EDP Renewables, S.A. (EDPR) Earnings Call Transcript

Hello, and welcome to the EDPR First Half 2020 Results Presentation. My name is Jess, and I'll be your coordinator for today's event. [Operator Instructions] I will now hand you over to your host, Mr. Rui Antunes, Head of Financial Planning and Control, IR and sustainability to begin today's call. Thank you.

So thank you very much. So good afternoon, everybody. So I'm Rui Antunes, the Head of IR, as you all know. I have here with me Rui Teixeira today, interim CEO of EDPR. We'll go and make this presentation. As always, we'll start with a brief introduction, some highlights of the period. We'll have some detail on the results, some detail on the execution of our business plan and then we'll hand with conclusions and open -- we'll open the call for Q&A that you may ask questions to us for us to answer to your questions. So I'll now hand over to Rui to start with the highlights.

Great. Thank you very much, Rui. Good afternoon to you all. Thank you very much for your availability to attend. And I hope you're all safe and well, either from home, from the offices in the -- amidst this -- under the pandemic that we are still living in. So I would first highlight, I think what is relevant within the first half of this year concerning the 3 building blocks of EDPR Strategy, the quality of our assets, the way we run a very selective but profitable growth and, of course, our self-funding business model for the entire strategy. Again, on the first building block, good load factors on the first half of 2020, 32% load factor, though still a slight decrease vis-a-vis the 2019 period, impacted here by some volatility on the wind profile, where, in the first half 2020, we reached about 91% of our long-term average that compares to 96% on the first half 2019. But again, we look at this from volatility characteristic on the wind profile. But good availability across the entire fleet of 97%, same level as in the first half 2019. So strong performance on the availability side. Revenues wise, we reached EUR 913 million in this period. This is a 2% increase if we exclude the sell-down scope. Of course, naturally, on a reported basis, year-on-year, they have a 9% decrease. And basically, this is the result of, as I said, lower megawatt driven by the lower capacity driven by the sell down. Lower NTF, as I stated before, but compensated by a improvement in prices and then FX and others. On the OpEx side, and here, we look at the adjusted OpEx on a unitary basis, almost [ 5 ] year-on-year, 3% increase. This naturally has to do with the fact that we are expanding. And we -- as you know, we do have 2.3 gigas under construction, so increasing our asset base. But all in all, I think good results. And we'll see later on some impacts, both at the EBITDA level and net profit as well. I think it's important to highlight here that as we look forward for the remaining year of 2020, also giving visibility that we have 95% of our revenues fixed, that's either through hedges or naturally structurally from on the PPA side and CFDs. So effectively, we tend to see rather a stability in our revenue stream, at least driven by the price variable. On the selective and profitable growth, 6 gigas of capacity already secured in terms of growth, to which we are adding, as you know, 0.5 gigas from the Viesgo acquisition that is -- that was signed in July. Naturally, we need to go through the closing of this transaction through the normal regulatory approvals. But this compares with the 7 gigas of cumulative target of additional capacity for the 2022 business plan. So I think this is -- translates into unparalleled execution of the business plan. Also, we have formally created the wind offshore JV, Ocean Winds with ENGIE. That's 5.3 gigas of portfolio. As we work -- as we are transferring those assets from EDPR books into the JV, naturally, there is value that is already being created. So we are booking this half of the year, EUR 145 million of capital gains. Again, it shows the value of the portfolio that we have been created and further on, that we'll be creating within the JV with ENGIE. So we closed the period with EUR 793 million of EBITDA. Of course, it's 18% reduction vis-a-vis the same period last year. Again, the majority of which is driven by the sell down, so the assets consolidation. And because that until the end of June, we have booked lower capital gains vis-a-vis last year. I'll address that in a few minutes. We have already closed transactions for this year, so we'll see those capital gains being booked in the second