Goodman Group — property platform and development record

Goodman Group’s five annual reports describe a triple-stapled ASX security rather than one legal entity. The security combines a share in Goodman Limited (GL), a unit in Goodman Industrial Trust (GIT) and a CHESS Depositary Interest over a share in Goodman Logistics (HK) Limited (GLHK). This was the reported structure in each of FY2021–FY2025. In the Australian accounting presentation, GL is the accounting acquirer and its consolidated accounts include the results of GIT and GLHK. That accounting treatment is a reporting presentation; it is not a statement that the three components are legally identical or that every reported asset has the same ownership basis.

The annual reports present the Goodman/Group consolidated financial statements and the GIT consolidated financial statements as separate adjacent columns under ASIC relief. GLHK is incorporated and domiciled in Hong Kong and prepares financial statements under Hong Kong Financial Reporting Standards and the applicable Hong Kong Companies Ordinance requirements. Its financial statements are supplied in a separate Appendix A rather than as a third adjacent column. Consequently, the tables in this report use the Group/Goodman column unless explicitly labelled otherwise; GLHK Appendix A figures are not added to Group figures.

Goodman Funds Management Limited (GFML) is GIT’s responsible entity and is reported as solely responsible for preparing GIT’s consolidated financial report. The FY2025 GLHK directors’ report says GLHK became party to the stapling deed with GL and GIT on 22 August 2012, and describes its activities as investment in industrial property—directly or with other investors—and related investment-management, property-management and development-management services. GLHK’s Appendix A operates in Asia, Continental Europe and the United Kingdom; those regions must not be treated as a substitute for, or added to, the Group’s five-region operating map.

Source note — reporting perimeter. Goodman Group Annual Report 2021, printed pp. 6, 74, 115, 136–139; Goodman Group Annual Report 2022, printed pp. 10, 154–155; Goodman Group Annual Report 2023, printed pp. 8, 10, 164, 167; Goodman Group Annual Report 2024, printed p. 7 and Appendix A p. A1; Goodman Group Annual Report 2025, printed pp. 7–8, 198, 217.

Unless stated otherwise, the following are Goodman Group measures for years ended 30 June, in Australian dollars. Goodman’s operating profit and operating EPS are directors’ non-IFRS measures. The reports define operating profit by adjusting statutory profit for property-valuation movements, hedge/derivative and foreign-exchange fair-value movements, and other non-cash or non-recurring items. They therefore remain distinct from statutory profit/(loss) attributable to Securityholders and statutory EPS.

The statutory and operating series do not move together because they have different definitions. In FY2021, the statutory-to-operating reconciliation included $1,308.5m of property-valuation-related movements, $55.0m of derivative/liability-management fair-value movements and $(271.0)m of other non-cash/non-recurring items. In FY2022, the equivalent property-valuation-related movement was $2,326.3m. In FY2023 it was $264.1m, and the reconciliation also included a $225.8m derivative fair-value loss and $261.6m of other non-cash/non-recurring adjustments. In FY2024, the reported $98.9m statutory loss was reconciled against operating profit with $(1,595.3)m of property-valuation-related movements. In FY2025, the property-valuation-related line was $(41.1)m, alongside a $285.8m derivative fair-value loss and $317.9m of other non-cash/non-recurring adjustments. These reconciliation items are reported accounting categories, not operating cash-flow measures.

The annual operating-profit bridges also separate property investment, management and development earnings from operating expenses, operating net finance and operating income tax. Management earnings and development earnings follow the issuer’s classifications: the former includes the reported income from managing capital invested in Partnerships and property services, while Partnership development-management income is reported within development earnings. These streams are therefore presented below as the company reported them rather than being recast as rental income or consolidated cash receipts.

In FY2025, the reported operating net-finance line became $33.9m of income; this is the company’s adjusted operating measure and does not mean the statutory financial statements had no gross borrowing cost.

The AUM and WIP measures in the first table have separate boundaries. Total AUM/portfolio includes properties directly held or under management, while external AUM is a Partnership/platform measure rather than a wholly owned-property measure. Development WIP is generally a projected end value for active developments across Goodman and associate/JV investments; for some early, longer-dated projects, the issuer uses land plus committed-works cost. It is not current carrying value, completed property value or a cash-capex total. The FY2024 external-AUM bridge also included the internalisation of GMT management rights, and FY2025 occurred alongside the GNAP restructuring and transfer of a $4.7bn portfolio to the Group; the annual-report endpoints should not be read as a like-for-like directly owned-property series.

For a separate Group liquidity and debt view, the reports give cash plus undrawn bank facilities of $1.9bn, $2.8bn, $3.1bn, $3.8bn and $6.6bn across FY2021–FY2025, and reported gearing of 6.8%, 8.5%, 8.3%, 8.4% and 4.3%, respectively. Those are Group measures. They exclude separately reported Partnership capital resources/liquidity and are not combined with GLHK Appendix A funding figures.

Source note — five-year operating and reported financial measures. Goodman Group Annual Report 2021, printed pp. 10, 13–15; Goodman Group Annual Report 2022, printed pp. 12, 15, 17–18; Goodman Group Annual Report 2023, printed pp. 16–17, 19, 21; Goodman Group Annual Report 2024, printed pp. 12–13, 17, 19–20; Goodman Group Annual Report 2025, printed pp. 12–13, 17–19, 20–23.

What the portfolio measures do — and do not — represent

Across FY2021–FY2025 Goodman described its operating model as Own–Develop–Manage: it owns selected properties, develops properties in selected markets, and manages a global investment portfolio with investment partners. The annual reports describe the platform as industrial-property focused—logistics and distribution facilities, warehouses, light industrial buildings, multi-storey industrial buildings, business parks and, increasingly, data centres. This is an operating-model description, not a statement that every asset in the reported portfolio is directly owned by Goodman.

The annual-report measures have different perimeters. Total AUM / total portfolio is the reported managed portfolio value in which Goodman owns all or part shares; external AUM is the reported value of assets in Partnerships managed for external capital; direct investment property and land/development properties are accounting carrying-value categories in the Group financial statements; and associate/JV investments are Goodman’s equity-accounted interests. They cannot be added together, and a movement in one measure does not automatically describe a movement in another.

