The companies on the Global 500 employ 70.2 million people, and their revenue represents more than one-third of the world’s GDP.

Fortune Global 500

With a combined revenue of $21 trillion and $2.1 trillion in profits, the 2026 Fortune 500 is the definitive list of America's largest companies.

Fortune 500

The corporations on our annual list of the world's 500 largest companies combined to generate $41.7 trillion in revenue over the past year.

Almost $20 trillion in revenue—and a record-breaking $1.87 trillion in profits. Introducing the 2025 Fortune 500, the definitive list of the biggest companies in America.

Energy sector dominated this year for the first time since 2008, with 28 companies featured on the list.

100 Fastest-Growing Companies

The corporations on our annual list posted aggregate revenues of $41 trillion for the second year in a row.

Industries included in the sector are mining, oil and gas exploration and services, pipelines, refining, and utilities.

Fortune Sector Leaders: Energy

The Fortune 500, in its 70th year in 2024, ranks the biggest U.S. companies by revenue.

The 25th Fortune World’s Most Admired Companies list suggests that tech giants’ peers respect them as much as ever.

World's Most Admired Companies

The corporations on our annual list of the world’s largest companies delivered a record $41 trillion in aggregate revenues.

The Fortune 500, in its 69th year in 2023, ranks the biggest U.S. companies by revenue.

F500-2023-049-ConocoPhillips

ConocoPhillips, one of the world’s largest independent oil and gas exploration and production companies, skyrocketed 28 spots up the rankings in 2023, surfing a rise in crude oil prices driven largely by the war in Ukraine. 
<ul> 
 	<li>ConocoPhillips revenue rose nearly 70%, and its profits increased 131% in 2022 compared with 2021, when energy companies were still recovering from the dip in oil and gas demand resulting from the pandemic’s effect on travel.</li> 
 	<li>Throughout 2022 ConocoPhillips doubled down on liquefied natural gas (LNG), increasing its ownership of LNG operations in Australia, Germany, Qatar, and the U.S. Gulf Coast.</li> 
 	<li>In March 2023 President Biden formally allowed ConocoPhillips to drill for oil in the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, the nation’s largest untouched expanse of wilderness, miring the energy giant in a larger controversy over government-sponsored oil and gas drilling projects.</li> 
</ul>

Industrials came out on top this year, with 22 companies featured on the list.

Just as it dominates our economy, Big Tech now dominates Fortune’s annual ranking of corporate reputation.

Aggregate sales hit $37.8 trillion last year—an increase of 19%, the highest annual growth rate in the list’s history.

This year’s Fortune 500 marks the 68th running of the list.

F500-2022-077-ConocoPhillips

The Houston-based company is one of the world's largest independent oil and gas exploration and production companies, operating in 14 countries. ConocoPhillips reported profits of $8.1 billion in 2021, and revenue jumped 151% as energy demand soared; the company leaped 79 spots on the Fortune 500. The company began new exploration projects in Canada, Malaysia, and Alaska over the course of the year. Its Alaska operations posed problems in early 2022, however, as a monthlong natural gas leak at its Alpine Oil Field forced a temporary shutdown of drilling and prompted lawmakers and regulators to criticize ConocoPhillips for its slow response.

After a year in which humanity leaned more heavily than ever on tech giants, see which companies topped Fortune's ranking of corporate reputation.

This year’s Fortune 500 marks the 67th running of the list.

F500-2021-156-ConocoPhillips

Operating out of Houston, Texas, the oil company conducts drilling operations in 17 countries with a focus on producing petroleum.

For an astounding 13th straight year, Apple claims the top spot in Fortune’s annual ranking of corporate reputation, based on a survey of almost 3,800 executives, directors, and analysts.

This year's Fortune Global 500 generated $33.3 trillion in revenues and $2.1 trillion in profits.

G500-2020-348-ConocoPhillips

The oil and gas company's 29-spot dip in rankings doesn’t tell the full story, given an enduring period of volatility in the crude market. While sales for the year fell 5%, to $36.7 billion, profits shot up 15% year-over-year, as ConocoPhillips tightened its structure and grew daily production volume by 5%. The Houston-based company generated more than $3 billion from the sales of its U.K. and northern Australia businesses, bringing total cash and short-term investments for the year up to $8.4 billion. The refocusing of its portfolio, as well as disciplined spending, allowed ConocoPhillips to reward shareholders with $1.5 billion in dividends and $3.5 billion in share buybacks.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 66th running of the list.

F500-2020-093-ConocoPhilips

The oil and gas company's seven-spot dip in rankings doesn’t tell the full story, given an enduring period of volatility in the crude market. While sales for the year fell 5%, to $36.7 billion, profits shot up 15% year-over-year, as ConocoPhillips tightened its structure and grew daily production volume by 5%. The Houston-based company generated more than $3 billion from the sales of its U.K. and northern Australia businesses, bringing total cash and short-term investments for the year up to $8.4 billion. The refocusing of its portfolio, as well as disciplined spending, allowed ConocoPhillips to reward shareholders with $1.5 billion in dividends and $3.5 billion in share buybacks.

