Q2 FY2026 Tobacco Products Overview

Marine Port & Services Sector Analysis: A Comprehensive Deep Dive into India's Maritime Infrastructure Landscape

Summary

The Indian Marine Port & Services sector is experiencing robust growth, driven by a resilient domestic economy, significant government infrastructure initiatives, and strategic expansion by key private players. This analysis synthesizes data from Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone Limited (APSEZ) and JSW Infrastructure Limited, revealing a dynamic landscape characterized by aggressive capacity expansion, integrated logistics development, and a strong focus on operational efficiency and sustainability. Both companies are demonstrating strong financial performance, expanding their market shares, and investing heavily in greenfield and brownfield projects to capitalize on India's burgeoning trade volumes. While APSEZ leads as the largest private port operator with a diversified portfolio and a strong push into integrated logistics and marine services, JSW Infrastructure is rapidly emerging as the second-largest, distinguished by its simultaneous development of multiple greenfield ports and strategic focus on captive and third-party cargo. The sector is poised for continued expansion, with ambitious long-term targets for cargo throughput and revenue growth, underpinned by favorable macroeconomic conditions and a proactive policy environment. However, global geopolitical tensions and evolving trade policies remain potential risks.

---

A. INDUSTRY OVERVIEW & MARKET LANDSCAPE

The Marine Port & Services sector in India is a critical backbone for the nation's trade and economic growth, facilitating the movement of goods across domestic and international borders. It encompasses port operations, cargo handling, logistics services (including rail, road, and warehousing), and marine services (tugs, bunkering, vessel management). India's strategic geographical location, coupled with its rapidly expanding economy, positions the sector for sustained long-term growth.

**Total Addressable Market Size and Growth Rates:** While specific aggregate market size figures for the entire Indian port sector are not explicitly provided in the extracts, the growth rates and targets of the leading players offer strong indicators. APSEZ, as India's largest private port operator, currently handles approximately 28% of India's total port volumes, indicating a significant market presence. Its H1 FY26 cargo volume reached 244 MMT, growing at 11% YoY. JSW Infrastructure, the second-largest private player, handled 58.2 MMT in H1 FY26, growing at 4% YoY. Both companies are targeting substantial capacity expansions, with APSEZ aiming for 1 billion tonnes throughput by 2030 (850 MMT domestic, 150 MMT international) and JSW Infrastructure targeting 400 MMTPA by FY30 or earlier, up from its current 177 MMTPA. These ambitious targets underscore a projected robust expansion of the overall market.

**Market Structure and Segmentation:** The market is primarily structured around port operations, which form the core, complemented by an increasingly integrated logistics ecosystem. * **Port Operations:** This segment involves cargo handling (dry bulk, liquid bulk, containers, gas, crude), vessel services, and warehousing within port premises. APSEZ's portfolio is highly diversified, with Q2 FY26 cargo composition being Dry (Coal): 30%, Dry (Other than coal): 33%, Liquid (excl. Crude): 5%, Crude: 2%, Gas: 2%, Container: 45%. JSW Infrastructure also handles a diverse range, including iron ore, coal, and various bulk and liquid cargoes. * **Logistics Services:** This is a rapidly growing segment, moving beyond port gates to offer end-to-end solutions. It includes rail freight (container rakes, GPWIS), road transportation (trucking), multimodal logistics parks (MMLPs), inland container depots (ICDs), and warehousing. Both APSEZ and JSW Infrastructure are aggressively expanding their logistics capabilities to create integrated transport utilities. APSEZ's logistics revenue grew to ₹1,055 Cr in Q2 FY26, targeting ~5X growth to ₹14,000 Cr by FY29. JSW Infrastructure's logistics revenue from operations was ₹162.7 Cr in Q2 FY26, targeting ₹7-8 billion for FY26 and ₹8,000 Cr by 2030. * **Marine Services:** This segment includes tug services, pilotage, bunkering, and vessel management. APSEZ's marine segment revenue grew exponentially to ₹641 Cr in Q2 FY26, targeting 2x growth over FY25 by FY26 and over ₹3,300 Cr by FY27 (3x FY25 revenue). APSEZ has expanded its fleet to 127 vessels and is expanding geographically to MEASA and West Africa waters. JSW Infrastructure also has mini bulk carrier operations. * **International Operations:** Both companies are expanding their global footprint. APSEZ has international ports (e.g., Haifa, Israel, and now NQXT, Australia acquisition) and marine services extending to West Africa. JSW Infrastructure has O&M contracts in UAE (Fujairah and Dibba).

**Key End Markets and Applications:** The sector serves a wide array of industries, including: * **Manufacturing & Industrial:** Raw material imports (coal, crude, chemicals) and finished goods exports (automobiles, machinery). APSEZ's Mundra Port loaded 5,612 cars onto a single vessel in under 40 hours in September 2025, showcasing its automotive handling capabilities. * **Energy:** Handling of coal, crude oil, LNG, and other petroleum products. APSEZ's Dhamra LNG JV and JSW's LPG at Jaigarh and JNPA Liquid Terminal are examples. * **Agriculture:** Movement of agri-commodities, supported by infrastructure like agri silos (APSEZ has 1.3 MMT capacity, targeting 10 MMT by FY29). * **Retail & E-commerce:** Containerized cargo for consumer goods, facilitated by efficient logistics networks and warehouses. * **Construction & Infrastructure:** Movement of construction materials, including iron ore, cement, and aggregates. JSW's iron ore slurry pipeline project is a direct example.

**Geographic Distribution and Regional Dynamics:** India's vast coastline is segmented into West, South, and East Coasts, each with distinct cargo profiles and growth dynamics. * **West Coast:** Traditionally a dominant hub for container and liquid cargo, with major ports like Mundra, Hazira, and Dahej. APSEZ's West Coast volume in Q2 FY26 was 62.0 MMT (54% of domestic volume), though it saw a slight decline of 1% YoY, possibly due to base effects or shifts. Mundra itself saw a 1% decline in Q2 FY26. JSW's Jaigarh and Dharamtar ports are also on the West Coast. * **South Coast:** Showing strong growth. APSEZ's South Coast volume grew 19% YoY to 29.5 MMT in Q2 FY26, contributing 26% of domestic volume. Krishnapatnam and Vizhinjam (a new, high-growth port) are key here. JSW has a presence in Tuticorin and Mangalore. * **East Coast:** Also exhibiting robust expansion. APSEZ's East Coast volume surged 22% YoY to 22.4 MMT in Q2 FY26, making up 20% of domestic volume. Dhamra and Gangavaram are significant ports. JSW has major operations in Paradip and Ennore, and is developing the Jatadhar port in Odisha.

**Market Maturity and Lifecycle Stage:** The Indian Marine Port & Services sector is in a growth phase, transitioning from a predominantly government-controlled model to one with significant private participation and investment. The focus is on modernization, mechanization, and the development of integrated logistics solutions to enhance efficiency and reduce logistics costs. The aggressive greenfield and brownfield expansion plans by both APSEZ and JSW Infrastructure, coupled with government initiatives like Gati Shakti, indicate a vibrant and expanding market rather than a mature one.

**Industry Value Chain and Ecosystem:** The value chain is complex and integrated: 1. **Port Infrastructure Development:** Planning, financing, and construction of berths, terminals, dredging, and associated facilities. Both APSEZ and JSW are heavily involved in this, with multi-year capex plans. 2. **Port Operations:** Cargo handling (loading/unloading), storage, customs clearance, and vessel services. 3. **Logistics & Connectivity:** Rail and road evacuation, warehousing, ICDs, MMLPs, and last-mile delivery. This is where both companies are increasingly investing to offer end-to-end solutions. 4. **Marine Services:** Tug operations, pilotage, bunkering, and other vessel support. 5. **Ancillary Services:** Ship chandling, repair, survey, and other support functions.

The ecosystem involves port operators (like APSEZ, JSW Infra), shipping lines, freight forwarders, railway operators, trucking companies, customs authorities, and various industrial customers. The trend is towards vertical integration, with port operators expanding into logistics and marine services to capture more value across the supply chain.

---

B. FINANCIAL & ECONOMIC PROFILE

The Marine Port & Services sector, as exemplified by APSEZ and JSW Infrastructure, demonstrates strong financial health, characterized by robust revenue growth, healthy profitability, and significant capital expenditure for expansion.

**Industry Aggregate Revenue Scale and Growth Trajectory:** * **APSEZ (Consolidated):** * Q2 FY26 Revenue: ₹9,167 Cr (+30% YoY) * H1 FY26 Revenue: ₹18,294 Cr (+25% YoY) * FY26 Guidance: ₹36,000-38,000 Cr, implying continued strong growth. * The growth is broad-based, with Domestic Ports, International Ports, Logistics, and Marine segments all showing significant increases. Logistics revenue grew from ₹588 Cr in Q2 FY25 to ₹1,055 Cr in Q2 FY26, and Marine revenue from ₹190 Cr to ₹641 Cr in the same period, indicating exponential growth in these integrated services. * **JSW Infrastructure (Consolidated):** * Q2 FY26 Total Revenue: ₹1,372 Cr (+26% YoY) * H1 FY26 Total Revenue: ₹2,686 Cr (+23% YoY) * FY26 Overall Growth Guidance: 8% to 10% (dependent on iron ore market), suggesting a more conservative outlook for the full year compared to H1, possibly due to specific cargo market conditions (e.g., Paradip Iron Ore Terminal). * Port segment operational revenue grew 10% YoY in Q2 FY26 to ₹1,103 Cr, and 9% YoY in H1 FY26 to ₹2,189 Cr. Logistics revenue from operations grew 20% YoY in Q2 FY26 to ₹163 Cr.

**Comparison of Revenue Growth:** APSEZ is demonstrating higher consolidated revenue growth rates (30% YoY in Q2, 25% YoY in H1) compared to JSW Infrastructure (26% YoY in Q2, 23% YoY in H1). This could be attributed to APSEZ's larger scale, more diversified portfolio, and aggressive expansion in high-growth segments like logistics and marine services, as well as significant contributions from international operations. APSEZ's International Ports revenue grew 35% YoY in Q2 FY26, and its Marine revenue grew over 3x.

