Use cases

{
  "total": 78,
  "limit": 10,
  "offset": 0,
  "count": 10,
  "data": [
    {
      "id": 26669455,
      "title": "This $70 Photoshop rival is now free, and I like it better than Photoshop",
      "url": "https://www.makeuseof.com/this-photoshop-rival-now-free-i-like-it-better-than-photoshop/",
      "publisher": "",
      "published_date": "2026-06-26T11:00:17",
      "sentiment": "Positive",
      "sentiment_score": 1,
      "ai_summary": "After acquiring UK software developer Serif in 2024, Canva has made the entire Affinity suite (photo editing, vector design, and page layout tools) completely free, unifying three separate apps into one application. More than one million people signed up in the first four days following the late 2025 launch. Canva's strategy is to drive users toward its $120/year Canva Premium subscription through generative AI features, while the core professional editing tools remain permanently free.",
      "full_text": "Bryan Wolfe has spent 15+ years writing about the tech people actually use — and occasionally the tech they probably shouldn't. With bylines at Yahoo, MakeUseOf, TechRadar, and Digital Trends, he brings an MBA-sharpened perspective to consumer tech, AI tools, and digital productivity. He's based in State College, PA, where he also runs GoingSolo.Life, a solo travel brand for the independently minded.\n\nAdobe Photoshop has been the default answer to photo editing for over three decades. On a Mac, it runs beautifully, integrates with the rest of Creative Cloud, and does more than most people will ever need. It also costs $22.99 per month, forever. That's not a one-time fee. It's a subscription you can never own, for software you can never keep. For years, Affinity Photo was the best argument against that model. At $69.99, it was a one-time purchase that gave you a genuine professional-grade editor with layers, RAW support, non-destructive editing, and masking tools, without the monthly toll booth. Now, Canva has made Affinity completely free, and that changes everything. Related Pixelmator Pro vs. Affinity Photo vs. Photoshop: Which Is the Best Image-Editing Tool? Features, performance, and value. Who wins? Affinity is now free: here's what changed Affinity Photo, Designer, and Publisher are now one app After design software giant Canva acquired Serif, the UK developer behind Affinity, in 2024, many creatives were understandably freaked out. Canva runs on subscriptions. Would Affinity go the same way? But at the Canva Keynote in late 2025, we got the exact opposite answer. Affinity CEO Ash Hewson told the crowd the new app was \"completely free, forever, for everyone.\" In just the first four days after launch, more than one million people signed up. This rebrand is also about more than just stripping away the price tag. The three separate apps, Affinity Photo, Affinity Designer, and Affinity Publisher, have been unified into a single app simply called Affinity. Photo editing, vector design, and page layout now live under one roof, without switching apps or importing files between them. If you've ever had to bounce a RAW image from one Affinity app to another just to finish a project, that’s no longer necessary. The free version requires a free Canva account but includes the full professional toolkit. The only thing behind a paywall is Canva's generative AI Studio, which includes features like Generative Fill, Expand & Edit, and AI background removal. Those require a Canva Premium subscription, which costs $120 per year. But if you're not chasing AI tools, you get everything else for nothing. Affinity by Canva Affinity is a free, all-in-one creative app for photo editing, vector design, and page layout, built for professional work without the subscription treadmill. Why Affinity is better than Photoshop on Mac A familiar interface that's easier to customize Credit: Bryan M. Wolfe / MakeUseOf On paper, Affinity has always worked on both Mac and Windows. But on a Mac, especially one running Apple Silicon, it has always felt more at home. Affinity is noticeably leaner than Photoshop on macOS. It starts faster, uses less memory, and stays responsive with large layered files. Where Photoshop can feel sluggish when working with complex compositions on older Intel Macs, Affinity stays smooth. On M1, M2, and M3 machines, the difference is even more pronounced. The app is optimized for Apple's GPU architecture in a way that Photoshop, with its legacy Windows roots, still hasn't fully matched. There's also the interface. Affinity's workspace will feel immediately familiar to anyone who has spent time in Photoshop. Panels sit where you expect them. Layers behave logically. Keyboard shortcuts map to muscle memory. If you're jumping ship from Photoshop, you’ll feel right at home almost instantly. And with the new version's customizable studios, where you can rearrange panels, hide tools you don't use, and save different layouts for different projects, it feels more like your editor than Adobe's editor. Affinity's key features for Mac photographers Focus stacking, HDR, and panorama stitching Credit: Bryan M. Wolfe / MakeUseOf Affinity's photo editing tools cover everything most photographers need day-to-day: Non-destructive RAW editing. The Develop persona handles RAW files directly, with full control over exposure, white balance, highlight and shadow recovery, curves, and lens corrections. Every adjustment is non-destructive, meaning you can tweak your edits later without ruining the original shot. Advanced layering and masking. Affinity matches Photoshop here. Live filters, adjustment layers, blend modes, and layer effects all work as expected. The magnetic selection tools are fast and accurate, and complex masks that would require multiple steps in Photoshop