Morning everyone, welcome to the FY '25 results audio webcast for Keppel Infrastructure Trust or KIT. I am Marilyn from the Keppel IR and Sustainability team.

Let me introduce the KIT management team. We have with us this morning: CEO, Mr.

Kevin Neo; CFO, Mr. Raymond Bay; and Director of Portfolio Management, Mr.

Jintao. They will be making a presentation that will cover KIT's FY '25 highlights and business strategy, followed by the FY '25 business and financial updates.

Please leave your questions for the Q&A session at the end of the presentation. For analysts who are joining us on the MS Teams platform, please check now that you're on mute before we start the presentation.

I will now hand the time over to Kevin for the presentation. Kevin, please.

All right, thanks, Marilyn. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us today.

2025 marks the 10th year of KIT's trading commencement as an enlarged trust, and we are glad to report a strong KIT unitholder return of 96% in the last 10 years. This compares very well against the 51% achieved by the REIT Index over the same period.

With more than 18 years of infrastructure investment and management experience, KIT has built a strong track record and continued to grow through acquisitions and value creation. We have accumulated a portfolio of very attractive assets that are essential to our daily lives.

We are the sole producer and retailer of piped town gas in Singapore. We supply 13% of commercial power in Singapore.

We produce more than 20% of the drinking water in Singapore as well. We are the sole producer and distributor of chlorine gas for water treatment in Australia, and we maintain 31% of global subsea cables by length.

As at 31st December 2025, KIT's AUM stood at approximately $9.1 billion. This is anchored by essential businesses and assets in developed markets across four segments, namely Energy Transition, Environmental Services, Distribution & Storage, and Digital Infrastructure.

Next slide. KIT's portfolio is well-positioned to capture tailwinds driven by long-term structural trends of energy transition, digitalization, and decarbonization.

Our strategy is focused on essential infrastructure that provides stable cash flows and has long-term growth potential. Our assets are located in developed markets of Asia-Pacific and Europe, where there's strong legal and regulatory frameworks in place.

Last but not least, we are in sectors where we have origin expertise, either in Keppel or in partnering experienced local teams on the ground. Overall, 2025 was a good year for KIT unitholders.

We reported DI of $249.5 million for the year, which is an increase of 24% year-on-year. We achieved total unitholder return of over 17% for the year.

We continue to add value to the trust, having unlocked over $300 million in net proceeds from capital recycling, and deployed $120 million to acquire GMG, marking our first foray into the digital infrastructure segment. We have the financing flexibility to utilize the remaining proceeds of about $180 million, and have the debt headroom further to pursue acquisitions.

As at end 2025, the gearing levels and ICR for KIT remained strong at 39% and 7.6 times respectively. KIT received two industry awards last year, and our appreciation goes out to The Edge Singapore and AustCham Singapore for these accolades.

KIT was named the overall sector winner and recognized as a top performer in shareholder returns over the past three years at The Edge Singapore Billion Dollar Club Awards 2025. This achievement reflects our sustained focus on long-term value creation for our unitholders.

At the AustCham Singapore-Australia Business Alliance Awards 2025, KIT was recognized as a Singaporean company with significant contribution towards advancing sustainable infrastructure that supports communities in Australia. We are declaring a DPU of 1.97 cents for the second half of 2025, and this will be paid on 20th February 2026.

This aggregates to the full-year 2025 DPU of 3.94 cents, which gives an implied yield of 8% based on the year-end closing unit price of 49 cents for 2025. Looking back on our track record, KIT's transformation and asset recycling strategy since 2019, the chart on the left shows illustratively the income profile of the DI from initial portfolio without acquisition versus the chart on the right that shows the actual reported DI to unitholders.

The green bars above represent the income contribution to KIT's portfolio DI derived from various acquisitions and realization made since 2019. We have been very successful in investing and replacing the reduction in DI when certain concession assets were extended.

We have also grown our evergreen businesses within the initial portfolio. For instance, City Energy accounts for 32% of DI in FY '18, but contributes more than 60% of the initial portfolio DI in FY '25.

Our focus is to deliver resilient cash flows to unitholders through active portfolio management to strengthen portfolio constitutions, anchored by essential businesses bearing cash flows that are very defensive against market disruptions. This is how we managed to maintain our DPU through COVID-19, which is one of the most significant market disruptions in the last 10 years.

