To estimate the S&P-adjusted FFO-to-debt ratio for Acciona SA for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022, we follow the workflow outlined below.

### Step 1: Identify the Relevant Industry

Acciona SA is a global leader in renewable energy and infrastructure services. Its primary business segments include Renewable Energy (wind, solar, hydro, biomass) and Infrastructure (water, transport, services).
*   **Regulated Utilities:** While Acciona has some regulated assets (e.g., water concessions), a significant portion of its renewable energy generation is sold under merchant conditions or long-term PPAs (Power Purchase Agreements) which are often classified as unregulated or "strongly protected unregulated revenue" rather than traditional rate-of-service regulation.
*   **Unregulated Power and Gas:** This sector covers renewable generation companies. The methodology notes that unregulated power companies may benefit from policy support and long-term contractual arrangements (PPAs). Acciona fits well here for its energy generation arm.
*   **Transportation Infrastructure:** Acciona has infrastructure concessions (roads, rail, airports). However, the conglomerate is primarily driven by its energy and construction/infrastructure services.

Given the mix, Acciona is often treated as a diversified utility/infrastructure company. S&P typically applies the **Unregulated Power and Gas** methodology for the renewable generation component and potentially **Transportation Infrastructure** for concessions, or a blended approach. However, for a consolidated entity like Acciona, if it doesn't fit neatly into a single pure-play definition, we look at the dominant risk profile. Acciona's renewable energy business is a major driver. The "Unregulated Power and Gas" methodology is appropriate for the generation side. The "Transportation Infrastructure" methodology applies to concessions.

However, looking at the provided text, there is no specific "Conglomerate" or "Construction" methodology. Acciona also has a significant Construction/Services arm which is cyclical. In the absence of a specific construction methodology, and given the prominence of its renewable energy assets (which are capital intensive and debt-funded), we will apply the **Unregulated Power and Gas** methodology as the primary lens for financial ratios, noting that S&P often uses standard corporate adjustments for diversified industrials if they don't meet the strict "regulated" or "pure infrastructure" criteria.

Let's look at the specific adjustments required.
*   **Leases:** IFRS 16 requires capitalization of leases. S&P typically adds lease liabilities to debt and adds lease interest/rent back to EBITDA/FFO calculations depending on the specific ratio definition.
*   **Hybrid Debt:** We need to check for hybrid instruments. The balance sheet lists "Participaciones Preferentes Obligaciones YOtros Valores Negociables" (Preferred Shares, Bonds, and other negotiable securities). These often contain hybrid characteristics.

Let's proceed with the calculations using the standard S&P Corporate Methodology baselines, adjusted for the specific line items available in the report.

### Step 2: Estimate Adjusted EBITDA

First, we reconstruct EBITDA from the Income Statement data provided for the period 2022-01-01 to 2023-01-01.

**Reported Data:**
*   Revenue: 11,195,000,000 EUR
*   Profit Loss From Operating Activities (EBIT): 1,334,000,000 EUR
*   Dotacion Amortizacion YVariacion De Provisiones (Depreciation, Amortization, and Provision changes): 762,000,000 EUR
*   Impairment Loss Reversal: -15,000,000 EUR (This is a gain/reversal, so it reduced expenses or increased income. To get to cash EBITDA, we usually add back impairment losses. A reversal is a non-cash gain, so we should subtract it if it's included in EBIT, or simply note that the D&A line likely includes the net provision movement).
    *   *Note:* "Dotacion Amortizacion YVariacion De Provisiones" usually represents the expense charged. If there was a reversal of 15M, the net charge might be lower, or the reversal is separate. The line item "Impairment Loss Reversal..." is listed separately in the P&L structure often. Let's assume the 762M is the D&A expense. The -15M impairment reversal likely increased the Operating Profit. To get to EBITDA, we add back D&A.
*   Other Gains/Losses: 13,000,000 EUR.

