To estimate the S&P-adjusted debt-to-EBITDA ratio for VERBUND AG for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022, we follow the workflow provided.

### Step 1: Identify the Relevant Industry

VERBUND AG is an Austrian electricity company. Its primary activities include the generation of hydroelectric power and the trading/sale of electricity. It also operates the electricity grid (through its subsidiary APG).

Looking at the provided industry methodologies:
1.  **Regulated Utilities:** This sector includes companies providing essential infrastructure services subject to comprehensive regulation. VERBUND's grid business is a natural monopoly and regulated. However, a significant portion of its revenue comes from electricity generation (hydro) and trading/sales, which are often considered unregulated or merchant activities, although hydro benefits from low variable costs and long asset lives.
2.  **Unregulated Power And Gas:** This sector includes renewable generation companies and those exposed to market prices. VERBUND's generation portfolio is largely hydroelectric, which is renewable. The trading arm is exposed to market volatility.

S&P Global Ratings typically classifies integrated utilities with significant regulated network assets and generation as **Regulated Utilities** if the regulated portion is dominant or if the generation is low-risk (like hydro with long-term contracts or stable demand). However, VERBUND is often assessed with a mix. Let's look at the revenue breakdown for 2022:
*   Total Revenue: 10,346,088,000 EUR
*   Revenue From Sale Of Electricity: 8,747,422,000 EUR
*   Grid Revenue: 1,309,254,000 EUR

The "Sale of Electricity" revenue is much larger than Grid Revenue. However, "Sale of Electricity" includes both generated power and traded power. The grid business is the core regulated utility component. The generation business (Hydro) is often treated as low-risk/unregulated but with stable cash flows.

In S&P's methodology for **Regulated Utilities**, there is a specific adjustment for "purchased power methodology" for debt-like obligations if they meet native load obligations via third-party contracts. VERBUND is a net exporter/generator, so this might not apply in the same way as a distributor buying power.

More importantly, S&P often applies the **Regulated Utilities** methodology to integrated European utilities, adjusting for the unregulated portions. The prompt provides specific details for "Regulated Utilities" and "Unregulated Power And Gas". Given VERBUND's status as a major national utility with a regulated grid monopoly and low-cost hydro generation (which acts similarly to regulated assets in terms of stability), and the fact that it is a state-owned entity (Republic of Austria holds ~51%), it fits best under the **Regulated Utilities** framework, potentially with adjustments for its merchant exposure. However, without specific details on the percentage of "strongly protected unregulated revenue," we must look at the standard adjustments.

A key distinction in the **Regulated Utilities** section is the treatment of **leases** and **pension deficits**.
*   **Leases:** Under IFRS 16, leases are capitalized. S&P typically adds back lease liabilities to debt if they are not already included in financial liabilities, or treats them as debt-like. In the balance sheet provided, we see "Right-of-use Assets" and implicitly lease liabilities within financial liabilities or separate line items. Standard S&P adjustment for utilities often includes lease liabilities in debt.
*   **Pension Deficit:** S&P adjusts debt for underfunded pension obligations. We need to check if there is a net pension deficit. The data provided does not explicitly list "Net Pension Liability" or "Pension Deficit". It lists "Employee Benefits Expense". Without explicit pension asset/liability data, we cannot make a precise pension adjustment. We will assume no material adjustment or that it is netted/immaterial based on available data, or standard practice if not provided.
*   **Cash:** S&P allows netting of "eligible cash" against debt. Eligible cash is typically unrestricted cash and cash equivalents.

Let's look at the **Unregulated Power And Gas** section. It mentions using EBITDA margin and ROC. It also mentions adjustments for PPAs.

Given the ambiguity and the typical classification of VERBUND by rating agencies (often BBB+ to A- range, viewed as a regulated utility with some merchant risk), we will proceed with the **Regulated Utilities** methodology as the primary framework, applying standard debt and EBITDA adjustments.

