INVESTOR PRESENTATION 3Q 2017 Forward Looking Statements and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

investor presentation 3q 2017 forward looking statements
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

INVESTOR PRESENTATION 3Q 2017 Forward Looking Statements and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

INVESTOR PRESENTATION 3Q 2017 Forward Looking Statements and Cautionary Statements Forward-Looking Statements The information in this presentation includes forward-looking statements that are made pursuant to the S afe Harbor Provisions


slide-1
SLIDE 1

INVESTOR PRESENTATION 3Q 2017

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Forward-Looking Statements The information in this presentation includes “ forward-looking statements” that are made pursuant to the S afe Harbor Provisions of the Private S ecurities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All statements, other than statements of historical fact included in this presentation, regarding our strategy, future operations, financial position, estimated revenues and losses, proj ected costs, prospects, plans and obj ectives of management are forward-looking statements. When used in this presentation, the words “ could,” “ believe,” “ anticipate,” “ intend,” “ estimate,” “ expect,” “ proj ect” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain such identifying words. These forward-looking statements are based on Parsley Energy, Inc.’ s (“ Parsley Energy,” “ Parsley,” or the “ Company” ) current expectations and assumptions about future event s and are based on currently available information as to the outcome and timing of future events. We caution you that these forward-looking statements are subj ect to all of the risks and uncertainties, most of which are difficult to predict and many of which are beyond our control, incident to the exploration for and development, production, gathering and sale of oil and natural gas. These risks include, but are not limited to, commodity price volatility, inflation, lack of availability of drilling and production equipment and services, environmental risks, drilling and other operating risks, regulatory changes, the uncertainty inherent in estimating reserves and in proj ecting future rates of production, the production potential of our undeveloped acreage, cash flow and access to capital, the timing of development expenditures and the risk factors discussed in or referenced in our filings with the United S tates S ecurities and Exchange Commission (“ S EC” ), including our Annual Report on Form 10-K and our subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and Current Reports on Form 8-K. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this presentation. Except as otherwise required by applicable law, we disclaim any duty to update any forward-looking statements, all of which are expressly qualified by the statements in this section, to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this presentation. Our production forecasts and expectations for future periods are dependent upon many assumptions, including estimates of production decline rates from existing wells and the undertaking and

  • utcome of future drilling activity, which may be affected by significant commodity price declines or cost increases.

Industry and Market Data This presentation has been prepared by Parsley and includes market data and other statistical information from third-party sources, including independent industry publications, government publications or other published independent sources. Although Parsley believes these third-party sources are reliable as of their respective dates, Parsley has not independently verified the accuracy

  • r completeness of this information. S
  • me data are also based on Parsley’ s good faith estimates, which are derived from its review of internal sources as well as the third-party sources described

above. Oil & Gas Reserves This presentation provides disclosure of Parsley’ s proved reserves, which are those quantities of oil and gas, which, by analysis of geoscience and engineering data, can be estimated with reasonable certainty to be economically producible— from a given date forward, from known reservoirs, and under existing economic conditions (using unweighted average 12-month first day of the month prices), operating methods, and government regulations— prior to the time at which contracts providing the right to operate expire, unless evidence indicates that renewal is reasonably certain, regardless of whether deterministic or probabilistic methods are used for the estimation. In this presentation, proved reserves attributable to Parsley as of 12/ 31/ 16 are estimated utilizing S EC reserve recognition standards and pricing assumptions based on S EC pricing, as adj usted for market differentials, transportation fees, and quality, of $39.36 / Bbl crude, $2.23 / Mcf gas, and $15.03/ Bbl NGL. References to our estimated proved reserves as of 12/ 31/ 16 are derived from our proved reserve report audited by Netherland, S ewell & Associates, Inc. (“ NS AI” ). We may use the t erm “ expected ultimate recoveries” (“ EURs” ) or other descriptions of volumes of reserves, which terms include quantities of oil and gas that may not meet t he S EC’ s definitions of proved, probable and possible reserves, and which the S EC's guidelines strictly prohibit Parsley from including in filings with the S

