Global ratings agency Moody’s Investor Service on Friday downgraded its ratings outlook for four Adani Group companies from stable to negative after they suffered huge losses on the stock market in the wake of allegations of stock manipulation and accounting fraud by United States-based firm Hindenburg Research.

The ratings outlook has been changed to negative for Adani Green Energy Ltd, Adani Green Energy Restricted Group (AGEL RG-1), Adani Transmission Step-One Limited and Adani Electricity Mumbai Limited.

Advertisement

Moody’s, however, retained a stable outlook for Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone Limited, Adani International Container Terminal Private Limited, Adani Green Energy Restricted Group (AGEL RG-2) and Adani Transmission Restricted Group 1.

“These rating actions follow the significant and rapid decline in the market equity values of the Adani Group companies following the recent release of a report from a short-seller highlighting governance concerns in the Group,” Moody’s said.

The ports-to-energy conglomerate led by billionaire Gautam Adani has been steeped in a crisis since January 24, when investment firm Hindenburg Research alleged that the group has amassed substantial debt by pledging overvalued shares. Since the report was released, Adani Group companies have lost nearly Rs 9 lakh crore in the stock market bloodbath.

Advertisement

In the wake of the allegations, Adani Group flagship company Adani Enterprises was also forced to call off its Rs 20,000 crore follow-on public offering that was meant to repay debt.

On Thursday, global stock index compiler Morgan Stanley Capital International cut the free float status of Adani Enterprises, Adani Total Gas, Adani Transmission and ACC Limited. A free float is the proportion of shares that can be bought publicly in the securities markets by international investors.

The Adani Group, on the other hand, claimed that Hindenburg published the report “purely out of selfish motives and in flagrant breach of applicable securities and foreign exchange laws”. It asserted that the report was neither objective nor well-researched.