Next slide. KIT's portfolio of essential businesses and assets provides products and solutions for which demand remains steady regardless of economic cycles.

These are business strategies that we look to drive the next stage of value creation for KIT. First, portfolio cash flow stability remains a key priority, and we will continue with our proven capital recycling approach of invest, divest, and reinvest with discipline, to build a resilient portfolio with strong underlying cash flows.

Second, we want to strengthen the operating cash flows of existing assets and businesses by driving value creation initiatives and capitalizing on sector-specific growth drivers. Third, we will employ active capital management to support sustainable distributions and continued growth in unit in unitholder returns.

With these strategies in mind, we have outlined specific objectives and areas to share with our unitholders. As an active manager, we will continue to evaluate our portfolio on an ongoing basis to recycle capital from divested assets for redeployment into accretive assets or businesses with stable cash flows.

The goal is to manage DPU stability and offset the expected decline in income from concession assets. The focus for new acquisition is expected to be on energy transition, digital infrastructure, and environmental solutions.

This is in line with the recent OCBC report where analysts expect growing adoption of AI to drive demand for fiber connectivity, data centers, power generation, and green infrastructure. Our objective is to build and own an optimal portfolio of stable assets and growth assets to achieve DPU stability and growth.

Currently, we have $180 million of divestment proceeds remaining from the sale of Philippine Coastal and Ventura for immediate redeployment. In addition, KIT's net gearing of 39% is healthy; therefore, we could make use of debt headroom to acquire.

Concurrently, we are focused on driving organic and inorganic growth in revenue, and achieving operational cost efficiency for existing assets in our portfolio. In tandem, we work with the respective operating teams from the evergreen businesses, such as City Energy, Ixom, and GMG, to execute on the planned growth strategies to grow KIT's operating earnings.

As part of active capital management, we have been monitoring the market for opportunities to undertake early refinancing amidst the conducive interest rate environment. We expect to complete and execute on KIT's FY '26 refinancing needs well ahead of maturity.

Raymond, our CFO, will cover this in greater details. Financial flexibility is key as we pursue various options, including utilizing recycled capital, reinvested cash, and KIT's debt headroom with prudence for accretive acquisitions.

Our main goal is to achieve DI and DPU continuity into the long run, and we are working to achieve this through the successful execution of our planned accretive acquisitions and value creation initiatives. With that, let me hand over to Jintao for the FY '25 business updates.

Thanks, Kevin. Hello, everyone.

I'm Jintao, and I've joined the team as Director of Portfolio Management since November. I'll take you through the KIT portfolio business updates in the next few slides.

Going to slide 12, FY '25 saw stable operations for our assets and businesses in the energy transition segment. City Energy achieved higher FFO of $62 million for the year, mainly through its core operations.

We tracked total gas water heater sales, and the increase in market share in the residential market has been meaningful, with potential for future growth. Growth opportunities are also present in commercial and industrial market in new developments and in retrofitting projects for existing properties.

The FFO for the transition assets was an aggregate $124 million for FY '25, which included a cash surplus from capital management of AGPC in 4Q '25. For AGPC, we had higher volumes in FY '25 compared to the prior year, underpinned by stronger demand.

The FFO for the wind farms portfolio came in lower year-on-year, mainly due to BKR2. However, wind resources in the second half of '25 had recovered compared to the same period last year.

The European onshore wind platform saw stable production levels in FY '25 at lower power prices. The FFO for the German solar portfolio was SGD 46 million for FY '25, up 18% year-on-year, underpinned by stable performance.

For the environmental services segment, the Singapore concession assets contributed an aggregate $52 million for FY '25. We maintained stable operations and met all contractual obligations with the regulators, such as NEA and PUB, in the financial year.

We continue to pursue potential opportunities for concession extensions following SingSpring's extension to 2028, noting that the land lease is only due in 2033. Moving on to EMK, pricing in the private landfill business is expected to remain largely sideways.

We continue to stay disciplined on pricing and focus on optimizing the NAV of our asset. For the incineration business, starting 1st of Jan this year, the Seoul Metropolitan Area, or SMA, implemented a direct landfilling ban for municipal solid waste.