Here are the World's Most Admired Companies for 2019 as ranked in their industries. See who made the list.

This year's Fortune Global 500 generated $27.7 trillion in revenues and $1.5 trillion in profits.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 65th running of the list.

Here are the World's Most Admired Companies for 2018 as ranked in their industries. See who made the list.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 64th running of the list.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 63rd running of the list.

Here are the World's Most Admired Companies for 2016 as ranked in their industries. See who made the list.

This year's Fortune Global 500 generated $27.6 trillion in revenues and $1.5 trillion in profits.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 62nd running of the list.

Business insiders have spoken: Asked which companies they most admire, more than 4,100 executives, directors, and analysts chose these top 50 All-Stars.

The world's 500 largest companies generated $31.2 trillion in revenues and $1.7 trillion in profits in 2014. Together, this year's Fortune Global 500 employ 65 million people worldwide and are represented by 36 countries.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 61st running of the list. Wal-Mart claims the top spot again. See who made the list.

Global business is back. After limping through a worldwide financial crisis and economic slowdown, the 500 largest companies ranked by revenues shattered all sorts of performance records in 2013: They racked up combined revenues of $31.1 trillion, up 2.5% from 2012, and profits soared 27% to nearly $2 trillion. China’s 95 companies (up from 89 last year) posted $5.8 trillion in revenues. The U.S. has four fewer companies on the list than last year but remains (for now) the country leader, with 128 corporations on the list—including No. 1 Wal-Mart Stores—reporting $8.6 trillion in revenues. 

Wal-Mart stayed on top as its sales crept closer to half-a-trillion dollars. Apple moved into the top five. And UnitedHealth Group continued its steady climb. 

Sector

Industry

Industry Rank

Previous Industry Rank

Overall Score

Innovation

People Management

Use of Corporate Assets

Social Responsibility

Quality of Management

Financial Soundness

Long-Term Investment Value

Quality of Products/Services

Global Competitiveness

Fastest-growing Companies

Revenue 3 Yr Growth Rank

Revenue 3 Yr Annual Growth Rate

EPS 3 Yr Growth Rank

EPS 3 Yr Annual Growth Rate

Total Return 3 Yr Rank

Total Return 3 Yr Annual Rate

Beat S&P 500 3 Yr Return

Current Streak

Years on List

Key Financials (last Fiscal Year)

Revenues ($M)

Profits ($M)

Assets ($M)

Total Stockholder Equity ($M)

Profit Ratios

Profit as % of Revenues

Profits as % of Assets

Profits as % of Stockholder Equity

Earnings Per Share (last Fiscal Year)

Earnings Per Share ($)

EPS % Change (from prior fiscal year)

EPS % Change (5 year annual rate)

EPS % Change (10 year annual rate)

Total Return

Total Return to Investors (last year)

Total Return to Investors (5 year, annualized)

Total Return to Investors (10 year, annualized)

The corporate history of ConocoPhillips traces back to 1875, when early precursors of today’s energy giant transported kerosene by rail to pioneers in the Mountain West. The firm’s current name comes from a 2002 merger between Phillips Petroleum and Conoco. Headquartered in Houston, ConocoPhillips extracts, processes, and transports a variety of fuels, including petroleum, natural gas, and bitumen. The company has operations in more than a dozen countries, with the bulk of its production in the United States, particularly Alaska. Other sites of production include Canada, Norway, Australia, and Southeast Asia.

Q2 2026

Q1 2026

Q4 2025

Q3 2025

Q2 2025

Q1 2025

Q4 2024

ConocoPhillips (COP): Company Profile, Stock Price, News, Rankings

legacy

ConocoPhillips

conocophillips

Welcome to the First Quarter twenty twenty five ConocoPhillips Earnings Conference Call. My name is Liz, and I will be your operator for today's call. At this time, all participants are in a listen only mode. Later, we will conduct a question and answer session. I will now turn the call over to Phil Gresh, Vice President, Investor Relations.

Thank you, Liz, and welcome everyone to our first quarter twenty twenty five earnings conference call. On the call today are several members of the ConocoPhillips leadership team, including Ryan Lance, Chairman and CEO Bill Bullock, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Andy O'Brien, Senior Vice President of Strategy, Commercial, Sustainability and Technology, Nick Olds, Executive Vice President, Lower forty eight, and Kirk Johnson, Senior Vice President of Global Operations. Brian and Bill will kick off the call with opening remarks, after which the team will be available for your questions. For the Q and A, we will be taking one question per caller. A few quick reminders.