The five annual reports do not publish a complete property-by-property legal-title schedule. The complete asset record available from the reports is therefore the issuer-disclosed aggregate portfolio, regional and named-Partnership record below. It deliberately does not manufacture a list of individual warehouses, development sites, tenants or data-centre properties from portfolio totals.

Five-year platform record

*Notes: Values use Goodman’s reported basis and Australian-dollar scale. FY2023 property count is the sum of the four counts in the issuer’s regional portfolio presentation. “Europe/UK” is an operating presentation grouping and is not a substitute for Goodman’s separate financial-report segment or GLHK Appendix A geography. Occupancy and NPI measures retain the issuer’s stated portfolio/Partnership scope.*

How the platform evolved across the reports

FY2021. The operating review described direct and indirect industrial-property investment, investment management, property services and property development. Directly held stabilised property was primarily Australian, while the Group reported development activity and Partnership investment across its five operating regions. Direct-property investment earnings were only one component of the platform: $411.5m of FY2021 operating earnings was reported as property-investment earnings, alongside $459.1m of management earnings and $717.9m of development earnings. These operating-earnings labels are management measures and should not be read as a single rental-income series.

The FY2021 AUM bridge began at $48.0bn and ended at $54.0bn of external AUM after $3.1bn of acquisitions, $3.1bn of disposals, $2.1bn of development capital expenditure, $5.6bn of valuations and a $1.7bn FX reduction. That is a managed-Partnership bridge, not an inventory of Group-owned properties. The report also noted $10.6bn of development WIP across Goodman and its associates/JVs; 81% of that WIP was undertaken by or for Partnerships and third parties.

FY2022. The reported portfolio expanded to 410 properties in 14 countries and $73.0bn of AUM. Goodman separated direct property-investment earnings of $103.7m from Partnership property-investment earnings of $390.9m. It said directly held properties were primarily in Australia and had redevelopment potential; completed Continental European inventory developments were held before disposal to Partnerships or third parties. The Group’s balance-sheet presentation at year-end separately showed $2,387.1m of directly held stabilised properties, $11,903.9m of cornerstone investments in Partnerships, $4,455.2m of development holdings and $795.4m of intangible assets. Those reported categories are not a gross portfolio-value bridge.

FY2023. The annual report’s regional portfolio presentation shows the platform at $81.0bn. Its four regional portfolio figures—$33.9bn in Australia/NZ, $24.7bn in Asia, $11.5bn in Europe/UK and $10.9bn in the Americas—are management-presentation values. Directly held-property net income fell from $103.7m to $87.4m; Goodman attributed the movement to disposals to Partnerships/external parties and deliberate vacancy for redevelopment, partly offset by acquisitions and rental growth. The report said the majority of directly held properties had potential for redevelopment to more intense or higher-and-better uses. This is a statement of potential, not a list of approved projects or a claim that every direct property would be redeveloped.

FY2024. The portfolio value was reported at $78.7bn and external AUM at $70.2bn. Portfolio occupancy was 97.7% and WALE was 5.0 years. Directly held-property net income was $77.6m, with Goodman attributing the reduction from the prior year to disposals to Partnerships and third parties and planned vacancy for redevelopment, partly offset by acquisitions and rental growth. The same report recorded a $1,555.4m pre-deferred-tax share of valuation decrements from stabilised portfolios, compared with a $721.9m gain in FY2023, and identified North America, New Zealand and Mainland China as the most significant decrement locations. This valuation item is not operating income or disposal proceeds.

FY2025. The reported portfolio rose to $85.6bn, with 439 properties. The AUM bridge was separately disclosed: $70.2bn opening AUM, $5.5bn acquisitions, $(8.8)bn disposals, $1.5bn development capital expenditure, $1.7bn valuations and $2.0bn FX translation, closing at $72.1bn. Goodman said the December 2024 GNAP restructure transferred $4.7bn of stabilised and development properties from GNAP to the Group, which the report identified as a reason AUM increased less than total portfolio value. The year-end financial-statement carrying values remain a separate accounting record: $2,131.7m land and development properties, $4,843.7m direct investment properties, $1,948.2m investment properties held for sale, $10,089.4m associates and $5,978.6m JVs. None of those values should be presented as the $85.6bn managed portfolio.

Regional portfolio presentation at FY2023 and FY2025

The annual reports present regional portfolio snapshots, while financial-statement segment reporting and the separate GLHK Appendix A use their own boundaries. The table preserves the operating presentation rather than attempting a synthetic region-by-region five-year valuation history where the reports do not supply comparable figures.

Disclosure boundary for underlying properties and data centres

Goodman’s reports provide portfolio counts, region totals, accounting asset movements, development aggregates and a named-Partnership register, but not a property-by-property ownership, tenant, value or data-centre-site schedule. The FY2025 report identifies Goodman Business Park, Chiba, Japan as an example of industrial and data-centre development coexisting through shared infrastructure and planning. It does not separately disclose a percentage interest, site valuation, WIP balance or completion date for that example. The report therefore retains it as an example rather than presenting it as a complete project register.

The annual reports increasingly identify data centres in the operating platform. In FY2021 data centres were described as a growing industrial-property user; no MW, power-bank, named-site, customer-load or dedicated Partnership schedule was disclosed. FY2024 reported a 5.0GW power bank across 13 major cities—2.5GW secured and 2.5GW in advanced procurement—attached to specific portfolio properties that were not named. FY2025 again reported 5.0GW across 13 major cities, with 2.7GW secured, 2.3GW in advanced procurement, 0.7GW stabilised and 0.3GW in WIP. A power bank is not automatically owned generation capacity, energised capacity, contracted customer load or a list of completed data centres. The dedicated data-centre programme and the new data-centre Partnerships are kept in Sections 6 and 4 respectively.

Partnership and accounting boundary

Goodman uses Partnerships for investments in associates and joint ventures. In the financial statements, associates are entities over whose financial and operating policies Goodman has significant influence but not control; JVs are arrangements under joint control in which the parties have rights to net assets. Both are accounted for using the equity method. A carrying amount in the associate/JV note is therefore Goodman’s reported accounting investment, not the gross property value of the vehicle or a direct title claim over its underlying assets.

Likewise, Partnership AUM, third-party capital commitments, Partnership cash/undrawn facilities, Group liquidity, fee income, performance fees and capital returns are distinct measures. Goodman’s reports state that most Partnership equity commitments are subject to the relevant investment partners’ approval of proposed investments. The amounts below retain that condition and do not treat commitments as completed acquisitions or cash available to the Group.

