A.P. Møller - Mærsk A/S

August 2016 page 2

Forward-looking statements This presentation contains forward-looking statements. Such statements are subject to risks and uncertainties as various factors, many of which are beyond A.P. Møller - Mærsk A/S’ control, may cause actual development and results to differ materially from the expectations contained in the presentation.

Comparative figures Unless otherwise stated, all comparisons refer to y/y changes.

Strategic review As announced on 23 June 2016, the Board of Directors has tasked the management to investigate the strategic and structural options to further increase agility and synergies. The Board of Directors will communicate on the progress before end of 3rd quarter 2016. Title of presentation |page 3 Agenda

1 History and Group overview

2 Market Overview

3 Business segments

4 Financial review and strategy

5 Funding strategy page| page 4 4 The Maersk Group at a glance

• Diversified global conglomerate with activities focused in energy and transportation

• Established 1904: 110+ years of financial strength

• Headquartered in Copenhagen, Denmark

• 2015 FY revenues USD 40.3bn, EBITDA USD 9.1bn

• Market cap of around USD 26.4bn at end Q2 2016

• Approximately 90,000 employees in more than 130 countries

• Long term credit ratings of BBB+ (credit watch negative) and Baa1 (stable) from S&P and Moody’s respectively

• Stable and consistent ownership structure

• Strategic focus on: • Maersk Line • Maersk Oil • APM Terminals • Maersk Drilling • APM Shipping Services page 5 The Maersk Group at a glance

MAERSK LINE Brands Share of FY #1 Global container liner by TEU capacity (15.3% share1) 2015 CFFO Operates a capacity of 3.1m TEU by end Q2 2016: • 283 (1.8m TEU) owned vessels • 347 (1.3m TEU) chartered vessels 41% Young fleet – efficient on fuel and reduced environmental impact

MAERSK OIL Mid sized independent E&P company with an entitlement production of 312,000 boepd in 2015 Production in 7 countries, exploration portfolio in 9 countries Reserves and resources (2P+2C) of 1,141m boe with proved and probable reserves (2P) of 649m 22% boe at end-2015 Expecting total cost savings by end-2016 to be 25-30% compared to end-2014.

APM TERMINALS #4 Global terminal operator by equity throughput in 20152 Services around 60 shipping companies 72 operating terminals and 140 inland operations with an overall presence in 69 countries, 11% spanning 5 continents Total container throughput of 36m TEU in 2015

MAERSK DRILLING Leading global operator of high technology drilling rigs, providing offshore drilling services to oil and gas companies Has one of the youngest and most advanced fleets in the world, consisting of premium, harsh and 16% ultra-harsh environment assets Market leader in the Norwegian jack-up market and growing in the ultra deep-water segment

APM SHIPPING SERVICES The leading high-end company One of the leading 4PL in the offshore supply vessel providers in the logistics industry industry 10% One of the largest companies The leading company in the in the product tanker industry towage industry

1 Source: Alphaliner, July 1st, 2016 2 Source: Drewry Maritime Research, July 2016 page 6 Group financial highlights

Group Financial Highlights* Group highlights Q2 2016

• Group profit decreased 89% to USD 118m (USD 1.1bn) USDm negatively impacted by significantly lower container freight Underlying Q2 2015 Q2 2016 Profit profit*Free cash flow rates and oil price. Group ROIC was 2.0% (10.2%) 4,852 5,000 • Underlying profit decreased to USD 134m (USD 1.1bn), 4,000 predominantly driven by a loss in Maersk Line

3,000 • The Group continues to execute on reducing cost and delivering high operational performance across its business 2,000 units. Maersk Line realised unit cost below 2,000 USD/FFE and 1,086 1,099 Maersk Oil continues to operate with a break-even price level 1,000 326 118 134 86 in the range of USD 40-45 per barrel 0 Profit Underlying Free cash flow • Free cash flow was USD 326m (USD 4.9bn) profit* • Cash flow from operating activities decreased to USD 940m *Free cash flow in Q2 2015 include the sale of shares in Danske Bank of USD 4.8bn. (USD 1.8bn) materially impacted by the low profit

Underlying profit by activity* • Net cash flow used for capital expenditure was USD 614m USDm (USD 1.7bn excluding the sale of shares in Danske Bank of Q2 2015 Q2 2016 USD 4.8bn) mainly driven by the acquisition of the jack-up 600 499 rig Maersk Highlander and development of the Culzean oil field 400 217 189 • Net interest bearing debt increased to USD 11.7bn (USD 130 159 164 200 109 109 10.7bn end-Q1 2016) mainly driven by dividend payment of 51 USD 1.0bn 0 • The Group maintains its strong financial position with an equity ratio of 55% and a liquidity reserve of USD 11.5bn. -200 -139 Maersk Maersk APM Maersk APM Line Oil Terminals Drilling Shipping Services • In H1 2016 the Group’s profit was USD 342m (USD 2.7bn)

*Underlying profit is equal to the profit or loss for the period excluding net impact from • Cash flow from operations in H1 was USD 1.2bn (USD 3.7bn) divestments and impairments page 7 Acceptable full year result in challenging times

Group Financial Highlights Group highlights FY 2015

USDm Underlying 2014 2015 • Group profit decreased 82% to USD 925m (2014: USD Profit profit*Free cash flow** 5.2bn) negatively impacted by net impairments of USD 8,000 6,561 2.6bn on oil assets as well as lower container freight rates and lower oil prices 6,000 5,195 4,532 • Group ROIC was 2.9% (2014: 11.0%) 4,000 3,071 2,588 • Underlying profit decreased to USD 3.1bn (2014: USD 2,000 4.5bn). All business units remained profitable but with 925 1,633 significantly lower profits in Maersk Line, Maersk Oil and 0 APM Terminals Profit Underlying Free cash flow** profit* • Free cash flow was USD 6.6bn (2014: USD 2.6bn). Excluding the sale of the shares in Danske Bank free cash flow was USD 1.6bn Underlying profit by activity* • Net cash flow used for capital expenditure came at USDm 2014 2015 USD 6.3bn (2014: USD 6.2bn), excluding the sale of 2,500 2,199 shares in Danske Bank of USD 4.9bn 2,000 • Cash flow from operating activities remained at a high 1,500 1,287 level of USD 8.0bn (2014: USD 8.8bn) 1,035 1,000 849 732 626 435 471 404 500 185 0 Maersk Line Maersk Oil APM Maersk APM Shipping Terminals Drilling Services

