By Cyrus Sanati
FORTUNE -- If it wasn't clear before, it certainly is now: Big Oil has got some big problems.
In a year in which oil remained near historic highs at around $100 a barrel, ExxonMobil (XOM), the all-around best-in-class energy company, said on Wednesday at its analyst meeting in New York that its return on capital employed (ROCE) for 2013 was 17%. Let me repeat that -- 17%. This is bad, people.
Admittedly, achieving a 17% ROCE is something many companies would kill for -- even other energy companies. But this is ExxonMobil. No other energy company is as skilled or as adept at maneuvering the political and economic quagmire that comes with drilling for fossil fuels than Grandpappy Exxon. In the 2000s, ExxonMobil's ROCE, which is a measure of profitability and efficiency of how capital is employed, was legendary for its strength and power, with 35% considered the internal benchmark. Achieving a level below 30% was considered failure among Exxon's conservative lot, according to a longtime engineer at the firm.
But the financial crisis put an end to ExxonMobil's profit party. Oil and natural gas prices plummeted, and, as one would expect, so did Exxon's ROCE. It still stayed in the mid-20% range, which, while disappointing, wasn't the end of the world. But investors cut the company some slack. They thought that once the tumult was over Exxon would again reign supreme.
And now we have this -- 17%. Even amid high oil prices, the company couldn't even hit 20%? Even more embarrassing, Chevron (CVX), the other big U.S. energy company, is expected to beat Exxon hands down when it comes to ROCE -- it has done so every year since 2010.
This must be very disturbing for Rex Tillerson, ExxonMobil's chief executive. On Wednesday, Tillerson took action, which he believes will boost Exxon's legendary profitability -- spend less. In a surprise move, Tillerson said that 2014 will see a $4 billion, or about 10%, decrease in ExxonMobil's ridiculously large $40 billion capital expenditures budget. Spending less capital means that the ratio will go up, provided that profits stay level. That's probably a good bet considering that it takes years, even decades, for a project to start paying off.
So is Tillerson making the right move? The markets don't think so -- Exxon's stock price sank 3% after the announcement, dragging the entire Dow Jones Industrial Index (INDU) down with it. Tillerson must be very confused. He is doing exactly what he thought shareholders and analysts wanted -- delivering a higher ROCE.
But while ROCE is an important metric, it isn't the only thing investors care about. People who invest in ExxonMobil tend to be conservative value players, more interested in consistent cash flow with long time-horizons than with hitting some financial target. For example, Warren Buffett, the king of value investing, disclosed last November that he had accumulated a nearly 1% stake in ExxonMobil during the second quarter of 2013, equating to some $3.45 billion.
At the same time he bought Exxon, Buffett slashed his relatively large stake in dimming energy giant ConocoPhillips (COP), which, at the time, was going through a major reorganization. Some investors found his choice strange as ConocoPhillips' stock was up 27% for the year at that point, while Exxon's stock was up only 8%. But it plays to the theme of value investing. Exxon's earnings are stable, with defined long-term earnings potential, while COP's future had been up in the air. Uncertainty isn't ideal for value investors, even if it means giving up some of the upside.
Exxon has made a point to be as consistent as possible with its returns, despite, of course, the volatility in oil prices. When it says it is going to invest $40 billion, investors trust that the company will deliver world-class returns on that money over the next few years.
That's why when Tillerson said on Wednesday that he was cutting the CapEx budget, investors ran for the exits. They had projected that Exxon would continue to plough money into new projects and that those projects would yield strong and consistent 20% to 30% returns over time. Sure, it is nice to have that extra $4 billion returned to shareholders, but that's just this year. Value investors are in it for the long haul and cutting CapEx means that they should expect decreased revenue down the road.
To be sure, no one is saying that Exxon should invest in unprofitable ventures just to keep busy -- too many companies already do that. It was just disappointing for investors to hear that the company doesn't believe it can deliver a strong enough return to justify its carefully planned CapEx budget.
Then there is the big fear -- did Exxon think a 17% ROCE was a strong enough return to justify last year's massive capital expenditure outlay? If so, what exactly does Exxon think its future projects will yield if it can so easily slash so much off of it -- 15%? Maybe 10%? You can see how this might have caused a bit of a panic.
