1
Investor Presentation November 2017 1 Forward Looking Statements - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Investor Presentation November 2017 1 Forward Looking Statements - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Investor Presentation November 2017 1 Forward Looking Statements This presentation contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. All
2
Forward Looking Statements
This presentation contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, included in this presentation that address activities, events or developments that Diamondback Energy, Inc. (the “Company” or “Diamondback”) expects, believes or anticipates will or may occur in the future are forward-looking statements. The words “believe,” “expect,” “may,” “estimates,” “will,” “anticipate,” “plan,” “intend,” “foresee,” “should,” “would,” “could,” or other similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements, which are generally not historical in nature. However, the absence of these words does not mean that the statements are not forward-looking. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, forward-looking statements contained in this presentation specifically include the expectations of plans, strategies, objectives and anticipated financial and operating results of the Company, including as to the Company’s recent acquisition, drilling program, production, hedging activities, capital expenditure levels and other guidance included in this presentation. These statements are based on certain assumptions made by the Company based on management's expectations and perception of historical trends, current conditions, anticipated future developments and other factors believed to be appropriate. Such statements are subject to a number of assumptions, risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond the control of the Company, which may cause actual results to differ materially from those implied or expressed by the forward-looking statements. These include the factors discussed or referenced in the Company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), including its Forms 10-K, 10-Q and 8-K and any amendments thereto, risks relating to the acquisition described in this presentation, financial performance and results, current economic conditions and resulting capital restraints, prices and demand for oil and natural gas, availability of drilling equipment and personnel, availability of sufficient capital to execute the Company’s business plan, impact of compliance with legislation and regulations, successful results from the Company’s identified drilling locations, the Company’s ability to replace reserves and efficiently develop and exploit its current reserves, the Company’s ability to successfully identify, complete and integrate acquisitions of properties or businesses and other important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected. Any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which such statement is made and the Company undertakes no obligation to correct or update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by applicable law. The presentation contains the Company’s updated 2017 production guidance. The actual levels of production, capital expenditures and expenses may be higher or lower than these estimates due to, among other things, uncertainty in drilling schedules, changes in market demand and unanticipated delays in production. These estimates are based on numerous assumptions, including assumptions related to number of wells drilled, average spud to release times, rig count, and production rates for wells placed on production. All or any of these assumptions may not prove to be accurate, which could result in actual results differing materially from estimates. If any of the rigs currently being utilized or intended to be utilized becomes unavailable for any reason, and the Company is not able to secure a replacement on a timely basis, we may not be able to drill, complete and place on production the expected number of wells. Similarly, average spud to release times may not be maintained in 2017. No assurance can be made that new wells will produce in line with historic performance, or that existing wells will continue to produce in line with expectations. Our ability to finance our 2017 and future capital budgets is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, including volatility in commodity prices and the potential for unanticipated increases in costs associated with drilling, production and transportation. In addition, our production estimate assumes there will not be any new federal, state or local regulation of portions of the energy industry in which we operate, or an interpretation of existing regulation, that will be materially adverse to our
- business. For additional discussion of the factors that may cause us not to achieve our production estimates, see the Company’s filings with the SEC, including its forms 10-K, 10-Q and 8-K
and any amendments thereto. We do not undertake any obligation to release publicly the results of any future revisions we may make to this prospective data or to update this prospective data to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this presentation. Therefore, you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on this information. Oil and Gas Reserves The SEC generally permits oil and gas companies, in filings made with the SEC, to disclose proved reserves, which are reserve estimates that geological and engineering data demonstrate with reasonable certainty to be recoverable in future years from known reservoirs under existing economic and operating conditions, and certain probable and possible reserves that meet the SEC’s definitions for such terms. The Company discloses only estimated proved reserves in its filings with the SEC. The Company’s estimated proved reserves as of December 31, 2016 contained in this presentation were prepared by Ryder Scott Company, L.P., an independent engineering firm, and comply with definitions promulgated by the SEC. Additional information
- n the Company’s estimated proved reserves is contained in the Company’s filings with the SEC. This presentation also contains the Company’s internal estimates of its potential drilling
locations, which may prove to be incorrect in a number of material ways. Actual number of locations that may be drilled may differ substantially. Non-GAAP Financial Measures Adjusted EBITDA is a supplemental non-GAAP financial measure that is used by management and external users of our financial statements, such as industry analysts, investors, lenders and rating agencies. We define Adjusted EBITDA as net income (loss) plus non-cash (gain) loss on derivative instruments net, interest expense, depreciation, depletion and amortization, impairment of oil and gas properties, non-cash equity based compensation expense, capitalized equity-based compensation expense, asset retirement obligation accretion expense and income tax (benefit) provision. Adjusted EBITDA is not a measure of net income (loss) as determined by United States’ generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP. Management believes Adjusted EBITDA is useful because it allows it to more effectively evaluate our operating performance and compare the results of our operations from period to period without regard to our financing methods or capital structure. We add the items listed above to net income (loss) in arriving at Adjusted EBITDA because these amounts can vary substantially from company to company within our industry depending upon accounting methods and book values of assets, capital structures and the method by which the assets were acquired. Adjusted EBITDA should not be considered as an alternative to, or more meaningful than, net income (loss) as determined in accordance with GAAP or as an indicator of our operating performance
- r liquidity. Certain items excluded from Adjusted EBITDA are significant components in understanding and assessing a company’s financial performance, such as a company’s cost of
capital and tax structure, as well as the historic costs of depreciable assets, none of which are components of Adjusted EBITDA. Our computations of Adjusted EBITDA may not be comparable to other similarly titled measures of other companies or to similar measures in our revolving credit facility and the indenture governing our senior notes. For a reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to net income (loss), please refer to filings we make with the SEC.
