articles Ratings /ratings/en/research/articles/250225-issuer-ranking-emea-transportation-infrastructure-companies-13419539 content esgSubNav
In This List
COMMENTS

Issuer Ranking: EMEA Transportation Infrastructure Companies

COMMENTS

What Looming Tariffs Could Mean For U.S. Corporates

COMMENTS

CreditWeek: What Systemic Risks Does Private Credit Pose To Financial Markets?

COMMENTS

How U.S. Tariffs Could Hit Rated Mexican Entities Across Sectors

COMMENTS

Turbulence At Temporary Health Care Staffing Companies In 2025 May Pressure Ratings On The Heels Of A Boom-Bust Cycle


Issuer Ranking: EMEA Transportation Infrastructure Companies

In this report, S&P Global Ratings ranks the transportation infrastructure companies it rates in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa (EMEA) from strongest to weakest.

We rank the companies by rating, outlook, stand-alone credit profile (SACP), business and financial risk profile, and liquidity assessment. Investment-grade companies (rated 'BBB-' or above) are ranked by business risk profile, then financial risk profile. Speculative-grade companies (rated 'BB+' and below) are ordered by financial risk profile, then business risk profile. We then list companies in alphabetical order if they are not distinguished by these factors.

In line with our corporate rating methodology, the rating may differ from the SACP, where government, group, or rating above the sovereign considerations apply. Where the SACP differs from the anchor, we have applied one or more modifiers, which may include that for liquidity. We have noted the anchor and active modifiers of each company for informational purposes only. For a more detailed analysis of each company, please refer to the company-specific pages on RatingsDirect via the hyperlinks below.

For our sector outlook and analysis, please refer to the related research section at the end of this article.

Table 1

Ranking of EMEA transportation infrastructure companies
Company Country Foreign currency long-term rating Outlook/ CreditWatch GRE SACP Business risk profile Financial risk profile Liquidity Anchor Modifier

Deutsche Bahn AG

Germany AA- Positive Very high (+5) bbb Strong Significant Adequate (0) bbb

Flughafen Zurich AG

Switzerland A+ Positive Moderate (+1) a Strong Modest Strong (0) a

DARS d.d.

Slovenia A+ Positive Extremely high (+5) bbb- Strong Significant Adequate (0) bbb Comparable rating analysis: Negative (-1)

NATS (En Route) PLC

United Kingdom A+ Stable High (+1) a Strong Modest Strong (0) a+ Comparable rating analysis: Negative (-1)

VR-Yhtyma Oyj

Finland A+ Stable High (+3) bbb+ Satisfactory Modest Adequate (0) bbb+

Avinor AS

Norway A+ Stable Very high (+4) bbb Strong Intermediate Adequate (0) bbb+ Comparable rating analysis: Negative (-1)

Societe Nationale SNCF

France A+ Stable Extremely high (+4) bbb Strong Significant Adequate (0) bbb

Royal Schiphol Group N.V.

Netherlands A Positive Moderately high (+2) bbb+ Excellent Significant Adequate (0) a- Comparable rating analysis: Negative (-1)

daa PLC

Ireland A Stable Moderately high (+1) a- Strong Modest Strong (0) a Comparable rating analysis: Negative (-1)

NS Groep N.V.

Netherlands A Stable High (+3) bbb Satisfactory Intermediate Adequate (0) bbb

Societe Nationale des Chemins de Fer Belges

Belgium A Stable Extremely high (+9) b Satisfactory Highly leveraged Adequate (0) b+ Comparable rating analysis: Negative (-1)

SEA S.p.A.

Italy A- Stable Moderate (0) a+ Strong Minimal Strong (0) aa- Comparable rating analysis: Negative (-1), Rating above the sovereign (-2)

Autoroutes du Sud de la France S.A.

France A- Stable N/A a Excellent Intermediate Strong (0) a Entity status within group: Core (-1)

Cofiroute

France A- Stable N/A a Excellent Intermediate Strong (0) a Entity status within group: Core (-1)

APRR S.A.

France A- Stable N/A a- Excellent Intermediate Strong (0) a Comparable rating analysis: Negative (-1)

VINCI S.A.

