Property, Plant and Equipment Disclosure
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2021-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2020-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-31), 20-F (reporting date: 2018-12-31), 20-F (reporting date: 2017-12-31).
Total property, plant, and equipment (PPE) costs exhibited a consistent upward trajectory between 2017 and 2021, increasing from US$ 5,170 million to US$ 7,311 million. This growth reflects a sustained commitment to capital expansion, with the gross cost of assets rising by approximately 41% over the five-year period.
- Asset Composition and Growth
- Machinery and installations represent the primary driver of capital expenditure, growing from US$ 3,179 million in 2017 to US$ 4,457 million in 2021. This category consistently constitutes the largest portion of the total asset base. Buildings also showed steady growth, increasing from US$ 1,200 million to US$ 1,465 million, while other equipment rose from US$ 453 million to US$ 802 million. In contrast, land values remained stagnant, fluctuating minimally around US$ 164 million to US$ 166 million.
- Construction and Prepayments
- Prepayments and construction in progress showed volatility throughout the period. After an increase to US$ 278 million in 2018, the balance declined to US$ 210 million by 2020. However, a significant spike occurred in 2021, with the value reaching US$ 423 million, suggesting a substantial increase in new projects or facility expansions initiated toward the end of the analyzed period.
- Depreciation and Net Book Value
- Accumulated depreciation increased linearly from US$ 2,875 million in 2017 to US$ 4,676 million in 2021. This steady accumulation indicates a consistent depreciation schedule as the asset base expanded. Consequently, the net book value of PPE remained relatively stable for several years, hovering between US$ 2,284 million and US$ 2,448 million from 2017 to 2020, before rising to US$ 2,635 million in 2021. The stability of the net value suggests that for much of the period, new capital investments were largely offset by depreciation charges.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
Without a user account, I tend to respond rather slowly.
How can I help you?
Asset Age Ratios (Summary)
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2021-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2020-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-31), 20-F (reporting date: 2018-12-31), 20-F (reporting date: 2017-12-31).
The analysis of asset age ratios indicates a general trend of asset aging alongside strategic adjustments to the estimated useful lives of property, plant, and equipment between 2017 and 2021.
- Average Age Ratio
- A consistent upward trend is observed in the average age ratio, which climbed from 57.45% in 2017 to a peak of 66.66% in 2020, before experiencing a slight contraction to 65.43% in 2021. This progression suggests that a larger proportion of the assets' estimated useful lives have been consumed over the period, indicating an aging infrastructure.
- Estimated Total Useful Life
- There was a significant upward revision in the estimated total useful life of assets, increasing from 8 years in 2017 to 12 years in 2018. This figure remained stable through 2020 and saw a further marginal increase to 13 years by the end of 2021. Such adjustments typically reflect changes in accounting estimates or the integration of assets with longer operational durations.
- Estimated Age and Remaining Life
- The estimated age of the asset base increased steadily from 5 years in 2017 to 8 years by 2020 and 2021. Concurrently, the estimated remaining life shifted from 3 years in 2017 to 5 years in 2018—driven by the expansion of the total useful life—before stabilizing at 4 years from 2019 through 2021.
Overall, the data reflects a maturing asset base where the natural progression of age is partially offset by the extension of estimated useful life parameters, resulting in a stabilized remaining operational window of approximately four years.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
Without a user account, I tend to respond rather slowly.
How can I help you?
Average Age
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2021-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2020-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-31), 20-F (reporting date: 2018-12-31), 20-F (reporting date: 2017-12-31).
2021 Calculations
1 Average age = 100 × Accumulated depreciation ÷ (Property, plant and equipment, cost – Land)
= 100 × 4,676 ÷ (7,311 – 164) = 65.43%
Between 2017 and 2021, a consistent increase is observed in both the gross cost of property, plant, and equipment and the associated accumulated depreciation. This indicates a period of sustained capital investment paired with the steady aging of the existing asset base.
- Property, Plant and Equipment Investment
- The total cost of assets grew from 5,170 million USD in 2017 to 7,311 million USD in 2021. This upward trajectory demonstrates an ongoing commitment to expanding productive capacity. Notably, land values remained virtually stagnant, fluctuating minimally between 164 million USD and 166 million USD, indicating that capital expenditures were directed toward depreciable assets such as machinery and facilities rather than real estate acquisition.
- Accumulated Depreciation Trends
- Accumulated depreciation increased linearly from 2,875 million USD in 2017 to 4,676 million USD in 2021. The steady rise confirms the systematic consumption of the economic benefits of the company's long-term assets over their estimated useful lives.
- Average Age Ratio Interpretation
- The average age ratio rose from 57.45% in 2017 to a peak of 66.66% in 2020, suggesting that the asset base was aging relative to its total cost for the majority of the period. This implies that the rate of depreciation outweighed the impact of new asset additions on the overall portfolio age. However, the ratio decreased slightly to 65.43% in 2021, which points to a relative rejuvenation of the asset base, likely resulting from more aggressive capital spending or the disposal of older, fully depreciated assets during that fiscal year.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
Without a user account, I tend to respond rather slowly.
How can I help you?
Estimated Total Useful Life
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2021-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2020-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-31), 20-F (reporting date: 2018-12-31), 20-F (reporting date: 2017-12-31).
