Khazanah reports $1.4b profit in 2025

Khazanah Nasional Bhd reported a profit of 5.6 billion ringgit (US$1.4 billion) for the 2025 financial year and returned 2 billion ringgit (US$509 million) in dividends to the Malaysian government, according to its annual review.

Since 2004, Khazanah has paid a total of 21.1 billion ringgit (US$5,3 billion) in dividends and generated 93.1 billion ringgit (US$23.7 billion) in shareholder returns.

Managing director Datuk Amirul Feisal Wan Zahir highlighted the importance of maintaining a diversified portfolio to manage risks and ensure consistent long-term returns.

He said Khazanah’s approach aims to support Malaysia’s economic growth while focusing on long-term wealth creation through a resilient investment strategy.

🔗 Source: The Star

🧠 Food for thought

Implications, context, and why it matters.

Khazanah’s portfolio supports profits plus national aims

Khazanah Nasional Berhad organises its holdings into four portfolios, Investments Portfolio, Dana Impak Portfolio, Developmental Assets, and Special Situations 1.
This mix ties to the governments Gear Up programme, a joint effort by six of Malaysia’s Government-Linked Investment Companies (GLICs) 2.
The programme links investment with social outcomes. It has secured commitments for a minimum monthly living wage of RM3,100 for 153,000 employees across 34 GLICs and Government-linked Companies (GLCs) (government-linked companies) 2.
As of 30 June 2025, the programme had deployed RM11 billion into high-growth, high-value sectors, including semiconductors plus the energy transition 2.

The RM100 billion goal could shift listed companies, with trade-offs

The Ministry of Finance has cited a RM540 billion base of investments on Bursa Malaysia (Malaysias stock exchange). Simple calculations cited by The Edge put five-year growth at about RM235 billion with 7.5% annual returns, versus about RM101 billion at 3.5% 3.
A push centred on government-linked companies (GLCs) can raise an invisible barrier for private firms. These businesses then compete with state-backed giants for capital plus resources 4.
The approach also leaves a gap in equity-based funding for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), compared with support for startups plus GLCs. Results depend on growing national champions while avoiding crowding out private enterprise 4.