CONVENTIONAL AND RENEWABLE IN THIS ISSUE ENERGY · 2017-10-05 · rein td 2 wwreinco CONVENTIONAL...

REAL ASSETS

SPOTLIGHTVOLUME 2, ISSUE 5 ■ JUNE 2017

alternative assets. intelligent data.

All data in this newsletter can be downloaded to Excel for free

SIGN UP

Sign up to Spotlight, our free monthly newsletter, providing insights into performance, investors, deals and

fundraising, powered by Preqin data: Alt Credit Intelligence European and US Fund Services Awards: Best Data and Information Provider | Africa Global Funds Awards 2016: Best Research and Data Provider | The Queen’s

Award for Enterprise: International Trade | HedgeWeek Global Awards: Best Global Hedge Fund Research Provider | CAIA Corporate Recognition Award

www.preqin.com/contact [email protected]|

IN THIS ISSUE

FEATURE Conventional and Renewable Energy

2

FEATUREInfrastructure Fund Life Spans

6

INDUSTRY NEWS 9

THE FACTS■ Overview of the Agriculture Industry■ Wind Power Deals ■ Investors’ Source of Allocation

11

1314

CONFERENCES 15

RECENTLY RELEASED: 2017 PREQIN SOVEREIGN WEALTH FUND REVIEW

THE 2017PREQIN SOVEREIGN WEALTH FUND REVIEW


in association with

THE 2017 PREQ

IN SO

VEREIGN

WEA

LTH FU

ND

REVIEW

Order Your Copy Download Sample Pages

INFRASTRUCTURE FUND LIFE SPANS

13.9 Years is the average life span of unlisted infrastructure funds closed since 2009, the longest among all private capital funds. We analyze how life spans for infrastructure funds vary by project stage and look at the proportion of funds that have requested extensions.

Find out more on page 6

CONVENTIONAL AND RENEWABLE ENERGY

52% of conventional energy investors also now target renewables, so here we take a look at this evolving market.

Find out more on page 2

www.preqin.com/signup

www.preqin.com/about

www.preqin.com/contact

mailto:[email protected]

www.google.com/+Preqin

https://www.linkedin.com/company/147822?trk=cws-btn-overview-0-0

https://twitter.com/intent/follow?original_referer=https%3A%2F%2Fabout.twitter.com%2Fresources%2Fbuttons&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&region=follow_link&screen_name=Preqin&tw_p=followbutton

www.preqin.com/swf

https://www.preqin.com/docs/samples/2017-Preqin-Sovereign-Wealth-Fund-Review-Sample-Pages.pdf?rnd=1

https://www.preqin.com/go.aspx?lid=22510

© Preqin Ltd. 2017 / www.preqin.com


2 Real Assets Spotlight | June 2017

CONVENTIONAL AND RENEWABLE ENERGYUsing data from the Preqin Special Report: Conventional and Renewable Energy, we take a look at this evolving market.

The energy industry has faced significant changes in recent years. Not only have

oil prices continued to fall since 2014 – a challenge for companies at all stages of the energy supply chain – but the development of shale gas technology has opened up new resources for extraction. The emergence of economically viable renewable energy assets represents a significant shift in the energy landscape, as well as an opportunity for investors in unlisted natural resources funds. Using data from Preqin’s Natural Resources Online, we examine how fund managers and investors are approaching both conventional and renewable energy sources in this changing environment.

FUNDRAISINGThe fundraising market for unlisted energy vehicles is significantly larger than that of all other natural resources strategies, representing 69% of all natural resources funds closed and 84% of aggregate capital raised since 2008. However, advances in technology, investors’ scrutiny of environmental policies and global trends towards sustainable energy production have resulted in changes to vehicles being brought to market. Fund managers are now eschewing private equity’s beginnings in the energy industry – of investment in non-renewable energy assets – in favour of renewable energy sources.

As such, fundraising for conventional energy vehicles – those with an energy investment remit focused on oil, natural gas, coal, oil field services or a combination of these – has declined significantly (-41%) from the record levels seen in 2015 (Fig. 1), in line with the fall in global oil prices. However, as a crucial aspect of the evolution of natural resources as a distinct asset class, the sub-sector still represents the largest proportion (46%) of energy fundraising since 2008.

Conversely, solely renewable energy fundraising – funds with an energy investment remit focused on biomass, geothermal, hydroelectric, solar or wind power, or a combination of these assets – has increased over recent years, with $14bn and $13bn raised in 2015 and 2016 respectively, above the average $8bn raised annually in the preceding seven years (Fig. 2).

However, the largest growth in energy fundraising comes from those vehicles following a mixed energy mandate. Despite a decline in the number of mixed energy funds reaching a final close in recent years, the amount of capital secured increased to $24bn in 2016 and already stands at $19bn as at May 2017 (Fig. 3). Much of this growth is the result of investors increasingly looking to place

more capital with fewer fund managers which are generally larger firms with the longest track records, as well as both managers and investors seeing value in greater levels of diversification within their portfolios. Larger funds generally have a broader investment mandate than smaller vehicles, which has helped drive the growth in mixed energy fundraising.

