Industry super fund-owned IFM Investors and ISPT have confirmed they are exploring the merits of a potential merger at the request of significant shareholders.
A merger would recognise IFM and ISPT’s “complementary businesses and capabilities”, the firms told Super Review in a joint statement.
Infrastructure fund manager IFM’s investment capabilities included some $100.9 billion in infrastructure, $43.7 billion of debt investments, $43.7 billion in listed equities, and private equity assets. Among some of its Australian holdings were airports in Brisbane, Sydney, Adelaide, and Melbourne; Port Kembla, Port Botany, and Port of Brisbane; and Ausgrid.
Meanwhile, property platform ISPT held $22.2 billion portfolio which invested in and developed properties across office, residential, retail, industrial, education and health.
The firms also had an extensive common shareholder base, including super funds like Cbus, AustralianSuper, and HESTA.
It was not the first time the firms were in merger talks, according to media reports.
“Any merger must create value for the shareholders and unitholders of IFM Investors and ISPT and deliver strong financial outcomes for their members,” the firms said.
“Discussions are ongoing between the organisations as they seek to identify and assess the opportunities and risks for their shareholders, investors, businesses and people.”
As at 31 December 2022, IFM Investors had some $211 billion in funds under management (FUM). A potential merger with ISPT would bring the combined entity to over $230 billion FUM.
Jim Chalmers has defended changes to the Future Fund’s mandate, referring to himself as a “big supporter” of the sovereign wealth fund, amid fierce opposition from the Coalition, which has pledged to reverse any changes if it wins next year’s election.
In a new review of the country’s largest fund, a research house says it’s well placed to deliver attractive returns despite challenges.
Chant West analysis suggests super could be well placed to deliver a double-digit result by the end of the calendar year.
Specific valuation decisions made by the $88 billion fund at the beginning of the pandemic were “not adequate for the deteriorating market conditions”, according to the prudential regulator.