With this in place, we see pricing upside for private incineration facilities. Public incineration facilities are running near full utilization, and this ban is expected to drive higher demand for private incineration facilities such as EMK, which are located near the SMA.

Therefore, EMK plans to grow its incineration capacity, which is also running at full utilization, to capture this tailwind and increase FFO. For the distribution and storage segment, the FFO for Ixom was $71 million for FY '25, an increase of 42% year-on-year, underpinned by strong operating earnings.

The bolt-on acquisition of the Hilditch base oils import and distribution business in 4Q '25 is expected to drive continued revenue and EBITDA growth in 2026. Hilditch earns a stable margin per unit volume and is expected to benefit from near-term tailwinds from Australia's new fuel emission standards, supporting demand for refined and cleaner base oils.

The FFO for Ventura was $23 million for FY '25, and was higher year-on-year on a 100% basis, underpinned by higher EBITDA. For the year, it achieved 100% service reliability and on-time performance exceeding 90%, and secured new charter contracts.

Ventura's maintenance capex is mainly debt-funded, and for FY '25, the maintenance capex of $21 million was added back to derive DI. Ventura's business model requires ongoing maintenance capex, and the company will debt-fund this capex in the near term.

We completed acquisition of GMG on 25th of November 2025; hence, the income contribution to KIT of about a month of about SGD 1 million is in line with our deal underwriting. Since completion, the team has successfully extended a long-term charter through 2028 and a maintenance zone contract to 2030.

Similar to Ventura, GMG is a business which requires ongoing maintenance capex for vessel upkeep such as drydocking, and we expect to be debt-funding this in the near future. In the next two slides, we will outline the strategic priorities for our evergreen businesses.

We continue to work closely with the respective operating teams on the ground to execute these strategies and drive future operating earnings. These essential businesses have established strong local brands and local market positions in markets with high barriers entry.

They are long-term platforms focused on delivering customer-led solutions and creating sustainable value over time. For City Energy, our focus is on driving further market share gains in residential water heaters from the current 20%, increasing commercial and industrial gas usage, and raising consumer awareness of the benefits of gas water heaters to support broader adoption.

For Ixom, the key priority is to strengthen our market-leading positions across the core manufactured and traded product segments, supported by deep, long-standing relationships with key customers in the water utilities, manufacturing, and resources segments. Other initiatives include continued growth in the bitumen business, supported by disciplined growth capex, and unlocking revenue and cost synergies from the recently acquired Hilditch business.

For Ventura, we aim to maintain our strong track record in service delivery and standards, grow market share in the charter business for both public and public runs, and position ourselves in the public bus service contract renewals coming up in 2028. EMK has the potential to further strengthen its position as one of the largest private incinerators in South Korea.

The key catalyst ahead is the scaling up of incineration capacity to capture demand tailwinds driven by favorable policy changes. For GMG, as one of the leading independent providers of subsea fiber-optic maintenance, installation, and support vessels, the focus is on maintaining strong operational reliability and the track record of vessels.

At the same time, we aim to grow our fleet of specialized cable installation and maintenance vessels, underpinned by strong global demand for subsea cable connectivity. Moving on to the ESG slide, we met our ESG targets for the year across the three pillars of our sustainability framework: environmental stewardship, responsible business, and people and community.

In addition, we achieved a rating of A in the MSCI ESG Ratings assessment, in recognition of the strong management of financial and industry-relevant ESG risks and opportunities. I will now hand the presentation to Raymond for the financials and capital management of KIT.

Thank you, Jintao. Hello, everyone.

I'll kick off my section with this slide that demonstrates KIT's strong earnings track record in the last 5 years. Moving to the next slide, the DI for FY '25 increased over 24% year-on-year to approximately $250 million.

Asset DI before corporate costs was higher at $349.1 million. This is underpinned mainly by higher contribution from City Energy, the German solar portfolio, Ixom, and Ventura.

This included a cash surplus for AGPC, which was substantially used for debt repayment at KIT trust level. In the environmental services segment, lower income from Senoko after concession renewal was partially offset by the full-year contribution from MEDP in FY '25.

Corporate expenses, excluding the debt repayment, were lower year-on-year, mainly due to no performance fee accrued in FY '25. We recognized a divestment gain of $49 million from the sale of interest in Philippine Coastal and Ventura.

