Equal · Financial Report

Pertamina Geothermal Energy

PGEO/FY2021–FY2025/Educational Analysis/USD/Data source · 2026-07-10

ROE = tax × interest × margin × turnover × leverage

	FY2021	FY2022	FY2023	FY2024	FY2025
Tax burdendriver	0.53x	0.68x	0.83x	0.89x	0.79x
Interest burden	0.92x	0.93x	0.89x	0.85x	0.85x
Operating margin	47.7%	52.4%	54.7%	52.2%	47.2%
Asset turnover	0.15x	0.16x	0.14x	0.14x	0.14x
Leverage (equity mult.)	1.95x	1.97x	1.50x	1.49x	1.48x
= Return on Equity (consolidated)	6.9%	10.1%	8.3%	8.0%	6.7%
Return on Invested Capital (ROIC)	4.5%	7.1%	9.1%	9.0%	7.8%

Consolidated (pre-minority-interest) basis; the headline ROE in the ratio grid is owners’ basis.

Liquidity

	FY2021	FY2022	FY2023	FY2024	FY2025
Current Ratio(Current Assets / Current Liabilities)	1.40x	0.51x	3.54x	3.65x	4.11x
Quick Ratio((Current Assets − Inventory) / Current Liabilities)	1.32x	0.48x	3.44x	3.56x	3.98x
Cash Ratio(Cash / Current Liabilities)	0.63x	0.31x	2.78x	2.88x	3.35x
Working Capital(Current Assets − Current Liabilities)	$ 80 M	-$ 424 M	$ 619 M	$ 601 M	$ 667 M

Leverage & Solvency

	FY2021	FY2022	FY2023	FY2024	FY2025
Debt to Equity (DER)(Total Debt / Total Equity)	0.78x	0.75x	0.37x	0.37x	0.37x
Liabilities to Equity(Total Liabilities / Total Equity)	0.95x	0.97x	0.50x	0.49x	0.48x
Debt to Assets(Total Debt / Total Assets)	0.40x	0.38x	0.25x	0.25x	0.25x
Net Debt(Total Debt − Cash)	$ 833 M	$ 683 M	$ 53 M	$ 91 M	$ 34 M
Interest Coverage(EBIT / Interest Expense)	12.08x	13.64x	9.18x	6.62x	6.75x
Equity Multiplier (Assets ÷ Equity)	1.95x	1.97x	1.50x	1.49x	1.48x

Profitability

	FY2021	FY2022	FY2023	FY2024	FY2025
Gross Margin(Gross Profit / Revenue)	50.6%	55.1%	55.9%	59.0%	53.9%
Operating Margin(EBIT / Revenue)	47.7%	52.4%	54.7%	52.2%	47.2%
Net Margin(Net Income / Revenue)	23.1%	33.0%	40.3%	39.4%	31.8%
EBITDA(EBIT + D&A)	$ 284 M	$ 307 M	$ 331 M	$ 324 M	$ 331 M
EBITDA Margin(EBITDA / Revenue)	76.9%	79.5%	81.4%	79.7%	76.4%
Return on Assets (ROA)(Net Income / Total Assets)	3.5%	5.1%	5.5%	5.4%	4.5%
Return on Equity (ROE)(Net Income (Owners) / Equity (Owners))	6.9%	10.1%	8.3%	8.0%	6.7%
Tax Burden (Net ÷ Pretax)	0.53x	0.68x	0.83x	0.89x	0.79x
Interest Burden (Pretax ÷ EBIT)	0.92x	0.93x	0.89x	0.85x	0.85x
Return on Invested Capital (ROIC)	4.5%	7.1%	9.1%	9.0%	7.8%

Operations & Efficiency

Turnover	FY2021	FY2022	FY2023	FY2024	FY2025
Asset Turnover(Revenue / Total Assets)	0.15x	0.16x	0.14x	0.14x	0.14x
Inventory Turnover(COGS / Inventory)	11.07x	8.63x	7.90x	9.02x	7.14x
Receivables Turnover(Revenue / Receivables)	2.96x	3.13x	2.98x	3.18x	3.43x
Payables Turnover(COGS / Payables)	2.51x	2.64x	2.17x	1.72x	2.26x