Five-year managed-capital and Partnership platform measures

*All values are as reported, in Australian dollars. Management earnings are not statutory management income: they cover investment-management base/performance fees and property services, while Partnership development-management income is reported in development earnings. Partnership liquidity is not Group liquidity.*

Named vehicle register: associates

The reports name the following principal associates. Percentages are Goodman’s consolidated ownership interests reported at each year-end (weighted-average where stated); the adjacent dollar amount is the equity-accounted carrying amount, not a gross property valuation. A blank / “not separately named” means the annual-report principal-associate table did not separately identify the vehicle; it is not evidence of disposal, closure or a zero balance.

Named vehicle register: joint ventures

Five-year vehicle and capital-partner changes

FY2021 platform and commitments. Goodman reported that the external Partnership AUM bridge ended at $54.0bn and that Group/Partnerships refinanced $5.4bn of bank debt and secured $1.8bn of third-party equity commitments. It reported $18.1bn of Partnership available cash, undrawn facilities and equity commitments. The report also separately disclosed approval-contingent Goodman commitments: GAIP $144.7m, GEP $63.0m, KGG $136.2m, GJDP $410.1m, GCLP $808.0m, GUKP $512.8m, GNAP $2,156.2m and GBLP $72.7m. These were subject to partner approval of relevant acquisitions/developments where specified, so they are recorded as commitments rather than funded property purchases.

FY2022 expansion. External AUM rose to $68.7bn. The reports identify $217.9m of remaining equity commitments to GAIP and $135.0m to GEP, alongside a $162.1m cum-distribution GAIP unit-purchase undertaking. Further approval-contingent commitments were KGG $130.7m, GJDP $344.8m, GCLP $793.8m, GUKP $599.3m, GNAP $1,888.9m, GBLP $73.0m and Wyuna $30.0m. The Group’s cash-flow statement separately reported $1,332.3m of payments for Partnership investments, $91.8m of Partnership capital returns and $442.5m of distributions received from equity investments including Partnerships. These cash-flow categories should not be collapsed into AUM movement.

FY2023 additions and accounting movement. The CEO letter reported four new Partnerships and $1.0bn in new equity commitments; the names are not disclosed in that statement. Partnership liquidity was reported at $17.6bn. The Group reported FY2023 associate investments of $8,315.4m and JV investments of $7,969.8m in its Goodman column. The JV movement included $742.3m share of net results, $1,259.3m acquisitions, $351.0m disposals, $373.9m distributions/dividends received or receivable and $164.3m FX translation. These are accounting-note movement lines, not the gross underlying Partnership asset movements.

FY2024 management-right and South Sydney changes. External AUM ended FY2024 at $70.2bn. Its bridge includes a $4.1bn reduction for management-right internalisation, specifically reflecting the GMT transaction: on 28 March 2024 GMT internalised management and acquired Goodman Property Services (NZ) Limited. The stated $286.4m consideration included performance/advisory fees and two investment properties, and Goodman immediately used it to subscribe for new GMT units. Separately, Goodman disposed of 49% interests in five controlled entities to GAIP, creating the South Sydney Partnership. Gross proceeds were $992.0m and the Group’s concluding investment was $505.9m; four of the entities were disposed by GIT for $839.2m of gross proceeds. The report records these as defined transaction terms, not a whole-portfolio transfer.

FY2025 data-centre vehicles and GNAP restructure. Goodman reported 23 Partnerships, $72.1bn AUM and $4.2bn of Partnership capital raised. This included $1.7bn for the newly established Goodman Hong Kong Data Centre Partnership with four major investors, $0.3bn for the Goodman European Data Centre Partnership, and $1.7bn associated with the GNAP restructure. The FY2025 report does not disclose a uniform Goodman ownership percentage, individual-site list, asset value or MW allocation for the Hong Kong vehicle. The GLHK Appendix A calls the European vehicle Goodman European Data Centre Partnership I in a related-party context; its $576.2m management/development activities and $63.0m due-from balance are not an ownership percentage or property valuation.

The December 2024 GNAP restructure transferred a $4.7bn portfolio of stabilised and development properties to the Group. The FY2025 accounting note separately records a $316.7m Goodman gain on reallocation of Partnership equity interests, a $16.9m reclassification to loan to related party, $913.7m JV acquisitions, $304.0m JV disposals and a $2,822.9m JV capital return. These separate lines must not be represented as a sale of the Partnership portfolio or an AUM reduction equal to the capital return. The report also states that GNAP and Goodman UK Partnership partner-interest restructurings produced capital returns for a partner and introduced Norges Bank Investment Management as a Goodman Partnership participant; it does not support a broader ownership conclusion.

Subsequent to 30 June 2025, Goodman said it launched a data-centre Partnership in Australia and expected another European data-centre Partnership in FY2026. These are subsequent-update disclosures, not FY2025 operating-period accomplishments. The annual-report text checked does not provide a name or site roster for the Australian vehicle.

Fees, service contracts and accounting movement controls

Partnership management, development and property-service contracts are described as varying in duration and typically market-consistent. The reports say revenue is linked to AUM, development-project cost or gross property income and is invoiced as services are provided. This is a description of contract mechanics; the annual reports do not provide a universal fee rate.

FY2025 reported management-services income of $465.3m and performance/transaction-related income of $372.1m. The latter included a $105.2m allocation of the Partnership-equity reorganisation gain and a $128.5m share of equity-accounted investee results. These items are distinct from both direct rent and the $72.1bn external-AUM measure. The Group also reported $866.5m of revenue from management/development activities for associates and $524.5m for JVs in FY2024; this related-party transaction table should not be substituted for the management-earnings series.

Reporting boundary

Goodman reports development work through several different measures. Its headline workbook estimates the eventual value of current development activity, including relevant associate and joint-venture interests described as Partnerships. For certain early or longer-dated projects, Goodman instead uses estimated land value plus the cost of committed works. The measure is therefore neither construction cost, consolidated inventory nor a list of properties held directly by Goodman. Commencement, completion, leasing, transfer to stabilised property, third-party disposal and Partnership execution are also separate states. The five reports do not publish a complete site-by-site schedule for the projects in WIP. This section consequently records the disclosed programme-level history and the few named items only; it does not turn a global aggregate into a synthetic property register.