**Reconstructed EBITDA:**
$$EBITDA = \text{Operating Profit} + \text{Depreciation & Amortization} + \text{Impairment Losses} - \text{Impairment Reversals}$$
$$EBITDA = 1,334,000,000 + 762,000,000 - (-15,000,000 \text{ is a reversal, so it's a gain}) $$
Wait, the line item is "Impairment Loss Reversal... -15,000,000". In many European formats, expenses are positive and income/reversals are negative or vice versa. Let's look at the context.
"Profit Loss From Operating Activities" is 1,334M.
If the impairment reversal is -15M, and it's listed under adjustments, it likely means it was a negative expense (a gain) included in the Operating Profit.
Standard EBITDA calculation: Start with Operating Profit, add back D&A.
$EBITDA = 1,334,000,000 + 762,000,000 = 2,096,000,000$ EUR.
We should adjust for non-recurring items. The impairment reversal of 15M is a non-cash gain. We should subtract it to normalize.
Other Gains/Losses of 13M. We will assume these are recurring or minor unless specified otherwise.
Let's assume **Reported EBITDA** $\approx 2,096,000,000$ EUR.

**Adjustments for Leases:**
Under IFRS 16, lease expenses are replaced by depreciation and interest. S&P often treats operating leases as debt. For EBITDA, since IFRS 16 already moves lease rent to Depreciation and Interest, the reported EBITDA (Operating Profit + D&A) *excludes* the interest portion but *includes* the depreciation portion.
S&P's definition of FFO often starts with Net Income or EBITDA.
If we use the formula: $FFO = \text{Adjusted EBITDA} - \text{Cash Interest} - \text{Cash Taxes}$.
In IFRS 16, "Finance Costs" include lease interest. "Depreciation" includes lease asset depreciation.
Reported EBITDA (Op Profit + D&A) adds back the lease depreciation. It does *not* add back lease interest (because interest is below Operating Profit).
So, Reported EBITDA is effectively "EBITDA before lease interest".
S&P often adds back lease interest to EBITDA if they treat leases as debt (to get a pre-interest metric) OR they leave it out if they define FFO as after-interest.
The prompt formula: $FFO = \text{Adjusted EBITDA} - \text{cash interest} - \text{cash taxes}$.
If Adjusted EBITDA includes lease interest add-back, then we subtract *all* cash interest (including lease interest) later.
If Adjusted EBITDA does *not* include lease interest add-back, we subtract only non-lease interest? No, standard FFO subtracts total interest.
Let's stick to the standard S&P adjustment: Add back lease interest to EBITDA?
Actually, for IFRS reporters, S&P often calculates EBITDA as Reported EBITDA + Lease Interest (if not already added). But Reported EBITDA (Op Inc + D&A) does not include interest. So Reported EBITDA is correct as a pre-interest metric *excluding* lease interest expense (which is in Finance Costs).
Wait, Operating Profit is before Finance Costs. So Operating Profit does not deduct lease interest. D&A adds back lease depreciation. So Reported EBITDA = Op Profit + D&A. This metric is before lease interest and before external interest.
So, $Adjusted EBITDA = \text{Reported EBITDA}$.
Are there other adjustments?
*   **Joint Ventures:** Acciona uses equity accounting ("Resultado De Puesta En Equivalencia Operativa" 159M). S&P often prefers proportional consolidation for JVs in utilities/infrastructure. However, without detailed JV financials, we cannot proportionally consolidate. We will stick to the reported numbers but note that FFO usually includes dividends from JVs or the equity income if cash is not distributed. The prompt asks to estimate based on facts. We will use the reported EBITDA and adjust FFO later if needed.
*   **Non-recurring:** The impairment reversal (15M) is small. We will ignore minor non-recurring items for this estimation unless they are material.

Let's refine EBITDA:
$EBITDA = 1,334 \text{ (Op Profit)} + 762 \text{ (D\&A)} = 2,096 \text{ M EUR}$.
Adjustment for Impairment Reversal: The reversal increased Op Profit. To normalize, we subtract the gain.
$Adjusted EBITDA = 2,096 - 15 = 2,081 \text{ M EUR}$.
(Note: The sign of the impairment line is -15M. If it's a reversal, it's a gain. Gains are subtracted from EBITDA for normalization if non-recurring).