*Continuing businesses excluding net impact from divestments and impairments **From continuing operations page 8 Strategy update - Group

Strategic review Current strategy

The Group is performing well relative to the industries in During the ongoing strategic review the Group strategy which it operates. Seven out of eight business units were remains unchanged as previously communicated with a top-quartile performers in their industries in FY 2015, strategic direction of representing around 97% of the Group’s invested capital. • targeting profitable growth through The Group has achieved its strong operational performance through focused efforts to reduce cost, improve utilisation, • business optimization and cost efficiency operational uptime and production efficiency. • strong customer focus Currently, however, the Group is challenged by market • value-enhancing acquisitions headwinds in form of low growth and excess capacity in most of its industries, which has led to declining prices and • maintain top-quartile performance in all business units revenue. • grow our businesses and thereby achieve our ambition Recognizing the Group’s low growth and returns the Board of a ROIC above 10% over the cycle. The Group of Directors has during Q2 initiated a process to develop reiterates that in a low interest environment its and consider the strategic and structural options for the businesses can make investment decisions that on a Maersk Group to further increase agility and synergies. standalone basis do not fully comply with the 10% ROIC target The purpose of this review is to ensure that the Group remains strong, profitable and financially viable and that The Group continues to focus on ensuring a strong capital the Group develops new growth opportunities. structure and a high operating cash flow conversion with an ambition to increase the nominal dividend per share over Progress will be communicated before end of Q3 2016. time, supported by underlying earnings growth. page 9 Group strategy overview The Group’s ambition is for all our businesses to deliver top quartile returns and achieve above 10% ROIC over the cycle

• Growing at least with the market to defend our market leading position • EBIT margin 5%-points above peer average • Funded by own cash flow

MAERSK LINE • Average returns of 8.5-12.0% (ROIC)

• Mature key projects • Acquisitions and opportunistic investments • Focus on cost management MAERSK OIL

• Container and multiport (adjacent) expansion • Active portfolio management • Grow ahead of global transportation market APM TERMINALS

• Capitalize on large & new fleet • Maintain core focus on ultra-deepwater & harsh-environment market segments • Focus on cost savings initiatives

MAERSK DRILLING • Optimise operational efficiency performance

• Executing on cost programs • Rejuvenating part of the fleet

APM SHIPPING SERVICES page 10 Invested capital and ROIC

Breakdown of ROIC by business Guidance for 2016 The Group’s expectation of an underlying result significantly Invested ROIC % ROIC % ROIC % Business capital below last year (USD 3.1bn) is unchanged. Gross cash flow Q2 2016 Q2 2015 FY 2015 (USDm) used for capital expenditure is now expected to be around USD 6bn in 2016 (USD 7.1bn) from previously around USD Group 46,424 2.0% 10.2% 2.9% 7bn.

Maersk Line 20,002 -3.0% 10.1% 6.5% Sensitivities for 2016

Maersk Oil 4,302 12.1% 9.2% -38.6% Factors Change Effect on the Group’s underlying profit rest APM Terminals 7,815 5.8% 10.9% 10.9% of year Oil price for Maersk Oil + / - 10 USD/barrel + / - USD 0.16bn Maersk Drilling 8,044 8.3% 10.6% 9.3% Bunker price + / - 100 USD/tonne - / + USD 0.1bn Container freight rate + / - 100 USD/FFE + / - USD 0.5bn APM Shipping 4,836 -3.6% 11.8% 9.5% Services Container freight volume + / - 100,000 FFE + / - USD 0.1bn

Maersk 1,663 6.9% 8.9% 9.9% Tankers Sensitivity Guidance

Maersk Supply The Group’s guidance for 2016 is subject to considerable 1,727 -24.0% 15.2% 8.5% Service uncertainty, not least due to developments in the global economy, the container freight rates and the oil price. Svitzer 1,233 7.8% 11.6% 10.9% The Group’s expected underlying result depends on a number Damco 213 18.5% 8.9% 7.1% of factors. Based on the expected earnings level and all other things being equal, the sensitivities for the rest of year 2016 Other Businesses 832 -6.1% 0.9% 10.8% for four key value drivers are listed in the table above. page 11 Agenda

1 History and Group overview

2 Market Overview

3 Business segments

4 Financial review and strategy

5 Funding strategy page 12 Container shipping market Challenging market due to continued supply/demand imbalance

Continued pressure on freight rates …as supply continues to outgrow demand Index CCFI Global nominal capacity Global container demand Growth y/y, (%) Estimate 1400 10%

8% 1200 6% 1000 4%

800 2%

0% 600

400 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Note: Global nominal capacity is deliveries minus scrappings Source: Bloomberg Source: Alphaliner, CTS Idling only partly offsets increasing capacity Competitive landscape

Q/Q (TEUm) TEUm Current fleet Orderbook 1.2 21 TEUm 4.0 0.8 20 3.5 3.0 0.4 19 2.5 2.0 0.0 18 1.5 1.0 -0.4 17 0.5 - -0.8 16 13-Q1 13-Q3 14-Q1 14-Q3 15-Q1 15-Q3 16-Q1 Deliveries Scrapping Idling Gross Nominal Fleet (rhs) Idling Adjusted Active Fleet (rhs) Note : An increase in idling reduces the active fleet *Consolidated fleets for COSCO and CSCL Source: Alphaliner Source: Alphaliner as of April 1st, 2016 page 13 Maersk Line’s position

Cost initiatives Network optimisation Core EBIT margin gap (%) Unit cost, (USD/FFE) TEU m No. 3,200 3.5 450 10% CAGR -10.7% 9% 9%9% 9% 391 400 9% 8% 8% 3,000 3.0 8% 347 350 8% 8% 325 336 2.5 299 7%7% 2,800 326 305 300 7% 7% 277 283 270 275 274 285 6% 2.0 254 250 6% 6% 2,600 253 245 1.5 200 5% 5% Target 5% 4% 2,400 150 4% 1.0 3% 2,200 100 3% 0.5 50 2% 2% 2,000 0.0 0 1% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Q2 1,800 2016 0% Q2 Q4 Q2 Q4 Q2 Q4 Q2 Q4 Q2 Q4 Q2 Q4 Q2 Q4 Q2 Q4 Q2 Owned (TEU) Chartered (TEU) 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 15 16 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 15 Owned (No.) Chartered (No.)