often come together in a single step. Focus stacking, HDR merging, and panorama stitching. These features are baked right into the app, meaning there’s no need to hunt down third-party plugins. Photoshop offers similar tools, but Affinity's implementations are clean and straightforward. Batch processing. You can automate repetitive edits across multiple files using macros, which is a massive timesaver if you’re batch-editing event or product shots. File format support. Affinity opens PSD, AI, PDF, SVG, TIFF, IDML, and more. You can open Photoshop files, edit them, and export them back out. The reverse isn't true; Photoshop can't open Affinity's native format. However, as long as you're working in standard formats, compatibility isn't a real obstacle. Where Adobe Photoshop still has the edge Credit: Bryan M. Wolfe / MakeUseOf Look, let’s be real: Affinity isn't going to kill Photoshop for everyone just yet. Adobe's generative AI tools are genuinely impressive. If removing complex objects, intelligently expanding canvases, or swapping skies with a single click is central to your workflow, Photoshop’s AI still goes deeper than anything in Affinity's free tier. Neural Filters and Generative Fill are massive time-savers for commercial retouching. Photoshop is also the industry default. If you collaborate with designers, agencies, or clients who expect PSD files and Creative Cloud sharing, sticking with Adobe just saves you a massive compatibility headache. Affinity is a better tool for independent creators than for teams embedded in the Adobe world. And Affinity still has no catalog or asset management. It's a file-by-file editor. If you need something to replace Lightroom's library function alongside its editing tools, Affinity isn't that. You'd pair it with something like Capture One or Apple Photos for organization. So, is this better than Photoshop? For most Mac users doing personal projects, freelance work, or content creation, yes. Now, 'better' depends heavily on your workflow, but consider what you're weighing: Photoshop costs you $22.99 every month. Over three years, that's more than $800. Affinity costs you nothing. The tools for everyday editing, such as retouching, compositing, RAW processing, and design work, will do the same job for 95% of what you need. Affinity is faster on Mac hardware, runs cleaner, and no longer asks you to pay for it. Of course, it’s worth asking what Canva’s endgame is here. The company is worth billions and is clearly using Affinity to funnel professionals toward Canva Premium subscriptions. Some in the creative community have noted that making something free rarely comes without a catch, and the AI paywall is the current form of that catch. But the core editing tools are genuinely free, with no time limits and no missing features. To get started, download Affinity. You'll create a free Canva account during setup, which takes about two minutes. The app is available now for macOS and Windows. An iPad version is in development. If you've been paying Adobe month after month for tools you mostly use to edit photos, resize graphics, and occasionally composite something together, give Affinity a real trial. Don't just open it once. Rather, spend a week in it. Set up your workspace. Import your RAW files. Run through the tools you use daily. Chances are, you'll realize you've been throwing money at an Adobe subscription you just don't need anymore.",
      "word_count": 1300,
      "original_language": "EN",
      "author": "Bryan M. Wolfe",
      "countries": [
        "GBR"
      ],
      "industries": [
        {
          "name": "Short-Form Video Creation, Editing & Templates Apps",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Self-Service BI & Data Visualization",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Beauty & Personal Care Online Retailers",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        {
          "name": "Pricing & Commercial Strategy",
          "code": "SD10",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Competitive Threats",
          "code": "II04",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Mergers & Acquisitions",
          "code": "CM03",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "company_mentions": [
        {
          "uuid": "00000l1",
          "name": "Canva",
          "website": "http://www.canva.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0006soj",
          "name": "Serif",
          "website": "https://www.serif.com"
        }
      ],
      "article_type": "Review",
      "is_press_release": true,
      "is_opinion": true,
      "is_breaking": true,
      "iptc_codes": [
        "20001248"
      ],
      "iab_categories": [
        "604",
        "614",
        "605"
      ],
      "naics_codes": [
        "513210",
        "5132",
        "51321",
        "541511"
      ],
      "sic_codes": [
        "7330",
        "7371"
      ],
      "entities": {
        "person": [
          "ash hewson",
          "bryan wolfe",
          "bryan m. wolfe"
        ],
        "location": [
          "uk",
          "state college, pa",
          "mac"
        ],
        "product": [
          "affinity photo",
          "affinity",
          "adobe photoshop",
          "pixelmator pro",
          "photoshop",
          "capture one",
          "lightroom",
          "ipad",
          "canva",
          "apple photos",
          "develop persona"
        ],
        "event": [
          "canva keynote"
        ]
      },
      "newsworthiness_score": 0.89410001039505,
      "group_id": null
    },
    {
      "id": 26669455,
      "title": "This $70 Photoshop rival is now free, and I like it better than Photoshop",
      "url": "https://www.makeuseof.com/this-photoshop-rival-now-free-i-like-it-better-than-photoshop/",
