Source: Bloomberg, GCP, Marten & Co. Note 1) EPS figures taken from 30 September each year. Note 2) As disclosed by the company.

Company profile – regular, sustainable, long-term income

More information is available on the trust’s website

GCP Infrastructure Investments Limited (GCP) is a Jersey-incorporated, closed-ended investment company whose shares are traded on the main market of the London Stock Exchange. GCP states that it aims to generate a regular, sustainable, long-term income while preserving investors’ capital. The company’s income is derived from loaning money predominantly at fixed rates to entities which derive their revenue – or a substantial portion of it – from UK public-sector-backed cashflows. The company seeks to secure an element of inflation protection where possible.

GCP’s portfolio is diversified across a range of different infrastructure subsectors. It includes exposure to renewable energy projects (where revenue is partly subsidy and partly linked to sales of power), PFI/PPP-type assets (whose revenue is predominantly based on the availability of the asset), and specialist supported social housing (where local authorities are renting specially-adapted residential accommodation for tenants with special needs).

The AIFM and investment adviser is Gravis Capital Management Limited (Gravis). Philip Kent is its CEO and the lead fund adviser to GCP.

The board is targeting a full-year dividend of 7.0p per share for the financial year ended 30 September 2026.

In December 2023, GCP announced a new capital allocation policy which prioritised a reduction in its leverage, risk-adjusted returns from the portfolio, and return of capital to shareholders through the use of share buybacks.

Opportunities to provide an attractive dividend yield from a relatively low risk portfolio

As the capital allocation policy progresses, GCP’s core proposition of providing a dividend yield from a portfolio that is considered by the company to be relatively low-risk may become more evident.

Annualised downward revaluations of just 0.51%

The infrastructure sector is characterised by relatively low economic sensitivity. It supports essential services, which may contribute to predictable and reliable cash flows that tend to be less correlated with wider markets. For GCP, which targets investments in debt rather than project equity, ranking higher up in the capital structure may provide additional risk mitigation. The company’s track record since launch shows annualised downward revaluations of GCP’s investments at 0.51% since launch. Management believes that this figure would have been lower if ultra-low interest rate policies had not affected markets. GCP’s loans are backed by assets, which may support its recovery rate in the event of default.

In the current higher interest rate environment, it may be easier for GCP to achieve its target rate of return while managing its risk profile. Under the capital allocation policy, the investment adviser has stated an intention to improve the risk profile by rebalancing the portfolio to be more debt-like and reducing the volatility in the valuation, while targeting exits in the supported living sector and reducing equity-like exposures, rather than focusing on higher returns.

The current focus appears to be on reducing GCP’s discount. At the present discount level, buying back stock may offer a higher risk-adjusted return than making new investments. However, there may be a point where this balance changes. GCP’s manager believes that the opportunity set available to it is significant and, when the financial metrics are favourable, it is likely that investors may prefer to see GCP make new investments.

It appears that governments with limited financial resources may need to consider the private sector to help fund replacements for ageing post-war infrastructure, achieve decarbonisation goals, and digitalise economies. GCP may have a role to play in this.

Market backdrop

Interest rates

As Figure 1 shows, UK interest rates have fallen across the board since the end of July 2025 (around the time that the last report on GCP was published). Concerns about UK government finances appear to have been reduced following the recent budget. In this context, the Bank of England cut its base rate to 3.75% in December 2025, and a further reduction may occur in the coming weeks, as four of nine members of its Monetary Policy Committee voted in favour of cutting the base rate to 3.5% at the last meeting on 4 February 2026.

Figure 1: Shift in UK yield curve since end July 2025

Source: Bloomberg

For GCP, the more significant change appears to be in the medium-to-long-term interest rates. At the end of December 2025, the average life of the portfolio was 11 years and the weighted average yield on the portfolio was 8%.