  • EC. Unless otherwise stated in this presentation, such estimates have

been prepared internally by our engineers and management without review by independent engineers. These estimates are by their nature more speculative than estimates of proved, probable and possible reserves and accordingly are subj ect to substantially greater risk of being actually realized, particularly in areas or zones where there has been limited or no drilling history. We include these estimates to demonstrate what we believe to be the potential for future drilling and production by the Company. Actual locations drilled and quantities that may be ultimately recovered from our properties will differ substantially. In addition, we have made no commitment to drill all of the drilling locations. Ultimate recoveries will be dependent upon numerous factors including actual encountered geological conditions, the impact of future oil and gas pricing, exploration and development costs, and our future drilling decisions and budgets based upon our future evaluation of risk, returns and the availability of capital and, in many areas, the outcome of negotiation of drilling arrangements with holders of adj acent or fractional interest leases. Our estimates may change significantly as development of our properties provides additional data and therefore actual quantities that may ultimately be recovered will likely differ from these estimates. Our related expectations for future periods are dependent upon many assumptions, including estimates of production decline rat es from existing wells, the undertaking and outcome of future drilling activity and activity that may be affected by significant commodity price declines or drilling cost increases. Unless otherwise noted, Net Present Value (“ NPV” ) estimates are before taxes and assume the Company generated EUR and decline curve estimates based on Company drilling and completion cost estimates that do not include facilities, land, seismic, general and administrative (“ G&A” ) or other corporate level costs.

Forward Looking Statements and Cautionary Statements

2

slide-3
SLIDE 3

S uperior acreage port folio

  • Premier combination of acreage quality and quantity
  • Large, concent rat ed development blocks in heart of Midland

Basin and S . Delaware Basin oil windows

  • Ongoing consolidat ion, lat eral ext ension, and invent ory uplift

t hrough acreage t rades Est ablished t rack record of efficient capit al invest ment

  • Robust operat ing margins and t op-t ier recycle rat io
  • Differentiat ed organic oil growt h per dollar invest ed

Efficient and sust ainable growt h profile

  • Decade plus invent ory of premium drilling locat ions in proven

t arget int ervals

  • Flexible development plan wit h st rong hedge book and

secured services and equipment Financial flexibility wit h st rong balance sheet

  • Pro-forma liquidity of ~$1.9 billion, including $934 million of

cash on hand(1) Organic resource opt imizat ion

  • Favorable well product ivit y t rends via ongoing complet ion

design evolut ion

  • Proven hist ory convert ing delineat ion capit al int o

development opport unity

Parsley Energy Overview

3

Market Snapshot Parsley Leasehold Premier Permian Pure-Play

ANDREWS MARTIN ECTOR LEA WINKLER LOVING WARD CRANE REEVES PECOS UPTON MIDLAND GLASSCOCK REAGAN HOWARD

(1) As of end 3Q17 pro forma for issuance of new 2027 notes announced 10/5/2017; (2) Calculated using 11/07/2017 closing price; (3) Net Debt is a non-GAAP financial measure that is defined as total debt less cash and cash equivalents; (4) As of end 3Q17 pro forma for subsequent acreage trades.

NYS E S ymbol: PE Market Cap: $8,881 MM(2) Net Debt : $1,266 MM(1)(3) Ent erprise Value: $10,147 MM S hare Count : 314 MM Permian Basin Net Leasehold Acreage: ~229,000(4) Midland Basin: ~178,000 Delaware Basin: ~51,000 Permian Basin Net Royalt y Acreage: ~7,000

Parsley Energy Leasehold

slide-4
SLIDE 4
  • 15%
  • 5%

5% 15% 25% 35% 45% PE 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1Q14 2Q14 3Q14 4Q14 1Q15 2Q15 3Q15 4Q15 1Q16 2Q16 3Q16 4Q16 1Q17 2Q17 3Q17

Value-Adding Production Growth

Quarterly Production Trajectory

Net Production (MBoe/ d) 71.5

  • 16%

compound quart erly product ion growt h rat e over 14 quart ers as a public company(1)

  • 15%
  • rganic quart erly product ion CAGR since IPO, wit h minimal

acquired product ion

(1) Parsley completed its initial public offering on May 29, 2014; (2) Evercore ISI “Buy the Growth Compounders” published October 2, 2017; Peers include APA, APC, AR, CHK, CLR, COG, CPE, CXO, DVN, ECA, EGN, EOG, EQT, FANG, MRO, NBL, NFX, OAS, PXD, QEP, RSPP, SWN, WLL, WPX, and XEC.

