Insights

Abhishek Gupta, Senior Research Engineer and Product Specialist at EDHECinfra, answers 4 frequent questions following our latest webinar on Strategic Asset Allocation. In the October 27th webinar, you emphasised the importance of taking unlisted infrastructure into account in an investors’ strategic asset allocation (SAA). What was the primary motivation behind this choice of topic? AG: Investors have a number of

EDHECinfra help fill the data gap and is now included in the GIH Infra Monitor 2020. Several years ago, the G20 identified the lack of adequate data on the financial performance of infrastructure investments, the majority of which is unlisted, as an important hurdle for the development of a full-fledged infrastructure asset class. The adequate understanding and benchmarking of infrastructure

We use the EDHECinfra index data to better understand the performance of two peer groups of infrastructure investors: large asset managers and large asset owners. This case study documents how they perform relative to the market, and to each other and why they perform the way they do.

Back in positive territory thanks to a strong cash yield. Roads are back in the black but airports struggle on. Contracted infrastructure continues to be a safe bet The unlisted infrastructure asset class is back to positive returns at the aggregate level, but only thanks to the strong cash yield of infrastructure companies. The infra300 index which tracks a representative global sample

The Q3 2020 release of the EDHECinfra indices incorporates the views and asset-level revenue forecasts of our team of financial analysts. by Jack Lee and the team 1.     Overview: Q3 Update – EDHECinfra updates to cash flow projections due to the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on infrastructure investments At the beginning of the third quarter of 2020, some countries

We examine how infrastructure companies differ from the rest of the economy and in particular whether or not they tend to pay larger and more frequent dividends. We find that infrastructure companies exhibit key systematic differences with a sample of ‘matched’ firms that are otherwise comparable.