuations can be volatile. S&P often normalizes earnings by removing mark-to-market volatility if it doesn't reflect cash flow or long-term economics. However, without explicit instruction to exclude it, and given it's part of operating activities, we must be careful. Often, "Adjusted EBITDA" in utility contexts excludes unrealized mark-to-market gains/losses on energy derivatives. Let's check the cash flow. The change in derivative assets/liabilities is huge.
        *   Let's look at the "Profit Loss From Operating Activities": 2,626,196,000.
        *   EBITDA is 3,160,679,000.
        *   Depreciation is 462,694,000.
        *   Operating Profit = EBITDA - Depreciation - Impairments (net)?
        *   3,160,679,000 - 462,694,000 - 71,788,000 (Net Impairment) = 2,626,197,000. This matches the "Profit Loss From Operating Activities" (2,626,196,000) closely (1k rounding diff). So the reported EBITDA already includes the impact of the derivative valuation (-857M) and the net impairment.

    *   **S&P Adjustment for Derivatives:** For utilities, S&P often adjusts for mark-to-market (MTM) volatility on energy derivatives. The loss is 857,961,000. If we consider this non-cash or volatile, we might add it back. However, the prompt asks to follow the baseline formula. The baseline formula mentions `nonrecurring_losses`. Is MTM on derivatives non-recurring? It's recurring in nature but volatile. S&P Global Ratings' criteria for utilities often state: "We adjust EBITDA for... unrealized gains/losses on energy derivatives." Let's assume we should add back the unrealized portion. The line item is "Valuation And Realisation". "Realisation" implies cash. "Valuation" implies non-cash. The total is -857M. In 2021, it was -269M. In 2022, energy prices spiked, causing massive MTM losses on short positions or hedging. These are often reversed in subsequent periods. It is standard practice in S&P utility analysis to add back unrealized MTM movements. Without a split, we might have to estimate or use the full amount if deemed "non-recurring" in the context of normalized earnings. Given the magnitude and the nature of 2022 energy markets, treating the derivative valuation loss as an adjustment is prudent for an "Adjusted" metric. Let's add back the full 857,961,000 EUR as a normalization adjustment for volatility/non-cash impact.
    *   **Impairment:** Add back net impairment of 71,788,000 EUR.

    Let's refine the Adjusted EBITDA calculation:
    Reported EBITDA: 3,160,679,000
    + Net Impairment Loss: 71,788,000 (197,761,000 - 125,973,000)
    + Derivative Valuation Loss (Normalization): 857,961,000 (Assuming this is largely unrealized/volatile and adjusted per utility norms)
    
    *Self-Correction/Refinement:* In many S&P utility cases, if the derivative positions are hedging physical assets, the volatility is part of the business. However, the 2022 spike was exceptional. If we do *not* adjust for derivatives, the FFO will be very low. If we do, it will be higher. Let's look at Cash Flow from Operations (CFO).
    CFO (Cash Flows From Used In Operating Activities): 2,019,859,000.
    This includes changes in working capital and derivatives.
    
    Let's stick to the stricter definition of FFO provided in the prompt's workflow: `FFO = Adjusted_EBITDA - cash_interest - cash_taxes`.
    
    Let's calculate Adjusted EBITDA conservatively first (only adding back impairments, which are clearly non-cash/non-recurring in the immediate sense, and potentially lease interest if separated).
    
    Actually, a common S&P adjustment for utilities is to add back the *interest* component of leases to FFO, not EBITDA. EBITDA is usually taken as reported or with minor non-recurring adjustments.
    