Inflation

UK inflation has moderated, but in recent months CPI appears to have settled in the 3.0%–4.0% range. Some economists predict that the rate may fall sharply over coming months, which could strengthen the case for further interest rate cuts. At the end of December 2025, 49% of GCP’s portfolio had some form of inflation protection providing a degree of cushioning if inflation proves stickier than expected. Figure 14 on page 10 shows the estimated sensitivity of GCP’s NAV to changes in inflation assumptions.

Figure 2: UK inflation – CPI and RPI

Source: ONS, Marten & Co

UK infrastructure plan

In June 2025, the UK government published its 10-year strategy for economic, housing, and social infrastructure. The plan outlined £725bn of government funding for infrastructure over the next decade, and stated an intention to create opportunities to attract other types of new investment into infrastructure, in order to maximise public investment. The published figures and timeframes may be subject to change. The strategy appears to highlight a need for UK infrastructure investment, and indicates that the government may not be able to fund this solely from its own balance sheet.

Cost disclosures

The issue of misleading cost disclosure, which had been a factor in the emergence of GCP’s discount, appears to have been partially addressed. The FCA’s new rules on consumer composite investments may be less of a deterrent for investors evaluating investment companies. However, there may still be a need to reform MiFID regulations, as wealth managers are still required to provide their customers with information that could be considered misleading. The FCA is reviewing the situation. Gravis was involved in the campaign for cost disclosure reform.

Asset allocation

As of 31 December 2025, there were 47 investments in GCP’s portfolio, down from 48 at the end of June 2025. The average annualised portfolio yield over the financial year was 8.0% (7.9%), and the portfolio had a weighted average life of 11 years (unchanged).

Figure 3: Split of the portfolio at 31 December 2025

Source: GCP Infrastructure Investments

Since end June 2025, the exposure to PPP/PFI has increased by 2 percentage points, while biomass, gas peaking, hydro-electric, and supported living have each increased by 1 percentage point. Solar has decreased by 3 percentage points, while onshore wind and anaerobic digestion have both decreased by 1 percentage point.

Figure 4: Sector allocation at 31 December 2025

Source: GCP Infrastructure Investments

Figure 5: Security allocation at 31 December 2025

Source: GCP Infrastructure Investments

Since the end of June 2025, GCP’s equity exposure has decreased from 5% to 4% of the portfolio. This reduction was one of the stated aims of the capital recycling programme, as was a plan to reduce the exposure to social housing, which may progress with the recently announced exchange of contracts.

Figure 6: GCP sources of income as at 31 December 2025

Source: GCP Infrastructure Investments

Top 10 investments

Figure 7: GCP’s 10 largest investments as at 31 December 2025

GCP’s list of holdings provides limited information about the underlying characteristics of the portfolio. To provide additional detail, GCP recently made an investor portal available – Carapace – which allows registered users to explore the portfolio in greater depth.

Figure 8: Top 10 revenue counterparties as at 30 September 2025

Figure 9: Top 10 project service providers as at 30 September 2025

Source: GCP Infrastructure Investments

Recent investment activity

No new investments were made during GCP’s 2025 financial year, although the company made £24.7m of follow-on investments to support existing borrowers. By the time of the publication of the annual report in mid-December, GCP had made an additional £1.7m of follow-on investments.

Figure 10: Outflows (investments) 12 months to end September 2025

Source: Gravis Capital Partners

Figure 11: Inflows (repayments) 12 months to end September 2025

Source: Gravis Capital Partners

Reflecting the progress made on the capital recycling programme, inflows exceeded outflows. Over FY25, GCP received £48.5m from scheduled repayments of principal and a further £27.7m of unscheduled prepayments. After the period end and up to mid-December, GCP received an additional £4.4 of cash inflows.

The recent deal in supported housing

On 2 February 2026, GCP announced that certain borrowers had exchanged contracts for the disposal of properties that are leased to registered providers of supported social housing. The proceeds of such disposals, if completed, are expected to repay £47.5m of loans and, allowing for deferred amounts, may generate day one cash proceeds of £43m.

