Research: Announcement of Periodic Review: Moody’s announces completion of a periodic review for a group of Infrastructure issuers in Europe, Middle East and Africa

New York, November 23, 2022 — Moody’s Investors Service (“Moody’s”) has completed a periodic review of the ratings -and other ratings that are associated with the same analytical units for the rated entity(entities) listed below.

The review was conducted through a portfolio review discussion held on 14 November 2022 in which Moody’s reassessed the appropriateness of the ratings in the context of the relevant principal methodology(ies), recent developments, and a comparison of the financial and operating profile to similarly rated peers. A possible outcome from periodic reviews is a referral of a rating to a rating committee.

This publication does not announce a credit rating action and is not an indication of whether or not a credit rating action is likely in the near future. Credit ratings and outlook/review status cannot be changed in a portfolio review and hence are not impacted by this announcement.

Key Rating Considerations

The principal methodology used for the rated entities listed below was Privately Managed Airports and Related Issuers published in September 2017. Please see the Rating Methodologies page on https://ratings.moodys.com for a copy of this methodology.

Key rating considerations on a forward-looking basis may include but are not limited to the following summarized below.

Privately Managed Airports and Related Issuers

Size and Market Profile: Metrics may include but are not limited to scope of operations as measured by operating revenue or usage volume (such as annual ridership or traffic volume) and service area population, network, project or facility size, physical limitations on types of services which can be provided and ease of expansion; strategic positioning exhibited by pricing power, competitive profile including proximity to competing facilities and sustainability of such competitiveness, monopoly position, essentiality of an asset to users, ability to generate demand based on strength and size of service area; capital investment funding and flexibility, diversity as measured by ratio of single largest revenue source to operating revenue; charter renewal risk, ownership and affiliation; service area wealth, economic diversity, income, size and growth rate as measured by data provided by the US Bureau of the Census, Bureau of Labor Statistics and commercial data vendors (where applicable).

Operating Performance and Risk: Metrics may include but are not limited to annual revenue, 3 year average operating margin, 5 year compound growth rate of operating revenue, stability and predictability of revenues, diversity of revenue from various payors/contributors/ operations; size and trend of operating cash flow margin or EBITDA; service area trend and utilization data, fixed costs as a portion of operating expenditures; measures of historic and expected usage measured by standard deviations of year over year; length of time in operation of asset; historic demand and revenue trends, demonstrated ability and willingness to raise rates and/or economic regulation; complexity of relevant technology; availability of cash flow to fund capital needs, operating performance relative to industry norms; quality of operator & experience with the asset type; strength and commitment of sponsor & likelihood of operational and financial support; protections in the concession and regulatory framework; restrictions on business activities, use of debt and revenue distributions.

Financial Position, Policy and Ownership: Metrics may include but are not limited to amount of cash & investments; days cash on hand; ratio of total cash and investments to operating expenses; debt service coverage; level of self-support; budget flexibility, operating cash flow margin, liquidity to demand debt, liquidity reserves or contractual arrangements. Assessments may include but are not limited to an Issuer’s desired capital structure / credit profile, and its adherence to its commitments and our views on the ability of the company to achieve its targets, an assessment of the likelihood and potential negative impact of M&A or other types of balance-sheet-transforming events, and the likelihood of uncontracted financial support being provided by owners; and the protective terms of debt documentation including but limited to restrictions on business activities, use of debt and revenue distributions; and control and liquidity afforded to creditors.

Debt Affordability: Metrics may include but are not limited to size and scope of multi-year CIP (capital improvement plan) relative to condition of assets that will rely on debt for funding; ratio of total cash and investments to debt and/or interest payments; ratio of debt to operating revenue; debt service coverage and ratios; ratio of debt to cash flow and to operating revenue; interest coverage metrics and concession life coverage ratios; debt and debt equivalents.

• Aena S.M.E., S.A.

• Aeroporti di Roma S.p.A.

• Airports Company South Africa SOC Ltd

• Avinor AS

• Azzurra Aeroporti S.p.A.

• Birmingham Airport (Finance) Plc

• Brussels Airport Company NV/SA

• Copenhagen Airports Denmark ApS

• Flughafen Berlin Brandenburg GmbH

• Gatwick Airport Finance plc

• Heathrow Finance plc

• Letiste Praha, a.s.

• Manchester Airport Group Funding Plc

• Milione S.p.A.

• NATS (En Route) PLC

• Royal Schiphol Group N.V.