France A- Stable N/A a- Strong Modest Strong (0) a+ Financial policy: Negative (-1), Comparable rating analysis: Negative (-1)

Aeroports de Paris

France A- Stable Moderate (0) a- Strong Intermediate Adequate (0) a-

Vygruppen AS

Norway A- Negative High (+3) bbb- Satisfactory Significant Strong (0) bb+ Comparable rating analysis: Positive (+1)

Heathrow Funding Ltd. - Class A

United Kingdom BBB+* Stable N/A bbb Excellent Agressive Strong (0) bbb Structural features: (+1)

Gatwick Funding Ltd.

United Kingdom BBB+* Stable N/A bbb Strong Significant Adequate (0) bbb Structural features: (+1)

Aeroporti di Roma SpA

Italy BBB Stable N/A a Strong Modest Strong (0) a+ Comparable ratings analysis: Negative (-1), Entity status within group: Highly strategic insulated (-3)

Ferrovie dello Stato Italiane

Italy BBB Stable Extremely high (-1) bbb+ Strong Intermediate Adequate (0) bbb+

Indigo Group S.A.

France BBB Stable N/A bbb Strong Significant Strong (0) bbb

Renfe Operadora Entidad Publica Empresarial

Spain BBB Stable Very high (+4) bb- Satisfactory Highly leveraged Adequate (0) b+ Comparable rating analysis: Positive (+1)

Holding d'Infrastructures de Transport S.A.S.

France BBB- Stable N/A bbb Strong Intermediate Strong (0) bbb+ Financial Policy: Negative (-1), Entity within group: Highly strategic (-1)

Abertis Infraestructuras S.A.

Spain BBB- Stable N/A bbb- Strong Significant Strong (0) bbb Comparable rating analysis: Negative (-1)

Autostrade per l'Italia SpA

Italy BBB- Stable High (0) bbb- Satisfactory Significant Adequate (0) bbb-

Mundys SpA

Italy BB+ Stable N/A bb+ Strong Significant Adequate (0) bbb Comparable rating analysis: Negative (-1), Group cash flow restrictions (-1)

Mersin Uluslararasi Liman Isletmeciligi A.S.

Turkey BB Stable N/A bbb- Satisfactory Intermediate Adequate (0) bbb- Rating above the sovereign (-2)

Getlink

France BB Stable N/A bb+ Strong Aggressive Adequate (0) bb+ Group cash flow restrictions (-1)

MEIF 5 Arena Holdings S.A.

Spain BB Stable N/A bb Satisfactory Aggressive Adequate (0) bb

Kazakhstan Temir Zholy

Kazakhstan BB Stable Very high (+2) b+ Fair Aggressive Less than adequate (-1) bb-

ContourGlobal Ltd.

United Kingdom BB- Stable N/A bb- Satisfactory Highly leveraged Adequate (0) b+ Comparable rating analysis: Positive (+1)

EP Bco S.A.

Netherlands BB- Stable N/A bb- Satisfactory Highly leveraged Adequate (0) b+ Comparable rating analysis: Positive (+1)

Georgian Railway JSC

Georgia BB- Stable Very high (+2) b Weak Highly leveraged Adequate (0) b

Q-Park Holding I B.V.

Netherlands BB- Stable N/A bb- Strong Highly leveraged Adequate (0) bb Comparable rating analysis: Negative (-1)

TAV Havalimanlari Holding AS

Turkey BB- Developing N/A b+ Satisfactory Highly leveraged Less than adequate (0) b+ Entity status within group: Moderately strategic (+1)

Ukrainian Railways JSC

Ukraine CCC- Negative N/A ccc- - - - -
*Refers to the Class A Senior Secured issue credit rating. N/A--Not applicable. Source: S&P Global Ratings.

The table and charts in this publication provide an overview of the 38 entities we rate in the EMEA infrastructure transportation industry. We rate 27 entities as investment-grade and 11 entities as speculative-grade.

Chart 1

image

About 82% of outlooks are stable; 10% are positive, relating to the airports sector; 5% are negative, relating to the rail sector; and 3% are developing (see chart 2).

Chart 2

image

Our business risk profile assessments mirror our view of each entity's competitive position in this sector and is mainly distributed among the strong and satisfactory categories (see chart 3). Where they diverge, it is usually because we consider country risk is high, which constrains the business risk profile.

