Corporate Valuation, Oil & Gas
Energy-Blog-10.22.jpg

October 22, 2018

How to Interpret Breakeven Prices

Before mid-2014, few investors took notice of efficiency-oriented metrics, instead focusing on stories of new oil discoveries and the development of new wells and new technologies.  Since the crash in oil prices, a new measure of success was brought to the forefront:  breakeven prices.

Since the crash in oil prices, a new measure of success was brought to the forefront:  breakeven prices.

Over the last couple of years, E&P companies have become more efficient, forced to create investor returns at $40 - $50/barrel oil.  Well productivity has improved as companies drilled longer laterals and used less proppant.  After the crash in oil prices, oilfield services companies lowered their prices to compete for limited work.  As oil prices recovered, the price of oilfield services was slow to catch up.  Additionally, companies have more capital discipline than they ever did at $100/barrel oil prices.

Even as oil prices have started to recover, companies are showing lower breakeven costs than ever before.  As shown in the chart below, breakeven prices in the Midland Basin fell by 50% from $87 in January 2014 to $44 in September 2018.

As more companies present this metric and more investors rely on it as an indication of performance, it becomes increasingly important to understand what it actually measures, and if breakeven prices can be compared consistently from company to company.

What is a Breakeven Price?

The Wall Street Journal stated, “At its simplest, the metric represents the oil price that a company needs to generate enough cash so it can cover its capital spending and dividend payouts.”  Most public E&P companies report breakeven costs in their investor presentations, oftentimes measuring themselves against peers.  However, these companies rarely explain how they develop these metrics.  Some companies, such as Chevron, don’t include covering dividends in this metric.  Additionally, some companies look at project-specific breakeven prices which don’t always cover all spending and dividends.

Many analysts and investors, including our oil and gas team, track Bloomberg New Energy Finance for region specific breakeven prices.  Beginning in January 2014, Bloomberg began publishing monthly breakeven oil prices and breakeven natural gas prices for the following regions.

According to Bloomberg, breakeven prices by region are sourced from BTU Analytics and provide:
Average wellhead breakeven prices estimates for all wells turned to sales each month.  Well economics calculations use a 10% discount rate. Well life is assumed to be 240 months. Gathering, processing, compression, fractionation, and operating expenses are estimated for individual basins and plays.

While somewhat helpful, this definition leaves a lot unexplained.   We talked to BTU Analytics so that we could better understand what it calculates.

BTU Analytics’ data set includes 60,000 horizontal wells from 2013 to present across major basins in the continental U.S.  Their data is collected at the well level and calibrated with production data from state agencies and reconciled with overarching trends discussed by major regional operators.

BTU’s breakeven measure on Bloomberg is a half-cycle breakeven price, meaning that all operating costs from drilling to completion of the well are accounted for. Additionally, the costs to keep the well operating such as taxes, royalties, and gathering and compression costs are included. However, what is not included in Bloomberg’s breakeven calculation is just as important.

What is Not Included in Bloomberg’s Breakeven Prices?

Notably, the Bloomberg Breakeven Price does not include wellhead differentials.  This means, that breakeven prices in the Permian are based off the WTI-Cushing benchmark, not off the regional hub which traded at as high of an $18 discount in August, according to pricing information from Bloomberg.

As the Permian Basin struggles with bottlenecks, differentials have become exceedingly important to consider.  Although there are plans underway to address the growing need for infrastructure in the Permian Basin, adjusting Bloomberg’s breakeven pricing to account for differentials observed at the wellhead is necessary to accurately understand a regions breakeven price.

Additionally, according to Matt Hagerty at BTU Analytics,

These breakevens exclude acreage acquisition costs which can vary significantly between operators and even across acreage for a specific operator.

Other Considerations

As mentioned previously, it is often difficult to compare breakeven prices across companies.  Since BTU Analytics calculates each of these metrics, it would seem that they are more comparable across regions. But it is important to remember that these regional breakeven prices are averages and may not explain company or inter-regional dynamics.

If we continue to rely on breakeven pricing, then it is pertinent that we better understand what is included in these calculations.

In August of this year, breakeven prices in the Bakken fell below breakeven prices in the Permian.  While we do not doubt the credibility of this metric, it leads us to consider the actual observations that make up this average.  By mid-2016, the Bakken had only 22 operating rigs and even now has only 52 rigs as compared to 489 in the Permian.  It would be interesting to get a deeper look at the standard deviation of breakeven prices in regions such as the Bakken, as these regions may exhibit a much wider range of breakeven prices.

Even at $70 oil, investors and analysts alike are still talking about breakeven pricing, suggesting that this metric has survived the downturn.  However, if we continue to rely on the metric, then it is pertinent that we better understand what is included in these calculations.

Mercer Capital has significant experience valuing assets and companies in the energy industry. Our oil & gas valuations have been reviewed and relied on by buyers and sellers and Big 4 Auditors. These oil & gas related valuations have been utilized to support valuations for IRS Estate and Gift Tax, GAAP accounting, and litigation purposes. We have performed oil & gas valuations and associated oil & gas reserves domestically throughout the United States and in foreign countries. Contact a Mercer Capital professional today to discuss your valuation needs in confidence.