As one of the most developed regions for alternatives and a major energy market, the vast majority of energy funds closed since 2008 focus on investment in North America. However, as seen in Fig. 4, it is mainly vehicles targeting conventional energy assets or a mixture of non-

UNLISTED ENERGY CAPITAL RAISED, 2008 - 2017 YTD

(AS AT APRIL 2017)

46%

21%

33%

Conventional Energy

Renewable Energy

Mix

33

2018

26

32

4145

39

27

6

17.914.0

10.3 10.1

19.6

32.0

21.0

38.1

22.3

1.90

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017YTD

No. of Funds Closed Aggregate Capital Raised ($bn)

Source: Preqin Natural Resources Online

Year of Final Close

Fig. 1: Annual Unlisted Conventional Energy Fundraising, 2008 - 2017 YTD (As at April 2017)

26

1922 21

3134

21 22

26

96.0

8.7 10.0

4.2

13.6

8.35.1

13.8 12.6

4.8

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017YTD



Year of Final Close

Fig. 2: Annual Unlisted Renewable Energy Fundraising, 2008 - 2017 YTD (As at April 2017)

www.preqin.com/nro

www.preqin.com/nro

https://www.preqin.com/docs/reports/Preqin-Special-Report-Conventional-and-Renewable-Energy-June-2017.pdf




renewable and renewable energy assets that lead to the region’s dominance in the energy sector.

Contrastingly, renewable energy funds are more geographically diverse than their non-renewable counterparts, with Europe-focused funds representing the largest proportion of funds closed since 2008, in part due to the EU’s Renewable Energy Directive which aims to have 20% of the bloc’s total energy output from renewable sources by 2020. More Asia-focused renewable energy funds have also closed than those with conventional and mixed energy investment mandates.

FUNDRAISING OUTLOOKThere are 140 unlisted energy funds in market as at April 2017, seeking $71bn in institutional capital commitments (Fig. 5). Interestingly, the constituent funds appear more specialized in specific energy markets than historical fundraising trends suggest,

with fund managers seeming to shift to a renewable energy focus: renewable energy funds represent 50% of capital targeted, compared with 40% for conventional energy funds.

The majority (85%) of conventional energy funds in market target North America-focused assets, while the majority (56%) of renewable energy funds are targeting Europe-focused assets. However, greater geographic diversification could be seen in the near future as a result of the Paris Agreement, ratified at the end of 2016. Notably, with commitments from major energy markets in China and India to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions’ starting in 2020, Asia-focused fundraising could represent a greater share of overall energy fundraising.

INVESTORSConventional energy investors are more likely to have a separate natural

resources mandate than renewable energy investors, a proxy for an institution’s level of experience in the asset class (Fig. 6). As conventional energy investment is more established, institutions with such a preference may have been in the asset class for longer and therefore allocate through a distinct bucket. However, when examining the assets under management (AUM) of these two samples, institutions that include a preference for renewables are typically larger: 36% of renewable energy investors have more than $10bn in AUM, including 17% that hold more than $50bn, compared with 28% and 11% of conventional energy investors respectively.

As shown in Fig. 7, investors with a preference for conventional energy investments have the largest appetite for midstream assets (63% of investors), although large proportions still seek downstream (45%) and upstream (52%) assets. Also shown is the crossover

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

ConventionalEnergy

RenewableEnergy

Mix

Diversified Multi-RegionalMiddle East & Israel

Latin America

Australasia

Africa

Asia

Europe

North America


Prop

ortio

n of

Fun

ds

Fig. 4: Unlisted Energy Fundraising by Type and Primary Geographic Focus, 2008 - 2017 YTD (As at April 2017)

52 28.7

73 35.2

15 7.2

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

No. of Funds Raising Aggregate Capital Targeted($bn)

Mix

RenewableEnergy

ConventionalEnergy


Prop

ortio

n of

Tota

l

Fig. 5: Unlisted Energy Funds in Market by Type

10

2

109

11 1112 12

8

3

10.5 9.6

6.3

12.3

9.1

16.016.9

13.8

23.5

19.3

0

5

10

15

20

25

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017YTD



Year of Final Close

Fig. 3: Annual Unlisted Energy Fundraising with a Mixed Energy Mandate, 2008 - 2017 YTD (As at April 2017)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Conventional Energy Renewable Energy

Other

Part of InfrastructureAllocation

Part of Real AssetsAllocation

Part of Private EquityAllocation

General AlternativesAllocation

Separate NaturalResources Allocation


Prop

ortio

n of

Inve

stor

s

Fig. 6: Institutional Investors in Conventional vs. Renewable Energy by Source of Natural Resources Allocation




between the two pools, with 52% of conventional energy investors also targeting renewables and 58% and 61% of renewable energy investors targeting oil and natural gas funds respectively. FUND PERFORMANCEAlthough renewable energy funds have been highly successful in raising capital from investors, over the longer term it is conventional energy funds that have trended towards higher returns, with a median net IRR of 10.3% across all vintages, compared with 4.6% for renewables (Fig. 8). Mixed energy funds, however, have also performed well, with a median net IRR similar to that of conventional energy funds (+9.1%), but a much smaller dispersion of returns, with a top quartile IRR boundary of 13.0% and a bottom quartile IRR boundary of 4.4%.