half. So all in all, our net profit reached EUR 255 million. It's a 26% decrease year-on-year. But again, it's basically back -- on the back of our EBITDA given these -- the changes in the portfolio and, of course, some lower wind resources. On the self-funding business, as you know, this is a very significant -- or it is of significant importance for the execution of the business plan also delivering here on this front. So already EUR 2.3 billion, and this excludes offshore of sell down between 2019 and '20. Out of this, EUR 1.1 billion have been signed since June. So I would say also very important delivery here on self-funding business model. On the net debt, we closed the period with EUR 4.4 billion. That includes tax equity partnerships. There is an increase of around EUR 300 million vis-a-vis the end of 2019. This has to do with the timing on the CapEx side as well as some FX impact. And of course, we haven't -- we will still have some proceeds of the sell-down that we'll see later on in this year. We haven't seen those yet in the first half. So we have -- we are naturally optimizing the capital structure as well as the cost of debt. All in all, debt was 3.7% cost by the end of June. Tax equity, on average, is around 7%, so rather stable and with good transactions in U.S. One data point, which I think is always important, is look at the cash flow, so retained cash flow at nearly $470 million, so $467 million to be precise. This is -- it compares with the EUR 490 million vis-a-vis the first half 2019. Again, this is driven by top line performance but still very robust cash flow profile. So I think those are the main highlights in what concerns the first half. I would hand over now to Rui to go through it in more detail. Thank you, Rui.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Rui. So I'll now jump to the detail of the results. We start on Page 7. Here is the typical page of the installed capacity of the company. So over the last 12 months, we almost have 1,000 megawatts to our capacity, but we sold down 1.3 gigawatts. So the very strong execution and performance that we have in the self-funding pillar. And today, we have 11.4 gigawatts of installed capacity. Since the beginning of the year, we installed 237 megawatts. There is a big project in U.S. installed in the quarter. We expect things to progress throughout the year. We already have 2.3 gigawatts of capacity under construction. Rui is going to explain this further, but some projects, due to COVID-19 situation, the pandemic situation, it suffered some delays into the beginning of 2021. But as we explained in the previous call, this should not change the fundamental value of the projects. Page 8. In terms of load factor performance, so we got to a 32% load factor in the first half of the year. This is 91% of the long-term average. So it's a big deviation for the first half. That's for sure. Wind resource was not good in the first half. Whereas in the last 2 months was a guide in resource. Of course, the demands of these areas. There's a deviation. And this one impacts, of course, the operating performance of the company in the first half of the year. When we look to Page 9, we see that there is a decline of 9% of the electricity production. If we exclude the assets that were sold, this would have been flat. Of course, we added capacity. We're expecting this to go up if we exclude the sell-down here. But the fact that wind resource was poor, made the numbers flat, and we lost electricity production when we compare with the last year, the same period of last year. So that's when you look to the regional differences, you see that in Europe, it went down by 23%, but this is totally explained by the assets that we sold in Europe mid last year in July. And the United States went up because we added more capacity. And in Brazil, we sold some assets there. And the wind resource was below what we expected for the first half of the year. In Page 10, in terms of electricity price, the average price of EDPR. This is down 2% when compared to last year. Of course, we sold some assets that have a price that is different than the average of the portfolio, a price that is above -- that was above the average of the portfolio. If we strip that out on the comparable basis, there is a positive individual performance of the wind farms in terms of selling price. And this makes the performance favorable in 2% when we compare with last year. We see that in Europe, plus 3%. In Spain, the performance is strong. It's plus 11%. To say here that we have a very good regulatory and financial