3
Notable Well Results
Diamondback Q3 2017 Highlights
Increased production 10% q/q to 85.0 Mboe/d (up 89% year over year) Realized cash margins of 80% for second consecutive quarter; highest among peer group Continued strong performance from Southern Delaware completions Core Permian footprint – 191,000 net surface acres with ~4,300 gross horizontal locations
economic at $50/Bbl; 85% with lateral lengths of 7,500’ or greater(1)
Q3 Highlights Industry-Leading Execution, Capital Efficiency and Cost Structure Best-in-Class Growth Profile
Source: Company data and filings. Financial data as of 9/30/2017 unless otherwise noted. (1) Location assumptions based on internal company estimates. Economic locations reflect expected IRR’s above 10% assuming $50/Bbl NYMEX oil prices and $3.00/Mcf NYMEX natural gas prices. (2) Reflects sum of LOE, Gathering and Transportation, Production and Ad valorem taxes and cash G&A expenses. (3) Excludes cash from Viper. Net debt to Q3 2017 annualized Adjusted EBITDA is net debt as of 9/30/2017 divided by annualized Adjusted EBITDA for the three months ended 9/30/2017. See the disclaimers at the beginning of this presentation.
Estimated Midland Basin YTD D,C&E costs of $694 per completed lateral foot with average
completed lateral length of 8,872 feet
Peer-leading cash operating costs: $7.67 per Boe in Q3 2017(2) Net debt to Q3 2017 Annualized Adjusted EBITDA of 1.4x(3) Cash flow positive for the first nine months of 2017 excluding acquisitions Pecos Upper/Lower WCA pad with latest IP10 of ~152 boe/d per 1,000’ (80% oil) per well ReWard WCA well with peak IP90 of 184 boe/d per 1,000’ (79% oil) Pecos Lower 2BS completion with peak IP90 of 149 boe/d per 1,000’ (91% oil) Four well pad in Midland County with average IP30’s of 152 boe/d per 1,000’ (89% oil);
recent LS wells in Andrews County competing with Spanish Trail
Over 80% annual production growth in 2017 at midpoint of guidance Plan to add 10th operated rig in Q4 2017 and maintain this rig cadence through year-end
2017, with ability to accelerate or decelerate as cash flow allows
Recently added fourth dedicated frac spread
4
Permian pure-play with ~191,000 net acres Six core areas with 1,000 Mboe+ EURs in multiple intervals normalized to 7,500 feet Significant resource upside from zone delineation and downspacing Rights to develop all depths through Wolfcamp Industry Leading Growth Profile and Execution Targeting over 80% annual production growth in 2017; 120-125 gross completions with ~8,500 ft. laterals Peer-leading cash margins and capital costs per completed lateral foot(1) Diamondback will target a rig count equivalent to estimated cash flow at different commodity prices
NASDAQ Symbol: FANG Market Cap: $10,934 million Net Debt: $1,240 million(2) Enterprise Value: $12,861 million Share Count: 98 million Net acreage: ~191,000 (~86,000 Midland, ~105,000 Delaware)
Market Snapshot(2)
WTI ($/bbl) Gross Economic Locations(3) Rig Count $40 ~3,200 6 or less $45 ~4,000 7 – 9 $50 ~4,300 10 – 12 $60 ~4,500 up to 18 – 20 as cash flow growth allows
Diamondback Energy: Leading Pure-play Permian Operator
Source: Company data, filings and estimates pro forma for the acquisition of Brigham assets. Peers include CPE, CXO, EGN, LPI, PE, PXD and RSPP. (1) Cash margins calculated as realized price per boe less LOE, gathering and transportation, production taxes and cash G&A expenses. (2) Net debt as of 9/30/2017. Market data as of 11/3/2017. (3) Location assumptions based on internal company estimates. Economic locations reflect expected IRR’s above 10% at each respective NYMEX oil price and $3.00/Mcf NYMEX natural gas prices.
Diamondback Acreage Map
1 MMBoe+ 7,500 ft. EURs
Core Delaware Basin Development Core Midland Basin Development
Inventory Overview
5 530 440 450 430 450 765 640 370 400 7,000' 7,500' 8,000' 8,500' 9,000' 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500
LS WCA WCB MS Other WCA WCB 2BS 3BS
Average Lateral Length (Ft.) Operated Locations
Relentless focus on cost control and full-cycle economics; returns matter Well positioned to increase or decrease activity as cash flow dictates; look to match to D,C&E and
infrastructure CAPEX
Conservatively spaced inventory relative to industry with significant upside from downspacing
Inventory Strength Promotes Years of Economic Growth
Source: Company data, filings and estimates. (1) Assumes WTI prices at or above $50/Bbl, 10% rate of return with EUR assumptions based on either Ryder Scott or internal company estimates.