The principal methodology used for the rated entities listed below was Privately Managed Ports Methodology published in May 2021. Please see the Rating Methodologies page on https://ratings.moodys.com for a copy of this methodology.

Key rating considerations on a forward-looking basis may include but are not limited to the following summarized below.

Privately Managed Ports Methodology

Size and Market Profile: Metrics may include but are not limited to scope of operations as measured by operating revenue or usage volume (such as annual ridership or traffic volume) and service area population, network, project or facility size, physical limitations on types of services which can be provided and ease of expansion; strategic positioning exhibited by pricing power, competitive profile including proximity to competing facilities and sustainability of such competitiveness, monopoly position, essentiality of an asset to users, ability to generate demand based on strength and size of service area; capital investment funding and flexibility, diversity as measured by ratio of single largest revenue source to operating revenue; charter renewal risk, ownership and affiliation; service area wealth, economic diversity, income, size and growth rate as measured by data provided by the US Bureau of the Census, Bureau of Labor Statistics and commercial data vendors (where applicable).

Operating Performance and Risk: Metrics may include but are not limited to annual revenue, 3 year average operating margin, 5 year compound growth rate of operating revenue, stability and predictability of revenues, diversity of revenue from various payors/contributors/ operations; size and trend of operating cash flow margin or EBITDA; service area trend and utilization data, fixed costs as a portion of operating expenditures; measures of historic and expected usage measured by standard deviations of year over year; length of time in operation of asset; historic demand and revenue trends, demonstrated ability and willingness to raise rates and/or economic regulation; complexity of relevant technology; availability of cash flow to fund capital needs, operating performance relative to industry norms; quality of operator & experience with the asset type; strength and commitment of sponsor & likelihood of operational and financial support; protections in the concession and regulatory framework; restrictions on business activities, use of debt and revenue distributions.

Financial Position, Policy and Ownership: Metrics may include but are not limited to amount of cash & investments; days cash on hand; ratio of total cash and investments to operating expenses; debt service coverage; level of self-support; budget flexibility, operating cash flow margin, liquidity to demand debt, liquidity reserves or contractual arrangements. Assessments may include but are not limited to an Issuer’s desired capital structure / credit profile, and its adherence to its commitments and our views on the ability of the company to achieve its targets, an assessment of the likelihood and potential negative impact of M&A or other types of balance-sheet-transforming events, and the likelihood of uncontracted financial support being provided by owners; and the protective terms of debt documentation including but limited to restrictions on business activities, use of debt and revenue distributions; and control and liquidity afforded to creditors.

Debt Affordability: Metrics may include but are not limited to size and scope of multi-year CIP (capital improvement plan) relative to condition of assets that will rely on debt for funding; ratio of total cash and investments to debt and/or interest payments; ratio of debt to operating revenue; debt service coverage and ratios; ratio of debt to cash flow and to operating revenue; interest coverage metrics and concession life coverage ratios; debt and debt equivalents.

• ABP Finance PLC

• EP Bco SA

• Limak Iskenderun Uluslararasi Liman

The principal methodology used for the rated entities listed below was Privately Managed Toll Roads Methodology published in December 2020. Please see the Rating Methodologies page on https://ratings.moodys.com for a copy of this methodology.

Key rating considerations on a forward-looking basis may include but are not limited to the following summarized below.

Privately Managed Toll Roads Methodology

Size and Market Profile: Metrics may include but are not limited to scope of operations as measured by operating revenue or usage volume (such as annual ridership or traffic volume) and service area population, network, project or facility size, physical limitations on types of services which can be provided and ease of expansion; strategic positioning exhibited by pricing power, competitive profile including proximity to competing facilities and sustainability of such competitiveness, monopoly position, essentiality of an asset to users, ability to generate demand based on strength and size of service area; capital investment funding and flexibility, diversity as measured by ratio of single largest revenue source to operating revenue; charter renewal risk, ownership and affiliation; service area wealth, economic diversity, income, size and growth rate as measured by data provided by the US Bureau of the Census, Bureau of Labor Statistics and commercial data vendors (where applicable).