      "publisher": "",
      "published_date": "2026-06-26T11:00:17",
      "sentiment": "Positive",
      "sentiment_score": 1,
      "ai_summary": "After acquiring UK software developer Serif in 2024, Canva has made the entire Affinity suite (photo editing, vector design, and page layout tools) completely free, unifying three separate apps into one application. More than one million people signed up in the first four days following the late 2025 launch. Canva's strategy is to drive users toward its $120/year Canva Premium subscription through generative AI features, while the core professional editing tools remain permanently free.",
      "full_text": "Bryan Wolfe has spent 15+ years writing about the tech people actually use — and occasionally the tech they probably shouldn't. With bylines at Yahoo, MakeUseOf, TechRadar, and Digital Trends, he brings an MBA-sharpened perspective to consumer tech, AI tools, and digital productivity. He's based in State College, PA, where he also runs GoingSolo.Life, a solo travel brand for the independently minded.\n\nAdobe Photoshop has been the default answer to photo editing for over three decades. On a Mac, it runs beautifully, integrates with the rest of Creative Cloud, and does more than most people will ever need. It also costs $22.99 per month, forever. That's not a one-time fee. It's a subscription you can never own, for software you can never keep. For years, Affinity Photo was the best argument against that model. At $69.99, it was a one-time purchase that gave you a genuine professional-grade editor with layers, RAW support, non-destructive editing, and masking tools, without the monthly toll booth. Now, Canva has made Affinity completely free, and that changes everything. Related Pixelmator Pro vs. Affinity Photo vs. Photoshop: Which Is the Best Image-Editing Tool? Features, performance, and value. Who wins? Affinity is now free: here's what changed Affinity Photo, Designer, and Publisher are now one app After design software giant Canva acquired Serif, the UK developer behind Affinity, in 2024, many creatives were understandably freaked out. Canva runs on subscriptions. Would Affinity go the same way? But at the Canva Keynote in late 2025, we got the exact opposite answer. Affinity CEO Ash Hewson told the crowd the new app was \"completely free, forever, for everyone.\" In just the first four days after launch, more than one million people signed up. This rebrand is also about more than just stripping away the price tag. The three separate apps, Affinity Photo, Affinity Designer, and Affinity Publisher, have been unified into a single app simply called Affinity. Photo editing, vector design, and page layout now live under one roof, without switching apps or importing files between them. If you've ever had to bounce a RAW image from one Affinity app to another just to finish a project, that’s no longer necessary. The free version requires a free Canva account but includes the full professional toolkit. The only thing behind a paywall is Canva's generative AI Studio, which includes features like Generative Fill, Expand & Edit, and AI background removal. Those require a Canva Premium subscription, which costs $120 per year. But if you're not chasing AI tools, you get everything else for nothing. Affinity by Canva Affinity is a free, all-in-one creative app for photo editing, vector design, and page layout, built for professional work without the subscription treadmill. Why Affinity is better than Photoshop on Mac A familiar interface that's easier to customize Credit: Bryan M. Wolfe / MakeUseOf On paper, Affinity has always worked on both Mac and Windows. But on a Mac, especially one running Apple Silicon, it has always felt more at home. Affinity is noticeably leaner than Photoshop on macOS. It starts faster, uses less memory, and stays responsive with large layered files. Where Photoshop can feel sluggish when working with complex compositions on older Intel Macs, Affinity stays smooth. On M1, M2, and M3 machines, the difference is even more pronounced. The app is optimized for Apple's GPU architecture in a way that Photoshop, with its legacy Windows roots, still hasn't fully matched. There's also the interface. Affinity's workspace will feel immediately familiar to anyone who has spent time in Photoshop. Panels sit where you expect them. Layers behave logically. Keyboard shortcuts map to muscle memory. If you're jumping ship from Photoshop, you’ll feel right at home almost instantly. And with the new version's customizable studios, where you can rearrange panels, hide tools you don't use, and save different layouts for different projects, it feels more like your editor than Adobe's editor. Affinity's key features for Mac photographers Focus stacking, HDR, and panorama stitching Credit: Bryan M. Wolfe / MakeUseOf Affinity's photo editing tools cover everything most photographers need day-to-day: Non-destructive RAW editing. The Develop persona handles RAW files directly, with full control over exposure, white balance, highlight and shadow recovery, curves, and lens corrections. Every adjustment is non-destructive, meaning you can tweak your edits later without ruining the original shot. Advanced layering and masking. Affinity matches Photoshop here. Live filters, adjustment layers, blend modes, and layer effects all work as expected. The magnetic selection tools are fast and accurate, and complex masks that would require multiple steps in Photoshop often come together in a single step. Focus stacking, HDR merging, and panorama stitching. These features are baked right into the app, meaning there’s no need to hunt down third-party plugins. Photoshop offers similar tools, but Affinity's implementations are clean and straightforward. Batch