Gross Midland & Delaware Basin Locations By Zone Over 4,300 gross locations economic at current strip prices(1)
Midland Basin: ~2,300 Gross Locations Delaware Basin: ~2,200 Gross Locations
Assumed Spacing per 1-mile Section
~8 wells ~6 wells ~6 wells ~6 wells ~4 wells ~4 wells ~6 wells ~4 wells ~6 wells
Average Lateral Length by Zone
6 238%
97% 140% 109% 132% 217% 135% 206%
50% 100% 150% 200% 250% Q2 2014 Q3 2014 Q4 2014 Q1 2015 Q2 2015 Q3 2015 Q4 2015 Q1 2016 Q2 2016 Q3 2016 Q4 2016 Q1 2017 Q2 2017 Q3 2017
DAPG FANG Peer 1 Peer 2 Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5 Peer 6 Peer 7
Corporate Level Full-Cycle Economics and Returns Matter
Source: Company data, Bloomberg and latest peer filings as of 11/9/2017. Peers include CPE, CXO, EGN, LPI, PE, PXD and RSPP. (1) Return on Average Capital Employed (“ROACE”) calculated as consolidated EBIT divided by average total assets for current and prior period less average current liabilities for current and prior period. (2) Production per debt adjusted share calculated as production divided by debt adjusted share count. Debt adjusted share count calculated as sum of weighted average diluted shares plus incremental shares from converting net debt into equity using the average share price over the calculation period.
Return on Average Capital Employed (“ROACE”) Over Time(1)
Realized Price ($/Boe)
Normalized Production Per Debt-Adjusted Share Growth Versus Peers(2)
10.1% 10.8% 8.6% 2.6% 5.7% 7.9% 8.6% 8.8% 9.7% 9.4% 0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Q1 2016 Q2 2016 Q3 2016 Q4 2016 Q1 2017 Q2 2017 Q3 2017
ROACE
$77.84 $25.09 $33.55 $34.39 $38.72 $38.18 $41.93 $38.25 $36.98 $69.74
7 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 – $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 Q4 2012 Q1 2013 Q2 2013 Q3 2013 Q4 2013 Q1 2014 Q2 2014 Q3 2014 Q4 2014 Q1 2015 Q2 2015 Q3 2015 Q4 2015 Q1 2016 Q2 2016 Q3 2016 Q4 2016 Q1 2017 Q2 2017 Q3 2017 Net Production (Boe/d) Acquisitions ($mm)
Leading Track Record of Accretive Acquisitions and Execution
Source: Company data and filings. Acquisition prices as of the date announced.
IPO
Diamondback’s strategy: acquire, develop and generate highest full-cycle returns at peer-leading efficiency
NW Howard $404 million SW Martin $288 million Glasscock / Midland $524 million NW Martin / Dawson $165 million Southern Delaware $560 million Viper minerals $440 million Southern Delaware $2.55 billion
Combination of best in class efficiency and accretive acquisitions of Tier 1 assets has consistently
driven shareholder value
8
$151 $91 $84 $93 $86 $63 $94 $121 $116 $180 $258 $99 $101 $140 $77 $73 $49 $105 $106 $176 $219 $244
10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000
$0 $50 $100 $150 $200 $250 $300
Boe/d $MM D,C&E CAPEX Operating Cash Flow Infrastructure CAPEX Total Production (Boe/d) Oil Production (Bo/d)
FANG has a track record of achieving robust production growth while spending within cash flow Cumulative cash flow has more than offset D,C&E and Infrastructure spending since the beginning of 2015 Asset base can support differential growth within cash flow for multiple years at today’s commodity prices
Multi-Year Growth Within Cash Flow
Source: Company filings, management data and estimates.
As of September 30, FANG had generated YTD cash flow of $638 million on CAPEX of $554 million
WTI Oil ($/Bbl)
9
6,290' 7,271' 7,170' 7,129' 7,709' 8,270' 8,062' 8,972' 8,469' 7,716' 9,603'
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 10 20 30 40 50
Q1 2015 Q2 2015 Q3 2015 Q4 2015 Q1 2016 Q2 2016 Q3 2016 Q4 2016 Q1 2017 Q2 2017 Q3 2017
Rig / Frac Spread Count Well Count
Drilled Wells Completed Wells Horizontal Rigs Frac Spreads
Accelerated drilling ahead of 4th frac spread; Over 20% increase in average lateral length / well quarter over quarter
Balanced, Capital Efficient Development
Drilling an average of ~500 lateral feet per day per rig in the Midland Basin including move time Completing an average of ~1,500 lateral feet per day per completion crew in Midland Basin; ~1,000 feet
per day in Delaware Basin
Maximizing average lateral length completed is crucial to capital efficiency
Source: Company filings, management data and estimates.