**Profitability Levels Across Companies:** Both companies exhibit strong EBITDA margins, characteristic of the capital-intensive port infrastructure business. * **APSEZ (Consolidated):** * Q2 FY26 EBITDA: ₹5,550 Cr (+27% YoY), EBITDA Margin: 60.5% (₹5,550 Cr / ₹9,167 Cr) * H1 FY26 EBITDA: ₹11,046 Cr (+20% YoY), EBITDA Margin: 60.4% (₹11,046 Cr / ₹18,294 Cr) * PAT Q2 FY26: ₹3,120 Cr (+29% YoY), PAT H1 FY26: ₹6,431 Cr (+17% YoY) * **Segmental Margins:** * Domestic Ports: High margins, e.g., Mundra 74% in Q2 FY26, Hazira 75%, Dahej 67%. Dhamra saw a decline from 63% to 50% YoY in Q2 FY26, and Krishnapatnam from 67% to 64%. Vizhinjam, a new port, showed very high margins (82% in Q2 FY26). * Logistics: Consolidated Logistics EBITDA Margin was 20.9% in Q2 FY26 (down from 26.5% in Q2 FY25), and 19.4% in H1 FY26 (down from 25.9% in H1 FY25). This decline is primarily due to the lower margins in Trucking (5.6% in Q2 FY26) and International Freight Network (7.2%), while other logistics maintained high margins (32.4%). This suggests that as APSEZ expands into asset-heavy, competitive logistics segments, overall logistics margins might see some dilution, though the absolute EBITDA is growing significantly. * Marine: Harbour (part of Marine) showed very high EBITDA margins of 89% in Q2 FY26. * **JSW Infrastructure (Consolidated):** * Q2 FY26 EBITDA: ₹716 Cr (+18% YoY), EBITDA Margin: 52.2% (₹716 Cr / ₹1,372 Cr) * H1 FY26 EBITDA: ₹1,387 Cr (+14% YoY), EBITDA Margin: 51.6% (₹1,387 Cr / ₹2,686 Cr) * PAT Q2 FY26: ₹369 Cr (-1% YoY), PAT H1 FY26: ₹758 Cr (+13% YoY) * PBT Q2 FY26: ₹463 Cr (-16% YoY), PBT H1 FY26: ₹936 Cr (-1% YoY). The decline in PAT/PBT in Q2 FY26 despite EBITDA growth is notable, attributed to higher depreciation (₹149 Cr vs ₹134 Cr), higher finance cost (₹99 Cr vs ₹75 Cr), and an unrealized FX loss of ₹5 Cr (vs gain of ₹155 Cr in Q2 FY25). * **Segmental Margins:** * Port Segment Operational EBITDA Margin: 53% in Q2 FY26 (up from 52% Q2 FY25), and 52.4% in H1 FY26 (up from 51.5% H1 FY25). This indicates stable to improving core port profitability. * Logistics Segment EBITDA Margin: 15.8% in Q2 FY26 (₹25.9 Cr / ₹163.9 Cr) and 15.9% in H1 FY26 (₹48.3 Cr / ₹304.3 Cr). Navkar Corporation, a key logistics asset, showed substantial EBITDA improvement in Q2 FY26. * Overall Margins (Consolidated): Management expects margins to oscillate between 45% and 50%.

**Comparison of Profitability:** APSEZ consistently reports higher consolidated EBITDA margins (around 60%) compared to JSW Infrastructure (around 52%). This could be due to APSEZ's asset base maturity, higher contribution from very high-margin segments like Marine/Harbour, and potentially better economies of scale. JSW's PBT/PAT was impacted by non-operational factors like FX loss and higher finance costs in Q2 FY26, masking underlying operational EBITDA growth. Both companies show strong core port margins (50-75% for APSEZ's key ports, 53% for JSW's port segment). Logistics margins are lower for both, reflecting the competitive nature of that segment, but are growing in absolute terms.

**Return Profiles (RoCE):** * **APSEZ (Consolidated):** RoCE has shown a consistent upward trend: FY23: 12%, FY24: 13%, FY25: 15%, H1 FY26: 16%. This indicates improving capital efficiency. * Domestic Ports: Very strong and improving RoCE (FY23: 15% to H1 FY26: 24%). Mundra (39%), Hazira (39%), Dahej (40%), Karaikal (24%) are particularly high. Dhamra (18%), Kattupalli (7%), Krishnapatnam (20%), Gangavaram (10%) are also contributing. * Marine: Stable to improving (FY23: 14% to H1 FY26: 15%). * Logistics: Improving but still lower than ports (FY23: 6% to H1 FY26: 9%). Gestating businesses are expected to achieve threshold RoCE in 3-4 years. * International Ports: Improving (FY24: 6% to H1 FY26: 7%). * **JSW Infrastructure:** RoCE (TTM Sep-25): 14.4% (down from 18.2% Sep-24). The decline in RoCE for JSW Infra could be attributed to significant ongoing capital expenditure for greenfield projects that are yet to become fully operational and contribute to earnings, thus increasing the capital employed without immediate corresponding increase in profits.

**Comparison of Return Profiles:** APSEZ shows a strong and improving consolidated RoCE of 16%, driven by its highly profitable and mature domestic port assets. JSW Infrastructure's RoCE of 14.4% is also healthy but has seen a slight dip, likely due to its aggressive greenfield development phase where large capital is deployed before revenue generation. This is a typical characteristic of infrastructure development.

**Working Capital Characteristics and Cash Conversion Cycles:** * **APSEZ:** H1 FY26 operating cash flow was ₹9,503 Cr, representing 86% of EBITDA, indicating strong cash generation and efficient working capital management. * **JSW Infrastructure:** Not explicitly detailed, but strong EBITDA and net profit suggest healthy cash flow generation. The company's low net debt to operating EBITDA ratio (0.75x) also implies good cash management.

**Capital Intensity Requirements:** The Marine Port & Services sector is inherently capital-intensive, requiring substantial investments in infrastructure development, mechanization, and logistics assets. * **APSEZ:** H1 FY26 capex was ₹6,462 Cr. Long-term capex guidance for FY25-FY29 is ₹65,000 – 75,000 Cr, with ₹45,000 – 50,000 Cr for domestic ports, ₹15,000 – 20,000 Cr for logistics, and ₹5,000 Cr for technology/decarbonization. This highlights massive ongoing investment. * **JSW Infrastructure:** H1 FY26 capex was ₹902 Cr. FY26 capex target is ₹4,000 Cr for port business and ₹1,500 Cr for logistics business, totaling ₹5,500 Cr. Aggregate financial commitments across all growth projects are ₹3,300 Cr. Logistics CAPEX (FY25-30) is ₹9,000 Cr. JSW is investing heavily in three greenfield ports (Keni, Murbe, Jatadhar) and an iron ore slurry pipeline, which are highly capital-intensive projects.

**Comparison of Capital Intensity:** Both companies are highly capital-intensive, reflecting the nature of the business. APSEZ's capex guidance of ₹65,000 – 75,000 Cr over FY25-FY29 is significantly larger than JSW's annual capex targets, reflecting its larger scale and broader portfolio. JSW's focus on greenfield projects means a higher proportion of its current capex is for new asset creation, which will take time to generate returns.

**Revenue Quality (Recurring vs One-time, Contract Length):** The revenue streams in the port sector are generally recurring, based on long-term concession agreements with government bodies and long-term contracts with industrial customers (e.g., JSW Steel's Take or Pay Agreement for the iron ore slurry pipeline). * **APSEZ:** Mentions "sticky cargo share" of 52% in Q2 FY26, indicating a significant portion of its cargo volumes comes from established, long-term relationships or captive cargo. The integrated logistics and marine services also contribute to sticky, recurring revenue streams. * **JSW Infrastructure:** Benefits from captive cargo from the JSW Group (54% of group volumes in Q2 FY26). The iron ore slurry pipeline project has a long-term Take or Pay Agreement with JSW Steel, ensuring revenue stability. Concession agreements for new terminals (Kolkata, Tuticorin) are typically for 30 years, providing long-term revenue visibility.

**Debt & Cash Position:** * **APSEZ:** * Gross debt (Sep'25): ₹51,082 Cr * Net debt (Sep'25): ₹38,019 Cr * Cash balance (H1 FY26): ₹13,063 Cr * Net debt/EBITDA (H1 FY26): 1.8x (well within policy of up to 2.5x) * Average debt maturity (Sep'25): 5.2 years * Issued ₹5,000 Cr NCDs for 15 years to LIC, indicating access to long-term funding. * Completed bond buyback program of US$386.03m, demonstrating proactive debt management. * **JSW Infrastructure:** * Gross Debt (September 2025): ₹4,898 Cr * Net debt (September 2025): ₹1,810 Cr * Cash and Bank balance (September 2025): ₹3,088 Cr * Net debt to operating EBITDA (TTM Sep 2025): 0.75x (very healthy, indicating low leverage and strong capacity for further borrowing). * Investment-grade rating of BBB-minus from BB-plus with a stable outlook by S&P Global Ratings and Fitch Ratings, reflecting strong financial health and creditworthiness.

**Comparison of Debt & Cash:** APSEZ has a significantly larger debt base commensurate with its larger scale and asset base, but maintains a healthy net debt/EBITDA ratio of 1.8x, well within its policy limits. JSW Infrastructure has a much smaller debt base and an exceptionally low net debt to operating EBITDA ratio of 0.75x, providing substantial headroom for its aggressive capex plans. Both companies demonstrate prudent financial management and access to capital markets.

---

C. COMPETITIVE STRUCTURE & DYNAMICS

The Indian Marine Port & Services sector is characterized by a mix of major public sector ports (Major Ports) and a growing number of private ports and terminals. The competitive landscape is increasingly dominated by large private players like APSEZ and JSW Infrastructure, who are expanding their footprint and integrating services across the value chain.

**Number of Players and Market Concentration:** The market is moderately concentrated, with APSEZ holding a dominant position among private players. * **APSEZ:** India's largest private port operator, handling approximately 28% of India's total port volumes. Its market share has been consistently growing, reaching 28.1% in Q2 FY26 (+70bps YoY) and 28% in H1 FY26 (+70bps YoY). In the container segment, APSEZ's dominance is even more pronounced, with an All-India Container Market Share of 45.9% in Q2 FY26 (+150bps YoY) and 45.5% in H1 FY26 (+40bps YoY). * **JSW Infrastructure:** The second largest private port operator in India. While its overall market share isn't explicitly stated, its H1 FY26 cargo volume of 58.2 MMT (compared to APSEZ's 244 MMT) indicates it is a significant, albeit smaller, player. * **Other Players:** The market also includes other private terminal operators and the Major Ports (run by the government), which are undergoing modernization and privatization efforts.

**Competitive Intensity Assessment:** * **Rivalry among existing competitors:** High. Both APSEZ and JSW are aggressively expanding capacity, acquiring new concessions, and integrating logistics services. This competition drives efficiency and innovation. For example, both are investing in greenfield ports and expanding existing capacities. * **Threat of new entrants:** Moderate to High. While port development requires significant capital and regulatory approvals (creating high barriers), government initiatives to privatize and develop new ports (like Gati Shakti Multi-Modal Cargo Terminals) can attract new players or expand existing ones. However, the scale and integrated capabilities of APSEZ and JSW create a formidable barrier for smaller, unintegrated players. * **Bargaining power of buyers (shippers/cargo owners):** Moderate. Large industrial groups (like JSW Group for JSW Infra) can exert significant power due to captive cargo volumes. However, diversified port operators with multiple locations and integrated services can offer competitive advantages and reduce buyer power. APSEZ's "sticky cargo share" of 52% suggests strong customer relationships. * **Bargaining power of suppliers (equipment manufacturers, labor):** Moderate. Specialized port equipment can be costly, but global supply chains offer options. Labor costs are a factor, but automation and mechanization are mitigating this. * **Threat of substitute products or services:** Low. For bulk and containerized cargo, sea transport remains the most cost-effective and efficient mode for long distances, especially international trade. Air freight is a substitute for high-value, time-sensitive cargo but not for the bulk of port traffic.