The disposal appears to have been in line with the valuation of those loans in GCP’s end September 2025 NAV.

It appears that the loans being repaid include most of those that comprise GCP Programme Funding 1 Ltd Series 1, GCP Social Housing 1 Ltd D, and approximately two thirds of GCP Social Housing 1 Ltd B. Approximately a third of the loans in that vehicle relate to accommodation leased to MySpace, which was not included in the sale.

Further exits from this part of the portfolio are likely over the course of the rest of the year.

Capital recycling

The investment adviser has identified a pipeline of potential disposals that may reshape the portfolio and free up capital to complete the capital recycling programme.

At 30 September 2025 (before the most recent transaction), the disposal pipeline included portfolios of 33 and 55 supported living assets, a large onshore wind farm, a portfolio of operational and ready-to-build solar assets, a portfolio of gas-to-grid anaerobic digestion plants, and the equity interest in a biomass plant. In addition, there appears to be scope to refinance a portfolio of ground-mounted solar projects, as well as a biomass project.

If executed in full, the disposal programme would reduce the weighted average life of loans in the portfolio from 11 to eight years. However, it may also result in an increase in the weighted average annualised yield on the portfolio from 8.0% to 8.3%.

Conservative assumptions

Figure 12 summarises the key assumptions that underpin the cash flow forecasts for renewable assets in which the company is invested, and the range of assumptions that the investment adviser observes in the market. GCP’s investment adviser states that it traditionally takes a conservative approach, with the chart highlighting alternative, more aggressive valuation assumptions that could be taken.

If GCP were to assume the most conservative assumptions in every category, the end-September NAV of 101.40p would have been reduced to 98.64p. If GCP were to assume the least conservative assumptions in each category, the NAV would have been 109.27p.

Figure 12: Valuation assumptions as at 30 September 2025

Source: GCP Infrastructure Investments

Sensitivities

The investment adviser also provides a sensitivity analysis for its forecast cash flows. Figures 13 and 14 show the impact of changes in power prices and changes in its base case inflation forecast.

The sensitivity to power prices has decreased over time (in the note published in January 2025, a 10% fall in prices would have meant a 9.1p fall in the NAV; by August 2025, that figure was 4.7p, and currently the figure is 4.0p).

Figure 13: Impact of change in forecast electricity prices

Source: GCP Infrastructure Investments

Figure 14: NAV impact associated with a movement in inflation

Source: GCP Infrastructure Investments

Performance

GCP has continued to report progress in its NAV total return. As in past notes, GCP’s returns have been compared to those of sterling corporate bonds, which may have some similar risk characteristics to GCP’s investment approach. As Figure 16 shows, GCP has delivered returns that appear to be ahead of sterling corporate bonds over the past five years.

The main issue for shareholders has been the widening of the discount that occurred over 2022. More recently, the discount appears to have narrowed, which may have contributed to shareholder returns.

Figure 15: GCP NAV total return

Source: Bloomberg, Marten & Co

Figure 16: GCP NAV total return performance relative to sterling corporate bond performance

Source: Bloomberg, Marten & Co

For shareholders, the main problem has been the widening of the discount that occurred over 2022. Fortunately, more recently the discount has been narrowing again to the benefit of shareholder returns.

Figure 17: Cumulative total return performance over periods ending 31 December 2025

Source: Bloomberg, Marten & Co

Drivers of recent performance

Financial year ended 30 September 2025

Figures 18 and 19 show the factors affecting GCP’s performance over the 12-month period ended 30 September 2025.

Figure 18: Cumulative total return performance over periods ending 31 December 2025

The largest positive contributor to the NAV return came from an upward revision of inflation forecasts. Cost savings within GCP’s operations and maintenance budget also helped. In addition, a longstanding issue relating to subsidy entitlements for certain solar projects – which had been under review by Ofgem – has been resolved.