For vintages 2004 to 2014, the median net IRRs of renewable energy and conventional energy funds were relatively similar (4.6% and 5.9% respectively), although conventional energy funds had higher risk (Fig. 9). However, the best risk-adjusted returns were generated by mixed energy funds, which had a median net IRR of 8.5% and lower risk than either renewable energy and conventional energy funds.

OUTLOOKThe future of the relationship between conventional and renewable energy sources remains uncertain. There are

still technical challenges to overcome to increase the competitiveness of renewable energy assets, as well as political discourse that will shape the future of the entire energy industry. Although the decision made by the US to withdraw from the Paris Agreement poses a challenge for the renewables industry in the US, the continued commitments of other countries to this agreement is likely to result in opportunities for fund managers and investors targeting these regions.

In the short term, OPEC’s decision to curb oil production should stabilize companies operating in the conventional energy industry, and help unlisted funds investing

in the sector to generate returns for their investors. What is certain is that global energy demand will continue to grow, particularly among emerging economies that are undertaking large-scale projects to enhance living standards in their nations. To meet this demand, investment in energy-related projects, technology and companies will increase in both the renewable and conventional energy markets, creating opportunities for fund managers looking for investable assets and for institutional investors looking to deploy capital.

12%

14%

16%

18%

4% 6% 8% 10%

Mix

RenewableEnergy

ConventionalEnergy


Risk

- St

anda

rd D

evia

tion

of N

et IR

R

Return - Median Net IRR

Fig. 9: Risk/Return of Unlisted Energy Funds by Type (Vintage 2004-2014)


Net

IRR

sinc

e In

cept

ion

Fig. 8: Median Net IRR and Quartile Boundaries of Unlisted Energy Funds (All Vintages)

Top Quartile Net IRR Boundary

Median Net IRR

Bottom Quartile Net IRR Boundary

x

ConventionalEnergy

MixRenewableEnergy

-5%

0%

10%

15%

20%

25%

xx

x5%

45%

63%

41%52%

93% 94%

7% 11%

52%43%

50%

36%44%

58% 61%

9% 12%

100%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Dow

nstr

eam

Mid

stre

am

Oil

Fiel

dSe

rvic

es

Ups

trea

m Oil

Nat

ural

Gas

Ura

nium Co

al

Rene

wab

les

Process/Stage Commodity

Conventional Energy Renewable EnergySource: Preqin Natural Resources Online

Fig. 7: Investment Preferences of Institutional Investors in Conventional vs. Renewable Energy

Prop

ortio

n of

Inve

stor

s

Parquest Capital

Global private equity fundraisingCapstone Partners (www.csplp.com) is a leading independent placement agent focused on raising capital for private equity, credit, real assets and infrastructure firms. The Capstone team includes 30 experienced professionals in North America, Europe and Asia.

www.csplp.com

Americas — Europe — Middle East — Asia Pacific

Securities placed through CSP Securities, LPMember FINRA/SIPCAuthorised by FINMA

We congratulate the Parquest Capital team on the first and final closing of Parquest Capital II above its hard cap.

www.csplp.com


© Preqin Ltd. 2017 / www.preqin.com6 Real Assets Spotlight | June 2017

Fund life spans vary considerably across asset classes, so using data from Preqin’s Infrastructure Online, we examine the trends within the infrastructure industry over the past eight years.


Closed-end unlisted infrastructure funds have the longest average life spans

among private capital funds – longer life spans allow infrastructure funds to invest in longer-term projects and help investors by providing steady returns with low correlation to other asset classes which can match investors’ long-term liabilities. However, the market has considerable variety, with fund managers offering vehicles of different lengths to suit asset types and investors’ requirements. In this article, we take a closer look at infrastructure fund life spans using data from Preqin’s Infrastructure Online.

The average life span of infrastructure funds closed since 2009 is 13.9 years, over two years longer than that of natural resources funds (11.3 years) and significantly longer than the average figures for private equity (8.3), real estate (7.3) and private debt (7.2) funds. The figure has grown in recent years, with the average life span for an infrastructure fund closed in 2015 at 15.8 years, up from 11.6 in 2009 (Fig. 1) – however, the average has since fallen to 12.9 years for funds closed since 2016.