processing. You can automate repetitive edits across multiple files using macros, which is a massive timesaver if you’re batch-editing event or product shots. File format support. Affinity opens PSD, AI, PDF, SVG, TIFF, IDML, and more. You can open Photoshop files, edit them, and export them back out. The reverse isn't true; Photoshop can't open Affinity's native format. However, as long as you're working in standard formats, compatibility isn't a real obstacle. Where Adobe Photoshop still has the edge Credit: Bryan M. Wolfe / MakeUseOf Look, let’s be real: Affinity isn't going to kill Photoshop for everyone just yet. Adobe's generative AI tools are genuinely impressive. If removing complex objects, intelligently expanding canvases, or swapping skies with a single click is central to your workflow, Photoshop’s AI still goes deeper than anything in Affinity's free tier. Neural Filters and Generative Fill are massive time-savers for commercial retouching. Photoshop is also the industry default. If you collaborate with designers, agencies, or clients who expect PSD files and Creative Cloud sharing, sticking with Adobe just saves you a massive compatibility headache. Affinity is a better tool for independent creators than for teams embedded in the Adobe world. And Affinity still has no catalog or asset management. It's a file-by-file editor. If you need something to replace Lightroom's library function alongside its editing tools, Affinity isn't that. You'd pair it with something like Capture One or Apple Photos for organization. So, is this better than Photoshop? For most Mac users doing personal projects, freelance work, or content creation, yes. Now, 'better' depends heavily on your workflow, but consider what you're weighing: Photoshop costs you $22.99 every month. Over three years, that's more than $800. Affinity costs you nothing. The tools for everyday editing, such as retouching, compositing, RAW processing, and design work, will do the same job for 95% of what you need. Affinity is faster on Mac hardware, runs cleaner, and no longer asks you to pay for it. Of course, it’s worth asking what Canva’s endgame is here. The company is worth billions and is clearly using Affinity to funnel professionals toward Canva Premium subscriptions. Some in the creative community have noted that making something free rarely comes without a catch, and the AI paywall is the current form of that catch. But the core editing tools are genuinely free, with no time limits and no missing features. To get started, download Affinity. You'll create a free Canva account during setup, which takes about two minutes. The app is available now for macOS and Windows. An iPad version is in development. If you've been paying Adobe month after month for tools you mostly use to edit photos, resize graphics, and occasionally composite something together, give Affinity a real trial. Don't just open it once. Rather, spend a week in it. Set up your workspace. Import your RAW files. Run through the tools you use daily. Chances are, you'll realize you've been throwing money at an Adobe subscription you just don't need anymore.",
      "word_count": 1300,
      "original_language": "EN",
      "author": "Bryan M. Wolfe",
      "countries": [
        "GBR"
      ],
      "industries": [
        {
          "name": "Short-Form Video Creation, Editing & Templates Apps",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Self-Service BI & Data Visualization",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Beauty & Personal Care Online Retailers",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        {
          "name": "Pricing & Commercial Strategy",
          "code": "SD10",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Competitive Threats",
          "code": "II04",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Mergers & Acquisitions",
          "code": "CM03",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "company_mentions": [
        {
          "uuid": "00000l1",
          "name": "Canva",
          "website": "http://www.canva.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0006soj",
          "name": "Serif",
          "website": "https://www.serif.com"
        }
      ],
      "article_type": "Review",
      "is_press_release": true,
      "is_opinion": true,
      "is_breaking": true,
      "iptc_codes": [
        "20001248"
      ],
      "iab_categories": [
        "604",
        "614",
        "605"
      ],
      "naics_codes": [
        "513210",
        "5132",
        "51321",
        "541511"
      ],
      "sic_codes": [
        "7330",
        "7371"
      ],
      "entities": {
        "person": [
          "ash hewson",
          "bryan wolfe",
          "bryan m. wolfe"
        ],
        "location": [
          "uk",
          "state college, pa",
          "mac"
        ],
        "product": [
          "affinity photo",
          "affinity",
          "adobe photoshop",
          "pixelmator pro",
          "photoshop",
          "capture one",
          "lightroom",
          "ipad",
          "canva",
          "apple photos",
          "develop persona"
        ],
        "event": [
          "canva keynote"
        ]
      },
      "newsworthiness_score": 0.89410001039505,
      "group_id": null
    },
    {
      "id": 26604703,
      "title": "Robinhood Ventures invests $25M in design platform Canva By Investing.com",
      "url": "https://www.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/robinhood-ventures-invests-25m-in-design-platform-canva-93CH-4761104",
      "publisher": "",
      "published_date": "2026-06-25T15:44:18",
      "sentiment": "Positive",
      "sentiment_score": 1,
