Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 303

Five myths of listed infrastructure

Infrastructure assets exhibit unique characteristics which have become increasingly relevant in the current economic environment. They provide essential goods or services to society that have a low level of sensitivity to the economic cycle, using contracted or regulated price structures which can provide an inflation hedge.

Myth 1: Listed infrastructure is highly correlated to equities

Global listed infrastructure assets tend to complement other typical constituents of an investment portfolio, meaning that allocating listed infrastructure assets to an investment portfolio can improve its risk/return profile. Global listed infrastructure has delivered higher returns with lower risk than general equities over the past 15 years, as illustrated in the chart below.

The sector has also proven to be defensive during periods of market volatility. In the past 15 years, the sector has provided over 80% of the upside in rising global equity markets but under 60% of the downside in falling markets. It may also suit investors who are concerned about the impact of inflation and aim to ensure that their investments maintain and grow in real terms.

Myth 2: Infrastructure assets are low growth and are left behind in rising markets

Infrastructure companies often generate growth from structural rather than cyclical drivers. Long-term trends like urban congestion, globalisation of trade, security of energy supplies, and mobility of communications have placed enormous strain on infrastructure networks and will require investment over many decades. Backed by the right business model, this investment has the potential to deliver strong capital growth for investors.

A number of infrastructure sectors are currently delivering double-digit growth due to structural change. For example, mobile towers have been a beneficiary of the exponential growth in smart phone usage and the resulting pressures on mobile carriers to improve network quality.

American Tower has been increasing rental charges, co-locating new tenants on existing sites and building or acquiring new sites. Strict planning restrictions and community opposition to new tower sites represent effective barriers to entry.

Among listed port and freight rail companies, Union Pacific is the largest North American Class I freight rail company. It owns and operates a 32,000-mile network of railroads covering the western two thirds of the United States. The company has been a beneficiary of volume recovery as the US economy has improved.

Myth 3: Exposure to listed infrastructure is available through traditional equity managers

Many global equity managers hold 2% or less of their portfolio in infrastructure assets, and this exposure could be concentrated amongst a small number of large, well-known utility names. However, much of the alpha generated in this sector comes from mid-cap stocks, which are under-researched by global equity managers, such as toll roads, oil storage, mobile towers and water utilities.

It is important to view investments in listed infrastructure from a global perspective. The global listed universe is capitalised at over US$2 trillion, allowing investors to diversify across various infrastructure sectors and geographies and to actively manage key risks.

A good example is the airport sector. Sydney Airport is one of the world’s leading airports in terms of profitability by passenger, but this is widely recognised and already fully reflected in the stock price – it trades at a 19x EV/EBITDA multiple. Alternatively, our fund can buy shares in Spanish airport operator AENA, which is currently trading at 11x EV/EBITDA. At these levels we believe that AENA represents a better investment for our clients’ money.

Infrastructure is a separate asset class for many pension funds, endowment funds, sovereign wealth funds, private banks and multi-managers from around the world. Early movers are typically allocating between 5% and 10% to this asset class.

Myth 4: Infrastructure assets are too highly leveraged and therefore less defensive

Extreme levels of debt can change the characteristics of equity. A handful of infrastructure stocks, notably in Australia and Spain, created inappropriate capital structures (70-90% leverage) in the mid 2000’s when debt was cheap and plentiful. But these companies represented less than 5% of the global investment universe. The vast majority of infrastructure stocks are traditional companies, sensibly leveraged (30-50%) and run for shareholders. In recent years, they have strengthened balance sheets by reducing costs and repaying debt. We have also seen widespread refinancing of existing debt, to lock in reduced rates and diversify funding sources. The wave of share buybacks and bolt-on acquisitions suggest that many management teams now feel they are under leveraged.

Some poorly aligned companies took a back-to-basics approach. Australian toll road operator Transurban is a great example. Following changes in the Board and senior management earlier this decade, the company raised equity to repay debt, cut the dividend to sustainable levels, halved corporate costs and refocused on its core assets. Having undertaken these measures, Transurban became a key portfolio holding and delivered a total return of over 18% pa in the period from September 2011 to May 2018.

The cash yields of infrastructure sectors are higher than dividend yields, implying scope for payout ratios to be raised. This is especially the case for railroads and toll roads.

Myth 5: Infrastructure is reliant on government funding, which is in short supply

Following years of underinvestment, a significant amount of infrastructure investment is now needed globally. Rough estimates from the OECD suggest that annual investment requirements for road, rail, electricity (transmission and distribution), telecommunications and water are likely to total around an average of 2.5% of world GDP (roughly US$53 trillion to 2030) . Economic growth for a number of nations has been hindered in by critical infrastructure bottlenecks, particularly in the transport sector.

However, while scarce government funding is problematic for societies in need of infrastructure upgrades, it is less of an issue for listed infrastructure companies.