Amid pressure from investors who argued the company had stretched itself too thin, Hess has shed assets and is moving forward as a streamlined company.Dec 4, 2013 10:52 AM ET
Why a coalition worth $3 trillion is calling on the oil, gas, coal, and energy industries to reassess the risks of a warming planet
By Ryan Bradley, senior editor
FORTUNE -- If human-caused climate change is accepted as a certainty -- it is, by 95% of scientists (a higher percentage, by the way, than agree that smoking causes cancer) -- what are the ramifications for business? If you are in the keeping-back-the-sea biz, rising seas will MOREOct 24, 2013 11:41 AM ET
What company does John Doerr believe will revolutionize energy?
FORTUNE -- Venture capitalist John Doerr today said at TC Disrupt that the real energy "game changer" would be tripling battery life, rather than the incremental increases we've seen over the past several years. Then he said that he has invested in a start-up that has pulled off the feat in a lab, but declined to identify it.
I'm not 100% certain, but MOREDan Primack - Sep 11, 2013 2:07 PM ET
A stunning government report says the U.S. economy has gone through a frightening structural change since the recession: a reduction in our capacity to grow. Here's what we need to do to turn things around.
By Shawn Tully, senior editor-at-large
FORTUNE -- A wonder of America is that, after every downturn, the economy inevitably regains its old, formidable growth trajectory. In good times, the U.S. expands its output faster than any MOREAug 15, 2013 8:00 AM ET
Despite all the legal, political, and business risks, Chevron has unapologetically doubled down on Argentina with a partnership with the state-controlled energy company YPF.
by Cyrus Sanati
FORTUNE -- Chevron is taking quite a gamble snuggling up with Argentina. The U.S. oil giant confirmed this week it is officially partnering up with Argentina's (now) state-controlled energy company, YPF, in a bid to help the firm develop the South American nation's potentially vast MOREJul 19, 2013 5:00 AM ET
Riverstone Holdings emerges from scandal with a huge new fund.
FORTUNE -- Four years ago, Riverstone Holdings was messier than an oil slick.
The energy-focused private equity firm's longtime partner, The Carlyle Group (CG), was pulling away in order to form its own energy investing platform. Firm co-founder David Leuschen had admitted to bankrolling a low-budget film produced by the brother of an influential public pension fund manager in New York. And MOREDan Primack - Jun 20, 2013 2:49 PM ET
More energy companies are converting to a tax-free status that was once reserved for a small segment of the industry.
FORTUNE -- More and more of the companies benefiting from new technologies that are fueling America's recent energy boom are paying little or no taxes.
In early May, Emerge Energy Services sold $127 million in shares in an initial public offering. Emerge (EMES) supplies sand to oil and gas drillers for blasting MOREStephen Gandel, senior editor - May 28, 2013 9:19 AM ET
Paul Ryan misstates the case on federal energy taxes.
FORTUNE -- Rep. Paul Ryan laid out his budget blueprint today, and it includes some whoppers about federal energy subsidies.
Here is what Ryan writes on page 48:
"The administration continues to penalize economically competitive sources of energy and to reward their uncompetitive alternatives. On the one hand, it pours money into its favored industries. In 2012, the Congressional Budget Office found total energy MOREDan Primack - Mar 12, 2013 12:26 PM ET
Bloom privately reports $32 million Q3 loss.
FORTUNE -- For years, the knock on fuel cell maker Bloom Energy Corp. has been that its boxes cost more to make than they cost to buy. Not exactly the sort of dynamic that would help Bloom make it up on volume.
But perhaps things are finally about to change, after 10 years and nearly $1 billion in venture capital funding.
Fortune recently obtained confidential documents MOREDan Primack - Nov 14, 2012 8:01 AM ET
|Chrysler Group orders donated Vipers destroyed|
|Albertsons to merge with Safeway|
|Everything must go: There's a flood of store closings|
|The real reasons to export U.S. gas|
|Bitcoin matters. Ignore the media circus.|