Stock Analysis on Net

EOG Resources Inc. (NYSE:EOG)

$22.49

This company has been moved to the archive! The financial data has not been updated since February 27, 2020.

Economic Value Added (EVA)

Microsoft Excel

EVA is registered trademark of Stern Stewart.

Economic value added or economic profit is the difference between revenues and costs,where costs include not only expenses, but also cost of capital.

Paying user area

The data is hidden behind: . Unhide it.

This is a one-time payment. There is no automatic renewal.


We accept:

Visa Mastercard American Express Maestro Discover JCB PayPal Google Pay
Visa Secure Mastercard Identity Check American Express SafeKey

Economic Profit

EOG Resources Inc., economic profit calculation

US$ in thousands

Microsoft Excel
12 months ended: Dec 31, 2019 Dec 31, 2018 Dec 31, 2017 Dec 31, 2016 Dec 31, 2015
Net operating profit after taxes (NOPAT)1
Cost of capital2
Invested capital3
 
Economic profit4

Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-31).

1 NOPAT. See details »

2 Cost of capital. See details »

3 Invested capital. See details »

4 2019 Calculation
Economic profit = NOPAT – Cost of capital × Invested capital
= × =


The period under review demonstrates a significant evolution in financial performance, as measured by economic profit. Initially, the company experienced substantial economic losses, which gradually diminished before increasing again in later years. This analysis details the observed trends in net operating profit after taxes, cost of capital, invested capital, and ultimately, economic profit.

Net Operating Profit After Taxes (NOPAT)
NOPAT began with a considerable loss in 2015, totaling over US$6.8 billion. A marked improvement occurred in subsequent years, with NOPAT becoming positive in 2017 at US$783.7 million. Further growth was observed in 2018, reaching US$4.67 billion, before decreasing slightly to US$3.77 billion in 2019. This indicates a volatile but generally improving trend in core operational profitability.
Cost of Capital
The cost of capital exhibited relative stability throughout the period, fluctuating between approximately 19.7% and 20.95%. A slight decrease was noted in 2019, falling to 19.94%. This suggests consistent financing costs over the observed timeframe, with a minor reduction in the most recent year.
Invested Capital
Invested capital consistently increased throughout the period, rising from US$24.4 billion in 2015 to US$32.7 billion in 2019. This demonstrates a continuous reinvestment in the business and expansion of the asset base. The rate of increase appeared to accelerate between 2017 and 2019.
Economic Profit
Economic profit mirrored the trend in NOPAT, starting with a substantial loss of over US$11.6 billion in 2015. Losses were reduced in 2016 and 2017, reaching approximately US$4.8 billion. While 2018 saw a significant reduction in the loss to under US$1.7 billion, economic profit again worsened in 2019, reaching a loss of US$2.7 billion. Despite the growth in NOPAT, the increasing invested capital and relatively stable cost of capital contributed to the renewed decline in economic profit in the final year.

In summary, while operational profitability improved considerably from 2015 to 2018, the company’s economic profit remained negative throughout the period. The increasing investment in capital, coupled with a consistent cost of capital, offset the gains in NOPAT, particularly in the later years. The 2019 results indicate a potential reversal of the positive trend observed in 2018, warranting further investigation.


Net Operating Profit after Taxes (NOPAT)

EOG Resources Inc., NOPAT calculation

US$ in thousands

Microsoft Excel
12 months ended: Dec 31, 2019 Dec 31, 2018 Dec 31, 2017 Dec 31, 2016 Dec 31, 2015
Net income (loss)
Deferred income tax expense (benefit)1
Increase (decrease) in equity equivalents2
Net interest expense
Interest expense, operating lease liability3
Adjusted net interest expense
Tax benefit of net interest expense4
Adjusted net interest expense, after taxes5
Net operating profit after taxes (NOPAT)

Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-31).

