Top 100 Infrastructure Investors 2019

The IPE Real Assets top 100 ranking of some of the world’s largest infrastructure investors has captured more than $415bn (€376bn) in infrastructure assets held by pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, insurers and other institutional capital owners. It was based on IPE Research survey data, Rainmaker information and publicly available information, predominantly in the form of annual reports. Where accurate numbers were not available, estimates have been made. Some investors have not been included due to a lack of information.

We also surveyed investors about their allocations, investment intentions and views on the market. One of the key findings is that most investors do not believe the infrastructure asset class is too expensive – the proportion of respondents with this perception has risen from 52% in 2018 to 72% in 2019 (figure 7).

The finding suggests investors have not been put off by the growing competition and will continue to direct capital towards the sector. Nearly all investors surveyed expect to increase (51%) or maintain (46%) their allocations to infrastructure over the next 18 months (figure 3). And of those that do not currently invest in infrastructure, 23% have definite plans to enter the asset class and 41% say they might invest in the future (figure 4).

For example, Holger Kerzel, who is responsible for illiquid assets of Munich Re and ERGO, says that although infrastructure is looking pricey historically, no asset class is cheap anymore. “Infrastructure, in comparison, is attractive,” he says. Some argue that infrastructure had been too cheap, echoing research by EDHECinfra that suggests the asset class has reached fair value after a period of “price discovery”.

“We’ve been involved in the asset class for a long time, so we’ve been benefitting from that compression of returns,” says Guillaume Morency, infrastructure portfolio manager at Canadian institution Desjardins. “It depends on sector and geography, but in general we still see a good opportunity with pricing that makes sense to us as a core investor.” He adds that the “current prices are supported by the wall of capital” targeting the asset class.

APG is included among those investors expecting to increase their weighting to infrastructure. The Dutch pension fund investor is in the midst of increasing its allocation from 3% to 4% and so it has plenty of ‘dry powder’, although Ron Boots, head of infrastructure Europe at APG, stresses that it is not under pressure to deploy capital.

“When we started infrastructure 15 years ago, clearly expected returns were much higher than currently. But if you do your homework well and you [are] selective on deals you want to pursue then I think there is still money to be made,” he says. “I think we can still make a decent return from infrastructure.”

Swedish pension fund manager Alecta is part of the 23% of investors that have definite plans to enter the asset class. “We have decided that we want to invest in the asset class,” Frans Heijbel, head of international real assets at Alecta. “We think it’s attractive, given where interest rates are and are likely to be and also given the perceived stability and predictability in terms of returns.”

He admits that the “pricing is challenging”, and that Alecta is looking for core infrastructure exposure, not higher-return, “value-add or private equity-type infra”.

top 100 at a glance

top 100 at a glance pt2

Close to two thirds of investors are seeking returns of between 5% and 10%, and most of the rest are seeking 10-15% returns (figure 12). Some investors are concerned about other investors stretching for higher returns by taking on more risk.

Adapting to market dynamics
”The structure in the market has changed,” says Kerzel. “The low-risk part of the market, where you have availability-based, government-backed, very, very stable assets, are more much expensive than they have been before, and there is continuing demand for those assets. So a lot of investors have shifted to the more risky side and take some market exposure.” He says fund managers are “less reluctant to be in more riskier assets”, because “they want to earn their carry and they can only deliver the returns to their LPs only if they take more risk.”

Morency says: “There are a lot of value-add managers. We don’t like the fact that many of them are stretching the risk profile of the asset they are acquiring just to meet their absolute-return target…. that is not why we invest in infrastructure.”

He says this is why Desjardins is increasingly investing more directly, which can include co-investment. “We invest in some more value-add GPs that can unlock value in a 10-year frame, but our preference would be to align with partners of 15 or 25-year-term holding period,” he says.

APG’s infrastructure programme has evolved over 15 years. “It has clearly transitioned, as planned, as we started from funds with co-investments and are more into direct type of deals,” says Boots. “We want to work with partners in a consortium. In some cases we try to lead the consortium. We like to steer where our money goes, we want to be in control.”

But this has required an increase in internal staff. Boots was the first in the infrastructure team in 2005; now APG has 35 people looking at the asset class spread between its offices in Amsterdam, Hong Kong and New York. “You need the skills, the experience, the team, the capacity,” Boots says.

When those investors without an exposure to infrastructure were asked to describe the biggest impediments to invest in the asset class, many mentioned a lack of resources, competition and pricing, complexity and transparency. Figure 11 shows that 41% are not persuaded by the risk-return or diversification properties (up from 10% last year).

The illiquidity of the asset class was selected by 27% of investors (down from 38% last year). Figure 10 shows how liquidity is very important to only 14% of investors, somewhat important to 24%, and not important to more than half. Figure 14 also shows that the majority are looking to hold assets for the long term, with 81% seeking to hold for more than 10 years.

Other investors, while similarly looking to hold for the long term, will consider taking profits if a buyer’s price is right. “We are generally at buy-and-hold,” says Ulrik Weuder, head of global direct investments at Danish pension fund ATP. “That said, every asset is for sale every day.”