First, along with today's release, we have published supplemental financial materials and a slide presentation, which you can find on the Investor Relations website. Second, during this call, we will make forward looking statements based on current expectations. Actual results may differ due to factors noted in today's release and in our periodic SEC filings. And we will make reference to some non GAAP financial measures. Reconciliations to our nearest corresponding GAAP measure can be found in today's release or on our website.

With that, I will turn the call over to Ryan.

Thanks, Phil, and thank you to everyone for joining our first quarter twenty twenty five earnings conference call. Before we cover the details of our first quarter results, some comments on the macro. Clearly, the current environment is marked by both uncertainty and volatility. Outlooks for global economic growth and oil demand have been revised lower. And on the supply side OPEC plus is unwinding voluntary cuts quicker than expected.

And as a result, oil prices have softened relative to the first quarter. However, the ultimate depth and duration of this current price environment remains unclear. And as I've said in the past, ConocoPhillips is built for this with clear competitive advantages. We have a deep durable and diverse portfolio. We have decades of inventory below our $40 per barrel WTI cost of supply threshold, both in The US and internationally.

And our advantaged U. S. Inventory position in particular should become increasingly evident as the market sorts through the inventory haves and have nots in the current environment. We believe we are the clear leader of the haves and we have a disciplined capital allocation framework that is battle tested through the cycles. In addition, our company is executing well.

Our integration of Marathon Oil is progressing ahead of schedule and we are finding additional opportunities to enhance capital efficiency and reduce costs across the entire organization as reflected in our updated guidance, which includes about a $05,000,000,000 reduction to our capital spending and a 200,000,000 reduction in operating costs, while keeping our production guidance unchanged. So we are delivering the same volume for less, less capital and reduced operating costs. And we will keep working to further advance this plan as the year progresses. We'll also continue monitoring the macro environment. We have flexibility in our capital program we could exercise should conditions warrant.

We've been here before and we know how to manage through a more challenging environment. With respect to return of capital, we distributed $2,500,000,000 to shareholders in the first quarter. We believe our shares represent a very attractive investment at these prices and we will continue returning a significant portion of our cash flow to our shareholders, consistent with our long term track record of distributing 45% of our annual CFO. To close out my commentary, while I recognize the current focus is on the near term macro uncertainties, we are playing the long game. I'll remind everyone that our fundamental long term value proposition is truly differentiated.

We have a deep, durable and diverse portfolio with decades of high quality, low cost supply inventory to develop. And we are on the cusp of a compelling multi year free cash flow growth trajectory led by our high quality, longer cycle investments in Alaska and LNG. This underlying improvement in our free cash flow will structurally lower our breakeven and increase our capacity to return capital to shareholders. Finally, you'll also seen our announcement this morning that Bill Bullock has decided to retire after thirty nine years of service to the company and that Andy O'Brien will take over as CFO. Bill has been an outstanding colleague and an integral part of our executive leadership team.

I know you will all join me in congratulating Bill on an exemplary career and wishing him well in retirement. Now, I'll hand it over to Bill for the last time to cover our first quarter performance and 2025 guidance in more detail.

Thanks Ryan. Shifting to our first quarter performance, as Ryan mentioned, we started 2025 with another quarter of strong execution across the portfolio. We produced 2,389,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day, exceeding the high end of our production guidance for the quarter. And in Lower 48, production averaged 1,462,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day, with 816,000 in the Permian, 3 Hundred And 70 9 Thousand in the Eagle Ford and 212,000 in the Bakken. Internationally, production continued to ramp up at Cermont Pad 267 in Canada and Nuna in Alaska.

And we completed the largest winter construction season at Willow, achieving critical milestones. Regarding first quarter financials, we generated $2.9 per share in adjusted earnings. First quarter CFO was $5,500,000,000 inclusive of $200,000,000 of APLNG distributions. Operating working capital was a $650,000,000 tailwind in the quarter, benefiting from the previously guided one time cash tax benefit associated with the Marathon acquisition, as well as changes in accounts receivable and accounts payable. Capital expenditures were $3,400,000,000 And on return of capital, we returned $2,500,000,000 to shareholders, including $1,500,000,000 in buybacks and $1,000,000,000 in ordinary dividends.

That represents 45% of CFO returned in the quarter, consistent with our long term track record. And we ended the quarter with cash and short term investments of $7,500,000,000 plus $1,000,000,000 in long term liquid investments. Now turning to our outlook for the year. Full year production guidance remains unchanged. We still expect to deliver low single digit production growth at this lower level of capital spending.