**Entry Barriers and Competitive Moats:** * **High Capital Expenditure:** Developing and operating ports requires massive upfront investment, creating a significant barrier. * **Regulatory Hurdles & Concessions:** Obtaining necessary government approvals, environmental clearances, and long-term concession agreements is complex and time-consuming. * **Strategic Locations:** Access to deep drafts, hinterland connectivity, and proximity to industrial clusters are crucial and limited. * **Integrated Logistics Network:** Developing an end-to-end logistics solution (ports, rail, road, warehouses) creates a powerful moat, making it harder for single-service providers to compete. APSEZ's "Integrated Transport Utility value proposition" is a prime example. * **Operational Expertise & Efficiency:** Optimizing port operations, achieving quick turnaround times, and managing diverse cargo types requires specialized knowledge and technology. * **ESG Compliance:** Increasingly, strong ESG performance and sustainability commitments (like APSEZ's Net Zero by 2040) are becoming competitive differentiators and requirements for attracting capital and customers.

**Pricing Power Dynamics and Pricing Trends:** Pricing power is influenced by capacity utilization, competition, and the type of cargo. Specialized terminals or those with unique advantages (e.g., deep draft, superior connectivity) may command better pricing. The shift towards integrated logistics allows for value-added pricing beyond just port handling. JSW Infrastructure mentioned "rate increases in SWPL and Ennore Coal Terminal," indicating some pricing power in specific assets.

**Differentiation Strategies Employed:** * **APSEZ:** * **Integrated Transport Utility:** Offers end-to-end logistics solutions, combining port, rail, road, and warehousing. This creates a seamless supply chain for customers. * **Diversified Portfolio:** Operates a wide network of ports across India's coasts and internationally, handling a broad range of cargo types. This diversification reduces reliance on any single cargo or region. * **Operational Excellence:** Focus on efficiency, quick turnaround times, and adoption of technology (e.g., Strategic Command Center for Marine operations, digital integration of Ocean Sparkle fleet). * **Sustainability Leadership:** Commitment to Net Zero by 2040, Zero Waste to Landfill, and deployment of electric cranes positions it as an ESG leader, attracting environmentally conscious customers and investors. * **Inorganic Growth:** Strategic acquisitions like NQXT Port in Australia expand its global footprint and capacity. * **JSW Infrastructure:** * **Greenfield Development Focus:** Unique in simultaneously developing three greenfield ports (Keni, Murbe, Jatadhar), which will significantly boost its capacity and strategic presence. * **Captive Cargo Advantage:** Strong linkage with the JSW Group provides a stable base of cargo volumes (54% of Q2 FY26 volumes), ensuring utilization for key assets like the iron ore slurry pipeline. * **Strategic Location Expansion:** Developing ports in new regions (Keni in Karnataka, Murbe in Maharashtra, Jatadhar in Odisha) to serve emerging industrial clusters. * **Logistics Integration:** Expanding into multimodal logistics parks (Kudathini) and ICDs to offer integrated solutions, leveraging its group's diverse business locations. * **Operational Efficiency:** Focus on improving operational performance at existing terminals and new projects (e.g., Fujairah port exceeding minimum cargo volume commitments).

**Consolidation Trends and M&A Activity:** The sector is seeing consolidation and strategic acquisitions as larger players seek to expand capacity, geographical reach, and service offerings. * **APSEZ:** Board approved the acquisition of NQXT Port, Australia (50 MTPA capacity). This is a significant international acquisition. It also has a history of acquiring domestic ports (e.g., Krishnapatnam, Gangavaram, Karaikal). * **JSW Infrastructure:** Acquired brownfield rail siding in Kudathini, Ballari, Karnataka, to transform into a multimodal logistics park. It also expresses interest in "acquiring CFS and ICD businesses" and participating in Gati Shakti Multi-Modal Cargo Terminal bids. The acquisition of Navkar Corporation is also a past example of inorganic growth in logistics.

**Competitive Advantages of Each Player:** * **APSEZ:** * **Scale & Network:** Largest private port operator with a vast network of 19 ports (including international) and a current cargo handling capacity of 633 MMTPA, targeting 1 Billion Metric Tonne by FY30. * **Integrated Value Chain:** Unmatched "Integrated Transport Utility" offering, combining ports, logistics (12 MMLPs, 3.1 Mn sq. ft. warehouses, 132 rakes, 937 trucks), and marine services (127 vessels). * **Financial Strength:** Strong balance sheet with healthy net debt/EBITDA (1.8x) and access to diverse funding sources. * **Operational Excellence:** Demonstrated ability to set new operational records (Mundra double-stacked rakes, car loading; Hazira bulk liquid). * **ESG Leadership:** Strong ESG ratings and commitment to Net Zero by 2040. * **JSW Infrastructure:** * **Greenfield Development Expertise:** Proven capability in developing new ports from scratch, positioning it for future growth in underserved regions. * **Captive Cargo Support:** Strong backing from the JSW Group ensures a stable base load for its terminals and logistics assets. * **Strategic Project Execution:** Progress on large-scale projects like the iron ore slurry pipeline and multiple greenfield ports demonstrates strong execution capabilities. * **Healthy Balance Sheet:** Very low net debt/EBITDA (0.75x) provides significant financial flexibility for future investments. * **Diversified Growth Avenues:** Expanding into new cargo types (LPG at Jaigarh) and regions (Kolkata container terminal, UAE O&M contracts).

---

D. OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS

Operational efficiency, capacity utilization, and asset management are paramount in the Marine Port & Services sector, directly impacting profitability and competitive positioning. Both APSEZ and JSW Infrastructure demonstrate strong operational focus, leveraging technology and strategic investments to enhance performance.

**Capacity and Utilization Trends Across Companies:** * **APSEZ:** * Current Cargo Handling Capacity: 633 million tonnes per annum (MMTPA). * H1 FY26 Cargo Handled: 244 MMT. This implies a current annualized utilization rate of approximately 77% (244 MMT * 2 / 633 MMTPA), indicating healthy utilization. * Ports Portfolio Target: 850 MMT domestic ports, 150 MMT international ports by 2030, totaling 1 Billion Metric Tonne (BMT) by FY30. This signifies massive planned capacity expansion. * Mundra Port, its flagship, handled 97.4 MMT in H1 FY26, showing a slight decline of 4% YoY, possibly due to higher growth in other non-Mundra ports (16% YoY growth in H1 FY26 to 129.3 MMT). * Navkar Capacity Utilization (JSW Infra's acquisition): Mumbai sector: 60% to 65%; Morbi: 55% to 60%. These figures suggest room for improvement in utilization for these specific logistics assets. * **JSW Infrastructure:** * Current Cargo Handling Capacity: 177 MMTPA. * H1 FY26 Cargo Handled: 58.2 MMT. This implies an annualized utilization rate of approximately 66% (58.2 MMT * 2 / 177 MMTPA). * Cargo Handling Capacity Target: Expanding to 400 MMTPA by FY30 or earlier. This is a significant increase, more than doubling current capacity. * Greenfield ports (Keni, Murbe, Jatadhar) will add 93 MMTPA in their initial phase. * Expansion at Dharamtar & Jaigarh will add 36 MMTPA. * Mangalore Container Expansion will increase capacity from 4.2 to 6 MMTPA.

**Comparison of Capacity and Utilization:** APSEZ operates at a much larger scale with significantly higher current capacity and throughput. Its overall utilization appears slightly higher than JSW Infrastructure's. Both companies have aggressive capacity expansion plans, indicating confidence in future cargo demand. JSW's lower current utilization might be partly due to its newer assets or specific cargo dependencies (e.g., Paradip Iron Ore Terminal impact).

**Production Economics and Cost Structures:** * **High Fixed Costs:** Port operations are characterized by high fixed costs associated with infrastructure, equipment, and land. This necessitates high utilization to achieve economies of scale and profitability. * **Variable Costs:** Primarily related to cargo handling (labor, energy for cranes, fuel for vessels/trucks), maintenance, and administrative overheads. * **APSEZ:** High EBITDA margins (60% consolidated, 70%+ for key ports) suggest efficient cost management and strong pricing power. The decline in Logistics EBITDA margin from 26.5% to 20.9% YoY in Q2 FY26, particularly in trucking (5.6%) and international freight (7.2%), indicates that these segments have different cost structures and lower margins compared to core port operations. * **JSW Infrastructure:** Consolidated EBITDA margins around 52% are also strong. The increase in depreciation and finance costs in Q2 FY26 highlights the impact of new asset commissioning and associated debt. JSW's strategy of developing greenfield ports and an iron ore slurry pipeline aims to create cost-efficient infrastructure for its captive and third-party cargo.

**Supply Chain Structure and Dependencies:** Both companies are actively integrating their operations across the supply chain to offer multimodal solutions. * **APSEZ:** Focuses on an "Integrated Transport Utility" model. * **Ports:** Act as central hubs. * **Rail Connectivity:** Owns 132 rakes (up from 58 in FY20) and operates GPWIS. Launched double-stack container rake movement between ICD Tumb and ICD Patli. * **Road Connectivity:** Owns 937 trucks (up from none in FY20) and manages 25,000+ trucks. * **Warehousing & MMLPs:** Expanding from 0.4 Mn sq. ft. to 3.1 Mn sq. ft. warehouses, targeting 20 Mn sq. ft. by FY29. Has 12 MMLPs (up from 5 in FY20). * **Marine Fleet:** 127 vessels (up from 26 in FY20) for various marine services. * **JSW Infrastructure:** * **Ports:** Core assets. * **Rail Connectivity:** Owns 14 rakes (3 on lease). Acquired brownfield rail siding in Kudathini for MMLP. Participating in Gati Shakti Multi-Modal Cargo Terminal (GCT) bids. * **Road Connectivity:** 602 trailers for last-mile delivery. * **Pipelines:** Developing a 302 km iron ore slurry pipeline, a critical infrastructure for efficient bulk cargo movement. * **ICDs/CFS:** Expanding Navkar Corporation and looking for inorganic opportunities in CFS/ICD businesses.

**Technology Landscape and Innovation Pace:** Both companies are embracing technology for operational efficiency and sustainability. * **APSEZ:** * **Digital Integration:** Ocean Sparkle's entire fleet operating paperless with a cloud-based vessel management system (SeaFlux). * **Strategic Command Center:** Inaugurated for Marine operations, suggesting centralized, data-driven management. * **Automation:** Deployment of electric-powered Mobile Harbour Cranes at Netaji Subhas Dock. * **ESG Technology:** Investment in decarbonization and renewable energy (12,136 MWh in H1 FY26). * **JSW Infrastructure:** * **Mechanization:** Redevelopment and mechanization of Berth 7 and 8 at Kolkata Container Terminal. * **Pipeline Technology:** Investment in the iron ore slurry pipeline for efficient bulk transport. * **Digitization:** Government efforts to digitize operations are a growth driver, which JSW would leverage.