Focused on balanced development, growing efficiencies and maximizing lateral lengths
Average completed lateral feet / well 113,000’ Completed Lateral Feet 143,000’ 94,000’ 100,000’ 91,000’ 62,000’ 169,000’ 220,000’ 270,000’ 230,000’ 206,000’
10 $1,000 $1,095 $233 $862 $694 $889 $193 $696
Total Net Revenue Total Net Revenue
Efficiently Converting Resource Into Cash Flow
Well productivity and low cost operations promote timely payback
At current NYMEX strip pricing, cash flow from 7,500 ft. Midland County Lower Spraberry and Southern Delaware Basin Wolfcamp A wells pay back majority of capital costs in the first year of production
Midland County Lower Spraberry Type Curve: First year gross production: 189 Mboe (86% oil) on 990 Mboe EUR
Delaware Basin Wolfcamp A Type Curve: First year gross production: 227 Mboe (89% oil) on 1,125 Mboe EUR
Source: Company and peer filings, management data and estimates. Note: Diamondback Midland County Lower Spraberry Type Curve based on reserve report for year ended 12/31/2016. Pecos County Wolfcamp A Type Curve based on management estimates built upon available geologic and engineering data provided by the seller. (1) Assumes a standard Spanish Trail Lower Spraberry well with a 7,500’ lateral and 990 Mboe EUR. (2) Current strip pricing as of 11/3/2017. Total net revenue assumes $51.91/Bbl realized oil prices and $2.90/Mcf realized natural gas prices net of a 25% royalty interest. Cash flow is total net revenue less D,C&E costs of $694/ft. in the Midland, $1,000/ft. in the Delaware and Q3 2017 cash operating expenses per boe. (3) Cash operating expenses comprised of the sum of LOE, G&A, G&T and production and ad valorem taxes.
Illustrative 1st Year Well Payback at Current Strip Oil Prices ($/lateral ft)(1)(2)
Delaware Basin Wolfcamp A – 1,125 Mboe EUR Diamondback Midland County Lower Spraberry – 990 Mboe EUR
($7.67 / Boe)(3) at strip(2) 25% royalty Cash Operating Costs Year 1 Cash Flow Total DC+E ($7.67 / Boe)(3) at strip(2) 25% royalty Cash Operating Costs Year 1 Cash Flow Total DC+E
100% cost payback in 1st year
YTD 2017 Costs
86% cost payback in 1st year
11 $1,115 $855 $649 $693 $694 $700
$0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200
2014 2015 2016 1H 2017 YTD 2017 2017E
Drill / Ft. Complete / Ft. Equip / Ft.
Capital and Operating Cost Control Fundamental to Strategy
Estimated YTD 2017 cost per completed lateral foot of $694; current estimated Midland Basin well costs of
~$220 to $250 per foot for drilling and ~$350 to $400 per foot for completion
Expect to begin using local sand in Midland Basin in Q1 2018; estimated savings of 5% versus current costs Continuing to mitigate service cost inflation via increased efficiencies, longer laterals, de-bundling services
and purchasing power
Midland Basin D,C&E ($/Completed Lateral Ft)(1)
Source: Company and peer filings, management data and estimates. (1) Drilling, completion and equip costs per foot correspond to completed lateral feet during each period. Equip costs for recently completed wells reflect fully accrued AFE amount. (2) Cash margins calculated as realized price per boe less LOE, gathering and transportation, production taxes and cash G&A expenses per boe.
Best in class cash margins and capital efficiency
Full Year Guidance Midpoint
Cash Margins ($/Boe)(2)
$55.29 $25.80 $24.28 $32.62 $30.52 $30.58 79% 70% 73% 78% 80% 80% 65% 70% 75% 80%
$0 $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60
2014 2015 2016 1Q17 2Q17 3Q17
Cash Margin (% of Realized $/Boe)
$/Boe
Cash Margin ($/Boe) LOE G&T
- Prod. taxes
Cash G&A Cash Margin (% of Realized)
12 $30.58 80%
76% 74% 73% 72% 70% 68% 66% 68% 65% 64% 71% 68% 56% 56% 51% 61% 51% 56% 47% 45%
30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% $0 $5 $10 $15 $20 $25 $30 $35
Cash Margin (% of Realized $/Boe) $/Boe
Cash Margin ($/Boe) % of Realized Price ($/Boe)
Peer-Leading Cash Margins and Operating Costs
Source: Company and latest peer filings as of 11/9/2017. Extended peers include AREX, CDEV, CPE, CXO, ECA, EGN, EOG, JAG, LPI, MTDR, NBL, PDCE, PE, PXD, QEP, REN, RSPP, SM, WPX and XEC. (1) Cash margins calculated as realized price per boe less LOE, gathering and transportation, production taxes and cash G&A expenses per boe. (2) Cash operating costs calculated as the sum of LOE, gathering and transportation, production taxes and cash G&A expenses per boe.