Let's check "Other Income" and "Other Expense".
Other Income: 1,016 M.
Other Expense by Nature: 4,814 M.
These are likely included in the Operating Profit calculation.
Revenue (11,195) + Other Income (1,016) - Raw Materials (3,483) - Employee Benefits (2,077) - Other Expense (4,814) - D&A (762) + Impairment Reversal (15) + Other Gains (13) + Equity Income (159?? No, equity income is usually below operating profit or separate).
Let's check the Operating Profit calculation:
$11,195 + 1,016 - 3,483 - 2,077 - 4,814 - 762 - 15 (\text{wait, reversal is gain}) + 13 = ?$
$12,211 - 3,483 - 2,077 - 4,814 - 762 + 15 + 13 = 1,103$?
The reported Operating Profit is 1,334.
There is a discrepancy. "Resultado De Puesta En Equivalencia Operativa" (159M) might be included in Operating Profit in this specific reporting format (Spanish GAAP/IFRS variations sometimes include share of associates in operating result).
If we add 159 to 1,103, we get 1,262. Still not 1,334.
There might be other items or the "Other Expense" includes non-operating items.
However, we should trust the reported "Profit Loss From Operating Activities" (1,334M) and "Dotacion Amortizacion..." (762M).
So, $EBITDA \approx 1,334 + 762 = 2,096$ M.
Subtract non-recurring gain (Impairment reversal 15M): $2,081$ M.
Add back any non-recurring losses? None significant listed.
**Adjusted EBITDA = 2,081,000,000 EUR.**

### Step 3: Estimate FFO

Formula: $FFO = \text{Adjusted EBITDA} - \text{Cash Interest} - \text{Cash Taxes}$

**Cash Interest:**
We need the cash interest paid.
From Cash Flow Statement:
"Interest Paid Classified As Operating Activities": 209,000,000 EUR.
"Interest Received Classified As Operating Activities": 40,000,000 EUR.
S&P typically uses **Net Cash Interest Paid** or Gross?
Standard S&P FFO definition: $FFO = \text{Net Income} + \text{Depreciation} + \text{Deferred Taxes} + \text{Other Non-Cash Items}$.
Alternatively: $FFO = \text{EBITDA} - \text{Cash Interest} - \text{Cash Taxes} - \text{Preferred Dividends}$.
The prompt specifies: $FFO = \text{Adjusted EBITDA} - \text{cash interest} - \text{cash taxes}$.
Usually, "Cash Interest" refers to the interest expense paid.
Interest Paid: 209,000,000 EUR.
Does this include lease interest? Under IFRS, lease interest is in Finance Costs. The Cash Flow statement classifies "Interest Paid" as operating. It likely includes lease interest payments.
We will use **209,000,000 EUR** as Cash Interest.

**Cash Taxes:**
From Cash Flow Statement:
"Income Taxes Paid Refund Classified As Operating Activities": 215,000,000 EUR.
This is the cash outflow for taxes.
We will use **215,000,000 EUR** as Cash Taxes.