**Operational Efficiency Benchmarks:** * **APSEZ:** * Mundra Port's record performance: Handled 898 double-stacked container rakes (c.46,000 TEUs) in July 2025; loaded 5,612 cars onto a single vessel in under 40 hours in September 2025. * Hazira Port's record performance: Highest-ever bulk liquid volume (0.51 MMT through 71 liquid tankers) in August 2025. * Adani Gangavaram Port: Handled 66 vessels in August 2025. * CWIT Performance: Handled over 350,000 TEUs since April 2025 (over 100,000 TEUs monthly in August & September 2025). * Sustainability metrics: Specific Energy Consumption (7,166 KJ/tch), GHG Emission Intensity (0.86 Kg CO₂e/tch), Specific Freshwater Consumption (4.2 L/tch). * **JSW Infrastructure:** * Fujairah and Dibba O&M contracts in UAE: Delivered exceptional operational performance, with Fujairah port on track to exceed minimum cargo volume commitments. * JNPA Liquid Terminal: Handled 0.44 MT in Q2 FY26 and 0.74 MT in H1 FY26 through interim operations, even before full completion. * Tuticorin Dry Bulk: Handled 1.09 MT in Q2 FY26 and 2.15 MT in H1 FY26 through interim operations.

**Key Performance Indicators (KPIs):** * **Cargo Volume (MMT/TEUs):** Primary KPI for both, showing overall throughput. * **Revenue & EBITDA Growth:** Financial performance indicators. * **EBITDA Margins:** Profitability and operational efficiency. * **RoCE:** Capital efficiency. * **Market Share:** Competitive positioning. * **Net Debt/EBITDA:** Financial leverage. * **Capacity Utilization:** Efficiency of asset deployment. * **Turnaround Time:** Speed of vessel and cargo handling (implied by records). * **Sustainability Metrics:** GHG emissions, energy/water consumption, waste recycling.

**Asset Efficiency Metrics:** * **APSEZ Asset Base (FY20 / Q2 FY26 / FY29 Target):** * Tugs: 26 / 127 / 3x revenue growth (FY27) * Ports: 10 / 19 / 1 Billion Metric Tonne (FY30) * Rakes: 58 / 132 / 300 * MMLPs: 5 / 12 / 20 * Warehouses: 0.4 Mn sq. ft. / 3.1 Mn sq. ft. / 20 Mn sq. ft. * Trucks: - / 937 / 5,000 * Agri Silos Capacity: 1.3 MMT (current), expected to increase to 10 MMT by FY29. * **JSW Infrastructure Key Equipments:** * Domestic standard containers: 2814 * Trailers for last mile delivery: 602 * Rakes: 14 (3 on lease) * RTG Cranes: 6 * **Land Bank:** Both companies hold significant land banks for future expansion. * APSEZ: Mundra (~12,500 Ha), Dhamra (~2,000 Ha), Gangavaram (~1,000 Ha), Krishnapatnam (~2,750 Ha). * JSW Infrastructure (Navkar): Panvel Maharashtra (Undeveloped 59 acres), Morbi Gujarat (Undeveloped 41 acres).

The rapid expansion of asset bases for both companies, particularly in logistics and marine for APSEZ, and greenfield ports for JSW, indicates a strong focus on building out comprehensive infrastructure to support future growth and improve asset efficiency over the long term.

---

E. GROWTH DYNAMICS & DRIVERS

The Marine Port & Services sector in India is experiencing robust growth, propelled by a confluence of macroeconomic tailwinds, strategic government initiatives, and aggressive expansion by private players.

**Historical Growth Trajectory (3-5 year view with specific rates):** While a full 3-5 year historical view for the entire sector isn't provided, the data for APSEZ offers a strong indication of the growth trajectory: * **APSEZ Consolidated Revenue:** Grew from ₹5,211 Cr in Q2 FY23 to ₹9,167 Cr in Q2 FY26, representing a CAGR of approximately 20.6% over three years. * **APSEZ Consolidated EBITDA:** Grew from ₹2,990 Cr in Q2 FY23 to ₹5,550 Cr in Q2 FY26, a CAGR of approximately 23.2%. * **APSEZ Cargo Volume:** Grew from 101 MMT in Q2 FY23 to 124 MMT in Q2 FY26, a CAGR of approximately 7.6%. * **APSEZ RoCE:** Improved from 12% in FY23 to 16% in H1 FY26, demonstrating increasing capital efficiency.

JSW Infrastructure, being a relatively newer public entity, has less historical data in the provided extract, but its H1 FY26 revenue growth of 23% YoY and EBITDA growth of 14% YoY indicate a strong current growth phase.

**Current Growth Rates and Acceleration/Deceleration:** * **APSEZ:** * Q2 FY26 Revenue: +30% YoY * Q2 FY26 EBITDA: +27% YoY * Q2 FY26 PAT: +29% YoY * Q2 FY26 Cargo: +12% YoY * Q2 FY26 Container Volume: +21% YoY * The growth is accelerating, particularly in revenue, EBITDA, and container volumes, indicating strong momentum. International volumes (cargo +80% YoY, container +84% YoY) and Marine revenue (+3x YoY) are showing exponential growth. * **JSW Infrastructure:** * Q2 FY26 Revenue: +26% YoY * Q2 FY26 EBITDA: +18% YoY * Q2 FY26 Cargo: +3% YoY (impacted by Paradip Iron Ore Terminal shortfall) * The growth in revenue and EBITDA is strong, but overall cargo volume growth is more subdued (+3% YoY) due to specific market challenges in iron ore exports. However, Navkar Corporation's EXIM cargo grew +20% YoY, and Domestic cargo +46% YoY, showing strong logistics growth.

**Volume vs Price Contribution to Growth:** * **Volume:** Both companies are primarily driven by volume growth. APSEZ's total cargo volume grew 12% YoY in Q2 FY26, and container volume grew 21% YoY. JSW Infrastructure's consolidated cargo grew 3% YoY, but specific terminals like Gangavaram (APSEZ, +47% YoY) and JSW's Jaigarh (+10% YoY), Dharamtar (+10% YoY), and Mangalore Container (+10% YoY) show strong volume increases. * **Price:** While not explicitly detailed, JSW Infrastructure mentioned "rate increases in SWPL and Ennore Coal Terminal," suggesting that pricing adjustments also contribute to revenue growth. APSEZ's high and stable EBITDA margins across many ports imply a degree of pricing power. The shift towards value-added integrated logistics services also allows for better realization per unit of cargo.

**Organic vs Inorganic Growth Components:** Both companies are pursuing a mix of organic and inorganic growth. * **Organic Growth:** * **Capacity Expansion:** Both are investing heavily in expanding existing port capacities (e.g., Dhamra, Dharamtar & Jaigarh, Mangalore Container) and developing greenfield ports (JSW's Keni, Murbe, Jatadhar). * **Logistics Network Expansion:** Building new MMLPs, ICDs, warehouses, and expanding trucking/rail fleets. * **Service Diversification:** Expanding marine services, LNG bunkering. * **Inorganic Growth:** * **Acquisitions:** APSEZ's acquisition of NQXT Port, Australia, and its past acquisitions of domestic ports. JSW Infrastructure's acquisition of Navkar Corporation and brownfield rail siding in Kudathini, and its stated interest in acquiring CFS and ICD businesses. * **Concessions:** Both companies actively bid for and win new port and terminal concessions (e.g., JSW's Kolkata Container Terminal, JNPA Liquid Terminal, Tuticorin Dry Bulk).

**Geographic Expansion Opportunities and Progress:** * **Domestic:** Both companies are expanding their footprint across India's coasts. * APSEZ: Strong growth in South and East Coast volumes (+19% and +22% YoY respectively in Q2 FY26), indicating successful diversification beyond its traditional West Coast dominance (Mundra). New ports like Vizhinjam are contributing significantly. * JSW Infrastructure: Developing greenfield ports in Karnataka (Keni), Maharashtra (Murbe), and Odisha (Jatadhar), expanding its presence in strategic coastal regions. It also secured concessions in Kolkata and Tuticorin. * **International:** * APSEZ: Acquisition of NQXT Port, Australia. Expansion of marine services to MEASA region and West Africa waters (through PSVs and workboat purchase). * JSW Infrastructure: O&M contracts in UAE (Fujairah and Dibba), with expectations of increased volumes.

**Product/Service Innovation Pipeline:** * **Integrated Logistics:** Both are innovating by offering comprehensive, multimodal logistics solutions, moving beyond just port-to-port services. This includes last-mile delivery, warehousing, and specialized freight services. * **Specialized Cargo Handling:** Development of specific terminals for LNG, LPG, iron ore slurry, and dedicated automobile handling facilities. * **Digitalization:** APSEZ's digital integration of its marine fleet (Ocean Sparkle) and Strategic Command Center for Marine operations. * **Sustainability Solutions:** APSEZ's deployment of electric cranes and commitment to Net Zero by 2040.

**Adjacent Market Opportunities:** * **Logistics Parks & Warehousing:** Significant expansion by both companies into MMLPs and large-scale warehousing. APSEZ's 70-acre logistics park in Kochi with ₹600 Cr investment is an example. * **Rail & Road Freight:** Expanding owned and managed fleets of rakes and trucks to capture more value in surface transportation. * **Marine Services:** APSEZ's aggressive expansion of its marine fleet and services, including LNG bunkering. * **Industrial Land Development:** Leveraging vast land banks (e.g., APSEZ's 12,500 Ha at Mundra) for industrial and logistics development.

**Customer Acquisition and Penetration Trends:** * **Diversification:** Both companies are diversifying their customer base beyond captive cargo (for JSW) or anchor customers (for APSEZ). APSEZ's "sticky cargo share" of 52% indicates strong customer retention. * **Integrated Solutions:** Offering end-to-end solutions helps attract and retain customers by simplifying their supply chain management. * **New Geographies:** Expanding to new port locations allows them to tap into new industrial clusters and hinterlands. * **Government Initiatives:** Participation in schemes like Gati Shakti Multi-Modal Cargo Terminals (JSW) helps acquire new government-backed projects and customers.

**Overall Growth Drivers:** 1. **Resilient Indian Economy:** RBI's upward revision of GDP growth forecast from 6.5% to 6.8% for FY25-26 provides a strong macroeconomic tailwind, driving trade volumes. 2. **Government Focus on Infrastructure:** Pro-growth stance, efforts to privatize, modernize, and expand port capacity, enhance connectivity, and digitize operations (e.g., Gati Shakti program) are key drivers. 3. **Integrated Logistics Demand:** Growing demand for efficient, cost-effective, and seamless end-to-end logistics solutions. 4. **Strategic Investments:** Aggressive greenfield and brownfield port development, coupled with logistics and marine fleet expansion by private players. 5. **Diversification:** Expansion into new cargo types, geographies, and value-added services reduces reliance on single market segments. 6. **Operational Efficiency & Technology:** Continuous improvement in port operations, faster turnaround times, and adoption of technology enhance competitiveness. 7. **Inorganic Opportunities:** Consolidation and acquisition of existing assets or concessions provide avenues for rapid growth.

---

F. RISK LANDSCAPE

While the Marine Port & Services sector in India demonstrates strong growth potential, it is also exposed to various risks, both systemic and specific to the industry or individual companies.