Chart 3

image

The financial risk profile assessments in this sector are distributed mainly among the intermediate, significant, and aggressive categories (see chart 4).

Chart 4

image

Roughly 50% of the ratings incorporate one or more modifiers. This mainly stems from the comparable ratings analysis (which we use to consider credit factors that we have not already factored into the ratings), the effect of the entity status within its group, and structural features.

Of the rated issuers, the liquidity position is adequate for 65% and strong for 30% (see chart 5). This reflects the sector's good access to debt markets.

Chart 5

image

Related Criteria

Related Research

This report does not constitute a rating action.

Primary Credit Analyst:Gonzalo Cantabrana Fernandez, Madrid + 34 91 389 6955;
gonzalo.cantabrana@spglobal.com
Secondary Contacts:Karl Nietvelt, Paris + 33 14 420 6751;
karl.nietvelt@spglobal.com
Luca Deslondes, Paris;
luca.deslondes@spglobal.com

No content (including ratings, credit-related analyses and data, valuations, model, software, or other application or output therefrom) or any part thereof (Content) may be modified, reverse engineered, reproduced, or distributed in any form by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC or its affiliates (collectively, S&P). The Content shall not be used for any unlawful or unauthorized purposes. S&P and any third-party providers, as well as their directors, officers, shareholders, employees, or agents (collectively S&P Parties) do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or availability of the Content. S&P Parties are not responsible for any errors or omissions (negligent or otherwise), regardless of the cause, for the results obtained from the use of the Content, or for the security or maintenance of any data input by the user. The Content is provided on an “as is” basis. S&P PARTIES DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE, FREEDOM FROM BUGS, SOFTWARE ERRORS OR DEFECTS, THAT THE CONTENT’S FUNCTIONING WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED, OR THAT THE CONTENT WILL OPERATE WITH ANY SOFTWARE OR HARDWARE CONFIGURATION. In no event shall S&P Parties be liable to any party for any direct, indirect, incidental, exemplary, compensatory, punitive, special or consequential damages, costs, expenses, legal fees, or losses (including, without limitation, lost income or lost profits and opportunity costs or losses caused by negligence) in connection with any use of the Content even if advised of the possibility of such damages.

Credit-related and other analyses, including ratings, and statements in the Content are statements of opinion as of the date they are expressed and not statements of fact. S&P’s opinions, analyses, and rating acknowledgment decisions (described below) are not recommendations to purchase, hold, or sell any securities or to make any investment decisions, and do not address the suitability of any security. S&P assumes no obligation to update the Content following publication in any form or format. The Content should not be relied on and is not a substitute for the skill, judgment, and experience of the user, its management, employees, advisors, and/or clients when making investment and other business decisions. S&P does not act as a fiduciary or an investment advisor except where registered as such. While S&P has obtained information from sources it believes to be reliable, S&P does not perform an audit and undertakes no duty of due diligence or independent verification of any information it receives. Rating-related publications may be published for a variety of reasons that are not necessarily dependent on action by rating committees, including, but not limited to, the publication of a periodic update on a credit rating and related analyses.

To the extent that regulatory authorities allow a rating agency to acknowledge in one jurisdiction a rating issued in another jurisdiction for certain regulatory purposes, S&P reserves the right to assign, withdraw, or suspend such acknowledgement at any time and in its sole discretion. S&P Parties disclaim any duty whatsoever arising out of the assignment, withdrawal, or suspension of an acknowledgment as well as any liability for any damage alleged to have been suffered on account thereof.

S&P keeps certain activities of its business units separate from each other in order to preserve the independence and objectivity of their respective activities. As a result, certain business units of S&P may have information that is not available to other S&P business units. S&P has established policies and procedures to maintain the confidentiality of certain nonpublic information received in connection with each analytical process.

S&P may receive compensation for its ratings and certain analyses, normally from issuers or underwriters of securities or from obligors. S&P reserves the right to disseminate its opinions and analyses. S&P's public ratings and analyses are made available on its Web sites, www.spglobal.com/ratings (free of charge), and www.ratingsdirect.com (subscription), and may be distributed through other means, including via S&P publications and third-party redistributors. Additional information about our ratings fees is available at www.spglobal.com/usratingsfees.

 

Create a free account to unlock the article.

Gain access to exclusive research, events and more.

Already have an account?    Sign in