Five-year development workbook

The programme moved from 73 projects at FY2021 year end to 85 in FY2022, 81 in FY2023, 80 in FY2024 and 57 in FY2025. These are annual-report WIP counts, not a retained list of individual projects. The fall in the FY2025 count must not be treated as a list of cancellations or completions at named sites because the reports do not identify all projects by site. Likewise, the reported pre-commitment and leased-completion percentages apply to the stated annual cohort, not necessarily to every project then in WIP.

Year-by-year record

FY2021. The report described development as the principal execution lane for urban infill, redevelopment of brownfield logistics sites, higher space utilisation and multi-storey facilities. At year end, WIP was $10.6bn across 73 projects, after $6.6bn of commencements and $2.4bn of completions. The 81% Partnership/third-party execution share is material: it means the WIP aggregate was not a direct-property-only measure. Goodman also said certain long-term infill projects could exceed five years; that statement describes project duration potential, not a completion timetable for an identified site.

FY2022. WIP rose to $13.6bn across 85 projects. The report recorded $7.9bn of commencements and $6.0bn of completions, with 85% of the WIP undertaken within, or pre-sold to, Partnerships or third parties. The report separately identified $7.7bn of multi-storey WIP and said brownfield development/regeneration represented more than half of global WIP. In the financial-statement movement record, direct development-property additions/expenditure were $1,267.1m and disposals/transfers to stabilised assets at completion were $909.8m. For Partnership development assets, acquisitions were $710.2m, valuation uplifts net of deferred tax were $451.3m, and transfers to stabilised assets were $724.9m. These are accounting/asset movements, not a record of every construction completion.

FY2023. The reported WIP end value was $13.0bn across 81 projects, with $6.0bn of commencements and $6.9bn of completions. Goodman continued to describe brownfield regeneration and more intensive uses, including multi-storey development, as programme characteristics. Direct development assets rose to $2,615.7m, with acquisitions/capital expenditure of $1,023.8m, valuation uplifts of $55.3m and FX gains of $66.1m, partly offset by $506.7m of disposals and transfers to stabilised assets. In contrast, Goodman’s share of Partnership development assets fell to $1,949.7m: the disclosed movements included $1,231.8m of transfers to stabilised assets at completion and $186.8m of third-party disposals at completion, partly offset by $818.0m of acquisitions. The direct and Partnership measures must remain separate.

FY2024. The $13.0bn workbook was unchanged year on year but covered 80 projects. The annual report recorded $5.2bn of commencements, $4.2bn of completions, a 25-month average development period and a $6.4bn annualised production rate. Direct development assets were $2,936.0m, rising $320.3m after $731.8m of acquisitions/capital expenditure, $34.6m of valuation uplifts and $114.7m of transfers from stabilised properties, offset in part by $532.9m of disposals and $28.0m of FX losses. Goodman’s share of Partnership development assets was $2,398.5m, including $620.1m of acquisitions and $115.4m of transfers to stabilised assets at completion. The report says no impairment losses were recognised on land and development properties in FY2024 or FY2023; this is an inventory-accounting statement and not a statement about every project’s economics.

FY2025. WIP ended at $12.9bn across 57 projects, following an intra-year $13.7bn level. Goodman reported $4.0bn of starts and $5.1bn of completions. Direct development assets increased to $4,108.3m; the disclosed $2,176.9m of acquisitions/capital expenditure included $1,117.2m from the Goodman North America Partnership (GNAP) restructure, while $674.9m of disposals and $467.1m of transfers to stabilised property were also recorded. Goodman’s share of Partnership development assets decreased to $1,478.4m, primarily reflecting $917.4m of disposals (including GNAP transfers) and $650.6m of completion transfers, partly offset by $546.2m of ongoing investment. The December 2024 GNAP restructuring transferred a portfolio of stabilised and development properties to Goodman; it should not be represented as a normal construction completion or as a named-project schedule.

Named-property and project disclosure boundary

The annual reports describe a global development programme, but do not disclose the names, legal holders, customer identities, project-by-project commencement dates, power allocations or completion dates for all 73, 85, 81, 80 or 57 WIP projects. The public record should retain this limitation rather than infer site names from WIP, portfolio, asset-accounting or Partnership totals.

The one named FY2025 location found in the reports is Goodman Business Park, Chiba, Japan. Goodman presents it as a master-planned example where industrial and data-centre developments coexist using shared infrastructure and planning. The annual report does not separately state an ownership percentage, project value, WIP amount, MW allocation, tenant, completion date or valuation for the location. It is therefore a named illustrative location, not a proxy for the wider workbook.

What the power-bank metric does—and does not—measure

Goodman’s annual reports progressively move from broad digital-economy and data-centre demand language to a quantified data-centre programme. The global power bank is a Goodman-reported programme measure covering power attached to selected portfolio properties and power in advanced procurement. It is not stated to be owned electricity generation, energised data-centre load, contracted customer load, a list of utility connections or an allocation of MW to every data-centre Partnership. Site, grid/power right, building completion, customer arrangement, operating control and Partnership ownership must be treated as separate fields; the five reports do not disclose a complete site-by-site register for them.

Five-year programme chronology

FY2021–FY2022: demand framing without a programme register

In FY2021, Goodman referred to digitalisation and identified data centres as a rapidly growing user of industrial property. The report also linked its development portfolio to demand for physical and digital space, automation and greater space utilisation. It did not separately report a data-centre WIP total, MW pipeline, power-bank right, energised load, customer contract or named site.

FY2022 continued the infrastructure-for-the-digital-economy framing for logistics and industrial property. Innovation examples included smart metering, carbon-neutral building products, on-site safety management, robotics and electric vehicles, but those references are not evidence of owned data-centre capacity. The FY2022 report did not create a data-centre project or power-bank register. The absence in these early reports is important: later 5.0GW data must not be backfilled into FY2021 or FY2022.

FY2023: data-centre use becomes a reported development-programme component

In FY2023, Goodman said it had developed data centres since 2010 and described them as a meaningful part of the business. It reported that data centres represented approximately 30% of the $13.0bn development workbook and referred to a pipeline exceeding 3GW. The report also described data storage and processing capacity as part of the demand context for its property platform.

