sign in sign up
<<
Home , LUKOIL, MOEX Russia Index, Novatek, Tatneft

UNLOCKING POTENTIAL

December, 2020

1 ▪ Certain statements in this presentation are not historical facts but are “forward-looking”. Examples of such Forward-Looking forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to: – projections or forecasts of revenues, income (or loss), earnings (or loss) per share, dividends, capital Statements structure or other financial items or ratios – statements of our plans, objectives or goals, including those related to products and services – statements of future economic performance – and statements of assumptions underlying such statements. ▪ Words such as “believes,” “expects,” “assumes,” “projects”, “intends” and “plans” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements, but are not the exclusive means of identifying such statements ▪ By nature, forward-looking statements imply certain inherent risks and unclear points, both general and specific, and there is a risk that plans, expectations, forecasts and other forward-looking statements will not be realized. You should be aware that a number of important factors could cause actual results to differ significantly from the plans, objectives, expectations, estimates and intentions expressed in such forward- looking statements. ▪ When relying on forward-looking statements, you should carefully consider the foregoing factors and other uncertainties and events, especially in light of the political, economic, social and legal environment in which we operate. Such forward-looking statements speak only as of the date on which they are made, and we do not undertake any obligation to update or revise any of them, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. We do not make any representation, warranty or prediction that the results anticipated by such forward-looking statements will be achieved Such forward-looking statements represent, in each case, only one of many possible scenarios and should not be viewed as the most likely or standard scenario.

2 Focus on delivering long-term shareholder value through growing FCF and a unique distributions investment ▪ Highly competitive ▪ Embedded oil price proposition industry positions downside protection ▪ Solid financial ▪ Well-positioned for in Oil&Gas standing higher oil price ▪ Distribution of scenario ▪ Disciplined at least 100% investment ▪ Combination of of adjusted free approach business and free cash flow cash flow growth ▪ Clear focus on even in conservative efficiencies and macro scenario increasing returns

Adhering to Excellence in corporate sustainability principles governance

3 Efficient and Exploration Petrochemistry Production Power generation sustainable Oil refining Filling stations

Gas processing Shipping business model terminals with significant potential

Vertically integrated business ▪ >30 ▪ 16 bln boe proved reserves ▪ 38 bln boe reserves and resources (3P+3C) ▪ 2.35 Mboepd production ▪ 1.4 Mboepd refinery throughput

2019 financial results: ▪ EBITDA $19.1 bln ▪ FCF $10.9 bln

4 Oil Gas

Leadership in reserve life Hydrocarbon production proven years bln boe Mboepd hydrocarbon reserve life

(2019) peers

* International

*Excluding International peers: BP, , ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Shell, Total 5 Existing refining Nelson index Light products Refineries Refineries Petrochemistry, Capacity assets - leadership in >7.0 yield >65% in in gas processing >10mt efficiency, basis for strategy Usinsky GPP Lokosovsky GPP 8 Refineries in Russia and Europe Perm Nizhny and gas Novgorod 9 processing facilities Saratovorgsyntez Petrotel Korobkovsky GPP Zeeland 69 mln tons refinery throughput Stavrolen throughput to 76 % oil production ratio ISAB 9.1 Nelson index

6 EBITDA per boe (9М20) Leadership in $ per boe resilience to external shocks 12

▪ High-quality production structure in upstream ▪ High refining coverage ▪ High quality of refining fleet Free cash flow per boe (9М20) $ per boe ▪ Access to premium markets and sales channels 5 ▪ High investment discipline

Russian O&G International O&G

Russian O&G: neft, , International O&G: BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Eni, ExxonMobil, Total 7 CAPEX Capital expenditures (ex. West Qurna-2 project), RUB bln optimization 70-90 RUB bln 15-35 RUB bln Savings 13-16%

~30 120- RUB bln Sources of optimization Savings 140 ▪ International upstream ~25 ~550 RUB bln 109 460- Exploration ~450 ▪ 480 Downstream ▪ 112