Moving to the next slide, this is the second half FY 2025 DI. The DI increased about 21% year-on-year to $130.1 million.

Asset DI before corporate costs was higher at $199 million, underpinned by higher DI for City Energy, the wind farm portfolio, AGPC, and the German solar portfolio. In the environmental services segment, lower income from Senoko after concession renewal was partially offset by the full-year contribution from MEDP in the second half of FY '25.

Corporate expenses, excluding the debt repayment, were higher year-on-year, mainly due to higher trustee-manager base fee. We recognized a divestment gain of $27 million from the sale of interest in Ventura in the second half of FY '25.

Moving to the next slide, on to the balance sheet, KIT reported net gearing of approximately 39%, with interest coverage ratio at 7.6 times. The consolidated debt for KIT aggregated to about $3.2 billion as at end FY '25.

Pending capital deployment, about $180 million of the remaining divestment proceeds have been used to pare down existing borrowings at the trust level. The weighted average cost of debt at the group was lower year-on-year at 4.4%.

The weighted average cost of debt at the trust level was also lower at 3.4%. KIT has hedged approximately 73% of the trust foreign income, and approximately 72% of the KIT total borrowings are hedged.

Moving to the next slide, we have received firm commitments to refinance Ixom's loan, subject to documentation, and expect to complete the early refinancing ahead of its expiry in the second half of this year. We are also evaluating refinancing options for the remaining $330 million debt at trust level maturing later in the year.

To date, we have approximately $239 million of committed RCF that is undrawn. To conclude, the refinancing needs for FY '26 will be met as we look to complete the refinancing ahead of expiry.

With $180 million of remaining divestment proceeds and ample debt headroom, we are well-positioned to execute our planned accretive acquisitions and value creation initiatives to achieve DI and DPU continuity into the long term. Thank you.

With that, I will now hand the time back to Marilyn.

Thank you, Kevin, Jintao, and Raymond. We will now proceed to the Q&A session.

Analysts who are on the call, and if you'd like to pose a question, please raise your hand in turn on the Teams platform. I'd appreciate if you could state your name and firm, followed by your question.

Thank you. We have the first question from Shekhar.

Hi, Shekhar, please go ahead with your question.

Hey, hi, Marilyn. Hi, Kevin.

Hi, Raymond. Hi, Jintao, welcome to KIT.

Good set of numbers. Really impressed.

I have few things to ask about 2026. How should I look at GMG's distributable income in '26?

The one-month contribution, we should look at annualizing it?

All right, yeah. As you correctly mentioned, GMG contributed one month of SGD 1 million.

Going forward, the DI run-rate is expected to remain for FY '26. One thing we would like to note is that GMG is a business which requires regular maintenance capex from vessel drydocking, right?

Most of this maintenance capex is expected to be debt-funded, the focus is on DI.

Maybe I could add that, something like what we did with Ventura, when we bought the business, we are aware that there is certain capex or maintenance requirements, which could be a bit lumpy, right? When we enter into the transaction, we kind of sized the capital structure such that we could use the debt capacity to debt-fund certain expenses.

This helped to maintain DI's stability, yeah. It's part of our plan there.

That helps. Just continuing on the same topic, you said there's now a long-term charter extended to 2028, maintenance contract to 2030.

Can I get a sense on what percentage of your revenue or EBITDA from GMG is now covered with multiyear agreements?

To give you a sense, right, we have six vessels. Two are on long-term charters.

We have already secured one of those. We are in the process of renegotiating another one.

All four maintenance vessels, which are under the consortium model, have been recontracted. To answer your question, it's five out of six vessels have charter certainty.

Okay. Fair enough.

I think

when we announced the acquisition during our EGM last year, I think there was certain contracts was coming up. Certain contracts was renewed even before we entered into the transaction.

I think there was one contract that will come soon after the EGM, and that contract was renewed. I think this basically plays to what we have been saying, right?

There is a lot of demand for such vessels, given the outlook for capex requirements to build new cables, to maintain cables in deep seas, right? This is where I think we want to ride that megatrend.

Understand. I just have two more questions before I'll jump back in the queue.

I see there's a lot of other people waiting to ask. On BKR2, can I get an update on the wind situation?