**Industry-Wide Systematic Risks:** * **Global Economic Slowdown:** The sector is highly sensitive to global trade volumes. A slowdown in major economies or a recession could reduce demand for cargo movement, impacting port throughput and revenue. APSEZ explicitly mentions "global economy complex terrain" as a risk. * **Geopolitical Tensions:** Conflicts or instability in key trade routes (e.g., Red Sea, Middle East) can disrupt shipping, increase insurance costs, and alter trade patterns, affecting port volumes and profitability. Both companies implicitly acknowledge "geopolitical tensions" as a risk. * **Evolving Trade Policies:** Changes in international trade agreements, tariffs, or protectionist measures by major trading blocs can impact export/import volumes. "Evolving trade policies" are mentioned by both APSEZ and JSW Infrastructure. * **Commodity Price Volatility:** Fluctuations in prices of key commodities like coal, iron ore, and crude oil can affect the volumes of these specific cargo types handled by ports. JSW Infrastructure notes that its "overall growth for full fiscal (FY26): 8% to 10% (dependent on iron ore market)" and mentions "subdued cargo volumes at Paradip Iron Ore Terminal due to challenging macroeconomic conditions in iron ore export market." * **Natural Disasters & Climate Change:** Ports are vulnerable to extreme weather events (cyclones, floods) which can cause operational disruptions, infrastructure damage, and necessitate significant repair costs. The commitment to sustainability (e.g., APSEZ's Net Zero by 2040) also implies managing climate-related risks.

**Cyclicality and Economic Sensitivity:** The port sector is cyclical, closely tied to economic activity and industrial output. During economic booms, cargo volumes surge, while during downturns, they contract. The diversified cargo portfolio and integrated logistics offerings of players like APSEZ and JSW Infrastructure can help mitigate some of this cyclicality by spreading risk across different industries and revenue streams.

**Regulatory and Policy Risks by Geography:** * **Concession Agreements:** The terms and conditions of long-term concession agreements with government authorities are critical. Any changes or disputes could impact operations and profitability. * **Environmental Regulations:** Stricter environmental norms or delays in obtaining clearances for new projects can impact expansion plans and increase compliance costs. * **Land Acquisition:** Acquiring land for greenfield projects or logistics parks can be a complex and time-consuming process, subject to local regulations and public sentiment. * **Port Tariffs:** Government regulation of port tariffs can limit pricing power, especially for Major Ports. Private ports often have more flexibility but are still subject to market forces.

**Technology Disruption Threats:** * **Automation & AI:** While largely an opportunity for efficiency, rapid technological advancements could require continuous investment in upgrades, potentially leading to asset obsolescence if not managed proactively. * **Cybersecurity:** Increased reliance on digital systems for operations and logistics exposes ports to cybersecurity threats, which could disrupt operations and compromise sensitive data.

**ESG and Sustainability Challenges:** * **Environmental Impact:** Port operations can have significant environmental impacts (dredging, emissions, waste). Failure to meet stringent ESG standards can lead to regulatory penalties, reputational damage, and difficulty in attracting green financing. APSEZ's high ESG ratings and Net Zero commitment are proactive measures to address this. * **Social License to Operate:** Community engagement and addressing local concerns (e.g., displacement, pollution) are crucial for smooth operations and expansion. JSW's public hearings for Keni and Murbe ports are part of this process.

**Supply Chain Vulnerabilities:** * **Logistics Bottlenecks:** While both companies are building integrated logistics, external bottlenecks in road or rail networks beyond their control can still impact overall efficiency and customer satisfaction. * **Labor Relations:** Disruptions due to labor disputes or strikes can severely impact port operations.

**Competitive Threats:** * **Intensified Competition:** Aggressive expansion by existing players and potential new entrants can lead to pricing pressure and market share erosion. * **Substitution:** While low for bulk cargo, for certain specialized cargo, alternative transport modes or routes could emerge.

**Customer Concentration Risks:** * **JSW Infrastructure:** A significant portion of its cargo (54% in Q2 FY26) comes from the JSW Group. While this provides stability, it also creates a degree of customer concentration risk if the group's own business performance falters. However, the long-term Take or Pay Agreement for the iron ore slurry pipeline mitigates this. JSW is also actively increasing third-party volumes. * **APSEZ:** With a "sticky cargo share" of 52%, it likely has strong relationships with key customers, but reliance on a few large clients could pose a risk if those relationships sour or their business volumes decline. However, its diversified portfolio across cargo types and geographies helps spread this risk.

**Specific Risks Mentioned by Companies:** * **APSEZ:** "Global economy complex terrain, geopolitical tensions, evolving trade policies." * **JSW Infrastructure:** "Subdued cargo volumes at Paradip Iron Ore Terminal due to challenging macroeconomic conditions in iron ore export market." "Monsoon period impacting pipeline laying progress" (for the iron ore slurry pipeline).

Overall, the sector is navigating a complex risk environment, requiring robust risk management strategies, continuous investment in resilient infrastructure, and adaptability to changing global and local dynamics.

---

G. CAPITAL ALLOCATION & INVESTOR RETURNS

The Marine Port & Services sector is characterized by significant capital allocation towards expansion and modernization, reflecting its capital-intensive nature and long-term growth prospects. Both APSEZ and JSW Infrastructure are deploying substantial capital to enhance capacity and integrate their value chains, while also focusing on maintaining healthy financial leverage and improving returns.

**Capex Trends and Requirements (Growth vs Maintenance):** * **APSEZ:** * H1 FY26 Capex: ₹6,462 Cr. * FY26 Capex Guidance: ₹11,000-12,000 Cr. This indicates a significant ramp-up in H2 FY26. * Long-term Capex Guidance (FY25-FY29): ₹65,000 – 75,000 Cr. This massive investment is allocated as: * Domestic ports: ₹45,000 – 50,000 Cr (primarily growth capex for capacity expansion, greenfield/brownfield development). * Logistics: ₹15,000 – 20,000 Cr (for MMLPs, warehouses, rail/truck fleets, ICDs). * Technology capex + Decarbonization: ₹5,000 Cr (for efficiency, automation, sustainability). * The capex is clearly geared towards aggressive growth, capacity enhancement, and vertical integration into logistics and technology. * **JSW Infrastructure:** * H1 FY26 Capex: ₹902 Cr. * FY26 Capex Target: ₹4,000 Cr for port business, ₹1,500 Cr for logistics business, totaling ₹5,500 Cr. This also implies a significant ramp-up in H2 FY26. * Logistics Capex (FY25-30): ₹9,000 Cr. * Aggregate financial commitments across all growth projects: ₹3,300 Cr. * Major projects include Keni port (₹4,119 Cr), Jatadhar port (₹3,000 Cr), Iron Ore Slurry Pipeline (₹4,000 Cr), Kolkata Container Terminal (₹740 Cr), Tuticorin (₹600 Cr), LPG at Jaigarh (₹900 Cr), Dharamtar & Jaigarh expansion (₹2,359 Cr). These are predominantly growth capex for new assets and significant expansions.

**Comparison of Capex:** APSEZ's capex plans are substantially larger in absolute terms, reflecting its current scale and ambitious long-term targets. Both companies are in aggressive growth phases, with a significant portion of their capex dedicated to expanding capacity, developing greenfield projects, and integrating logistics. JSW's capex is more concentrated on a few large greenfield port and pipeline projects.

**R&D Investment Levels as % of Revenue:** Neither company explicitly details R&D investment as a percentage of revenue. However, APSEZ's allocation of ₹5,000 Cr for "Technology capex + Decarbonization" over FY25-FY29 indicates a focus on innovation and efficiency improvements, which can be considered a form of R&D in an infrastructure context. JSW's investment in the iron ore slurry pipeline also involves significant engineering and project management, which has R&D-like characteristics.

**Dividend Policies and Payout Ratios:** The extracts do not provide specific details on dividend policies or payout ratios for either company. However, given the high capital intensity and significant growth capex, it is common for companies in this sector to prioritize reinvestment of earnings for growth, potentially leading to moderate payout ratios.

**Share Buyback Programs:** * **APSEZ:** Completed a bond buyback program in August 2025, repurchasing US$386.03m. This is a debt management strategy rather than an equity share buyback, aimed at optimizing its capital structure and reducing debt. * **JSW Infrastructure:** No mention of share buyback programs.

**M&A Activity and Strategy:** Both companies view M&A as a key component of their growth strategy. * **APSEZ:** Board approved the acquisition of NQXT Port, Australia. This demonstrates a strategy of expanding internationally and acquiring strategic assets to boost capacity. APSEZ also mentions "inorganic growth opportunities" as a growth driver, supported by its low balance sheet leverage. * **JSW Infrastructure:** Acquired Navkar Corporation and a brownfield rail siding in Kudathini. It explicitly states its interest in "acquiring CFS and ICD businesses" and participating in Gati Shakti Multi-Modal Cargo Terminal bids, indicating a strategy to grow its logistics footprint through inorganic means.

**Cash Generation and Free Cash Flow Profiles:** * **APSEZ:** H1 FY26 operating cash flow was ₹9,503 Cr, representing 86% of EBITDA, indicating strong cash generation. With H1 FY26 capex of ₹6,462 Cr, its free cash flow (before financing activities) would be positive, demonstrating its ability to fund a significant portion of its growth internally. * **JSW Infrastructure:** H1 FY26 EBITDA was ₹1,387 Cr. While operating cash flow is not explicitly stated, its healthy EBITDA and low net debt/EBITDA ratio (0.75x) suggest strong cash generation. With H1 FY26 capex of ₹902 Cr, its free cash flow would also likely be positive, allowing it to fund its aggressive capex plans.

**Capital Efficiency Improvements:** * **APSEZ:** Consolidated RoCE has consistently improved from 12% in FY23 to 16% in H1 FY26. This indicates that new investments are generating increasingly better returns, and existing assets are being utilized more efficiently. The management expects "gestating businesses to achieve threshold RoCE in 3-4 years," implying a focus on bringing new assets to profitability. * **JSW Infrastructure:** RoCE (TTM Sep-25) was 14.4%, a slight decrease from 18.2% in Sep-24. This is likely due to the significant capital deployed in greenfield projects that are yet to become fully operational and contribute to earnings. As these projects come online (e.g., Keni, Murbe, Jatadhar ports, slurry pipeline by FY27-29), their contribution to revenue and EBITDA is expected to improve the overall RoCE. Management expects "significant gains in EBITDA and profitability starting FY27-28," which would translate to improved RoCE.

In summary, both companies are actively managing their capital to drive growth and enhance shareholder value. APSEZ is demonstrating strong and improving capital efficiency, while JSW Infrastructure is in a heavy investment phase, with anticipated improvements in returns as its new projects mature.

---

H. FUTURE OUTLOOK & PROJECTIONS

The future outlook for the Marine Port & Services sector in India is overwhelmingly positive, driven by strong macroeconomic fundamentals, continued government support for infrastructure development, and the strategic expansion plans of leading private players. Both APSEZ and JSW Infrastructure have laid out ambitious long-term projections, indicating a period of sustained high growth and transformation.

**Industry Growth Projections (with timeframes):** The sector is projected for significant expansion, primarily driven by increasing trade volumes and the need for integrated logistics solutions. * **Cargo Throughput:** APSEZ targets 1 billion tonnes throughput by 2030 (850 MMT domestic, 150 MMT international). JSW Infrastructure targets expanding its cargo handling capacity from current 177 MMTPA to 400 MMTPA by FY30 or earlier. These targets imply a substantial increase in India's overall port capacity and throughput. * **Logistics Sector:** Expected to grow exponentially. APSEZ targets logistics revenue to grow ~5X by FY29 to ₹14,000 Cr (from ₹2,881 Cr in FY25). JSW Infrastructure targets logistics top line of ₹8,000 Cr and EBITDA of ₹2,000 Cr by 2030. * **Marine Services:** APSEZ forecasts marine revenue to increase to over ₹3,300 Cr in FY27 (3x FY25 revenue).