For the second quarter, we expect production to be in a range of 2.34 to 2,380,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day, including approximately 40,000 barrels per day of planned turnarounds. We expect the second quarter to be our peak turnaround activity for the year, with the triennial turnaround at Ekofiska, Norway and a turnaround at Qatar. Then third quarter turnarounds should be around 25,000 barrels per day, primarily in Alaska. For capital, we now expect to spend between 12,300,000,000.0 and $12,600,000,000 for the full year, or about a half billion lower than our prior guidance of approximately $12,900,000,000 This is the result of continued capital efficiency improvements and plan optimization. Now second quarter capital should be similar to the first quarter and then decline materially over the back half of the year.

On adjusted operating costs, we have lowered our guidance range by $200,000,000 to 10,700,000,000.0 to $10,900,000,000 primarily due to ongoing cost optimization efforts. We expect our full year effective corporate tax rate to be a bit higher than prior guidance of 36% to 37% range, excluding one time items, and this is due to geographic mix. We expect an effective cash tax rate to be roughly in line with book tax, which is a function of discrete items in the first quarter. Now moving to cash flows. Full year APLNG distributions are now expected to be $800,000,000 primarily due to lower pricing.

From a timing perspective, we expect the remaining 600,000,000 of distributions for this year to be in the third quarter, with no APLNG distributions in the second or fourth quarter. In terms of working capital, we expect a modest use of cash on a full year basis. This includes an operating working capital outflow of 800,000,000 in the second quarter related to normal timing of tax payments, as well as the unwinding of the $800,000,000 investing working capital tailwind from the first quarter over the remainder of the year. So to wrap up, ConocoPhillips had a strong start to 2025. The teams executed well operationally.

We continue to improve our plan and deliver on our strategic initiatives across our deep, durable and diverse portfolio. And amid a more volatile macro environment, we remain focused on delivering competitive returns on and of capital to our shareholders, while maintaining our A rated balance sheet. And our long term value proposition remains compelling, with a differentiated free cash flow growth trajectory and the strongest Lower 48 inventory position of any operator. That concludes our prepared remarks. I'll now turn it over to the operator to start the Q and A.

Thank you. We'll now begin the question and answer session. In the interest of time, we ask that you limit yourself to one question. If you have a question, please press 11 on your touch tone phone. If you wish to be removed from the queue, please press 11 again.

If you're using a speakerphone, you may need to pick up the handset first before pressing the numbers. Our first question comes from Neil Mehta with Goldman Sachs.

Hey, good morning Ryan and team and Bill, thanks for everything. Congratulations to you, thirty nine years incredible and Andy, congratulations to you as well. In your honor, Bill, let's ask a return of capital question and a cash flow question, which is you guys had $2,500,000,000 of capital return in the first quarter. You're very much tracking towards the $10,000,000,000 number. We're obviously in a softer commodity macro than we were in the first quarter.

But do you still view the $10,000,000,000 as an attainable number? And given the fact that you acknowledge the stock is undervalued, would you be willing to take on debt in order to support the shrinking of the share count?

Yeah, let me take that with Neil and thanks for the shout out for Bill. He's been an integral part of our team and with me for a long period. So I thank him a lot for all his support. Yeah, step back for a minute, Neil, just a little bit. Our CFO based distribution framework has been unchanged for a number of years.

And you correctly pointed out in the first quarter and for the last number of year, multi year history, we've been in the mid 40% or as I said in my commentary, the 45% return of capital back to our shareholders. And we've been able to sustain that because of really the quality, the depth, the duration of the portfolio, the low cost supply nature of that, the depth of that inventory and the duration that we have as well as allowed us to sustain that. And all the while we've been investing for future growth of our CFO and our free cash flow. As we've talked about with the projects that are coming on and I think or we think that's unmatched by any other E and P in this business. So the future looks very, very bright for the company too.

Now as we assess our CFO, which then leads to distributions each quarter for the year, I think a great place to start is assuming that 45% or mid 40% distribution against that CFO. And that's what we've been counting on. And as you've indicated, we have cash on the balance sheet. So we're willing to use some of that if we need to, as we go through the course of the year. Now, what does this mean for the second quarter?

We still think we ought to be buying our shares and we're doing that. But as we kind of go into the second quarter reflective of where the macro is at to, it probably represents a couple hundred million reduction in the second quarter relative to the first quarter. And we're still looking to see where commodity prices are going and what it means for the third and fourth quarter. And we'll deal with those as we see the course of the year play out.

Our next question comes from Devin McDermott with Morgan Stanley.

Hey, good morning. Thanks for taking my question and echo the congrats Bill to you and Andy to you as well. I wanted to ask on the capital side. So it looks like the reduction in this year's budget is largely efficiency driven. We'd love to get a little bit more detail on the drivers.

And then kind of stepping back, I think over the years, you've been very consistent about the strategy of investing through maximize returns. Ryan, in your remarks, you mentioned flexibility in the program if needed. So I'd love to you just elaborate on how you're thinking about that flexibility and at what price levels or macro conditions you might utilize it.