Figure 19: Negative factors affecting FY2025 performance

On the downside, there was a hit to the NAV that resulted from a reduction in the assumed long-term availability forecast of a portfolio of anaerobic digestion plants.

The investment adviser has been working to reduce the portfolio’s sensitivity to power prices and output, but lower than forecast generation occurred over this period. Gilt yields have been trending down recently; however, in Q4 2024 they were rising, which may have contributed to the decision to increase discount rates.

Factors affecting GCP’s Q4 2025 performance

Over Q4 2025, the most significant influence on the NAV was a further reduction in power price forecasts, which took 0.5p off the NAV. This reduction has affected renewable energy companies and the impact on GCP’s NAV was relatively minor. Actual generation contributed positively to the NAV. The only other notable negative impact (-0.53p) was the UK government’s decision to impose changes to the way that subsidies are calculated by replacing RPI with CPI in the calculation.

There appears to be significant opposition, and it is possible that this could raise the cost of financing the UK’s infrastructure programme if investors factor in an additional risk premium to contracts.

Up-to-date information on GCP and its peers is available on the QuotedData website

Peer group

GCP sits within the AIC’s infrastructure sector. Within this peer group, its closest comparator is Sequoia Economic Infrastructure, which, like GCP, invests primarily in infrastructure debt, but uses a broader definition of what constitutes infrastructure. As in previous notes, information on the renewable energy sector is included, as GCP’s underlying asset exposures appear to be weighted toward this area.

Figure 20: GCP peer group comparisons

GCP’s five-year returns appear comparable to those of its immediate and renewable energy peers, and its debt portfolio appears to have shown relative resilience compared to the equity portfolios of companies in the renewable energy sector. Sequoia has less renewable exposure than GCP.

Quarterly dividend

Dividends are declared and paid quarterly. Shareholders are able to elect to take their dividend as scrip (in shares rather than cash). For its new financial year, GCP’s target dividend remains stable at 7.0p in line with its previous four financial years.

Premium/(discount)

Over the 12 months ended 31 December 2025, GCP’s shares traded on an average discount of 28.1%, with the discount ranging from as wide as 35.1% to as narrow as 21.3%. As of publishing, the discount stood at 23.0%.

The widening of the discount appears to have been initially associated with the sharp rise in interest rates aimed at addressing inflation. This was followed by selling from funds of funds and wealth managers, which may have been influenced by the cost disclosure rules discussed on page 5. Since then, progress with disposals and buybacks under the capital allocation programme may have contributed to a reduction in the discount, as could cuts to interest rates over the last few quarters and the partial resolution to the cost disclosure issue. It appears that the positives may not yet be fully reflected in the discount, which could continue to narrow.

In pursuit of its capital recycling programme, GCP bought back £22.8m worth of shares over the course of its financial year ended 30 September 2025. Since then, more than 3m additional shares have been repurchased. In total, since the programme was announced, 34,610,234 shares have been repurchased.

Figure 21: GCP discount over five years ending 31 January 2026

Source: Bloomberg, Marten & Co

Structure

Fees and costs

The investment adviser receives an investment advisory fee of 0.9% per year of the NAV net of cash. This fee is calculated and payable quarterly in arrears. There is no performance fee. The investment adviser is also entitled to an arrangement fee of up to 1% (at its discretion) of the cost of each new investment made by GCP. Gravis will charge the arrangement fee to borrowers rather than to the company. If any arrangement fee negotiated by the investment adviser with a borrower exceeds 1%, the benefit of any such excess is paid to the company. The investment adviser also receives a fee of £70,000 (subject to RPI adjustments) per year for acting as AIFM, which was £92,000 for the 2025 financial year.

The investment advisory agreement may be terminated by either party on 24 months’ written notice.

Capital structure and life

As of 18 February 2026, GCP has 884,797,669 ordinary shares outstanding, of which 51,595,253 are held in treasury. The number of shares with voting rights is 833,202,416.

