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

It’s time for LICs to die

A high-profile dividend cut and a prominent fund manager’s apology have reignited a long-running debate. If investors can access similar exposures more cheaply and efficiently elsewhere, what exactly is keeping LICs alive?

The retirement scorecard: how many of these questions can you answer?

From the maths of retirement, estimating spending and picking the right asset allocation to survive a poor decade, here are the questions every retiree – current or future – should be able to answer for themselves.

Division 296: the initial moves to make before the windows close

What if the best superannuation strategy isn't about earning more, but acting before your options disappear? Several overlooked planning windows are narrowing, with consequences that can last for decades.

Testamentary trusts: Treasury has picked the wrong reading

A decades-old estate planning tool has survived one tax crackdown only to be caught by another. The surprise isn't who the reform is targeting, but who could end up paying the price for drafting choices made years ago.

Higher yields are creating opportunities in global bonds

Bond markets are adjusting to a new reality, but not in the ways investors expect. With markets repricing and capital competing for attention, investors may need to rethink where resilience and opportunity lie. 

Will investors be better or worse off under new housing tax changes?

Housing tax reforms have sparked warnings of market turmoil and promises of greater fairness. But after modelling nearly two decades of property data, the results suggest winners and losers may not be who many investors expect.

Latest Updates

Superannuation

Superannuation’s structural failings

Politicians are fighting over access to super, but they may be arguing about the wrong thing. The system’s three fundamental flaws have been hiding in plain sight for decades, costing Australians far more than they realise.

Planning

The great wealth transfer myth

Why do some families preserve wealth for generations while others struggle to? As the great wealth transfer unfolds, the determining factor is often not the structure of the estate, but the preparation of those who will inherit it.

Investment strategies

What comes after bank hybrids?

For years, bank hybrids have been a cornerstone of portfolio income. With tens of billions of dollars now disappearing from the market, investors face a critical question: what comes next, and are the obvious replacements enough?

Investment insights from the US

What happens when knowledge becomes a commodity? The latest themes emerging from the US tech sector suggest AI could reshape company moats, disrupt incumbents and create winners and losers in unexpected places.

Investing

Can Berkshire thrive without Buffett?

Warren Buffett's departure marks the end of an era. But the more important question for investors is whether Berkshire's culture, discipline and capital allocation framework can survive without the man who built them.

Retirement

The Bengen 4% Rule: Lost in translation

For years, retirees have been told to focus on withdrawal rates. But the real question is far simpler: how many dollars can you safely spend? The answer may be very different from what conventional retirement wisdom suggests.

Interest rates

Super low interest rates came with side effects

For more than a decade, investors lived through an era of near-zero interest rates. With bond yields now surging, it's worth asking whether cheap money solved economic problems, or introduced a much larger set of risks.

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.