Devin. This is Andy. I can start with that one. As you pointed out, we have reduced the capital this year to a range of 12,300,000,000.0 to $12,600,000,000 That's about a $05,000,000,000 reduction. And it really is a combination of capital efficiency improvements across the portfolio and then plan optimization.

The capital reduction, it does not include any material changes to the scope in the Lower 48 versus our prior guidance. And as you saw, it didn't have any real impact on our production guidance for the full year. It's also probably also worth pointing out that already within our guidance on the last quarter and again now, we've been factoring in a drop in activity in the Lower 48 as we get Marathon onto a steady state program. That remains unchanged. So the way we think about it is we've got a global portfolio.

And the first thing we obviously do is we look everywhere to see where we can defer some discretionary capital that doesn't impact production. That's effectively what we've done here. I think as we're doing this, we also shouldn't lose sight of the trend we're on. We're finding ways to deliver the same level of production for less capital and less operating costs. So we kind of think we're taking a pretty measured approach here.

We want to take our time to better understand any potential depth or duration of any ongoing commodity price weakness before we determine if we really need to make any changes to our program. I would say we haven't really changed any scope of note. And for us, we're really going just continue to focus on maximizing our returns on capital through the cycle. We'll leave it there. Sort of I say, at this point for us it's kind of just a measured approach to see where things are going.

Our next question comes from Steven Richardson with Evercore ISI.

Hi, good morning. Ryan, I was wondering if you could talk a little bit about your current views on cost structure and opportunity for further employment improvement. I think you've started the year well with the $200,000,000 reduction. One of the themes this quarter in the industry has been kind of resource maturity, and I appreciate your comments about the depth of inventory, particularly in the Lower 48. But I'm wondering if you could talk about kind of as the industry matures, as Conoco's business kind of matures, how you think about the overall cost structure and where to go from here considering all the macro considerations you talked about?

Yeah, thanks Steve. I think it's a part of our DNA. We're constantly looking at the costs and we benchmark both our operations and our G and A across the whole world pretty constantly. We're looking at across the fence line to our fence line neighbors making sure that we're not disadvantaged in any way, shape or form. So I think this is something that's built into us.

We've had the opportunity now with the Marathon transaction to step back and take a look at the company, what we're doing in the center, what we're doing in the business units. And we're just trying to drive that efficiency across the whole organization just to maintain our competitive edge and maintain the competitive nature. Just watch us every quarter. We're focused on continuing to get better these kinds of environments just make that all the more important, but it needs to be a constant thing that you do as part of your just running a company like this in a volatile macro.

Our next question comes from Arun Jayaram with JPMorgan.

Yeah. Good morning, Ryan and team. Ryan, we've seen a modest activity reduction from several of your E and P peers, yet Conoco looks to be staying put in terms of your 2025 plans. I guess my question is you've built Conoco with a low cost of supply in your core basins. And how do you think about kind of balancing this low cost of supply with the macro as well as perhaps preserving precious inventory, particularly in the Lower 48?

Yeah, I can let Andy jump into a little bit here, but yeah, I think it's right. Low cost supply wins in this business. So we're trying to drive that as much as we can in our entire inventory. And I think we've gotten ourselves to a pretty great place with the depth of the inventory and the duration. And now it's just, how do you affect that program and drive the best returns on the capital that you're investing in the business.

And then I can let Andy sort of provide a little bit of more about how we think about that as we execute our programs.

Yeah, thanks Ryan. And Arun, as Ryan said, we've got that decade of low cost supply inventory and it's actually times like this where it's been our relentless focus on low cost supply. We've been talking about this for years now. Sometimes in sort of a higher price environment it doesn't get quite the same focus externally. But we've remained laser focused on it.

We invest in projects that generate 10% returns in a $40 world. It's one of the central tenants to our resiliency. I'd say we're not looking to try and time the market with our capital investments. Where we're sitting right now with oil prices, they're actually not that far from a mid cycle price. What history has taught us is that we really value our steady state program.

And when we look back on times like this, these are the times where you get a great opportunity to capture lower capital costs and operating costs. So that's the way we think about it. We're also fully aware that the market is not calling us to grow anything like 4% to 5% like we did last year. And remember, we've adjusted our plan. Plan this year is for low single digit production growth, significantly lower than last year.

The way I would sort of sum it up is that we just remain very focused on delivering the returns on free cash flow and production just remains an output of our plan.

And I would finish that Arun with, look, the people that can do this are the ones that have the kind of inventory that we do. We mentioned the have and the have nots in our opening comments and companies like ours with the kind of inventory we have, have this optionality in terms of how we execute our programs. And as long as we're driving returns on and of capital, that's our North Star, that's what's driving it is, as Andy said, the production growth is really an output, the real driver is cash flow and free cash flow growth.