• In Q2 2016 total costs decreased by • Maersk Line aims to continuously adjust • Maersk Line’s EBIT margin gap to peers 10% (reduction of USD 549m) against a capacity to match demand and optimise was around 8% in Q1 2016 - adjusting volume increase of 6.9% compared to utilisation for peers’ impairments it was around Q2 2015 5% • Network capacity increased by 2.2% • Unit cost improved by 15% y/y y/y to 3.1m TEU and by 5.0% q/q • Maersk Line regained the lead (reduction of 335 USD/FFE) and 7.2% compared to peers, with a Core EBIT q/q (reduction of 149 USD/FFE) • Chartered capacity increased 5.1% y/y Margin of 1.3% in Q1 2016 • Total bunker costs decreased by 40% while owned capacity increased 0.2% and had an impact of 124 USD/FFE on y/y unit cost • Cost initiatives announced in Q4 2015 are progressing as planned, including reducing cost through standardisation, automation and digitalisation

Note: See Appendix for data description and sources page 14 Oil market Supply shock has pushed oil prices to their lowest level in a decade Supply/demand imbalances… …leading to increases in oil stocks

mb/d mb/d mb

98 2.5 1,250 96 2.0 1,200 94 1.5 1,150 92 1.0 1,100 90 0.5 1,050 88 - 86 -0.5 1,000 84 -1.0 950 82 -1.5 900 80 -2.0 850 78 -2.5 800 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

supply/demand gap (RHS) Oil demand Oil supply OECD crude oil stocks

Source: Bloomberg Source: Bloomberg …and causing oil prices to drop Imbalances due to supply shock as demand is still growing USD/barrel 5% 4% 140 3% 120 2% 100 1% 80 0% 60 -1% 40 -2% 20 -3% 0 -4% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Brent crude IEA crude demand growth Source: Bloomberg Source: Bloomberg page 15 Maersk Oil’s position

Maersk Oil responses Maersk Oil’s share of production (‘000 boepd)

500 • Focus on building a sustainable cost base 424 429 387 377 400 • Expected 25-30% Opex savings by end of 2016 vs. 320- 321 333 330 2014 312 300 257 251 235 • Global workforce reduced by more than 1,500 positions (25%) compared to end-2014 200

• Focus on shifting from organic to inorganic growth 100

• Continuously optimising capital expenditure by active 0 portfolio management 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016e

DK UK Qatar Algeria Other • Investing through the cycle – Johan Sverdrup (NO) and Culzean (UK) Maersk Oil’s exploration costs* (USDm) • Maersk Oil completed the acquisition of 50% of Africa Oil’s shares in three onshore exploration 1,400 licences in Kenya and two contiguous licences in 1,200 1,149 Ethiopia. After nine successful exploration wells, 1,088 990 Maersk Oil and partners are evaluating the future 1,000 development options 831 765 800 676 • Break-even level unchanged at around USD 40-45 605 per barrel for full-year 2016 600 404 423 400 <423 229 200

0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016e

*All exploration costs are expensed directly unless the project has been declared commercial page 16 Container terminal market Slow down in volume growth due to challenging global economy Development in volumes Regional split of container volumes (2015F)

800 20% 4% 2% 700 16% 600 12% 7% 500 8% Asia/Middle East 400 4% 8% Europe 300 0% N America 200 -4% 15% C+S America 100 -8% 64% Africa 0 -12% Oceania 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015F 2016F

Asia/Middle East Europe N America C+S America Africa Oceania growth Y/Y (rhs) Source: Alphaliner, July 1st 2016 Source: Alphaliner, July 1st 2016 Growth by region Competitive landscape

8% 60 12% 50 10% 6% 40 8%

4% 30 6% 20 4% 2% 10 2% 0 0% 0%

-2% Asia/ME Europe N America C+S Africa Oceania Total America

2013-2014 2014-2015F Equity weighted throughput (TEUm) % share (rhs) *excl. the acquired GrupTCB Terminals Source: Alphaliner, July 1st 2016 Source: Drewry Maritime Research for 2015, July 2016 page 17 APM Terminals’ position Diversified global portfolio

Container throughput by geographical region Port volume growth development (%) (equity weighted crane lifts, %) 10% 72 65 8% 62 64 63 6% 55 Americas Africa & 4% 16% Middle East 17% 2% 0% 38 35 36 36 -2% 34 Europe, Asia -4% Russia and 27% -6% 18 Baltics 40% -8% 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 H1 2016 Throughput (TEUm) Equity weighted throughput Total throughput of Like-for-like Global market 9.4m TEU in Q2 2016 No. of terminals Note: Like-for-like volumes exclude divestments and acquisitions Average remaining concession length in years Adapting to the market

• Terminals in oil dependent markets face declining volumes 30 26 25 • APM Terminals is responding by accelerating ongoing cost 25 21 saving initiatives in all controlled entities and head offices 20 • Continued portfolio optimisation, including: 16 15 14 • The Grup Maritim TCB acquisition for 8 of 11 terminals mainly in Spain and Latin America was concluded in 10 March, with an estimated annual equity weighted volume of 2m TEU 5 • Integration of Grup Maritim TCB is progressing as 0 planned and contributed with a small result in Q2 Americas Europe, Asia Africa and Total portfolio Russia and Middle East • The enlarged portfolio including the projects under Baltics implementation may create opportunities for Note: Average concession lengths as of Q2 2016, arithmetic mean consolidation and potentially divestments. page 18 Offshore drilling market Drop in oil prices has led to reduced rig demand and decreasing dayrates