**Key Adjustments for Regulated Utilities:**
*   **Debt:** Reported Financial Liabilities + Lease Liabilities (if not included) + Pension Deficit - Eligible Cash.
*   **EBITDA:** Reported EBITDA + Lease Interest/Depreciation add-backs (if EBITDA is after lease depreciation) - Non-recurring items.

Let's extract the data for 2022 (Period: 2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01).

### Step 2: Estimate Adjusted Debt

**1. Reported Debt (Financial Liabilities):**
From the Balance Sheet data for 2023-01-01 (End of 2022):
*   Noncurrent Financial Liabilities: 2,844,559,000 EUR
*   Current Financial Liabilities: 1,109,297,000 EUR
*   **Total Financial Liabilities:** 2,844,559,000 + 1,109,297,000 = **3,953,856,000 EUR**

*Note: The balance sheet also lists "Noncurrent Derivative Financial Liabilities" and "Current Derivative Financial Liabilities". S&P typically excludes derivatives from debt unless they are debt-like hedges. We will exclude them from core debt.*

**2. Leases:**
Under IFRS 16, lease liabilities are often part of financial liabilities or disclosed separately. The data shows "Right-of-use Assets" of 146,613,000 EUR. It does not explicitly list "Lease Liabilities" as a separate line item from "Financial Liabilities". In many IFRS reports, lease liabilities are included within "Financial Liabilities". If they are not, we would add them. Given the magnitude of Right-of-Use assets (~147M), the corresponding liability is similar. If "Financial Liabilities" already includes them, we don't add. If not, we add. Standard S&P practice is to ensure lease liabilities are included in debt. Let's assume the reported "Financial Liabilities" includes interest-bearing debt and lease liabilities, as is common in aggregated line items. If we look at the change in ROU assets and typical reporting, it's safer to check if there's a specific lease liability line. There isn't. We will assume **Financial Liabilities** captures the interest-bearing debt obligations including leases. If we were to be conservative and add the ROU asset value as a proxy for lease liability (assuming 1:1 for simplicity in absence of explicit liability data), Debt would increase. However, usually, `Financial Liabilities` in such summaries encompasses all interest-bearing obligations. Let's stick to the explicit **Financial Liabilities**.

**3. Pension Deficit:**
No explicit pension deficit data is provided in the facts. We assume **0** adjustment.

**4. Other Debt-like Items:**
No guarantees or hybrid debt details are provided. We assume **0**.

**5. Eligible Cash:**
*   Cash And Cash Equivalents (2023-01-01): **409,252,000 EUR**
*   S&P typically nets unrestricted cash against debt. We assume all cash is eligible.

**Adjusted Debt Calculation:**
$$ \text{Adjusted Debt} = \text{Total Financial Liabilities} - \text{Eligible Cash} $$
$$ \text{Adjusted Debt} = 3,953,856,000 - 409,252,000 = 3,544,604,000 \text{ EUR} $$

*Self-Correction/Refinement:* Does VERBUND have significant "Money Market Transactions" that act as cash equivalents? The Cash Flow statement shows "Cash Inflow From Money Market Transactions" and "Cash Outflow". The Balance Sheet "Cash And Cash Equivalents" is the standard net position. We use the Balance Sheet figure.