Conversion Period	FY2021	FY2022	FY2023	FY2024	FY2025
Days Inventory Outstanding (DIO)(365 × Inventory / COGS)	33.0 days	42.3 days	46.2 days	40.5 days	51.1 days
Days Sales Outstanding (DSO)(365 × Receivables / Revenue)	123.3 days	116.5 days	122.4 days	114.9 days	106.5 days
Days Payable Outstanding (DPO)(365 × Payables / COGS)	145.3 days	138.1 days	168.3 days	211.9 days	161.8 days
Cash Conversion Cycle (CCC)(DIO + DSO − DPO)	10.9 days	20.7 days	0.3 days	-56.6 days	-4.2 days

Cash Flow

	FY2021	FY2022	FY2023	FY2024	FY2025
Free Cash Flow(Operating Cash Flow − Capex)	$ 222 M	$ 189 M	$ 187 M	$ 155 M	$ 229 M

Valuation

price as-of 2026-07-31fundamentals: FY2025FX 18,058 IDR/USD (2026-07-31)

Price Rp 1,010 · market cap Rp 42 T ($ 2.3 B at the cited rate; statements are filed in USD)

Multiple	PGEO	Peer median	vs median
P/E	17.02x	17.40x	-2%
P/B	1.15x	1.15x	0%
P/S	5.42x	3.91x	+39%
EV/EBITDA	7.19x	7.19x	0%
EV/EBIT	11.64x	11.64x	0%
EV/Sales	5.50x	4.30x	+28%
FCF Yield	9.78%	9.78%	0%
Dividend Yield	5.26%	4.16%	+26%

EV = mkt cap $ 2.3 B + debt $ 753 M − cash $ 718 M = $ 2.4 B

What the price implies

At today’s price, the market is paying for 0.8%/yr FCF growth (-2.6% at 9.3% to 3.9% at 13.3% discount rates). Delivered over the last 4 years: 0.8% FCF · 4.1% revenue.

Reverse DCF: single-stage FCF, terminal growth 2.5%, discount band 9.3–13.3% (β=1; build cited in Methodology). Not a forecast.

Forward DCF (glass-box)

This model projects the operating cash the whole business generates, discounts it back at the blended cost of capital, and subtracts net debt. What remains is the equity value, stated per share. Every input below comes from the company's own audited record or from cited market data, and you can adjust each one yourself.

Assumption	Value	Basis
Rf (risk-free)	4.66%	US 10Y Treasury, 10 Jul 2026
ERP (Rm − Rf)	6.69%	Damodaran Indonesia, Jul 2026 (Baa2, CRP 2.46%)
β	0.46 → 0.58	Green & Renewable Energy (unlevered) relevered at own D/E 0.32
Cost of equity	8.52%	Rf + β × ERP
Cost of debt	4.02%	FY2025 interest expense ÷ total debt
Tax rate	20.9%	median effective rate, FY2021–FY2025 (pretax ≈ EBIT − interest)
WACC	7.22%	76% E × CoE + 24% D × Kd × (1 − t)
Revenue growth (yr 1, fading)	4.1%	delivered 4-yr revenue CAGR 4.1%, fading linearly to terminal
EBIT margin	51.4%	mean EBIT margin, last 3 FYs
D&A / revenue	27.8%	mean D&A/revenue, last 3 FYs
Capex / revenue	20.6%	mean capex/revenue, last 3 FYs, for the explicit years; in the terminal year capex falls to replacement level (equal to depreciation, 27.8% of revenue) because holding a build-phase or pause-phase ratio in perpetuity misprices the company in whichever direction that phase points
ΔNWC / Δrevenue	53.9%	median ΔNWC/Δrevenue across the seeded years (NWC = AR + inventory − AP)
Terminal growth	2.5%	BI inflation-target midpoint (2.5% ± 1%)

Growth path

year 1 → fading to terminal over 5 yrs4.1%

EBIT margin51.4%

WACC7.2%

Terminal growth2.5%

Explicit years5

Year	+1	+2	+3	+4	+5	T∞
Growth	4.1%	3.7%	3.3%	2.9%	2.5%	2.5%
Revenue	$ 450 M	$ 467 M	$ 482 M	$ 496 M	$ 509 M	$ 521 M
EBIT	$ 231 M	$ 240 M	$ 248 M	$ 255 M	$ 261 M	$ 268 M
NOPAT	$ 183 M	$ 190 M	$ 196 M	$ 202 M	$ 207 M	$ 212 M
+ D&A	$ 125 M	$ 130 M	$ 134 M	$ 138 M	$ 141 M	$ 145 M
− Capex	$ 93 M	$ 96 M	$ 99 M	$ 102 M	$ 105 M	$ 145 M
− ΔNWC	$ 9.5 M	$ 8.9 M	$ 8.3 M	$ 7.5 M	$ 6.7 M	$ 6.8 M
FCFF	$ 206 M	$ 215 M	$ 223 M	$ 230 M	$ 237 M	$ 205 M
PV	$ 192 M	$ 187 M	$ 181 M	$ 174 M	$ 167 M	$ 3.1 B