Global rig utilisation Continued bifurcation in Dayrates decline as a decreasing as supply utilisation for rigs delivered reaction to the rig supply- outpaces demand before and after 2000 demand imbalance

Demand Supply Floaters (Post-2000) UDW Dayrates Utilisation (RHS) Floaters (Pre-2000) Premium JU Dayrates (RHS) No. of rigs USD `000s

1,000 90% 100% 600 300

90% 500 250 800 80% 80% 400 200 600

70% 70% 300 150

400 60% 200 100 60% 200 50% 100 50

- 50% 40% - - 2010 2012 2014 2016 2010 2012 2014 2016 2010 2012 2014 2016

Note: 2016YTD Source: IHS Petrodata, Maersk Drilling page 19 Maersk Drilling’s position Strong forward coverage with backlog providing revenue visibility

Contract coverage Revenue backlog, USDbn Revenue backlog by customer

100% 2.0 Others

80% Exxon Mobil BP 1.5 4%4% 73% ~1.5 Total 6% 60% Conoco 33% 8% 56% ~1.2 Phillips 1.0 ~1.1 USD 40% 45% 8% ~0.9 ENI 4.7bn Ghana 0.5 11% Maersk 20% 15% Oil Det Norske 11% Statoil 0% 0.0 ROY 2017 2018 ROY 2017 2018 2019+ 2016 2016 Source: Maersk Drilling

• Commitment to enhancing resiliency has enabled 15% cost reduction since Q4 2014 • Cost reduction and efficiency enhancement programme initiated in 2014, focusing on: • Evaluating operational expenditures, administrative and overhead costs • Optimisation of yardstays and maintenance • Strategic approach to stacking • Five rigs were available by end-Q2 2016, further five rigs will come off contracts in the remainder of 2016. page 20 APM Shipping Services

• Q2 2016 NOPAT USD -106m (Q2 2015: USD 64m), ROIC of • Q2 2016 NOPAT USD 28m (Q2 2015: USD 35m), ROIC of -24.0% (Q2 2015: 15.2%) 6.9% (Q2 2015: 8.9%). • The market demand in the offshore industry remains low • Improving profitability and relative performance through due to the low oil prices. In addition, there is a significant improved commercial initiatives and cost savings. global oversupply of offshore support vessels • Increasing vessel supply and flat demand for oil products • Significant cost improvements during 2015 and continued due to high stock levels and disruption of supply in several focus on improving the cost base during 2016 aiming at locations, is causing reduction in rates across all segments double digit percentage reductions of the market • 300+ seafarers made redundant (15% of crew pool) resulting in annual savings of USD 21.5m

• Q2 2016 NOPAT USD 24m (Q2 2015: USD 32m), ROIC of • Q2 2016 NOPAT USD 10m (Q2 2015: USD 7m), ROIC of 7.8% (Q2 2015: 11.6%) 18.5% (Q2 2015: 8.9%) • Improved financial and operating performance driven by • Continued positive impact from cost saving initiatives, improved productivity, cost saving initiatives and higher improved processes and operational efficiencies market shares in harbour towage • Positive development in supply chain management • Growth potentially negatively impacted by the difficult margins, while air and ocean freight margins remained outlook for commodity exports, shipping and offshore in under pressure general • Focus remains on generating profitable and sustainable growth through cost optimisation, customer service improvements, improving productivity and supply chain management product development. Title of presentation | page 21 Agenda

1 History and Group overview

2 Market Overview

3 Business segments

4 Financial review and strategy

5 Funding strategy page 22 Maersk Line – loss making at all-time low rates

Q2 Q2 FY (USD million) Change Maersk Line highlights Q2 2016 2016 2015 2015 • Maersk Line reported an underlying loss of USD 139m (profit Revenue 5,061 6,263 -19% 23,729 of USD 499m) and a ROIC of -3.0% (10.1%) due to EBITDA 365 998 -63% 3,324 significantly lower freight rates • Volume increased 6.9% to 2.7m FFE, while global container Underlying profit -139 499 NA 1,287 demand is estimated to have grown around 2%. The global container fleet grew around 6% Reported profit -151 507 NA 1,303 • Maersk Line’s capacity grew by 2.2% to 3.1m TEU. Chartered Operating cash flow 89 873 -90% 3,271 capacity grew by 5.1% to accommodate increased volume while owned capacity grew by 0.2% Volume (FFE ‘000) 2,655 2,484 6.9% 9,522 • Freight rates declined 24% and deteriorated across all trades Rate (USD/FFE) 1,716 2,261 -24% 2,209 with North America and West Central Asia declining most, and Africa, Oceania and European trades also notably lower than Bunker (USD/tonne) 194 335 -42% 315 Q2 2015 • EBIT-margin gap to peers is estimated to be around 8% in Q1 -3.0 10.1 -13.1pp 6.5 ROIC (%) 2016 and around the 5% when adjusting for impairments Global nominal capacity and demand growth • Free cash flow was negative USD 20m (USD 12m) Growth y/y, (%) • Cash flow from operating activities was USD 89m (USD 10% 873m) impacted by reduced profit and worsening net working capital 8% • Cash flow used for capital expenditures declined to USD 6% 109m (USD 861m) mainly as a result of lower vessel 4% investments and divestments. 2% 2016 Guidance: 0% Maersk Line reiterates the expectation of an underlying result Q1 Q3 Q1 Q3 Q1 Q3 Q1 significantly below last year (USD 1.3bn). Global demand for 2013 2013 2014 2014 2015 2015 2016 seaborne container transportation is still expected to increase Global nominal capacity Global container demand by 1-3%. Maersk Line aims to grow at least with the market to Note: Global nominal capacity is deliveries minus scrappings defend its market leading position. Source: Alphaliner, CTS page 23 Maersk Oil – reducing operating expenses further