### Step 3: Estimate Adjusted EBITDA

**1. Reported EBITDA:**
*   EBITDA (2022-01-01 - 2023-01-01): **3,160,679,000 EUR**

**2. Adjustments:**
*   **Leases:** If EBITDA is reported under IFRS 16, it typically includes the depreciation of ROU assets and interest on lease liabilities is below EBITDA. S&P often adds back the depreciation portion of leases to EBITDA to make it comparable to pre-IFRS 16 or to treat leases as debt (where interest is covered by EBITDA). However, the standard S&P definition of EBITDA for utilities often starts with reported EBITDA. If we treat leases as debt, we should add back the lease depreciation included in the EBITDA calculation? No, EBITDA is Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, and Amortization. The depreciation of ROU assets is a non-cash charge included in Depreciation. So Reported EBITDA *already adds back* the depreciation of ROU assets. The interest on leases is below EBITDA. So, no adjustment to EBITDA is needed for leases if we are using Reported EBITDA, *unless* we need to add back the "rent" equivalent. But under IFRS 16, there is no rent expense, only depreciation and interest. Since Depreciation is added back to get EBITDA, Reported EBITDA is effectively "EBITDAR" regarding leases. So, **0 adjustment** for leases to EBITDA.
*   **Non-recurring Items:**
    *   Impairment Loss: 197,761,000 EUR
    *   Reversal Of Impairment Loss: 125,973,000 EUR
    *   Net Impairment: $197,761,000 - 125,973,000 = 71,788,000$ EUR (Expense).
    *   S&P typically adds back impairment losses (non-cash) to EBITDA.
    *   Adjustment: **+71,788,000 EUR**.
    *   Are there other non-recurring items? "Valuation And Realisationof Energyderivatives" is -857,961,000 EUR. This is a huge number. Is it non-recurring? For a utility/trader, derivative valuation is part of normal operations, but extreme volatility might be adjusted. However, S&P usually views trading gains/losses for utilities as part of core earnings unless specified as hedging ineffectiveness or one-offs. Given VERBUND's trading arm, this is likely operational. We will **not** add this back unless it's explicitly marked non-recurring. The prompt doesn't mark it as such.
    *   "Other Income Expense From Subsidiaries..." is small.
    *   "Share Of Profit Loss Of Associates..." is equity income, usually excluded from EBITDA or included depending on definition. Reported EBITDA usually excludes equity income (it's below operating profit). Let's check the reconstruction.
    
    Let's verify the Reported EBITDA reconstruction:
    Profit from Operating Activities: 2,626,196,000
    + Depreciation: 462,694,000
    + Impairment Loss: 197,761,000
    - Reversal of Impairment: 125,973,000
    = 2,626,196,000 + 462,694,000 + 71,788,000 = 3,160,678,000. (Matches reported 3,160,679,000 within rounding).
    
    So, Reported EBITDA includes the add-back of net impairments.
    S&P Adjusted EBITDA typically adds back *non-recurring* impairments. Are these non-recurring? Impairments are often considered non-recurring. Reversals are also non-recurring. So we should add back the *net* impairment loss to EBITDA?
    Wait. The Reported EBITDA *already* has the depreciation and impairment added back to Operating Profit?
    Let's check the definition. EBITDA = Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, and Amortization.
    Operating Profit (EBIT) = Revenue - Expenses.
    Expenses include Depreciation and Impairment.
    So EBITDA = EBIT + Depreciation + Amortization + Impairment (if impairment is considered a non-cash charge similar to depreciation for EBITDA purposes).
    Standard EBITDA definitions vary. Some exclude impairments, some include.
    The provided line item "EBITDA" is 3,160,679,000.
    If we assume this is the standard management EBITDA, it likely adds back impairment.
    S&P Adjusted EBITDA usually starts with Reported EBITDA and adjusts for non-recurring items. If the impairment is non-recurring, and it was *added back* to get to Reported EBITDA, then Reported EBITDA is already "adjusted" for it. If Reported EBITDA *did not* add it back, we would add it.
    Given the calculation above ($2,626M + 462M + 71M \approx 3,160M$), the Reported EBITDA **includes** the add-back of net impairments.
    Therefore, if S&P considers impairments non-recurring and wants them added back, they are **already** in the Reported EBITDA. No further adjustment needed.
    
    However, if S&P considers the *Reversal* as a gain that should be subtracted, and the *Loss* as a loss to be added, and they are both in there, it's neutral.
    