No impact on key 121 projects and strategic goals Original 1Q20 2Q20 3Q20 4Q20 FY 2020 2021 plan actual actual actual expected target guidance

in $ bln $8.5 $6.4 – ~$5.8 6.6 Savings 22-25% 8 Well positioned for market recovery

9 Well positioned ▪ ability to quickly ramp-up production by maintaining spare capacity High operational flexibility for market ▪ ability to quickly increase refining throughput as recovery margin grows

Significant upstream recovery ▪ significant potential to ramp-up production potential ▪ growing share of high-margin barrels

▪ extremely low crack spreads

Significant downstream ▪ significant potential to increase refining recovery potential throughput

▪ higher light product yield in 2021

Additional focus on improving ▪ cost savings above the original plan efficiency

▪ automatic growth of dividends as free cash flow Effective capital return policy grows

10 Production cut oil production in Russia Spare capacity breakdown due to OPEC+ excluding gas condensate, Kbpd (November 2020), %

2000 -310

+20 +60 11% 1500 10%

1000 ~230 Kbpd 53% 26% 500

0 West Siberia Timan Pechora Ural region Other

11 Gas projects in Hydrocarbon production (LUKOIL share) Kboepd 9М20 results ▪ Significant gas production cut due to Kandym Gissar suspension of gas exports from the Company's projects amid lower demand for Uzbek gas from China

264 84 236 219 Current status 68 65 191 ▪ Resumption of gas exports 59 ▪ Recovery of production almost to 180 168 designed production level 154 119 133 82 21 61 98 27 Plans 14 54 ▪ Maintaining designed production 48 level

3Q19 4Q19 1Q20 2Q20 3Q20 Oct.20 Nov.20 exp.

12 Throughput volumes at own refineries Key operating Kbpd 9М20 / 3Q20 / 9М19 2Q20 results in 2019 1,389 average 1,183 downstream 1,216 (12.5%) 8.6% 1,089 -14% Europe 494 -21% 402 370 (18.6%) 8.2% 342 Partial recovery of throughput at refineries in 3Q20 due to completion of Russia 895 scheduled maintenance 814 748 813 (9.0%) 8.8% works

9М19 9М20 2Q20 3Q20 Light product yield Russia 70% 72% 70% 72% +2 p.p. +2 p.p. Europe 77% 77% 77% 79% - +2 p.p. Fuel oil 10% 6% 5% 7% (4 p.p.) +2 p.p. Mid-distillates 47% 50% 52% 50% +3 p.p. (2 p.p.)

Mid-distillates include , fuel, bunker fuel 13 Premium sales Refined products sales volumes at filling stations in Russia and internationally, th.t per day channels 2019 2020

40 -5% In 3Q20 sales volumes recovered -7% ▪ 30 -7% y-o-y -10% y-o-y almost to 2019 levels y-o-y -22% y-o-y 20 y-o-y Filling ▪ Reduction in 4Q20 due to stations 10 tightening restrictive measures

0 1Q 2Q 3Q Oct. Nov. exp.

Jet fuel sales volumes (in a form of aircraft fueling) th.t per day 2019 2020 Aircraft 8 fueling 6 ▪ In 3Q20 sales volumes recovered almost to a half of 4 2019 levels -15% -48% y-o-y -41% y-o-y ▪ Reduction in 4Q20 due to 2 y-o-y -51% -71% y-o-y tightening restrictive measures 0 y-o-y 1Q 2Q 3Q Oct. Nov. exp. 14 RUB bln, as of 30.09.2020

Total debt Robust RUB 803 bln Leases 207 Financial debt maturity schedule financial Credit 286 position lines* 596 Cash and cash 444 equivalents 233 136 Net financial debt / 93 55 62 17 EBITDA: 0.2 4Q20 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 and further Confirmed investment grade credit ratings Financial debt structure (excluding leases) Credit ratings USD / EUR / USD / EUR / Other 97% 2%1% Other debt