Q2 Q2 FY (USD million) Change 2016 2015 2015 Maersk Oil highlights Q2 2016 • Underlying profit decreased to USD 130m (USD 217m) mainly due Revenue 1,278 1,583 -19% 5,639 to 26% lower oil price, partly offset by increased production and reduced costs Exploration costs 47 109 -57% 423 • ROIC increased to 12.1% (9.2%) EBITDA 755 849 -11% 2,748 • Entitlement production increased 8.2% to 331,000 boepd (306,000 boepd) primarily driven by higher entitlement share in Underlying profit 130 217 -40% 435 Qatar and increased efficiency in the UK, partly offset by a natural decline and maintenance shut downs in Denmark Reported profit 131 137 -4.4% -2,146 • Operating expenses excluding exploration costs was reduced by 25% compared to Q2 2015 to USD 475m (USD 632m). Total cost 514 611 -16% 1,768 Operating cash flow savings by the end-2016 are now expected to be 25-30% compared to end-2014 Prod. (boepd ’000) 331 306 8.2% 312 • Exploration costs decreased by 57% to USD 47m (USD 109m) Brent (USD per barrel) 46 62 -26% 52 • Break-even level unchanged at around USD 40-45 per barrel for full year 2016 ROIC (%) 12.1 9.2 2.9pp -38.6 • Qatar Petroleum announced that Maersk Oil was not selected to participate in the joint venture operating the Al Shaheen field Maersk Oil’s entitlement share of production from July 2017 ‘000 boepd • The financial impact of not continuing production in Qatar is Q2 2015 Q2 2016 limited as a new contract would have been on less attractive 150 139 terms compared to the existing terms 120 120 • The tender result will not lead to any impairments or reduce Maersk Oil’s reserves and resource base which was disclosed in 90 7785 the Q1 2016 interim report. 64 60 57 2016 Guidance: 34 Maersk Oil now expects a positive underlying result versus 29 previously a break-even result. A break-even result is still to be 30 6 9 6 6 reached with an oil price in the range of USD 40-45 per barrel. 0 1 4 0 0 Maersk Oil maintains an expected entitlement production of Qatar UK DK Algeria US Kazakhstan Kurdistan Brazil 320,000 - 330,000 boepd (312,000 boepd). Exploration costs are now expected to be significantly below last year (USD 423m) versus previously to be below 2015. page 24 APM Terminals – ROIC remains under pressure

Q2 Q2 FY (USD million) Change APM Terminals highlights Q2 2016 2016 2015 2015 • APM Terminals delivered an underlying profit of USD 109m Revenue 1,064 1,033 3.0% 4,240 (USD 159m) and a ROIC of 5.8% (10.9%) EBITDA 187 206 -9.2% 845 • Throughput increased 2.6% mainly due to the acquisition Share of profit: of Grup TCB, while global market grew 2.3%. Like for like - Associated companies 25 22 14% 85 throughput increased 0.2% - Joint ventures 22 32 -31% 114 • Terminals in oil dependent markets faced declining volumes Underlying profit 109 159 -31% 626 and commercially challenged terminals in Latin America, North-West Europe and Egypt have not regained business Reported profit 112 161 -30% 654 to compensate earlier lost services

Operating cash flow 163 176 -7.4% 874 • APM Terminals is responding by accelerating ongoing cost saving initiatives in all controlled entities and head offices Throughput (TEU m) 9.4 9.2 2.6% 36.0 • Operating businesses generated a ROIC of 8.8% (12.5%) ROIC (%) 5.8 10.9 -5.1pp 10.9 while projects under implementation had a ROIC of negative 2.1% (negative 6.3%) resulting from start-up Volume growth and underlying ROIC development* costs 15% • Integration of Grup Maritim TCB is progressing as planned and contributed with a small result in Q2 10% • The enlarged portfolio including the projects under 5% implementation may create opportunities for consolidation and potentially divestments. 0% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Q2 2016 2016 Guidance: -5% APM Terminals now expects an underlying result significantly below 2015 (USD 626m) versus previously below the 2015 -10% level, due to reduced demand expectations in oil producing Underlying ROIC Throughput growth emerging economies and network adjustments by customers.

*Excluding net impact from divestments and impairments page 25 Maersk Drilling - solid operational performance

Q2 Q2 FY (USD million) Change Maersk Drilling highlights Q2 2016 2016 2015 2015 • Maersk Drilling reported an underlying profit of USD 164m Revenue 566 624 -9.3% 2,517 (USD 189m) negatively impacted by more idle rigs. ROIC EBITDA 330 361 -8.6% 1,396 was 8.3% (10.6%) Underlying profit 164 189 -13% 732 • Cost has been reduced by 8% compared to Q2 2015 and by more than 15% since the launch of the cost reduction Reported profit 164 218 -25% 751 program in Q4 2014

Operating cash flow 129 248 -48% 1,283 • The average operational uptime was 98% (98%) for the jack-up rigs and 99% (96%) for the floating rigs

Fleet (operating units) 23 23 0 22 • Forward contract coverage was 73% for 2016, 56% for 2017 and 45% for 2018. Revenue backlog was USD 4.7bn Contracted days 1,686 1,671 0.9% 7,086 (USD 5.3bn) by end-Q2 2016

ROIC (%) 8.3 10.6 -2.3pp 9.3 • The lower cash flow from operating activities of USD 129m (USD 248m) was due to higher net working capital

Revenue backlog end-Q2 2016 • Maersk Drilling acquired a newbuild harsh environment jack-up rig, Maersk Highlander, for USD 190m backed by a USDbn ~1.5 five-year drilling contract with a revenue value of 1.5 approximately USD 420m

~1.1 • An early termination agreement for Maersk Valiant was 1.0 ~0.9 signed with effect from mid-September 2016, leaving ~0.6 Maersk Drilling financially neutral to the original contract ~0.6 • Five rigs were available by end-Q2 2016. Another five rigs 0.5 (including Valiant) will come off contract during the remainder of 2016.