Q3 2017 Cash Margins Versus Extended Peer Group ($/Boe)(1) Q3 2017 Cash Operating Costs Versus Extended Peer Group ($/Boe)(2)
$7.67 $8.18 $8.83 $9.70 $9.98 $10.04 $10.16 $10.62 $10.72 $10.87 $11.06 $11.33 $11.81 $12.04 $12.23 $12.66 $13.55 $13.65 $13.99 $14.33 $15.34
$0 $4 $8 $12 $16
$/Boe LOE
- Prod. taxes
G&T Cash G&A
13
Oil Growth and Percentage of Volumes Over Time
Diamondback has consistently maintained an oil cut in the mid-70%’s Execution remains primary driver in performance; continuing to execute on publicly stated growth plans
Source: Company and peer filings, management data and estimates. Peers include CPE, CXO, EGN, LPI, PE, PXD and RSPP.
FANG continues to grow oil production at peer leading rates
Average Daily Oil Production Since IPO Normalized Oil Production Growth vs. Peers
50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 15,000 30,000 45,000 60,000 75,000 Q4 2012 Q2 2013 Q4 2013 Q2 2014 Q4 2014 Q2 2015 Q4 2015 Q2 2016 Q4 2016 Q2 2017
% of Total Boe/d Bo/d
Oil (Bo/d) % of Total Boe/d FANG +132% Peer 1 +114% Peer 2 +99% Peer 3 +66% Peer 4 +34% Peer 5 +19% Peer 6 +25% Peer 7 +20% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 225% 250% Q2 2016 Q3 2016 Q4 2016 Q1 2017 Q2 2017 Q3 2017
14
4,000 8,000 12,000 16,000 20,000 24,000 5 10 15 20 25 Depth (Ft.) DAYS
Southern Delaware Basin Execution
Development Plan: Running 3-4 rigs with 1 dedicated completion crew Evaluating additional Second Bone Spring tests following success of Kelley State 2H Completion Design: Focused on High Density Near Wellbore (“HDNW”) design: 2,000 – 2,500 Lbs. / Ft. of proppant and tighter stage spacing Continued optimization of completion design, fluid, diverting agents, cluster spacing, etc. Lift / Production Optimization: Seeing significant production uplift following ESP conversions versus gas lift
Source: Company filings, data and estimates. (1) Latest average 10-day IP-rates; wells still cleaning up.
Delaware Basin Well Performance
Infrastructure: Maximizing netbacks by building / upgrading:
◊
Oil gathering systems
◊
Gas gathering systems
◊
SWD infrastructure
◊
Freshwater delivery infrastructure
Drilling: Continuing to decrease drilling times Utilizing pre-set rig, testing different hole sizes, surface depths and intermediate casing points to decrease cost and days on location
Pecos County Days vs. Depth
WELL COUNTY TARGET LATERAL DAYS IP (Boe/d / 1k’) WALER STATE UNIT 4 1WA Reeves WCA 10,252’ 90 184 (79% oil) KELLEY STATE 2H Pecos L 2BS 4,724’ 90 149 (91% oil) NEAL LETHCO 36-3201/02WA Pecos U/L WCA 7,553’ 30 130 (88% oil) SIBLEY 3-2 2WA/3WA Pecos U/L WCA 7,462’ 10 152 (80% oil)(1) WARLANDER 501 WA Reeves WCA 10,372’ 10 193 (81% oil)(1) Peer drilled wells FANG drilled wells
15 WELL COUNTY TARGET IP30 (Boe/d / 1k’) % Oil SIBLEY 3-2 2WA/3WA Pecos U/L WCA 152(1) 80% WARLANDER 501 WA Reeves WCA 193(1) 81% STATE ARDENNES 1101 WA Ward WCA 154 81% NEAL LETHCO 36-3201/02WA Pecos U/L WCA 130 88% STATE MCGARY 16-1H Pecos U WCA 219 85% WALER STATE UNIT 4 1WA Reeves WCA 205 80% COLDBLOOD 7372 UNIT 1WA Ward WCA 176 87% NEAL LETHCO STATE 20 1H Pecos U WCA 215 85% OATES 10N-2 1H Pecos L WCA 153 83%
Southern Delaware Basin Wolfcamp A Update
Source: Company filings, management data and estimates. (1) Latest average 10-day IP-rates; wells still cleaning up.
Central Type Log and Landing Targets
FANG Primary Targets
U WC A U WC B L WC A WOLFCAMP
WC A & B OOIP
53 MMbbls/sec.
Oil-In-Place
High-graded landing zones through integration of captured core and log data; high-res 3-D seismic shoot expected in 2018 Well results confirming geologic assessment of rock quality
20 40 60 80 100 120 20 40 60 80 100 120 CUM OIL PRODUCTION, MBBL DAYS
1,100 MBOE (975 MBO) STATE NEAL LETHCO 36-32 1WA STATE NEAL LETHCO 36-32 2WA OATES 10N 2-1H NEAL LETHCO STATE 20-1H STATE MCGARY 16-1H COLDBLOOD 7372 1WA (UPR WCA) WALER STATE UNIT 4 1WA STATE ARDENNES UNIT 1101WA
16
Kelley State Type Log and Landing Targets
Second Bone Spring Target Update
The Kelley State 22-2H targeted reservoir rock that has not yet been tested in the Southern Delaware Basin; 300 feet deeper than prior Bone Spring targets Landing zone displays excellent reservoir quality and is over-pressured Currently assessing target availability across Pecos County acreage and testing in 2018
FANG Targets
Second Bone Spring Targets Kelley State 22-1H (Upper Second Bone Spring) Kelley State 22-2H (Lower Second Bone Spring)
Kelley State 2H has a comparable IP90 to WCA wells in the vicinity, but 900’ shallower and significantly cheaper to drill and complete
Source: Company filings, management data and estimates.