Continue Reading

Defying the Cycle: Haynesville Production Strength in a Shifting Gas Market
Defying the Cycle: Haynesville Production Strength in a Shifting Gas Market
Haynesville shale production defied broader market softness in 2025, leading major U.S. basins with double-digit year-over-year growth despite heightened volatility and sub-cycle drilling activity. Efficiency gains, DUC drawdowns, and Gulf Coast demand dynamics allowed operators to sustain output even as natural gas prices fluctuated sharply.
Haynesville Shale M&A Update: 2025 in Review
Haynesville Shale M&A Update: 2025 in Review
Key TakeawaysHaynesville remains a strategic LNG-linked basin. 2025 transactions emphasized long-duration natural gas exposure and proximity to Gulf Coast export infrastructure, reinforcing the basin’s importance in meeting global LNG demand.International utilities drove much of the activity. Japanese power and gas companies pursued direct upstream ownership, signaling a shift from traditional offtake agreements toward greater control over U.S. gas supply.M&A was selective but meaningful in scale and intent. While overall deal volume was limited, announced transactions and reported negotiations reflected deliberate, long-term positioning rather than opportunistic shale consolidation.OverviewM&A activity in the Haynesville Shale during 2025 was marked by strategic, LNG-linked transactions and renewed international investor interest in U.S. natural gas assets. While investors remained selective relative to prior shale upcycles, transactions that did occur reflected a clear pattern: buyers focused on long-duration gas exposure, scale, and proximity to Gulf Coast export markets rather than short-term development upside.Producers and capital providers increasingly refocused efforts on the Haynesville basin during the year, including raising capital to acquire both operating assets and mineral positions. This renewed attention followed a period of subdued transaction activity and underscored the basin’s continued relevance within global natural gas portfolios.Although the Haynesville did not experience the breadth of consolidation seen in some oil-weighted plays, the size, counterparties, and strategic motivations behind 2025 transactions reinforced the basin’s role as a long-term supply source for LNG-linked demand.Announced Upstream TransactionsTokyo Gas (TG Natural Resources) / ChevronIn April 2025, Tokyo Gas Co., through its U.S. joint venture TG Natural Resources, entered into an agreement to acquire a 70% interest in Chevron’s East Texas natural gas assets for $525 million. The assets include significant Haynesville exposure and were acquired through a combination of cash consideration and capital commitments.The transaction was characterized as part of Tokyo Gas’s broader strategy to secure long-term U.S. natural gas supply and expand its upstream footprint. The deal reflects a growing trend among international utilities to obtain direct exposure to U.S. shale gas through ownership interests rather than relying solely on long-term offtake contracts or third-party supply arrangements.From an M&A perspective, the transaction highlights continued willingness among major operators to monetize non-core or minority positions while retaining operational involvement, and it underscores the Haynesville’s attractiveness to buyers with a long-term, strategic view of gas demand.JERA / Williams & GEP Haynesville IIIn October 2025, JERA Co., Japan’s largest power generator, announced an agreement to acquire Haynesville shale gas production assets from Williams Companies and GEP Haynesville II, a joint venture between GeoSouthern Energy and Blackstone. The transaction was valued at approximately $1.5 billion.This acquisition marked JERA’s first direct investment in U.S. shale gas production, representing a notable expansion of the company’s upstream exposure and reinforcing JERA’s interest in securing supply from regions with strong connectivity to U.S. LNG export infrastructure.This transaction further illustrates the appeal of the Haynesville to international buyers seeking stable, scalable gas assets and highlights the role of upstream M&A as a tool for portfolio diversification among global utilities and energy companies.Reported Negotiations (Not Announced)Mitsubishi / Aethon Energy ManagementIn June 2025, Reuters reported that Mitsubishi Corp. was in discussions to acquire Aethon Energy Management, a privately held operator with substantial Haynesville production and midstream assets. The potential transaction was reported to be valued at approximately $8 billion, though Reuters emphasized that talks were ongoing and that no deal had been finalized at the time.While the transaction was not announced during 2025, the reported discussions were notable for both their scale and the identity of the potential buyer. Aethon has long been viewed as one of the largest private platforms in the Haynesville, and any transaction involving the company would represent a significant consolidation event within the basin.The reported talks underscored the depth of international interest in Haynesville-oriented platforms and highlighted the potential for large-scale transactions even in an otherwise measured M&A environment.ConclusionWhile overall deal volume remained selective, the transactions and reported negotiations in 2025 reflected sustained global interest in U.S. natural gas assets with long-term relevance. Collectively, the transactions and negotiations discussed above point to a Haynesville M&A landscape driven less by opportunistic consolidation and more by deliberate, long-term positioning. As global energy portfolios continue to evolve, the Haynesville basin remains a focal point for strategic investment, particularly for buyers seeking exposure tied to U.S. natural gas supply and LNG export linkages.
Mineral Aggregator Valuation Multiples Study Released-Data as of 06-11-2025
Mineral Aggregator Valuation Multiples Study Released

With Market Data as of June 11, 2025

Mercer Capital has thoughtfully analyzed the corporate and capital structures of the publicly traded mineral aggregators to derive meaningful indications of enterprise value. We have also calculated valuation multiples based on a variety of metrics, including distributions and reserves, as well as earnings and production on both a historical and forward-looking basis.

Cart

Your cart is empty