1 Elimination of deferred tax expense. See details »

2 Addition of increase (decrease) in equity equivalents to net income (loss).

3 2019 Calculation
Interest expense on capitalized operating leases = Operating lease liability × Discount rate
= × =

4 2019 Calculation
Tax benefit of net interest expense = Adjusted net interest expense × Statutory income tax rate
= × 21.00% =

5 Addition of after taxes interest expense to net income (loss).


The financial data reveals significant fluctuations in the company's profitability and operating performance over the five-year period.

Net Income (Loss)
There is a marked improvement from a substantial loss of approximately $4.52 billion in 2015 to a more moderate loss of about $1.10 billion in 2016. This negative trend reverses in 2017 when the company reports a net income of roughly $2.58 billion. The upward trajectory continues through 2018 and 2019, with net income increasing to approximately $3.42 billion and then slightly declining to about $2.73 billion, respectively. This pattern indicates a recovery and stabilization of net profitability after the initial losses in 2015 and 2016.
Net Operating Profit After Taxes (NOPAT)
The NOPAT data exhibits a similar trend to net income, with significant losses recorded in 2015 and 2016, amounting to approximately $6.84 billion and $1.42 billion, respectively. The company moves into positive territory in 2017 with a NOPAT of about $784 million, which then substantially increases to around $4.67 billion in 2018. There is a slight decrease in NOPAT to approximately $3.77 billion in 2019. These changes suggest improvements in core operational efficiency and profitability through the period, particularly from 2017 onwards.

Overall, the data indicates a transition from heavy losses to consistent profitability, reflecting either operational improvements, favorable market conditions, or other strategic adjustments that significantly enhanced financial performance starting in 2017. Both net income and NOPAT trends are aligned, reinforcing the conclusion of a robust turnaround in the company’s financial health over the observed years.


Cash Operating Taxes

EOG Resources Inc., cash operating taxes calculation

US$ in thousands

Microsoft Excel
12 months ended: Dec 31, 2019 Dec 31, 2018 Dec 31, 2017 Dec 31, 2016 Dec 31, 2015
Income tax provision (benefit)
Less: Deferred income tax expense (benefit)
Add: Tax savings from net interest expense
Cash operating taxes

Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-31).


The financial data reveals several notable trends and changes over the examined periods.

Income Tax Provision (Benefit)
This item shows significant volatility throughout the years. In 2015 and 2016, the figures reflect substantial tax benefits, with values of approximately -2.4 billion and -460.8 million respectively, indicating periods of considerable tax relief or deferred tax benefits. The benefit peaked again in 2017 at nearly -1.9 billion, before reversing sharply in 2018 and 2019 to positive figures of 822 million and 810 million respectively. This shift from benefit to provision suggests a change in taxable income or tax obligations, possibly due to improved profitability or changes in tax regulations.
Cash Operating Taxes
Cash operating taxes presented a more stable but fluctuating pattern across the years. From 2015 to 2017, this expense remained positive, ranging between approximately 157.8 thousand and 173.4 thousand, indicating ongoing tax payments related to operations. Contrastingly, 2018 and 2019 show negative values of -165.6 thousand and -15.3 thousand, respectively, which could imply tax refunds, credits, or adjustments exceeding tax payments during these periods. The sharp decline and transition from positive to negative cash operating taxes in 2018 particularly highlight a notable operational or fiscal event impacting tax cash outflows.

Invested Capital

EOG Resources Inc., invested capital calculation (financing approach)

US$ in thousands

Microsoft Excel
Dec 31, 2019 Dec 31, 2018 Dec 31, 2017 Dec 31, 2016 Dec 31, 2015
Current portion of long-term debt
Long-term debt, excluding current portion
Operating lease liability1
Total reported debt & leases
Stockholders’ equity
Net deferred tax (assets) liabilities2
Equity equivalents3
Accumulated other comprehensive (income) loss, net of tax4
Adjusted stockholders’ equity
Invested capital

Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-31).

1 Addition of capitalized operating leases.

2 Elimination of deferred taxes from assets and liabilities. See details »

3 Addition of equity equivalents to stockholders’ equity.

4 Removal of accumulated other comprehensive income.


The financial data reveals several notable trends in the company's capital structure over the five-year period ending December 31, 2019.