Unsecured / Fitch BBB+ ST 89% 11% Unsecuredsecured / secured debt

Fixed / Fixed / variable 73% 27% S&P BBB ST Variable rate

Eurobonds (all in $) / Eurobonds ($) / other 73% 27% Other debt Moody’s Baa2 ST

* Stand-by revolving committed credit lines. 15 Competitive ESG positions

16 ESG Highlights Environmental Social Governance

Strong ESG Management System RUB 38 bln RUB 20 bln 55% ▪ Control at BoD level environmental expenditures safety expenditures and social share of independent Board (average 2017-19) support (average 2017-19) directors ▪ ESG KPI’s in remuneration Mitigating environmental Increasing safety (2017-19) Highly qualified Board ▪ ESG requirements in impact (2017-19) supply chain ▪ LTAFR decreased by 5% ▪ 64% directors with ▪ spills ratio decreased by more to 0.19 <7 years tenure* than 10 times to 0.2 kg/ th.t ▪ rate of fatalities kept low at ▪ 18% women waste disposal to generation Contributing to the UN ▪ 0.01 ▪ 3 committees including ratio maintained at 1:1 SDGs ▪ 84 training hours per trained Strategy, investment, ▪ air pollutants down by 20% to employee (avg) in 2019 sustainability and climate 402 th.t adaptation committee

Updating the standards Expanding social Enhancing governance practices ▪ new version of HSE policy responsibility (inclusion of climate topic and ▪ 31 cooperation agreements ▪ approval of the Anticorruption shifting to the new ISO 45001 with Russian regions Policy standard)

*as at latest AGM in June 2020 17 Adopting 2004 2008 2012 2014 leading practices First CSR Joining UN Global Signing agreement with First CDP report Compact International Labour Organization report

2019 2017 2017 2015 Compliance with best international standards

. Management: ISO14001, OHSAS 18001 . Reporting: GRI, UN Global Raising role of Board in Joining the World bank First independent non- Signing cooperation Compact Sustainable Development initiative on zero routing financial audit by agreement with . GHG Emissions: CDP, GHG issues flaring of APG by 2030 KPMG WWF Protocol 2019 2020 2020

Cooperation with leading international organizations

Working on transition to Inclusion of Conducting inventory of GHG ISO 45001 standard climate topic in emissions sources and indirect (from OHSAS 18001) Group HSE Policy emission calculation 18 1997 2003 2004 2005 2016 2019 2020

Developing strong 1st target to reduce BoD Strategy, BoD 1st Energy 1st efficient Methane Started to GHG emissions investment, resposibility carbon management Saving APG use emissions implement Kyoto Scope 1 sustainability Scope 2, 3 Program program disclosure Protocol provisions disclosure committee disclosure system GHG emissions, mln t CO2e Increasing efficient APG use • 97.6% in 2019 (92.1% in Scope 2 Increasing BoD responsibility 10.4 10.5 9.0 8.6 2016) -17% (to 2016) Increasing energy efficiency Reducing absolute GHG 40.5 Scope 1 40.2 39.6 39.8 • 5 mln GJ average annual emissions -1% (to 2016) reduction in energy consumption for 2017-2019 Developing climate strategy 2016 2017 2018 2019 Carbon intensity in Upstream, Developing renewables Improving disclosure Scopes 1,2, kg CO2e/boe • 6% of total commercial ▪ Direct and indirect GHG emissions power generated by the disclosure Group in 2019 -16% (to 2016) • Launched the construction of 25 24 the second 20 MW solar 21 21 power plant at Volgograd Refinery 2016 2017 2018 2019

19 Continuous permafrost LUKOIL assets Managing risks Severneftegaz in permafrost LUKOIL-Kaliningradmorneft Yamalneftegaz in permafrost LUKOIL-Komi of liquids production in 7% Russia