The listed infrastructure investment universe consists of mature, established businesses. These companies provide essential services and generate predictable cash flows underpinned by regulated or contracted business models. Regulatory frameworks often encourage infrastructure companies to invest to maintain or improve their existing assets and allow them to earn a return on money spent in this way. Under this model, infrastructure companies are incentivised to provide better and more efficient services; with no reliance on government help.

Financially-distressed governments have felt the need to divest assets, including valuable infrastructure, to help maintain financial stability. A good example of this theme is AENA, the world’s largest airport operator. The company handles approximately 200 million passengers per year, primarily at 46 Spanish airports including hubs at Madrid and Barcelona. Previously wholly owned by the Spanish government, a 49% stake was IPO’d in early 2015. Since then the stock has risen strongly as robust passenger growth, limited capital expenditure requirements and improving commercial earnings have propelled its share price higher.

Looking ahead, many infrastructure assets remain in state government hands. The partial sale of WestConnex to a consortium led by Transurban offers a roadmap to the recycling of these assets. Brazil is also in the midst of a major privatisation program of toll roads, ports, railroads, airports and utilities.

The listed infrastructure investment universe is benefitting from a wave of corporate restructurings. Many infrastructure assets reside within large, vertically integrated corporations and conglomerates. Companies are increasingly looking to streamline and optimise their capital structures. This has often led to the divestment of infrastructure assets - highly valuable in their own right but deemed peripheral by a larger entity.

Combined, these themes of government privatisation and corporate restructuring have resulted in significant expansion, as well as improvements in quality and diversification, for the listed infrastructure asset class in recent years.

 

Peter Meany is Head of Global Listed Infrastructure at Colonial First State Global Asset Management, a sponsor of Cuffelinks. This article is general information and does not consider the circumstances of any investor.

For more articles and papers from CFSGAM, please click here.

 

  •   25 April 2019
  • 1
  •      
  •   
banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Are you making these SMSF mistakes?

After four decades advising investors, there are a few common mistakes I've seen SMSF investors make. From holding too much cash and chasing yield to overtrading and trusting tips. Are these errors costing you?

Why have Australian living standards 'fallen' and how do we fix it?

For the last few years there has been much talk of a 'cost-of-living' crisis in Australia and of 'falling living standards'. Lately this has flared up again with the pickup in inflation resulting in a renewed fall in real wages.

Retirement spending is not one-size-fits-all

New data challenges the idea that Australians are underspending their super. The bigger issue may be helping retirees navigate complexity, make confident decisions and use their savings to support security, wellbeing and choice.

Will you run out of money in retirement?

Fear of running out has become a defining retirement anxiety. Why do some retirees die with substantial wealth while others deplete their nest egg? Evidence suggests the answer is more complicated than we think. 

Four options for an income investor’s next dollar

What if Australia’s golden age of dividends is ending? Rather than overhaul your portfolio, it may be worth considering where new capital can work harder. I discuss four income strategies and the trade-offs behind each.

The missing link in the CGT debate

A little-noticed consequence of Labor’s tax changes could have implications well beyond investors’ tax bills. The issue raises bigger questions about incentives, capital allocation and the drivers of long-term economic growth.

Latest Updates

SMSF strategies

Meg on SMSFs: What do we think about reversionary pensions these days?

Reversionary pensions have long been a staple of SMSF estate planning, but are they still the best option? Meg Heffron revisits a once-clear favourite and asks whether changing super rules have shifted the balance.

The ageing ‘crisis’ has not and will not happen

Rising age dependency is frequently treated as a warning sign for economies. But when actual workforce participation is examined, a strikingly different picture emerges about ageing, productivity and economic sustainability.

Retirement

How does the 4% rule stack up?

The 4% rule has long been retirement's gold standard. But after a difficult period for investors, fresh analysis suggests a more conservative approach may significantly improve the chances of making savings last.

Shares

Four charts that expose market concentration risk

Investors have recently been rewarded for backing market leaders, but history suggests this eventually comes at a cost. Now may be the time to review whether your portfolio is carrying unintended risks beneath the surface.

Investment strategies

The case for gearing beyond property

Most Australians gear into property but ignore shares. That may be a mistake. Used carefully, geared equity strategies can enhance long-term returns, reduce cash tied up in growth assets and support retirement income goals.

Economy

Australia's $1 trillion debt pile

The headlines exclaiming that Australian government debt has hit A$1 trillion and US government debt has hit $40 trillion has turned heads, but how serious are they really? Will Australia's mix of debt create challenges?

Economy

Has 100 years of growth made us any happier?

For decades, GDP has been the benchmark for economic success, but has it made us materially happier? If happiness does not rise in lockstep with prosperity, are we overlooking what constitutes a successful society?

Sponsors

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

© 2026 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.