Total reported debt & leases
The total reported debt and leases show a consistent decline from 7,023,659 thousand US dollars in 2015 to 5,974,808 thousand US dollars in 2019. This represents a reduction of approximately 15% over the period, indicating a strategic effort to decrease debt obligations.
Stockholders’ equity
Stockholders’ equity demonstrates a steady and significant increase each year, rising from 12,943,035 thousand US dollars in 2015 to 21,640,716 thousand US dollars by the end of 2019. This growth, approximately 67% over five years, suggests retained earnings accumulation and possible additional equity issuances, strengthening the company's financial base.
Invested capital
Invested capital shows an upward trend throughout the period, increasing from 24,433,279 thousand US dollars in 2015 to 32,663,914 thousand US dollars at the end of 2019, marking a growth of about 34%. This trend indicates ongoing investments in assets, supporting the company's expansion or operational needs.

Overall, the combination of decreasing debt levels alongside increasing equity and invested capital suggests a strengthening of the capital structure with a shift towards greater equity financing. This could enhance the company's financial stability and capacity for future investment.


Cost of Capital

EOG Resources Inc., cost of capital calculations

Capital (fair value)1 Weights Cost of capital
Equity2 ÷ = × =
Long-term debt and finance leases3 ÷ = × × (1 – 21.00%) =
Operating lease liability4 ÷ = × × (1 – 21.00%) =
Total:

Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-31).

1 US$ in thousands

2 Equity. See details »

3 Long-term debt and finance leases. See details »

4 Operating lease liability. See details »

Capital (fair value)1 Weights Cost of capital
Equity2 ÷ = × =
Long-term debt and finance leases3 ÷ = × × (1 – 21.00%) =
Operating lease liability4 ÷ = × × (1 – 21.00%) =
Total:

Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-31).

1 US$ in thousands

2 Equity. See details »

3 Long-term debt and finance leases. See details »

4 Operating lease liability. See details »

Capital (fair value)1 Weights Cost of capital
Equity2 ÷ = × =
Long-term debt and finance leases3 ÷ = × × (1 – 35.00%) =
Operating lease liability4 ÷ = × × (1 – 35.00%) =
Total:

Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31).

1 US$ in thousands

2 Equity. See details »

3 Long-term debt and finance leases. See details »

4 Operating lease liability. See details »

Capital (fair value)1 Weights Cost of capital
Equity2 ÷ = × =
Long-term debt and finance leases3 ÷ = × × (1 – 35.00%) =
Operating lease liability4 ÷ = × × (1 – 35.00%) =
Total:

Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31).

1 US$ in thousands

2 Equity. See details »

3 Long-term debt and finance leases. See details »

4 Operating lease liability. See details »

Capital (fair value)1 Weights Cost of capital
Equity2 ÷ = × =
Long-term debt and finance leases3 ÷ = × × (1 – 35.00%) =
Operating lease liability4 ÷ = × × (1 – 35.00%) =
Total:

Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-31).

1 US$ in thousands

2 Equity. See details »

3 Long-term debt and finance leases. See details »

4 Operating lease liability. See details »


Economic Spread Ratio

EOG Resources Inc., economic spread ratio calculation, comparison to benchmarks

Microsoft Excel
Dec 31, 2019 Dec 31, 2018 Dec 31, 2017 Dec 31, 2016 Dec 31, 2015
Selected Financial Data (US$ in thousands)
Economic profit1
Invested capital2
Performance Ratio
Economic spread ratio3
Benchmarks
Economic Spread Ratio, Competitors4
Chevron Corp.
ConocoPhillips
Exxon Mobil Corp.

Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-31).

1 Economic profit. See details »

2 Invested capital. See details »

3 2019 Calculation
Economic spread ratio = 100 × Economic profit ÷ Invested capital
= 100 × ÷ =

4 Click competitor name to see calculations.


The economic spread ratio demonstrates a consistent, though moderating, negative trend over the five-year period. Initially, the ratio is significantly negative, but it moves closer to zero each year before exhibiting a slight worsening in the final year observed.