**Management Guidance Across Companies:** * **APSEZ (FY26 Guidance):** * Revenue: ₹36,000-38,000 Cr (H1 FY26 already at ₹18,294 Cr, indicating strong H2 expected). * EBITDA: ₹21,000-22,000 Cr (H1 FY26 at ₹11,046 Cr). * Capex: ₹11,000-12,000 Cr (H1 FY26 at ₹6,462 Cr). * Net debt to EBITDA: Policy up to 2.5x (H1 FY26 at 1.8x, providing headroom). * Port cargo volume: 505-515 MMT (H1 FY26 at 244 MMT). * Trucking revenue growth: 3x-4x over FY25 (FY25: ₹428 Cr). * Marine revenue growth: 2x over FY25 (FY25: ₹1,144 Cr). * **JSW Infrastructure (FY26 Guidance):** * Overall Growth for Full Fiscal: 8% to 10% (dependent on iron ore market). * CAPEX Target: ₹4,000 Cr for port business, ₹1,500 Cr for logistics business (total ₹5,500 Cr). * Logistics Revenue Target: ₹7 billion to ₹8 billion. * Logistics EBITDA Target: ₹1 billion. * Navkar EBITDA Guidance: ₹100 Cr (vs ₹45 Cr in H1).

**Emerging Opportunities and Whitespace:** * **Greenfield Port Development:** JSW's strategy of developing Keni, Murbe, and Jatadhar ports highlights the opportunity in new coastal regions to serve emerging industrial corridors. * **Integrated Logistics Solutions:** The shift from standalone port operations to comprehensive, end-to-end logistics is a major whitespace. Both companies are aggressively pursuing this by expanding MMLPs, ICDs, rail, and road networks. * **Specialized Cargo & Value-Added Services:** Opportunities in handling new cargo types (e.g., LNG, LPG, specialized automotive logistics) and offering value-added services like LNG bunkering (APSEZ at Vizhinjam). * **Digitalization & Automation:** Further adoption of AI, IoT, and automation in port operations and logistics to enhance efficiency, reduce costs, and improve safety. * **Sustainability & Green Logistics:** Growing demand for environmentally friendly logistics solutions. APSEZ's Net Zero by 2040 commitment and investment in renewable energy and electric cranes position it well. * **International Expansion:** Opportunities for Indian port operators to manage and develop ports globally, leveraging their expertise. APSEZ's NQXT acquisition and JSW's UAE O&M contracts are examples. * **Gati Shakti Multi-Modal Cargo Terminals (GCTs):** Government's initiative to develop low-cost, efficient logistics hubs offers significant opportunities for private players. JSW is actively participating in bids.

**Transformation Themes and Inflection Points:** * **From Port Operator to Integrated Logistics Provider:** This is the most significant transformation, driven by customer demand for seamless supply chains and the desire to capture more value. * **Digitalization and Smart Ports:** Adoption of advanced technologies to create more efficient, transparent, and predictive port operations. * **Sustainability as a Core Business Driver:** ESG considerations moving from compliance to strategic advantage, influencing investment decisions, customer choices, and access to capital. * **Privatization and Modernization of Major Ports:** Ongoing government initiatives will open up more opportunities for private players through concessions and partnerships. * **India's Manufacturing & Export Hub Ambition:** As India aims to become a global manufacturing and export hub, the demand for world-class port and logistics infrastructure will surge.

**Long-Term Structural Trends (5-10 year view):** * **Continued Growth in Indian Trade:** Driven by a large domestic market, increasing disposable incomes, and India's integration into global supply chains. * **Infrastructure-Led Growth:** Government's sustained focus on building world-class infrastructure (ports, roads, railways, industrial corridors) will underpin sector growth. * **Shift to Multimodal Logistics:** Increasing preference for integrated, multimodal transport solutions to optimize costs and delivery times. * **Decarbonization of Logistics:** Growing pressure to reduce carbon footprint across the supply chain, leading to investments in green technologies and fuels. * **Regional Hub Development:** Emergence of specific port clusters as regional trade and manufacturing hubs.

**Potential Disruptions on the Horizon:** * **Major Geopolitical Shifts:** Prolonged conflicts or significant shifts in global trade alliances could redraw shipping routes and impact port relevance. * **Technological Leaps:** Breakthroughs in autonomous shipping, hyperloop, or advanced drone logistics, while distant, could eventually alter traditional freight models. * **Climate Change Impacts:** Rising sea levels and increased frequency of extreme weather events could necessitate massive investments in resilient infrastructure and potentially impact operational continuity. * **Economic Nationalism/Protectionism:** A global trend towards protectionism could hinder international trade volumes.

**Expected Margin Evolution:** * **Core Port Operations:** Expected to maintain strong and stable margins, especially for well-established, efficient ports with high utilization. APSEZ's domestic port RoCE is expected to continue growing. * **Integrated Logistics:** While initial margins in segments like trucking might be lower, the overall logistics segment is expected to see absolute EBITDA growth. As these businesses mature and achieve scale, their margins are likely to improve, contributing significantly to overall profitability. JSW expects Navkar margins to inch higher and significant gains in EBITDA and profitability starting FY27-28 as new projects come online. * **New Projects:** Greenfield projects will initially have lower returns (as seen with JSW's current RoCE) but are expected to achieve threshold RoCE in 3-4 years (APSEZ's view), contributing to overall margin expansion in the long run.

In conclusion, the Marine Port & Services sector is on a strong growth trajectory, with leading players strategically positioning themselves to capitalize on India's economic expansion and infrastructure development. The focus on integrated logistics, capacity enhancement, and sustainability will be key determinants of success in the coming decade.

---

I. COMPANY-BY-COMPANY PROFILES

Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone Limited (APSEZ)

**Company Name and Brief Description:** Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone Limited (APSEZ) is India's largest private port operator and an integrated transport utility. It is a diversified port and logistics company with a presence across India's coastline and increasingly, internationally. APSEZ aims to be a global integrated multi-modal value chain enabler, offering end-to-end logistics solutions.

**Scale Metrics:** * **Market Position:** India's largest private port operator. * **All-India Market Share:** 28.1% in Q2 FY26 (+70bps YoY) of total port volumes. * **All-India Container Market Share:** 45.9% in Q2 FY26 (+150bps YoY). * **Current Cargo Handling Capacity:** 633 million tonnes per annum (MMTPA). * **Ports:** Operates 19 ports (including international) as of Q2 FY26, up from 10 in FY20. * **Cargo Volume (H1 FY26):** 244 MMT (+11% YoY). * **Container Volume (H1 FY26):** 7.19 MTEUs (+21% YoY). * **Marine Fleet:** 127 vessels as of Sep 2025, up from 26 in FY20. * **Logistics Assets:** 132 rakes (up from 58 in FY20), 12 MMLPs (up from 5 in FY20), 3.1 Mn sq. ft. warehouses (up from 0.4 Mn sq. ft. in FY20), 937 owned trucks (up from none in FY20), 1.3 MMT Agri Silos capacity. * **Land Bank:** Significant land bank including Mundra (~12,500 Ha), Dhamra (~2,000 Ha), Gangavaram (~1,000 Ha), Krishnapatnam (~2,750 Ha).

**Financial Performance Summary (H1 FY26):** * **Revenue:** ₹18,294 Cr (+25% YoY). * **EBITDA:** ₹11,046 Cr (+20% YoY), EBITDA Margin: 60.4%. * **PAT:** ₹6,431 Cr (+17% YoY). * **RoCE (H1 FY26):** 16% (consistent improvement from 12% in FY23). * **Net Debt/EBITDA (H1 FY26):** 1.8x (well within policy of 2.5x). * **Operating Cash Flow (H1 FY26):** ₹9,503 Cr (86% of EBITDA). * **Capex (H1 FY26):** ₹6,462 Cr.

**Strategic Priorities and Focus Areas:** 1. **Integrated Transport Utility:** Expanding its end-to-end logistics capabilities, including ports, rail, road, and warehousing, to offer seamless supply chain solutions. This is evident in the rapid growth of Logistics and Marine segments. 2. **Capacity Expansion:** Aggressive organic and inorganic growth to reach 1 billion tonnes throughput by 2030. This includes domestic port expansion (850 MMT target) and international growth (150 MMT target). 3. **International Footprint:** Strategic acquisitions like NQXT Port, Australia, and expansion of marine services to new geographies (MEASA, West Africa). 4. **Operational Excellence & Digitalization:** Leveraging technology for efficiency, as seen with the Strategic Command Center for Marine operations and digital integration of the Ocean Sparkle fleet. 5. **Sustainability Leadership:** Commitment to Net Zero by 2040, Zero Waste to Landfill, and investment in renewable energy and electric equipment. 6. **Capital Optimization:** Proactive debt management (bond buyback) and focus on improving RoCE across all business segments.

**Competitive Advantages and Positioning:** * **Unrivaled Scale & Network:** Dominant market share and extensive network of ports across India's coasts provide significant competitive advantage. * **Integrated Value Proposition:** The "Integrated Transport Utility" model offers a comprehensive solution, creating stickiness with customers and capturing more value across the logistics chain. * **Financial Strength & Access to Capital:** Strong balance sheet, healthy credit metrics, and ability to raise long-term capital support aggressive growth plans. * **Operational Efficiency & Records:** Demonstrated ability to achieve high operational benchmarks and set new records at its ports. * **ESG Leadership:** Strong ESG ratings and commitment to sustainability enhance brand reputation and attract responsible investors.

**Key Metrics and KPIs Specific to the Company:** * **Sticky Cargo Share:** 52% in Q2 FY26, indicating strong customer retention. * **Domestic vs. International Volume Mix:** H1 FY26: Domestic 226.7 MMT (+7% YoY), International 17.5 MMT (+130% YoY), showing strong international growth. * **Coastal Volume Mix:** H1 FY26: West Coast 54%, South Coast 27%, East Coast 19%, indicating diversification. * **Logistics EBITDA Margin:** 20.9% in Q2 FY26 (consolidated logistics). * **Marine Revenue Growth:** 3x YoY in Q2 FY26. * **ESG Ratings:** MSCI upgraded to "B", CRISIL "Strong", included in Nifty ESG indices.

**Management Outlook and Guidance:** * **FY26 Guidance:** Revenue ₹36,000-38,000 Cr, EBITDA ₹21,000-22,000 Cr, Capex ₹11,000-12,000 Cr, Port cargo volume 505-515 MMT. * **Long-term Targets:** 1 billion tonnes throughput by 2030, Logistics revenue ~5X by FY29 to ₹14,000 Cr, Marine revenue over ₹3,300 Cr in FY27. Gestating businesses to achieve threshold RoCE in 3-4 years.

