US Oil and Gas Price Objective Change

Equity | United States | Oils 13 April 2015

Sector strategy: improving confidence in recovery

Doug Leggate

Research Analyst MLPF&S  Sector strategy: improving confidence in a recovery The US energy sector outlook continues to be dominated by an oil price debate Jason Smith anchored on two issues: near term risk and whether there is any value after strong Research Analyst MLPF&S recent sector performance and based on an uncertain long term oil price outlook. In this short note we revisit our strategy that through the downturn has been to layer into John H. Abbott greater sector exposure, with a simplified valuation framework anchored on a mid Research Analyst cycle multiple of cash flow. On this basis we suggest the ‘average’ price discounted by MLPF&S

the US oils is currently ~$65. In an accompanying “Taking the long term” we lay out our case for confidence in a directional recovery but where we contend the ‘strip’ is not Kalei Akamine Research Analyst enough. In summary we maintain our view that the US oils on the whole are MLPF&S undervalued and continue to advocate a gradual shift towards higher ‘beta’ exposure, but with one eye on portfolio quality and balance sheet strength.

First upward revisions to PO’s since the downturn Table 1: PO Changes We continue to believe we are approaching an inflection in near term oil price risk New PO Previous PO with the very real possibility US shale production rolls over just as US refiners return APC $116 $103 from maintenance. Notable is that the pace of slowdown in the US rig count has APA $85 $75 surpassed our service team’s prior expectations while the scale and speed of cost CHK $10 $9 COG $40 $40 reductions in the lower 48 in particular is an increasingly dominant theme emerging CRC $15 $14 from recent industry discussions. In summary the market is running out of reasons CVX $106 $101 for oil to go lower: longer term, the debate turns to what oil price is sustainable. In COP $85 $77 the accompanying report we lay the BofA ML case that underlines confidence in a CLR $70 $67 necessary recovery. With a medium term oil price outlook of $80 Brent / $75 WTI, DVN $86 $85 revised higher from ‘strip’, we introduce the first upward revisions to price targets for EOG $105 $97 HES $100 $95 the large / SMID E&P’s since the collapse in oil prices in late 2014. MRO $36 $32 NBL $65 $62 Layering in to higher ‘beta’ exposure: MRO upgraded to Buy OXY $101 $98 We maintain OXY as our top idea, with ‘beta’ leverage through midcaps, CLR, PXD, PXD $200 $190 XEC, CXO and CRC. Amongst large caps, COP, HES, DVN and APC offer RRC $86 $85 SWN $47 $46 ‘conservative’ beta exposure. Underlining our view of an improving balance of XOM $103 $101 sector risk Marathon Oil is added to our ‘Buy’ list: while this mainly reflects an SMID updated view of recent portfolio developments it also acknowledges that MRO has CXO $138 $129 lagged a strong sector recovery despite favorable oil leverage, with the balance XEC $140 $134 sheet and yield to navigate continued near term volatility. EPE $14 $14 LPI $9 $8 MRD $26 $29 Improving balance of sector risk OAS $18 $17 In our view, the confluence of higher refining demand and a rollover in US shale PDCE $66 $62 production is improving the balance of risk for oil prices. Globally we believe the ROSE $24 $23 industry is set up a period of under investment akin to 1999 that risks another spike WLL $45 $43 higher at some point – precisely what OPEC’s attempts to manage oil prices have Source: BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research sought to avoid. Modest downside risk remains, while US refining maintenance

winds down: but on anything beyond a short term view we believe that balance of risk for the sector is improving and warrants a gradual shift to higher exposure.

BofA Merrill Lynch does and seeks to do business with companies covered in its research reports. As a result, investors should be aware that the firm may have a conflict of interest that could affect the objectivity of this report. Investors should consider this report as only a single factor in making their investment decision. Refer to important disclosures on page 21 to 23. Analyst Certification on Page 19. Price Objective Basis/Risk on page 14. 11502903

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

Contents Sector strategy update 3

Greater confidence in the long term 3

Impact on valuation 6

Focus on MRO 10

Summary 11

Appendix 12

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

Chart 1: US Oils: pricing off the long term Sector strategy update 1.20 1.10 Greater confidence in the long term 1.00 0.90 While substantial volatility continues to characterize the oil price outlook, the large 0.80 cap and SMID US oils have staged a solid recovery since the start of the year. On 0.70 0.60 average absolute performance has ranged between 5% and 100%, albeit the 0.50 0.40 most significant rebound has been reserved for the most levered stocks, with 0.30 greatest exposure to balance sheet risk as shown in the chart below. 0.20 However, despite strong sector performance we are struck by the extent to which the Jul-14 Oct-14 Apr-15 Apr-14 Jun-14 Jan-15 Jan-14 Feb-15 Mar-15 Feb-14 Mar-14 Aug-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Dec-14 May-14 sector has continue to track the long term price outlook – underlining our long XOI Index BRENT BRENT June 2018 standing view that it is confidence in the long term oil price that is the critical determinant of whether value still exists across the large and SMID cap US oils. A Source: BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research glance at the margin chart underlines the relationship we observe between the XOI, as a proxy for the US oils, and the long dated Brent contract – on this case, Dec 2018.

Chart 2: Performance from 12/15/14 to 4/10/15 & Upside to PO

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

-20%

-40%

Source: BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research

While this does not yet capture the full extent of expected cost reductions as the industry adjusts to a lower commodity outlook, we have argued that at ‘strip’ prices the sector continues to offer material upside – albeit for some names this has been eroded by strong performance to date.

In recent discussions with investors this has arguably become the single biggest point of debate: if the long term oil futures has only modest upside from here, does the sector continues to offer attractive upside given this already appears ‘discounted’. In this note we address two issues: the long term oil price outlook as a driver of perceived value and the assessment of what is discounted.

Our conclusion is that on average, we estimate the large and SMID US oils currently ‘discount’ average oil prices around ~$65; however, given the apparent significance of long term oil prices as a screen for determining fair value, we also take the debate on the outlook for long term oil prices and the implications for our sector coverage. We examine the rationale of BofA Merrill Lynch’s long term oil price outlook in an accompanying report “Taking the long term”. Given the uncertainty that recent price collapse has introduced to market confidence in the commodity, we moved to a ‘strip’ default to frame our sector view at the start of the year.

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

However, after a detailed reassessment of both the approach and conclusions that frame our long term price outlook, our conclusion is simply that the ‘strip’ is not enough.

Framing our long term oil price view One of the greatest challenges facing the Global Energy Sector is determining a credible outlook for the long term oil price which we view as a necessary starting point for an industry whose resource base extends well beyond short term price volatility. Since 2008, consensus has been increasingly framed by OPEC’s apparent defense of $100 oil; but with recent events invalidating confidence in OPEC policy, the market is being forced to rethink the long term price outlook with the challenge of determining a viable frame of reference.

With this in, and in concert with our Global Energy team, we present an approach we believe overcomes many of the shortcomings that typically characterize consensus views. While obviously subjective we anchor our analysis on Global coverage that accounts for 90% of non OPEC supply and a framework that looks to free cash flow as the critical screen of capital allocation across the industry.

By our analysis the long term oil price necessary to meet the level of investment necessary to sustain long term demand is at least $80 (Brent).

The table below summarizes BofA Merril Lynch’s current price outlook.

Table 2: BofAML Commodity price assumptions 15Q1E 15Q2E 15Q3E 15Q4E 2015FY 16Q1E 16Q2E 16Q3E 16Q4E 2016FY 2017FY 2018E+ BRENT 53.92 52.00 53.50 60.00 54.85 58.00 58.00 58.00 58.00 58.00 70.00 80.00 WTI 48.64 44.50 49.00 56.50 49.70 57.00 57.00 57.00 57.00 57.00 65.00 75.00 Henry Hub $2.92 $2.50 $2.80 $3.40 $2.91 $3.90 $3.90 $3.90 $3.90 3.90 4.00 4.00 Source: BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research

The outlook for long term oil prices is obviously subjective. However, by building on analysis we already employ in our individual stock coverage, we believe we have an intellectually robust approach to determining what level of oil price is reasonable to meet demand. Critically, our approach is deliberately elegant in its simplicity: while we require a number of assumptions, these are familiar to most observers and hence are transparent within their respective ranges.

While all assumptions can be challenged, we contend that with reasonable scenarios for the critical assumptions, the ‘puts’ and ‘takes’ arrive broadly within a relatively narrow range that spans $75 - $85 Brent, as shown in the chart below. Accordingly we believe that a reasonable starting point to determine long term oil prices in the current cost environment is ~$80 Brent.

This becomes BofAML’s base case and compares with current ‘strip’ prices of $75 Brent / $70 WTI that has been the default for sensitivity analysis and BofA ML’s ‘dated’ prior assumptions of $95 Brent / $90 WTI.

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

Chart 3: Global Oils: Required oil price to meet incremental non-OPEC supply

95 90 85 80 75 70 60% 60% 60% 70% 70% 70% 80% 80% 80% Market Market Market share share share 20 30 35 20 30 35 20 30 35 F&D Cost F&D Cost F&D Cost

R/P 10 R/P 12.5 R/P 15

Source: BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research

With a medium term oil price outlook of $80 Brent / $75 WTI, revised higher from ‘strip’, we introduce the first upward revisions to price targets for the large / SMID E&P’s since the collapse in oil prices in late 2014. The table below summarized our updated sector view.