coverage, especially the financial coverage that was very well made. In the United States, we also had some financial coverage there. So I would say that we did not suffer from the decline -- the sharp decline in energy markets. We're well covered for this year. And as you've seen at the beginning, also are very well covered for next year with 92% of the revenues already fixed. In terms of revenues, it's a decrease of 9%. Without the sell down, the assets sold, it's -- the revenues are up by 2%. The biggest driver here, of course is, besides the assets that were sold, is the wind resource and the variation of the wind resource took out EUR 52 million out of the revenues, but it was offset by better selling prices, mostly because of the coverage of the hedging coverage that we made, and also ForEx that helped to support this positive performance without the sell-down when compared with last year. In terms of price of OpEx, and here is where we bring the efficiency of the company. We showed the reported OpEx figures that are up by 4% and the controllable OpEx is up by 3%. We like to translate this on unitary figures, which shows the efficiency of the company. And the adjusted core OpEx per megawatt is up by 3%. So it's an increase of the cost, of the unitary cost. This was expected by us. We are bringing costs upfront for us to be able to deliver the business plan that we have. As you know, the business plan is very ambitious. Many megawatts are already secured, so a very good visibility on that. We need to bring people to help us to exit -- fully execute and build the megawatts and start with the operations very soon. In terms of EBITDA, EBITDA going down 18%. There are 2 drivers here. One, the scope of assets because of the sell down. And the other one, the difference in capital gains between last year and this year. Last year, we sold the portfolio in Europe, the 1,000 megawatts, and we booked a capital gain of more than EUR 220 million. Right now, we have EUR 145 million due to JV offshore, the transactions asset sales that we made to the JV offshore. We expect this to recover, of course, given that we already announced the transactions this summer, one yesterday. So the first one was in Spain, and the yesterday one was in the United States. And we should bring more capital gains to balance the year-end to get to the positive territory here. So EUR 793 million of total EBITDA is the one that we have reached in the first half. In terms of net profit and making the bridge between EBITDA and net profit. So between EBITDA and EBIT, nothing special to it add here when we compare with last year. Probably I make some remarks on financial results. We have lower financial expenses. So net debt -- average net debt is lower. Cost of debt is lower. So we saved $25 million when compared with last year. In Texas, we have lower taxes in $43 million, so our taxes was -- an effective tax rate actually is quite low in the first half of the period. We got some credits in the United States. We've got some credits in Mexico as well that we got there, and that also helped. Also bear in mind that the capital gains of the very low tax effect there. So almost here in terms of effective tax rates over capital gains. Minority is coming down as well. Given that we sold the portfolio that had minorities last year. Those 1,000 megawatts, we had -- roughly 51% of those assets. So we removed minorities also out of the equation here. And on the bottom line, you see the EUR 255 million. It's a decline vis-à-vis last year. Of course, it's not quite comparable given that capital gains difference that you should compare this on annual basis is when we start to compare sell down capital gains with sell-down capital gains on the year-on-year basis. In terms of net debt, Page 15. Here, you can see the cash flow that we generated in the period. So almost EUR 470 million of cash flow. We made strong cash investments here, more than EUR 800 million. So we are investing strongly, although we might see some months of delays given the pandemic situation, but this will catch up, of course. It's not -- this year or next year, we'll have those cash investments. And -- but we continue to make strong investments to fulfill the growth that we have on the business plan. We paid the dividends to EDPR minorities. We have some ForEx and other differences here. And the difference in total economic liability is about EUR 300 million, mostly explained by the CapEx that we've done in the period. So I'll now stop here with the details, and I will pass to Rui Teixeira to -- for the business plan update.