Fund life spans vary considerably, as seen in Fig. 2: almost half (47%) of unlisted infrastructure funds closed since 2009 have a life span of 10-12 years; 16% have terms of less than 10 years, and 14% have planned life spans of 25 years or more. Participatiemaatschappij Vlaanderen (PMV), for example, raised the €100mn PMF Infrastructure Fund, a fund with a 35-year life span which invests in infrastructure projects in Belgium and the eurozone and held a final close in March 2013. More recently, France-based fund manager Meridiam raised Meridiam Infrastructure Europe III, a 25-year fund investing in European public private partnership (PPP) projects, which reached a final close on €1.3bn in April 2016.Different funds often target different

types of infrastructure projects, and those investing in greenfield projects have the longest average life span at 13.9 years (Fig. 3). Funds investing in brownfield and secondary-stage projects have average life spans of 12.4 years and 12.3 years respectively, suggesting that the greater time required to construct and generate returns from new infrastructure projects may elongate the average life span of these vehicles.

For long-dated and illiquid assets such as infrastructure projects, there may be occasions when a fund’s life needs to be

11.6

14.1

11.9

14.0 13.3

15.6 15.8

12.9

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

-201

7 Y

TD

Source: Preqin Infrastructure Online

Ave

rage

Fun

d Li

fe S

pan

(Yea

rs)

Fig. 1: Average Life Span of Unlisted Infrastructure Funds Closed, 2009 - 2017 YTD (As at May 2017)

Year of Final Close

16%

47%

13%10%

14%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Less than 10 10-12 13-15 16-24 25 or More


Prop

ortio

n of

Fun

ds

Fig. 2: Unlisted Infrastructure Funds Closed since 2009 by Life Span (As at May 2017)

Life Span (Years)

AVERAGE FUND LIFE SPAN (YEARS) OF FUNDS CLOSED SINCE 2009

(AS AT MAY 2017)

Infr

astr

uctu

re

Nat

ural

Re

sour

ces

Priv

ate

Equi

ty

Real

Est

ate

Priv

ate

Deb

t

13.9

11.3

8.37.3 7.2

AVERAGE LIFE SPAN (YEARS) OFFUNDS IN MARKET (AS AT MAY 2017)

Infr

astr

uctu

re

Nat

ural

Re

sour

ces

Priv

ate

Equi

ty

Real

Est

ate

Priv

ate

Deb

t

12.6 12.1

8.7

6.6 6.8

www.preqin.com/infrastructure


https://www.preqin.com/user/INF/gp_profile.aspx?firmid=58333&=src10

https://www.preqin.com/user/INF/gp_profile.aspx?firmid=58333&=src10

https://www.preqin.com/user/INF/fund_profile.aspx?FundID=19558=src10

https://www.preqin.com/user/inf/gp_profile.aspx?firmid=11176=src10

https://www.preqin.com/user/inf/fund_profile.aspx?fundID=61186=src10

https://www.preqin.com/user/inf/fund_profile.aspx?fundID=61186=src10



13.9

12.412.3

11

12

13

14

Greenfield Brownfield Secondary Stage


Fig. 3: Average Life Span of Unlisted Infrastructure Funds Closed since 2009 by Project Stage Preference (As at May 2017)

Aver

age

Fund

Life

Spa

n (Y

ears

)

extended in order to maximize returns and find the best opportunity to sell assets. Among funds closed since 2009 that are known to have a pre-agreed potential fund extension, over half (54%) have an extension period of two years, a further 37% have extensions of between three and five years and 4% have a potential fund extension of over five years (Fig. 4).

The average life span for unlisted infrastructure funds currently in market is 12.6 years, which is lower than the average since 2009 but still higher than all other private capital fund types. As with funds closed, the largest proportion of funds in market fall in the 10-12-year bracket, but 22% plan to have a life of less than 10 years and only 5% are targeting life spans of 25 years or more.

Despite the greater number of infrastructure funds in market with shorter lives, fund managers are likely to continue offering funds with differing fund life spans to fit the assets available and the fund’s operating model. Stockholm-based Infranode, for example, is currently raising Infranode I, a 25-year fund primarily targeting small- and mid-sized infrastructure assets in the Nordics. The fund held a second close on SEK 3.35bn in February 2017 and plans to hold a final close later in 2017, targeting SEK 4bn. With a wide range of investors currently targeting infrastructure, all with different objectives, fund managers are likely to find appetite for both longer- and shorter-dated funds.

22%

47%

15%12%

5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Less than 10 10-12 13-15 16-24 25 or More


Fig. 5: Unlisted Infrastructure Funds Currently in Market by Life Span (As at May 2017)

Life Span (Years)

Prop

ortio

n of

Fun

ds

5%

54%

14%

9%

14%

4%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

1 2 3 4 5 More than 5


Fig. 4: Life Span Extension for Unlisted Infrastructure Funds Closed since 2009 (As at May 2017)

Prop

ortio

n of

Fun

ds w

ith E

xten

sion

Life Span Extension (Years)

Project Stage Preference

DATA SOURCE:

Access comprehensive information on over 500 infrastructure fund managers worldwide on Preqin’s Infrastructure Online, including total capital raised in the last 10 years, estimated dry powder, number of portfolio companies, investment preferences, direct contact information for key decision makers and more.