      "ai_summary": "Robinhood Ventures Fund I announced it has closed a $25 million investment in Canva, purchasing Class A Common Stock of the design platform company. The investment was made through a closed-end fund that began trading on the NYSE in March 2026, which provides investors exposure to a concentrated portfolio of primarily private companies. Canva, which launched in 2013, now serves over 250 million monthly active users across enterprises, small businesses, consumers, and students in more than 190 countries worldwide.",
      "full_text": "Advertisement\n\nAdvertisement\n\n# Robinhood Ventures invests $25M in design platform Canva\n\nAuthor[Luke Juricic](https://www.investing.com/members/contributors/266175113)\n\n[Stock Markets](https://www.investing.com/news/stock-market-news)\n\nPublished 06/25/2026, 11:44 AM\n\n[0](#comments-4761104)\n\nRobinhood Ventures invests $25M in design platform Canva\n\n[View all comments (0)0](#comments-4761104)\n\nRobinhood Ventures invests $25M in design platform Canva\n\n[View all comments (0)0](#comments-4761104)\n\n© Reuters.\n\nIn this article:\n\n[HOOD-2.53%](https://www.investing.com/equities/robinhood-markets)\n\nInvesting.com - Robinhood Ventures Fund I announced today it has closed a $25 million investment in Canva. The fund purchased Class A Common Stock of the design platform company on Tuesday.\n\nSarah Pinto, President of Robinhood Ventures Fund I, said the firm believes Canva is one of the world’s most compelling design platforms. \"With its mission to put the power of design in everyone’s hands, Canva represents the kind of category-defining company our investors deserve access to,\" Pinto said.\n\nKelly Steckelberg, Chief Financial Officer at Canva, said more than a quarter of a billion people now use the platform every month. \"As we continue to accelerate our investment in building the world’s best visual AI tools, we believe we’re still in the very early stages of the opportunity ahead,\" Steckelberg said.\n\nCanva launched in 2013 as an all-in-one platform for visual communication and collaboration. The company serves enterprises, small businesses, consumers, and students in more than 190 countries worldwide.\n\nRobinhood Ventures Fund I began trading on the New York Stock Exchange on March 6, 2026. The closed-end fund provides investors exposure to a concentrated portfolio of primarily private companies including Airwallex, Boom, Databricks, ElevenLabs, Mercor, OpenAI, Oura, Ramp, Revolut, SpaceX and Stripe.\n\n*This article was generated with the support of AI and reviewed by an editor. For more information see our T&C.*\n\n[Robinhood Markets Inc](https://www.investing.com/equities/robinhood-markets)\n\nFollow\n\nAnalyze HOOD\n\nIncluded in our AI-picked strategies\n\n·\n\n[Review strategies](/pro/propicks)\n\n1D\n\n1W\n\n1M\n\n6M\n\n1Y\n\n5Y\n\nMax\n\nAnalyze HOOD\n\n## Is HOOD a bargain right now?\n\nThe fastest way to find out is with our Fair Value calculator. We use a mix of 17 proven industry valuation models for maximum accuracy.   \n  \n **Get the bottom line for HOOD plus thousands of other stocks** and find your next hidden gem with massive upside.\n\n[See Undervalued Stocks](/equities/most-undervalued)\n\nRobinhood Ventures invests $25M in design platform Canva\n\n[View all comments (0)0](#comments-4761104)\n\n## Latest comments\n\nPost\n\nComment Guidelines\n\n## Industry Spotlight\n\n[5 Things You Need to Know About the Gold and Silver Selloff](https://www.investing.com/analysis/5-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-gold-and-silver-selloff-200678742)\n\nApr 20, 2026•\n\nBy[Daniela Hathorn](https://www.investing.com/members/contributors/240862619)\n\n[Trade With A Regulated Broker](https://www.investing.com/brokers/)\n\nIndicesCommoditiesBondsStocks\n\n1D\n\n1W\n\n1M\n\n6M\n\n1Y\n\n5Y\n\nMax\n\n[US 30](https://www.investing.com/indices/us-30-futures?cid=1175152 \"US 30 Cash - (CFD)\")\n\n52,209.30\n\n+358.4\n\n+0.69%\n\n[US 500](https://www.investing.com/indices/us-spx-500-futures?cid=1175153 \"US 500 Cash - (CFD)\")\n\n7,365.10\n\n+6.6\n\n+0.09%\n\n[Dow Jones](https://www.investing.com/indices/us-30 \"Dow Jones Industrial Average\")\n\n52,221.53\n\n+372.63\n\n+0.72%\n\n[S&P 500](https://www.investing.com/indices/us-spx-500 \"S&P 500 - (CFD)\")\n\n7,367.08\n\n+8.86\n\n+0.12%\n\n[Nasdaq](https://www.investing.com/indices/nasdaq-composite \"NASDAQ Composite\")\n\n25,366.24\n\n-110.40\n\n-0.43%\n\n[S&P 500 VIX](https://www.investing.com/indices/volatility-s-p-500 \"CBOE Volatility Index - (CFD)\")\n\n18.94\n\n+0.31\n\n+1.66%\n\n[Dollar Index](https://www.investing.com/currencies/us-dollar-index \"US Dollar Index Futures - (CFD)\")\n\n101.105\n\n-0.286\n\n-0.28%\n\n[Crude Oil WTI Futures](https://www.investing.com/commodities/crude-oil \"Crude Oil WTI Futures - (CFD)\")\n\n71.58\n\n+1.24\n\n+1.76%\n\n[Brent Oil Futures](https://www.investing.com/commodities/brent-oil \"Brent Oil Futures - (CFD)\")\n\n75.07\n\n+1.20\n\n+1.62%\n\n[Natural Gas Futures](https://www.investing.com/commodities/natural-gas \"Natural Gas Futures - (CFD)\")\n\n3.292\n\n+0.031\n\n+0.95%\n\n[Gold Futures](https://www.investing.com/commodities/gold \"Gold Futures - (CFD)\")\n\n4,054.40\n\n+45.60\n\n+1.14%\n\n[Silver Futures](https://www.investing.com/commodities/silver \"Silver Futures - (CFD)\")\n\n58.84\n\n+0.753\n\n+1.30%\n\n[Copper Futures](https://www.investing.com/commodities/copper \"Copper Futures - (CFD)\")\n\n6.0838\n\n+0.1353\n\n+2.27%\n\n[US Soybeans Futures](https://www.investing.com/commodities/us-soybeans \"US Soybeans Futures - (CFD)\")\n\n1,151.63\n\n+16.63\n\n+1.46%\n\n[U.S. 10Y](https://www.investing.com/rates-bonds/u.s.-10-year-bond-yield \"United States 10-Year\")\n\n4.38\n\n-0.020\n\n-0.45%\n\n[U.S. 30Y](https://www.investing.com/rates-bonds/u.s.