LUKOIL-Perm RITEK of pipelines and tanks in LUKOIL-West Siberia 4% Russia (age <30 years)

of infrastructure LUKOIL-Nizhnevolzhskneft 10% maintenance costs

Integrated approach to ensuring the reliability of assets in permafrost

▪ Determining the presence of permafrost based on geological surveys Vertical storage tank at Pyakyakhinskoye field ▪ Use of special standards and regulations in design and construction (Yamalneftegaz) ▪ Regular monitoring of the condition of foundations and soils ▪ Systematic maintenance, timely repair and replacement of equipment ▪ Maintaining readiness for emergency response Yamalneftegaz and Severneftegaz are parts of LUKOIL-West Siberia and LUKOIL-Komi respectively 20 Enhancing ESG Upgrades in 2020 Positions

Among the leaders in ESG transparency Score C (from D) Risk score 33 (from 42) ESG Score 46 (from 30) Independent verification

Score С (from C-) Score BBB (from BB) Score 7.5 (+1)

63.5/100 84/100 2/4 (2019) 3.7/5 (2019)

21 OUR STRATEGY:

BALANCED DEVELOPMENT

UNLOCKING POTENTIAL

22 Increasing THREE-STRING SMALL DIAMETER ENERGY-EFFICIENT efficiency DESIGN WELLS WELLS PUMPS via technology development and ▪ Increasing drilling ▪ Using drilling rigs with ▪ Reduction of energy cost speed lower capacity due to transition to scale-up ▪ 104 horizontal wells with ▪ Lower metals usage in downhole permanent three-string design were well construction magnet engines and Lighter well construction, batch introduction of energy- completed in 2018-2019, ▪ 119 wells were completed efficient pumps at oil drilling including 21 multilateral in 2018-2019 wells pump stations Implementation of intellectual systems of well completion Mature fields development management with neural networks % % % Scaling of the “intellectual field” 20 50 10-15 technology Reduction of cost per well Reduction of cost per well Reduction of electricity compared to a standard compared to a standard cost well well

23 Product slate Potential to improve refined products slate at Russian and international Group refineries improvement High-sulfur fuel oil yield, % Middle distillates yield, %

Processes % optimization 50 Record low fuel oil production 47% 47%

Launch of delayed Further reduction potential coker at Nizhny Novgorod refinery 21 % 10% <8% <4% 2019 2020 2022 2019 2020 2022

Mid-distillates include diesel fuel, jet fuel, bunker fuel. 24 Financial strategy Indicators Indicators Strategic 2013-17 2019 targets

Maximizing returns 10% 15% 15% ROACE

Conservative financial policy 0.6 0.0 0.5-1.0 Net debt / EBITDA

Distributions to Dividends no less shareholders Progressive dividend policy than 100% of adj. FCF Dividends top + buyback priority

Buyback is secondary 1 Control over 2 Balanced 3 Incentive and opportunistic operational efficiency investment program system focused Tools improvement and and investment on strategy cost reduction discipline delivery 25 3Q20 Results

26 Urals net price Price and tax $ per bbl environment 3Q20 / in Upstream Urals $61 2Q20 Export duty $13

$43 46.2% $43 $40 Higher average $6 98.4% $6 $6 international oil price Mineral $26 $30 extraction $3 $18 89.8% $17 Weaker ruble tax $16 $9 Net price in ruble terms Net price $22 13.7% in October-November $17 $20 $18 $20 in RUB 1,415 almost flat year-on-year 1,252 1,449 15.7% 1,389 1,527

3Q19 2Q20 3Q20 October November 2020 2020 (exp.)

Tax lag effect ($0.8) $0.5 $0.4 (16.0%) ($0.8) $0.6

Net price excluding tax $22.7 $16.8 $19.3 14.6% $18.7 $19.2 lag effect

RUB / USD 64.6 72.4 73.6 1.7% 77.6 77.1 average 27 refining margins $ per bbl Refining 7.7

Profitability Europe 4.5 MED/NWE average 2.4 2.4 2.2 3Q20 / 2Q20 1.4 1.4 0.5 0.3

Refining margin change Russia -1.8 ▪ Europe: lower margins due to higher feedstock prices, lower crack spreads for diesel fuel 3Q19 2Q20 3Q20 Oct.20 Nov.20 exp. ▪ Russia: higher margins due to Prices higher export duty differential, as Europe, $ per t well as oil feedstock excise among other things driven by 623 269 394 382 367 lower negative damper Diesel fuel 579 280 354 329 341