Table 3: US Oils Valuation Summary Mkt Cap Net Debt EV Current EV/DACF Ticker Company ($bn) ($bn) ($bn) Price Current Current Upside Base Large Cap US Oils 2015E 2016E OXY Occidental 60,451 4,545 64,996 78.45 BUY 101 29% 10.9x 9.3x HES Hess 21,017 4,288 25,305 73.12 BUY 100 37% 8.5x 7.5x PXD Pioneer 25,770 2,449 28,219 172.52 BUY 200 16% 11.0x 9.0x APC Anadarko Petro 46,445 8,164 54,609 90.10 BUY 116 29% 9.0x 8.3x DVN Devon Energy 26,664 13,485 40,149 64.86 BUY 86 33% 4.1x 4.8x CLR Continental Res. 18,641 5,018 23,660 49.96 BUY 70 40% 11.5x 8.2x RRC Range 9,337 3,235 12,572 55.25 BUY 86 56% 10.0x 8.3x COG Cabot Oil & Gas 12,822 1,197 14,018 31.00 BUY 40 29% 10.4x 7.5x XOM ExxonMobil 358,898 15,562 374,460 85.56 BUY 103 20% 9.9x 8.8x CRC CRC 3,243 6,346 3,243 8.41 BUY 15 78% 9.3x 6.9x COP ConocoPhillips 81,929 13,686 95,615 66.53 BUY 85 28% 6.8x 5.3x NBL Noble 19,749 3,657 23,406 50.92 BUY 65 28% 7.7x 6.6x SWN Southwestern 9,330 1,809 11,138 24.26 BUY 47 94% 7.3x 5.6x MRO Marathon 19,702 4,496 24,198 29.18 BUY 36 23% 8.7x 7.0x EOG EOG Resources 52,976 4,242 57,219 96.59 NEUTRAL 105 9% 11.0x 9.0x APA Apache Corp 25,566 8,030 33,596 67.84 NEUTRAL 85 25% 8.6x 7.0x CHK Chesapeake 9,930 12,307 22,237 14.93 UNDERPERFORM 10 -26% 6.1x 5.9x CVX Chevron 201,042 7,442 208,484 106.91 UNDERPERFORM 106 -1% 9.1x 7.9x 8.9x 7.4x SMID Cap E&P XEC Cimarex Energy 10,959 1,020 11,979 125.01 BUY 140 12% 12.2x 9.4x CXO Concho Resources 14,509 3,674 18,184 120.91 BUY 138 14% 10.4x 9.2x WLL Whiting Petroleum 7,210 2,247 9,457 35.26 BUY 45 28% 6.9x 7.4x MRD Memorial Resource De 3,377 956 4,333 17.61 BUY 26 48% 8.4x 5.1x PDCE PDC Energy 2,255 520 2,775 56.29 NEUTRAL 66 17% 6.5x 6.5x EPE EP Energy Corp 3,109 3,933 7,042 12.70 NEUTRAL 14 10% 4.7x 5.1x OAS Oasis Petroleum 2,354 2,204 4,558 16.91 NEUTRAL 18 6% 5.9x 8.4x ROSE Rosetta Resources 1,617 1,505 3,122 21.56 NEUTRAL 24 11% 5.1x 5.1x LPI Laredo Petroleum 3,086 954 4,040 14.43 UNDERPERFORM 9 -38% 7.2x 8.5x 7.5x 7.2x Source: BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

Impact on valuation Focus on the multiple In our view one of the casualties of the oil price decline is a valuation approach predicated on NAV. With current oil price uncertainty, we believe any expectations of fair value need demand greater emphasis on execution, and reasonable expectations on the line of sight for growth that the market will discount. Confidence in NAV requires confidence in the pace of activity, the proportion of the drilling backlog that is economic at lower prices and the impact of cost reductions, portfolio high grading etc. While these assumptions may be reasonable in a stable oil price environment, they take on an entirely new level of subjective risk in a lower more volatile world. Accordingly, earlier this year we adopted a simple multiple-based approach to setting Price Objectives for the sector. We examine the approach in detail below, but we also make a number of adjustments we believe are reasonable to assess the impact of lower oil prices on the sector outlook.

 For the majors, we continue to approach valuation as an annuity that assesses long term portfolio stability with consistent assumptions for sustaining capital that adjusts for long life assets etc. For a detailed review of this approach please refer to “The Major Debates”.

 For the large cap E&P’s we set PO’s on a rolling 5 year forward EV/DACF multiple of 5.0x – 7.0x benchmarked off the ex-growth super majors and capturing respective growth rates and portfolio structures of individual E&P’s and what we believe is a reasonable limit of market visibility. NAV is relegated to a reality check.

 Across the board we continue to assume capital costs fall by 25% implemented ratably over the next two years. We similarly assume a lower 20% reduction in cash opex consistent with the observed relationship for ‘big oil’ shown above.

On the whole, we assume individual company management’s reduce spending to live within cashflow. Unless declared by management we have not adjusted near term development programs to reflect high graded ‘type’ curves from greater near term portfolio focus, probably leaving some upside potential to assumed growth rates.

Valuation framework revisited: Multiple or NAV? For much of the past five years oil prices have been relatively stable. Over the same timeline, the US shale ‘revolution’ not only reshaped the production landscape for the Energy Sector, but in our view, it also changed the emphasis of the market in terms of how E&P stocks were being valued. Net Asset Value has increasingly dominated valuation assessments and while the reality check has been forward multiples, some combination of the two has been the ‘de facto’ approach to valuing the sector.

With the correction in oil prices we believe NAV will take a back seat as the timeline to develop a given companies drilling inventory has arguably been extended by lower cashflow. This is still critical to assessing total company value – but with elevated commodity volatility we expect the market’s risk tolerance to shorten the visibility that the market is prepared to recognize, putting greater emphasis on execution and delivery of production growth. Accordingly we believe a multiple approach to achieving price objectives will take on greater prominence given greater visibility.

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

Both methods lack precision and have significant drawbacks that can be summarized as follows:

 Commodity outlook: Both are dependent on the oil price outlook; however NAV is dependent on the pace of development so that when oil prices fall, the impact is compounded by slower growth.

 Timing: to assume the market will award full value for Net Asset Value is to presume it will pay to recognize full value for long dated production and the associated execution risk that is in part dependent on oil prices.

For a multiple approach to valuation the problem of course is to determine the correct multiple? For high growth stocks, some adjustment has to be made for different growth rates and for portfolio depth that will determine the duration of growth. Conversely ex growth stocks or those with deteriorating production or impaired assets – such as short life or where low multiples have been confirmed by 3rd party transactions - should more appropriately carry a discount. In all cases there will be some limit to which the market will recognize growth – we assume five years given that this is the timeline routinely cited by management’s, recognizing that as the timeline extends so goes the precision of longer dated targets.

In our view, the collapse in oil prices shifts the emphasis on the most appropriate basis for assessing fair value – or more correctly the value that will recognized by the market in a reasonable timeline. The distinction is between price objective and Net Asset Value assuming that is that the NAV is sufficiently above the value implied by a given multiple. But again, determining the multiple is the tricky bit.

Our approach: what is ‘mid cycle’? There is no perfect way to assess the right multiple for a given stock. At the simplest level we view the multiple as the output – this has been our approach for the refining sector for a decade, but is enabled by the fact that refiners are generally ex growth so that they are essentially annuities with free cashflow the critical input to assessment. The problem for the E&P’s is that growth rates vary enormously.

Our solution benchmarks the E&P’s to similar ex growth ‘annuities’ – which in the oil and gas world is the Supermajors where the lowest risk ‘annuity’ is XOM. Below we walk through a review of how we derive the multiple for a given stock and the implied value we believe is reasonable for individual names.

ExxonMobil as the benchmark Our analysis of the US Oils expands the boundaries of ‘like’ sector peers to include ExxonMobil and large, domestic E&P’s in the same peer group. There are obvious differences in tax structure etc., and so our valuation reference is cash flow (as opposed to EBITDA) although for the domestic E&P’s this is essentially the same. We use XOM as the industry benchmark for the following reasons:

 In our view ExxonMobil is basically an ex growth annuity; at its large scale, it is difficult to growth although portfolio high grading routinely offsets new project growth.

 XOM typically holds its proven reserves at around 12x-14x; however its resource depth is typically above 70 years, providing ample depth to replace reserves for an extended period.

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

This is essentially an annuity, where the value is an assessment of future discounted free cashflow divided by its cost of capital, that we estimate is ~8%. The implied EV / DACF multiple is the output which will obviously vary, dependent on the implied oil price. Over the past few years XOM has traded at ~6x-7x when oil prices were ~$100; however a glance at the chart below shows that the longer term average has routinely been considerably higher.

Chart 4: XOM forward EV/DACF (consensus)

16.0x

14.0x

12.0x

10.0x

8.0x

6.0x

4.0x

2.0x

0.0x Apr-05 Apr-06 Apr-07 Apr-08 Apr-09 Apr-10 Apr-11 Apr-12 Apr-13 Apr-14

Source: BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research

Under our revised long term oil price deck of ~$75 WTI / $80 Brent we estimate the implied multiple for XOM at our fair value PO of $103 is reasonably ~7.5x representative of XOM’s ‘through cycle’ annuity characteristics.

Table 4: EV / DACF Analysis for ExxonMobil Implies PO of $103 / share 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 WTI 93.1 49.7 57.0 65.0 75.0 Brent 98.9 54.9 58.0 70.0 80.0 Net Debt 24,463 35,354 41,435 41,773 19,948 DACF 54,538 39,562 44,863 52,453 61,843 Mkt Cap 441,020 433,494 429,158 424,821 420,484 EV 465,483 468,849 470,593 466,594 440,432 EV / DACF Multiple 11.8x 10.5x 9.0x 7.5x Source: BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research

Again, the reference to XOM is simply reference to its stability as an ex growth annuity, a proxy for a going concern valuation within the energy sector.

So where should the US E&P sector trade? Routinely over the past few years, industry commentators have referred to a ‘sector’ multiple of ~6x or more correctly a range around that level; in actual fact this had crept higher – but on the whole a glance at the chart below shows that the large cap E&P’s typically trade at a ~15% - 25% discount to XOM. At the simplest level this would imply a 5.0x – 7.0x multiple versus XOM’s ‘annuity’.