The FY2023 disclosures establish a programme-level data-centre share and a pipeline statement, but not a data-centre asset ledger. They do not identify the locations, site rights, utility connection status, commissioned MW, contracted customers, pre-leases or Partnership vehicles behind the >3GW figure. The year should therefore be presented as the point at which a material data-centre component is quantified within the development workbook, not as the first year of 3GW of operating capacity.

FY2024: quantified global power bank and data-centre WIP

FY2024 is the first report in the five-year set to present the 5.0GW global power-bank measure across 13 major cities. The reported composition was 2.5GW secured power and 2.5GW in advanced procurement. Within the secured component, Goodman separately stated 0.5GW in completed facilities, 0.4GW in WIP and 1.6GW secured to sites it owned or controlled. These categories do not establish that all 2.5GW was energised, operational or contracted to customers.

The FY2024 development workbook was $13.0bn across 80 projects, with data-centre projects representing 40%. Goodman stated that power was connected to specific portfolio properties, while other Group- or Partnership-owned/controlled sites were being reviewed for potential data-centre use. It also described active customer discussions around delivery and leasing alternatives, including powered-shell and full-infrastructure fit-out approaches. The report distinguishes those discussions from completed customer contracts, and says Goodman had not taken an operational-control position in any data centres to that point.

FY2025: programme composition, construction stages and regional capital platforms

At 30 June 2025, Goodman again reported a 5.0GW power bank across 13 major cities. The stated mix changed to 2.7GW secured power and 2.3GW in advanced procurement; 0.7GW had been stabilised and 0.3GW was included in WIP. The annual report does not convert the remaining power-bank capacity into energised MW, customer commitments or owned generation, and neither should this report.

Data centres accounted for 57% of the $12.9bn FY2025 development workbook. Goodman reported 130MW of fully fitted projects underway and described work streams including demolition, substructure, power connections and substations. It separately said it was discussing customer solutions from powered shell through fully fitted operational delivery. “Underway”, customer discussions and planned further starts are deliberately retained as distinct states; the report does not name every building, customer or commissioning date.

FY2025 also introduced named data-centre capital vehicles:

The report also identifies access to a significant power bank in Germany, France, the Netherlands and Spain in its Continental Europe impairment-testing narrative, and says relevant developments had commenced and in some cases completed in FY2025. This is regional programme evidence only: it does not specify all sites, MW allocations, legal holders, customers or operational dates.

Complete-register limitation and status controls

The five annual reports name Goodman Business Park, Chiba as an FY2025 master-planned industrial and data-centre example, the two FY2025 Hong Kong/European data-centre Partnerships, and the subsequent Australian Partnership event. They do not provide a complete underlying data-centre property list or a map linking each power-bank MW to a property, power right, building, customer or Partnership. This section therefore retains only issuer-named items and programme aggregates. It does not infer that a power-bank location is a data centre, that a site is energised because power is secured, that a development is operated by Goodman, or that capital raised equals a property purchase.

Goodman reports five Group operating regions: Australia & New Zealand (ANZ), Asia (Greater China, including Hong Kong SAR, and Japan), Continental Europe, the United Kingdom and the Americas (principally North America, including Brazil). This has been the five-region Group map throughout FY2021–FY2025. It is a management-reporting presentation, rather than a property title register or a statement that every asset is directly owned by Goodman.

The regional data below needs a careful perimeter reading. A Group segment can include operating properties, equity-accounted Partnership investments and operating receivables, while excluding specified corporate assets and liabilities. By contrast, the separate GLHK Appendix A covers only Asia, Continental Europe and the UK. GLHK figures are therefore shown only as a separately reported subgroup disclosure and are not added to Group segment or portfolio measures.

7.1 Group regional reporting basis and five-year record

The reported asset composition by region changed over the five years, including through development, transfers, sales, Partnership activity and the FY2025 GNAP restructuring. As a result, the direct-property figures should not be treated as a continuous proxy for the size of a regional Goodman platform.

7.2 Operating-segment measures: years with comparable tables

An em dash means the annual-report table did not present a regional amount in that particular direct-property line; it does not mean that Goodman had no customers, developments, Partnership investments, management activity or office presence in the region. FY2023, for example, recorded direct properties only in ANZ, Asia and the Americas in the segment table while reporting Partnership investments across the platform.

7.3 Portfolio capitalisation-rate record

The following weighted-average capitalisation rates (WACRs) relate to the total reported portfolio and include Partnership exposure where stated. They are valuation inputs/portfolio metrics—not debt yields, cash yields, a valuation opinion for a particular security or a forecast of future values.

The FY2024 operating review specifically identified the first-half North American, New Zealand and Mainland China valuation decrements as most significant, with smaller Hong Kong and Continental European decrements; Australia was described as relatively stable. In FY2025 Goodman said the total-portfolio WACR decreased from 5.17% to 5.08%, and attributed valuation movements to capitalisation rates, market rents and stabilisation factors, identifying China as the notable region with valuation decrements. These are the company’s reported explanations, not an independent regional-market conclusion.

7.4 GLHK is not a second set of Group regions

GLHK’s Appendix A is a separate financial-reporting perimeter. In FY2021 it reported Asia, Continental Europe and UK operations, $46.1m property-investment earnings, a 4.9% WACR, 3.8-year WALE and 98.0% occupancy. In FY2022 it reported $5,283.3m total assets, including $336.8m stabilised investment properties, $1,845.6m cornerstone Partnership investments and $1,552.6m development holdings. In FY2023 it reported $28.7bn external AUM and $5.8bn WIP across 32 developments, and 14 developments completed during the year. These Appendix A disclosures are useful context for the stapled structure but are not summed into the Group tables above.

Section sources (official issuer documents; printed pages used). Goodman Group Annual Report 2021, pp. 12, 88, 90, 139–141; Annual Report 2022, pp. 12, 14, 91–92, 100, 157, 159, 175–176; Annual Report 2023, pp. 18, 20, 23, 101–102, 167–168; Annual Report 2024, pp. 16, 18, 123, 133, 135; Annual Report 2025, pp. 13, 15, 18, 21, 121–125, 132, 134.

Goodman’s reported property-asset record uses several measures which answer different questions. Inventories are land and development properties held for sale or development and sale, carried at the lower of cost and net realisable value. Investment properties are held for rental income and/or capital appreciation and are carried at fair value. Assets held for sale are a separate accounting classification. Associates and joint ventures are equity-accounted Partnership investments. They are not direct property carrying values, and none of these accounting lines is synonymous with total portfolio/AUM.