Check it yourself: revenue × margin = EBIT · NOPAT = EBIT × (1 − tax) · FCFF = NOPAT + D&A − Capex − ΔNWC · PV = FCFF ÷ (1+WACC)^yr · TV = FCFF(T∞) ÷ (WACC − g), discounted from year 5

EV = PV(explicit) $ 901 M + PV(TV) $ 3.1 B = $ 4.0 B · TV 77% of EV · − net debt $ 34 M − minority $ 0

Model output: Rp 1,694/share (+68% vs price Rp 1,010)· exit-multiple check (7.2x): Rp 1,254

Under these assumptions the model lands 68% above today's price. The market, in other words, is paying for slower growth, a thinner margin, or a higher discount rate than the inputs here assume.

Sensitivity (per share, Rp)

g \ WACC	6.2%	7.2%	8.2%
2.0%	1,915	1,554	1,309
2.5%	2,140	1,694	1,404
3.0%	2,435	1,867	1,516

Model output under the stated assumptions. Every input above comes from the company's own audited record or from cited market data, and every one can be adjusted. This is not a price target and not advice.

Educational analysis. Multiples pair today’s price with the latest audited fiscal year (trailing-FY convention); peer figures are the covered peer sample, not the whole market. Never a price target.

Macro backdropfull backdrop + sensitivity map →

BI Rate 5.75%IDR/USD 18,05810Y government bond yield 7.26%Inflation 3.34%(as-of 2026-07-31)

Oil ↑(H)Rupiah weaker(M)GDP/consumption ↑(M)

Income Statement

	FY2021	FY2022	FY2023	FY2024	FY2025
Revenue	$ 369 M	$ 386 M	$ 406 M	$ 407 M	$ 433 M
Cost of Goods Sold	$ 182 M	$ 173 M	$ 179 M	$ 167 M	$ 200 M
Gross Profit	$ 186 M	$ 213 M	$ 227 M	$ 240 M	$ 233 M
Operating Income (EBIT)	$ 176 M	$ 202 M	$ 222 M	$ 213 M	$ 204 M
Interest Expense	$ 15 M	$ 15 M	$ 24 M	$ 32 M	$ 30 M
Net Income	$ 85 M	$ 127 M	$ 164 M	$ 160 M	$ 138 M
Net Income Attributable to Owners	$ 85 M	$ 127 M	$ 164 M	$ 160 M	$ 138 M
Depreciation & Amortization	$ 108 M	$ 105 M	$ 108 M	$ 112 M	$ 126 M

Balance Sheet

	FY2021	FY2022	FY2023	FY2024	FY2025
Cash & Equivalents	$ 125 M	$ 262 M	$ 678 M	$ 655 M	$ 718 M
Accounts Receivable	$ 125 M	$ 123 M	$ 136 M	$ 128 M	$ 126 M
Inventory	$ 16 M	$ 20 M	$ 23 M	$ 18 M	$ 28 M
Current Assets	$ 280 M	$ 433 M	$ 863 M	$ 829 M	$ 881 M
Total Assets	$ 2.4 B	$ 2.5 B	$ 3.0 B	$ 3.0 B	$ 3.0 B
Accounts Payable	$ 73 M	$ 66 M	$ 83 M	$ 97 M	$ 89 M
Current Liabilities	$ 200 M	$ 858 M	$ 244 M	$ 227 M	$ 214 M
Total Liabilities	$ 1.2 B	$ 1.2 B	$ 993 M	$ 989 M	$ 989 M
Total Interest-Bearing Debt	$ 959 M	$ 945 M	$ 731 M	$ 746 M	$ 753 M
Total Equity	$ 1.2 B	$ 1.3 B	$ 2.0 B	$ 2.0 B	$ 2.0 B
Equity Attributable to Owners	$ 1.2 B	$ 1.3 B	$ 2.0 B	$ 2.0 B	$ 2.0 B