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

Chart 5: E&P Sector vs XOM: EV/Fwd 12 Month Consensus CF 14 13 E&P 12 XOM 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 Mar-06 Mar-09 Mar-12

Source: BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research

Table 5: EV/DACF based Price Objectives In our view this is a reasonable ‘target’ multiple for high growth E&P’s and using Price Obj EV/DACF the current five year target that is 2014-18, we believe it is reasonable for the Multiple expected value that can be recognized by the market for a given E&P and APC 116 7.0x represents a reasonable limit to the growth that will be recognized by the market. APA 85 5.0x Recognizing the significantly different growth rates for individual names, the CLR 70 6.0x outcome for PO’s of the large cap US oils is shown in the margin table. COG 40 6.0x CRC 15 5.0x DVN 86 6.0x Critically, in almost all cases the multiple approach to determining a reasonable EOG 105 6.0x level that will be recognized by the market over time is below full cycle NAV. Note HES 100 6.0x that with CRC and APA we push the multiple towards the lower end of the historic PXD 200 6.0x range reflecting short reserve life assets where lower value has been confirmed NBL 65 6.0x by 3rd party transactions (APA) and the limited period as a public company CHK 10 6.0x MRO 36 6.0x (CRC). At the higher end of the scale, SMID cap names XEC and CXO are XEC 140 6.5x supported by the prospect of substantially higher growth rates should oil prices RRC 86 6.0x stabilize. By simplifying our valuation approach in this manner, assessing some SWN 47 6.0x idea of what oil price is discounted becomes a significantly more transparent CXO 138 6.5x exercise: by our estimate, for the large cap US oils, the average long term WTI oil EPE 14 5.0x LPI 9 6.5x price currently ‘discounted’ stands at around $65 per barrel. PDCE 66 6.0x OAS 18 6.0x Chart 6: Implied Oil Price (WTI) ROSE 24 5.0x $80 WLL 45 5.5x Source: BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research $75

$70

$65

$60

$55

$50

$45

$40 APC HES CRC CLR CLR CLR APA MRO COP EOG PXD XOM CVX CHK

Implied WTI Avg

Source: BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

Focus on MRO Upgrading MRO with revised PO of $36 Consistent with our strategy to layer into greater sector exposure we have upgraded MRO to Buy, with a revised PO of $36. With a portfolio that is 70% liquids MRO stands amongst the most levered names to a recovery.

While management has slowed spending, recent industry data suggests MRO’s drilling backlog across its three core plays has improved.

 Near term, MRO’s activity levels results in outspending; but with proceeds from last year’s Norway sale, the balance sheet stays within a 30% net debt / cap target while allowing growth to pick up at rates that drive the forward multiple to competitive levels vs peers.

 With a revised l/term $80 oil deck we view MRO as a low risk, levered option on a recovery, with the added bonus of a competitive dividend which at 3% stands apart from similar size E&P peers.

Amidst the carnage of the oil price collapse. Marathon has continued to improve its drilling backlog, de-risking both its absolute resource base but with improving well economics through enhanced completions and cost efficiencies. The result is a multi-year drilling inventory, competitive at $50 oil that can sustain growth under our base case of a gradual oil price recovery through 2018. Notable are 3rd party well results in the OK Scoop / Stack play where MRO has only minimal activity but which anchors a 3rd leg of MRO’s growth outlook. With similar de-risking of its upper Eagle Ford position concerns over MRO’s resource depth are being addressed.

Confidence in the oil price outlook remains a critical first step to any sector view. With a revised long term deck of $80 Brent and an improved US supply demand balance we continue to advocate greater exposure to a recovery. With its leverage, yield and an improving growth outlook we believe MRO offers attractive upside of 25% to our revised PO of $36, based on a 6x EV/DACF multiple on a normalized oil price of $80 Brent.

Valuation: PO $36 Our valuation basis of the large cap US oils is anchored on a mid-cycle sector multiple of 6x EV/DACF multiple based on normalized oil and gas prices of $80 Brent, $75 WTI and $4.00 HH natural gas from 2018. While oil and gas prices are expected to be lower near term, we do not believe this is sustainable, with any cash shortfalls versus planned spending reflected in balance sheet expansion.

Table 6: $36 PO based on 2018 cash flow 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Net Debt 6,012 6,198 3,993 6,163 7,506 7,766 6,706 Market Capitalization 25,533 25,533 25,533 25,533 25,533 25,533 25,533 Enterprise Value 31,545 31,731 29,526 31,696 33,039 33,299 32,239 Debt Adjusted Cash Flow 4,477 4,913 2,106 2,974 4,167 5,520 Forward EV/DACF @ $36.00 7.0 6.5 14.0 10.7 7.9 6.0 Source: BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

Summary We continue to believe we are approaching an inflection in near term oil price risk with the very real possibility US shale production rolls over just as US refiners return from maintenance. Notable is that the pace of slowdown in the US rig count has surpassed our service team’s prior expectations while the scale and speed of cost reductions in the lower 48 in particular is an increasingly dominant theme emerging from recent industry discussions. In summary the market is running out of reasons for oil to go lower: longer term, the debate turns to what oil price is sustainable. In the accompanying report we lay the BofA ML case that underlines confidence in a necessary recovery. With a medium term oil price outlook of $80 Brent / $75 WTI, revised higher from ‘strip’, we introduce the first upward revisions to price targets for the large / SMID E&P’s since the collapse in oil prices in late 2014.

We maintain OXY as our top idea, with ‘beta’ leverage through midcaps, CLR, PXD, XEC, CXO, and CRC. Amongst large caps, COP, HES, DVN and APC offer ‘conservative’ beta exposure. Underlining our view of an improving balance of sector risk Marathon Oil is added to our ‘Buy’ list: while this mainly reflects an updated view of recent portfolio developments it also acknowledges that MRO has lagged a strong sector recovery despite favorable oil leverage, with the balance sheet and yield to navigate continued near term volatility.

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

Appendix Exhibit 1: Large Cap Valuation Table US Large Cap Exploration & Production

% EPS Company Ticker QRQ Rating Price PO Upside Shares Mkt Div EV 2013 2014E 2015E 2016E Anadarko APC C-1-7 BUY 90.10 116 29% 515 46,445 1.1% 54,168 4.03 4.13 -1.24 0.68 Apache APA B-2-7 NEUTRAL 67.84 85 25% 377 25,566 1.5% 36,042 7.94 5.93 -1.43 0.17 Cabot Oil and Gas COG C-1-7 BUY 31.00 40 29% 414 12,822 0.3% 14,553 0.71 0.97 0.92 1.76 California Resources CRC C-1-7 BUY 8.41 15 78% 386 3,243 0.0% 10,685 NA 1.65 -0.63 -0.20 Chesapeake CHK C-3-7 UNDERPERFORM 14.93 10 -33% 665 9,930 2.0% 17,372 1.50 1.43 -0.25 0.10 Chev ron CVX A-3-7 UNDERPERFORM 106.91 106 -1% 1,880 201,042 3.9% 216,067 10.84 8.99 4.22 5.23 ConocoPhillips COP B-1-7 BUY 66.53 85 28% 1,231 81,929 4.3% 99,432 6.55 5.38 1.56 2.93 Continental Resources CLR B-1-9 BUY 49.96 70 40% 373 18,641 0.0% 24,780 2.67 3.43 -0.20 0.87 Dev on Energy DVN B-1-7 BUY 64.86 86 33% 411 26,664 1.4% 36,446 4.27 4.92 1.52 1.06 EOG Resources EOG B-2-7 NEUTRAL 96.59 105 9% 548 52,976 0.5% 56,799 4.14 5.14 -0.25 0.64 Hess Corp HES B-1-7 BUY 73.12 100 37% 287 21,017 1.4% 24,560 5.61 4.25 -2.99 -1.12 Marathon Oil MRO B-1-7 BUY 29.18 36 23% 675 19,702 2.8% 23,695 1.85 1.58 -1.24 -0.64 Noble Energy NBL B-1-7 BUY 50.92 65 28% 388 19,749 1.4% 24,669 2.94 2.34 0.26 0.42 Occidental Petroleum OXY B-1-7 BUY 78.45 101 29% 771 60,451 3.7% 63,500 6.96 5.03 1.40 2.88 Pioneer Natural Resources PXD C-1-7 BUY 172.52 200 16% 149 25,770 0.0% 27,410 4.45 4.81 0.85 2.05 Range Resources RRC C-1-7 BUY 55.25 86 56% 169 9,337 0.3% 12,410 1.55 1.58 1.00 1.34 Southw estern SWN C-1-9 BUY 24.26 47 94% 385 9,330 0.0% 16,244 2.00 2.27 0.43 1.93 Ex x onMobil XOM A-1-7 BUY 85.56 103 20% 4,195 358,898 3.2% 383,361 7.37 7.22 4.43 5.34 Average 32% 3%

CFPS P/E (x) EV/DACF (x) Company Ticker QRQ 2013 2014E 2015E 2016E 2013 2014E 2015E 2016E 2013 2014E 2015E 2016E