Production/Debt-Adjusted Share CAGR (2014-2017E)(2) Volume growt h has accrued t o shareholders, wit h leading production growt h per debt -adj ust ed share even during period of significant asset expansion. 4

slide-5
SLIDE 5

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 $0 $5 $10 $15 $20 $25 $30

Top-Tier Capital Efficiency

5

Source: SGS E&P Comp Sheets – Week Ending September 29, 2017. Companies include APA, APC, AR, AXAS, BBG, CDEV, CHK, CLR, CNX, COG, CPE, CRC, CRK, CRZO, CXO, DNR, DVN, ECA, ECR, EGN, EOG, EPE, EQT, ESTE, FANG, GPOR, HES, HK, JAG, LPI, MRO, MTDR, MUR, NBL, NFX, OAS, OXY, PDCE, PHX, PXD, QEP, REN, RICE, RRC, RSPP, SD, SGY, SM, SN, SRCI, SWN, UNT, UPL, WLL, WPX, WRD, WTI, XEC, and XOG. Oily E&P Companies are defined as companies with oil accounting for 40% or more of 2016 production, and Gassy E&P Companies are defined as companies with oil accounting for less than 40% of 2016 production. (1) F&D costs based on 2016 data and operating margin based on 2Q17. Recycle ratio is equal to operating margin divided by PD F&D. PE recycle ratio includes actual 2016 PD F&D/Boe of $8.04.

  • Liquids-rich production mix and favorable productivity to cost ratio

drive top performance on key capital efficiency measures

  • S

uperior capital efficiency translates to value-adding growth

Recycle Ratio(1)

Oily E&P Companies Gassy E&P Companies Parsley Energy

Operating Margin ($/Boe)

Parsley Energy Oily E&P Companies Gassy E&P Companies

slide-6
SLIDE 6

2017

  • Integrated ~95,000 net acres into portfolio
  • Largest rig ramp among Permian peers(1)
  • Initial development activity in three new counties
  • Drilling success in four new target zones

2018

  • S

teady anticipated development pace

  • Focus on established areas, targets, and well spacing
  • Emphasis on portfolio optimization

(6) (4) (2) 2 4 6 8 10

PE Peer 1 Peer 2 Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5 Peer 6 Peer 7

Building for the Long Run

6 Rig Additions 4Q16 to 4Q17(1)

(1) Source: RigData dated October 2016 and October 2017. Permian peers consist of CPE, CXO, EGN, FANG, LPI, PXD, and RSPP.

Acreage Footprint and Activity –YE16 Acreage Footprint and Activity –YE17E

YE17E Pads PE Operated PE Non-Operated

ANDREWS MARTIN ECTOR LEA WINKLER LOVING WARD CRANE REEVES PECOS UPTON MIDLAND GLASSCOCK REAGAN HOWARD ANDREWS MARTIN ECTOR LEA WINKLER LOVING WARD CRANE REEVES PECOS UPTON MIDLAND GLASSCOCK REAGAN HOWARD

Transformative 2017 Clears Forward Path

YE16E Pads PE Operated PE Non-Operated

slide-7
SLIDE 7
  • 5

5 10 15 20 25

Efficient 2018 Growth in View

7

Companies include oily (% oil > 40%) mid- and large-cap (market cap > $5 billion) peers: APA, APC, CDEV, CLR, CXO, DVN, EGN, EOG, FANG, HES, MRO, NFX, OXY, PE, PXD, and RSPP. Peer estimates based on FactSet consensus as of 11/3/2017. Parsley estimates based on midpoints of 2017 and 2018 volume guidance ranges and low-end of 2017 % oil guidance range.

Parsley Energy

2018 Bbls/d Added per $MM Capex Preliminary 2018 Outlook

  • Net oil production: 67.5 – 72.5 MBo/ d
  • Capital expenditures: $1.35 - $1.55 billion
  • Top-tier oil growth per dollar invested
slide-8
SLIDE 8

3Q17 Midland Basin Acreage Trades

Putting the Pieces Together

8

  • Ongoing acreage trades enhance development potential of core
  • perated footprint
  • 3Q17 represents most active trading period to date
  • Traded out of scattered properties with lower working interest

(“ WI” ) into concentrated operated properties with higher WI

  • ~55%

average WI on acreage traded away in 3Q17

  • ~90%

average WI on acreage traded for in 3Q17

  • Recent trades added more than 1.2 million net lateral feet to

horizontal drilling inventory, on top of 1.4 million net lateral feet previously added following Double Eagle (“ DEEP” ) acquisition announcement

  • Post-DEEP trades akin to adding over 10,000 premium net acres

with four target intervals(1)