**Calculation:**
$FFO = 2,081,000,000 - 209,000,000 - 215,000,000$
$FFO = 1,657,000,000$ EUR.

*Self-Correction/Refinement:*
Does FFO include dividends from JVs? The Equity Income (159M) is in EBITDA (if included in Op Profit). If it's not cash, we might need to adjust. However, without info on dividends received from JVs vs equity income, we assume the accrual is a proxy or that the "Dividends Received" (89M) in Cash Flow from Operations is the cash part.
If the 159M equity income is included in EBITDA but is non-cash, and we didn't receive it as cash, our FFO is overstated.
S&P often adjusts for this by subtracting the equity income and adding back dividends received.
Adjustment: Subtract Equity Income (159M) from EBITDA, Add Dividends Received from JVs (part of the 89M "Dividends Received Classified As Operating Activities").
Let's assume the 89M includes JV dividends.
Revised Adjusted EBITDA: $2,081 - 159 = 1,922$ M.
Revised FFO: $1,922 - 209 - 215 = 1,498$ M.
However, the prompt asks to follow the baseline formula. The baseline formula doesn't explicitly mandate JV proportional consolidation adjustments unless specified by industry. For "Unregulated Power", S&P often looks at consolidated FFO. If the equity income is non-cash, it inflates EBITDA.
Let's look at the "Dividends Received" line: 89M.
If we use the strict formula $FFO = \text{Adj EBITDA} - \text{Cash Int} - \text{Cash Tax}$, and Adj EBITDA includes non-cash equity income, FFO is overstated.
Standard S&P adjustment for Equity Method Investments: Subtract equity income, add dividends received.
Let's apply this standard adjustment.
$Adjusted EBITDA (modified) = 2,081 - 159 (\text{Equity Income}) = 1,922$ M.
$FFO = 1,922 - 209 (\text{Cash Interest}) - 215 (\text{Cash Taxes}) + \text{Dividends Received?}$
Wait, the formula is $FFO = \text{Adj EBITDA} - \text{Cash Int} - \text{Cash Tax}$.
If we remove Equity Income from EBITDA, we have removed the non-cash accrual. We should then add the cash dividends received if they are not already in the "Cash Interest/Tax" subtraction (they aren't).
Actually, FFO is a cash-flow-like metric.
$FFO \approx \text{Operating Cash Flow} + \text{Interest Paid} + \text{Taxes Paid} - \text{Working Capital Changes}?$ No.
Let's stick to the simpler interpretation often used in these automated estimates unless detailed JV data is present: Use Reported EBITDA. The error from equity income (159M) is significant.
Let's check the Cash Flow from Operations: 1,648 M.
CFO = Net Income + D&A + Working Cap Changes + Other.
Net Income (Continuing) = 615 M.
D&A = 762 M.
$615 + 762 = 1,377$.
CFO is 1,648. Difference is 271 M.
This difference comes from Working Capital (135 M increase? No, "Increase Decrease In Working Capital" is 135M. If positive, it's a source? Or use? Usually "Increase in WC" is a use. The label is ambiguous. Let's look at the components.
Also "Other Adjustments" 79M.
Also "Interest Paid" 209M is an outflow in CFO? Yes, classified as operating.
Also "Taxes Paid" 215M is an outflow in CFO? Yes.
So CFO (1,648) is *after* interest and taxes.
$FFO$ is typically *before* interest and taxes? No, FFO is after interest and taxes in the S&P definition provided: $FFO = \text{EBITDA} - \text{Cash Interest} - \text{Cash Taxes}$.
Let's reconcile CFO to FFO.
$CFO = 1,648$.
$CFO$ includes changes in working capital. FFO generally excludes working capital changes (or rather, FFO is closer to operating cash flow before WC changes).
$FFO \approx CFO + \text{Change in WC} + \text{Other non-cash/operating adjustments}$.
If "Increase Decrease In Working Capital" is 135M (positive), and it's added to reconcile profit to cash, it means WC decreased (source of cash) or the label implies the *adjustment* was +135.
Let's assume the standard S&P FFO is roughly CFO + WC changes.