8.1 Property-asset categories: five reported balance dates

The presentation evolved: FY2022 reports a combined $14,379.6m equity-accounted-investment line, while FY2021 and FY2023–FY2025 separately identify associate and JV holdings. The table retains that definition change rather than inventing an FY2022 split. FY2024 inventory comprises $434.4m current and $1,924.5m non-current land and development properties; it is an inventory carrying value, not WIP’s projected end value.

8.2 Direct-property movement and asset rotation

8.3 Valuation, capitalisation-rate and sensitivity disclosures

Goodman states that investment properties are valued externally independently or internally, with markets assessed as active in FY2022, FY2024 and FY2025. The share independently valued during the year was 59% of direct Goodman stabilised properties in FY2021, 57% in FY2022, 72% in FY2023 and 68% in FY2024; the FY2025 report describes its external/internal valuation approach and says no stabilised-portfolio DCF carrying-value adjustment was made on an inactive-market basis. All Partnership properties stabilised throughout FY2021, FY2023 and FY2024 were reported as externally independently valued during those years, subject to the wording in each annual report.

These are issuer sensitivity illustrations at each reporting date. They are not a forecast, a target value, a recommendation, or a calculation of the market value of Goodman securities. The FY2024 direct-property inputs included an average 5.0% capitalisation rate and market rents of $110–$477 per sqm per annum, identified as Level 3 valuation inputs. Those inputs should not be applied mechanically to properties not covered by the disclosure.

The fair-value amount also requires separation from operating/development measures. Direct-property fair-value gains were $63.1m in FY2021, $260.1m in FY2022 and $278.9m in FY2023; FY2024 reported a $28.6m valuation decrement in its direct stabilised-property movement, and FY2025 reported a $(116.1)m net fair-value loss in its direct investment-property bridge. In FY2022, the reported Group share of Partnership investment-property fair-value gains before deferred tax was $2,330.8m; in FY2023 it was $508.1m. Neither series is a cash proceeds measure or a development-profit measure.

8.4 Leasing disclosures

These are commitments from existing investment-property customer lease agreements, with the annual reports’ stated assumptions about customer termination options and recoverable outgoings. They are not a projection of portfolio revenue. At the broader Group/Partnership portfolio level, FY2021 occupancy was reported at 98%, FY2022 at 99% (with 98.7% Partnership occupancy also highlighted), and FY2025 at 96.5%; these are distinct operating measures from direct-property lease commitments.

Section sources (official issuer documents; printed pages used). Goodman Group Annual Report 2021, pp. 86–91, 97; Annual Report 2022, pp. 12, 16, 19–20, 98–103; Annual Report 2023, pp. 20, 23–24, 108–113; Annual Report 2024, pp. 23, 130–136; Annual Report 2025, pp. 13, 18, 21–22, 130–135.

All figures in this section are Group figures unless explicitly identified as a Partnership platform measure. Goodman’s liquidity, facilities, drawn debt, gearing and interest cover must not be combined with Partnership cash, undrawn facilities, third-party equity commitments or managed AUM. Similarly, statutory interest-bearing liabilities and facilities utilised are different accounting/funding measures.

9.1 Five-year Group capital-management record

Goodman reported a 0%–25% policy gearing range across these years. Its gearing calculation includes specific cash and derivative adjustments described in each financial report; the percentage should be read as the issuer’s capital-management metric rather than recreated by dividing one headline debt line by a portfolio/AUM number.

9.2 Funding actions and maturity record

In FY2021, available debt facilities and fixed-rate bonds were $3.1bn and $2.1bn was drawn. The annual report listed US$525m notes due March 2028, US$325m due October 2037, €500m notes due September 2025 and a ¥12.5bn private placement due April 2023. In FY2022, facilities/bonds rose to $4.6bn, $2.9bn was drawn and the Group issued a US$500m 10-year Sustainability Linked Bond in April 2022. The Group and Partnerships also reported $2.0bn of long-term bond issuance, $6.4bn of bank-debt refinancing and $1.8bn third-party equity commitments; only the Group-specific portion belongs in the Group funding table.

FY2023 reported $5.0bn available Group facilities/bonds, $3.3bn drawn and no significant maturity until 2025. FY2024 reported $5.8bn available and $3.7bn drawn. In April 2024 the Group repaid €197m of the €500m September-2025 notes, issued €500m notes maturing May 2030, and retained €303m due September 2025. FY2025 then reported a $4.0bn institutional placement in February 2025, US$600m notes issued in October 2024, refinancing/extensions of facilities, and the €303m notes as the significant next-12-month maturity.

The balance-sheet interest-bearing-liability figures also differ from facility utilisation: $2,060.3m in FY2021, $2,832.2m in FY2022, $3,292.9m in FY2023 and $5,235.5m in FY2025 (with FY2025 total assets $31,565.3m). They should not be substituted for the available/drawn facilities table.

9.3 Partnership capital is a separate platform measure

These figures are reported in the context of capital partners, managed developments and Partnership investment approvals. The FY2021, FY2022 and FY2024 annual reports state that many equity commitments are subject to the relevant investment partner approving a proposed investment. In FY2025 the $9.0bn was described as Partnership cash and undrawn bank facilities, while $10.5bn debt financing was completed including Partnerships. Neither is Group liquidity or Group debt.

9.4 Distributions: total stapled security and component split

The total distribution was 30.0 cents per stapled security in every year shown, but the component allocations changed. FY2021 comprised GIT 24.0 cents/$443.4m and GLHK 6.0 cents/$110.8m, with no GL dividend. FY2022 comprised GIT 27.5 cents/$513.8m and GLHK 2.5 cents/$46.7m, with no GL dividend. FY2023 comprised GIT 25.0 cents/$470.4m and GLHK 5.0 cents/$94.2m. FY2024 comprised GIT 26.0 cents/$493.8m and GLHK 4.0 cents/$76.0m. FY2025 reported GIT distributions of $540.6m and a 2.5-cent GLHK final dividend totalling $50.8m; Goodman Limited again declared no dividend. The total per-security figure and individual legal-component amounts should therefore not be interchanged.

The reported payout ratios were 46% in FY2021, 32% in FY2023, 28% in FY2024 and 25% in FY2025. Each is expressed by Goodman against its operating-profit framework, which is a non-IFRS measure; it is not a payout ratio calculated from statutory profit attributable to Securityholders.