Okay. Thank you, Rui. So before we move on to Q&A, again, I think that we are very confident that not only we will deliver, but actually we are very positive about how this execution has been unparalleled in terms of our business plan. We have already 11.4 gigas of operational portfolio, where structurally, we have very high visibility on the revenue stream, given the structurally the PPA, CFT hedges that we have set up for the portfolio basis. And therefore, with good visibility on the returns and profitability of -- for this entire operational base. Already 84% of our growth targets are -- have been secured so far in terms of closing PPAs or closing contracts that give us this visibility that we are in for the low-risk profile for these projects. Adding on top of that, this 0.5 gigas of the renewable portfolio that will come after the closing of the transaction in Spain, the acquisition of Viesgo. And also on the self-funding business model, as you know, growth will be supported by the cash generated through the sell-down. You will see afterwards, already 55% of this, the EUR 4 billion target have been achieved or at least finalized. So also good visibility on this. So we're -- I think it's also relevant to see do we see potential disruptions coming out of the COVID-19 pandemia. So let me just go through some issues that we think is relevant to share. In what concerns the revenue stream, very limited exposure in what concerns 2020. As we said before, 95% of our revenues are contracted for 2020, around 93% for 2021. This is as of 2020. So limited exposure to this volatility and to the depression in merchant prices that we observed in different markets, particularly between April and May, June. Also, naturally, we are concerned about the ability to maintain our assets operational if there were some constraints to access the sites or across the different teams, very low availability losses at 0.2% of the fleet in the first half. So also here, I mean, not impacting the operational side, our ability to maintain and operate our sites. On the growth, and in what concerns construction, effectively, we have experienced some supply chain disruptions that impact the timing of the delivery of the equipment on site. And therefore, there has been some delays. This means that we will have some delays on COD. So some -- around 500 megawatts that we're expecting to deliver before the end of this year will move to early 2021. Nevertheless, without any major impact on the project fundamentals, I guess what we are talking about here, just time value of cash moving from the second half of this year or later the last quarter of this year to the beginning of 2021. So I would say that medium-term execution is definitely on track. And not only we have added an additional 600 gig -- sorry, megawatt that are already secured year-to-date, but also with the visibility that with the closing of the transaction from Viesgo, would be adding this 500 megawatts to the operating portfolio. And on the [ SS ] building model. Also here, I would not see any major disruptions as of now from the COVID-19. The fact is that we were initiating these transactions, the one in Spain, of EUR 0.5 billion and the one that we just announced yesterday in the U.S. with USD 0.7 billion. So we were just negotiating this transaction as we went through the peaks of the crisis. Investors were very supportive, actually very keen to conclude the transaction. I think it also highlights the fact that we have quality assets. It's the type of asset that is attractive for many investors, particularly in this context of low interest rates. So here, we did not observe any major impact in terms of disrupting our self-funding business model. Also on the tax equity side, already closed $352 million year-to-date. And we do have an ongoing negotiation with a partner to close the 2020 projects, a letter of interest already signed. So moving 100% full steam ahead. So we would see this flowing as a normal course of business. So I think it shows the resilience of the company. It shows the resilience of the portfolio and effectively also the resilience of the sector within this -- the pandemic that we are -- in getting impacted in our personal lives, but we saw here the resilience of our asset base and develop the company. Naturally, we have seen also many geographies and many governments stating that sustainable investments should be accelerated or should be at the center of an economic recovery. Therefore, we see that we are very well placed to benefit from those recovery programs as they start getting implemented. So best that we prepare for that. On Page 18, I'm sorry, again, just to highlight how confident we are that we should be able -- or we will be able to deliver on this business plan. As you know, we have 7 gigas of target of capacity, additional capacity, for the period [ 2008 ] in [ '19, '22. ] We have been progressing quite well since the announcement of this business plan earlier in 2019. As of today, 84% of this target is secured. And I would highlight, not going through the detail of each of the individual project, but I would highlight that it's relatively across different geographies. So it includes Brazil, Italy, Mexico, Spain. It includes the U.S., of course. It includes Greece. So again, to show that our footprint and the pipeline that we have and ability that we have to move forward and be competitive in these processes is there, and that's why we have reached this 84% of target for the 2022. And again, highlighting the value of the projects that we are acquiring from Viesgo, 511 megawatt, 87% of this is regulated. High load factors, 39%. So it was a good transaction, I think, very strong portfolio, very synergistic with our operations in Iberia. So we do see very relevantly being captured there. And also, on Page 19, a little bit of color on the 2 recent transactions that were announced to the market. So the first one was a portfolio of wind farms in Spain sold to Finerge, 242 megawatt. It was 100% stake sale, EUR 507 million of EV. So very interesting multiple, EUR 2.1 million per megawatt. We will expect this transaction to be completed or to be closed by the fourth quarter of the year. And then just yesterday announcing the second sell down to Connor Clark-Lindh, it's an infrastructure fund, 563 megawatt in U.S. where we sold 80% stake. And here, $676 million EV. It's also a very attractive multiple. Part of this transaction is being -- the closing is expected for at the end of this year, 362 megawatts, and then 200 megawatts will be closed in 2021 before 2020 year-end. It has to do with the timing of COD of these projects. This -- we do expect, roughly speaking, EUR 0.2 billion of capital gains in 2020, driven by these transactions. And again, if we sum up all the transactions that have been done by EDPR, as of now, we have 55% of our EUR 4 billion target already secured. So definitely on track also to deliver on this front. And just to finalize, and before we open to Q&A, on Page 20, just to show that with the creation of the Ocean Winds JV with ENGIE, we have been transferring the assets from EDPR and, of course, from ENGIE side to the JV. Right now only 3 pending, one in Portugal, one in Belgium and the project in U.S. As of now, through this, as you know, this is a transaction that has been done on an ongoing basis, so at market value. And driven by that, we have already generated a capital gain of EUR 145 million. So again, showing the value that we create in the development of these projects. With this, I would thank you again for your time and open to any questions you may have. Thank you.