Our next question comes from Doug Leggate with Wolfe Research.

Good morning, everyone. Thank you for having me on. And, Bill, it's been a lot of fun. And, Andy, wouldn't be an inaugural call as a pending CFO if I didn't ask you about breakeven. So I'm going to try that if I may.

It's really a clarification question on the $450,000,000 reduction. Is this coming out of growth capital in terms of doing things more efficiently or is it coming out of, I guess, you would call base capital for maintaining the business? In other words, has the sustaining capital also being reset by almost half a billion dollars? And if so, what does that do to your breakeven? And I will leave it there.

Yeah. Thanks, Doug. A couple of threads there to sort of weave together. So I think as I said earlier, the capital reduction of $05,000,000,000 is really coming out of a combination of things in terms of where we can simply defer things that are not adding production this year with basically a very negligible impact next year. There's obviously sort of a when we go through the prices coming down, we're starting to see some capture of deflation.

So we always say when we talk about breakevens, does take a bit of a hypothetical conversation because if price goes down, we would expect some deflation. So I'd say it's a mix of things that where we're seeing where we can do things cheaper and we're basically making sure that we're in a way where we can push scope out, it doesn't have any impact on our production, we're not really playing with rigs and tractors, we're going to do that. So yes, over time it reduces our breakeven. But to put it quite clearly where we are with breakeven, this year our free cash flow breakeven is in the mid-40s and the dividend will add about $10 to that. And really importantly, that includes all of the pre productive CapEx that we've got going on on our major projects, is about $7 So as you look through this year and going forward, we talk about our free cash flow inflection.

This is exactly where you'll start to see it with our breakeven coming down into the low 30s as we start to basically reduce the capital and we see the projects coming on.

Our next question comes from Nitin Kumar with Mizuho.

Hi, good afternoon guys. And Bill, congratulations on the retirement. Maybe I'll take it away from the macro for a minute and talk over your long cycle projects. You mentioned that you hit some critical milestones at Willow. I'd love to hear a little bit more about that.

Then I think the spending in Alaska was just north of $1,000,000,000 this year or this quarter. How can we look for it to trend over the next few quarters as you get into the later phases of that project?

Nitin, this is Kirk. I can take that one. Certainly as you're pointing to with your question, execution here in first quarter on our Willow project was very important and the project team delivered the key milestones that were required to ensure that this project remains on track fully in support of our first oil in 2029. We saw really good progress up there. We ramped to roughly 2,400 people on the North Slope, which again reaffirms that this was our peak winter construction season.

And again, a little bit of kudos to the folks up there, really strong safety performance, we saw some really strong efficiencies in a broad span of work across those activities. So on that winter construction, we're now roughly 50%, if not slightly better on completion of all of our civil scopes. So when you hear that, think roads, pads, bridges, and we've got about 80 miles of pipeline installed. And very importantly, we executed a horizontal directional drill underneath one of the key waterways and that allows us to connect East West pipelines. Again, continued build out of that infrastructure.

And as you've heard from me before, really critical this year as well was that operation center pad. Those modules that we see lifted up there here last year, those are now set on the pad. We opened our Wheel Of Construction Camp and that becomes important because it allows us to begin construction work on the North Slope a bit more throughout the year as opposed to being completely confined to the winter season. And then outside of Alaska, engineering fabrication on our processing modules that continues to go well. And then of course key for us here this year being our second major season on this project is procurement activities and sourcing activities.

So we do expect to source and receive a bulk of the engineered equipment that's required to procure again for those process modules as well as all this forward looking work that we have on the slope. So here by year end, we'll have 90% to 95% of that work sourced and that brings even more certainty just to understanding how this will continue to play out for us in a positive way. So again, peak capital, we guided you a bit to about a third of total spend here. This year will be in the first three to four months of this year. We're seeing that actualize for us and so we expect capital to continue to taper down through the remainder of the year.

Our next question comes from Lloyd Byrne with Jefferies.

Hey, good afternoon everybody. Bill, congratulations and thank you for all your help over the years. Ryan, you talked a lot about what separates Conoco and the advantages you have going forward, including all the free cash you have coming. So would you use your balance sheet and your asset sales and lean in a little bit on going above that 45% return to shareholders going forward? Thanks.

Well, I think Lloyd, I was trying to guide to sort of the 45% feels about right for where we are in the cycle. Obviously, if these kinds of commodity prices, if you think about it, it may require a little bit of use of cash on the balance sheet. But as Bill described in his opening remarks, we stand in pretty good shape. We think buying our shares makes sense right now. We're not going to drop off that at all.

And in a small factoid in the last four to five months, bought nearly 20% of the Marathon shares back in. So we think that's important and we know that returns of capital are important, but I would probably anchor on the mid 45% of our CFO. And that may have some impact on net debt, but we're not intending to borrow gross debt to do this.

