Thursday, October 22, 2026
The news that moves freight
Companies & Markets Oct 22, 2026 · 7 min read

IFM agrees to buy control of Associated British Ports

ABP changes hands, but the UK’s biggest port group won’t change course. Canada’s CPP Investments (33.9%) and OMERS (30.0%) agreed on 21 October to sell their stakes in Associated British Ports to a fund run by Australia’s IFM Investors. ABP handles about 25% of UK seaborne trade, the release says. Our view: this is one pension investor handing over to another, not a strategy reset. IFM’s Kyle Mangini calls it a “commitment to mobilising pension capital into UK infrastructure”. Price is undisclosed; the FT reported the company could be valued above £10bn. Nothing changes on the quay until completion. Our call: the deal completes by 30 June 2027.

IFM wins ABP: the UK’s port landlord gets a new owner and the same playbook

On 21 October, CPP Investments and OMERS agreed to sell their entire stakes in Associated British Ports (ABP) to a fund managed by IFM Investors. Together the two Canadian pension investors hold 63.9% of the company: CPP Investments 33.9%, OMERS 30.0%. That is according to their joint release, also published by IFM.

ABP is not a small asset. The release calls it the largest ports group in the UK. It runs 19 facilities and handles about 25% of UK seaborne trade. It also says ABP supports over half of the UK’s offshore wind. Financial terms were not disclosed. The deal still needs shareholder and regulatory approvals and is expected to complete in the first half of 2027.

Our view is simple. This is a change of owner, not a change of direction.

A long-term pension investor is handing control to another long-term pension investor. IFM describes itself as owned by Australian and UK pension funds. Those owners want steady, predictable cash for decades. So did the Canadians. For a forwarder routing boxes, cars, bulk or project cargo through Southampton, Immingham or Hull, that matters more than the name on the share register.

The more interesting story is who did not win. Adani Ports, the Indian port group, was on the shortlist. A strategic port operator would have been a different kind of owner. It could have tied ABP into a wider network and pushed for its own terminal strategy. That outcome is now off the table, at least for the majority stake.

What the deal documents and reporting show

Start with the bidders. Infralogic reported on 21 August that four parties had been shortlisted for the majority stake: KKR Infrastructure, Apollo Global Management, IFM Investors and Adani Ports. It also reported that Adani was interested in buying all of ABP, and that if it won, other shareholders were likely to seek an exit. IFM, a financial buyer, won instead.

Next, who stays. The Loadstar reports that minority shareholders GIC, Singapore’s sovereign wealth fund, and Wren House, part of the Kuwait Investment Authority, are understood to be keeping their stakes. Multimodal, citing the Financial Times in February, listed GIC at 20%, Wren House at 10% and Hermes at about 6%. A stable minority group plus a pension-backed majority owner points to more of the same.

The quotes point the same way. IFM’s global head of infrastructure, Kyle Mangini, said the deal “reflects our longstanding commitment to mobilising pension capital into UK infrastructure”. OMERS’ Luca Lupo said: “The UK remains a priority market for OMERS Infrastructure.” CPP Investments’ James Bryce said: “This transaction represents an attractive opportunity to realize the value of our long-term investment.” ABP chief executive Henrik Pedersen said: “Attracting investment from a fund managed by IFM Investors is a powerful endorsement of our business”.

None of that is the language of a turnaround. It is the language of an asset that has done well and is being passed on.

The price, and what it tells you

The price is not public. But the reporting gives a clear range.

In February, Multimodal relayed a Financial Times report that the sale could value ABP at over £10bn. In August, Infralogic reported a potential valuation of about £9bn, or around 20 times EBITDA. EBITDA is earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation, a rough measure of cash profit. Infralogic put ABP’s 2025 EBITDA at £473.7m, up from £430.1m. The Loadstar, citing CapitalIQ, puts 2025 net profit at £393.3m.

Our arithmetic: £10bn is a little over 21 times £473.7m. That is a full price. It sits at the top of the 16x to 21x range one Infralogic source gave; that source expected a multiple “in the middle of 16x and 21x”.