9.5 Financial-risk framework and commitments

Goodman describes financial risk as market risk (foreign exchange and interest rates), liquidity risk and credit risk. Its stated foreign-currency policy is to hedge 65%–90% of net investment in major overseas operations using same-currency liabilities and/or derivatives. Its interest-rate policy addresses a stated 60%–100% range of payment interest-rate exposure for three years. The Group says it does not hold or issue derivatives for speculative trading.

In FY2025 the annual report separately recorded a $285.8m derivative fair-value loss and a $462.9m related FX movement gain in reserves. Those are separate accounting outcomes; netting them into a single operating funding result would misstate the report. The liquidity-risk process included monthly three-year cash-flow forecasts and Board debt-maturity reporting, with stated funding objectives covering working capital, capital expenditure, investments, debt expiries and distributions. These controls are reported process descriptions, not a liquidity guarantee.

Reported commitments likewise remain distinct from expenses or debt. Examples include FY2021 development commitments of $534.7m and contracted property acquisitions of $67.7m; FY2022 inventory/other-development commitments of $691.8m; FY2024 development commitments of $189.0m and investment-property commitments of $5.8m. The FY2024 report also itemised remaining Partnership equity commitments, including GAIP $600.0m, GEP $143.0m, GJDP $115.2m, GCLP $455.7m, GUKP $486.1m, GNAP $1,633.6m and GBLP $67.6m, with approval qualifications where stated. A commitment is not an amount already spent, a Group debt balance or an assured future investment.

Section sources (official issuer documents; printed pages used). Goodman Group Annual Report 2021, pp. 10, 16, 103–106, 114, 126; Annual Report 2022, pp. 12, 18, 79, 120–126, 133, 145; Annual Report 2023, pp. 16–17, 22, 104, 130–135; Annual Report 2024, pp. 12–13, 21, 23, 156–157, 181; Annual Report 2025, pp. 4, 12, 14, 20–22, 155, 157, 160.

What the reported sustainability perimeter does—and does not—cover

Goodman’s reports organise its 2030 Sustainability Strategy around three lanes: sustainable properties and places; people, culture and community; and corporate governance and performance. That framework is a stated strategy, rather than a statement that every property has achieved the same outcome. The FY2025 report also makes an important measurement boundary explicit: its Group Scope 1 and Scope 2 operational target covers activities under Goodman’s direct operational control, with 100% of emissions inside that boundary counted irrespective of equity interest. Customer emissions in leased areas and embodied emissions from development are excluded. Accordingly, the operational series below is neither a whole-portfolio result nor an equity-weighted result. FY2025 presents a separate equity-weighted reference table; it should not be combined with the operational-control series.

The distinction matters particularly as Goodman expands data-centre development. The reports identify growing warehouse and data-centre customer energy demand, but say that customer control of operations limits the Scope 3 inventory presently reported. They do not provide an asset-by-asset emissions, renewable-energy, safety or social-performance register across the portfolio. Where an annual report describes a design feature, target, assessment, installed-or-committed solar capacity, certification, or policy, this section preserves that status rather than recasting it as realised performance for every asset.

Five-year sustainability and asset-performance timeline

Energy, solar and carbon-management record

The five annual reports show a reported progression in installed-or-committed solar PV: approximately 125 MW in FY2021, 203 MW in FY2022, 306 MW in FY2023, 330 MW in FY2024 and about 350 MW in FY2025. These are not presented as annual power generation or as energised capacity. The FY2021 400 MW objective was expressly subject to government regulation by jurisdiction. In FY2024 Goodman explained that its estimated solar roof availability had fallen by 50% from initial expectations because of divestments, redevelopment, structural audits and the move toward multi-storey and data-centre development. It consequently expected 350–370 MW by the end of FY2025 and removed a specific 2030 MW solar target from subsequent LTIP awards. The FY2025 report describes the changing multi-level/data-centre mix, negligible data-centre solar space and experimental lower-embodied-emission projects under evaluation; none is described as a completed portfolio-wide solution.

The carbon record also changes in disclosure maturity. In FY2021 Goodman said it had begun calculating embodied emissions in global logistics developments. In FY2022, it reported a consistent calculation process in new-development approvals and approximately 750,000 carbon offsets purchased for embodied emissions. In FY2023, it reported 89 embodied-carbon assessments and ongoing refinement of reduction/offset guidance. FY2025 says it intended to report demonstrable embodied-carbon reduction efforts from FY2026 after establishing a baseline. These measures are separate from the operational Scope 1/2 series and from tenant-controlled leased-area activity.

Goodman reported that longer-term SBTi targets, including Net-Zero, were suspended in FY2025 while SBTi methodology was under review. The reported options were to resume an SBTi-aligned target, adopt an alternative benchmark or build a new methodology. This is the reported status at FY2025, not a continuing approved long-term target.

Asset resilience, sourcing and development practices

The reports link the real-estate platform to redevelopment and development-process measures without supplying a property-level environmental scorecard. FY2021 described solar PV, EV charging, LED lighting, drought-tolerant landscaping and smart irrigation. It also described brownfield redevelopment as reuse of infrastructure and said infill locations could reduce customers’ transport-related emissions; this is the company’s explanatory framing, not an independently calculated asset-level outcome.

FY2022 and FY2023 each reported that more than half of global developments were brownfield. The FY2024 report said physical-climate review covered more than 400 directly and Partnership-held properties valued at $78.7bn for that risk exercise, with storm, flooding and heat identified as focus hazards for the ten highest-exposure properties. That population was a climate-risk disclosure population, not a complete property register or a quantified financial-impact estimate. FY2025 named heat, extreme precipitation/flooding, windstorm, hail and long-term sea-level rise; it reported reviews and remedial actions, said no material storm/flood management costs had been identified at 30 June 2025, and also said future financial impact could not be reliably measured because it depends on matters including regulation, building codes and market behaviour.

Supply-chain disclosure developed from FY2021’s expansion toward a global supplier code focused on human rights and potential modern slavery to the Sustainable Sourcing Framework reported as implemented in FY2023 and updated in FY2024–FY2025. The FY2025 report refers to support from the Code of Conduct, Modern Slavery Statement and Ethical Concerns Policy. This is a policy and programme record; it does not establish performance by every supplier or project.

