If you look only at Sterlite Grid 5’s consolidated P&L, you’ll see a big loss.
But a closer reading reveals something very different.
The Indian business is profitable.
The trouble lies entirely in the old Brazil exposure.
Here’s what the annual report actually tells us.
A Transmission Powerhouse at Its Core
Sterlite Grid 5 (SGL 5) is the Sterlite Group’s dedicated transmission platform. It builds, owns and operates high-voltage networks and occasionally monetises them through sales to InvITs or institutional investors.
The scale speaks for itself:
-
24 transmission projects (operational + in progress + flipped)
-
~13,671 ckm of lines and substations
-
₹52,844 crore invested across the portfolio
-
4.5 GW renewable integration capacity
-
15% share in India’s private transmission market
Effectively, it runs a hybrid model:
Stable annuity-like income from operating assets + EPC income + periodic asset monetisation.
The Financial Reality: India Positive, Brazil Negative
Indian Business (continuing operations)
Revenue
-
FY25 → ₹1,160.55 crore
-
FY24 → ₹1,245.76 crore
EBITDA
-
FY25 → ₹97.01 crore
-
FY24 → ₹127.36 crore
Profit After Tax
-
FY25 → ₹16.23 crore
-
FY24 → ₹14.57 crore
The slowdown came mainly from lower EPC activity, not from any structural weakness.
The bottom line is clear:
The India business made a profit again this year.
Brazil (discontinued operations)
Loss before tax
Loss after tax
These losses alone are several times the profit India generated.
Consolidated net loss
It is Brazil—not India—that pushes the company into consolidated red ink.
Why the Losses Continue
1. The Brazil business was abandoned
The entire Brazil portfolio has been classified as discontinued, with a loss of ₹452.16 crore this year alone.
2. Heavy impairments were necessary
The Brazilian holding company had borrowed BRL 3.25 billion under restrictive covenants. Once those covenants were breached, lenders could demand repayment.
A restructuring arrangement now proposes that:
This means equity value = zero.
So SGL 5 wrote off receivables and exposure worth ₹313.75 crore.
3. Indian EBITDA dipped due to lower EPC volume
The combination of these three elements explains why a profitable Indian business still reports a consolidated loss.
Why Brazil Turned Into a Disaster
-
Excess leverage
-
Breach of covenants
-
Lender-controlled restructuring
-
Assets being surrendered for a symbolic amount
-
Equity wiped out
-
Hundreds of crores written off
It wasn’t one bad project — it was a full-scale value erosion.
The Resonia Piece: The JV Where Much of the Action Happens
When GIC decided to bet on India’s power transmission story, it didn’t want exposure to everything inside Sterlite Power. The parent company has EPC operations, manufacturing units, international ventures, and even the troubled Brazil business. A sovereign wealth fund would never pump money into a diversified entity with legacy risks it cannot control. So instead of writing a cheque to Sterlite Power, GIC partnered with Sterlite to create a clean, ring-fenced platform — Resonia — that would hold only the transmission assets.
This structure gives GIC something far more valuable than a minority stake in the parent: control and clarity. In Resonia, GIC owns 49% with board rights, veto rights, and transparent cash flow waterfalls. Every rupee goes directly into transmission SPVs, not into EPC working capital, overseas expansions, or parent-level liabilities. It creates a governance framework that global investors prefer — predictable assets, stable availability-based returns, and no surprises.
The JV design also solves another practical problem: asset separation. If Sterlite Power mixed EPC operations and asset ownership inside one company, valuation would be messy and conflicts would arise. With Resonia, Sterlite can operate projects and sell stakes cleanly into the JV. For GIC, this becomes a scalable India transmission platform—one they can eventually monetise through an InvIT listing or a strategic sale without touching Sterlite’s other businesses.
In short, Resonia exists because it gives both sides what they want: Sterlite retains operational control and a vehicle to monetise projects, while GIC gets a protected, transmission-only platform insulated from Brazil, EPC volatility, and parent-level risks. It’s structure over simplicity — by design.
Resonia is a 51:49 joint platform between SGL 5 and GIC. Many transmission SPVs operate within this entity.
Key interactions include:
During this year, Sterlite Grid 5 has transferred 4 assets to Resonia Limited i.e. Sterlite Grid 13 Limited, Sterlite Grid 14 Limited, Sterlite Grid 18 Limited and Sterlite Grid 29 Limited
Industry Tailwinds Are Strong
India’s transmission landscape is expanding rapidly:
-
Line length: 4.58 lakh ckm to 6.5 Lkah ckm by 2030
-
Renewable capacity: ~259 GW, targeting 500 GW by 2030
-
Transmission capex (2026-27): ₹1 lakh crore
-
Competitive-bid awards rising: 45 projects in FY25 vs 23 in FY24
Sterlite Grid 5 is well positioned with:
-
deep execution capability,
-
major RE evacuation projects,
-
and a significant share of the private transmission market.
The Bottom Line
Sterlite Grid 5 is running two parallel stories:
The India story:
Profitable operations, strong asset base, healthy sector outlook.
The Brazil story:
A failed international expansion that required a full clean-up and continues to distort consolidated results.
As the Brazil exposure gets fully written off and removed from the balance sheet, the company’s numbers should start reflecting the underlying strength of the Indian business.
The business model is intact.
The foreign misadventure was not.
If Sterlite continues disciplined capital allocation and effective monetisation through Resonia, the long-term outlook remains favourable.
Leave a Reply