0.0 2016 Guidance: ROY 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020+ Maersk Drilling now expects an underlying result below last year (USD 732m) up from significantly below last year, due to the positive impact from the termination fees. page 26 APM Shipping Services – deteriorating markets

Q2 Q2 FY (USD million) Change APM Shipping Services highlights Q2 2016 2015 2015 Revenue 1,109 1,234 -10% 5,080 APM Shipping Services reported an underlying profit of USD 51m (USD 109m) and a ROIC of -3.6% (11.8%) EBITDA 157 214 -27% 809 Maersk Tankers was negatively affected by declining rates Underlying profit 51 109 -53% 404 across all segments driven by increased vessel supply and flat demand for oil products, partly offset by improved Reported profit -44 138 NA 446 commercial performance and cost savings

Operating cash flow 127 193 -34% 806 Maersk Supply Service remains significantly impacted by lower rates and utilisation. The company made a USD 97m ROIC (%) -3.6 11.8 -15.4pp 9.5 impairment related to old vessels with limited trading opportunities, and focus on improving the cost base during Underlying profit by activity* 2016 continues with the aim at reaching double digit percentage reduction. By the end of Q2 Maersk Supply USDm Q2 2015 Q2 2016 Service had 13 vessels in lay-up 50 39 Svitzer improved underlying profitability through 40 33 30 productivity and cost saving initiatives, but experienced a 26 30 23 high level of integration and start-up costs in Americas, in 20 addition to a weak salvage market 10 7 10 Damco increased underlying profit mainly driven by cost 0 saving initiatives, improved processes and operational efficiencies. Focus in 2016 will remain on generating -10 -8 profitable and sustainable growth through cost optimisation -20 and customer service improvements. Maersk Maersk Supply Svitzer Damco Tankers Service 2016 Guidance: APM Shipping Services reiterates the expectation of an *Underlying profit is equal to the profit or loss for the period excluding net impact from divestments and impairments underlying result significantly below the 2015 result (USD 404m) predominantly due to significantly lower rates and activity in Maersk Supply Service. page 27 Agenda

1 History and Group overview

2 Market Overview

3 Business segments

4 Financial review and strategy

5 Funding strategy page 28 A strong financial framework

Strong financial position Active portfolio management USDbn Cash flow from divestments has been USD 17.5bn with divestment 20 125% gains of USD 5.8bn pre-tax since 2009 USDbn 16 100% 7 15.3 5.8 14.5 6 12 75% 12.4 11.6 11.7 5 4.4 8 9.6 50% 4 3.4 8.9 8.8 3.3 7.7 8.0 7.8 6.7 7.0 3 4 25% 2 1.4 1.2 1.2 0.7 1 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.4 0 0% 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 H1 2016 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 H1 2016 CFFO NIBD CFFO/NIBD* (rhs) Cash flow from divestments Divestment gains (pre-tax) *Calculated based on annualized CFFO for Q1 2016 Investment in growth Balanced cash flows USDbn 12 CFFO Capex Divestments 10.8 9.6 Dividends Share Buyback Net 9.1 USDbn 8.9 8.8 8.7 8.0 15 8 7.2 6.7 7.0 6.3 10

5.1 5 5.4 4 2.9 0 3.1 2.7 0.4 -0.5 1.2 -5 -2.4 -4.4 -4.5 -10 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 H1 2016 -15 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 H1 2016 Cash flow from operating Cash flow for capital expenditure, activities gross page 29 Strong platform

Historically stable cash flows (CFFO) Our businesses are top quartile performers USDbn Below WACC return and top Above WACC return and top 12 quartile performance quartile performance Top quartile 10 performance in 2015

8 Note: Adjusted for Maersk Oil impairments

6

4 Not top quartile performance 2 in 2015 Below WACC return and not Above WACC return and not top quartile performance top quartile performance 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 H1 2016 Below BU WACC return in Above BU WACC return in 2015 2015 Maersk Line Maersk Oil APMT Maersk Drilling APM SS Source: Maersk Group Limited capital commitments Flexible capex process

USDbn Maersk Line Maersk Oil APM Terminals 12 Maersk Drilling APM Shipping Services $

From 5 year capital 8 allocation plan

4 $ per year for the 2016 2017 2018… planning period

Non-approved 0 Financial ROY 2016 2017 2018-2021 2021+ Total flexibility Approved – not committed externally Maersk Line Maersk Oil APMT Maersk Drilling APM Shipping Services Approved and committed externally For illustration purposes pagepage 3030 Agenda

1 History and Group overview

2 Market Overview

3 Business segments

4 Financial review and strategy

5 Funding strategy page 31 Financial policy and funding strategy

Defined key financial ratios in line with strong investment grade rating Key ratio guidelines: • Equity / Total Assets ≥ 40% The Maersk Group’s financial policy • Equity / Adj. Total Assets* ≥ 30% • Adj. FFO / Adj. Net Debt* ≥ 30% • Adj. Interest Coverage Ratio* ≥ 4x *Adjusted for operating lease obligations

• BBB+ (credit watch negative) and Baa1 (stable) ratings from S&P and Financial Moody’s policy • Liquidity reserve1 of USD 11.5bn2 Funding status and • Average debt maturity of about four years2 funding • Undrawn facilities of USD 9.0bn with 23 global banks2 strategy • Pledged assets represent 6% of total assets3

• Focus on securing long term funding • Funding from diversified sources gives access to market in volatile times • Continued diversification through debt capital markets issuance Ongoing funding • Ample liquidity resources strategy • Centralised funding and risk management at Group level • Funding is primarily raised at parent company level and on unsecured basis • No financial covenants or MAC clauses in corporate financing agreements

1 Cash and bank balances and securities (excl. restricted cash and securities) plus undrawn revolving credit facilities with more than one year to expiry 2 As of 30 June 2016 3 As of 31 December 2015 Note: As announced on 23 June 2016, the Board of Directors has tasked the management to investigate the strategic and structural options to further increase agility and synergies. The Board of Directors will communicate on the progress before end of 3rd quarter 2016. page 32 Conservative long term funding position Q2 2016

