The difference between BOT and ABS. BOT and ABS financing methods are both suitable for infrastructure construction, but their operating characteristics and economic impact are quite different. The main differences are as follows:

1, the difference between operational complexity and financing cost.

BOT mode is complicated and difficult to operate. The adoption of BOT mode must go through the stages of project determination, project preparation, bidding, negotiation, document contract signing, construction, operation, maintenance and handover. , involving government concessions, foreign exchange guarantees and many other links, involving a wide range, not easy to implement, and its financing costs have also increased due to many intermediate links. The operation of ABS financing mode is relatively simple. It only involves the original owners, SPC, investors, securities underwriters and other subjects, and does not need government franchising and foreign exchange guarantee. It is a financing mode that mainly operates through non-governmental channels. It not only simplifies the operation, but also reduces the financing cost.

2. Differences in project ownership and operation rights.

The ownership and management right of BOT project belongs to the project company during the concession period, and the ownership will be handed over to the government at the expiration of the concession period. Therefore, financing infrastructure projects through foreign BOT can bring advanced foreign technology and management, but it will give foreign investors control over the project. Under ABS mode, during the issuance of bonds, the ownership of project assets belongs to SPC, while the decision-making power of project operation belongs to the original beneficiary, who is obliged to pay the cash income of the project to SPC. After the bond expires, the debt and interest are repaid with the income generated by the asset, and the ownership of the asset returns to the original owner. Therefore, using ABS to finance international infrastructure projects can keep the host country in control of project operation, but it can't gain advanced foreign technology and management experience.

3. Differences in investment risks.

BOT project investors are generally enterprises or financial institutions, and their investment can't be given up and transferred casually, so each investor bears a relatively large risk. The investors of ABS project are bond buyers in the international capital market, which greatly disperses the investment risk. At the same time, this kind of bond can circulate in the secondary market, which reduces the investment risk through credit enhancement and is very attractive to investors.

4. Differences in the scope of application.

BOT is the intervention of non-government capital in the field of infrastructure, and its essence is the privatization of BOT projects during the concession period. Therefore, some key departments related to the national economy and people's livelihood cannot adopt BOT. ABS is not like this. In the process of bond issuance, although the asset ownership of the project belongs to SPC, the decision-making power of the project still belongs to the original owner. Therefore, there is no need to worry about important projects being controlled by foreign investors when using ABS. For example, ABS mode can be considered for major infrastructure projects such as important railway trunk lines and large power plants that cannot adopt BOT mode. Comparatively speaking, ABS mode is more widely used than BOT mode in the field of infrastructure.