Operating Performance and Risk: Metrics may include but are not limited to annual revenue, 3 year average operating margin, 5 year compound growth rate of operating revenue, stability and predictability of revenues, diversity of revenue from various payors/contributors/ operations; size and trend of operating cash flow margin or EBITDA; service area trend and utilization data, fixed costs as a portion of operating expenditures; measures of historic and expected usage measured by standard deviations of year over year; length of time in operation of asset; historic demand and revenue trends, demonstrated ability and willingness to raise rates and/or economic regulation; complexity of relevant technology; availability of cash flow to fund capital needs, operating performance relative to industry norms; quality of operator & experience with the asset type; strength and commitment of sponsor & likelihood of operational and financial support; protections in the concession and regulatory framework; restrictions on business activities, use of debt and revenue distributions.

Financial Position, Policy and Ownership: Metrics may include but are not limited to amount of cash & investments; days cash on hand; ratio of total cash and investments to operating expenses; debt service coverage; level of self-support; budget flexibility, operating cash flow margin, liquidity to demand debt, liquidity reserves or contractual arrangements. Assessments may include but are not limited to an Issuer’s desired capital structure / credit profile, and its adherence to its commitments and our views on the ability of the company to achieve its targets, an assessment of the likelihood and potential negative impact of M&A or other types of balance-sheet-transforming events, and the likelihood of uncontracted financial support being provided by owners; and the protective terms of debt documentation including but limited to restrictions on business activities, use of debt and revenue distributions; and control and liquidity afforded to creditors.

Debt Affordability: Metrics may include but are not limited to size and scope of multi-year CIP (capital improvement plan) relative to condition of assets that will rely on debt for funding; ratio of total cash and investments to debt and/or interest payments; ratio of debt to operating revenue; debt service coverage and ratios; ratio of debt to cash flow and to operating revenue; interest coverage metrics and concession life coverage ratios; debt and debt equivalents.

• Arena Luxembourg Investments S.a r.l.

• ASTM S.p.A.

• Atlantia S.p.A.

• Autostrade per l’Italia S.p.A.

• Brisa Concessao Rodoviaria S.A.

• Channel Link Enterprises Finance plc

• Concessioni Autostradali Venete – CAV S.p.A.

• FNM S.p.A.

• Holding d’Infrastructures de Transport

• Q-Park Holding B.V.

• SANEF S.A.

• Vinci S.A.

The principal methodology used for the rated entities listed below was Guarantees, Letters of Credit and Other Forms of Credit Substitution Methodology published in July 2022. Please see the Rating Methodologies page on https://ratings.moodys.com  for a copy of this methodology.

Key rating considerations on a forward-looking basis may include but are not limited to the following summarized below.

Guarantees, Letters of Credit and Other Forms of Credit Substitution Methodology

Third-party credit support: The goal of third-party credit support is to substitute the credit risk of the support provider for the credit risk of the issuer. For credit substitution to be achieved, investors must be insulated from the risk of payment default by the underlying obligor. Generally, the long-term ratings on credit-supported transactions track the long-term rating assigned to the credit provider.

Additional Considerations: Credit substitution requires more than just the presence of a credit support instrument from a third-party credit provider. The transaction documentation provides clear instructions to ensure that payments under the credit support facility are made when due and that there are no impediments to the timely payment of debt service. The key elements evaluated include: mitigation of bankruptcy risk of issuer; sufficiency of credit support; structural provisions which provide for the timely payment of debt service; bondholders to be paid in full if credit support expiration or termination will result in a change.

• Infraestruturas de Portugal, S.A.

• LCR Finance plc

• Network Rail Infrastructure Finance PLC

• OeBB-Infrastruktur AG

The principal methodology used for the rated entities listed below was REITs and Other Commercial Real Estate Firms published in September 2022. Please see the Rating Methodologies page on https://ratings.moodys.com for a copy of this methodology.

Key rating considerations on a forward-looking basis may include but are not limited to the following summarized below.

REITs and Other Commercial Real Estate Firms

Scale: Scale is considered because it is an indicator of an issuer’s ability to support a stable or growing market position. Larger scale can make a commercial real estate firm more resilient to changes in demand and better able to absorb changes in costs. An indicator of scale is gross assets.

Business Profile: The business profile of a REIT or commercial real estate firm provides an important indication of the stability of a firm’s portfolio based on several measures of diversification, the tenor of its leases and quality of its lessees, its market position and scale, and its operating environment.

Liquidity and Access to Capital: Liquidity management and access to capital are important considerations for all commercial real estate firms because their businesses are capital-intensive, and they can be subject to cycles in access to credit and capital markets. Tax rules also limit the ability of REITs to retain cash, thus requiring them to have ongoing access to external sources of capital to support their businesses. The amount of a commercial real estate firm’s unencumbered assets relative to gross assets is also considered because properties that are free and clear of mortgages are sources of alternative liquidity via the issuance of property-specific mortgage debt, or even sales.