Cash Flow Statement

	FY2021	FY2022	FY2023	FY2024	FY2025
Operating Cash Flow	$ 248 M	$ 220 M	$ 255 M	$ 258 M	$ 314 M
Capital Expenditure	$ 26 M	$ 31 M	$ 68 M	$ 103 M	$ 84 M

Company Deep Analysis

Reviewed: 2026-07-31

Analyst Verdict

PGEO gross margin shows 100.0% every year in this dataset: the same synthetic artefact as BREN, not a real metric (no cogs/gross-profit breakout exists in the source for utility-template companies). Operating margin (from real EBIT) is the metric that actually describes PGEO's business: 47.7% (2021) → 52.4% → 54.7% (2023 peak) → 52.2% → 47.2% (2025); strong throughout, mildly declining from the 2023 peak in the most recent two years. NM: 23.1% → 33.0% → 40.3% (2023, NM exceeding OPM; a real, unusual pattern meaning a non-operating gain added to profitability that year) → 39.4% → 31.8% (2025). ROE stayed modest and stable despite PGEO's strong margins: 6.9% → 10.1% (2022 peak) → 8.3% → 8.0% → 6.7% (2025); lower than BREN's ROE, reflecting PGEO's much larger, more conservative equity base. ROIC: 4.50% → 7.09% → 9.07% (2023 peak) → 9.01% → 7.77% (2025). D/E: 0.78× (2021) → 0.75× → 0.37× (2023, a sharp drop as equity nearly tripled from USD 1,255.5 M to 1,971.3 M) → 0.37× → 0.37× (2025, stable and low); meaningfully more conservative than BREN throughout. Interest coverage: 12.08× (2021) → 13.64× (2022 peak) → 9.18× → 6.62× → 6.75× (2025); strong throughout despite the decline from the 2022 peak. Current ratio: 1.40× (2021) → 0.51× (2022, a real, notable dip below 1×) → 3.54× (2023, snapping back sharply, coinciding with the equity jump) → 3.65× → 4.11× (2025). Net debt (USD): 833.3 M (2021) → 683.0 M → 53.1 M (2023) → 90.6 M → 34.4 M (2025, near-fully deleveraged). FCF positive every year, USD 154.9-229.1 M range, relatively stable. Revenue (USD): 368.8 M → 386.1 M → 406.3 M → 407.1 M → 432.7 M (2025), growing steadily every year.

Business Model

PGEO (Pertamina Geothermal Energy), part of Pertamina's state-controlled Power & New Renewable Energy subholding, manages 15 geothermal working areas totalling 1,932 MW installed capacity: 727 MW operated directly by PGE, with the remaining 1,205 MW under Joint Operating Contracts (JOC) with other operators. Revenue comes from two structures: Steam Sales Contracts (PGEO owns the steam field, sells steam only to PLN or IPPs, 20-30 year terms with ~2% annual tariff escalation) and Power Purchase Agreements (PGEO owns both steam field and power plant, sells electricity directly to PLN, 30-year terms, PPI/CPI-linked). PGEO is targeting 1 GW of PGE-operated capacity by 2028 and 1.8 GW by 2034.

Segments

PGEO's 1,932 MW total installed capacity splits between directly-operated assets (727 MW, generating both steam-sale and power-sale revenue) and JOC-managed capacity (1,205 MW, where PGEO's economic interest is structured differently through the joint-operating arrangement). The directly-operated share is set to grow toward 1 GW by 2028 as new projects (Ulubelu, Hululais, Lahendong, Sungai Penuh, Kamojang expansions) come online through 2029-2030.

Value Chain & Positioning

Geothermal resource exploration and drilling → steam field development → either steam-only sale (Steam Sales Contracts, to PLN/IPPs) or steam-plus-power-plant development and direct electricity sale (Power Purchase Agreements, to PLN) → long-term contracted revenue (20-30 year terms). PGEO's scale (15 working areas) gives it a broader development pipeline than BREN's more concentrated asset base.

Competitive Forces (Porter’s 5)

Supplier powerLow

How much leverage input/funding providers have over pricing.

PGEO owns its own geothermal working areas and steam fields outright (for directly-operated capacity): no third-party generation dependency for its core business.

Implication → Cost structure is driven by resource quality and drilling economics, not supplier leverage.