Anadarko APC C-1-7 17.24 16.42 7.90 10.56 22.4x 21.8x -72.7x 132.5x 5.2x 6.2x 11.4x 9.5x Apache APA B-2-7 25.04 22.23 10.31 12.37 8.5x 11.4x -47.4x 399.1x 4.7x 4.6x 9.3x 6.8x Cabot Oil and Gas COG C-1-7 2.48 2.99 3.12 4.65 43.7x 32.0x 33.7x 17.6x 8.2x 10.8x 10.4x 7.1x California Resources CRC C-1-7 6.42 6.15 1.85 2.60 NA 5.1x -13.3x -42.1x NA NA 13.7x 8.1x Chesapeake CHK C-3-7 6.94 6.97 3.02 3.20 10.0x 10.4x -59.7x 149.3x 4.9x 4.3x 7.8x 8.2x Chev ron CVX A-3-7 18.61 16.74 13.27 15.04 9.9x 11.9x 25.3x 20.4x 5.5x 6.6x 9.1x 8.3x ConocoPhillips COP B-1-7 13.06 13.59 9.08 11.73 10.2x 12.4x 42.6x 22.7x 5.6x 5.4x 8.1x 6.3x Continental Resources CLR B-1-9 6.87 8.99 3.99 6.20 18.7x 14.6x -249.8x 57.4x 6.4x 6.3x 14.1x 10.1x Dev on Energy DVN B-1-7 13.22 14.55 10.84 10.03 15.2x 13.2x 42.7x 61.2x 5.1x 3.5x 5.5x 5.8x EOG Resources EOG B-2-7 13.36 15.77 7.27 9.18 23.3x 18.8x -386.4x 150.9x 4.7x 6.9x 13.8x 11.5x Hess Corp HES B-1-7 16.94 15.53 10.16 11.91 13.0x 17.2x -24.5x -65.3x 3.9x 5.4x 8.3x 7.3x Marathon Oil MRO B-1-7 6.50 7.01 2.92 4.18 15.8x 18.5x -23.5x -45.6x 4.8x 3.9x 11.1x 9.4x Noble Energy NBL B-1-7 7.78 9.04 5.11 5.73 17.3x 21.8x 195.8x 121.2x 5.6x 6.8x 11.0x 10.3x Occidental Petroleum OXY B-1-7 13.27 11.51 7.08 8.62 11.3x 15.6x 56.0x 27.2x 5.9x 11.0x 11.0x 9.4x Pioneer Natural Resources PXD C-1-7 14.40 18.34 10.55 13.08 38.8x 35.9x 203.0x 84.2x 7.2x 7.7x 15.4x 12.3x Range Resources RRC C-1-7 4.40 5.65 5.85 7.73 35.6x 35.0x 55.3x 41.2x 14.4x 8.3x 11.2x 8.9x Southw estern SWN C-1-9 4.96 6.07 3.89 6.60 12.1x 10.7x 56.4x 12.6x 6.4x 4.3x 9.9x 5.5x Ex x onMobil XOM A-1-7 10.71 10.76 9.29 10.54 11.6x 11.9x 19.3x 16.0x 8.4x 7.0x 9.7x 8.6x Av erage 18.7x 17.7x 73.0x 87.6x 6.3x 6.4x 10.6x 8.5x

US Large Cap Exploration & Production

Net Debt Net Debt / Cap DACF Company Ticker 2014q4 2013 2014E 2015E 2016E 2013 2014E 2015E 2016E 2013 2014E 2015E 2016E

Anadarko APC 7,723 9,867 7,723 11,039 12,141 29% 26% 32% 34% 9,049 8,930 4,622 5,997 Apache APA 10,476 7,819 10,476 6,778 7,707 18% 27% 20% 22% 10,267 8,682 3,957 4,735 Cabot Oil and Gas COG 1,731 1,124 1,731 1,443 651 34% 45% 37% 17% 1,139 1,318 1,354 1,968 California Resources CRC 6,346 (2) 6,346 6,155 6,253 200% 71% 72% 73% 1,407 2,425 931 1,218 Chesapeake CHK 7,442 12,182 7,442 9,584 10,719 40% 29% 37% 41% 5,424 5,470 2,446 2,578 Chev ron CVX 15,025 4,186 15,025 29,038 36,669 3% 9% 16% 19% 36,386 32,145 25,250 28,632 ConocoPhillips COP 17,503 15,416 17,503 21,358 22,293 23% 25% 30% 31% 16,151 17,518 11,898 15,073 Continental Resources CLR 6,139 4,687 6,139 7,108 7,214 54% 55% 59% 58% 2,722 3,661 1,700 2,538 Dev on Energy DVN 9,782 5,956 9,782 9,269 8,971 23% 27% 26% 25% 5,842 6,285 4,754 4,426 EOG Resources EOG 3,823 4,595 3,823 4,884 5,321 23% 18% 22% 24% 7,381 8,356 4,138 5,208 Hess Corp HES 3,543 3,984 3,543 5,668 6,365 14% 14% 21% 24% 6,575 5,315 3,145 3,650 Marathon Oil MRO 3,993 6,198 3,993 6,163 7,506 24% 16% 24% 30% 4,477 4,913 2,106 2,974 Noble Energy NBL 4,920 3,449 4,920 5,197 5,976 27% 32% 32% 35% 3,408 3,231 2,139 2,403 Occidental Petroleum OXY 3,049 3,546 3,049 7,693 11,290 8% 8% 20% 28% 9,910 8,121 5,489 6,685 Pioneer Natural Resources PXD 1,640 2,260 1,640 395 220 25% 16% 4% 2% 2,270 2,860 1,693 2,067 Range Resources RRC 3,073 3,140 3,073 2,981 3,150 57% 47% 45% 45% 901 1,096 1,092 1,412 Southw estern SWN 6,914 1,927 6,914 4,922 4,771 35% 60% 40% 37% 2,011 2,308 1,554 2,594 Ex x onMobil XOM 24,463 17,786 24,463 35,354 41,435 9% 12% 16% 18% 51,123 54,538 39,562 44,863 Av erage 38% 30% 55% 38% Source: BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

Exhibit 2: SMID Valuation Table US SMID Exploration & Production

% EPS Company Ticker QRQ Rating Price PO Upside Shares Mkt Div EV 2013 2014E 2015E 2016E Concho Resources CXO C-1-9 BUY 118.13 138 17% 120 14,176 0.0% 17,693 $3.53 $4.03 $0.43 $0.78 Cimarex XEC C-1-7 BUY 116.51 140 20% 88 10,206 0.5% 11,300 $5.38 $5.76 ($1.60) $0.50 EP Energy EPE C-2-9 NEUTRAL 10.78 14 30% 245 2,639 0.0% 7,215 $1.96 $0.87 $0.70 $0.21 Laredo Petroleum LPI C-3-9 UNDERPERFORM 13.40 9 -33% 214 2,866 0.0% 4,638 $0.56 $0.61 $0.07 $0.03 Memorial Resource Dev MRD C-1-9 BUY 17.82 26 46% 192 3,417 0.0% 4,194 NA $0.42 $0.35 $0.86 Oasis OAS C-2-9 NEUTRAL 14.69 18 23% 139 2,045 0.0% 4,700 $2.64 $2.23 $0.75 ($0.14) PDC Energy PDCE C-2-9 NEUTRAL 54.03 66 22% 39 2,128 0.0% 2,777 $0.06 $0.64 $1.71 $1.24 Rosetta Resources ROSE C-2-9 NEUTRAL 17.39 24 38% 75 1,305 0.0% 6,856 $3.87 $2.35 ($0.14) ($0.65) Whiting Petroleum WLL C-1-9 BUY 32.05 45 40% 204 6,554 0.0% 8,519 $4.14 $0.49 ($1.15) ($0.42) Average 23% 0.1%

CFPS P/E (x) EV/DACF (x) Company Ticker QRQ 2013 2014E 2015E 2016E 2013 2014E 2015E 2016E 2013 2014E 2015E 2016E

Concho Resources CXO C-1-9 11.35 13.95 11.16 12.86 33.5x 29.3x 274.7x 151.4x 8.1x 8.8x 12.0x 10.5x Cimarex XEC C-1-7 15.11 18.47 7.28 11.53 21.7x 20.2x -72.8x 233.0x 4.5x 7.1x 14.5x 10.8x EP Energy EPE C-2-9 3.92 4.85 5.02 4.40 5.5x 12.4x 15.4x 51.3x 0.0x 3.3x 5.2x 5.6x Laredo Petroleum LPI C-3-9 1.71 2.33 1.65 1.42 23.9x 22.0x 191.4x 446.7x 9.1x 5.0x 8.9x 11.0x Memorial Resource Dev MRD C-1-9 NA 3.53 1.95 3.28 NA 42.4x 50.9x 20.7x NA 6.3x 10.4x 6.4x Oasis OAS C-2-9 5.01 6.27 4.24 2.71 5.6x 84.4x 31.6x 43.6x 4.7x 4.5x 6.5x 9.9x PDC Energy PDCE C-2-9 3.97 5.91 9.01 10.23 900.5x 84.4x 31.6x 43.6x 6.3x 8.2x 6.7x 6.2x Rosetta Resources ROSE C-2-9 7.88 8.65 5.03 4.63 4.5x 7.4x -124.2x -26.8x 4.8x 3.8x 7.6x 8.4x Whiting Petroleum WLL C-1-9 8.53 8.88 5.48 6.52 7.7x 65.4x -27.9x -76.3x 4.2x 3.0x 7.6x 7.9x Av erage 125.4x 40.9x 41.2x 98.6x 5.2x 5.5x 8.8x 8.5x

Net Debt Net Debt / Cap DACF Company Ticker 2014q4 2013 2014 2015E 2016E 2013 2014E 2015E 2016E 2013 2014E 2015E 2016E

Concho Resources CXO 3,517 3,630 3,517 3,386 3,364 49% 40% 36% 36% 1,588 1,857 1,469 1,685 Cimarex XEC 1,094 919 1,094 1,418 1,383 19% 20% 25% 25% 1,357 1,664 692 1,072 EP Energy EPE 4,576 4,370 4,576 4,571 4,611 60% 51% 50% 50% 1,121 2,346 1,445 1,292 Laredo Petroleum LPI 1,772 853 1,772 1,249 1,294 40% 53% 36% 36% 440 561 428 366 Memorial Resource Dev MRD 777 NA 777 921 913 NA 31% 34% 32% NA 506 384 602 Oasis OAS 2,654 2,444 2,654 2,373 2,451 64% 59% 50% 51% 792 895 686 474 PDC Energy PDCE 649 464 649 554 710 32% 36% 28% 33% 241 282 393 442 Rosetta Resources ROSE 1,966 1,306 1,966 1,731 1,735 49% 54% 48% 49% 578 684 428 396 Whiting Petroleum WLL 5,551 1,954 5,551 5,248 5,641 34% 49% 44% 46% 1,758 2,046 1,321 1,544 Av erage 43% 44% 39% 40%

Source: BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

Price objective basis & risk Anadarko Petroleum Corp. (APC) Our price objective of $116 / share is based on a 5 year outlook which assumes a 7x DACF multiple and a commodity deck of $75 WTI and $80 Brent. The multiple is based on a finite timeline to delivery which is supported by core NAV.