  • Trades enabling step change in average completed lateral lengths

Trade Tracker –Accretive Inventory Additions

HOWARD GLASSCOCK REAGAN UPTON MIDLAND MARTIN

(1) Assumes 32 wells per drilling spacing unit (DSU) and that 7,500’ stimulated lateral length wells correspond to a 960 acre DSU. (2) Double Eagle acquisition announced on 2/7/2017. Leasehold Acquired via Trade Leasehold Traded Away Parsley Energy Leasehold

500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 DEEP Acq. 1Q17 2Q17 3Q17 Cumulative Net Lat eral Feet Added

+200 net locat ions added +300 net locat ions ext ended

(2)

4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 2014 2015 2016 2017E 2018E Average Lat eral Length (ft .)

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Creating Value through Trades

9

SM – Qstar, 4Q16 ~$42.5K / acre Callon – Element, 3Q16 ~$43.5K / acre ~$2.2 MM / location Concho – Oxy, 2Q17 ~$40K / acre Concho – Reliance, 3Q16 ~$32K / acre $2.4 MM / location QEP – RK, 2Q16 ~$58.5K / acre ~$1.3 MM / location QEP – Cox, 3Q17 ~$51.5K / acre ~$1.0 MM / location SM – Rock Oil, 3Q16 ~$32.5K / acre

  • Nearby peer acquisitions in the Midland Basin carry an average cost of over $40,000/net acre or $1.7 million/net
  • location. (1)
  • Valuation markers imply over $400 million of value creation from Parsley’s costless acreage swaps this year.

5 6 7 1 2 3 4

Average Comparable Transaction ~$43K / acre ~$1.7 MM / location 2017 YTD Parsley Trades ~10,000 net acres equivalent at $0K / acre $0 MM / location

(1) Source: 1Derrick and Company presentations. Acreage and location prices are adjusted for acquired PDP at $35,000/flowing Boe/d. Location counts are sourced from Company materials where provided. PE Leasehold PE Acquired Leasehold PE Traded Leasehold

6 7 1 2 3 4 5

HOWARD GLASSCOCK REAGAN UPTON MIDLAND MARTIN ANDREWS ECTOR

Peer Acquisitions

2

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Operator of Choice

10

  • Long-term trend of operating efficiency

and cost reductions

  • Advantaged logistics reduce transport

and disposal costs, with ~95%

  • f

produced water on pipe

  • Continued buildout of automated well

control

  • DEEP acquisition highlights low-cost
  • perator status with material

improvement in LOE on acquired legacy wells

  • Data suggests production stream worth

more when operated by Parsley

Acquired DEEP wells - Operated vs Non-Operated LOE

$3.00 $4.00 $5.00 $6.00 $7.00 $8.00 $/ Boe 25% increase in LOE for non-

  • perat ed DEEP wells

17% decrease in LOE for

  • perat ed DEEP wells

Historical LOE – Stringent Cost Control

$3.00 $4.00 $5.00 $6.00 $7.00 $8.00 $9.00 $10.00 1Q15 2Q15 3Q15 4Q15 1Q16 2Q16 3Q16 4Q16 1Q17 2Q17 3Q17 $/ Boe DEEP Operat ed Wells DEEP Non-Operat ed Wells 2Q17 2Q17 3Q17 3Q17

Resumed downward t rend aft er acquiring over 600 most ly vert ical wells

slide-11
SLIDE 11

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 6 12 18 24 30 36 Cumulat ive Oil Product ion (MBo) Mont hs of Product ion Midland Basin Ref. Curve Wolfcamp A/ B Wolfcamp C Lower S praberry 2 wells 5 wells 180+ wells

  • Previous 1 MMBoe / 600 MBo EUR curve (7,000’ ) based on

Wolfcamp A/ B results in Upton and Reagan Counties

  • New 1.6 MMBOE / 860 MBo EUR curve (10,000’ ) reflects broader

results and development program across six counties and four primary target intervals

  • New curve compares favorably to previous curve
  • Equivalent oil per lateral foot at two-year mark and for

life of well

  • Higher gas and NGL volumes on new curve
  • Parsley has significantly enlarged asset base without diluting

average well quality

New Basin-Level Curves Show Productivity Uplift

11 Midland Basin Reference Curve vs Historical Results(1) Southern Delaware Basin Reference Curve

  • S. Delaware Basin Reference Curve vs Historical Results(1)

Midland Basin Reference Curve

  • Reflects historical and anticipated well performance in Pecos

and Reeves Counties

  • More oil and less gas than Midland Basin reference curve
  • 1.5 MMBoe / 1.0 MMBo EUR

(1) Actual results normalized to 10,000 ft. lateral and adjusted for downtime.