Fuel oil 330 162 240 236 247 Russia, th. RUB per t Premium gasoline 43.1 37.5 43.2 40.7 40.6

Diesel fuel 40.7 37.2 38.2 37.9 37.7 Damper:

Calculation of benchmark refining margin in Russia is Gasoline 5.2 (13.1) (4.5) (4.0) (4.8) based on CDU TEK data and uses actual weighted average product mix at refineries in the European part of Diesel fuel 4.2 (10.1) (5.5) (5.9) (5.3) Russia as well as their share of exports in production. Prices for gasoline and diesel fuel in Russia for Nizhny Novgorod region excluding VAT (CDU TEK). 28 Financial results 3Q20 2Q20 % RUB bln 9М20 9М19 % 1,457 986 47.7 Sales 4,109 5,929 (30.7)

202 144 40.0 EBITDA 497 958 (48.1)

152 72 110.1 Upstream 334 682 (51.1)

78 79 (1.4) Downstream 197 289 (32.1)

50 (19) - Profit (loss) to shareholders (14) 521 -

113 117 (3.8) CAPEX 360 314 14.7

115 26 4.5х Free cash flow (FCF) 196 517 (62.2)

88 38 2.3х FCF before working capital 137 569 (76.0)

152 (16) - Net financial debt 152 4 -

29 “Controllable” expenses “Controllable” expenses Cost control RUB bln RUB per boe

123 120 117 610 614 586 643

SG&A 39 Temporary increase in 44 40 costs per unit due to 2017 2018 2019 9М20 reduced production 10 volumes Other 10 10 Lifting costs in Russia Implementation of 25 21 Refining RUB per boe measures for additional 24 cost optimization in 2020 OPEX -3%

Production 248 244 240 50 237 45 43

3Q19 2Q20 3Q20 2017 2018 2019 9М20

Controllable expenses include operating expenses for hydrocarbon production (excluding extraction expenses at the West Qurna-2 field), power generation and distribution expenses, petrochemical expenses and own refining expenses, and SG&A (excluding share-based compensation and expenses on allowance for expected credit losses). 30 North Caspian Hydrocarbon production Advantages Kboepd ▪ Short transportation leg, low production costs, high quality of oil

185 9М20 results 177 175 180 164 ▪ Filanovsky one production well commissioned ▪ Korchagin one production well commissioned ▪ Grayfer installation of jackets for platforms, Net price under $50/bbl construction readiness of the production and living platforms is 59% and 77% Export respectively duty

MET 4Q20 plans 85% 85% ▪ Filanovsky: drilling program Net 41% price ▪ Korchagin: drilling program

Standard Filanovsky Korchagin 3Q19 4Q19 1Q20 2Q20 3Q20 ▪ Grayfer: infrastructure development taxation

31 Hard-to-recover: High viscosity oil production Advantages high viscosity oil Kbpd ▪ Substantial production growth potential

9М20 results 97 91 90 92 ▪ Yaregskoye 88 19 production SAGD wells and 238 underground wells commissioned ▪ Usinskoye 34 production wells and reservoir pressure maintenance facilities Net price commissioned under $50/bbl Export 4Q20 plans duty ▪ Yaregskoye MET drilling program, capacity expansion for 98% oil treatment and transportation

Net 62% ▪ Usinskoye 41% price drilling program, commissioning steam generation facilities Standard Usinskoye* Yaregskoye 3Q19 4Q19 1Q20 2Q20 3Q20 taxation

*Permian deposit 32 Hard-to-recover: Oil production Advantages low permeability Kbpd ▪ Substantial production growth potential Imilorskoye Vinogradov