Boots says APG is a long-term investor and takes on projects “for at least 15 years or longer”. He adds: “So we are not in the need of selling assets, given that we are into a building phase and growing our exposure. But it is fair to say that if we identify a project that either is not performing as expected or maybe someone is reaching out and says you have this in your portfolio and I am very desperate to buy it…. we clearly will consider taking some money off the table where appropriate.”

While most investors agree that infrastructure is not too expensive across the board, there are pockets where greater concentration of capital has led to pricing that is deterring some of them.

One of the most sought-after and keenly priced areas of the market is renewable energy. This was the most favoured sector among investors (72%), followed by telecoms (61%) and water (47%) – note that percentages do not add up to 100 as survey respondents were able to select more than one answer. “Generally, the renewables market is quite expensive,” says Boots. “If you look at some of the offshore wind projects – especially if you look at Germany – the returns you can make there are quite tight. It might be for a good reason, but a lot of money has flown into some market segments.”

renewable energy assets top the list of favoured sectors

Renewable energy assets top the list of favoured sectors

Morency says Desjardins has invested in renewables a lot in the past, because the long-term contracts are a good match for the group’s pension and insurance liabilities. “But going forward it’s getting more and more difficult to acquire assets with long-term contracts,” he says.

Desjardins is also “cautious” on regulated assets, because of the political risk involved, and is targeting an exposure to 20%. “We have exposure to the water sector in the UK, so we follow that carefully,” he says, referring to the potential for a future Labour government to nationalise British utilities.

Kerzel points to the UK under a Labour government led by Jeremy Corbyn as “probably more of a threat” than Brexit, because the ramifications for infrastructure investors could be “more long lasting”. In line with the two previous years, the proportion of investors that say Brexit has had no effect on their infrastructure strategies has remained at 70% or above (figure 19). This year, the next biggest group (22%) said they would decrease their investment in the UK, also consistent with the findings in 2018 and 2017.

Kerzel says Brexit “has an impact on the market” but does not affect “our investment activity directly”. He explains: “Indirectly because there is less activity currently in the UK market. Obviously, that is related to the Brexit uncertainty…. If there is an opportunity within the UK, of course we would in our due diligence process have a look at the Brexit consequences for this investment, but it doesn’t hinder us to do something.”

Boots says Brexit has led to “remaining uncertainty” and APG has exposure to the market. But, he says, it could lead to opportunities if other investors avoid parts of the market.

Top 100 investor survey results

1 investment intentions

2 do you invest in infrastructure

3 do you expect your allocation to change over the next 18 months

4 if you do not invest in infrastructure which of the following apply

5 how much do you expect to invest or commit over the coming 18 months

6 how much have you invested or committed in the past 12 months

7 broadly speaking is infrastructure too expensive as an asset class

8 how attractive is infrastructure versus real estate

9 would a rise in interest rates affect your allocation to infrastructure

10 how important is liquidity in your infrastructure portfolio

11 what are the main reasons why you do not invest infrastructure

12 what annual return do you require

13 where does infrastructure sit

14 what investment holding period are you

15 do you invest directly or indirectly through funds or listed investments

16 do you invest in infrastructure debt or only equity

17 do you consider infrastructure

18 when investing in infrastructure

19 has brexit affected your infrastructure strategy

20 will infrastructure opportunities in the us increase under the donald trump administration