[Operator Instructions] The first question comes from the line of Alberto Gandolfi from Goldman Sachs.

I have 2 questions, please. The first one is considering the fast pace at which you've been rotating assets and considering that your parent company has been also carrying out quite decisive deleveraging, including the acquisitions for the Viesgo, leg of the transaction on their side, I was wondering where do you see leverage lending at year-end? And where do you think is your -- through the cycle? Or what would be your maximum leverage? Would it be like 3.5, 4x temporarily, and then you bring it down? I'm just trying to understand what your balance sheet headroom would be? And the second question, which is connected to the first one, is considering the deleveraging of the parent company and the transaction you announced today, I count that since December last year, there have been measures of about EUR 5 billion between EDP and EDPR. I mean you're still -- your EBITDA is still down, even adjusting, but it's down because of the perimeter change. You're selling more assets than you're building in the very short term. So I guess the question is do you anticipate a significant CapEx upgrade on the horizon? And can you help us understand and navigate through that? Is your organization ready, say, instead of doing 2 gigawatt growth, 1 gigawatt net to do 3 gigawatt growth, for instance, and 1 gigawatt net, most of your competitors are accelerating growth because of the whole backdrop, green deal, potential to buy the plan, and you've been interestingly silent. You've been preparing the balance sheet. So are you preparing for a big upgrade? When do we hear from you next?

Alberto, it's Rui, the Antunes one. So in terms of leverage, it seems that you're asking leverage target. You know that we at EDPR don't specifically have a leverage target, given that most of the lending comes from parent company, right? Of course, they are in some countries that we have project financing, but what we propose always to do is to keep a balance in terms of investment efforts and the leverage one. I think we have been around the 3x. If you can go more or less, I think also given that we will end, most of it is really EDP also a question of what is EDP leverage headroom, okay. But on our side, what we want to have is the self-funding independence. If we keep the self-funding, we can keep accelerating the growth of the company because we accelerate the CapEx and we -- as you have seen, there is interest on the sell-down on the asset rotation. You can accelerate the asset rotation as well. So this is the balance that we want to keep.