If WC change is +135 (source), then Pre-WC Cash Flow = $1,648 - 135 = 1,513$ M.
This is close to the 1,498 M calculated earlier with the JV adjustment.
Without JV adjustment: $1,657$ M.
Given the ambiguity, and that S&P often treats equity income as non-cash and subtracts it, the **1,498 M - 1,513 M** range is more accurate.
Let's use the calculated **1,513 M** as a robust estimate of FFO (derived from CFO + WC adjustment, which implicitly handles the cash/non-cash equity income difference if dividends are included in CFO).
Actually, let's look at the "Dividends Received" 89M. This is in CFO.
Equity Income 159M is in Net Income.
Net Income includes 159M non-cash.
CFO includes 89M cash.
So CFO is lower than Net Income by roughly 70M due to this item (ignoring tax/other).
Our EBITDA-based FFO (1,657) included the full 159M.
The CFO-based FFO (1,513) includes the 89M.
The difference is 144M. This aligns with the 159M equity income vs 89M dividends (diff 70M) plus other items.
I will use **FFO = 1,513,000,000 EUR** as a more cash-representative figure, derived from:
$FFO = \text{Cash Flow from Operations} (1,648) - \text{Working Capital Source} (135) = 1,513$.
(Note: If WC change was a use, it would be added. "Increase Decrease... 135". In indirect method, a decrease in WC is added. An increase is subtracted. If the number is positive 135 in the reconciliation, it was likely a source (decrease in WC) or the label is "Change in WC" and it's positive. Given Acciona's growth, WC often increases (use). But let's trust the sign in the reconciliation sum.
Reconciliation: Profit (615) + Adj (927) + WC (135) + Other (-283) = 1,394?
$615 + 927 + 135 - 283 = 1,394$.
But Reported CFO is 1,648.
There is a missing 254M.
Ah, "Interest Paid" and "Taxes Paid" are listed *below* the CFO total in some formats, or included?
The line "Cash Flows From Used In Operating Activities" is 1,648.
The items below it (Interest Paid 209, Taxes 215) are often *components* or *supplemental*.
If they are supplemental, they are *included* in the 1,648.
Let's re-sum the indirect method components provided:
Profit: 615
Adjustments: 927
WC: 135
Other Flows: -283
Sum: $615 + 927 + 135 - 283 = 1,394$.
This does not equal 1,648.
Difference: 254.
Maybe "Other Adjustments" or "Impairment" are double counted or I missed a line.
"Impairment Loss Reversal" -15. Included in Adj?
"Dotacion..." 762. Included in Adj?
"Adjustments For Reconcile Profit Loss" is 927. This likely sums the D&A, Impairment, Equity Income, etc.
If Adj is 927, and D&A is 762, and Equity Income is -159 (subtracted), and Impairment is -15...
$762 - 159 - 15 + \text{Other} = 927$?
$588 + \text{Other} = 927 \rightarrow \text{Other} = 339$.
This seems plausible.
So the Indirect Method sum is 1,394.
Why is CFO 1,648?
Perhaps "Other Flujos De Efectivo..." (-283) is not the only other item.
Or perhaps the "Interest Paid" and "Taxes Paid" are *not* included in the 1,648?
If 1,648 is before interest and taxes?
$1,394 + 209 (\text{Int}) + 215 (\text{Tax}) = 1,818$. No.
Let's assume the reported **Cash Flows From Operating Activities = 1,648 M** is the correct starting point for cash generation.
S&P FFO is often approximated as CFO + Cash Interest + Cash Taxes (if CFO is after interest/tax) - WC Changes?
No, FFO is a long-term cash flow metric.
Let's use the formula provided: $FFO = \text{Adj EBITDA} - \text{Cash Int} - \text{Cash Tax}$.
We established Adj EBITDA ~ 2,081 M (with equity income).
$FFO = 2,081 - 209 - 215 = 1,657$ M.
If we adjust for Equity Income (non-cash):
$Adj EBITDA = 2,081 - 159 = 1,922$ M.
$FFO = 1,922 - 209 - 215 = 1,498$ M.
I will use **1,498,000,000 EUR** as the FFO estimate, as it removes the non-cash equity accrual which is a standard S&P adjustment for infrastructure/utilities with significant JVs.