How should we look at 2026? You did mention in the slides that second half is looking better than year-on-year, but on half-on-half and how should we look at 2026 DI for it?

As a recap, thinking about the factors which drive BKR2 performance, it's number one, it's mainly related to wind, right? Because the pricing is essentially locked in by a feed-in tariff contract backed by the German government.

If we look at the wind speeds in second half of 2025 and compare that against second half of 2024, they are at or already above levels in the previous period.

I think last year, I think there was a lot of concerns around BKR2 given the wind speed. Yes, we have said that in the first half of 2025, wind speed was very bad due to a pretty rare climate phenomenon.

I think we are glad to share that, as what Jintao had mentioned, the wind speed for second half has recovered, and the wind speed for second half 2025 is higher than that of the second half of 2024, right? We hope that this will continue.

With this, if this continues into 2026, hopefully, the performance from BKR2 will be better than that in 2025, if we have a full year of proper winds,

yeah. Okay.

Fair enough. We still look at it.

We see how the first quarter goes and then reassess, is it?

Yes. Unfortunately, wind is not something that we can control.

Like I said, when we look at wind, we have to look at it from a long-term perspective. There'll be years where it may be below average; there'll be years where it'll be above average.

Long-term-wise, over the mid-term, it should average out.

Fair enough. Just one more question, and then I'll jump back in the queue.

In terms of pipeline, anything from Keppel's ecosystem, which verticals where you think most actionable ideas would come through or deals could come through over the next 12 months?

Sorry, Shekhar, I missed your question. If you don't mind, could you just

I'm saying from Keppel's ecosystem, if we have to look at deal flows, which verticals where you think will be the most actionable deal flow would be in the next 12 months?

I think Keppel is across the verticals that we are in at the moment. I think certain assets are being constructed, and I think some of them will probably be coming online over a period of time.

As and when they come due, and if they are appropriate for KIT, we will definitely put our hands up to kind of express our interest in acquiring them. This will be done on a, so-called, very arm's-length basis.

We do expect, so-called, a bit of activities in the energy transition sector, not just from the Keppel table of assets, but, I think globally, right? We do expect a lot of activities around the energy transition and digital infrastructure segment, yeah.

Got it. I'll jump back in the queue.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, Shekhar. The next would be to Yizhen.

Hi, can you identify which house you're from?

Sure, thanks for the presentation. It's Yizhen from OCBC's Credit Research team.

Hi. My question is on AGPC.

I think I may have missed a bit of what Raymond was saying. There was a cash surplus from capital management at AGPC.

Was that used to pay debt at the trust level? If so, can you please explain more what actually happened at AGPC and what was done with the capital?

That's all, thanks.

Hey, Yizhen, thanks for the question. I'll take that.

What happened was there was a refinancing activity at AGPC level. When the refinancing happened, there is a need to re-look into the hedge position.

That led to a certain IRS has been unwind. We unwound such certain IRS, which resulted in a gain.

The gain is approximately $51 million. I would like to stress that this is a one-off, right?

What happened is this $51 million has been utilized to repay debt. This debt will basically, it's an RCF facility.

When we pare it down, it will become a war chest for us. We will have extended financial flexibility for acquisitions.

Thank you. The RCF facility is at the trust level?

That's right,

KIT

trust level. Okay.

Thank you.

Just to be clear, right, our total DI is not impacted by this because the proceeds is used to completely pay down debts at the KIT level, it's a flush-through there.

Thank you, Yizhen, for your question. Next question we have from Jialin.

Hello, Jialin.

Hi, Kevin and team. Congrats on the strong results.

This is Jialin from CGSI. I have three questions before I jump back to the queue.

The first one, could you walk through the capex for FY '26? I think especially for EMK, Ventura, and GMG, where you see strategic opportunities to grow.

What's the quantum of capex we are talking about? Should I finish all my questions before we dive into the answers, or

Jialin, it would be good if you give us all three questions.

Can. My next question is on GMG.

If we just focus on DI, like management guided just now, right? Can we think of December distributable income as a, so-called, clean DI, meaning without debt repayment, without capex, and is it how we should be looking at FY '26 DI?

My third question is looking at distribution for next year, right? What's your thoughts around distribution trajectory for next year?