  • New reference curves update for hist orical well performance, expanded asset base, and enhanced lease geomet ry
  • Based on 10,000’ lat eral
  • Designed t o reflect well mix associat ed with anticipat ed development program over next several years

100 200 300 400 6 12 18 24 30 36 Cumulat ive Oil Product ion (MBo) Mont hs of Product ion S . Delaware Basin Ref. Curve Wolfcamp 15 wells

slide-12
SLIDE 12

200 400 600 800 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 Cumulat ive Product ion (MBoe) Daily Product ion (Boe/ d) Days of Product ion

Glasscock Nose CBP

MARTIN MIDLAND UPTON HOWARD GLAS S COCK REAGAN

10 mi.

Wolfcamp C Offers Compelling Upside

12

  • First Wolfcamp C well (Taylor) still producing a

robust 700 barrels of oil per day after 240 days(1) with cumulative oil recovered exceeding 290,000 barrels

  • Achieved payout within six months
  • S

econd Wolfcamp C well (Paige) registered IP60 rate

  • f nearly 1,600 Boe/ d (~56%
  • il)
  • Additional Wolfcamp C wells honing in on optimal

target interval

  • Wolfcamp C “ rediscovery” represents capstone of

2017 delineation program

Strong Results from Initial Wolfcamp C Wells(2)

(1) Normalized for downtime; (2) Normalized for downtime; Midland Basin reference curve normalized to 10,500’ lateral.

900+ Drilling Locations in Wolfcamp C Fairway

200’ 400’ 600’ 800’ 1,000’ 1,200’ GROS S THICKNES S

Taylor 45-33-4601H Paige 13A-12A-4810H

Wolfcamp C Play Fairway Paige Wolfcamp C Taylor Wolfcamp C 2017 Planned Wolfcamp C

CBP

Increasing GOR and decreasing reservoir pressure to south and east

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Promising Results from Compressed Stage Design

13

  • S

everal Midland Wolfcamp compressed st age t est s

  • ut performing offset s wit h st andard design by 10-25%

wit h 5-7% increment al cost

  • Early result s point t o 5-15%

uplift in proj ect ROR

  • Init ial t est achieved 3 mont h proj ect payout
  • Incremental cost not t ied t o consumables, providing

added leverage t o efficiency gains

  • Early compressed st age result s suggest
  • More uniform clust er t reat ment
  • Great er near wellbore frac complexit y
  • Higher hydrocarbon recovery fact or
  • Monit oring result s wit h several additional t est s planned

for 2018

(1) All wells referenced have one mile laterals and results are shown on non-normalized basis.

Compressed Stage Design Boosting Productivity

Compressed Stage Test Locations

Compressed Stage Test Locations

REAGAN UPTON

Parsley Energy Leasehold Compressed Stage Pads by Area

20 40 60 80 100 30 60 90 120 150 180 Cumulative Oil Production (MBo)(1) Days of Production Area 1 (1-Well Test) Area 1 Offset Area 2 (3-Well Test) Area 2 Offsets Area 3 (3-Well Test) Area 3 Offsets +26% vs offsets +11% vs offsets +25% vs offset

slide-14
SLIDE 14

$1,000 $1,800 $400 $650 $700 $450

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Revolving Credit Facility Senior Notes $0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 $1,400 $1,600 $1,800 $2,000 PE Peer 1 Peer 2 Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5 Cash on Hand Borrowing Base Availability

$934 $997

$1,931 MM

Cash on hand First lien credit facility

  • Peer-leading(1) liquidity of $1.9 billion(2) provides

ample flexibility to fund efficient growth

  • Fully undrawn borrowing base of $1.8 billion,

increased from $1.4 billion in 2Q17, with company-elected commitment of $1.0 billion

  • Issued $700 million senior notes in October 2017
  • S

&P upgraded rating on existing senior notes to BB- from B+

  • Favorable debt maturity schedule with earliest

maturity in 2024

Strong Financial Position

14

Favorable Debt Maturity Schedule

Committed Amount Borrowing Base

1H25 2H25

Ample Liquidity

(2)