Thank you. Alberto, it's Rui Teixeira. So just addressing the second question. Now we are executing this business plan. Whenever we present the new business plan, we'll talk about that context and that new business plan. But maybe I would just like to highlight the following. I think that we all recognize that there is a significant potential out there, actually driven by economic recovery plans, the green deal in Europe, some potential evolution in the U.S. also depending on the results from the electoral -- from the elections later on this year. So I think we all recognize that politics, there is a significant potential out there in different markets where EDPR is already present. And the second thing I would like to highlight is that hopefully, and particularly since -- hopefully, over time, and particularly since earlier 2019, we have been showing how credible we mean with the long-term targets and how credible hopefully have been being able to build that credibility that once we are committing to a target, we deliver on the target. But as I said, now we are executing this business plan. Whenever we present a new business plan, we'll talk about that.

And forgive me, Rui, the follow-up here, and please cut me off if you want to speak to 2 questions only. But is -- would, theoretically, the organization and the pipeline be ready to basically capture this great potential out there you just eloquently defined?

I think -- again, it will always depend on the targets, right? So -- but what I can say is that we have been -- from an organization perspective, we show that we have -- we delivered on our -- we are delivering on our business plan targets. We are recognized as a place to track talent and where talent is retained. So I think, again, as an organization, we have shown that we are able to meet those -- the challenges that we have. Also on the pipeline, I mean, as you know, we develop pipeline on a greenfield basis, on a quasi-greenfield basis. So again, today, we are executing this business plan. We show that we are building that credibility. We hope to leverage on that credibility also for whatever comes next.

The next question comes from the line of José Ruiz from Barclays.

The first one is about the Spanish hedges. Can you tell us for how long will you benefit from these good hedges? In other words, could we expect EUR 34 million benefit from these hedges in the second half of the year? The second question is very quick. If you can comment on the solar auctions in Portugal, and I'm asking this because of the price signal that came out. Actually, these auctions have now the record lowest price ever seen in an auction.

We're pretty much hedged in Spain. I'm not going to quantify the value. So I don't know what is going to be the market price until the end of the year, but we are pretty much covered there, either with the financial one or the regulatory one. So this has been done at the values around EUR 50 per megawatt hour. We follow very -- have our own risk policy, and we did it some years in advance. So we have some good coverage here for the rest of the year. For 2021, we keep having good coverage there. Of course, it's a bit lower than this one in terms of volumes. And in 2022, we also have some coverage. But we feel comfortable for the rest of the year, even despite that we are seeing the market prices where they are.

Okay. Thank you, Rui. So it's Rui Teixeira here. So in what concerns the auction in Portugal last Monday and Tuesday. So as you know, 700 megawatts were awarded. Out of those, around -- I think it was a 10-megawatt project that was awarded with the CFD at EUR 11.14 per megawatt hour, so effectively the lowest. Although a small -- only 1 small project, but still the lowest CFD price recorded. Indefinitely a record. But the bulk of the capacity was awarded on a merchant basis. So effectively, we have 2 different modalities, one was including storage and the other one without storage. The one including storage, those won, and it was fundamentally Q Cells or the parent company of Q Cells, the South Korean panel producer. So basically they were awarded with half of the capacity, roughly half, at an average cost of EUR 37,000 per megawatts. So basically, they are paying on average -- or per annum for the next 15 years EUR 37,000 per megawatt to sell electricity to the market or to whomever is the offtaker and also capturing any potential from arbitrage by using the storage or the batteries. And then the other block, again, pretty much the other half, was -- were attributed to player, to agents that were selling -- we'll be paying to the system, on average, EUR 73,700 per megawatt for the next 15 years per annum for the next 15 years. Again, and then they will sell electricity, either to the market or to any offtakers. So my comment on this is, definitely, this shows that currently, these options are very competitive, which we are fine with. It also shows that there are a number of players out there that have a view in terms of risk profile that allow them to be in order to pay to the system and be able to produce and to sell on a merchant basis or later on try to lock in some sort of contract. We participated in the project in this -- sorry, participated in this auction. At some point, we see that it doesn't make sense, the profitability, and then we stepped out. And definitely, we do not see that it makes sense to invest on a merchant basis, and therefore, we are keeping our capital allocation into projects with low risk profile, long-term contract where we see it makes sense for this type of projects. So it's just a question of different players have a different perspective on the risk profile that they are taking while operating this solar plant for the next 15 years, at least.