Loan profile for the Group Public debt capital markets maturities

USDbn USDbn

10 2.5

8 2.0

6 1.5

4 1.0

2 0.5

0 0.0 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026+ 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026+

Drawn debt Corporate bonds Undrawn revolving facilities* USD EUR NOK SEK GBP * USD 5.1bn facility previously expiring in 2020 was extended to 2021 in May 2016

Funding sources (drawn debt) Borrower structure (drawn debt)

USDbn USDbn 16 16 5% 7% 21% 14% 17% Export credit agencies & 28% 12 18% 12 6% 6% 17% multilateral institutions 22% 19% 29% 12% 24% 22% Ship financing institutions Joint ventures* 8 27% & leases 8 10% 100% owned subsidiaries 17% Bank financing 13% 76% A.P. Møller - Maersk A/S 67% 75% 4 57% 4 70% 50% Bonds 33% 38%

0 0 2013 2014 2015 Q2 2016 2013 2014 2015 Q2 2016 * Mostly non-recourse financing page 33 Operating lease obligations end-2015

Operating lease tenor split Adjusted net debt

USDbn 16

14 20% 2016 12 2017 7.0 10 5.0 43% 2018 8 14% 2019 14.8 6 12.7 2020 4 7.8 9% After 2020 6% 8% 2 0 Gross debt Total interest- Net debt Lease Adjusted net bearing assets commitments debt

USD million Maersk Line APM Terminals All other businesses Total

2016 1,221 248 426 1,895 2017 770 244 287 1,301 2018 524 228 151 903 2019 443 226 90 759 2020 277 226 79 582 After 2020 136 3,651 251 4,038 Total 3,371 4,823 1,284 9,478

Net present value 3,015 2,866 1,104 6,985 page 34 Ownership and dividend policy

Summary The Foundation • The shares are listed on NASDAQ OMX Copenhagen and are divided into two classes • A shares with voting rights. Each A share entitles the A.P. Møller og Hustru Chastine Mc-Kinney Møllers Fond til holder to two votes almene Formaal, Copenhagen, Denmark • B shares without voting rights (The Foundation) • The Foundation was established in 1953 100% • The ambition is to increase the nominal dividend per share over time, supported by underlying earnings growth A.P. Møller Holding A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark • 18.4% ownership in Danske bank divested in Q1 2015. A.P. Møller Holding A/S bought 17%, other shareholders bought 1.4% and the Group has 1.6% of Danske Bank shares Share capital 41.5% classified as held for trading Voting rights 51.2% • A 12 month share buy-back programme for approximately A.P. Møller - Mærsk A/S USD 1bn (DKK 6.7bn) was announced in August 2015. The (Issuer) program was executed from 1 September 2015 to 31 March 2016. The shares bought under the programme was cancelled on 21 June 2016. Dividend history* Key shareholders Dividend pr. share (%) (DKK) Dividend yield Share 350 3.5% Votes capital 300 3.0% 250 2.5% A.P. Møller Holding A/S, Copenhagen, 41.5% 51.2% 200 2.0% Denmark 150 1.5% A.P. Møller og Hustru Chastine Mc-Kinney 8.8% 13.1% 100 1.0% Møllers Familiefond, Copenhagen, Denmark 50 0.5% Den A.P. Møllerske Støttefond, Copenhagen, 0 0.0% 3.1% 6.0% 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Denmark Dividend DKK pr. share (LHS) Dividend yield (RHS)

* Adjusted for bonus shares issue page 35 The Maersk Group – summary

Summary

Business • Balanced business portfolio diversification across industries and geographies portfolio • Competitive advantages due to large scale and industry leadership in transportation

• World leading in container shipping, terminals and product tankers, solid market position in oil & gas Leading and drilling position • Strong brand recognition

• Reduced overall business risk, due to • Business and geographic diversification Risk profile • Strong balance sheet • Historical strong cash flow generation • Stable ownership structure allowing long-term stability

• Prudent financial policies in place • Conservative dividend policy Financial • Strong credit metrics policy • Significant financial flexibility – no financial covenants in corporate finance agreements and limited encumbered assets

Rated by • Moody’s: Baa1 (stable) Moody’s and • S&P: BBB+ (credit watch negative) S&P page 36

Appendix page 37 Maersk Line Capacity market share by trade

16% no.3 no.3 no.2 no.1 no.3 15% Intra 21% 8% Europe Pacific Atlantic Asia-Europe Pacific

no.4 9% Intra 8% Asia no.1 Intra Trade Δ y/y America Latin Africa West- Oceania Asia-Europe -1pp America Central Atlantic +10pp Asia Pacific +1pp Oceania +1pp 26% 26% 17% 16% West-Central Asia 0pp Africa -2pp Latin America +3pp no.1 no.1 no.1 no.1 Intra Europe +2pp Intra Asia +1pp Intra America +1pp Maersk Line capacity (TEU)

East-West 40.5% North-South 48.2% Intra 11.4% Capacity market share no. Market position

Note: 1)West-Central Asia is defined as import and export to and from Middle East and India. 2) Trades mapped as per ML definition. 3) ML EW market shares calculated as ML accessible capacity based on internal data on ML-MSC allocation split applied to 2M capacity market share (deployed capacity data from Alphaliner) Source: Alphaliner as of 2015 FY (end period), Maersk Line page 38 Maersk Oil’s Key Projects

Sanctioned development projects

Working Net Capex Plateau Production Project First Production Operator Interest (USD Billion) (Entitlement, boepd) Swara Tika (Iraqi 2015 18% 0.1 6,000 HKN Energy Kurdistan) Flyndre1) 2017 73.7% ~0.5 8,000 Maersk Oil (UK/Norway) Johan Sverdrup Late 2019 8.44% 1.8 29,000 Statoil Phase 1 (Norway) Culzean (UK) 2019 49.99% 2.3 30-45,000 Maersk Oil

Major discoveries under evaluation (Pre-Sanctioned Projects2)

Project First Working Net Capex Plateau Production Production Interest Estimate Estimate Estimate (USD Billion) (Entitlement, boepd)