-30-year-bond-yield \"United States 30-Year\")\n\n4.85\n\n-0.006\n\n-0.12%\n\n[U.S. 5Y](https://www.investing.com/rates-bonds/u.s.-5-year-bond-yield \"United States 5-Year\")\n\n4.146\n\n-0.035\n\n-0.84%\n\n[U.S. 3M](https://www.investing.com/rates-bonds/u.s.-3-month-bond-yield \"United States 3-Month\")\n\n3.776\n\n-0.006\n\n-0.16%\n\n[US 10Y T-Note Futures](https://www.investing.com/rates-bonds/us-10-yr-t-note \"US 10 Year T-Note Futures\")\n\n110.17\n\n+0.17\n\n+0.16%\n\n[Euro Bund Futures](https://www.investing.com/rates-bonds/euro-bund \"Euro Bund Futures - (CFD)\")\n\n127.39\n\n+0.09\n\n+0.07%\n\n[10-2 Yield Spread](https://www.investing.com/rates-bonds/10-2-year-treasury-yield-spread \"10-2 Year Treasury Yield Spread\")\n\n31.32\n\n+4.15\n\n+15.27%\n\n[AAPL](https://www.investing.com/equities/apple-computer-inc \"Apple Inc\")\n\n277.97\n\n-15.11\n\n-5.16%\n\n[NVDA](https://www.investing.com/equities/nvidia-corp \"NVIDIA Corporation\")\n\n195.77\n\n-3.23\n\n-1.62%\n\n[GOOGL](https://www.investing.com/equities/google-inc \"Alphabet Inc Class A\")\n\n341.18\n\n-4.11\n\n-1.19%\n\n[TSLA](https://www.investing.com/equities/tesla-motors \"Tesla Inc\")\n\n375.25\n\n-0.28\n\n-0.07%\n\n[AMZN](https://www.investing.com/equities/amazon-com-inc \"Amazon.com Inc\")\n\n229.27\n\n-5.00\n\n-2.13%\n\n[NFLX](https://www.investing.com/equities/netflix,-inc. \"Netflix Inc\")\n\n72.11\n\n+0.27\n\n+0.38%\n\n[META](https://www.investing.com/equities/facebook-inc \"Meta Platforms Inc\")\n\n549.05\n\n-8.62\n\n-1.55%\n\nAdvertisement\n\nMost Popular Articles\n\nNews\n\nAnalysis\n\n[Drop-the-mic moment: Micron adds over $200B in value after blowout earnings, guide](https://www.investing.com/news/earnings/micron-posts-record-profit-as-ai-memory-demand-fuels-explosive-growth-4758914)\n\nBy Investing.co...\n\nJun 25, 2026\n\n[Stocks mixed in choppy trade as Apple slide counters Micron gain; Dow hits record](https://www.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/us-stock-futures-surge-as-micron-qualcomm-spark-chipmaker-rally-4759483)\n\nBy Investing.co...\n\nJun 25, 2026\n\n[Fed’s preferred inflation gauge posts highest annual rise since October 2023](https://www.investing.com/news/economy-news/feds-preferred-inflation-gauge-rises-in-may-matching-expectations-4760569)\n\nBy Investing.co...\n\nJun 25, 2026\n\n[Apple raises Mac and iPad prices due to chip shortage, shares plunge 5%](https://www.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/apple-raises-mac-and-ipad-prices-due-to-chip-shortage-4760686)\n\nBy Investing.co...\n\nJun 25, 2026\n\n[IBM unveils sub-1nm chip technology breakthrough; shares slip](https://www.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/ibm-surges-on-unveiling-sub1nm-chip-technology-breakthrough-4760044)\n\nBy Investing.co...\n\nJun 25, 2026\n\n[8 Mega-Caps With More Attractive Risk-Reward Than SpaceX](https://www.investing.com/analysis/8-megacaps-with-more-attractive-riskreward-than-spacex-200682602)\n\nBy David Wagner\n\nJun 23, 2026\n\n[Micron Under the Spotlight: What to Expect From Today’s Quarterly Earnings Report?](https://www.investing.com/analysis/micron-under-the-spotlight-what-to-expect-from-todays-quarterly-earnings-report-200682689)\n\nBy Matteo Farci\n\nJun 24, 2026\n\n[Is Gold’s Big Rally Over, or Just Catching Its Breath?](https://www.investing.com/analysis/is-golds-big-rally-over-or-just-catching-its-breath-200682591)\n\nBy Luis Flavio ...\n\nJun 23, 2026\n\n[Global Bonds Stumble as Surging US Dollar Piles on the Pain](https://www.investing.com/analysis/global-bonds-stumble-as-surging-us-dollar-piles-on-the-pain-200682704)\n\nBy James Picern...\n\nJun 24, 2026\n\n[9 Jesse Livermore Lessons Still Relevant in Today’s Markets](https://www.investing.com/analysis/jesse-livermores-9-old-lessons-for-todays-markets-200682698)\n\nBy Michael Lebo...\n\nJun 24, 2026\n\n[More News](https://www.investing.com/news/most-popular-news)\n\n[Market Movers](https://www.investing.com/markets/united-states)\n\nMost ActiveGainers %Losers %\n\n| Name | Last | Chg. % | Vol. |  |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| [NVDA](https://www.investing.com/equities/nvidia-corp) | 195.86 | -1.58% | 69.63M |  |\n| [INTC](https://www.investing.com/equities/intel-corp) | 129.41 | -1.70% | 67.58M |  |\n| [MU](https://www.investing.com/equities/micron-tech) | 1,200.20 | +14.47% | 46.46M |  |\n| [AAPL](https://www.investing.com/equities/apple-computer-inc) | 277.97 | -5.16% | 36.96M |  |\n| [MSFT](https://www.investing.com/equities/microsoft-corp) | 354.99 | -2.86% | 22.11M |  |\n| [AMD](https://www.investing.com/equities/adv-micro-device) | 520.84 | +0.21% | 12.92M |  |\n| [SNDK](https://www.investing.com/equities/sandisk-corp) | 2,219.99 | +15.96% | 7.29M |  |\n\n| Name | Last | Chg. % | Vol. |  |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| [TECH](https://www.investing.com/equities/techne-corp) | 70.50 | +19.74% | 34.04M |  |\n| [SNDK](https://www.investing.com/equities/sandisk-corp) | 2,219.99 | +15.96% | 7.29M |  |\n| [MU](https://www.investing.com/equities/micron-tech) | 1,200.20 | +14.47% | 46.46M |  |\n| [GLW](https://www.investing.com/equities/corning-inc) | 222.23 | +7.97% | 15.67M |  |\n| [AMAT](https://www.investing.com/equities/applied-matls-inc) | 632.99 | +7.47% | 5.32M |  |\n| [MOH](https://www.investing.com/equities/molina-healthcare-inc) | 215.04 | +6.76% | 524.00K |  |\n| [RVTY](https://www.investing.com/equities/perkinelmer) | 113.28 | +7.24% | 1.04M |  |\n\n| Name | Last | Chg. % | Vol. |  |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| [MSTR](https://www.investing.com/equities/microstrategy-inc) | 87.61 | -6.93% | 23.62M |  |\n| [DELL](https://www.investing.com/equities/dell-inc) | 407.48 | -6.12% | 6.06M |  |\n| [AKAM](https://www.investing.com/equities/akamai-technologies-inc) | 112.40 | -5.93% | 