2021 Calculations
1 Estimated total useful life = (Property, plant and equipment, cost – Land) ÷ Depreciation of property, plant and equipment
= (7,311 – 164) ÷ 551 = 13
A consistent expansion in capital investment is observed between 2017 and 2021, as the total cost of property, plant, and equipment grew from 5,170 million USD to 7,311 million USD. This represents a steady upward trajectory in asset acquisition, while the value of land remained virtually stagnant throughout the period, fluctuating minimally around 164 to 166 million USD. This indicates that the growth in the asset base was driven by investments in depreciable assets, such as machinery and facilities, rather than real estate expansion.
- Estimated Useful Life Trends
- A significant adjustment in the estimation of asset longevity occurred between 2017 and 2018, where the estimated total useful life increased from 8 years to 12 years. This figure remained stable through 2020 before further increasing to 13 years by the end of 2021. Such adjustments suggest a strategic re-evaluation of asset productivity or a shift toward acquiring assets with longer operational lifespans.
- Depreciation Dynamics
- An inverse relationship is observed between the growth of the asset base and the annual depreciation expense. Despite the total cost of property, plant, and equipment increasing by approximately 41% from 2017 to 2021, annual depreciation decreased from 611 million USD to 551 million USD. This divergence is primarily attributable to the extension of the estimated useful life; by spreading the cost of assets over a longer duration, the annual depreciation charge is reduced even as the total volume of assets increases.
- Asset Efficiency and Capital Allocation
- The combined effect of increasing total asset costs and extending useful life suggests a strategy focused on maximizing the accounting lifecycle of capital expenditures. The stability of land values compared to the growth in total PP&E indicates that capital allocation is heavily weighted toward technological or operational infrastructure rather than land holdings.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
Without a user account, I tend to respond rather slowly.
How can I help you?
Estimated Age, Time Elapsed since Purchase
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2021-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2020-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-31), 20-F (reporting date: 2018-12-31), 20-F (reporting date: 2017-12-31).
2021 Calculations
1 Time elapsed since purchase = Accumulated depreciation ÷ Depreciation of property, plant and equipment
= 4,676 ÷ 551 = 8
The analysis of property, plant, and equipment reveals a consistent maturation of the asset base between 2017 and 2021. A steady increase in the average age of assets is evident, with the time elapsed since purchase rising from 5 years to 8 years over the observed period.
- Accumulated Depreciation Trends
- A continuous upward trajectory is observed in accumulated depreciation, which grew from US$ 2,875 million in 2017 to US$ 4,676 million in 2021. This systemic increase indicates the ongoing allocation of cost over the useful lives of the assets and suggests that a substantial portion of the capital investment is progressing through its depreciation cycle.
- Annual Depreciation Expense Volatility
- The annual depreciation expense experienced a decline from US$ 611 million in 2017 to US$ 478 million in 2018, followed by a gradual recovery to US$ 551 million by 2021. The relative stabilization of this figure, despite the increasing age of the asset base, suggests a controlled replacement cycle or the introduction of new assets with depreciation schedules that offset the full depreciation of older equipment.
- Asset Age and Lifecycle Analysis
- The extension of time elapsed since purchase to 8 years by the end of 2021 reflects an aging infrastructure. When viewed alongside the rising accumulated depreciation, the data indicates that the fixed asset base is moving further into its estimated useful life, which may eventually necessitate increased capital expenditures for modernization or replacement to maintain operational efficiency.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
Without a user account, I tend to respond rather slowly.
How can I help you?
Estimated Remaining Life
Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2021-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2020-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-31), 20-F (reporting date: 2018-12-31), 20-F (reporting date: 2017-12-31).
2021 Calculations
1 Estimated remaining life = (Property, plant and equipment, net of accumulated depreciation – Land) ÷ Depreciation of property, plant and equipment
= (2,635 – 164) ÷ 551 = 4
The net value of property, plant, and equipment exhibited a general upward trajectory over the five-year period, despite a temporary contraction in 2020. The asset base grew from 2,295 million US dollars in 2017 to a peak of 2,635 million US dollars by the end of 2021, indicating a net increase in capital investment. In contrast, land holdings remained nearly stagnant, fluctuating minimally between 164 million and 166 million US dollars, which suggests that the growth in net PPE was driven by machinery, equipment, or facility improvements rather than real estate acquisition.
- Depreciation Expense Trends
- Annual depreciation expenses showed significant volatility, beginning at 611 million US dollars in 2017 before dropping sharply to 478 million US dollars in 2018. From 2019 through 2021, a consistent year-over-year increase was observed, with expenses rising from 518 million to 551 million US dollars. This steady climb in the latter three years correlates with the eventual expansion of the net PPE base.
- Estimated Remaining Useful Life
- The estimated remaining life of assets underwent an initial period of adjustment, moving from 3 years in 2017 to 5 years in 2018. Since 2019, this metric has stabilized at 4 years. This stabilization indicates a consistent accounting approach to the depreciation of assets over the most recent three fiscal years.
- Asset Utilization and Capital Lifecycle
- The relationship between the net PPE increase in 2021 and the stabilized remaining life of 4 years suggests a cycle of asset replacement or expansion. The fact that depreciation expenses increased while the remaining life remained constant implies the addition of new depreciable assets to the balance sheet.
AI Ask an analyst for more
Hi, I’m an AI-powered financial analyst at Stock Analysis on Net.
Without a user account, I tend to respond rather slowly.
How can I help you?