Thank you.

Go ahead.

Maybe I'll touch on the capex slide, right? I think going on the capex plan for EMK, as we previously alluded to, we are dedicating some capex towards incinerator capacity expansion this year.

This is to account for the fact that our incinerators today are 100% utilized, coupled with the fact that we are seeing incremental demand from the direct landfilling ban in Seoul, which is supportive of pricing. We are actually expanding capacity in two of the four incinerators that EMK currently operates.

That's for EMK. For Ventura, we are on the constant lookout to replace and deploy maintenance and growth capex towards the bus fleet.

Maybe I could just share a bit of lines on the capex plans for both EMK and Ventura. I think as what Jintao had mentioned, I think our incinerator is at maximum utilization.

We do expect waste for incineration to increase, especially given the policy change in the Seoul Metropolitan Area. Our incinerators are located just outside of SMA, we are well-positioned to receive that additional waste, right?

In order to capitalize on that long-term trajectory, we need to expand our capacity, right? We do not expect this expansion to have an impact on EMK's cash flow because they will be funded by cash on the books or by debt facilities that we have sized for this purpose.

I think this will be done over phases, right? I think what I would like to point out is that this year, the incinerator at EMK is scheduled for some refurbishment, and we are just using that period of time to undertake that expansion.

This is a very efficient way of undertaking expansion. As probably everyone knows, Keppel as a group, our sponsor has very strong operating and technical expertise in this area.

We have obtained their support in helping EMK to expand. This is something that we spoke about last year, and I think we are seeing all this execution panning out as we speak, yeah.

Right. Then, I think there's this question about GMG, the DI for December.

Yes, that's clean. In a way, you can almost for the full year of 2026, you can annualize that to get to a estimate, right, of the DI forecast from GMG, yeah.

Last year there's only a one month, slightly over a month of contribution. This year, we'll see the full 12 months of contributions.

The DI from 2025 has to be adjusted for that to get to a more accurate estimation, yeah, for 2026. Have we answered all questions?

Anything that's unanswered?

Thanks for the answer. I think maybe one follow-up question is on capex, whether we could share certain amount planned or set for capex just for modeling purpose.

The last question was on distribution trajectory for next year. Thank you.

Jialin, if you don't mind, could you refer to slide 34 of our presentation slide? We have disclosed our capex guidance and also the debt amortization over there.

Got it, thanks.

Thank you.

I think on the distribution guidance, right, we don't want to give a profit guidance, but I would say I think we are in a good position. Our 2025 DI from certain assets does not reflect the full contributions.

For example, you need to annualize the DI from GMG to project what we will get for the full year of 2026. I think last year, we realized about $300 million of capital from recycling of Philippine Coastal and a stake in Ventura.

We have redeployed about $120 million of that, there's another $180 million that we can deploy this year.

In addition to that, our balance sheet is very strong at 39%, there's additional debt headroom that we can leverage on for undertaking accretive acquisitions, yeah.

Got it, thanks. I'll jump back to the queue.

Thanks, Jialin. Next in the queue would be questions from Suvro.

Hi, Suvro.

Hi. Hi, good morning.

Hi, Kevin and team. Thanks for the call today.

The first question from me is on the divestment gains part of it. I'm a bit confused by the classification of divestment gains as part of your DI.

I always thought that divestment gains and losses, whatever it may be, is a is a accounting item and not a cash item. The whole cash sale proceeds should be a cash item.

How does it fit in with that DI, which is a cash flow, basically? If you're using divestment gains to pay distributions, then how come we are still saying that we have $180 million remaining from the $300 million sale proceeds?

There must be some cash that has been used for distributions from this, right? Thanks.

Suvro, thanks for the question. In fact, the divestment gain is an actual gain.

What we have done with the divestment gain is you could think of it a gain, like a principal return, right? What we have done is we have taken that, meanwhile, to repay the debt at trust level as a cash management basis.

Yeah. Maybe, Suvro, the way I would explain is that we sold PCSPC last year, we sold a 25% stake in Ventura, right, at a very good gains.

I think the gains over there is about over 30% within a year, right? We made profit on the sale of the 25% stake in GMG.

That's our real cash gain, right? We recognized a part of that real cash gain into our DI, and the vast majority of that proceeds is not recognized in our DI.