Top 100 Infrastructure Investors 

Top 100 Infrastructure Investors 2019
 InvestorCountryInfrastructure assets ($’000)Total assets ($’000)As at
2Canada Pension Plan Investment BoardCanada24,936,200293,453,00031/03/19
3National Pension ServiceSouth Korea20,507,900575,260,00031/05/19
4Caisse de dépôt et placement du QuébecCanada16,638,500226,855,00031/12/18
7Ontario Teachers’ Pension PlanCanada13,088,200151,542,00030/06/19
9PSP InvestmentsCanada12,580,400125,804,00031/03/19
10Legal & GeneralUK11,805,700625,016,00031/12/18
13State SuperAustralia9,282,48030,238,40031/12/18
14Future FundAustralia9,012,120109,540,00031/03/19
15British Columbia Investment CorpCanada8,955,920112,946,00031/03/18
17Teacher Retirement System of TexasUS7,695,967154,699,52531/12/18
22MEAG Munich ERGOGermany6,393,180269,186,00031/03/19
25Employees Provident FundMalaysia4,800,850200,640,00031/12/18
26Korea Investment CorporationSouth Korea4,400,000131,600,00031/12/18
34Alaska Permanent FundUS3,460,30061,844,70031/12/18
35First State SuperAustralia3,023,84052,882,00031/12/18
36Washington State Investment BoardUS2,980,853134,700,00031/03/19
37Bayerische VersorgungskammerGermany2,961,79097,107,90031/12/18
38Industriens PensionDenmark2,909,890263,441,00031/12/18
42Ärzteversorgung Westfalen LippeGermany2,816,91015,984,00031/05/19
43Government Pension Investment FundJapan2,647,1401,433,880,00031/03/19
46New Jersey Division of InvestmentUS2,400,00078,186,00030/06/18
47Lloyds Banking GroupUK2,308,61060,566,20031/12/17
48New York City Retirement SystemsUS2,155,000198,986,00031/05/19
49Swiss LifeSwitzerland2,119,590216,308,00031/12/18
50Rest SuperAustralia2,109,65041,771,10031/12/18
51Desjardins GroupCanada2,083,26010,482,90031/03/19
52The Crown EstateUK2,065,87017,628,30031/03/19
53Oregon PERFUS2,000,00075,000,00031/12/18
54CFS FirstChoiceAustralia1,898,69054,288,40031/12/18
59Maine PERSUS1,564,94715,160,47730/06/18
60BBC Pension SchemeUK1,509,77023,243,40031/03/18
61Alberta Heritage Savings Trust FundCanada1,444,50013,663,20031/03/19
62Barclays BankUK1,422,58037,718,00031/12/18
64New York State Common Retirement FundUS1,349,605218,548,32231/12/18
65Danica PensionDenmark1,278,93068,666,50030/06/19
68Pennsylvania PSERSUS1,201,00053,329,00031/12/18
69MTAA SuperAustralia1,195,4708,649,58031/12/18
70Lothian Pension FundUK1,172,09010,418,60031/03/19
71Virginia Retirement SystemUS1,169,84076,669,01830/06/18
73Commonwealth SuperAustralia1,125,15031,363,50031/12/18
77Maryland SRPSUS1,000,00054,200,00030/06/19
78Pension Protection FundUK982,21052,078,50031/03/19
79Swiss ReSwitzerland920,000207,570,00031/12/18
80Nordrheinischen ÄrzteversorgungGermany915,03316,013,10031/12/18
81Sacramento CERSUS892,5009,500,00031/03/19
82Texas ERSUS861,00028,700,00030/06/19
83Mercer Super TrustAustralia843,86117,158,50031/12/18
84Alberta Teachers’ Retirement FundCanada830,52812,816,20031/08/18
85Alaska Retirement Management BoardUS782,31324,874,76031/12/18
86Pension Fund AssociationJapan775,560103,708,00031/03/19
87Australian Catholic SuperAustralia773,5406,188,32031/12/18
90ASGA PensionkasseSwitzerland750,54017,233,00031/12/18
91Varma Mutual Pension Insurance Co.Finland708,03252,855,20030/06/19
92MLC SuperAustralia703,22057,171,60031/12/18
93BT Pension SchemeUK684,00465,363,70031/12/18
94Florida State Board of AdministrationUS682,300160,438,42530/06/18
96MP PensionDenmark624,13118,439,60019/08/19
99Railways Pension SchemeUK534,25933,827,10031/12/18
104South Yorkshire Pensions AuthorityUK428,91511,032,50030/06/19
107Arizona State Retirement SystemUS373,42839,968,35531/12/18
108State Pension Fund (Valtion Elakerahasto – VER)Finland371,81421,871,40031/03/19
109SERS of OhioUS370,00014,300,00031/03/19
110Fonds de Reserve pour les RetraitesFrance329,61637,187,50028/06/19
112Tyne and Wear Pension FundUK266,90111,426,30031/03/19
115Worcestershire Pension FundUK205,5753,498,58030/06/19
119Basellandschaftliche PensionskasseSwitzerland150,9122,012,16010/07/19
120Profond VorsorgeeinrichtungSwitzerland148,7878,332,06031/05/19
121SEB Pension och Försäkring ABSweden115,4852,624,66020/06/19
122VBV Pensionskasse AGAustria98,0007,622,00028/02/19
123ABB Koncernens PensionsstiftelseSweden91,162652,80531/05/19
124Vinci Pension SchemeUK89,173331,21525/06/19
125New England Teamsters Pension FundUS88,0002,500,00028/02/19
126Pensions Caixa 30Spain73,8844,941,10030/06/19
127Norsk Hydros PensjonskasseNorway70,4752,349,17027/06/19
128An Post Superannuation FundIreland56,6443,625,18008/07/19
129Versorgungswerk der Architektenkammer SachsenGermany48,487678,58909/07/19
130Pensioenfonds KBCBelgium44,5362,560,83031/05/19
131La Caisse Marocaine des RetraitesMorocco31,0869,325,76021/06/19
132Pensioenfonds voor de Houtverwerkende Industrie en JachtbouwNetherlands22,876686,27531/12/18
133Pensions Caixa 2Spain2,227226,02131/05/19

Pages in: Top 100 Infrastructure Investors 2019

    Have your say

    You must sign in to make a comment


    Your first step in manager selection...

    IPE Quest is a manager search facility that connects institutional investors and asset managers.

    • QN-2570

      Asset class: Direct Real Estate.
      Asset region: Europe excluding Switzerland.
      Size: 150m.
      Closing date: 2019-10-30.

    Begin Your Search Now