**Recent Developments and Initiatives:** * Acquisition of NQXT Port, Australia (Board approved). * Acquired 9 new marine vessels, total fleet 127. Inaugurated Strategic Command Center for Marine operations. * Groundbreaking of 70-acre, 1.3 Mn sq. ft. logistics park in Kochi with ₹600 Cr investment. * Received EXIM Operations Approvals for Virochannagar, Kishangarh, and Malur ICDs. * Launched double-stack container rake movement between ICD Tumb and ICD Patli. * Opened new export berth at Dhamra Port; commenced construction of two new berths to increase capacity to 92 MMT. * MoU signed with Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited for India's first ship-to-ship LNG bunkering operations at Vizhinjam port. * En bloc purchase of 4 PSVs and 1 workboat, expanding geographical presence to West Africa waters. * Issued ₹5,000 Cr NCDs for 15 years to LIC. * Completed bond buyback program of US$386.03m.

---

JSW Infrastructure Limited

**Company Name and Brief Description:** JSW Infrastructure Limited is the second-largest private port operator in India, part of the JSW Group, a US$23 Bn conglomerate. The company is actively involved in developing and operating ports and port-related infrastructure, with a strong focus on greenfield projects and integrated logistics solutions.

**Scale Metrics:** * **Market Position:** Second largest private port operator in India. * **Current Cargo Handling Capacity:** 177 million tonnes per annum (MMTPA). * **Cargo Handled (H1 FY26):** 58.2 MMT (+4% YoY). * **Group Cargo Volume (Q2 FY26):** 15.7 MMT (+6% YoY), representing 54% of total volumes. * **Logistics Assets:** 2814 Domestic standard containers, 602 Trailers, 14 Rakes (3 on lease), 6 RTG Cranes. * **Land Bank (Navkar):** ~100 acres undeveloped (59 acres in Panvel, 41 acres in Morbi).

**Financial Performance Summary (H1 FY26):** * **Total Revenue:** ₹2,686 Cr (+23% YoY). * **EBITDA:** ₹1,387 Cr (+14% YoY), EBITDA Margin: 51.6%. * **Net Profit (PAT):** ₹758 Cr (+13% YoY). * **RoCE (TTM Sep-25):** 14.4% (vs 18.2% Sep-24, reflecting heavy capex in gestating projects). * **Net Debt/Operating EBITDA (TTM Sep 2025):** 0.75x (very healthy, investment-grade rating). * **Capex (H1 FY26):** ₹902 Cr.

**Strategic Priorities and Focus Areas:** 1. **Greenfield Port Development:** Unique in simultaneously developing three greenfield ports (Keni, Murbe, Jatadhar) to significantly expand capacity and geographical reach. 2. **Integrated Logistics Expansion:** Building multimodal logistics parks (e.g., Kudathini), expanding ICDs, and participating in Gati Shakti Multi-Modal Cargo Terminal bids to offer end-to-end solutions. 3. **Captive & Third-Party Cargo Growth:** Leveraging JSW Group's captive cargo while aggressively growing third-party volumes. 4. **Strategic Concessions:** Actively bidding for and securing new port and terminal concessions (e.g., Kolkata Container Terminal, JNPA Liquid Terminal, Tuticorin). 5. **Operational Efficiency & Modernization:** Investing in mechanization and improving operational performance at existing and new terminals. 6. **Diversification:** Expanding into new cargo types like LPG at Jaigarh and increasing international O&M contracts.

**Competitive Advantages and Positioning:** * **Greenfield Development Expertise:** Strong capability in executing large-scale greenfield port projects, providing a long-term growth pipeline. * **Captive Cargo Support:** Backing from the JSW Group ensures a stable base of cargo volumes and strategic long-term agreements (e.g., iron ore slurry pipeline with JSW Steel). * **Strong Financial Health:** Very low leverage and investment-grade credit ratings provide significant financial flexibility for aggressive expansion. * **Strategic Project Execution:** Demonstrated progress on complex projects like the iron ore slurry pipeline and multiple port developments. * **Diversified Growth Avenues:** Expanding across different coasts, cargo types, and into international O&M contracts.

**Key Metrics and KPIs Specific to the Company:** * **Group Cargo Contribution:** 54% of Q2 FY26 volumes from JSW Group. * **Paradip Iron Ore Terminal Impact:** Shortfall of 2.1 MMT in Q2 FY26 and 3.4 MMT in H1 FY26 due to market conditions. * **Navkar Corporation Performance:** EXIM Cargo +20% YoY, Domestic Cargo +46% YoY in Q2 FY26. * **Investment-Grade Rating:** BBB-minus from S&P and Fitch.

**Management Outlook and Guidance:** * **Cargo Handling Capacity Target:** 400 MMTPA by FY30 or earlier (from 177 MMTPA). * **Overall Growth for FY26:** 8% to 10%. * **CAPEX Target for FY26:** ₹5,500 Cr (₹4,000 Cr port, ₹1,500 Cr logistics). * **Logistics Revenue Target (FY26):** ₹7 billion to ₹8 billion. * **Logistics EBITDA Target (FY26):** ₹1 billion. * **Logistics Top Line Target (by 2030):** ₹8,000 Cr, EBITDA ₹2,000 Cr. * **Significant Gains in EBITDA and Profitability:** Expected starting FY27-28 as greenfield projects become operational.

**Recent Developments and Initiatives:** * Public hearing concluded for Keni port (Karnataka); EIA report submitted for Murbe port (Maharashtra). * Jatadhar port (Orissa) construction in full swing, targeting March 2027 completion. * Iron Ore Slurry Pipeline project on track for completion by March 2027. * JNPA Liquid Terminal construction nearing completion, commercial operations expected Nov 2025. * Signed 30-year concession for Kolkata Container Terminal (Netaji Subhash Dock), expected completion H1 FY28. Interim operations by end of FY. * Acquired brownfield rail siding in Kudathini for MMLP, commercial operations expected soon. * Concession agreement signed for V.O. Chidambarana Port, Tuticorin; construction underway, expected completion Q1 FY27. * Mangalore Container Expansion underway, expected completion Q2 FY27. * LPG at Jaigarh project targeting completion FY2027. * Expansion at Dharamtar & Jaigarh targeting completion March 2027.

---

J. TABLES

**Table 1: APSEZ Consolidated Financials**

| Metric | Q2 FY26 (₹ Cr) | Q2 FY25 (₹ Cr) | H1 FY26 (₹ Cr) | H1 FY25 (₹ Cr) | | :----------- | :------------- | :------------- | :------------- | :------------- | | Revenue | 9,167 | 7,067 | 18,294 | 14,627 | | EBITDA | 5,550 | 4,369 | 11,046 | 9,217 | | PAT | 3,120 | 2,413 | 6,431 | 5,520 |

**Table 2: APSEZ Business Segment Revenue Trajectory (₹ Cr)**

| Segment | Q2 FY23 | Q2 FY24 | Q2 FY25 | Q2 FY26 | | :------------------- | :------ | :------ | :------ | :------ | | Domestic Ports | 4,306 | 4,900 | 5,474 | 6,351 | | International Ports | 181 | 806 | 798 | 1,077 | | Logistics | 361 | 483 | 588 | 1,055 | | Marine | 151 | 152 | 190 | 641 | | Others | 212 | 305 | 17 | 43 | | **Total** | **5,211** | **6,646** | **7,067** | **9,167** |

**Table 3: APSEZ Logistics EBITDA Margin (%)**

| Period | Consolidated | Trucking | International Freight Network | Logistics (other than Trucking & International Freight Network) | | :----- | :----------- | :------- | :---------------------------- | :------------------------------------------------------------ | | Q2 FY26 | 20.9% | 5.6% | 7.2% | 32.4% | | Q2 FY25 | 26.5% | NA | - | 29.8% | | H1 FY26 | 19.4% | 5.2% | 8.3% | 31.0% | | H1 FY25 | 25.9% | NA | - | 28.4% |

**Table 4: APSEZ Key Ports Revenue & EBITDA (Q2 FY26 vs Q2 FY25, H1 FY26 vs H1 FY25) (₹ Cr)**

| Port | Q2 FY26 Rev | Q2 FY26 EBITDA (Margin) | Q2 FY25 Rev | Q2 FY25 EBITDA (Margin) | H1 FY26 Rev | H1 FY26 EBITDA (Margin) | H1 FY25 Rev | H1 FY25 EBITDA (Margin) | | :------------ | :---------- | :---------------------- | :---------- | :---------------------- | :---------- | :---------------------- | :---------- | :---------------------- | | Mundra | 2,058 | 1,515 (74%) | 1,803 | 1,266 (70%) | 3,897 | 2,745 (70%) | 3,693 | 2,326 (63%) | | Dhamra | 483 | 242 (50%) | 582 | 367 (63%) | 995 | 498 (50%) | 1,165 | 709 (61%) | | Hazira | 526 | 393 (75%) | 482 | 356 (74%) | 1,009 | 760 (75%) | 919 | 678 (74%) | | Krishnapatnam | 777 | 499 (64%) | 767 | 513 (67%) | 1,574 | 1,016 (65%) | 1,583 | 1,092 (69%) | | Kattupalli | 99 | 55 (56%) | 111 | 75 (68%) | 193 | 116 (60%) | 219 | 147 (67%) | | Karaikal | 131 | 81 (62%) | 136 | 92 (68%) | 322 | 228 (71%) | 316 | 231 (73%) | | Dahej | 165 | 110 (67%) | 155 | 103 (66%) | 299 | 201 (67%) | 314 | 209 (67%) | | Gangavaram | 347 | 187 (54%) | 247 | 127 (51%) | 619 | 333 (54%) | 409 | 199 (49%) | | Vizhinjam | 187 | 153 (82%) | 23 | 23 (99%) | 387 | 331 (86%) | 23 | 20 (89%) | | Gopalpur | 54 | 16 (29%) | NA | NA (NA) | 120 | 43 (36%) | NA | NA (NA) | | Harbour | 1,035 | 921 (89%) | 831 | 737 (89%) | 2,103 | 1,852 (88%) | 1,633 | 1,452 (89%) |

**Table 5: APSEZ JV Financial Performance (Q2 FY26 vs Q2 FY25, H1 FY26 vs H1 FY25) (₹ Cr)**

| JV Name | Q2 FY26 Rev | Q2 FY26 EBITDA | Q2 FY26 PAT | Q2 FY25 Rev | Q2 FY25 EBITDA | Q2 FY25 PAT | H1 FY26 Rev | H1 FY26 EBITDA | H1 FY26 PAT | H1 FY25 Rev | H1 FY25 EBITDA | H1 FY25 PAT | | :---------------- | :---------- | :------------- | :---------- | :---------- | :------------- | :---------- | :---------- | :------------- | :---------- | :---------- | :------------- | :---------- | | AICTPL (CT-3) | 566 | 328 | 176 | 441 | 230 | 121 | 1,073 | 610 | 386 | 926 | 499 | 342 | | ACMTPL (CT-4) | 255 | 151 | 76 | 235 | 142 | 73 | 507 | 303 | 162 | 468 | 273 | 139 | | IAVL | 126 | 85 | 52 | 137 | 84 | 44 | 253 | 163 | 95 | 268 | 170 | 93 | | Dhamra LNG | 137 | 115 | (49) | 193 | 116 | (55) | 306 | 229 | (53) | 314 | 154 | (175) | | AECTPL | 73 | 17 | (14) | 67 | 20 | (10) | 137 | 35 | (25) | 67 | 20 | (10) |

