21x or 87x? Both are 'right': they measure different denominators, and the gap is the whole valuation debate
Both numbers are right. One enterprise value, two denominators: contracted EBITDA including capacity still being built, against the EBITDA AirTrunk was expected to earn in a year still in progress at signing. The 4x gap is the whole valuation debate.
The two multiples: one numerator (A$24bn EV), two denominators
contracted EBITDA
EV divided by EBITDA from signed, contracted customer commitments, including capacity still being built. This is how infrastructure buyers underwrite: they purchase the contracted earnings stream.
expected 2024 EBITDA
EV divided by the EBITDA AirTrunk was expected to earn in calendar 2024, a year still in progress at signing: most contracted capacity had not yet been commissioned or begun billing.
Why the gap exists
AirTrunk's A$24bn EV includes committed capex and >800 MW of contracted-but-ramping capacity against a 2024 earnings base that reflected only the capacity then billing. The 4x spread between the two multiples is precisely the market's judgement about (a) conversion certainty and (b) the scarcity value of powered land. It is the same judgement, at different scale, that puts NEXTDC at ~45x EV/EBITDA on a 565 MW forward order book.
Precedent pattern
The same denominator logic explains the comp set: Metronode cleared ~16x (2018, mature metro assets, full billing); iseek ~19x forward; Global Switch AU ~24.7x (stabilised, ~4.05% implied earnings yield, PwC). As the contracted-but-unbuilt share of a platform rises, so does its multiple on current-year earnings.
EV/EBITDA multiples, x
| Item | Value (x) |
|---|---|
| Equinix / Metronode, 2018 Equinix (Apr 2018) | 16 |
| DigiCo / iseek, 2024 fwd | 19 |
| AirTrunk, contracted EBITDA, PwC | 21 |
| DigiCo / Global Switch AU, 2024 | 24.7 |
| AirTrunk, expected 2024 EBITDA, AFR/Reuters AFR via Reuters Breakingviews (5 Sep 2024) | 87 |
Committee guidance
Quote both numbers or neither. '21x' without 'contracted' overstates comparability with listed comps; '~87x' without 'expected 2024' implies a bubble that contracted cash flows may not support. The truth (a platform bought on contracted future earnings at a full but not absurd infrastructure multiple) requires both denominators.
Sources
- PwC Australia, as at 10 Mar 2026
- AFR via Reuters Breakingviews, as at 5 Sep 2024
- Equinix, as at Apr 2018
- Savills, as at Q1 2025
- Mingtiandi
Related
- What have Australian data centres sold for?
- Why does NEXTDC trade at such a high EBITDA multiple?
- What yields and cap rates do Australian data centres trade at?
- How can you invest in Australian data centres on the ASX?
The full primer is published as an 85-page PDF (download) with the underlying market model as a workbook (download).
This page is one of 30 in Australian data centres: the research, indexed by the question each one answers, with the four pages where the published sources disagree set first.
The research is published by inashanu, a studio that produces fixed-scope market research for Australian private equity, priced and dated before work starts. The sample engagement is this primer in full.
This standard, on your question. Six fixed-price deliverables, A$14,000 to A$45,000 excluding GST, opening at the A$14,000 market map in 10 business days. State the decision and the date it has to be made; the written assessment of whether the evidence base will carry it follows within two business days and carries no charge. Request a brief assessment · the catalogue and its prices.