1.36M |  |\n| [PLTR](https://www.investing.com/equities/palantir-technologies-inc) | 106.99 | -5.74% | 31.31M |  |\n| [RKLB](https://www.investing.com/equities/vector-acquisition) | 80.470 | -5.78% | 14.28M |  |\n| [AAPL](https://www.investing.com/equities/apple-computer-inc) | 277.97 | -5.16% | 36.96M |  |\n| [APP](https://www.investing.com/equities/applovin) | 442.23 | -4.89% | 1.99M |  |\n\nAdvertisement\n\n## [Trending Stocks](https://www.investing.com/equities/trending-stocks)\n\n| Name | Last | Chg. % | Vol. |  |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| [MU](https://www.investing.com/equities/micron-tech) | 1,200.20 | +14.47% | 46.46M |  |\n| [SPCX](https://www.investing.com/equities/spacex) | 151.92 | -1.70% | 32.06M |  |\n| [NVDA](https://www.investing.com/equities/nvidia-corp) | 195.77 | -1.62% | 69.74M |  |\n| [SNDK](https://www.investing.com/equities/sandisk-corp) | 2,219.99 | +15.96% | 7.29M |  |\n| [MSFT](https://www.investing.com/equities/microsoft-corp) | 354.99 | -2.86% | 22.11M |  |\n\nShow more\n\nAdvertisement\n\nProPicks AI\n\nAI-powered **stock picks** with a proven track record to **beat the S&P 500**.\n\n[Tech Titans](/pro/propicks/tech-titans)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/tech-titans?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Top Value Stocks](/pro/propicks/top-value-stocks)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/top-value-stocks?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Best of Buffett](/pro/propicks/best-of-buffett)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/best-of-buffett?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Energy Elite](/pro/propicks/energy-elite)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/energy-elite?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Financial Fortresses](/pro/propicks/financial-fortresses)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/financial-fortresses?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Quality Compounders](/pro/propicks/quality-compounders)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/quality-compounders?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Small-Cap Sprinters](/pro/propicks/small-cap-sprinters)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/small-cap-sprinters?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Healthcare Heroes](/pro/propicks/healthcare-heroes)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/healthcare-heroes?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Beat the S&P 500](/pro/propicks/beat-sp-500)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/beat-sp-500?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Dominate the Dow](/pro/propicks/dominate-the-dow)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/dominate-the-dow?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Mid-Cap Movers](/pro/propicks/midcap-movers)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/midcap-movers?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Mexican Stock Exchange Leaders](/pro/propicks/beat-bmv-ipc)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/beat-bmv-ipc?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Best Brazilian Stocks](/pro/propicks/beat-bovespa)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/beat-bovespa?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Italian Market Elite](/pro/propicks/beat-ftse-italia)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/beat-ftse-italia?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Alpha Germany Select](/pro/propicks/beat-dax)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/beat-dax?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n\\_undefined\\_chat\\_widget\\_header\n\n---\n\nPost\n\nComment Guidelines\n\nCalendars\n\n[Economic Calendar](/economic-calendar/)[Earnings Calendar](/earnings-calendar/)[Holiday Calendar](/holiday-calendar/)\n\nUS Economy\n\n[Fed Rate Monitor Tool](/central-banks/fed-rate-monitor)[US Treasury Yield Curve](/rates-bonds/usa-government-bonds)\n\nMore Tools\n\n[Stock Screener](/stock-screener/)[Currency Converter](/currency-converter/)\n\nMarketsAsk WarrenAI\n\nNew\n\nStocks Picked by AIWatchlistAlertsTop Brokers\n\nNew\n\nBreaking NewsTools\n\nInstall Our AppScan QR code to install app\n\n* [Google Play](https://app.appsflyer.com/com.fusionmedia.investing?pid=direct_inv&c=refactored&af_channel=%2Fnews%2Fstock-market-news%2Frobinhood-ventures-invests-25m-in-design-platform-canva-93CH-4761104&af_adset=www&af_ad=&af_pmod_priority=null&af_sub_siteid=null&click_id=null&af_sub1=null&af_ad_id=null&af_sub2=null&af_sub3=null&af_sub4=null&af_sub5=null&af_keywords=null&af_adset_id=null)\n* [App Store](https://app.appsflyer.com/id909998122?pid=direct_inv&c=refactored&af_channel=%2Fnews%2Fstock-market-news%2Frobinhood-ventures-invests-25m-in-design-platform-canva-93CH-4761104&af_adset=www&af_ad=&af_pmod_priority=null&af_sub_siteid=null&click_id=null&af_sub1=null&af_ad_id=null&af_sub2=null&af_sub3=null&af_sub4=null&af_sub5=null&af_keywords=null&af_adset_id=null)\n\nFollow us\n\n* [About Us](https://www.investing.com/about-us)\n* [Advertise](https://www.investingmediakit.com/)\n* [Help & Support](/about-us/contact-us)\n* [Authors](https://www.investing.com/lp/authors)\n\n* [Blog](https://www.investing.com/blog)\n* [Mobile](https://www.investing.com/mobile)\n* [Portfolio](https://www.investing.com/portfolio)\n* [Widgets](https://www.investing.com/webmaster-tools)\n\nRisk Disclosure: Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.  \nBefore deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.  \n**Fusion Media** would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. **Fusion Media** and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.  \nIt is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.  \n**Fusion Media** may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.\n\n© 2007-2026 - Fusion Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.\n\n* [Terms And Conditions](https://cdn.investing.com/about-us/terms_and_conditions.pdf)\n* [Privacy Policy](https://www.investing.com/about-us/privacy-policy)\n* [Risk Warning](https://cdn.investing.com/about-us/risk_warning.pdf)",