History shows why sellers were happy. Multimodal reports that a group including Goldman Sachs’ infrastructure arm and OMERS took ABP private in 2006 for £2.8bn. If the FT figure is right, the business is now worth more than three times that, 20 years later. OMERS held through that whole period. CPP Investments joined in 2015.

What happened last time ownership changed

There is a useful precedent here. ABP has already been through two big ownership changes: the 2006 take-private and CPP Investments’ arrival in 2015. In our reading, in neither case did the port group change its basic model. It stayed a landlord and operator across a spread of ports, earning from dues, leases and cargo handling.

What did change over time was where the money went. OMERS’ own summary of its 20 years points to the Immingham Renewable Fuels Terminal, Green Port Hull and Southampton’s Horizon cruise terminal. In our view, those are long-life projects of the kind that fits pension owners who want income they can forecast.

We expect the same pattern under IFM. The owners change; the model does not. The direction of spending, if anything, leans further towards energy.

The sale process itself also tells you something. Infralogic reported that strategic buyers were not formally invited, to avoid deterring financial bidders, and that Peel Ports was kept at “arm’s-length”. The sellers set the process up for a buyer like IFM. The result matches the design.

What it means for forwarders and shippers

In the short term, nothing changes. Until completion in the first half of 2027, CPP Investments and OMERS remain owners. Management is the same. Pedersen has been at ABP for eight years, by his own account in the release. Existing terminal agreements, berth windows and tariffs carry on.

In the longer term, the price paid shapes the behaviour. This is our view, not a published plan. A buyer paying around 20 times earnings needs earnings to keep growing. At a port, that comes from three places: more volume, higher charges, and new business lines.

Volume is the hardest lever for any landlord port to pull, because it depends on trade and on carriers’ port choices. So we expect the other two levers to do most of the work.

On charges, forwarders should expect ABP’s published port dues and long-term terminal deals to be priced firmly. A pension owner is not a discounter. Shippers with contracts up for renewal in 2027 should expect inflation-linked rises, not cuts, and should negotiate on service levels and volume bands rather than headline rates.

On new business, the release itself points the way. It stresses offshore wind. OMERS cites projects including the Immingham Renewable Fuels Terminal, Green Port Hull and Southampton’s Horizon cruise terminal. In our view, capital will keep tilting towards energy, cruise and long-lease land deals. Those earn steady returns. Container and general cargo customers should not assume they are first in the queue for new cranes or yard space.

There is one upside for shippers. A financial owner with no carrier or terminal network of its own has no reason to favour one shipping line over another. That is not guaranteed under a strategic owner. Neutral access to quays at the Humber ports and Southampton is worth something, especially for ro-ro (roll-on, roll-off, where trucks and trailers drive on and off the ship) and short-sea traffic to Europe.

What to do now: very little, and that is the point. Forwarders with ABP-linked contracts expiring after mid-2027 should check for change-of-control clauses, which let one side reopen terms when an owner changes. Most port agreements are with the operating company, not the shareholders, so we expect few to be triggered. But it is a ten-minute check worth doing before renewal talks start next year.

Risks to watch

Two things could still shift the picture.

First, approvals. The release says the deal is “subject to customary shareholder and regulatory approvals”. It does not name them. Ports are sensitive national infrastructure, and the UK government can review foreign takeovers on security grounds. We think an Australian pension-backed fund is a low-risk buyer on that test, far lower than a strategic foreign operator would have been.

Second, the minorities. Infralogic reported in August that GIC was running a right of first offer process, a contractual chance to buy before outsiders, to possibly raise its stake. It had started but not finished. Any late move by GIC or Wren House could alter the final shareholding.

Our prediction

Our call: the deal completes on the announced terms by 30 June 2027, inside the window the release gives, with IFM holding a majority and GIC and Wren House still on the register. We also expect ABP’s published port charges for 2027 to rise, not fall, and its first major investment announcement under IFM, within 12 months of completion, to be energy-related rather than container capacity.

Sources