Leverage and Coverage: Leverage and coverage measures are considered because they are indicators of an issuer’s financial flexibility and long-term viability, including its ability to navigate and adapt to changes in the economic and business environment. High leverage can drain cash and heighten an issuer’s vulnerability to operating and market challenges. Leverage and coverage metrics include (Total Debt + Preferred Stock)/ Gross Assets, Net Debt/ EBITDA, Secured Debt/ Gross Assets, and Fixed Charge Coverage.

Other Considerations: Other considerations include but are not limited to: financial controls and the quality of financial reporting; the quality and experience of management; corporate legal structure; assessments of corporate governance as well as environmental and social considerations; exposure to uncertain licensing regimes; and possible government interference in some countries. Regulatory, litigation, technology, and reputational risk as well as changes to consumer and business spending patterns, competitor strategies and macroeconomic trends also affect ratings.

• Deutsche Raststaetten Gruppe IV GmbH

• Roadster Finance DAC

The principal methodology used for the rated entities listed below was Government-Related Issuers Methodology published in February 2020. Please see the Rating Methodologies page on https://ratings.moodys.com for a copy of this methodology.

Key rating considerations on a forward-looking basis may include but are not limited to the following summarized below.

Government-Related Issuers Methodology

Assigning a Baseline Credit Assessment (BCA): The majority of Government-Related Issuers (GRIs) begin with an assessment of the GRI’s standalone strength (i.e. BCA) – its ability to service and repay outstanding debt without recourse to extraordinary support from the supporting government – using the published sector-specific methodology that is most suitable for the predominant activities of the GRI. Our assessment of standalone strength includes any day-to-day support received from the government that can be clearly distinguished from extraordinary support. Support mechanisms, such as an obligation of the government to ensure the GRI’s solvency and liquidity, are reflected in the BCA when they are legally or contractually documented.

Government uplift: The GRI’s ratings include any uplift due to systemic support and typically focus on three structural factors and three factors explaining the level of the government’s willingness to provide support. Structural factors address the legal and quasi-legal aspects of the government’s relationship with the GRI and include: (1) guarantees, (2) ownership level and (3) barriers to support. The factors underlying willingness consider the softer connections between the two entities and include (4) the likelihood of government intervention, (5) political linkages and (6) economic importance. Support is determined using a joint default analysis framework which considers an estimate of the likelihood of extraordinary support, an assessment of the credit quality of the supporting government, and default correlation between the two entities.

GRIs without a BCA: In limited instances, it is not possible or meaningful to assign a BCA. The GRI is so inextricably linked to the government that a meaningful standalone BCA cannot be derived. In such cases, a top-down analytical approach is used that chiefly considers the ability and willingness of the government to provide timely support, instead of the usual bottom-up approach of starting with the BCA and then considering uplift towards the government’s rating.

• ADIF-Alta Velocidad

• Administrador de Infraestruct. Ferroviarias

• Aena S.M.E., S.A.

• Airports Company South Africa SOC Ltd

• Avinor AS

• Brussels Airport Company NV/SA

• Copenhagen Airports A/S

• Flughafen Berlin Brandenburg GmbH

• FNM S.p.A.

• Infrabel

• Letiste Praha, a.s.

• NATS (En Route) PLC

• Royal Schiphol Group N.V.

This announcement applies only to Rated Entities with EU rated, UK rated, EU endorsed and UK endorsed ratings. Rated Entities, with Non EU rated, non UK rated, non EU endorsed and non UK endorsed ratings may be referenced herein to the extent necessary, if they are part of the same analytical unit.

Please see the Issuer page on https://ratings.moodys.com for each of the ratings covered, most updated credit rating action, rating history, and Credit Rating action Press Release including the rating rationale and factors that could lead to a rating upgrade or downgrade.

This publication does not announce a credit rating action.

For any credit ratings referenced in this publication, please see the issuer/deal page on https://ratings.moodys.com

for the most updated credit rating action information and rating history.

Releasing Office:
Moody’s Investors Service, Inc.
250 Greenwich Street
New York, NY 10007
U.S.A.
JOURNALISTS: 1 212 553 0376
Client Service: 1 212 553 1653

Source link