For more information, please visit:



https://www.preqin.com/user/inf/gp_profile.aspx?firmID=109298=src10

https://www.preqin.com/user/INF/fund_profile.aspx?FundID=52432=src10

Streamline and automate your entire portfolio management process with Preqin Solutions, our powerful web-based analytics platform designed exclusively for private capital investment professionals.

DATA INTEGRATION

LIMITED PARTNER REPORTING

Automate your data collection work�ows and portfolio

performance analysis.

Shorten your valuation cycle, ensuring consistency and

transparency.

Analyze fund investment performance and utilize exit planning and benchmarking

features.

Replicate and automate your existing LP reports, both in the cloud and in Excel, allowing your IR team to streamline your quarterly reporting process.

Contact us to arrange an online demonstration and �nd out how we can help you:

[email protected] · www.preqinsolutions.com

About Preqin Solutions

Preqin Solutions, formerly Baxon Solutions, delivers market-leading cloud collaboration software for monitoring, valuation, benchmarking and reporting on private capital portfolio investments. The software automates the compilation, analysis and exchange of all portfolio information including operating metrics (�nancial, KPIs, ESG), investment valuations, and ultimately investment and aggregate fund performance. Through the integration of Preqin data, this performance can be contextualized with reference to the broader market for internal and investor reporting purposes.

Now integrated with Preqin performance data on 8,602 private capital funds, in addition to LN, KS, PME+ and Direct Alpha PME methodologies, giving you the

ability to benchmark your performance against private or public markets on the �y.

PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT MADE EASY

PORTFOLIO COMPANIES PREQIN SOLUTIONS USERS

GPs · LPsReports + Dashboards

OUTPUTS

Preqin Solutions One Page Ad v7.pdf 1 16-Jan-17 2:25:12 PM


www.preqinsolutions.com



INDUSTRY NEWS


INDUSTRY NEWSIn this month’s industry news, we examine Blackstone Group’s recently announced plans to raise the largest unlisted infrastructure fund to date, as well as wind power transactions, which have been on the rise in recent years.

Do you have any news you would like to share with the readers of Spotlight? Perhaps you’re about to launch a new fund, have implemented a new investment strategy, or are considering investments beyond your usual geographic focus?

Send your updates to [email protected] and we will endeavour to publish them in the next issue.

SHARE YOUR NEWS

RECENT WIND POWER TRANSACTIONSBLACKSTONE ENTERS THE INFRASTRUCTURE MARKET

In May 2017, Blackstone Group and Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund signed a memorandum of understanding to create a new infrastructure fund to invest in US infrastructure projects. With a target size of $40bn, Blackstone Infrastructure I would be the largest unlisted infrastructure fund ever raised by a considerable margin; to date Global Infrastructure Partners III holds the record, closing on $15.8bn in January 2017. Public Investment Fund, Saudi Arabia’s $183bn sovereign wealth fund, has agreed to commit $20bn to the pool, with Blackstone Group looking to secure the remaining amount from other investors.

Blackstone Group has previously raised the largest buyout fund closed to date (Blackstone Capital Partners V, $20.4bn, closed July 2006) as well as the largest private real estate fund (Blackstone Real Estate Partners VIII, $15.8bn, closed September 2015) – and now looks set to become manager of the largest infrastructure fund as well. In doing so, it would join Global Infrastructure Partners and Brookfield Asset Management as one of the firms raising infrastructure mega funds in recent y ears. If it reaches its target size, Blackstone’s fund will be the third record-breaking raise since Brookfield Infrastructure Fund III ($14.0bn) in July 2016 and Global Infrastructure Partners III ($15.8bn) in January 2017.

Further explained on page 13, the number of wind power deals has increased steadily in recent years due to fund managers taking advantage of the opportunities in the sector: the number of deals completed during 2010-2016 increased from 234 to 437.

Although there have been fewer transactions in 2017 so far – with 122 deals as at May – there has been some high-profile deal activity. In May, Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners acquired three wind power sites under development in the Taiwan Strait for $5.97bn. The three wind farms are currently being developed by Fuhai Wind Corporation and have a total capacity of up to 1,500 MW. Another notable deal was completed in December 2016 when Allianz Global Investors acquired Hästhalla Wind Farm in Sweden, a secondary-stage project, from Eolus Vind for €6.5bn.

$15.8bnSize of Global Infrastructure Partners III, which closed in

January 2017.

$8.3bnSize of Global Infrastructure

Partners II, which reached a final close in October 2012.