    Let's look for other adjustments.
    **Joint Ventures:** "Share Of Profit Loss Of Associates..." is 4,293,000 EUR. This is equity income, not included in EBITDA. S&P may require proportional consolidation for JVs. If the JV EBITDA is not in the reported EBITDA, we should add the proportional EBITDA of JVs. We don't have JV EBITDA data, only the share of profit. We will assume this is immaterial or included in the "Other" adjustments if necessary, but without data, we leave it.
    
    **Pension Adjustments:** No data.
    
    **Other Normalization:**
    The "Valuation And Realisationof Energyderivatives" is -857,961,000 EUR. This is a significant expense. In 2021, it was -269M. This volatility is due to market conditions. For a utility with a trading book, this is often considered part of core operations, but S&P might smooth it or adjust if it's deemed speculative. However, without specific instruction to treat it as non-recurring, and given VERBUND's business model, we treat it as recurring operational volatility.
    
    So, **Adjusted EBITDA** ≈ **Reported EBITDA** = **3,160,679,000 EUR**.

### Step 4: Calculate the Ratio

$$ \text{Adjusted Debt} = 3,544,604,000 \text{ EUR} $$
$$ \text{Adjusted EBITDA} = 3,160,679,000 \text{ EUR} $$

$$ \text{Ratio} = \frac{3,544,604,000}{3,160,679,000} $$

$$ \text{Ratio} \approx 1.12146... $$

Rounding to two decimal places: **1.12**

**Double Check on Debt Components:**
Did we miss any debt-like items?
*   "Noncurrent Provisions": 619,486,000 EUR. Provisions are generally not debt unless they are pension deficits (already checked) or asset retirement obligations (ARO). AROs are sometimes treated as debt-like by S&P if they are significant and mandatory. However, standard S&P utility methodology often excludes AROs from debt unless they are funded by dedicated assets or are very certain. Without specific classification, we exclude provisions.
*   "Deferred Tax Liabilities": Not debt.
*   "Contributions To Building Costs And Grants": Not debt.
*   "Derivative Financial Liabilities": 1,069,177,000 (Noncurrent) + 1,491,588,000 (Current) = ~2.56 Billion. This is huge. Are these debt-like?
    *   Derivatives are marked-to-market. The liability represents the fair value of out-of-the-money positions. It is not a principal amount owed like a bond. It is a settlement obligation. S&P typically **excludes** derivative liabilities from debt calculations, treating them as working capital or operational items, unless they are structured as synthetic debt. Given VERBUND is an energy trader, these are likely trading/hedging positions. Including them would drastically increase debt. Standard practice is to exclude fair value of derivatives from debt.
    *   However, if these derivatives are hedges for debt, they might be viewed differently. But generally, Gross Debt excludes derivatives.

**Double Check on Cash:**
*   Cash: 409,252,000.
*   Are there restricted cash? Not specified. Assume all eligible.

**Double Check on EBITDA:**
*   Is there any lease adjustment?
    *   If we assume leases are debt, we added the liability to Debt (via Financial Liabilities).
    *   Did we adjust EBITDA? Reported EBITDA adds back D&A. Lease D&A is in D&A. So EBITDA is pre-lease-depreciation. This is consistent with treating leases as debt (where you want EBITDA to cover the interest). So no EBITDA adjustment needed.

**Alternative Interpretation of "Financial Liabilities":**
Does "Financial Liabilities" include the derivative liabilities?
Usually, Balance Sheets separate "Financial Liabilities" (Bonds, Loans) from "Derivative Financial Liabilities". The provided data lists them separately:
*   Noncurrent Financial Liabilities
*   Noncurrent Derivative Financial Liabilities
*   Current Financial Liabilities
*   Current Derivative Financial Liabilities

So our Debt calculation of ~3.95B is correct for interest-bearing debt.

**Final Calculation:**
Debt: 3,953,856,000
Cash: 409,252,000
Net Debt: 3,544,604,000

EBITDA: 3,160,679,000

Ratio: 1.12

<answer>1.12</answer>