    Let's assume **Adjusted EBITDA** = Reported EBITDA + Net Impairments.
    Adjusted EBITDA = 3,160,679,000 + 71,788,000 = 3,232,467,000 EUR.
    *(Note: If we added back the derivative loss, it would be ~4.09B. Given the "Realisation" part of the label, some of it is cash. Adding back the whole amount might overstate. Let's look at the Cash Flow statement. The change in derivative assets was +548M (inflow/reduction of asset) and liabilities -1.36B (outflow/reduction of liability). The net cash impact is complex. Usually, S&P uses "Funds From Operations" which starts with Net Income or EBITDA and adjusts. Let's try to derive FFO from Net Income as a cross-check.)*
    
    Alternative FFO Calculation (Standard S&P):
    FFO = Net Income + Depreciation + Amortization + Impairments (net) + Deferred Taxes + Other Non-Cash Items - Gains on Asset Sales.
    
    Let's use the provided Net Income and adjust:
    Profit Loss Attributable To Owners Of Parent: 1,717,012,000
    + Depreciation and Amortisation: 462,694,000
    + Net Impairment Loss: 71,788,000 (197,761,000 - 125,973,000)
    - Reversal of Impairment is already netted above.
    + Deferred Tax Expense?
      Income Tax Expense Continuing Operations: 583,352,000.
      We need the cash tax paid.
      Cash Taxes Paid: The report lists "Income Taxes Paid Classified As Operating Activities": 343,100,000 EUR.
    
    Let's use the `FFO = Adjusted_EBITDA - cash_interest - cash_taxes` formula as requested.
    
    We need **Cash Interest**.
    Interest Expense (P&L): 101,703,000.
    Interest Paid (Cash Flow): 36,100,000 EUR.
    S&P uses **Cash Interest** paid.
    So, Cash Interest = 36,100,000 EUR.
    
    We need **Cash Taxes**.
    Income Taxes Paid: 343,100,000 EUR.
    
    Now, back to **Adjusted EBITDA**.
    If we use Reported EBITDA: 3,160,679,000.
    Adjustments:
    1.  **Impairments:** Add back net impairment of 71,788,000.
    2.  **Derivatives:** The loss of 857,961,000 is significant. In 2022, VERBUND reported that this was due to mark-to-market valuations. S&P typically adjusts for these in regulated/unregulated utilities to reflect normalized earnings. Let's assume we add it back.
    3.  **Leases:** S&P adds back the interest portion of lease payments to FFO. The lease payment was 11,447,000. The interest portion is not explicitly broken out in the summary, but we can estimate it or assume it's small. However, the formula `FFO = Adjusted_EBITDA - cash_interest` implies we subtract *all* cash interest. If we use Reported EBITDA, lease interest is *inside* EBITDA? No, lease interest is below EBITDA in IFRS (finance cost). Lease *depreciation* is below EBITDA? No, EBITDA is Earnings Before Interest, Tax, Depreciation, Amortization. In IFRS 16, depreciation of ROU and interest on lease liability are below EBITDA. So EBITDA is *before* lease interest and lease depreciation. Therefore, no adjustment to EBITDA for leases is needed for the interest component. The interest is subtracted later as "cash_interest".
    
    So, `Adjusted_EBITDA` = 3,160,679,000 + 71,788,000 (Impairments) + 857,961,000 (Derivative Normalization) = 4,090,428,000 EUR.
    
    *Wait*, if we add back the derivative loss, we are assuming it's non-cash or non-recurring. The label says "Valuation AND Realisation". Realised losses are cash. If we add back realised losses, we overstate FFO.
    Let's look at the Cash Flow from Operations again: 2,019,859,000.
    CFO = Net Income + D&A + Changes in WC + Changes in Derivatives etc.
    
    Let's try calculating FFO directly from CFO, which is often a good proxy or starting point for S&P FFO.
    S&P FFO = CFO - Changes in Working Capital (sometimes) + Interest Paid + Taxes Paid?
    Actually, S&P defines FFO as:
    FFO = Net Income + Depreciation + Amortization + Impairments + Deferred Taxes + Other Non-Cash Items - Gains on Sales of Assets.
    