**Table 6: APSEZ RoCE (%)**

| Segment | FY23 | FY24 | FY25 | H1 FY26 | | :------------------ | :--- | :--- | :--- | :------ | | APSEZ (Consolidated)| 12% | 13% | 15% | 16% | | Domestic Ports | 15% | 19% | 21% | 24% | | Marine | 14% | 12% | 13% | 15% | | Logistics | 6% | 5% | 6% | 9% | | International Ports | - | 6% | 6% | 7% |

**Table 7: APSEZ Domestic Port RoCE (%)**

| Port | FY23 | FY24 | FY25 | H1 FY26 | | :------------ | :--- | :--- | :--- | :------ | | Mundra | 20% | 27% | 36% | 39% | | Hazira | 19% | 20% | 31% | 39% | | Dahej | 33% | 33% | 38% | 40% | | Dhamra | 13% | 21% | 22% | 18% | | Kattupalli | 6% | 7% | 9% | 7% | | Krishnapatnam | 12% | 16% | 15% | 20% | | Gangavaram | 11% | 11% | 4% | 10% | | Karaikal | 20% | 22% | 20% | 24% |

**Table 8: APSEZ Cargo Volume (MMT)**

| Metric | Q2 FY26 | Q2 FY25 | H1 FY26 | H1 FY25 | | :--------------------- | :------ | :------ | :------ | :------ | | APSEZ Total Volume | 123.6 | 110.8 | 244.2 | 219.8 | | Domestic Volume | 113.9 | 105.4 | 226.7 | 212.2 | | International Volume | 9.7 | 5.4 | 17.5 | 7.6 |

**Table 9: APSEZ Container Volume (MTEUs)**

| Metric | Q2 FY26 | Q2 FY25 | H1 FY26 | H1 FY25 | | :------------------------- | :------ | :------ | :------ | :------ | | Domestic Container Volume | 3.08 | 2.72 | 6.01 | 5.43 | | International Container Volume | 0.66 | 0.36 | 1.18 | 0.51 | | APSEZ Container Volume | 3.74 | 3.08 | 7.19 | 5.94 |

**Table 10: APSEZ Domestic Volume Across Coasts (MMT)**

| Coast | Q2 FY26 | Q2 FY26 (%) | Q2 FY25 | Q2 FY25 (%) | H1 FY26 | H1 FY26 (%) | H1 FY25 | H1 FY25 (%) | | :------------ | :------ | :---------- | :------ | :---------- | :------ | :---------- | :------ | :---------- | | West Coast | 62.0 | 54% | 62.4 | 59% | 121.9 | 54% | 126.9 | 60% | | South Coast | 29.5 | 26% | 24.7 | 24% | 60.9 | 27% | 50.4 | 24% | | East Coast | 22.4 | 20% | 18.3 | 17% | 43.9 | 19% | 34.9 | 16% |

**Table 11: APSEZ Domestic Volume Across Mundra & Non-Mundra Ports (MMT)**

| Port Type | Q2 FY26 | Q2 FY26 (%) | Q2 FY25 | Q2 FY25 (%) | H1 FY26 | H1 FY26 (%) | H1 FY25 | H1 FY25 (%) | | :-------------- | :------ | :---------- | :------ | :---------- | :------ | :---------- | :------ | :---------- | | Mundra Volume | 49.4 | 43% | 49.9 | 47% | 97.4 | 43% | 101.1 | 48% | | Non-Mundra Volume | 64.5 | 57% | 55.5 | 53% | 129.3 | 57% | 111.1 | 52% |

**Table 12: APSEZ Logistics Volume**

| Metric | Q2 FY26 | Q2 FY25 | H1 FY26 | H1 FY25 | | :---------------------- | :-------- | :-------- | :-------- | :-------- | | Rail Container Volume (TEUs) | 178,927 | 154,630 | 358,406 | 311,220 | | GPWIS Volume (MMT) | 4.92 | 5.14 | 10.98 | 10.70 |

**Table 13: APSEZ Diversified Cargo Portfolio (%)**

| Cargo Type | Q2 FY26 | H1 FY26 | | :----------------------- | :------ | :------ | | Dry (Coal) | 30% | 32% | | Dry (Other than coal) | 33% | 33% | | Liquid (excl. Crude) | 5% | 5% | | Crude | 2% | 2% | | Gas | 2% | 2% | | Container | 45% | 44% |

**Table 14: APSEZ Domestic Port Volume (MMT)**

| Port | Q2 FY26 | Q2 FY25 | H1 FY26 | H1 FY25 | | :------------ | :------ | :------ | :------ | :------ | | Mundra | 49.4 | 50.0 | 97.4 | 101.1 | | Hazira | 7.6 | 6.9 | 14.5 | 13.7 | | Dahej | 2.7 | 2.5 | 5.1 | 5.3 | | Dhamra | 11.2 | 11.5 | 23.3 | 23.4 | | Krishnapatnam | 15.0 | 14.1 | 31.5 | 29.4 | | Kattupalli | 3.5 | 3.7 | 6.6 | 7.3 | | Ennore | 3.5 | 3.3 | 6.6 | 6.8 | | Karaikal | 2.8 | 2.8 | 6.8 | 6.0 | | Gangavaram | 10.0 | 6.8 | 18.2 | 11.5 | | Gopalpur | 1.2 | NA | 2.5 | NA | | Vizhinjam | 4.7 | 0.8 | 9.4 | 0.8 |

**Table 15: APSEZ Asset Base (FY20 / Q2 FY26 / FY29 Target)**

| Asset | FY20 | Q2 FY26 | FY29 Target (or FY30 for Ports) | | :----------- | :-------------- | :-------------- | :------------------------------ | | Tugs | 26 | 127 | 3x revenue growth (FY27) | | Ports | 10 | 19 | 1 Billion Metric Tonne (FY30) | | Rakes | 58 | 132 | 300 | | MMLPs | 5 | 12 | 20 | | Warehouses | 0.4 Mn sq. ft. | 3.1 Mn sq. ft. | 20 Mn sq. ft. | | Trucks | - | 937 | 5,000 | | Agri Silos | NA | 1.3 MMT | 10 MMT |

**Table 16: JSW Infrastructure Consolidated Financials**

| Metric | Q2 FY26 (₹ Cr) | Q2 FY25 (₹ Cr) | H1 FY26 (₹ Cr) | H1 FY25 (₹ Cr) | | :------------ | :------------- | :------------- | :------------- | :------------- | | Total Revenue | 1,372 | 1,089 | 2,686 | 2,184 | | EBITDA | 716 | 607 | 1,387 | 1,217 | | Net Profit | 369 | 374 | 758 | 671 | | PBT | 463 | 551 | 936 | 948 | | Depreciation | 149 | 134 | 275 | 260 | | Finance Cost | 99 | 75 | 180 | 149 | | Unrealized FX | (5) | 155 | (15) | 167 | | ETR | 20% | 33% | 20% | 29% |

**Table 17: JSW Infrastructure Port Segment Financials**

| Metric | Q2 FY26 (₹ Cr) | Q2 FY25 (₹ Cr) | H1 FY26 (₹ Cr) | H1 FY25 (₹ Cr) | | :---------------- | :------------- | :------------- | :------------- | :------------- | | Operational Revenue | 1,103 | 1,003 | 2,189 | 2,008 | | Operational EBITDA | 585 | 524 | 1,146 | 1,032 | | EBITDA Margin | 53% | 52% | 52.4% | 51.5% |

**Table 18: JSW Infrastructure Logistics Segment Financials (₹ Cr)**

| Metric | Q2 FY26 | Q2 FY25 | H1 FY26 | H1 FY25 | | :--------------------- | :------ | :------ | :------ | :------ | | Revenue from Operations| 162.7 | 135.6 | 300.8 | 249.2 | | Other Income | 1.2 | 1.1 | 3.5 | 2.5 | | Total Income | 163.9 | 136.7 | 304.3 | 251.7 | | Operating EBITDA | 24.7 | 19.3 | 44.8 | 36.5 | | EBITDA | 25.9 | 20.4 | 48.3 | 39.0 | | Depreciation | 14.2 | 12.1 | 27.5 | 23.9 | | Finance Cost | 4.2 | 3.2 | 8.0 | 6.4 | | Profit/Loss before Tax | 7.6 | 5.1 | 12.8 | 8.7 | | Tax Expenses | 2.5 | 1.9 | 4.1 | 3.0 | | Profit/Loss after Tax | 5.1 | 3.2 | 8.6 | 5.7 |

**Table 19: JSW Infrastructure Navkar Corporation Financials**

| Metric | Q2 FY26 (₹ Cr) | Q2 FY25 (₹ Cr) | H1 FY26 (₹ Cr) | H1 FY25 (₹ Cr) | | :--------------------- | :------------- | :------------- | :------------- | :------------- | | Revenue from operations| 163 | 136 | 300.8 | 249.2 | | EBITDA | 25 | NA | 48.3 | NA | | Net profit | 4 | (2) | 8.6 | NA |

**Table 20: JSW Infrastructure Cargo Handled (Consolidated) (MMT)**

| Metric | Q2 FY26 | Q2 FY25 | H1 FY26 | H1 FY25 | | :---------------- | :------ | :------ | :------ | :------ | | Total Cargo Handled | 28.9 | 28.1 | 58.2 | 55.9 |

**Table 21: JSW Infrastructure Navkar Corporation Cargo Volumes**

| Metric | Q2 FY26 | Q2 FY25 | H1 FY26 | H1 FY25 | | :---------------------- | :-------- | :-------- | :-------- | :-------- | | EXIM Cargo (TEUs) | 79,000 | 66,000 | 160,000 | 128,000 | | Domestic Cargo (Metric Tonnes) | 394,000 | 270,000 | 669,000 | 517,000 |

**Table 22: JSW Infrastructure Cargo Handled by Terminal (MMT)**

| Terminal | Q2 FY26 | H1 FY26 | | :-------------------------------------- | :------ | :------ | | JSW Infrastructure Limited (Standalone) | 0.79 | 2.43 | | JSW Jaigarh Port Limited | 5.46 | 19.85 | | JSW Dharamtar Port Private Limited | 6.15 | 23.14 | | South West Port Limited (Goa) | 2.22 | 6.36 | | JSW Paradip Terminal Private Limited | 0.96 | 3.03 | | Paradip East Quay Coal Terminal Limited | 4.19 | 9.04 | | Ennore Coal Terminal Private Limited | 2.43 | 5.43 | | Ennore Bulk Terminal Private Limited | 0.32 | 0.70 | | Mangalore Coal Terminal Private Limited | 1.22 | 2.82 | | JSW Mangalore Container Terminal Private Limited | 0.63 | 1.28 | | PNP Maritime Services Private Limited | 1.33 | 2.91 | | JSW Middle East Liquid Terminal Corp | 1.63 | 3.24 | | JSW JNPT Liquid Terminal Private Limited | 0.44 | 0.74 | | JSW Tuticorin Multipurpose Terminal Pvt Ltd | 1.09 | 2.15 | | **Total Cargo Handled** | **28.87** | **58.24** |

**Table 23: JSW Infrastructure Land Bank (Acres) (Navkar)**

| Location | Developed | Undeveloped | Total | | :---------------- | :-------- | :---------- | :---- | | Panvel Maharashtra | 84 | 59 | 143 | | Morbi Gujarat | 99 | 41 | 140 | | **Total** | **183** | **100** | **283** |