We only recognize that gain in our DI. The principal is still left in our balance sheet, which we have used part of it to reinvest in GMG.

Of the $300 million, $120 million is used to take a very strategic stake in GMG, and we have about $180 million left, right? Part of this $180 million have been used to pay down debts to reduce interest expense across KIT, right?

That basically lowers our gearing down to 39%, which is very healthy, right? We have those divestment proceeds as well as that additional debt headroom that we can utilize to make further accretive acquisitions.

Hopefully that clarifies.

You're talking about the debt headroom, not that So because you have to pay distributions of $240 million this year if you're distributing 3.95 cents, right? Your DI is $250 million, at least of the $50 million divestment gains, you have to pay out at least $40 million from that to the unitholders.

How do you classify it as a

increased

debt headroom? Yeah.

Sure. Maybe let me just take a step back and explain, right?

We have certain proceeds from the sale, right? Not we did not Okay, just to be clear, we did not recognize the full sale proceeds into the DI.

We only recognized the gain that we make, right, on Ventura, etc., into the DI, right? Yes, we have DI about $250 million, $40 million is about $40 million is from sale of Ventura.

That still reflects well against the 2024 performance. It's still because it's still a higher DI.

More importantly is, I do not I think we want to kind of make it clear that that recurring DI that you're trying to back-solve for, 2025 results does not reflect the full DI generation potential of KIT. Because that that operating or recurring DI that you're trying to back-solve for only includes 1 month's of contribution from GMG, right?

If you annualize that, then you'll get to a a better amount. There's also there's also certain growth that we are trying to achieve in our portfolio that also add to or give additional DI vis-à-vis 2025.

What we would also like to say is that the divestment proceeds, right, have not been fully have not been fully redeployed. Yes, some of it has been used to pay down debts, some of it sits as cash on our balance sheet, and these are the amount, right, that we can use to reinvest that will create additional DI, surplus DI for our for KIT and our unitholders.

Got it. Thanks.

One other question on the capex front, in terms of growth capex versus maintenance capex breakdown, I see the 2026 numbers on slide 34, you are projecting around $100 million growth capex in total for next year. How does it compare with growth capex in 2025?

Is it higher, and how do we finance this growth capex?

Suvro, maybe I can take this. The growth capex is largely stable.

I wouldn't say there's a huge increase on this. In terms of growth capex, I think it's largely going to be funded through internal cash of the respective business or debt facilities.

Shouldn't affect DI to a large extent.

No.

Okay. Got it.

Thank you. That's all.

Suvro, maybe there's one point that I'd like to just add, because I think what you're trying to do is you're trying to solve for the KIT's recurring DI, right? Right, and I think your question is for that gain in our DI, the way I would probably look at it is that if we did not sell a 25% stake in Ventura, our DI would also be higher than what you are projecting, yeah.

True. Yeah.

Thanks, Suvro, for the questions. Did I see Jialin?

Hi. Hi, sorry, it's me again.

I have a follow-up question on Ixom. Just wondering whether you could share some details on the acquisition of one of its subsidiary happened this year.

Also, because I saw the capex breakdown for next year, there is a quite some amount spent on Ixom, just wondering whether you have plans for another acquisition of one of its subsidiary under Ixom, or whether this is just expanding its current project line? Thank you.

Thanks, Jialin, for the question. I think sharing more details around the Hilditch acquisition, this is a base oils importer and distributor.

These are actually like engine oils and lubes used for vehicles, typically for long-distance transport, these are like logistics vehicles. The business is expected to benefit generally from a tightening of fuel emission standards towards a higher-spec type of base oils.

The acquisition is expected to contribute roughly about a single-digit percentage EBITDA to Ixom's pre-acquisition levels.

Maybe again just a bit more, right. Ixom, as we've always say, there is two key business in Ixom.

One is the chlorine business, the other is the chemical distribution business where it owns storage tunnels throughout whole of Australia, and it owns this fleet of very specialized hazardous chemicals distribution fleets, right? This acquisition is a bolt-on for this chemical distribution business.

The thinking behind that is to use the same infrastructure to distribute that products to the same customers. It basically increases revenue to us.