    Let's calculate FFO using the Net Income approach (more robust than guessing EBITDA adjustments for derivatives):
    
    **Net Income (Attributable to Parent):** 1,717,012,000
    **Add: Depreciation & Amortization:** 462,694,000
    **Add: Net Impairment Loss:** 71,788,000 (197,761,000 - 125,973,000)
    **Add: Deferred Tax:**
    Total Tax Expense: 583,352,000
    Cash Tax Paid: 343,100,000
    Deferred Tax Expense = Total - Cash = 240,252,000. (Add back deferred tax to Net Income to get pre-tax cash flow equivalent? No, FFO adds back deferred taxes because they are non-cash).
    So, add 240,252,000.
    **Adjust for Derivatives:** The 857M loss reduced Net Income. If it is non-cash (valuation), we add it back. If it is cash (realised), we don't.
    Let's check the Balance Sheet change in Derivative Liabilities/Assets.
    Current Derivative Liabilities: 3,313,346,000 (2022) vs 215,091,000 (2021). Increase of ~3.1B.
    Noncurrent Derivative Liabilities: 734,780,000 (2022) vs 57,342,000 (2021). Increase of ~0.68B.
    Total Derivative Liabilities Increase: ~3.78B.
    Current Derivative Assets: 1,972,632,000 (2022) vs 144,338,000 (2021). Increase of ~1.83B.
    Noncurrent Derivative Assets: 437,341,000 (2022) vs 115,946,000 (2021). Increase of ~0.32B.
    Total Derivative Assets Increase: ~2.15B.
    
    Net Derivative Liability Position Increase: 3.78B - 2.15B = 1.63B.
    This increase in net liability corresponds to the loss. Since the liability increased, it means the company owes more in the future (or has to post collateral). This is largely a valuation adjustment (non-cash until settled/margin calls). Margin calls would be working capital changes.
    S&P typically adds back unrealized MTM. Given the scale, it's likely mostly unrealized valuation of long-term contracts.
    Let's assume the full 857,961,000 is added back to FFO as a non-cash/normalization adjustment.
    
    **Other Items:**
    Share of Profit of Associates: 4,293,000. (Equity income is non-cash if not distributed. We subtract equity income and add dividends received).
    Dividends Received (Operating): 29,900,000.
    Adjustment: Subtract Share of Profit (4,293,000) and Add Dividends Received (29,900,000)?
    Standard S&P FFO: Start with Net Income. Subtract equity income from associates. Add dividends received from associates.
    
    Let's assemble the FFO:
    1.  Net Income (Parent): 1,717,012,000
    2.  + Depreciation & Amortization: 462,694,000
    3.  + Net Impairment: 71,788,000
    4.  + Deferred Tax: 240,252,000 (Calculated as Tax Exp 583,352,000 - Cash Tax 343,100,000)
    5.  + Derivative Valuation Loss: 857,961,000
    6.  - Share of Profit of Associates: (4,293,000)
    7.  + Dividends from Associates (if included in Net Income? No, equity method). Add Dividends Received from Associates? The line "Dividends Received Classified As Operating Activities" is 29,900,000. This likely includes dividends from associates. Since we subtracted the equity income (4.3M), we should add the cash dividends received (29.9M).
    8.  +/- Other non-cash items?
        "Other Adjustments For Noncash Items": 31,340,000. (Add back).
        "Adjustments For Losses Gains On Disposal": 4,914,000. (This is in the cash flow subtotal, likely a gain/loss adjustment). If it's a gain, subtract. If loss, add. The label is "Adjustments For Losses Gains...". In the cash flow, it's added to Net Income?
        Let's check the Cash Flow Subtotal logic.
        Subtotal (before WC) = 2,516,130,000.
        Net Income = 1,948,767,000 (Total) or 1,717,012,000 (Parent).
        The Cash Flow statement usually starts with Profit Before Tax or Net Income.
        Let's trust the `FFO = Adjusted_EBITDA - Cash Interest - Cash Taxes` formula provided in the prompt, as it simplifies the derivation.
    