Advantaged Liquidity Profile ($MM)(1)(2)

(1) Permian SMID-Cap peers include CPE, EGN, FANG, LPI, and RSPP. Calculated as availability on committed portion of borrowing base plus cash on hand. Peer data obtained from 2Q17 presentations and filings; (2) As of 3Q17 pro forma for issuance of new 2027 notes announced 10/5/2017; (3) Committed portion; net of letters of credit on the Company’s fully undrawn revolver. (3)

$1,100

slide-15
SLIDE 15

$0 $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60 15 30 45 60 75 90 4Q17 1Q18 2Q18 3Q18 4Q18 1Q19 2Q19 3Q19 4Q19 WTI ($/ Bbl) MBbls/ d MBbls/ d Hedged Weighted Average Long Put Price

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

  • Proactive hedging program protects cash

flow and balance sheet

  • Fully hedged at midpoint of preliminary

estimated 2018 oil production range

  • S

ignificantly more hedge protection than peers in 2018

  • Heightened visibility facilitates
  • perational continuity and steady

execution

Substantial Oil Hedge Position Insulates Capital Program

15

(1) KeyBanc Capital Markets; Oil & Gas Industry Weekly Statistical Summary dated October 2, 2017. Operators include AREX, BBG, BCEI, CLR, CPE, CRZO, CXO, DNR, FANG, GST, JAG, LPI, NFX, OAS, PDCE, PXD, RSPP, SM, SRCI, WLL, XEC, and XOG. Includes operators with oil accounting for 40% or more of 2016 production; PE hedge positions as of 11/7/2017 shown at midpoint

  • f 2018 oil guidance range; (2) Excludes swaps.

Oil Volumes Hedged % of Estimated 2018 Oil Production Hedged(1)

(2)

Parsley Energy

2 operators with 0% hedged

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Interests Aligned With Shareholders

16

  • Highest management ownership among

Permian peers makes total shareholder return (“ TS R” ) management’s strongest incentive

  • 2016 annual incentive program

characterized by strong emphasis on capital efficiency and cost control

  • Equal weighting to PDP F&D, LOE per

Boe, and production metrics

  • HS

E record and G&A metrics, among

  • thers, also incorporated
  • Long-term performance-based incentive

program based exclusively on TS R relative to peers

Significant Management Ownership(1)

(1) Source: Bloomberg and Company filings; Ownership % as of 6/30/17; Market value as of 10/27/2017; Peers include CPE, CXO, EGN, FANG, LPI, PXD, and RSPP.

0.0% 3.0% 6.0% 9.0% 12.0% 15.0% 18.0% $0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 PE Peer 1 Peer 2 Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5 Peer 6 Peer 7 Management Ownership ($MM) Management Ownership (% )

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Parsley Energy Investment Summary

17

Parsley Energy Leasehold HOWARD GLASSCOCK REAGAN UPTON MIDLAND MARTIN ANDREWS ECTOR CRANE WARD PECOS REEVES LOVING WINKLER GAINES DAWSON MITCHELL STERLING IRION

  • Premier acreage in oil

windows

  • S

trong financial position

  • Robust returns
  • Abundant resource upside
  • Capital efficient growth
slide-18
SLIDE 18

Investment Highlights

18

SUPPLEMENTARY SLIDES

slide-19
SLIDE 19

22 27 36 40 - 50 7,696' 7,636' 7,726' 9,000' 1Q17 2Q17 3Q17 4Q17E Gross Operat ed Horizont al Complet ions Average Lat eral Length ~

Guidance Summary

19

Unit Costs LOE ($/Boe) $3.50 - $4.50 Cash G&A ($/Boe) $4.00 - $5.00 Production & Ad Valorem Taxes (%

  • f Revenue)

6.0 - 7.0% Capital Program Drilling & Completion ($MM) $840 - $960 Infrastructure & Other ($MM) $160 - $190 Total Development Expenditures ($MM) $1,000 - $1,150 % Non-Operated 3 – 5% Activity Gross Operated Horizontal Completions Midland Basin Delaware Basin Average Lateral Length 125 – 135 95 – 100 30 – 35 ~8,000’ Gross Operated Vertical Completions 5 - 10 Average Working Interest 85 – 95% Production Annual Net Production (MBoe/d) % Oil 4Q17 Net Production (MBoe/d) 2017E 67 - 68 67 – 70% 80 – 83

Quarterly Completion Cadence(1)

Midland Basin Delaware Basin Capital Allocation (%

  • f 2017E capex)

65 – 70% 30 – 35%

2017E Capital Allocation

Note: 2017 guidance as of 9/28/2017 operational update. (1) Completions represent frac starts.