Our next question comes from Scott Hanold with RBC Capital Markets.

Yeah, thanks. Congrats, Bill and Andy and Bill, wish you well in your future endeavors. My question and look, I don't want to belabor this sort of macro kind of question and what does Conoco do, but I'm going try a bit of a different angle at it. And Ryan, you talked about the haves and have nots where Conoco is advantaged. But if we do have a weaker macro environment, what do you think should happen in the industry?

Should it be companies with higher cost of supply should be the first to cut and companies like Conoco show a little bit more resilience or do larger companies like Conoco need to take a leadership role in making some of the first cuts?

Well, I think it's a question, Scott. Obviously the folks that don't have the kind of cost of supply sitting in their portfolio are gonna find themselves cash strapped return strapped. So they're obviously the balance sheets are pretty good shape across the industry better than we were in the last downturn, but you'll see a lot of activity cut back. And presumably what you're talking about is a price outlook that is well below 60. So into the 50s or the low 50s.

And I think you'll see even some of the larger companies, I think if we found ourselves thinking that the remainder of the year was gonna be in the low 50s, we would be looking probably at additional scope kinds of opportunities within our company too. But again, we have to assess whether we think that's going to be here for a quarter or a month or two months, or is that kind of the new normal and lower for longer kind of a view of this. So I go back to kind of our prevailing view of the macro and that is while demand is come off a little bit from our current think of a million barrels a day, it's still our view in '25 is probably 8,000,000 barrels or 800,000 barrels of additional demand growth in 2025 and that's not stopping. And Yao Pek is doing their thing to put some softness in market, but remind people $60 is pretty close to our mid cycle planning price. So you shouldn't expect a lot of things to change out of our company at these kinds of prices because we're built for it, we can handle the volatility, got a great balance sheet.

We know we're executing low cost supply, we're delivering the efficiencies that Andy and Nick are driving and what Kirk talked about in the operating side of the business. And so we're really focused on doing that. Would we have to look at potentially doing something different at 50? Sure, we would. But that's not our view today and doesn't represent where we think the market is going to be for the next few years.

All things to change, but that's kind of why for us it's, don't whipsaw this thing too hard right now and use some of the strengths that we have as a company because we can't because of the portfolio that we're investing in and the opportunity set that's in front of us. So don't overreact, but don't put your head in the sand either.

Our next question comes from Ryan Todd with Piper Sandler.

Thanks. Maybe one on a follow-up on the Marathon integration. I think it would appear that it's going well given your guidance on capital and operational cost reduction. So maybe can you talk about how that integration is going and what you're seeing on the operational front? You've called out Eagle Ford Performance.

Hey, Ryan. Andy here. I can start that one and maybe Nick might have a couple of comments to add too. So it really feels pretty good to have the first full quarter of Marathon behind us. And things are going really well.

The integration is tracking ahead of schedule. We're making great progress on a $1,000,000,000 of synergy captures. And we continue to find more opportunities as a combined company. It is actually one of the drivers to why we're able to lower our capital operating guidance from the improvements we've announced today. What I'd say on the capital side is we're already delivering capital synergies of over $500,000,000 So that started day one.

And what's particularly pleasing is we're continuing to see efficiency improvements come forward. An example I can give you and maybe Nick can add to it is that this quarter our teams achieved record drilling performance in Eagle Ford. And what was particularly pleasing about that is they were leveraging combined best practices from both companies. So they're the kinds of things that we're still continuing to get. But on the cost side of it, we're also ahead of schedule.

We're seeing opportunities for additional synergies in areas that we really couldn't evaluate pre close, particularly on the commercial side of the business. Again, there would be that we've got opportunities in areas like crude lending and midstream contracts that we didn't have factored in that we can now see. And of course, we're actually realizing synergies in the first quarter from things like the debt transaction we did that lowered our interest costs and the day one employee exit. So that's right on track. As we previously guided, we'd expect to see the synergy pace accelerate during the second half of the year as we ramp up merging all the systems.

We remain very confident that we're going to exit the year achieving the cost and S and J synergies for that run rate of $500,000,000 Maybe one just final comment I'll make is we don't consider this a synergy because we think of it as a one time. But got tax benefits from this transaction too. Between the foreign tax credit utilization and the NOLs, the services of Marathon, that's about $1,000,000,000 of incremental value that we're getting from the transaction above and beyond the synergies. I would just say that we're really pleased with how things are going. We're getting it integrated into our company, I think, pretty seamlessly.

Our next question comes from Betty Jiang with Barclays.

Good afternoon. Thank you for taking my question. Brian, I really appreciate all the color on the cash return framework. If I'm hearing it, if the cash return is closer to the mid forties of cash flow from ops going forward, if I could ask on the flip side of that, is it fair to think you will be more willing to let reinvestment rate run a bit higher given where you are in the investment cycle on the major capital projects? I guess what I'm trying to get to is, is there a level of outspend that you'll feel less comfortable for the next couple of years?