    **Recalculating via the Prompt's Formula:**
    
    **1. Adjusted EBITDA:**
    Reported EBITDA: 3,160,679,000
    + Net Impairment: 71,788,000
    + Derivative Loss (Normalization): 857,961,000
    **Adjusted EBITDA** = 4,090,428,000 EUR.
    
    **2. Cash Interest:**
    Interest Paid: 36,100,000 EUR.
    
    **3. Cash Taxes:**
    Income Taxes Paid: 343,100,000 EUR.
    
    **4. FFO:**
    FFO = 4,090,428,000 - 36,100,000 - 343,100,000
    FFO = 3,711,228,000 EUR.
    
    *Sanity Check:*
    Does this FFO make sense?
    CFO was 2,019,859,000.
    FFO is usually higher than CFO because CFO deducts cash taxes and cash interest and changes in WC.
    FFO ~ 3.7B.
    CFO ~ 2.0B.
    Difference ~ 1.7B.
    Cash Taxes (0.34B) + Cash Interest (0.036B) = 0.38B.
    Changes in Working Capital:
    Inventories: -73M
    Receivables: -192M
    Payables: +339M
    Derivatives (Asset): +548M (Inflow)
    Derivatives (Liability): -1,360M (Outflow)
    Net WC Change from Derivatives: -812M.
    Other WC: +74M.
    Total WC Change: ~ -738M.
    CFO = FFO - Cash Tax - Cash Interest - WC Changes?
    2.02B = 3.71B - 0.34B - 0.036B - WC?
    2.02 = 3.33 - WC.
    WC = 1.31B.
    The derivative cash flows (margin calls) are huge. The "Adjustments For Decrease Increase In Derivative Financial Liabilities" is -1,360,527,000. This is a cash outflow.
    If we added back the 857M derivative *loss* to EBITDA, but the cash outflow was 1.36B (plus asset changes), there is a mismatch. The loss is accounting (accrual), the cash flow is settlement.
    However, S&P FFO is a *cash-flow-like* metric but adds back non-cash items. The margin calls are cash outflows, effectively reducing FFO if they are considered operating. But often, collateral postings are financing or investing? No, usually operating for utilities.
    If the derivative loss is added back, but the cash wasn't spent (it's just valuation), then FFO is high. If the cash *was* spent (margin calls), FFO should be lower.
    In 2022, energy companies faced massive margin calls. These are cash outflows.
    If the 857M loss is largely unrealized, adding it back is correct for "Funds From Operations" which aims to capture sustainable cash generation. The margin calls are temporary liquidity squeezes, often netted out over time. S&P often adjusts for this volatility.
    
    Let's proceed with **FFO = 3,711,228,000 EUR**.

### Step 3: Estimate Adjusted Debt

**Formula:** `Adjusted_Debt = (reported_debt + leases + pension_deficit + guarantees + hybrid_debt_portion + other_debt_like_items) - eligible_cash`

1.  **Reported Debt:**
    *   Noncurrent Financial Liabilities: 2,844,559,000 EUR
    *   Current Financial Liabilities: 1,109,297,000 EUR
    *   Total Reported Debt = 3,953,856,000 EUR

2.  **Leases:**
    *   S&P treats leases as debt. We need the present value of lease liabilities.
    *   The balance sheet shows "Right-of-use Assets" of 146,613,000.
    *   It does not explicitly list "Lease Liabilities" as a separate line item in the summary provided, but they are likely embedded in "Noncurrent Payables" or "Current Payables" or "Financial Liabilities".
    *   However, often "Financial Liabilities" includes interest-bearing debt. Lease liabilities are interest-bearing.
    *   Let's check if "Financial Liabilities" includes leases. In many IFRS reports, lease liabilities are part of financial liabilities.
    *   If they are not explicitly broken out, we might estimate them.
    *   Alternatively, look at "Payments Of Lease Liabilities Classified As Financing Activities": 11,447,000.
    *   Without a specific lease liability balance, we might assume it's small or included in Financial Liabilities. Given the ROU asset is 146M, the liability is likely similar. Let's assume the reported Financial Liabilities *include* the lease liabilities (standard presentation). If they are excluded, we would add them. Let's assume they are included in the 3.95B. If not, we'd add ~146M. Let's look for "Lease Liabilities" in the text. Not found.
    *   Conservative approach: Add the ROU asset value as a proxy for lease debt if not included. But typically, "Financial Liabilities" captures all interest-bearing debt. Let's assume the 3.95B is the core debt.
    *   Let's check the magnitude. 146M is small relative to 3.95B.