The next question comes from the line of Manuel Palomo from Exane.

I've got -- actually I got 4 questions. I will be brief anyway. Is there any specific rationale behind the sale of an 80% stake instead of 100% stake in your most recent transaction? Do you, first of all, relate it to the most recent transaction announced yesterday? Second one of this is well, you have given some data about the achieved enterprise value per megawatt, but it includes both solar and wind onshore assets. I wonder whether you could provide with some detail by technology. I mean is it fair to assume that the unitary gains are bigger in onshore than in PV, given the different unitary installation cost? The third one would be on -- well, on other 2 transactions that you've made, the one related to 242 megawatts in Spain and also the Viesgo. And according to your press releases, the enterprise value to megawatt, it's pretty different in both transactions. And I wonder whether there is any fundamental -- well, fundamental argument behind the difference in multiples or whether maybe it's just because of your ability when negotiating? And last one is on the U.S.? I mean I'm not going, of course, to ask you whether you prefer Biden to win or Trump to stay put. My question is should we expect a further acceleration in the U.S. in case of a change in government? Or could we assume that you have already reached the cap in terms of run rate of your installations in the U.S. at around 1 gigawatt? Is there any potential upside? I'm not asking you whether you will go from 2 to 3 gigawatts. I'm just asking whether any change could allow you to install 1 megawatts in the U.S. and maybe reshape a bit the installation profile of the company in the coming years.

Thank you, Palomo. So the first one, 80% [ SAV ] 100%. So it really depends on what the investor wants, right? If the investor wants to buy 100% of the assets or they want to buy 80%, and they want us to keep the 20% and keep operating and managing the assets. So it depends on the market. Typically, in the United States, we are seeing 80% there. Elsewhere, we are seeing 100%, is what we are seeing. We fully divested last year on that big portfolio. We fully divested this year on this Spanish transaction as well. We fully divested in the Brazilian one as well. But in the United States, the trends is for us to keep and retain the 20% on the shareholding of the assets. Number two, solar and wind valuation on the yesterday transaction. So it's not that solar and wind are going to have different capital gains per megawatt or unitary gains per megawatt. The difference areas on the EV per megawatts on each technology, given the CapEx per megawatt on each technology. You might see lower CapEx per megawatt on solar. So if we -- this is a blended value that we gave. If we're to disclose value per technology, you might see lower EV per megawatt on solar and higher EV per megawatt on wind, especially if you take the projects to the COD dates. That wind projects already have some years of age and cash flows already generated to us. And that's why also the multiple is lower because the buyer is not purchasing those cash flows. If you take that to see at this stage, the difference on the EV per megawatt, yes, would have been high between the 2 technologies on the EV side. But unitary gain, I don't expect the differences. It's all about the NPV that we are generating in each one of the projects, and we believe we are -- might have difference between solar and wind, but not massive differences as we have on the CapEx per megawatt. On the 3 -- why so different in the 2 multiples in Spain, the Viesgo one and the assets that we sold in August. One thing, when we were the buyers. So it was good that we bought at 1.1. On the other one, we're the sellers. So it's good that we sold that 2.1. Of course, there are some small difference on the assets. The asset that we sold, the edge of those assets, they are younger assets. The difference is not massive. So the one that were sold at 9 years of age and the ones that we bought have 13 years of age. But there are some difference there, not to justify the magnitude of the difference. On the profile of the wind farms in terms of wind resource, there's good wind resource on the Viesgo assets as we have good wind resource on our assets. So I would say, besides that, I think it's a question of opportunity, is what I believe. And we have a program that is gaining a lot of reputation in the assets that we sell. They're very good quality, and we're attracting a lot of interest and investors for -- to buy those assets. Number four, I'll pass this to Rui.