Risks to our price objective: E&P companies, in general, are subject to commodity price volatility, operating risk, regulatory risk, and uncertainty of reserve estimates. Company-specific risks to achieving our price objective are: (1) About 22% of APC's production is derived from the Gulf of Mexico, which could be affected by weather-related or mechanical downtime. (2) Disappointing results in APC's exploratory program in the Gulf of Mexico, Brazil, or West Africa could negatively impact the longer-term growth outlook. (3) A weak commodity price environment could undermine the assumptions in our valuation.

Apache Corp (APA) Our price objective of $85 share is based on a 5 year outlook which assumes a 5x DACF multiple and a commodity deck of $75 WTI and $80 Brent. The multiple is based on a finite timeline to delivery which is supported by core NAV.

Risks to our price objective: E&P companies, in general, are subject to commodity price volatility, commensurate slowdowns in development drilling and delays to large scale projects. Upside risks to achieving our price objective are: higher than forecasted production and commodity prices. Downside risks to achieving our price objective are: (1) A significant portion of APA's production (22%) is in Egypt, where political risk may result in a partial or complete loss of asset value there, (2) Project timing delays could impact our growth rates, and (3) As an oil leveraged company, a weak oil price environment would affect our estimates and valuation.

Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. (COG) Our price objective of $40 share is based on a 5 year outlook assumes a 6x DACF multiple which is a slight discount to the majors due to its size and a commodity deck of $75 WTI, and $4.00 Henry Hub. The multiple is based on a finite timeline to delivery which is supported by core NAV.

Risks to our price objective: E&P companies in general are subject to price volatility, operating risk regulatory risk and uncertainty of reserve estimates. Company-specific factors are a slower pace of development than we assume, infrastructure constraints in the Marcellus could adversely affect the production estimates.

California Resources Corporation (CRC) Our price objective of $15 / share is based on a 5 year outlook which assumes a 5x DACF multiple and a commodity deck of $75 WTI and $80 Brent. The multiple is based on a finite timeline to delivery which is supported by core NAV.

Risks to our price objective: E&P companies, in general, are subject to commodity price volatility, commensurate slowdowns in development drilling and delays to large scale projects. Company-specific risks to our price objective are: (1) Regulatory risks in California, (2) Project timing delays could impact our growth rates, and (3) As an oil leveraged company, a weak oil price environment would affect our estimates and valuation.

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

Chesapeake Energy Corp. (CHK) Our price objective of $11 share is based on a 5 year outlook which assumes a 6x DACF multiple and a commodity deck of $75 WTI. The multiple is based on a finite timeline to delivery which is supported by core NAV.

Risks to our price objective: E&P companies in general are subject to commodity price volatility, operating risk, regulatory risk and uncertainty of reserve estimates. Company-specific risks to achieving our price objective are: (1) Ability to close the funding gap in the near to medium term (2) Ability to reduce debt and continue to grow production (3) A prolonged weak natural gas pricing environment or global recession could undermine the pricing assumptions in our valuation and (4) negative newsflow.

Chevron Corp. (CVX) Our price objective of $106/ share is based on a DCF valuation that assumes long term Brent and WTI oil prices of $80/bbl and $75/bbl respectively and a WACC of 8%.

The risks to our price objective are (1) the oil and gas price and margin environment (2) significant delays to the new upstream projects critical to its growth targets and (3) inability to capture the price environment due to cost pressures (opex, capex and taxation). Upside risks to our price objective are higher oil prices and lower cap ex spending.

Cimarex Energy (XEC) Our price objective of $140 share is based on a 5 year outlook which assumes a 6.5x EBITDA multiple and a commodity deck of $75 WTI. The multiple is based on a finite timeline to delivery which is supported by core NAV.

Concho Resources (CXO) Our price objective of $138 share is based on a 5 year outlook which assumes a 6.5x EBITDA multiple and a commodity deck of $75 WTI. The multiple is based on a finite timeline to delivery which is supported by core NAV.

ConocoPhillips (COP) Our price objective of $85/share is based on a DCF valuation that assumes long- term Brent and WTI oil prices of $80/bbl and $75/bbl, respectively, and a WACC of 9%.

The risks to our price objective are (1) the oil and gas price and margin environment, (2) significant delays to the new upstream projects critical to its growth targets, (3) inability to capture the price environment due to cost pressures (opex, capex, and taxation) and (4) uncertainty surrounding execution and impact of recently announced asset sales and de-leveraging of the balance sheet.

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

Continental Resources Inc. (CLR) We base our $70 price objective on a sector multiple of 5x 2017 debt adjusted cash flow. Our long term price deck is $75/Bbl oil and $4.00/Mcf natural gas (from 2017) and we assume an industry standard 10% discount rate.

Risks to our price objective: E&P companies in general are subject to price volatility, operating risk regulatory risk and uncertainty of reserve estimates. Company-specific factors include a slower pace of development than we assume and risks that deeper resource opportunities are less contiguous than currently embedded in our 'risked' acreage assumptions. Additionally any decision by senior management to sell down its existing holdings may present an overhang on the stock.

Devon Energy Corp. (DVN) Our price objective of $86 / share is based on a 5 year outlook which assumes a 6x DACF multiple and a commodity deck of $75 WTI and $80 Brent. The multiple is based on a finite timeline to delivery which is supported by core NAV.

Risks to our price objective: E&P companies, in general, are subject to commodity price volatility, operating risk, regulatory risk, and uncertainty of reserve estimates. Company-specific risks to achieving our price objective are: (1) DVN's ability to grow production in the Permian Basin and the Eagle Ford shale (2) A prolonged weak natural gas pricing environment or global recession could undermine the pricing assumptions in our valuation (3) Bottlenecks to takeaway capacity, especially the Canadian oil sands.

EOG Resources (EOG) Our price objective of $105 / share is based on a 5 year outlook which assumes a 6x DACF multiple and a commodity deck of $75 WTI and $80 Brent. The multiple is based on a finite timeline to delivery which is supported by core NAV.

Risks to our price objective: E&P companies, in general, are subject to commodity price volatility, operating risk, regulatory risk, and uncertainty of reserve estimates. Company-specific risks to achieving our price objective are: (1) Ability to close the funding gap in the near to medium term (2) Ability to grow production without increasing debt and (2) A prolonged weak natural gas pricing environment or global recession could undermine the pricing assumptions in our valuation.

EP Energy Corp (EPE) Our price objective of $14 share is based on a 5 year outlook which assumes a 5x EBITDA multiple and a commodity deck of $75 WTI and $80 Brent. The multiple is based on a finite timeline to delivery which is supported by core NAV.

Risks to our price objective: E&P companies in general are subject to commodity price volatility, operating risk, regulatory risk, weather and uncertainty of reserve estimates. Company specific factors are sustained cash outspend over next few years, concerns over acreage quality and overhang from significant PE sponsor ownership.

ExxonMobil Corp. (XOM) Our price objective of $103/share is based on a DCF valuation that assumes long term Brent and WTI oil prices of $80/bbl and $75/bbl respectively a WACC of 8% and a 0% terminal growth rate.

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

The risks to our price objective are: (1) the oil and gas price and margin environment, (2) significant delays to the new upstream projects critical to its growth targets, (3) the inability to capture the price environment due to cost pressures (opex capex and taxation), and (4) and the impact of XTO on XOM's production mix and profitability.

Hess Corp. (HES) Our price objective of $100 / share is based on a 5 year outlook which assumes a 6x DACF multiple and a commodity deck of $75 WTI and $80 Brent. The multiple is based on a finite timeline to delivery which is supported by core NAV.

The risks to our price objective are: 1) the oil and gas price environment, (2) slowdowns in development drilling that leave production below expectations, and (3) news flow around HES' exploratory and appraisal drilling activities that could impact the stock.

Laredo Petroleum (LPI) Our price objective of $9 share is based on a 5 year outlook which assumes a 6.5x EBITDA multiple and a commodity deck of $75 WTI and $80 Brent. The multiple is based on a finite timeline to delivery which is supported by core NAV.

Risks to our price objective: E&P companies in general are subject to commodity price volatility, operating risk, regulatory risk, weather and uncertainty of reserve estimates. Company-specific factors are significant insider ownership by the private equity sponsor, basis risk in the Permian Basin and lack of infrastructure in the region. Upside risk to our PO would be potential for M&A given a management team that has sold 3 companies in the past or anything else that could improve the state of the balance sheet.

Marathon Oil Corp. (MRO) Our price objective of $36 / share is based on a 5 year outlook which assumes a 6x DACF multiple and a commodity deck of $75 WTI and $80 Brent. The multiple is based on a finite timeline to delivery which is supported by core NAV.

The risks to our price objective are (1) the oil and gas price and margin environment, (2) significant delays to the new E&P projects critical to its growth targets and (3) limited visibility around long-term upstream developments necessary to sustain production

Noble Energy (NBL) Our price objective of $65 / share is based on a 5 year outlook which assumes a 6x DACF multiple and a commodity deck of $75 WTI and $80 Brent. The multiple is based on a finite timeline to delivery which is supported by core NAV.