300’
2BS Performance – Normalized to 7,500’ (Mbo)
2nd & 3rd BSPG OOIP
95 MMbbls/sec.
Oil-In-Place
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 50 100 150 200
CUM OIL PRODUCTION, MBBL
DAYS
1,100 MBOE TC (975 MBO) KELLEY STATE 22 1H KELLEY STATE 22 2H
17
Midland Basin: Continued Best-in-Class Execution
Currently running six rigs: ~3 in Midland / SW Martin counties 1 in Howard County 1 in Glasscock County ~1 in Martin / Andrews counties Completion Design: High Density Near Wellbore “HDNW” remains standard Midland Basin frac design:
~1,600 pounds of proppant / Ft.
40-45 barrels of fluid per foot
Diverting agents Continue to actively block up acreage in core areas via trades and bolt-on acquisitions
Source: Company filings, management data and estimates.
Howard County WCA Performance – Normalized to 7,500’ (Mbo) Andrews County LS Performance – Normalized to 7,500’ (Mbo)
50 100 150 200 250 50 100 150 200 250 300
CUMULATIVE OIL, MBO
DAYS
REED 1A 1WA ASRO UNIT 13-1WA BULLFROG 47 NORTH UNIT 1WA METCALF UNIT 21 1WA W H 48 UNIT 2WA 750 MBO - RYDER SCOTT TC 900 MBO TC
1000 MBO TC
40 80 120 160 200 50 100 150 200 250
CUMULATIVE OIL, MBO
DAYS
633 MBO RYDER SCOTT TC 800 MBO TC UL MASON 3 WELL 500' SPACED AVG UL MASON WEST 13,000' AVG
18
Current Hedge Summary
Source: Company data as of 11/6/2017.
Q4 2017 Q1 2018 Q2 2018 Q3 2018 Q4 2018 FY 2019
14,000 27,000 28,000 24,000 23,000 3,000 $53.37 $51.33 $51.08 $50.51 $50.48 $49.82 – 2,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 – – $54.00 $55.07 $54.99 $54.92 – 24,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 – ($0.72) ($0.88) ($0.88) ($0.88) ($0.88) – 18,000 6,000 – – – – $47.11 $47.00 – – – – 9,000 3,000 – – – – $56.05 $56.34 – – – –
Q4 2017 Q1 2018 Q2 2018 Q3 2018 Q4 2018 FY 2019
30,000 25,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 – $3.26 $3.39 $3.07 $3.07 $3.07 –
Crude Oil (Bbls/day, $/Bbl) Natural Gas (Mmbtu/day, $/Mmbtu)
Swaps - Brent Swaps Swaps - WTI Basis Swaps Costless Collars - Floor Costless Collars - Ceiling
19
$0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 9/30/2017 ($MM) Cash and cash equivalents $30 FANG's Revolving Credit Facility 235 VNOM's Revolving Credit Facility 36 4.750% Senior Notes Due 2024 500 5.375% Senior Notes Due 2025 500 Total Debt $1,270 Pro Forma Cash(1) $26 Elected commitment amount 1,000 FANG borrowing base 1,800 Liquidity (2) $791 FANG's Consolidated Capitalization FANG's Standalone Liquidity
Net Debt to Q3 2017 Annualized Adjusted EBITDA of 1.4x(1); continue to target leverage below 2.0x
$235 million drawn on revolver as of September 30th
Lead bank recently recommended increasing FANG’s borrowing base to $1.8 billion from $1.5 billion(2): ◊ FANG to elect an increased commitment of $1.0 billion from $750 million previously ◊ Anticipated pricing grid of L+125-225 bps from L+150-250 bps previously
Pro forma FANG standalone liquidity of $791 million(2)
Liquidity Strength Creates Capital Flexibility
FANG’s Debt Maturity Profile ($MM)(2)(3)
FANG Credit Facility
Source: Company Filings, Management Data and Estimates. (1) Excludes cash from Viper. (2) During the Fall 2017 redetermination, FANG’s lead lender recommended an increase in FANG’s borrowing base to $1.8 billion from $1.5 billion, with FANG electing to increase its commitment to $1 billion from $750 million. The proposed increase in FANG’s borrowing base is subject to approval of the additional lenders within the syndicate. (3) Reflects outstanding debt and maturity timeline of 4.750% Senior Notes due 2024 and 5.375% Senior Notes due 2025.