Economic Spread Ratio Trend
In 2015, the economic spread ratio is reported at -47.75%. This represents a substantial negative spread, indicating that the company’s return on invested capital is considerably lower than its cost of capital. A notable improvement is observed in 2016, with the ratio increasing to -26.03%, suggesting a narrowing of the gap between return and cost of capital. This positive trend continues through 2017 (-18.00%) and 2018 (-5.48%), demonstrating a continued, albeit diminishing, improvement in the economic spread. However, in 2019, the ratio declines slightly to -8.38%, indicating a potential reversal of the improving trend.

The invested capital figures show a consistent upward trend throughout the period. This suggests the company is continually reinvesting and expanding its capital base. Despite this increase in invested capital, the economic spread ratio does not become positive, indicating that the returns generated from this capital are not sufficient to cover the cost of that capital.

Relationship between Economic Profit and Invested Capital
Economic profit remains negative across all five years, although the magnitude of the loss decreases from 2015 to 2018 before increasing again in 2019. The consistent negative economic profit, coupled with the increasing invested capital, contributes to the observed trend in the economic spread ratio. The narrowing of the negative spread from 2016 to 2018 coincides with the reduction in the absolute value of economic profit, despite the increase in invested capital. The increase in economic profit loss in 2019 contributes to the slight decline in the economic spread ratio.

The observed trend suggests that while the company is improving its efficiency in generating returns relative to its cost of capital, it has not yet reached a point where it is creating economic value. The slight deterioration in the economic spread ratio in 2019 warrants further investigation to determine the underlying causes and potential implications for future performance.


Economic Profit Margin

EOG Resources Inc., economic profit margin calculation, comparison to benchmarks

Microsoft Excel
Dec 31, 2019 Dec 31, 2018 Dec 31, 2017 Dec 31, 2016 Dec 31, 2015
Selected Financial Data (US$ in thousands)
Economic profit1
Operating revenues and other
Performance Ratio
Economic profit margin2
Benchmarks
Economic Profit Margin, Competitors3
Chevron Corp.
ConocoPhillips
Exxon Mobil Corp.

Based on: 10-K (reporting date: 2019-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2018-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2017-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2016-12-31), 10-K (reporting date: 2015-12-31).

1 Economic profit. See details »

2 2019 Calculation
Economic profit margin = 100 × Economic profit ÷ Operating revenues and other
= 100 × ÷ =

3 Click competitor name to see calculations.


The economic profit margin exhibited significant fluctuations between 2015 and 2019. Initially negative, the margin demonstrated improvement before declining again towards the end of the period. A consistent pattern of negative economic profit was present throughout the five-year span, indicating that the company’s returns did not exceed its cost of capital during these years.

Economic Profit Margin Trend
The economic profit margin began at -133.23% in 2015, representing a substantial loss relative to capital employed. A marked improvement was observed in 2016, with the margin increasing to -89.55%. This positive trend continued into 2017, reaching -42.67%, suggesting a narrowing of the gap between returns and the cost of capital. However, the margin improved significantly in 2018 to -9.64%, indicating a substantial, though still negative, economic profit. The margin then worsened in 2019, settling at -15.75%, representing a reversal of the prior year’s gains.
Relationship to Operating Revenues
Operating revenues and other revenues increased from US$8,757,428 thousand in 2015 to US$17,379,973 thousand in 2019. Despite this substantial growth in revenue, the economic profit remained negative throughout the period. The increasing revenues did not translate into positive economic profit, suggesting that the cost of capital, or operational inefficiencies, were increasing at a faster rate than revenue growth, or that the revenue growth was not sufficient to offset the cost of capital.

The volatility in the economic profit margin suggests sensitivity to underlying economic factors or company-specific operational changes. The initial improvement followed by a subsequent decline warrants further investigation to determine the drivers behind these shifts and their implications for long-term value creation.