Preliminary 2018 Outlook

  • Net oil product ion: 67.5 – 72.5 MBo/ d
  • Capital expenditures: $1.35 - $1.55 billion
  • S

t eady development pace of approximately 40 gross

  • perat ed wells t urned t o product ion per quart er
  • Opt imized and efficient program wit h average lat eral

lengt h of ~9,500 feet

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Gross Three-Stream Volumes Oil (MBbls) NGL (MBbls) Gas (MMcf) Equivalent (MBoe) 3-mo 73 20 67 104 6-mo 136 38 130 195 1-yr 216 61 211 312 2-yr 314 90 311 456 5-yr 477 139 478 695 10-yr 630 184 635 920 EUR 994 292 1,007 1,454

Midland Basin – Return Profile(2) Southern Delaware Basin – Return Profile(3)

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 140% $35 $40 $45 $50 $55 $60 $65 IRR (% ) Realized Oil Price ($/ Bbl) D&C $7.5 MM D&C $8.5 MM D&C $9.5 MM 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% $35 $40 $45 $50 $55 $60 $65 IRR (% ) Realized Oil Price ($/ Bbl) D&C $10.5 MM D&C $11.5 MM D&C $12.5 MM

New Reference Curves Imply Compelling Economics

20

Midland Basin Cumulative Gross Volumes

Gross Three-Stream Volumes Oil (MBbls) NGL (MBbls) Gas (MMcf) Equivalent (MBoe) 3-mo 74 19 52 102 6-mo 124 36 95 176 1-yr 189 66 176 284 2-yr 269 117 311 437 5-yr 400 208 555 701 10-yr 523 294 783 947 EUR 860 529 1,409 1,624

  • S. Delaware Basin Cumulative Gross Volumes

(1) Gross volumes are not adjusted for volume-based processing contracts and various loss and downtime factors, and are presented before the application of working interest and royalty interest; (2) Assumes realized gas price of $3.00/MMBtu, realized NGL price of 40% WTI, and 25% royalty burden; (3) Assumes realized gas price of $3.00/MMBtu, realized NGL price of 40% WTI, and 15% royalty burden. (1) (1)

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Expansive, High-quality Drilling Inventory

21 Horizontal Drilling Inventory(1)

(1) As of end 3Q17 pro forma for subsequent acreage trades; Location counts rounded to the nearest ten; (2) Assumes current annual ~130 completion run rate; (3) 16 wells per section reflects two landing zones; (4) Reflects an average of two landing zones.

  • Extensive inventory of premium drilling

locations provides visibility to years of high-return production growth

  • Operate 94%
  • f net inventory
  • 12+ drilling years of long-lateral

(>7,500’ ), high working interest (>90% ),

  • perated inventory in Development

Zones(2)

  • Low average royalty burden of 15%
  • n

nearly 600 net Wolfcamp locations in the S

  • uthern Delaware Basin
  • Established track record of converting

delineation capital into development

  • pportunities

GROSS NET WELLS PER SECTION Development Zones Midland Basin Lower S praberry 1,510 870 8 Wolfcamp A 1,850 1,060 8 Wolfcamp B 3,160 1,890 8 / 16(3) Wolfcamp C 1,480 920 8 Delaware Basin Wolfcamp 600 560 16(4) Development Total 8,600 5,300 Delineation Zones Midland Basin Middle S praberry 1,070 600 5 / 6 Cline 1,910 1,140 8 Atoka 1,450 860 8 Delaware Basin 2nd Bone S pring 150 140 4 3rd Bone S pring 150 140 4 Delineation Total 4,730 2,880 Total 13,330 8,180

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Efficient Reserve Growth

22

Strong Growth in Proved Reserves

Total Proved Reserves (MMBoe) Oil (MMBbl) Gas (Bcf) NGL (MMBbl) Total (MMBoe) PDP 59.3 121.8 23.7 103.3 PDNP 1.9 2.2 0.6 2.8 PUD 75.4 99.7 24.2 116.2