Sredne-Nazymskoye 9М20 results ▪ Imilorskoye: 86 production wells and 54 51 38 injectors commissioned 48 13 ▪ Vinogradov: 25 production wells 45 11 commissioned 42 9 8 ▪ Sredne-Nazymskoye: 30 production 6 12 13 wells commissioned Net price 10 11 under $50/bbl 10 Export 4Q20 plans duty 27 28 28 25 27 ▪ Imilorskoye: commissioning of 36 MET production wells ▪ Sredne-Nazymskoye: commissioning Net 58% of 14 production wells 45% price 41%

Standard Sredne- Imilorskoye**, taxation Nazymskoye* Vinogradov 3Q19 4Q19 1Q20 2Q20 3Q20

* MET benefit for Tyumen reservoirs ** MET benefit for reservoirs with low permeability 33 Appendix

34 TOP-5 most ADTV (100d), $ mln 52 week LUKOIL share capital structure Stock liquid range, $ per Russian MCap, ADR stocks $ bln Highlights Total MOEX LSE / min max NASDAQ

Yandex 300 119 181 24 28.9 68.2 Management Other 693 mln 39% 61% and BoD Sberbank 273 222 51 72 8.6 17.4 shareholders shares

Gazprom 146 112 34 58 3.8 8.4

LUKOIL 116 82 34 48 46.7 109.1

Polymetal 69 32 37 10 12.0 27.2

Source: Bloomberg, data as at November 27, 2020

Trading venues Main tickers Weight in key indices

London Stock Exchange (LSE) LSE: LKOD LI MSCI Russia: 13.2% Exchange (MOEX) MOEX: LKOH RX MSCI EM Eastern Europe: 9.2% MOEX Russia Index: 11.1%

35 Natural oil price hedge with Government take*, $/bbl Government take, % of Urals price taxation 69% 67% 68% 65% 63% 60% $69 55% The progressive taxation limits $61 the exposure of Russian oil 46% $54 producers to oil price swings $46 $38 The limited benefit when oil 26% market is on top of the cycle is $30 flip side of the coin $22

7% $14 $5 The tax benefits give boost to 0 $1 the sensitivity of upstream 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 earnings to oil price price scenario, $/bbl

*Sum of regular MET and export duty rates under standard taxation 36 LUKOIL business Liquids production (2019) Gas production (2019) geography and Russia 96% Russia 51% production flows 3% Uzbekistan 40% 1.8 Uzbekistan .5% 0.6 Kazakhstan 5% Mbpd Mboepd .3% 4% Production flows (2019) Azerbaijan .3% Congo .4% Congo .1% Production Purchases 85 mln t 76 mln t

Total crude oil 161 mln t

To refineries For sale Refinery throughput (2019) Filling stations (2019) 69 mln t 90 mln t

Russia 64% Russia 49%

Output Purchases 15% Europe 40% 65 mln t 54 mln t 5,046 1.4 10% FSU 6% filling Total products Mboepd 7% USA 5% stations 119 mln t 4%

For sale

Crude oil Petroleum products 37 100 LUKOIL Other refineries in Russia Strong and 90 Volgograd 80 Nizhny Perm modernized 70 Novgorod 60 Ukhta 50 refining fleet 40 30 in Russia 20 10 Light products yield in 2019, % in 2019, yield products Light 0 Three large-scale and Throughput in 2019 right-on refineries benefit from geography advantage with proximity access to European 78% 70% 64% 57% 56% Light products yield: markets Motor gasoline 11% 36% 12% Diesel fuel 25%* 8% 22% 9% 6% Jet Sizeable refining fleet 5% 8% 9% 3% 3% modernization program Other light products 38% 27% completed in 2016 36% 30% 38% Fuel oil 11% 18% 20% 15% 13% Other LUKOIL G-neft Rosneft Surgut

* liquids, semi-finished diesel fuel, Source: CDU TEK, InfoTEK 38 CONTACT DETAILS

Tel.: +7 (495) 627-16-96 [email protected]

Alexander Palivoda, Head of IR Tel.: +7 (495) 981-75-26 Mob.: +7 (906) 789-49-24 [email protected]

Alexander Kornilov, CFA Deputy Head of IR Tel.: +7 (495) 981-72-63 Mob.: +7 (909) 986-12-93 [email protected]

39