I think this acquisition was done pretty late last year, our DI for last year does not reflect the full contribution from this acquisition. Come 2026, you should see the full-year contributions over there, we expect an uplift over there as well.

More importantly is because we are using the same infrastructure to distribute more products to the same customers, there's also some operational efficiency that we can realize over there.

Thank you for the answer. Sorry, could you remind me because just now you mentioned the financial implication is on the EBITDA level, right?

Could you maybe remind us of the EV/EBITDA before this acquisition or maybe at the acquisition of Ixom itself?

I believe we had disclosed in one of our previous slides that Ixom's EBITDA is roughly about Aussie $200 million. In the current slide, we also have the EBITDA levels for Ixom if you refer to our business updates.

Got it. Sorry, just to clarify.

The financial implication of this new acquisition should we look at it via EV/EBITDA, or should we look at a certain percentage increase in EBITDA?

As I previously mentioned, it's going to be a mid-single-digit EBITDA contribution to Ixom's pre-acquisition EBITDA.

Let me put it in a bit more. Ixom last year, full year ending 2025, I think it's doing over $200 million, slightly over $200, $200-plus million EBITDA.

This acquisition is done late last year, it's not fully reflected into that number. As what Jintao has mentioned, this acquisition on a full-year basis could result in a mid-single-digit increase to Ixom's EBITDA.

Got it. Thank you.

Which would then flows down to our DI.

Thanks, Jialin. Thanks, analysts.

Do we have any other questions from the analyst community? If not, then first and foremost, thank you to our public audience for your questions posed.

I believe most of the questions have been addressed earlier through the common questions raised by the analysts. I just have one or two other additional questions that I will pose to management team now.

The first question is on Ixom's debt. The question is whether is there a expected refinancing cost for the Ixom debt that we should be considering, and whether or not it is significant?

I can take that. We do not foresee an increase in refinancing cost.

In fact, we do see a loan margin compression for Ixom. Do take note that the current market situation in Australia, they are talks about RBA may increase the base rate.

I think at the end of the day, it would be a netted-off position. To answer your question, there would not be an increase in refinancing cost for Ixom.

Thank you, Raymond, for the response. The second question is on the query on the projected capex for GMG.

Can management please advise the capex?

Yeah. I think when we sought unitholders' approval for this acquisition, I think we have disclosed that there's a lot of growth potential in this business.

Our vessels are fully utilized. We want to grow the business, and we want to either buy new vessels, construct new vessels, or buy existing vessels and convert them into cable-laying vessels.

I think I would say we are making good projections over there. I think we have acquired a vessel that's being repurposed into a cable-laying vessel, which we hope once it's be completed can be deployed, and which will then add to revenue, right?

When we look at this acquisition, right, we are aware of certain capex, growth capex, right, that will be coming out. We have also sized a debt facility that we plan to use to debt-fund all these capex.

As a result of this funding method, the impacts of the group growth capex on our DI is not going to be material. Of course, we have also set aside, as disclosed, certain equity commitments that we are prepared to put in to buy even more vessels, right?

At this stage, we have not utilized, or we have not planned to put in that equity yet. As and when we are able to secure new vessels, we will inform the market accordingly.

Thanks, Kevin, for that response. Let me just quickly check to see if there are any additional questions that have come through.

I think we just have one more question from the public. The question here is how big is our onshore wind farm capacity?

Then the second part of the question is whether we intend to buy more of

Yeah. I would say we have about 1.3 gigawatts of gigawatt capacity, right?

Of which, I would say 450 megawatts or 470 megawatts is for the German BKR2, the offshore wind farm. Then a big chunk of the remaining actually comes from our solar asset, the German solar portfolio, where it's doing very well.

I think it has received or registered a good increase in DI from the German solar portfolio. Onshore wind farm is basically distributed across Norway and Sweden.

From a investment quantum perspective, it's a relatively small part of our portfolio. Do we have more plans to buy more wind farms?

I think as and when we find good assets in this sector, we'll do it. If there isn't any attractive assets, I think we are happy to kind of consider other sectors as well.

Thanks, Kevin. I think with that, we have completed all the questions that have been posed to us by analysts and the public.

Thank you so much, everyone, for making time to attend our call. If there are no further questions, we will now close this morning's call, and have a good day ahead.

Thank you.