Total Proved 136.6 223.7 48.5 222.3

124

  • 14
  • 4
  • 7

24 99 222

  • 50

50 100 150 200 250

YE15 Prod. Rev. Divest. Acq. Adds YE16

(1) Source: SGS E&P Comp Sheets – Week Ending September 29, 2017. Companies include APA, APC, AR, BBG, CDEV, CHK, CLR, COG, CPE, CRK, CRZO, CXO, DNR, DVN, ECA, ECR, EGN, EOG, EPE, EQT, FANG, GPOR, HES, HK, JAG, JONE, LPI, MRO, MTDR, NBL, NFX, NOG, OAS, OXY, PDCE, PE, PXD, QEP, REN, RICE, RRC, RSPP, SD, SGY, SM, SN, SRCI, SWN, SWTF, UNT, WLL, WPX, WTI, XCO, XEC, and XOG. Oily E&P Companies are defined as companies with 2016 percent oil of 40% or greater, and Gassy E&P Companies are defined as companies with 2016 percent oil of less than 40%; (2) Organic reserve replacement ratio calculated as total 2016 reserves additions and revisions (technical and pricing) divided by total 2016 production; excludes acquisitions and divestitures; (3) PD F&D calculated as total 2016 Capex (including Infrastructure and Other) divided by total 2016 proved developed reserves additions and revisions (technical and pricing); excludes acquisitions and divestitures; (4) Reserve summary as of 12/31/2016 and audited by NSAI.

Proved Reserves Summary(4)

+80%

$0 $5 $10 $15 $20 $25 $30 $35 $40

2016 PD F&D ($/Boe) Ranks Highly among Oily E&Ps(1)

Oily E&P Companies Gassy E&P Companies Parsley Energy

  • YE16 proved reserves up 80%

Y/ Y (oil up 85% Y/ Y) despite writing off remaining ~18 MMBoe of vertical PUD reserves

  • S

trong organic reserve replacement ratio of approximately 680%

(2)

  • PD F&D down 70%

Y/ Y to $8.04/ Boe(3)

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Substantial Oil Hedge Position

23

Hedge positions as of 11/7/2017; (1) When the NYMEX price is above the put price, Parsley receives the NYMEX price. When the NYMEX price is between the put price and the short put price, Parsley receives the put price. When the NYMEX price is below the short put price, Parsley receives the NYMEX price plus the difference between the short put price and the put price; (2) Functions similarly to put spreads except that when the index price is at or above the call price, Parsley receives the call price; (3) Premium realizations represent net premiums paid (including deferred premiums), which are recognized as income or loss in the period of settlement; (4) When the NYMEX price is above the call price, Parsley receives the call price. When the NYMEX is below the put price, Parsley receives the put price. When the NYMEX price is between the call and put prices, Parsley receives the NYMEX price; (5) Parsley receives the strike price; (6) Parsley receives the swap price.

4Q17 1Q18 2Q18 3Q18 4Q18 1Q19 2Q19 3Q19 4Q19 Put Spreads (MBbls/d)1 45.5 38.3 37.9 39.1 42.4 11.7 11.5 Put Price ($/ Bbl) $50.96 $51.74 $51.09 $49.69 $49.71 $50.00 $50.00 Short Put Price ($/ Bbl) $41.43 $40.65 $41.09 $39.69 $39.71 $40.00 $40.00 Three Way Collars (MBbls/d)2 21.7 28.0 31.0 31.0 8.3 8.2 8.2 8.2 Short Call Price ($/ Bbl) $68.85 $70.79 $75.65 $75.65 $80.40 $80.40 $80.40 $80.40 Put Price ($/ Bbl) $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 Short Put Price ($/ Bbl) $40.00 $40.00 $40.00 $40.00 $40.00 $40.00 $40.00 $40.00 Premium Realization ($MM)3 ($9.6) ($19.6) ($18.0) ($18.3) ($19.6) ($5.9) ($5.9) ($1.5) ($1.5) Collars (MBbls/d)4 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Short Call Price ($/ Bbl) $59.98 $61.31 $61.31 $61.31 Put Price ($/ Bbl) $46.75 $45.67 $45.67 $45.67 Swaps (MBbls/d)5 0.5 Strike Price ($/ Bbl) $55.00 Total MBbls/d Hedged 50.0 60.0 68.9 73.1 76.4 20.0 19.8 8.2 8.2 Mid-Cush Basis Swaps (MBbls/d)6 16.7 11.5 11.4 11.3 11.3 Swap Price ($/ Bbl) ($1.00) ($0.86) ($0.86) ($0.86) ($0.86)