South Lokichar (Kenya) 2021 25% TBD TBD Chissonga (Angola) TBD 65% TBD TBD Buckskin3 (USA) TBD 20% TBD TBD

1) The Cawdor project, originally co-developed with Flyndre, is currently deemed sub-economic and has been recycled into the Assess stage 2) Significant uncertainties about time frames, net capex estimates and production forecast 3) Buckskin being re-evaluated following operator Chevrons decision to exit page 39 Maersk Oil’s portfolio (Q2 2016)

Exploration Resources Project Maturation Process Reserves Production

Prospects in Initiate & Assess the pipeline1) Discoveries Select Define Execute Assets

Southern Area Jack II Fields2) Yeoman USA Johan Farsund Sverdrup II3) Denmark Johan Sverdrup I South Drumtochty Kazakhstan Lokichar Buckskin Flyndre 6) Iraqi Itaipu Zidane Kurdistan Alma Swara Tika Wahoo Adda LC UK Chissonga5) Tyra Future

Algeria Quad9 Gas Greater Culzean 6) Blowdown Gryphon Cawdor Area4) Total of 25 exploration Tap o’Noth Qatar prospects and leads in Harald East the exploration pipeline Dunga 2016

Total 25 6 11 12 3 15 Total no. of projects per phase

Uncertainty

Bubble size indicates estimate of net resources: Colour indicates resource type: >100 mmboe 50-100 mmboe <50 mmboe Primarily oil Primarily gas Discoveries and prospects (Size of bubbles do not reflect volumes)

1) Includes Kenya and Ethiopia prospects, and total prospect numbers are adjusted for recent acreage relinquishments 2) Southern Area Fields cover Dan Area Redevelopment and Greater Halfdan FDP projects (Denmark) 3) Phase 2 of the Johan Sverdrup development (Norway) is expected to commence production in 2022 4) Greater Gryphon Area project has been reduced to a number of small well projects to be matured on an individual basis with different timing 5) Reevaluating options in light of the low oil price 6) The Cawdor project, originally co-developed with Flyndre, is currently deemed sub-economic and has been recycled into the Assess stage page 40 Maersk Oil’s reserves and resources

End End (million boe) 2015 2014

Proved reserves (1P) 408 327

Probable reserves (2Pincremental) 241 183

Proved and Probable reserves (2P) 649 510

Contingent resources (2C) 492 801

Reserves and resources (2P + 2C) 1,141 1,311

2015 Highlights

• 1P Reserves Replacement Ratio (RRR) increased to 171% with 114m boe entitlement production in 2015 (RRR 2014: 30%)

• Significant 2P reserves additions, mainly from Johan Sverdrup and Culzean, of close to 300m boe

• 2P + 2C reserves and resources decreased 13% due to production and revision of projects mainly caused by lower oil price

• No Qatar reserves or resources included post 2017. page 41 Consolidated financial information

Q2 Q2 H1 H1 FY Income statement (USD million) Change Change 2016 2015 2016 2015 2015 Revenue 8,861 10,526 -16% 17,400 21,073 -17% 40,308 EBITDA 1,779 2,631 -32% 3,376 5,201 -35% 9,074 Depreciation, etc. 1,294 1,223 5.8% 2,456 2,324 5.7% 7,944 Gain on sale of non-current assets, etc. net 111 68 63% 122 343 -64% 478 EBIT 656 1,539 -57% 1,146 3,362 -66% 1,870 Financial costs, net -154 -80 93% -275 -151 82% -423 Profit before tax 502 1,459 -66% 871 3,211 -73% 1,447 Tax 384 373 2.9% 529 553 -4.3% 522 Profit for the period 118 1,086 -89% 342 2,658 -87% 925 Underlying profit 134 1,099 -88% 348 2,418 -86% 3,071

Q2 Q2 H1 H1 FY Key figures (USD million) Change Change 2016 2015 2016 2015 2015

Cash Flow from operating activities 940 1,777 -47% 1,190 3,727 -68% 7,969 Cash Flow used for capital expenditure -614 3,075 NA -2,477 1,432 NA -1,408 Net interest bearing debt 11,706 8,835 32% 11,706 8,835 33% 7,770 Earnings per share (USD) 5 49 -90% 15 121 -88% 37 ROIC (%) 2.0 10.2 -8.2pp 2.4 12.0 -9.6pp 2.9 Dividend per share (DKK) 300 page 42 The Executive Board - acts as the daily management of the Group

APM Shipping Services Søren Skou CEO of Maersk Years with Maersk: 33 Other Education: APM Shipping, MBA (IMD), HD-A (CBS)

Maersk Oil Maersk Line Maersk Drilling Finance APM Terminals

Jakob Thomasen Søren Skou Claus V. Hemmingsen Trond Ø. Westlie Kim Fejfer CEO of Maersk Oil CEO of Maersk Line CEO of Maersk Drilling CFO of Maersk CEO of APM Terminals Years with Maersk: 28 Years with Maersk: 33 Years with Maersk : 35 Years with Maersk: 6 Years with Maersk: 24 Education: M.Sc. Education: APM Education: APM Education: Chartered Education: M.Sc. Geology Shipping, MBA (IMD), shipping, MBA (IMD) accountant, ICAEW Finance and Economics HD-A (CBS) page 43 Notes

Contract Coverage chart, slide 13 Note: Unit cost excluding gain/loss, restructuring, share of profit/loss from associated companies and including VSA income. Source: Maersk Line

Core EBIT margin gap to peers, (% pts.) chart, slide 13 Note: Peer group includes CMA CGM, APL, Hapag Lloyd, Hanjin, ZIM, Hyundai MM, K Line, NYK, MOL, COSCO, CSCL and OOCL. Peer average is TEU-weighted. EBIT margins are adjusted for gains/losses on sale of assets, restructuring charges, income/loss from associates. Maersk Line’ EBIT margin is also adjusted for depreciations to match industry standards (25 years). Source: Alphaliner, Company reports, Maersk Line