Buyer powerHigh

How much leverage customers have to push prices down.

PGEO sells steam and/or electricity almost exclusively to PLN (and IPPs, for steam-only contracts) under long-term Steam Sales Contract / PPA structures: a concentrated buyer base with real negotiating leverage on new-contract terms, though PPI/CPI-linked tariff escalation on existing PPAs provides real inflation protection.

Implication → PLN's buyer concentration caps upside on new capacity while existing contracts' escalation clauses provide more built-in protection than BREN's fixed-tenor contracts.

Threat of new entryLow

How easily new competitors can enter the market.

Geothermal development requires enormous, multi-year exploration and drilling capital before any revenue: real barriers that have kept Indonesia's tapped geothermal share near just 10% of its 29 GW potential.

Implication → PGEO's 15 working areas and Pertamina's state backing give it access to capital and working-area rights that would be difficult for a new entrant to replicate.

Threat of substitutesMedium

Risk that alternative products/services replace demand.

Geothermal power competes against coal, which still supplies over half of Indonesia's generation capacity.

Implication → PGEO's growth, like BREN's, depends partly on continued government commitment to RUPTL renewables targets.

Competitive rivalryMedium

Intensity of competition among existing players.

PGEO and BREN are direct rivals in the same geothermal-development race, both targeting multi-GW capacity over overlapping 2028-2034 horizons: though Indonesia's largely-untapped 29 GW potential means both can grow for years without directly displacing each other.

Implication → PGEO's larger, more diversified 15-working-area portfolio versus BREN's more concentrated asset base is a real structural difference in growth-pipeline breadth, even if BREN's per-project operating margins currently run slightly higher.

Moat / Competitive Edge

PGEO's moat is scale, diversification and state backing: 15 geothermal working areas totalling 1,932 MW (larger than BREN's 926 MW), Pertamina's capital access and policy alignment, and a genuinely conservative balance sheet (D/E just 0.37× since 2023, versus BREN's 2.3-4.8× range). Operating margin has stayed strong throughout (47.2-54.7%), and interest coverage, while declining from its 2022 peak (13.64× to 6.75×), remains healthy. The real vulnerability is the 2022 liquidity dip (current ratio fell to 0.51×, briefly below 1×): a real, notable event that reversed sharply the following year, worth understanding rather than dismissing, since a similar working-capital squeeze could recur during a future capacity build-out phase.

Key Drivers & Sensitivities

Geothermal Capacity Expansion (15 Working Areas)
PGEO is targeting 1 GW of PGE-operated capacity by 2028 and 1.8 GW by 2034, with named projects (Ulubelu, Hululais, Lahendong, Sungai Penuh, Kamojang expansions) coming online through 2029-2030: a real, disclosed, multi-year pipeline broader than BREN's more concentrated growth plan.
Conservative Balance Sheet (D/E 0.37x Since 2023)
PGEO's D/E fell sharply in 2023 (0.75× to 0.37×, as equity nearly tripled from USD 1,255.5 M to 1,971.3 M) and has stayed there: a genuinely more conservative capital structure than BREN's, consistent with state-owned capital discipline, though it may also mean PGEO has less leverage-driven ROE upside than BREN showed in 2022.
PLN Contract Structure (SSC vs PPA)
PGEO's revenue mix between Steam Sales Contracts (steam only, ~2% annual escalation) and Power Purchase Agreements (steam+power, PPI/CPI-linked) determines how much inflation protection its long-term revenue actually has: a real, structural difference from BREN's simpler electricity-only contracts.
2022 Working-Capital Liquidity Dip
Current ratio fell to 0.51× in 2022 (from 1.40× in 2021), a real, notable dip below 1× that reversed sharply in 2023 (3.54×) coinciding with a near-tripling of equity: understanding what drove both the dip and the reversal is more informative than either data point alone.

Linkages

PGEO and BREN both sell to PLN and are direct rivals in Indonesia's geothermal-development race. PGEO, as Pertamina's geothermal subholding, shares an ultimate parent with PGAS (Pertamina's gas subholding): both are part of the same state energy group, tracked here as separate listed entities with their own statements and genuinely different subsegments (geothermal generation vs. gas transmission).