$14bnSize of Brookfield Infrastructure Fund III, which reached a final

close in July 2016.

$40bnTarget size of Blackstone

Infrastructure I, the largest fund currently in market.

https://www.preqin.com/user/inf/DealsInfra_CoInvestorProfile.aspx?FirmID=116572&=src10

https://www.preqin.com/user/inf/DealsAsset_Profile.aspx?AssetID=226581&=src10

https://www.preqin.com/user/inf/DealsInfra_CoInvestorProfile.aspx?FirmID=12677&=src10

https://www.preqin.com/user/inf/DealsAsset_Profile.aspx?AssetID=233074&=src10

https://www.preqin.com/user/inf/gp_profile.aspx?FirmID=100177&=src10


https://www.preqin.com/user/inf/fund_profile.aspx?Fundid=57457&=src10




https://www.preqin.com/user/inf/gp_profile.aspx?firmID=14944&=src10

https://www.preqin.com/user/RE/fund_profile.aspx?FundID=49157&=src10

https://www.preqin.com/user/RE/fund_profile.aspx?FundID=49157&=src10

https://www.preqin.com/user/PE/FIM_details.aspx?Fundid=5495&=src10



https://www.preqin.com/user/inf/Investor_details.aspx?FirmID=16244&=src10



CLAIM YOUR FREE COPY OF THE2018 PREQIN PRIVATE CAPITAL COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYMENT REVIEW


Preqin is pleased to partner once again with FPL Associates L.P. to conduct the 2018 Preqin Private Capital Compensation and Employment Survey, the largest global private capital survey of its kind. Participants that fully complete the survey will get a free copy of the Review plus a free excelsheet of all the compensation data for further analysis.

The objective of the survey is to provide clients and participants with customized, real-time compensation trends and data that can be used at all levels of the organization to assist with human capital decisions.

THE SURVEY IS OPEN NOW!

Please click here for more information or contact Lindsay Pankratz: [email protected] to participate.


https://www.preqin.com/item/the-2017-preqin-private-equity-compensation-survey/0/18395

THE FACTS


5%of unlisted natural resources capital

raised since 2008 has been secured by agriculture/farmland funds.

$13bnis being targeted by the 51 unlisted

agriculture/farmland funds currently in market (as at March 2017).

224agriculture/farmland fund managers

globally are profiled on Natural Resources Online.

5 5

9

1413

20

17

1113

11.40.5 0.8

2.34.0

2.04.0

5.2

2.8

0.20

5

10

15

20

25

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

YTD

No. of FundsClosed

AggregateCapital Raised($bn)

Source: Preqin Natural Resources OnlineYear of Final Close

Fig. 1: Annual Unlisted Agriculture/Farmland Fundraising, 2008 - 2017 YTD (As at March 2017)

202.4

10

1.7

5

0.7

15

2.4

4

1.0

31

8.5

11

0.8

125.6

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

No. of FundsClosed

Aggregate CapitalRaised ($bn)

Diversified Multi-RegionalSub-Saharan Africa

North America

MENA

Latin America

Europe

Australasia

Asia


Prop

ortio

n of

Tota

l

Fig. 2: Unlisted Agriculture/Farmland Fundraising by Primary Geographic Focus, 2008 - 2017 YTD (As at March 2017)

25%

88%

22%27%

20%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Agriculture/Farmland

Energy Metals &Mining

Timberland Water


Prop

ortio

n of

Fun

d Se

arch

es

Strategy Targeted

Fig. 3: Strategies Targeted in the Next 12 Months by Natural Resources Investors

55%

73%69%

63%69% 66% 67%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

AgT

ech

Land

Ow

ner

Ope

rato

r

Ow

ner

Ope

rato

r

Ann

ual/R

ow

Pere

nnia

l/Pe

rman

ent

Live

stoc

k

Process/Stage Commodity


Prop

ortio

n of

Inve

stor

s

Fig. 4: Investment Preferences of Agriculture/Farmland Investors

Using data from Preqin’s Natural Resources Online, we provide an overview of agriculture fundraising and the investment preferences of those active in the sector.

OVERVIEW OF THE AGRICULTURE INDUSTRY

www.preqin.com/nro

www.preqin.com/nro

PREQIN GLOBAL DATA COVERAGE

+PLUS

Comprehensive coverage of:

+ Placement Agents + Dry Powder+ Fund Administrators + Compensation+ Law Firms + Plus much more...+ Debt Providers

THE PREQIN DIFFERENCE+ Over 250 research, support and development staff + Global presence - New York, London, Singapore, San Francisco, Hong Kong and Manila+ Depth and quality of data from direct contact methods+ Unlimited data downloads+ The most trusted name in alternative assets

*Private equity includes buyout, growth, venture capital, turnaround, private equity fund of funds, private equity secondaries, direct secondaries, balanced, hybrid, hybrid fund of funds, PIPE, co-investment and co-investment multi-manager funds.**Buyout deals: Preqin tracks private equity-backed buyout deals globally, including LBOs, growth capital, public-to-private deals, and recapitalizations. Our coverage does not include private debt and mezzanine deals.***Venture capital deals: Preqin tracks cash-for-equity investments by professional venture capital fi rms in companies globally across all venture capital stages, from seed to expansion phase. The deals fi gures provided by Preqin are based on announced venture capital rounds when the capital is committed to a company.