The risks to our price objective are (1) the oil and gas price and margin environment, (2) significant delays to the new E&P projects critical to its growth targets, (3) limited visibility around long-term upstream developments necessary to sustain production.

Oasis Petroleum (OAS) Our price objective of $18 share is based on a 5 year outlook which assumes a 6x EBITDA multiple and a commodity deck of $75 WTI and $80 Brent. The multiple is based on a finite timeline to delivery which is supported by core NAV.

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

Risks to our price objective: E&P companies in general are subject to commodity price volatility, operating risk, regulatory risk, weather and uncertainty of reserve estimates. Company specific factors include exposure to volatile Bakken differentials and a drilling program that is weighted toward the Three Forks formation.

Occidental Petroleum Corp. (OXY) Our price objective of $101/share is based on an aggregate of two measures: Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) and Net Asset Value (NAV). Our estimated NAV of the existing portfolio, and for the key P1 value we use the SEC declared proven reserves and projected capital to bring PUDs to production. Our DCF valuation assumes long term Brent and WTI oil prices of $80.00 and $75.00/bbl, respectively and assumes a WACC of 10%.

Risks to our price objective are (1) the oil and gas price environment, (2) significant delays to large scale projects versus scheduled start dates and, (3), given leverage to the Middle East, political risk associated with growth projects in those emerging market areas.

PDC Energy (PDCE) Our price objective of $66 share is based on a five year outlook which assumes a 6.5x EBITDA multiple and a commodity deck of $75 WTI and $80 Brent. The multiple is based on a finite timeline to delivery which is supported by core NAV.

Pioneer Natural Resources (PXD) Our price objective of $200 / share is based on a five year outlook which assumes a 6x DACF multiple and a commodity deck of $75 WTI and $80 Brent. The multiple is based on a finite timeline to delivery which is supported by core NAV.

Risks to our price objective: E&P companies in general are subject to price volatility, operating risk, regulatory risk and uncertainty of reserve estimates. Company-specific factors are a slower pace of development than we assume and risks that deeper resource opportunities are less contiguous than currently embedded in our 'risked' acreage assumptions.

Rosetta Resources (ROSE) Our price objective of $24 share is based on a 5 year outlook which assumes a 6x EBITDA multiple and a commodity deck of $75 WTI and $80 Brent. The multiple is based on a finite timeline to delivery which is supported by core NAV. Risks to our price objective: E&P companies in general are subject to price volatility, operating risk, regulatory risk, weather and uncertainty of reserve estimates. Company-specific factors are execution risk in both the Eagle Ford and Permian.

Southwestern Energy Corp. (SWN) Our price objective of $47 / share is based on a 5 year outlook which assumes a 6x DACF multiple and a commodity deck of $75 WTI, $80 Brent and $4.00 Henry Hub. The multiple is based on a finite timeline to delivery which is supported by core NAV.

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

Whiting Petroleum Corp. (WLL) Our price objective of $45 share is based on a 5 year outlook which assumes a 5.5x EBITDA multiple and a commodity deck of $75 WTI and $80 Brent. The multiple is based on a finite timeline to delivery which is supported by core NAV.

Analyst Certification We, Doug Leggate and Jason Smith, hereby certify that the views each of us has expressed in this research report accurately reflect each of our respective personal views about the subject securities and issuers. We also certify that no part of our respective compensation was, is, or will be, directly or indirectly, related to the specific recommendations or view expressed in this research report.

US - Large Cap Oils Coverage Cluster BofA Merrill Lynch Investment rating Company ticker Bloomberg symbol Analyst BUY Anadarko Petroleum Corp. APC APC US Doug Leggate Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. COG COG US Doug Leggate ConocoPhillips COP COP US Doug Leggate Continental Resources Inc. CLR CLR US Doug Leggate Devon Energy Corp. DVN DVN US Doug Leggate ExxonMobil Corp. XOM XOM US Doug Leggate Hess Corp. HES HES US Doug Leggate Marathon Oil Corp. MRO MRO US Doug Leggate Noble Energy NBL NBL US Doug Leggate Occidental Petroleum Corp. OXY OXY US Doug Leggate Phillips 66 PSX PSX US Doug Leggate Pioneer Natural Resources PXD PXD US Doug Leggate Range Resources Corp RRC RRC US Doug Leggate Southwestern Energy Corp. SWN SWN US Doug Leggate NEUTRAL Apache Corp APA APA US Doug Leggate EOG Resources EOG EOG US Doug Leggate HollyFrontier Corp HFC HFC US Doug Leggate Marathon Petroleum Company MPC MPC US Doug Leggate Northern Tier Energy LP NTI NTI US Jason Smith Tesoro Corp. TSO TSO US Doug Leggate Valero Energy Corp. VLO VLO US Doug Leggate UNDERPERFORM Calumet Specialty Products Partners CLMT CLMT US Jason Smith Chesapeake Energy Corp. CHK CHK US Doug Leggate Chevron Corp. CVX CVX US Doug Leggate Delek US Holdings, Inc. DK DK US Doug Leggate PBF Energy PBF PBF US Doug Leggate

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

US - Oil & Gas Exploration and Production and MLP Coverage Cluster BofA Merrill Lynch Investment rating Company ticker Bloomberg symbol Analyst BUY BreitBurn Energy Partners, L.P. BBEP BBEP US John H. Abbott California Resources Corporation CRC CRC US Doug Leggate Cimarex Energy XEC XEC US Jason Smith Concho Resources CXO CXO US Jason Smith EV Energy Partners EVEP EVEP US John H. Abbott Memorial Production Partners LP MEMP MEMP US John H. Abbott Memorial Resource Development MRD MRD US Jason Smith Whiting Petroleum Corp. WLL WLL US Jason Smith NEUTRAL Atlas Resource Partners LP ARP ARP US John H. Abbott EP Energy Corp EPE EPE US Jason Smith Legacy Reserves LP LGCY LGCY US John H. Abbott Oasis Petroleum OAS OAS US Jason Smith PDC Energy PDCE PDCE US Jason Smith Rosetta Resources ROSE ROSE US Jason Smith Vanguard Natural Resources VNR VNR US John H. Abbott UNDERPERFORM Laredo Petroleum LPI LPI US Jason Smith LRR Energy LRE LRE US John H. Abbott Mid-Con Energy Partners MCEP MCEP US John H. Abbott Pacific Coast Oil Trust ROYT ROYT US John H. Abbott

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

Important Disclosures

Investment Rating Distribution: Energy Group (as of 31 Mar 2015) Coverage Universe Count Percent Inv. Banking Relationships* Count Percent Buy 129 51.81% Buy 110 85.27% Neutral 60 24.10% Neutral 45 75.00% Sell 60 24.10% Sell 45 75.00% Investment Rating Distribution: Global Group (as of 31 Mar 2015) Coverage Universe Count Percent Inv. Banking Relationships* Count Percent Buy 1696 50.89% Buy 1258 74.17% Neutral 805 24.15% Neutral 586 72.80% Sell 832 24.96% Sell 539 64.78% * Companies that were investment banking clients of BofA Merrill Lynch or one of its affiliates within the past 12 months. For purposes of this distribution, a stock rated Underperform is included as a Sell.

FUNDAMENTAL EQUITY OPINION KEY: Opinions include a Volatility Risk Rating, an Investment Rating and an Income Rating. VOLATILITY RISK RATINGS, indicators of potential price fluctuation, are: A - Low, B - Medium and C - High. INVESTMENT RATINGS reflect the analyst’s assessment of a stock’s: (i) absolute total return potential and (ii) attractiveness for investment relative to other stocks within its Coverage Cluster (defined below). There are three investment ratings: 1 - Buy stocks are expected to have a total return of at least 10% and are the most attractive stocks in the coverage cluster; 2 - Neutral stocks are expected to remain flat or increase in value and are less attractive than Buy rated stocks and 3 - Underperform stocks are the least attractive stocks in a coverage cluster. Analysts assign investment ratings considering, among other things, the 0-12 month total return expectation for a stock and the firm’s guidelines for ratings dispersions (shown in the table below). The current price objective for a stock should be referenced to better understand the total return expectation at any given time. The price objective reflects the analyst’s view of the potential price appreciation (depreciation). Investment rating Total return expectation (within 12-month period of date of initial rating) Ratings dispersion guidelines for coverage cluster* Buy ≥ 10% ≤ 70% Neutral ≥ 0% ≤ 30% Underperform N/A ≥ 20% * Ratings dispersions may vary from time to time where BofA Merrill Lynch Research believes it better reflects the investment prospects of stocks in a Coverage Cluster. INCOME RATINGS, indicators of potential cash dividends, are: 7 - same/higher (dividend considered to be secure), 8 - same/lower (dividend not considered to be secure) and 9 - pays no cash dividend. Coverage Cluster is comprised of stocks covered by a single analyst or two or more analysts sharing a common industry, sector, region or other classification(s). A stock’s coverage cluster is included in the most recent BofA Merrill Lynch Comment referencing the stock.