Undrawn Senior Notes 4.750% Senior Notes 5.375%
FANG’s Liquidity and Capitalization
(2) (2)
20
Updated 2017 Guidance
Increasing full year production guidance by 3%;
implied annual production growth of over 80%
Narrowed 2017 capital program to the range of
$850 million - $900 million
Expect to complete 120 – 125 gross horizontal
wells with an average lateral length of ~8,500 feet (35 – 40 gross horizontal wells in Q4 2017)
Targeting annual production growth of over
75% for Viper Energy Partners in 2017
2018 capital budget will target estimated
- perating cash flow and drilling rigs will be
added or dropped accordingly
Diamondback Energy, Inc. Viper Energy Partners LP Net Production – Mboe/d 77.5 – 78.5 11.0 – 11.5 Unit Costs ($/boe) Lease Operating Expenses $4.00 – $4.50 n/a Gathering & Transportation $0.25 – $0.75 $0.15 – $0.20 Cash G&A Under $1.00 $0.75 – $1.25 Non-Cash Equity Based Compensation $0.75 – $1.25 $0.50 – $1.00 DD&A $10.50 – $11.50 $9.00 – $10.00 Interest Expense (net) $1.00 – $2.00 Production and Ad Valorem Taxes (% of Revenue)(1) 7.0% 7.0% Corporate Tax Rate 5% – 15% n/a
Diamondback 2017 Capital Activity Gross (Net) Horizontal Wells Completed 120 – 125 (103 – 108) Horizontal Well Costs – Midland Basin 7,500’ $5.0 – $5.5 mm Horizontal Well Costs – Delaware Basin 7,500’ $7.0 – $8.0 mm Diamondback Capex Budget ($MM) 2017 Capital Budget $850 – $900
Source: Company filings, management data and estimates. Note: Based on updated 2017 guidance provided on 11/6/2017, which guidance is subject to numerous assumptions and risks. See the disclaimer at the beginning of this presentation. (1) Includes production taxes of 4.6% for crude oil and 7.5% for natural gas and NGLs and ad valorem taxes.
21
Q3 2017 production up 20% and per unit cash operating costs down 15% from Q2 2017; cash distribution of
$0.337 per unit, up 63% over Q3 2016 and the highest in Viper’s history
Variable Rate MLP structure: 100% of all available cash is returned to unitholders Focused on mineral acquisitions in oil-weighted basins with high visibility towards active development Robust A&D activity: 70 deals closed year to date, adding 2,769 net royalty acres (37% FANG-operated)
Viper Update
Source: Company data and filings.
Production Growth of 448% Since IPO Distributions Have Eclipsed Prior Highs
$0.250 $0.250 $0.190 $0.220 $0.200 $0.230 $0.149 $0.189 $0.207 $0.258 $0.302 $0.332 $0.337 $0 $20 $40 $60 $80 $100 $120 $0.000 $0.050 $0.100 $0.150 $0.200 $0.250 $0.300 $0.350 Q3 2014 Q4 2014 Q1 2015 Q2 2015 Q3 2015 Q4 2015 Q1 2016 Q2 2016 Q3 2016 Q4 2016 Q1 2017 Q2 2017 Q3 2017 WTI Oil Price ($/Bbl) Quarterly Distribution
$92 $32 $12 $2 $9 $126 $68 $8 $117 $179
2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 – $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700 Q3 2014 Q4 2014 Q1 2015 Q2 2015 Q3 2015 Q4 2015 Q1 2016 Q2 2016 Q3 2016 Q4 2016 Q1 2017 Q2 2017 Q3 2017 Net Production (Boe/d) Acquisitions ($mm)
22
Rate of Return Driven Strategy Conservative Financial Management Strategic Acquisitions Significant Resource Potential Efficient Conversion of Resource to Cash Flow
23
APPENDIX
24
$15.47 $12.22 $12.00 $10.13 $10.82 $8.02
FY2015 FY2015
Peer 1 Peer 2 Peer 3 FANG Peer 4 Peer 5 Peer 6 Peer 7
0.0x 0.5x 1.0x 1.5x 2.0x 2.5x 3.0x 3.5x 4.0x
Source: Company and latest peer filings as of 11/9/2017, management data and estimates and Seaport Global Securities. Peers include CPE, CXO, EGN, LPI, PE, PXD and RSPP. (1) Operating costs per boe include LOE, cash and non-cash G&A expenses and production and ad valorem taxes. (2) Calculated as realized price per boe less cash operating costs per boe. (3) Net Debt to Annualized EBITDA has derived by taking latest Net Debt figures divided by the most recently reported annualized quarterly Adjusted EBITDA. (4) Seaport Global Securities calculates Q2 2017 Recycle ratio by dividing Q2 2017 Operating Margin per Boe by 2016 adjusted PDP F&D costs per Boe.