### Step 4: Estimate Adjusted Debt

Formula: $Adjusted Debt = \text{Reported Debt} + \text{Leases} + \text{Hybrid Debt} - \text{Eligible Cash}$

**Reported Debt:**
We need interest-bearing debt.
From Balance Sheet (2023-01-01, which is year-end 2022):
*   "Noncurrent Portion Of Noncurrent Loans Received": 2,624,000,000 EUR
*   "Current Loans Received And Current Portion Of Noncurrent Loans Received": 553,000,000 EUR
*   "Participaciones Preferentes Obligaciones YOtros Valores Negociables No Corrientes": 3,101,000,000 EUR
*   "Participaciones Preferentes Obligaciones YOtros Valores Negociables Corrientes": 1,139,000,000 EUR

Total Reported Interest-Bearing Debt (including Hybrids/Preferreds):
$2,624 + 553 + 3,101 + 1,139 = 7,417,000,000$ EUR.

**Leases:**
*   "Noncurrent Lease Liabilities": 439,000,000 EUR
*   "Current Lease Liabilities": 72,000,000 EUR
Total Leases: $439 + 72 = 511,000,000$ EUR.

**Hybrid Debt:**
The "Participaciones Preferentes..." (3,101 + 1,139 = 4,240 M) are likely hybrids. S&P typically treats preferred shares with mandatory dividends or fixed terms as debt or hybrid. If they are perpetual, they might be 50% equity. However, "Obligaciones" means Bonds. So this line item likely contains Bonds (Debt) and Preferreds. Without a breakdown, we treat the entire "Obligaciones" (Bonds) portion as debt. The label "Participaciones Preferentes Obligaciones..." suggests a mix. Given Acciona's structure, these are likely senior notes and bonds. We will treat them as **Debt**. If they were pure equity-like hybrids, they would be in Equity. They are in Liabilities. So they are Debt.

**Total Gross Debt:**
$7,417 (\text{Loans + Bonds}) + 511 (\text{Leases}) = 7,928,000,000$ EUR.
Wait, did I double count?
The "Participaciones..." are separate from "Loans Received".
So Total Debt = Loans (2,624 + 553) + Bonds/Preferreds (3,101 + 1,139) + Leases (439 + 72).
$3,177 + 4,240 + 511 = 7,928,000,000$ EUR.

**Eligible Cash:**
*   "Cash And Cash Equivalents": 2,360,000,000 EUR.
S&P typically deducts unrestricted cash. We assume all cash is eligible unless stated otherwise.
Deduction: 2,360,000,000 EUR.

**Adjusted Debt:**
$7,928,000,000 - 2,360,000,000 = 5,568,000,000$ EUR.

### Step 5: Calculate FFO / Adjusted Debt

$FFO = 1,498,000,000$ EUR
$Adjusted Debt = 5,568,000,000$ EUR

$Ratio = 1,498 / 5,568$
$Ratio \approx 0.269037$

Let's double check the FFO calculation with the other estimate (1,657 M).
$1,657 / 5,568 = 0.2975$.

Which FFO is more appropriate?
S&P Methodology for Unregulated Power/Infrastructure:
FFO is defined as Funds From Operations.
Standard S&P FFO = Net Income + Depreciation + Deferred Taxes + Other Non-Cash Items.
Let's calculate FFO directly from Net Income to verify.
Net Income (Attributable to Parent): 441 M.
Non-controlling Interest: 174 M.
Total Net Income: 615 M.
Add: D&A: 762 M.
Add: Deferred Taxes?
Change in Deferred Tax Assets: $920 - 872 = 48$ M (Decrease in Asset = Source/Add).
Change in Deferred Tax Liabilities: $890 - 813 = 77$ M (Increase in Liab = Source/Add).
Net Deferred Tax Benefit/Expense in Cash Flow?
Income Tax Expense: 254 M.
Cash Taxes Paid: 215 M.
Difference: 39 M (Deferred Tax Benefit).
So Add back Deferred Taxes: ~39 M.
Add: Equity Income (Non-cash, subtract): -159 M.
Add: Impairment Reversal (Non-cash gain, subtract): -15 M.
Other adjustments?
$FFO = 615 + 762 + 39 - 159 - 15 = 1,242$ M.
This is significantly lower than 1,498 M.
Why?
The EBITDA method: $EBITDA (2,081) - Int (209) - Tax (215) = 1,657$.
Difference between 1,657 and 1,242 is 415 M.
This difference is largely due to **Working Capital** and **Other Items**.
FFO *does not* subtract Working Capital changes. Net Income does.
So the 1,242 M is "Net Income based FFO" but hasn't added back WC uses?
No, FFO is generally *before* WC changes.
Net Income includes WC effects? No, Net Income is accrual.
The difference between Accrual Operating Profit and Cash Operating Profit is WC.
If WC increased (use of cash), Accrual Profit > Cash Flow.
Acciona's WC Change: "Increase Decrease In Working Capital" 135 M.
If this is a source (positive in CF), then Cash > Accrual.
If it's a use, Cash < Accrual.
Given the discrepancy, let's look at the Cash Flow from Operations again: 1,648 M.
CFO is after Interest and Taxes.
$CFO = 1,648$.
FFO is typically CFO + Interest + Taxes - WC Changes?
No, FFO is a measure of operating cash generation *available* to pay interest and taxes?
S&P Definition: $FFO = \text{Net Income} + \text{Depreciation} + \text{Deferred Taxes} + \text{Non-Cash Items}$.
This definition *excludes* WC changes.
So, $FFO \approx 1,242$ M (from NI derivation) + WC Adjustment?
If WC was a use of 135M (negative), we add it back?
If the CF line "Increase Decrease In Working Capital" is 135, and it's positive, it means WC *decreased* (released cash).
If WC decreased, Accrual Income < Cash Flow.
So we should *subtract* the WC release from CFO to get to a "normalized" FFO? Or add to NI?
$NI (615) + D\&A (762) + DefTax (39) - EquityInc (159) - ImpRev (15) = 1,242$.
If WC decreased by 135, this cash is included in CFO but not in NI.
So $FFO (which ignores WC) = 1,242$.
Wait, if WC decreases, it's a one-time cash boost. FFO should exclude it.
So FFO = 1,242 M.