PRIVATE EQUITY* HEDGE FUNDS REAL ESTATE INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE DEBT NATURAL

RESOURCES

INVESTORCOVERAGE

6,581Active

Private Equity LPs

5,201Active

Hedge Fund Investors

5,753Active

Real Estate LPs

3,070Active

InfrastructureLPs

2,699Active

Private Debt Investors

2,734Active

Natural Resources Investors

FUNDCOVERAGE

17,439Private Equity

Funds

24,138Hedge Funds

6,434PE Real Estate

Funds

1,148Infrastructure

Funds

2,304Private Debt

Funds

1,653Natural Resources

Funds

FIRMCOVERAGE

11,523Private Equity

Firms

8,939Hedge Fund

Firms

3,888PE Real Estate

Firms

513Infrastructure

Firms

1,475Private Debt

Firms

946Natural Resources

Firms

PERFORMANCECOVERAGE

5,841Private Equity

Funds

16,321Hedge Funds

1,676PE Real

Estate Funds

230Infrastructure

Funds

808Private Debt

Funds


Funds

FUNDRAISINGCOVERAGE

1,954Private Equity

Funds

16,773Hedge Funds

1,086PE Real

Estate Funds

269Infrastructure

Funds

306Private Debt

Funds


Funds

Alternatives Investment Consultants Coverage:

562Consultants Tracked

Funds Terms Coverage: Analysis Based on Data for Around

16,286Funds

Best Contacts: Carefully Selected from our Database of over

400,821Contacts

DEALS & EXITSCOVERAGE

BUYOUT VENTURE CAPITAL REAL ESTATE INFRASTRUCTURE

80,464 Buyout Deals** and Exits

135,415 Venture Capital Deals*** and Exits

37,056Real Estate Deals

26,801Infrastructure Deals

2015 Annual CAIA CorporateRecogni on Award Winner

As at 5th June 2017

ALTERNATIVES COVERAGE

FIRMS FUNDS FUNDS OPEN TO INVESTMENT

INVESTORSMONITORED

FUNDS WITH PERFORMANCE DEALS & EXITS

27,284 49,361 19,882 14,399 25,374 279,736

www.preqin.com/about

THE FACTS


Fig. 5: 10 Largest Wind Power Deals Completed 2016-2017 YTD (As at May 2017)

Asset Location Investor(s) Deal Size (bn) Stake (%) Deal Date

Hästhalla Wind Farm Sweden Allianz Global Investors Capital 6.5 EUR 100 Dec-16

Taiwan Strait Wind Assets Taiwan Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners 6.0 USD 100 May-17

Baltic Srodkowy III Offshore Wind Farm Poland Kulczyk Investments 2.6 USD 100 Aug-16

940MW Vietnam Wind Project Vietnam Mainstream Renewable Power 2.2 USD - Nov-16

Race Bank Offshore Wind Farm UK Macquarie Infrastructure and Real Assets (MIRA) 1.6 GBP 50 Dec-16

Merkur Wind Project Germany ADEME, Deme Group, General Electric, InfraRed Capital Partners, Partners Group 1.6 EUR 100 Aug-16

Hibikinada 229MW Offshore Wind Farm JapanHokutaku Renewable Energy Service, J-Power, Kyudenko Corporation, Kyushu Electric Power

Company, Saibu Gas175.0 JPY 100 Feb-17

LM Wind Power Assets Denmark GE Energy 1.5 USD 100 May-17

Kriegers Flak Wind Farm Denmark Vattenfall 1.3 EUR 100 Nov-16

Deutsche Bucht Offshore Wind Project Germany Northland Power 1.3 EUR 100 Mar-17

254 234266

296

359 360 377

437

122

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

050

100150200250300350400450500

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

YTD

No. of DealsReported Aggregate Deal Value ($bn)Estimated Aggregate Deal Value ($bn)


Fig. 1: Completed Wind Power Deals, 2009 - 2017 YTD (As at May 2017)

Aggregate Deal Value ($bn)

No.

of D

eals

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

YTD

North America Europe Asia Latin America Australasia Africa

Fig. 2: Completed Wind Power Deals by Region, 2009 - 2017 YTD (As at May 2017)

No.

of D

eals


69% 63% 61% 58% 52% 57%44% 45%

30%

5%6% 5%

2%3%

4%

5% 2%

3%

26% 30% 34% 39% 45% 40%51% 52%

67%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

YTD

SecondaryStage

Brownfield

Greenfield

Fig. 4: Completed Wind Power Deals by Project Stage,2009 - 2017 YTD (As at May 2017)