Price charts for the securities referenced in this research report are available at http://pricecharts.ml.com, or call 1-800-MERRILL to have them mailed. MLPF&S or one of its affiliates acts as a market maker for the equity securities recommended in the report: Anadarko Petro, Apache Corp, Cabot Oil & Gas, California Resources, Chesapeake Energy, Chevron Corporation, Cimarex Energy, Concho Resources, ConocoPhillips, Continental Res., Devon Energy, EOG Resources, EP Energy Corp, Exxon Mobil Corp, Hess, Laredo Petroleum, Marathon Oil, Noble Energy, Oasis Petroleum, Occidental Pete, PDC Energy, Pioneer Nat Res, Rosetta Resources, Southwestern Egy, Whiting Petroleum. MLPF&S or an affiliate was a manager of a public offering of securities of this company within the last 12 months: Anadarko Petro, Cabot Oil & Gas, California Resources, Chevron Corporation, Concho Resources, ConocoPhillips, Continental Res., Exxon Mobil Corp, Hess, Laredo Petroleum, Noble Energy, Pioneer Nat Res, Rosetta Resources, Southwestern Egy, Whiting Petroleum. The company is or was, within the last 12 months, an investment banking client of MLPF&S and/or one or more of its affiliates: Anadarko Petro, Apache Corp, Cabot Oil & Gas, California Resources, Chesapeake Energy, Chevron Corporation, Concho Resources, ConocoPhillips, Continental Res., Devon Energy, EOG Resources, Exxon Mobil Corp, Hess, Laredo Petroleum, Noble Energy, Occidental Pete, PDC Energy, Pioneer Nat Res, Rosetta Resources, Southwestern Egy, Whiting Petroleum. MLPF&S or an affiliate has received compensation from the company for non-investment banking services or products within the past 12 months: Anadarko Petro, Apache Corp, Cabot Oil & Gas, California Resources, Chesapeake Energy, Chevron Corporation, Concho Resources, ConocoPhillips, Continental Res., Devon Energy, EOG Resources, Exxon Mobil Corp, Hess, Laredo Petroleum, Marathon Oil, Noble Energy, Occidental Pete, PDC Energy, Pioneer Nat Res, Rosetta Resources, Southwestern Egy, Whiting Petroleum. The company is or was, within the last 12 months, a non-securities business client of MLPF&S and/or one or more of its affiliates: Anadarko Petro, Apache Corp, Cabot Oil & Gas, California Resources, Chesapeake Energy, Chevron Corporation, Cimarex Energy, Concho Resources, ConocoPhillips, Continental Res., Devon Energy, EOG Resources, Exxon Mobil Corp, Hess, Laredo Petroleum, Marathon Oil, Noble Energy, Oasis Petroleum, Occidental Pete, PDC Energy, Pioneer Nat Res, Rosetta Resources, Southwestern Egy, Whiting Petroleum. MLPF&S or an affiliate has received compensation for investment banking services from this company within the past 12 months: Anadarko Petro, Apache Corp, Cabot Oil & Gas, California Resources, Chesapeake Energy, Chevron Corporation, Concho Resources, ConocoPhillips, Continental Res., Devon Energy, Exxon Mobil Corp, Hess, Laredo Petroleum, Noble Energy, Occidental Pete, Pioneer Nat Res, Rosetta Resources, Southwestern Egy, Whiting Petroleum. MLPF&S or an affiliate expects to receive or intends to seek compensation for investment banking services from this company or an affiliate of the company within the next three months: Anadarko Petro, Apache Corp, California Resources, Chesapeake Energy, Chevron Corporation, Concho Resources, ConocoPhillips, Continental Res., Devon Energy, EOG Resources, Exxon Mobil Corp, Hess, Laredo Petroleum, Noble Energy, Occidental Pete, PDC Energy, Pioneer Nat Res, Southwestern Egy, Whiting Petroleum. MLPF&S together with its affiliates beneficially owns one percent or more of the common stock of this company. If this report was issued on or after the 8th day of the month, it reflects the ownership position on the last day of the previous month. Reports issued before the 8th day of a month reflect the ownership position at the end of the second month preceding the date of the report: Anadarko Petro, Cabot Oil & Gas, Chesapeake Energy, ConocoPhillips, Devon Energy, Exxon Mobil Corp, Hess, Noble Energy, Occidental Pete, Whiting Petroleum. MLPF&S or one of its affiliates is willing to sell to, or buy from, clients the common equity of the company on a principal basis: Anadarko Petro, Apache Corp, Cabot Oil & Gas, California Resources, Chesapeake Energy, Chevron Corporation, Cimarex Energy, Concho Resources, ConocoPhillips, Continental Res., Devon

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

Energy, EOG Resources, EP Energy Corp, Exxon Mobil Corp, Hess, Laredo Petroleum, Marathon Oil, Noble Energy, Oasis Petroleum, Occidental Pete, PDC Energy, Pioneer Nat Res, Rosetta Resources, Southwestern Egy, Whiting Petroleum. The company is or was, within the last 12 months, a securities business client (non-investment banking) of MLPF&S and/or one or more of its affiliates: Anadarko Petro, Apache Corp, Cabot Oil & Gas, California Resources, Chesapeake Energy, Chevron Corporation, Concho Resources, ConocoPhillips, Continental Res., Devon Energy, EOG Resources, Exxon Mobil Corp, Hess, Laredo Petroleum, Marathon Oil, Noble Energy, Occidental Pete, PDC Energy, Pioneer Nat Res, Rosetta Resources, Southwestern Egy, Whiting Petroleum. BofA Merrill Lynch Research personnel (including the analyst(s) responsible for this report) receive compensation based upon, among other factors, the overall profitability of Bank of America Corporation, including profits derived from investment banking revenues. Other Important Disclosures

Officers of MLPF&S or one or more of its affiliates (other than research analysts) may have a financial interest in securities of the issuer(s) or in related investments. From time to time research analysts conduct site visits of covered companies. BofA Merrill Lynch policies prohibit research analysts from accepting payment or reimbursement for travel expenses from the company for such visits. BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research policies relating to conflicts of interest are described at http://www.ml.com/media/43347.pdf. "BofA Merrill Lynch" includes Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated ("MLPF&S") and its affiliates. Investors should contact their BofA Merrill Lynch representative or Merrill Lynch Global Wealth Management financial advisor if they have questions concerning this report. "BofA Merrill Lynch" and "Merrill Lynch" are each global brands for BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research. Information relating to Non-US affiliates of BofA Merrill Lynch and Distribution of Affiliate Research Reports: MLPF&S distributes, or may in the future distribute, research reports of the following non-US affiliates in the US (short name: legal name): Merrill Lynch (France): Merrill Lynch Capital Markets (France) SAS; Merrill Lynch (Frankfurt): Merrill Lynch International Bank Ltd., Frankfurt Branch; Merrill Lynch (South Africa): Merrill Lynch South Africa (Pty) Ltd.; Merrill Lynch (Milan): Merrill Lynch International Bank Limited; MLI (UK): Merrill Lynch International; Merrill Lynch (Australia): Merrill Lynch Equities (Australia) Limited; Merrill Lynch (Hong Kong): Merrill Lynch (Asia Pacific) Limited; Merrill Lynch (Singapore): Merrill Lynch (Singapore) Pte Ltd.; Merrill Lynch (Canada): Merrill Lynch Canada Inc; Merrill Lynch (Mexico): Merrill Lynch Mexico, SA de CV, Casa de Bolsa; Merrill Lynch (Argentina): Merrill Lynch Argentina SA; Merrill Lynch (Japan): Merrill Lynch Japan Securities Co., Ltd.; Merrill Lynch (Seoul): Merrill Lynch International Incorporated (Seoul Branch); Merrill Lynch (Taiwan): Merrill Lynch Securities (Taiwan) Ltd.; DSP Merrill Lynch (India): DSP Merrill Lynch Limited; PT Merrill Lynch (Indonesia): PT Merrill Lynch Indonesia; Merrill Lynch (Israel): Merrill Lynch Israel Limited; Merrill Lynch (Russia): OOO Merrill Lynch Securities, Moscow; Merrill Lynch (Turkey I.B.): Merrill Lynch Yatirim Bank A.S.; Merrill Lynch (Turkey Broker): Merrill Lynch Menkul Değerler A.Ş.; Merrill Lynch (Dubai): Merrill Lynch International, Dubai Branch; MLPF&S (Zurich rep. office): MLPF&S Incorporated Zurich representative office; Merrill Lynch (Spain): Merrill Lynch Capital Markets Espana, S.A.S.V.; Merrill Lynch (Brazil): Bank of America Merrill Lynch Banco Multiplo S.A.; Merrill Lynch KSA Company, Merrill Lynch Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Company. This research report has been approved for publication and is distributed in the United Kingdom to professional clients and eligible counterparties (as each is defined in the rules of the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority) by Merrill Lynch International and Bank of America Merrill Lynch International Limited, which are authorized by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority, and is distributed in the United Kingdom to retail clients (as defined in the rules of the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority) by Merrill Lynch International Bank Limited, London Branch, which is authorised by the Central Bank of Ireland and subject to limited regulation by the Financial Conduct Authority and Prudential Regulation Authority - details about the extent of our regulation by the Financial Conduct Authority and Prudential Regulation Authority are available from us on request; has been considered and distributed in Japan by Merrill Lynch Japan Securities Co., Ltd., a registered securities dealer under the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act in Japan; is distributed in Hong Kong by Merrill Lynch (Asia Pacific) Limited, which is regulated by the Hong Kong SFC and the Hong Kong Monetary Authority is issued and distributed in Taiwan by Merrill Lynch Securities (Taiwan) Ltd.; is issued and distributed in India by DSP Merrill Lynch Limited; and is issued and distributed in Singapore to institutional investors and/or accredited investors (each as defined under the Financial Advisers Regulations) by Merrill Lynch International Bank Limited (Merchant Bank) and Merrill Lynch (Singapore) Pte Ltd. (Company Registration No.’s F 06872E and 198602883D respectively). Merrill Lynch International Bank Limited (Merchant Bank) and Merrill Lynch (Singapore) Pte Ltd. are regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore. Bank of America N.A., Australian Branch (ARBN 064 874 531), AFS License 412901 (BANA Australia) and Merrill Lynch Equities (Australia) Limited (ABN 65 006 276 795), AFS License 235132 (MLEA) distributes this report in Australia only to 'Wholesale' clients as defined by s.761G of the Corporations Act 2001. With the exception of BANA Australia, neither MLEA nor any of its affiliates involved in preparing this research report is an Authorised Deposit-Taking Institution under the Banking Act 1959 nor regulated by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority. No approval is required for publication or distribution of this report in Brazil and its local distribution is made by Bank of America Merrill Lynch Banco Múltiplo S.A. in accordance with applicable regulations. Merrill Lynch (Dubai) is authorized and regulated by the Dubai Financial Services Authority (DFSA). Research reports prepared and issued by Merrill Lynch (Dubai) are prepared and issued in accordance with the requirements of the DFSA conduct of business rules. Merrill Lynch (Frankfurt) distributes this report in Germany. Merrill Lynch (Frankfurt) is regulated by BaFin. This research report has been prepared and issued by MLPF&S and/or one or more of its non-US affiliates. MLPF&S is the distributor of this research report in the US and accepts full responsibility for research reports of its non-US affiliates distributed to MLPF&S clients in the US. Any US person receiving this research report and wishing to effect any transaction in any security discussed in the report should do so through MLPF&S and not such foreign affiliates. Hong Kong recipients of this research report should contact Merrill Lynch (Asia Pacific) Limited in respect of any matters relating to dealing in securities or provision of specific advice on securities. Singapore recipients of this research report should contact Merrill Lynch International Bank Limited (Merchant Bank) and/or Merrill Lynch (Singapore) Pte Ltd in respect of any matters arising from, or in connection with, this research report. General Investment Related Disclosures: Taiwan Readers: Neither the information nor any opinion expressed herein constitutes an offer or a solicitation of an offer to transact in any securities or other financial instrument. No part of this report may be used or reproduced or quoted in any manner whatsoever in Taiwan by the press or any other person without the express written consent of BofA Merrill Lynch. This research report provides general information only. Neither the information nor any opinion expressed constitutes an offer or an invitation to make an offer, to buy or sell any securities or other financial instrument or any derivative related to such securities or instruments (e.g., options, futures, warrants, and contracts for differences). This report is not intended to provide personal investment advice and it does not take into account the specific investment objectives, financial situation and the particular needs of any specific person. Investors should seek financial advice regarding the appropriateness of investing in financial instruments and implementing investment strategies discussed or recommended in this report and should understand that statements regarding future prospects may not be realized. Any decision to purchase or subscribe for securities in any offering must be based solely on existing public information on such security or the information in the prospectus or other offering document issued in connection with such offering, and not on this report. Securities and other financial instruments discussed in this report, or recommended, offered or sold by Merrill Lynch, are not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and are not deposits or other obligations of any insured depository institution (including, Bank of America, N.A.). Investments in general and, derivatives, in particular, involve numerous risks, including, among others, market risk, counterparty default risk and liquidity risk. No security, financial instrument or