Strong Margins and Value Creation
FY2015
Diamondback Peers
FY2016 $30.52 Cash Margins Have Led Peers(2) $24.07 Operating Expenses Below Peer Average ($/Boe)(1) Net Debt to Annualized Q3 2017 EBITDA(3)
Liquids-Weighted E&P Q2 2017 Recycle Ratio(4)
Q2 2017 Q3 2017
Focused on full cycle economics and corporate returns
Q3 2017
Peer Avg: 1.6x Peer Avg: 1.8x
Peers FANG
Liquids E&P Avg: 1.4x
$29.59 $7.18
= = 4.12x
RecycleRatio (RR) = Operating Margin ($/Boe) Adjusted PDP F&D Cost ($/Boe)
RR > 1.0x = Value Creation
$25.18 $30.58
25 2013 2014 2015 2016 53.3 94.3 130.6 174.0 10.3 18.5 26.3 31.4
FANG Standalone VNOM
High Growth, Oil Weighted Reserves
Total Reserves Growth (MMboe) (1)
1P Reserves – By Commodity
205.5 MMBOE 205.5 MMBOE 63.6 112.8
◊ 2016 total proved reserves increased 31% y/y to 205.5 MMboe ◊ FANG standalone reserves increased 33% y/y to 174.0 MMboe ◊ 58% proved developed; conservatively booked ◊ Proved developed F&D for 2016 was $7.26/Boe ◊ ~2% of total proved reserves currently attributed to Delaware Basin
F&D Costs
1P Reserves – By Category
156.9
Source: Company Filings, Management Data and Estimates. (1) Historical FANG reserves per independent reserve report prepared by Ryder Scott as of 12/31/2016. (2) Defined as exploration and development costs divided by the sum of extensions and discoveries and revisions. 2014 F&D excludes 6.2 MMboe of revisions due to vertical PUD downgrades. 2015 F&D excludes 14.6 MMboe of revisions due to vertical and horizontal PUD downgrades. (3) Defined as the sum of extensions, discoveries, revisions, and purchases, divided by annual production. (4) Defined as the sum of extensions, discoveries, and revisions, divided by annual production.
Oil 68% NGL 18% Natural Gas 14% PD 58% PUD 42% 205.5
($/boe) 2014 2015 2016 Drill Bit F&D(2) $11.09 $5.51 $6.31 Reserve Replacement(3) 793% 465% 409% Organic Reserve Replacement(4) 626% 422% 380%
26
45% 55% 49% 51%
Upside Potential
Conservatively Spaced, Balanced Inventory in Midland and Delaware Basins
FANG Net Locations FANG Net Acres
Source: Company flings and estimates. Peers include CDEV, EGN, JAG, PE and RSPP. (1) Location assumptions based on internal company estimates. Economic locations reflect expected IRR’s above 10% assuming $50/Bbl NYMEX oil prices and $3.00/Mcf NYMEX natural gas prices.
Delaware Basin Midland Basin
Inventory reflects conservative spacing assumptions; continue to test downspacing and monitor industry activity
85% of horizontal well locations have lateral lengths of 7,500 feet or greater
Lateral Length # of Gross Locations % of Total 5,000’ ~600 15% 7,500’ ~1,600 37% 9,000’+ ~2,100 49%
Wolfcamp A Wolfcamp C/D Middle Spraberry Lower Spraberry Wolfcamp B
- N. Midland
Peer 1 Peer 2 Peer 3
Gross Economic Locations by Lateral Length(1)
41%
Upper Wolfcamp A Lower Wolfcamp A Wolfcamp C/D 1st Bone Spring 2nd Bone Spring 3rd Bone Spring Wolfcamp B
- S. Delaware
Peer 1 Peer 2 Peer 3
Delaware Basin Spacing Assumptions Versus Peers Midland Basin Spacing Assumptions Versus Peers
27
Pecos County Compares Favorably to Midland Basin and Reeves Co.
Greater thickness in the Delaware Basin; Contains more Oil in Place
Avalon Shale Upper 1st Bone Spring Lower 1st Bone Spring Upper 2nd Bone Spring Lower 2nd Bone Spring Upper 3rd Bone Spring Lower 3rd Bone Spring Wolfcamp A Wolfcamp B Wolfcamp C
Brigham Type Log 2,950’ of hydrocarbon bearing rock
400’ 450’ 250’ 250’ 1
Avalon Shale Upper 1st Bone Spring Lower 1st Bone Spring Upper 2nd Bone Spring Lower 2nd Bone Spring Upper 3rd Bone Spring Lower 3rd Bone Spring Wolfcamp A Wolfcamp B Wolfcamp C
ReWard Type Log(1) 3,300’ of hydrocarbon bearing rock
250’ 225’ 350’ 2
Upper Spraberry Middle Spraberry Shale Jo Mill Lower Spraberry Shale Dean Sandstone Wolfcamp A Wolfcamp B Wolfcamp C Pennsylvanian Lower Clearfork Shale
Spanish Trail Type Log 2,150’ of hydrocarbon bearing rock
275’ 375’ 275’ 175’ 3 3 2 1
Core development zones in Delaware comparable to Northern Midland Basin (NMB)
Higher pressure coupled with better porosity and permeability translate to higher ultimate recoveries from fewer wells
880’ spacing in Delaware compared to 660’ in NMB
Development Phase Upside Potential
(1) Acquisition on Reeves / Ward Co. line in July 2016.
28