Industry super fund-owned IFM Investors and ISPT have confirmed they are exploring the merits of a potential merger at the request of significant shareholders.
A merger would recognise IFM and ISPT’s “complementary businesses and capabilities”, the firms told Super Review in a joint statement.
Infrastructure fund manager IFM’s investment capabilities included some $100.9 billion in infrastructure, $43.7 billion of debt investments, $43.7 billion in listed equities, and private equity assets. Among some of its Australian holdings were airports in Brisbane, Sydney, Adelaide, and Melbourne; Port Kembla, Port Botany, and Port of Brisbane; and Ausgrid.
Meanwhile, property platform ISPT held $22.2 billion portfolio which invested in and developed properties across office, residential, retail, industrial, education and health.
The firms also had an extensive common shareholder base, including super funds like Cbus, AustralianSuper, and HESTA.
It was not the first time the firms were in merger talks, according to media reports.
“Any merger must create value for the shareholders and unitholders of IFM Investors and ISPT and deliver strong financial outcomes for their members,” the firms said.
“Discussions are ongoing between the organisations as they seek to identify and assess the opportunities and risks for their shareholders, investors, businesses and people.”
As at 31 December 2022, IFM Investors had some $211 billion in funds under management (FUM). A potential merger with ISPT would bring the combined entity to over $230 billion FUM.
A member body representing some prominent wealth managers is concerned super funds’ dominance is sidelining small companies in capital markets.
Earlier this month, several Australian superannuation funds fell victim to credential stuffing attacks, which saw a small number of members lose more than $500,000.
Small- to medium-sized funds have become collateral damage in an "imperfect" model for super industry levies, a financial institution has said.
Big business has joined the chorus of opposition against the proposed Division 296 tax.