People, safety and community: reported results and boundaries

FY2025’s sustainability target table also recorded 96.5% occupancy against a target of at least 95%. Occupancy is a portfolio metric in the reported target table, not a sustainability result for each building. The report’s 2030 social-contribution target is $100m by 30 June 2030.

Digital-infrastructure context within this section

The digital-infrastructure programme affects sustainability measurement boundaries but is addressed substantively in the data-centre section of this report. For context, the FY2024 report described a 5.0 GW site-and-power bank across 13 major cities (2.5 GW secured power and 2.5 GW in advanced procurement), and FY2025 reported the same 5.0 GW total with 0.7 GW stabilised and 0.3 GW in WIP. The reports do not state that this metric is owned electricity generation, contracted customer load or operating data-centre capacity. In FY2024 and FY2025 Goodman also said it did not control leased-area data-centre operations where it was not operator, so energy and emissions measures cannot be extended from its stated operational boundary to tenant operations.

Section sources — official issuer documents (printed PDF pages used). Goodman Group Annual Report 2021, pp. 49, 53, 55; Goodman Group Annual Report 2022, pp. 53, 57–58; Goodman Group Annual Report 2023, pp. 66–70; Goodman Group Annual Report 2024, pp. 20, 46–59, 82–83, 92; Goodman Group Annual Report 2025, pp. 19–20, 51–60, 84–85.

Governance record across FY2021–FY2025

The annual reports consistently describe a CEO-chaired Group Investment Committee meeting weekly to consider major operating decisions and transactions. In FY2021, the Risk & Compliance Committee was described as monitoring market, operational, sustainability, regulatory/compliance and IT risks, with the Audit Committee monitoring financial-risk management and tax. FY2022 retained the annual regional strategic/operational risk process and the weekly Investment Committee arrangement.

The governance structure changed during the five-year period. Goodman established its Sustainability and Innovation Committee in October 2022. In March 2023 it merged Audit with Risk and Compliance, and Remuneration with Nomination. FY2024 reported that responsibility for sustainability disclosures moved to the Audit, Risk and Compliance Committee while the Sustainability and Innovation Committee continued its innovation/technology focus. At 30 June 2025, responsibility for sustainability/climate targets and risk/disclosure monitoring had moved from the Sustainability and Innovation Committee; that committee was disbanded on 30 June 2025. The FY2025 report describes the Audit, Risk and Compliance Committee as reviewing risk appetite/profile and material operational, development, safety/social, financial, tax and compliance risk.

These statements describe committee roles and process. They do not show that a particular risk was avoided or that a Partnership has the same governance arrangements: the reports note that relevant Partnership governance bodies set their own overarching requirements. GLHK Appendix A also has its own risk and subsequent-events disclosures and is not combined here with Group/GIT metrics or statements.

Five-year company-described risk record

Financial-risk management policy—reported ranges, not outcomes

The FY2025 financial-risk disclosure says Goodman’s policy is to hedge 65%–90% of foreign-currency assets with same-currency liabilities and/or cross-currency interest-rate swaps/forward-exchange contracts, and 60%–100% of payment interest-rate exposure for three years. It describes monthly three-year cash-flow forecasts and Board debt-maturity reporting, with the stated objective of funding working capital, capex, investments, debt expiries and distributions while spreading maturities within Board policy. These are policy ranges and process descriptions. They should not be substituted for actual hedge coverage at a particular date, the Group’s current liquidity, or the separately reported funding position of managed Partnerships.

Subsequent-events register

Section sources — official issuer documents (printed PDF pages used). Goodman Group Annual Report 2021, pp. 6, 20–21, 128, 142–143; Goodman Group Annual Report 2022, pp. 23–24, 148, 160–162; Goodman Group Annual Report 2023, pp. 8, 27–29, 158, 170–173; Goodman Group Annual Report 2024, pp. 5, 26–31, 40–42, 183; Goodman Group Annual Report 2025, pp. 5, 24–25, 28–29, 39–40, 104, 155, 157, 160, 209–211, 214.

Primary sources

• Goodman Group Annual Report 2021 — year ended 30 June 2021.
• Goodman Group Annual Report 2022 — year ended 30 June 2022.
• Goodman Group Annual Report 2023 — year ended 30 June 2023.
• Goodman Group Annual Report 2024 — year ended 30 June 2024.
• Goodman Group Annual Report 2025 — year ended 30 June 2025.

Each substantive section above identifies the specific annual-report documents and printed pages used. The report uses Goodman-hosted public documents rather than internal records or exchange-document identifiers.

Method and disclosed limits

This is a five-year, issuer-report-led record. It keeps separate where Goodman does: Group, GIT and GLHK reporting perimeters; directly held property, inventories, assets held for sale, associate/JV carrying amounts and managed AUM; actual results, plans, targets, commitments and subsequent events. The annual reports do not publish a complete property-by-property legal-title schedule, all WIP project names, every data-centre site, tenant, power allocation or vehicle ownership percentage. Those omissions are recorded as issuer disclosure limits rather than filled by inference.

AI-led preparation notice

MII Research actively used AI for evidence extraction, comparison across periods, numerical cross-checking, drafting, translation preparation and explanatory formatting. Human review is selective and reasonable, not an audit, legal review, investment-advice review or verification of every source statement. AI systems and source materials can contain mistakes, omissions, ambiguities, dated information or inconsistent classifications. Readers should check material facts against the linked primary documents and seek qualified professional advice where appropriate.

Factual-information disclaimer and corrections

This publication is provided for general factual and educational information only. It is not financial product advice, a recommendation, an offer, a solicitation, a valuation, a forecast or a statement of suitability for any reader. Information is drawn from public sources considered reliable as of the stated cut-off, but accuracy, completeness, currency and fitness for a particular purpose are not guaranteed. To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, MII Research and its contributors disclaim liability for loss arising from reliance on this publication; nothing here excludes or limits liability that cannot lawfully be excluded or limited. If you identify a material factual, source, translation or presentation issue, please contact MII Research with the relevant document and page reference so the record can be reviewed and, where appropriate, corrected.

Copyright and transformation notice

This report is independently written and reorganises publicly available factual information into original explanatory prose, comparison tables and source references. It does not reproduce long passages, issuer charts, photographs or logos. Report titles, company names and linked documents remain the property of their respective owners. The linked primary documents should be consulted for the original context.