US Oil and Gas 13 April 2015

derivative is suitable for all investors. In some cases, securities and other financial instruments may be difficult to value or sell and reliable information about the value or risks related to the security or financial instrument may be difficult to obtain. Investors should note that income from such securities and other financial instruments, if any, may fluctuate and that price or value of such securities and instruments may rise or fall and, in some cases, investors may lose their entire principal investment. Past performance is not necessarily a guide to future performance. Levels and basis for taxation may change. This report may contain a short-term trading idea or recommendation, which highlights a specific near-term catalyst or event impacting the company or the market that is anticipated to have a short-term price impact on the equity securities of the company. Short-term trading ideas and recommendations are different from and do not affect a stock's fundamental equity rating, which reflects both a longer term total return expectation and attractiveness for investment relative to other stocks within its Coverage Cluster. Short-term trading ideas and recommendations may be more or less positive than a stock's fundamental equity rating. BofA Merrill Lynch is aware that the implementation of the ideas expressed in this report may depend upon an investor's ability to "short" securities or other financial instruments and that such action may be limited by regulations prohibiting or restricting "shortselling" in many jurisdictions. Investors are urged to seek advice regarding the applicability of such regulations prior to executing any short idea contained in this report. Foreign currency rates of exchange may adversely affect the value, price or income of any security or financial instrument mentioned in this report. Investors in such securities and instruments, including ADRs, effectively assume currency risk. UK Readers: The protections provided by the U.K. regulatory regime, including the Financial Services Scheme, do not apply in general to business coordinated by BofA Merrill Lynch entities located outside of the United Kingdom. BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research policies relating to conflicts of interest are described at http://www.ml.com/media/43347.pdf. Officers of MLPF&S or one or more of its affiliates (other than research analysts) may have a financial interest in securities of the issuer(s) or in related investments. MLPF&S or one of its affiliates is a regular issuer of traded financial instruments linked to securities that may have been recommended in this report. MLPF&S or one of its affiliates may, at any time, hold a trading position (long or short) in the securities and financial instruments discussed in this report. BofA Merrill Lynch, through business units other than BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research, may have issued and may in the future issue trading ideas or recommendations that are inconsistent with, and reach different conclusions from, the information presented in this report. Such ideas or recommendations reflect the different time frames, assumptions, views and analytical methods of the persons who prepared them, and BofA Merrill Lynch is under no obligation to ensure that such other trading ideas or recommendations are brought to the attention of any recipient of this report. In the event that the recipient received this report pursuant to a contract between the recipient and MLPF&S for the provision of research services for a separate fee, and in connection therewith MLPF&S may be deemed to be acting as an investment adviser, such status relates, if at all, solely to the person with whom MLPF&S has contracted directly and does not extend beyond the delivery of this report (unless otherwise agreed specifically in writing by MLPF&S). MLPF&S is and continues to act solely as a broker-dealer in connection with the execution of any transactions, including transactions in any securities mentioned in this report. Copyright and General Information regarding Research Reports: Copyright 2015 Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated. All rights reserved. iQmethod, iQmethod 2.0, iQprofile, iQtoolkit, iQworks are service marks of Bank of America Corporation. iQanalytics®, iQcustom®, iQdatabase® are registered service marks of Bank of America Corporation. This research report is prepared for the use of BofA Merrill Lynch clients and may not be redistributed, retransmitted or disclosed, in whole or in part, or in any form or manner, without the express written consent of BofA Merrill Lynch. BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research reports are distributed simultaneously to internal and client websites and other portals by BofA Merrill Lynch and are not publicly-available materials. Any unauthorized use or disclosure is prohibited. Receipt and review of this research report constitutes your agreement not to redistribute, retransmit, or disclose to others the contents, opinions, conclusion, or information contained in this report (including any investment recommendations, estimates or price targets) without first obtaining expressed permission from an authorized officer of BofA Merrill Lynch. Materials prepared by BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research personnel are based on public information. Facts and views presented in this material have not been reviewed by, and may not reflect information known to, professionals in other business areas of BofA Merrill Lynch, including investment banking personnel. BofA Merrill Lynch has established information barriers between BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research and certain business groups. As a result, BofA Merrill Lynch does not disclose certain client relationships with, or compensation received from, such companies in research reports. To the extent this report discusses any legal proceeding or issues, it has not been prepared as nor is it intended to express any legal conclusion, opinion or advice. Investors should consult their own legal advisers as to issues of law relating to the subject matter of this report. BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research personnel’s knowledge of legal proceedings in which any BofA Merrill Lynch entity and/or its directors, officers and employees may be plaintiffs, defendants, co-defendants or co-plaintiffs with or involving companies mentioned in this report is based on public information. Facts and views presented in this material that relate to any such proceedings have not been reviewed by, discussed with, and may not reflect information known to, professionals in other business areas of BofA Merrill Lynch in connection with the legal proceedings or matters relevant to such proceedings. This report has been prepared independently of any issuer of securities mentioned herein and not in connection with any proposed offering of securities or as agent of any issuer of any securities. None of MLPF&S, any of its affiliates or their research analysts has any authority whatsoever to make any representation or warranty on behalf of the issuer(s). BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research policy prohibits research personnel from disclosing a recommendation, investment rating, or investment thesis for review by an issuer prior to the publication of a research report containing such rating, recommendation or investment thesis. Any information relating to the tax status of financial instruments discussed herein is not intended to provide tax advice or to be used by anyone to provide tax advice. Investors are urged to seek tax advice based on their particular circumstances from an independent tax professional. The information herein (other than disclosure information relating to BofA Merrill Lynch and its affiliates) was obtained from various sources and we do not guarantee its accuracy. This report may contain links to third-party websites. BofA Merrill Lynch is not responsible for the content of any third-party website or any linked content contained in a third-party website. Content contained on such third-party websites is not part of this report and is not incorporated by reference into this report. The inclusion of a link in this report does not imply any endorsement by or any affiliation with BofA Merrill Lynch. Access to any third-party website is at your own risk, and you should always review the terms and privacy policies at third-party websites before submitting any personal information to them. BofA Merrill Lynch is not responsible for such terms and privacy policies and expressly disclaims any liability for them. Subject to the quiet period applicable under laws of the various jurisdictions in which we distribute research reports and other legal and BofA Merrill Lynch policy- related restrictions on the publication of research reports, fundamental equity reports are produced on a regular basis as necessary to keep the investment recommendation current. Certain outstanding reports may contain discussions and/or investment opinions relating to securities, financial instruments and/or issuers that are no longer current. Always refer to the most recent research report relating to a company or issuer prior to making an investment decision. In some cases, a company or issuer may be classified as Restricted or may be Under Review or Extended Review. In each case, investors should consider any investment opinion relating to such company or issuer (or its security and/or financial instruments) to be suspended or withdrawn and should not rely on the analyses and investment opinion(s) pertaining to such issuer (or its securities and/or financial instruments) nor should the analyses or opinion(s) be considered a solicitation of any kind. Sales persons and financial advisors affiliated with MLPF&S or any of its affiliates may not solicit purchases of securities or financial instruments that are Restricted or Under Review and may only solicit securities under Extended Review in accordance with firm policies. Neither BofA Merrill Lynch nor any officer or employee of BofA Merrill Lynch accepts any liability whatsoever for any direct, indirect or consequential damages or losses arising from any use of this report or its contents.