Let's try the EBITDA method again with this logic.
$EBITDA (2,081) - Cash Int (209) - Cash Tax (215) = 1,657$.
This 1,657 includes the WC release of 135?
$EBITDA$ is accrual. $Cash Int$ and $Cash Tax$ are cash.
So $1,657$ is a mix.
$Accrual EBITDA - Cash Int - Cash Tax$.
This is not a standard metric.
Standard FFO = $EBITDA - Depreciation? No.$
Let's stick to the S&P Standard:
$FFO = \text{Net Income} + \text{Depreciation} + \text{Deferred Taxes}$.
$FFO = 615 + 762 + 39 = 1,416$.
Adjust for Equity Income (159) and Impairment (15):
$1,416 - 159 - 15 = 1,242$.

Is there any other add-back?
"Other Adjustments To Reconcile Profit Loss": 79 M.
This might include stock-based comp, etc.
Let's add 79 M.
$1,242 + 79 = 1,321$ M.

Let's use **FFO = 1,321,000,000 EUR**.

**Recalculate Ratio:**
$FFO = 1,321$ M
$Adj Debt = 5,568$ M
$Ratio = 1,321 / 5,568 = 0.23724$

Let's check the Debt again.
Is "Participaciones Preferentes" debt?
If they are hybrids, S&P might treat 50% as equity.
If 50% of 4,240 is equity, Debt reduces by 2,120.
$Adj Debt = 5,568 - 2,120 = 3,448$.
$Ratio = 1,321 / 3,448 = 0.383$.

However, "Obligaciones" are bonds. Bonds are debt. "Participaciones Preferentes" are preferred shares.
The line item combines them. In Acciona's case, these are mostly bonds ("Obligaciones").
We will treat them as 100% Debt.

Final Check on FFO.
S&P often uses "FFO" for utilities/infrastructure.
For Acciona, a reported FFO yield or ratio might be available in analyst reports.
Acciona's leverage is typically around 3x-4x Net Debt/EBITDA.
Net Debt = 5,568 M.
EBITDA = 2,081 M.
Net Debt/EBITDA = 2.67x.
FFO/Debt is typically around 10-15% for investment grade utilities.
$1,321 / 5,568 = 23.7\%$. This is strong.
$1,498 / 5,568 = 26.9\%$.
$1,657 / 5,568 = 29.7\%$.

Given the conservative nature of S&P adjustments (subtracting equity income), **1,321 M** is the most methodologically sound FFO estimate.

<answer>0.2372</answer>