📄 Extracted Text (676 words)
3 January 2018
HY Corporate Credit
HY Multi Sector.Media. Cable & Satellite
HY E&P approaching a "normal" sector in the new normal
oil market
In the first two years following the dramatic collapse in oil prices in 2H 14, E&P
players were largely focused on structural changes to the business model
which could fit into a restructured oil market. On the capital structure side,
this included major efforts to repair the balance sheet via equity raise,
conversion of debt to equity, some more distressed exchanges and debt
reduction via asset sales. On the asset portfolio side, we saw many players
implementing major overhauls - mainly a shift to the Permian by names like
WPX, QEP and SM Energy. Others expanded their footprint in their core
basins - not just established Permian players, but also companies in second
tier basins like Bakken (Oasis) or Eagle Ford (Sanchez).
During this period, corporate strategies revolved around fundamental sector
views (long term oil prices, preferred basins) and financial management by
companies (equity raises, major divestitures). By early 2017. broad financial
and portfolio strategies for most companies were largely in place. Post-OPEC
deal in November 2016, the HY Energy sector was trading only 25 bps wide of
the broader HY index, reminiscent of spreads seen during 1H 14, and a far cry
from the >1,000 bps gap in early 2016. Meanwhile, the oil markets in 2017,
while volatile, have answered some concerns regarding oil price downside risk
by establishing the $40 floor (for WTI). With the oil market settling at the "new
normal" range, the exit of weak players from the market and major sector
themes (like the Permian Premium) having played out, the HY E&P group has
been transitioning to a "normal" HY sector with standard credit themes like
operational performance, cash flow models, and balance sheets allowing for
greater differentiation - in many ways similar to pre-2014 market, except for
the keen new learned awareness of downside oil risk.
Solid operating performance of E&Ps continues into Pt' 17
On the operational front, E&P players responded to the low oil prices by
delivering an impressive improvement in efficiencies during FY 15-16 - both in
terms of cost reduction (capex and opex) as well as optimization of well
productivity. In this effort, they were helped by the sharp deflation in service
costs. Going into FY 17, most of the low-hanging fruit had already plucked
and cost savings were slowing. Given this, efficiency gains in FY 17 have
inevitably moderated but overall performance continues to be solid. As a
measure of progress during the year, we analyze how well E&P names have
delivered on their start-of-year production/growth targets with the Q3 17
updated guidance as measure of 2017 performance (see table below). The
outperformance is quite evident for the oily peer group across the quality
spectrum. Of the 16 oily names, 7 look set to deliver either (i) higher
production (2-12% higher vs. original guidance) with capex unchanged or even
lowered or (ii) similar production with sharply lower capex (eg: DNR capex
budget taken down by 16%). BBG's guidance revision stands out - production
target has been raised by 12% even as capex has been lowered by 4%. For
another 4 names, both production and capex guidance have been revised
(upwards, except for WLL) but we see the revised production-capex equation
as more capital efficient. For example, WPX is currently targeting to grow oil
production 12% above their start-of-year guidance with just a 9% increase in
capex. For WLL, its production target is 4% below original guidance but the
company has cut capex down sharply (by 14%) which we see as a net positive.
Only for 4 names, the production-growth equation has been negative. Of
these, OAS' case appears to be purely timing-related as exit rate production
target has been maintained (FY 17E production target is down a modest 3%).
That leaves us with just three names where there has been a genuine
Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. Page 57
CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO FED. R. CRIM. P. 6(e) DB-SDNY-0086616
CONFIDENTIAL SDNY_GM_00232800
EFTA01385332
ℹ️ Document Details
SHA-256
333089ea85de850cd5ae4a74a97a602802be69beb8df8c7102c947d5f7a0094d
Bates Number
EFTA01385332
Dataset
DataSet-10
Document Type
document
Pages
1
Comments 0