Recent Developments

The most stable business in this group and the least levered. Operating margin has run between 47.2% and 54.7% in all five years and net margin between 23.1% and 40.3%, on revenue that grew in every year from USD 368.8m to USD 432.7m. FY2025 net income of USD 137.7m is nonetheless below the USD 163.6m of FY2023 despite the higher revenue, because margin eased: gross margin 59.0% to 53.9% and operating margin 52.2% to 47.2%. Debt to equity fell from 0.78× to 0.37× and has held there for three years, interest coverage is 6.75× and the current ratio rose to 4.11×. Returns are the caveat: ROIC has never exceeded 9.1% and ROE never 10.1%, modest for margins this wide, which is what a capital-hungry geothermal asset base looks like.

Regulation

PGEO operates under geothermal working-area (Wilayah Kerja Panas Bumi) permits issued by Kementerian ESDM, governed by UU Panas Bumi, with its Joint Operating Contract structure adding an additional layer of regulatory/contractual complexity versus BREN's more direct ownership model. PLN's RUPTL sets the capacity-addition roadmap PGEO's targets are built against. As a Pertamina subholding, PGEO's capital-allocation decisions also reflect broader state-energy-policy considerations. All new capacity requires AMDAL environmental clearance.

ESG & Sustainability

Environmental: geothermal is a genuine low-carbon generation source, positioning PGEO as a direct beneficiary of Indonesia's energy-transition policy. Social: operations span multiple regions (the 15 working areas are geographically distributed) with real community/land-rights considerations. Governance: PGEO is state-controlled (a Pertamina subholding); SOE oversight and public-policy alignment shape its capital-allocation decisions alongside commercial objectives, a genuinely different governance structure from BREN's private Barito Pacific ownership.

Risks

Gross margin/cogs are not meaningful metrics for PGEO given this data source's utility-template presentation (no COGS breakout exists) -- operating margin is the correct metric, and while strong, it has declined from its 2023 peak (54.7% to 47.2% by 2025)
The 2022 current-ratio dip to 0.51x (briefly below 1x) was a real, notable liquidity event -- understanding its cause matters for assessing whether a similar squeeze could recur during future capacity build-out phases
PGEO and BREN both depend on PLN as their dominant/sole buyer -- any adverse shift in PLN's tariff-setting or capacity-planning priorities directly affects PGEO's growth economics
As a Pertamina subholding, PGEO's capital-allocation decisions may reflect broader state-energy-policy priorities rather than pure shareholder-return optimisation
Geothermal capacity targets (1 GW by 2028, 1.8 GW by 2034) depend on execution against genuinely difficult, multi-year subsurface and construction development across a 15-working-area, partly-JOC-managed portfolio

Outlook & What to Watch

Base: PGEO's directly-operated capacity grows toward 1 GW by 2028 as named projects come online, operating margin stays in the high-40s to low-50s percent range, the conservative balance sheet (D/E 0.37x) persists. Bull: Indonesia's RUPTL renewables targets get reinforced, new PPA/SSC tariff terms improve, and PGEO's broader 15-working-area pipeline lets it capture more of the 29 GW untapped potential than more concentrated rivals. Bear: JOC-managed capacity's more complex economics compress PGEO's effective margin capture, and coal's continued grid dominance slows the pace of new PLN contract awards. PGEO is best read as a large-scale, state-backed, conservatively-financed geothermal operator with a broader growth pipeline than BREN but a lower current ROE: the tradeoff between BREN's more aggressive capital structure and PGEO's more conservative one is a real, ongoing contrast worth tracking across both companies. (Interpretation, not a forecast.)

Key KPIs

Operating Margin (Real Metric, Not Gross Margin): 47.2-54.7% range across all 5 years -- strong; gross margin shows a synthetic 100% in this dataset and is not meaningful for PGEO's business model
Directly-Operated Capacity Growth: 727 MW currently (of 1,932 MW total), targeting 1 GW by 2028 and 1.8 GW by 2034
D/E Ratio (Conservative): 0.37x since 2023 -- meaningfully lower leverage than BREN's 2.3-4.8x range
2022 Liquidity Dip: Current ratio fell to 0.51x (from 1.40x in 2021), reversed sharply in 2023 (3.54x) as equity nearly tripled
International Project Funding: Up to USD 477.87M secured across three geothermal projects (per Q1 2026 disclosure) -- a real, disclosed capital-access signal

Sources

Curated narrative (educational interpretation), backed by the linked sources. The figures above are deterministic. Not investment advice.