GCP is an evergreen company with no fixed life and no regular continuation vote. The company’s financial year end is 30 September and AGMs are held in February.

Gearing

Structural gearing of investments is permitted up to a maximum of 20% of NAV immediately following drawdown of the relevant debt. GCP has been targeting debt reduction, and at the end of December 2025 it had net gearing of 1.2%.

Board

The GCP board has six directors, all of whom are non-executive and independent of the investment adviser. Two directors – Heather Bestwick and Ian Brown – have been recruited over the past year, replacing Julia Chapman and Michael Gray.

Figure 22: Board members, fees, and shareholdings

Andrew Didham (chairman)

Andrew Didham, a UK resident, is a Fellow of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales. A senior executive director with extensive board‑level experience in the Rothschild Banking group, Andrew was group finance director for 16 years and a member of the group management of the worldwide Rothschild business, comprising investment banking, wealth management, asset management and merchant banking activities. He serves on the boards of IG Group Holdings Plc and Shawbrook Group Plc as a non‑executive director and audit committee chairman. Within Rothschild, he remains an executive vice chairman, presently on a part-time basis. Formerly, he served as a non-executive director of Charles Stanley Plc and Jardine Lloyd Thompson Group Plc and, prior to joining Rothschild & Co, he was a partner in the London office of KPMG with responsibility for the audit of a number of global financial institutions and assignments for various government and regulatory authorities.

Heather Bestwick (senior independent director)

Heather Bestwick, a Jersey resident, is a qualified solicitor with over 30 years’ experience in the financial services sector. Since 2014, she has acted as an independent non-executive director of a number of investment funds and corporate services providers.

Heather is currently a non-executive director on the boards of EPE Special Opportunities Limited, an AIM listed company, and Rathbones Investment Management International Limited, the Jersey subsidiary of Rathbones Group Plc. She qualified as a solicitor with Norton Rose in London and worked in their London and Greek offices for eight years, specialising in shipping finance. Heather subsequently joined global offshore law firm Walkers in the Cayman Islands, qualifying as a Cayman Islands attorney and notary public, and became a partner in 2003. She moved to Jersey in 2007 to become a managing partner in the Walkers Jersey office, following which she served for three years as deputy chief executive and technical director of Jersey Finance Limited.

Steven Wilderspin (chair of the audit and risk committee)

Steven Wilderspin, a Jersey resident, is a Fellow of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of England & Wales. Since 2007, he has acted as an independent director on a number of public and private investment funds and commercial companies.

Steven is a non‑executive director of Henderson Far East Income Limited, a non-executive director and chair of the audit and risk committee of HarbourVest Global Private Equity Limited, and a non-executive director of Phoenix Spree Deutschland Limited. Prior to 2007, he was a director at Maples Finance Jersey, with responsibility for their fund administration and fiduciary business. Steven began his career at PwC in London in 1990.

Dawn Crichard (chair of the management engagement committee)

Dawn Crichard, a Jersey resident, is a Fellow of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of England and Wales with over 25 years’ experience in senior chief financial officer and financial director positions. Having qualified with Deloitte, she moved into the commercial sector and was chief financial officer of a large private construction group for 12 years. Dawn then worked with both private and listed clients in the hedge fund division of State Street. Following this, she was appointed as chief financial officer for Bathroom Brands Plc, and was later head of finance at a substantial multinational family office, including establishing and overseeing high-value private expert funds. Her broad accounting and commercial experience includes establishing new group head offices, mergers, acquisitions, refinancing and restructuring.

