A company specializing in the development and management of energy assets commissioned us to carry out a valuation to make strategic decisions with a solid economic base, combining internal information with market contrast. From the outset, we approached the work with a very practical objective: to convert a complex portfolio into a clear and actionable conclusion for management.
The differentiating element of the assignment was that we did not value the platform “as a block”, but project by project, analyzing each initiative according to its technology, stage of maturity, investment needs, risks, and monetization potential. This way of working allows us to capture the real value (and its nuances), because in renewable portfolios the value changes radically depending on the degree of progress and the exit path of each project.
In addition, we incorporated the analysis of the company’s value creation model: integral development, support in construction and financing, and the ability to structure operations that maximize value when divesting or rotating assets. In that model, power purchase agreements play a central role.
This is where PPAs come in as a key lever: beyond being “a contract”, a well-structured PPA provides revenue visibility, stability against price volatility, and project bankability. Therefore, in our valuation, we treat PPAs as a decisive factor in understanding which projects were in a better position to be financed, executed, and capture value, and which required a different strategy.
The portfolio also included a specific storage vertical, especially relevant in environments where supply stability is critical. Therefore, we also analyzed that line with the same project-by-project approach, reflecting its strategic value within the whole and preventing it from being “diluted” within an aggregate.
With all this, the final deliverable was not just a figure: it was a value map by initiative, with an executive reading of which projects concentrate the greatest potential, what conditions (including PPAs) unlock it, and what risks must be managed to capture it. That is the kind of clarity that allows you to make quick and safe decisions.
To adequately reflect a platform with projects in different phases, we used an equity approach based on Net Asset Value as a central framework, and we fed it with the individualized analysis of each project (status, investment already made, expectations, risks, and monetization route).
In parallel, we incorporated the key pieces that determine the total economic value: net cash position, adjustments for relevant economic elements (such as the recognition of the value of management when applicable), and a rigorous treatment of obligations and contingencies (returns linked to projects, tax contingencies, and guarantees).
And, very importantly, we integrated the role of PPAs as a project quality variable: their existence, fit, and coherence within the model (for stability, bankability, and execution capacity) was considered a lever that directly conditions the value and the optimal strategy per asset.
The resolution was excellent because we brought together two things that rarely come together: extreme detail (project by project) and global vision (NAV and risks/contingencies). Thus, the management obtained a robust and defensible result, but above all usable: a diagnosis that allows prioritizing, deciding, and negotiating with greater control.
In terms of value for consulting, the difference was in the approach: we did not stay in an aggregated “photo”, but we delivered a strategic portfolio reading where the PPAs appear as what they really are in renewables: a value accelerator and a tool to convert projects into financeable assets.