Well, think we've kind of factored that into the plans that we've talked about, Betty. The absolute worst thing to do right now is to try to whipsaw these long cycle investments. So we're not trying to slow Willow down or we're not trying to create inefficiencies in that and we're not equally important not trying to do that on the LNG side. So depending on where the price goes and what our CFO is, obviously our reinvestment rate will be a little bit higher as you kind of factor that in. But I'll remind you back when we showed a ten year plan, what we've done with a company, over time as our cash flow goes and free cash flows, these projects come on, the reinvestment rate falls, the breakeven falls, the reinvestment rate falls.

And that's really the reason why we're doing these projects to begin with. We can't always anticipate what the commodity price cycle is going to look like through that. But we know these projects are sub 40 dollars cost of supply that can compete and they deliver a good rate of return based on our view of the mid cycle price call because they're low cost of supply. So there's things shareholders should be wanting us to invest in for the future growth and development of the company. But yeah, there'll be some natural ups and downs in our reinvestment rate as we go through that.

And the shorter cycle stuff is where we have the flexibility and today we're choosing not to exercise that because we have a longer term view, but we always have that flexibility as we go forward.

Our next question comes from Paul Cheng with Scotiabank.

Bill, just want to say thank you that with all the insight and help over the number of years. And Andy, welcome to that congratulation on the new role. Brian, I don't know whether this is a fair question.

If we look at your inventory in the Lower 48, it's probably one of the best in the industry, But we have heard from a lot of your competitors talking about how we are in the leading and in the shale oil anyway, and inventory will become far more difficult. So with that in mind, do you think that Chronicle needs to start more maybe aggressively diversify away from the Lower 48 into your other area of operation? If you think that is a reasonable approach with a potential downturn typically opportunity arise and which you have captured the opportunity in the past. So with that, is there any areas or asset type you would like to expand into or that substantially increase your existing position? Thank you.

Yeah, long detailed question, Paul. I think, look, cost of supplies are North Star. We're a bit indifferent is to gas oil, US Lower 48 international. We like the diversity in the portfolio. All things being equal, there are areas you would like to grow to kind of offset the profile, maybe the unconventional, but look, it's all about the cost of supply first and foremost.

And we like adding more resource that is low cost of supply into our portfolio and into our company. Inorganically doing that at this point, it's a pretty high bar in the company because we obviously have a differentiated, we believe a differentiated portfolio both in terms of the cost of supply and its depth and duration as well. So we're not, we don't need to do anything, but we watch the market, we monitor it, we know what we like and what we don't like. So, we pay close attention to it, but we're first and foremost focused on delivering our plans and delivering what we've got in the portfolio in executing whether it's in Norway, Alaska, Canada, Lower Forty Eight, The Middle East or the Far East. So, having that diversity is important.

We like it, but, we're not trying to go after it if that ends up being a higher cost of supply that just doesn't fit our model.

Our next question comes from Josh Silverstein with UBS.

Hey guys. My question was going to be on the percent of capital allocation to the long cycle projects going forward. Ryan, you mentioned the free cash flow is starting to increase going forward because the spending from these four big projects is starting to roll off. I think it's around 25% of the budget this year on those projects. Can you just talk about the capital allocation going forward?

Does that 25% trend over the next few years towards 15%? Or do you start backfilling some of these projects as they come online?

Yeah, Josh, you look the, when we tried to signal what the cash flow and free cash flow inflection is coming as these projects come online. I mean, we don't have another Willow and another big batch of LNG things sitting on the cupboard waiting to get fall into the execution plan. So no, at this point, you ought to see the capital start ramping down commensurate with the completion of those projects and the CFO going up as those projects come online and the free cash flow going up at an even faster pace because not only is the CFO coming up, we see a drop off in the capital that's being invested. That doesn't mean that we're starving Alaska and Norway and Canada, with investment, we're still investing in those base businesses just like we're doing today. And that continues and then we're obviously investing in the Lower 48 and over time would expect to see some ramping activity there as well over time, but that's all part of our base plan.

Our next question comes from Kevin McCurdy with Pickering Energy Partners.

Hey, good morning and thanks for taking my question. Just on the quarter, I mean, looks like you got a really good operational quarter, but cash flows kind of missed the mark a little bit and to tell us that looks to be driven by cash taxes. Can you talk a little bit about why the cash taxes were higher in the first quarter and what your outlook is for the remainder of the year? Thank you.

Well, Kevin. We wanted to get Bill in on this call. That seems like an appropriate thing for Bill to talk about.

ConocoPhillips (COP) Q1 2025 Earnings Call Transcript

Company Participants