Prop

ortio

n of

Dea

ls


45%53%

44%

25%

45% 47%37%

49% 43%

41%37%

43%

54%

39% 41%54% 31% 35%

8%7%

6%4%

9%8% 5%

10%4%

7% 3% 7%17%

7% 4% 4%11% 17%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

YTD

$1bn or More

$500-999mn

$100-499mn

Less than$100mn

Fig. 3: Completed Wind Power Deals by Value Band, 2009 - 2017 YTD (As at May 2017)

Prop

ortio

n of

Dea

ls


WIND POWER DEALSUsing data from Preqin’s Infrastructure Online, we examine wind power deals by region and aggregate deal value, and look at the largest deals completed since 2016.



THE FACTS


INVESTORS’ SOURCE OF ALLOCATION

33%

13%24%

21%

9%

Separate InfrastructureAllocation




Other Allocation


Fig. 1: Institutional Investors in Infrastructure by Source of Allocation

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Ass

etM

anag

er

Endo

wm

ent

Plan

Foun

datio

n

Insu

ranc

eCo

mpa

ny

Priv

ate

Sect

orPe

nsio

n Fu

nd

Publ

icPe

nsio

n Fu

nd

Other Allocation





Fig. 2: Institutional Investors’ Source of Infrastructure Allocation by Investor Type

Prop

ortio

n of

Inve

stor

s

17%

10%

22%16%

22%

13%






Other Allocation


Fig. 3: Institutional Investors in Natural Resources by Source of Allocation

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Ass

et M

anag

er

Endo

wm

ent

Plan

Foun

datio

n

Insu

ranc

eCo

mpa

ny

Priv

ate

Sect

orPe

nsio

n Fu

nd

Publ

icPe

nsio

n Fu

nd

Other Allocation







Fig. 4: Institutional Investors’ Source of Natural Resources Allocation by Investor Type

Prop

ortio

n of

Inve

stor

s

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Agr

icul

ture

/Fa

rmla

nd

Ener

gy

Met

als

&M

inin

g

Tim

berla

nd

Wat

er

Other Allocation

Part of NaturalResources Allocation





Separate Allocation toStrategy


Fig. 5: Institutional Investors’ Source of Natural Resources Allocation by Primary Strategy

Prop

ortio

n of

Inve

stor

s

We look at how investors in infrastructure and natural resources allocate to the asset class.

33%of investors in infrastructure invest from a separate allocation, compared with only 17% of investors in natural resources.

49%of asset managers have a separate infrastructure allocation, while foundations are the least likely to do so.

15%of natural resources investors have a separate allocation to timberland.

CONFERENCES


CONFERENCES

JULY 2017

Conference Dates Location Organizer Preqin Speaker Discount Code

Family Office & Private Wealth Management Forum 2017 24 - 26 July 2017 Newport, RI Opal Financial

Group - -

SEPTEMBER 2017


Total Alts 2017 7 - 8 September 2017 San Francisco, CA IMN - -

Ai CEO Institutional Investment Summit 2017 18 September 2017 New York, NY Africa Investor - -

SuperReturn Infrastructure 26 - 28 September 2017 London KNect365 Elliot Bradbrook 10% Discount -

FKR2438PRQW

Channel Islands Funds Forum 2017 27 September 2017 Jersey BL Global Amy Bensted Tom Carr -

OCTOBER 2017


Australian Investors Summit 2017 5 - 6 October 2017 Sydney marcus evans Summits - -

Latin Private Wealth Management Summit 9 - 10 October 2017 Cancún marcus evans

Summits - -

FundForum Middle East & Africa 9 - 11 October 2017 Dubai KNect365 - -

C4K Investors Conference 18 - 19 October 2017 Toronto Capitalize for Kids - -

Family Office & Private Wealth Forum – West 25 - 27 October 2017 Napa, CA Opal Financial

Group - -

ASK 2017 Infrastructure Summit 25 October 2017 Seoul The Korea Economic Daily - -

Private Wealth Management Summit APAC 2017

30 October - 1 November 2017 Macao marcus evans

Summits - -

JUNE 2017


GAI AgTech Week 26 - 28 June 2017 Boston, MA HighQuest Group - 15% Discount - Preqin2017

NOVEMBER 2017


9th Annual Women’s Alternative Investment Summit (WAIS) 2 - 3 November 2017 New York, NY Falk Marques Group - -

CONVENTIONAL AND RENEWABLE IN THIS ISSUE ENERGY · 2017-10-05 · rein td 2 wwreinco CONVENTIONAL...

Documents

Transcript of CONVENTIONAL AND RENEWABLE IN THIS ISSUE ENERGY · 2017-10-05 · rein td 2 wwreinco CONVENTIONAL...