Alex Yew (chair of the investment committee)

Alex Yew, a UK resident, has more than 25 years of experience as a lawyer, banker and investor. He is a qualified solicitor in Singapore, England and Wales. Alex currently holds a number of non-executive roles in infrastructure, energy, and energy transition. Prior to this, he was a senior adviser and a senior managing director at John Laing, an international investor in infrastructure and energy assets. Alex worked at John Laing for more than 14 years, during which time he held leadership positions in project finance, new markets, strategy, and partnerships, and was regional head of the European and Latin American businesses. He was also a member of the senior leadership team and the investment committee. Prior to John Laing, Alex was a director in the infrastructure advisory team at CIBC World Markets in London. He was also a banker and lawyer in Southeast Asia before he moved to the UK.

Ian Brown (non-executive director)

Ian Brown, a UK resident, is a banker and investor with over 35 years’ experience. He is currently the head of banking and investments at the UK National Wealth Fund (formerly the UK Infrastructure Bank) where he sits on the Fund’s executive, valuation, risk, and investment committees. In August 2025, Ian accepted a temporary appointment as interim CEO of the UK National Wealth Fund until Oliver Holbourn was permanently appointed on 1 November 2025. Before this role, he was head of private markets at LGPS Central, where he was responsible for the establishment and investment of a number of infrastructure, private equity and private credit funds of funds. Prior to LGPS Central, Ian held senior leadership roles at Lloyds Banking Group and was a member of Lloyds’ credit committee for 14 years. He joined Lloyds from UBS, where he was a managing director in the leveraged and acquisition finance business.

Previous publications

Readers interested in further information about GCP may wish to read our previous notes.

Figure 23: QuotedData’s previously published notes on GCP

IMPORTANT INFORMATION

Marten & Co (which is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority) was paid to produce this note on GCP Infrastructure Investments Limited.

This note is for information purposes only and is not intended to encourage the reader to deal in the security or securities mentioned within it. Marten & Co is not authorised to give advice to retail clients. The research does not have regard to the specific investment objectives financial situation and needs of any specific person who may receive it.

The analysts who prepared this note are not constrained from dealing ahead of it but, in practice, and in accordance with our internal code of good conduct, will refrain from doing so for the period from which they first obtained the information necessary to prepare the note until one month after the note’s publication. Nevertheless, they may have an interest in any of the securities mentioned within this note.

This note has been compiled from publicly available information. This note is not directed at any person in any jurisdiction where (by reason of that person’s nationality, residence or otherwise) the publication or availability of this note is prohibited.

Accuracy of Content: Whilst Marten & Co uses reasonable efforts to obtain information from sources which we believe to be reliable and to ensure that the information in this note is up to date and accurate, we make no representation or warranty that the information contained in this note is accurate, reliable or complete. The information contained in this note is provided by Marten & Co for personal use and information purposes generally. You are solely liable for any use you may make of this information. The information is inherently subject to change without notice and may become outdated. You, therefore, should verify any information obtained from this note before you use it.

No Advice: Nothing contained in this note constitutes or should be construed to constitute investment, legal, tax or other advice.

No Representation or Warranty: No representation, warranty or guarantee of any kind, express or implied is given by Marten & Co in respect of any information contained on this note.

Exclusion of Liability: To the fullest extent allowed by law, Marten & Co shall not be liable for any direct or indirect losses, damages, costs or expenses incurred or suffered by you arising out or in connection with the access to, use of or reliance on any information contained on this note. In no circumstance shall Marten & Co and its employees have any liability for consequential or special damages.

Governing Law and Jurisdiction: These terms and conditions and all matters connected with them, are governed by the laws of England and Wales and shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the English courts. If you access this note from outside the UK, you are responsible for ensuring compliance with any local laws relating to access.

No information contained in this note shall form the basis of, or be relied upon in connection with, any offer or commitment whatsoever in any jurisdiction.

Investment Performance Information: Please remember that past performance is not necessarily a guide to the future and that the value of shares and the income from them can go down as well as up. Exchange rates may also cause the value of underlying overseas investments to go down as well as up. Marten & Co may write on companies that use gearing in a number of forms that can increase volatility and, in some cases, to a complete loss of an investment.