3.  **Pension Deficit:**
    *   "Other Comprehensive Income... Remeasurements Of Defined Benefit Plans": 172,041,000 (Gain/Loss?).
    *   The reserve "Reserve Of Remeasurements..." is -205,455,000 (2023-01-01). A negative reserve usually indicates a deficit (liability > asset).
    *   S&P adds the underfunded status of pension plans to debt.
    *   Pension Deficit ≈ 205,455,000 EUR.

4.  **Eligible Cash:**
    *   Cash And Cash Equivalents: 409,252,000 EUR.
    *   S&P deducts unrestricted cash.
    *   Are there restrictions? Not specified. Assume all eligible.

5.  **Other Debt-like Items:**
    *   Derivative Liabilities? S&P generally does *not* treat derivative liabilities as debt unless they are debt-like hedges. For utilities, they are often operating items. We will exclude them from Debt.
    *   Hybrid Debt? None identified.

**Calculation of Adjusted Debt:**
*   Reported Financial Debt: 3,953,856,000
*   + Pension Deficit: 205,455,000
*   - Eligible Cash: (409,252,000)
*   **Adjusted Debt** = 3,953,856,000 + 205,455,000 - 409,252,000 = 3,750,059,000 EUR.

*(Note: If Lease Liabilities were not included in Financial Liabilities, we would add ~146M. Let's assume they are included as is standard for "Financial Liabilities" in IFRS summaries unless "Lease Liabilities" are separate. If they are separate and missing, we might be underestimating debt. However, given the small size, the impact on the ratio is minimal.)*

### Step 4: Calculate FFO / Adjusted Debt

*   **FFO:** 3,711,228,000 EUR
*   **Adjusted Debt:** 3,750,059,000 EUR

Ratio = 3,711,228,000 / 3,750,059,000
Ratio ≈ 0.989645...

Let's double check the Derivative Adjustment. If we *don't* add back the 857M derivative loss:
Adjusted EBITDA = 3,232,467,000.
FFO = 3,232,467,000 - 36,100,000 - 343,100,000 = 2,853,267,000.
Ratio = 2,853,267,000 / 3,750,059,000 ≈ 0.7608.

Which is more appropriate for S&P?
S&P's "Regulated Utilities" criteria state: "We adjust EBITDA for... unrealized gains/losses on energy derivatives."
Given VERBUND is a utility and 2022 was a year of extreme volatility, the 857M loss is largely unrealized valuation (mark-to-market) of hedging contracts. Adding it back is the standard S&P adjustment to normalize earnings. Therefore, the higher FFO (0.99) is the correct S&P-adjusted estimate.

Let's refine the numbers one last time.
EBITDA: 3,160,679,000
Net Impairment: 71,788,000
Derivative Loss: 857,961,000
Adj EBITDA: 4,090,428,000

Cash Interest: 36,100,000
Cash Tax: 343,100,000
FFO: 3,711,228,000

Debt:
Noncurrent Fin: 2,844,559,000
Current Fin: 1,109,297,000
Total Debt: 3,953,856,000
Pension Deficit: 205,455,000 (From Equity Reserve "Reserve Of Remeasurements..." which is negative 205M, indicating a liability excess).
Cash: 409,252,000
Adj Debt: 3,953,856,000 + 205,455,000 - 409,252,000 = 3,750,059,000.

Ratio: 3,711,228,000 / 3,750,059,000 = 0.9896455...

Rounding to four decimal places: 0.9896

<answer>0.9896</answer>