      "word_count": 1544,
      "original_language": "EN",
      "author": "",
      "countries": [],
      "industries": [
        {
          "name": "Multi-Sector / Generalist Growth Equity",
          "is_primary": true
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        {
          "name": "Equity Fund-Raising",
          "code": "CM01",
          "is_primary": true
        }
      ],
      "company_mentions": [
        {
          "uuid": "00000k7",
          "name": "Robinhood",
          "website": "https://www.robinhood.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00000l1",
          "name": "Canva",
          "website": "http://www.canva.com"
        }
      ],
      "article_type": "News analysis",
      "is_press_release": true,
      "is_opinion": false,
      "is_breaking": true,
      "iptc_codes": [],
      "iab_categories": [
        "71"
      ],
      "naics_codes": [
        "525910"
      ],
      "sic_codes": [
        "6211"
      ],
      "entities": {
        "person": [
          "kelly steckelberg",
          "sarah pinto",
          "luke juricic",
          "daniela hathorn",
          "jesse livermore",
          "michael lebo",
          "matteo farci",
          "luis flavio",
          "james picern",
          "david wagner"
        ],
        "location": [
          "new york",
          "u.s.",
          "us",
          "germany"
        ],
        "product": [
          "mac",
          "ipad",
          "canva",
          "hood",
          "aapl",
          "gold",
          "app",
          "cryptocurrencies",
          "google play",
          "appscan"
        ],
        "event": []
      },
      "newsworthiness_score": 1,
      "group_id": null
    },
    {
      "id": 26604703,
      "title": "Robinhood Ventures invests $25M in design platform Canva By Investing.com",
      "url": "https://www.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/robinhood-ventures-invests-25m-in-design-platform-canva-93CH-4761104",
      "publisher": "",
      "published_date": "2026-06-25T15:44:18",
      "sentiment": "Positive",
      "sentiment_score": 1,
      "ai_summary": "Robinhood Ventures Fund I announced it has closed a $25 million investment in Canva, purchasing Class A Common Stock of the design platform company. The investment was made through a closed-end fund that began trading on the NYSE in March 2026, which provides investors exposure to a concentrated portfolio of primarily private companies. Canva, which launched in 2013, now serves over 250 million monthly active users across enterprises, small businesses, consumers, and students in more than 190 countries worldwide.",
      "full_text": "Advertisement\n\nAdvertisement\n\n# Robinhood Ventures invests $25M in design platform Canva\n\nAuthor[Luke Juricic](https://www.investing.com/members/contributors/266175113)\n\n[Stock Markets](https://www.investing.com/news/stock-market-news)\n\nPublished 06/25/2026, 11:44 AM\n\n[0](#comments-4761104)\n\nRobinhood Ventures invests $25M in design platform Canva\n\n[View all comments (0)0](#comments-4761104)\n\nRobinhood Ventures invests $25M in design platform Canva\n\n[View all comments (0)0](#comments-4761104)\n\n© Reuters.\n\nIn this article:\n\n[HOOD-2.53%](https://www.investing.com/equities/robinhood-markets)\n\nInvesting.com - Robinhood Ventures Fund I announced today it has closed a $25 million investment in Canva. The fund purchased Class A Common Stock of the design platform company on Tuesday.\n\nSarah Pinto, President of Robinhood Ventures Fund I, said the firm believes Canva is one of the world’s most compelling design platforms. \"With its mission to put the power of design in everyone’s hands, Canva represents the kind of category-defining company our investors deserve access to,\" Pinto said.\n\nKelly Steckelberg, Chief Financial Officer at Canva, said more than a quarter of a billion people now use the platform every month. \"As we continue to accelerate our investment in building the world’s best visual AI tools, we believe we’re still in the very early stages of the opportunity ahead,\" Steckelberg said.\n\nCanva launched in 2013 as an all-in-one platform for visual communication and collaboration. The company serves enterprises, small businesses, consumers, and students in more than 190 countries worldwide.\n\nRobinhood Ventures Fund I began trading on the New York Stock Exchange on March 6, 2026. The closed-end fund provides investors exposure to a concentrated portfolio of primarily private companies including Airwallex, Boom, Databricks, ElevenLabs, Mercor, OpenAI, Oura, Ramp, Revolut, SpaceX and Stripe.\n\n*This article was generated with the support of AI and reviewed by an editor. For more information see our T&C.*\n\n[Robinhood Markets Inc](https://www.investing.com/equities/robinhood-markets)\n\nFollow\n\nAnalyze HOOD\n\nIncluded in our AI-picked strategies\n\n·\n\n[Review strategies](/pro/propicks)\n\n1D\n\n1W\n\n1M\n\n6M\n\n1Y\n\n5Y\n\nMax\n\nAnalyze HOOD\n\n## Is HOOD a bargain right now?\n\nThe fastest way to find out is with our Fair Value calculator. We use a mix of 17 proven industry valuation models for maximum accuracy.   \n  \n **Get the bottom line for HOOD plus thousands of other stocks** and find your next hidden gem with massive upside.\n\n[See Undervalued Stocks](/equities/most-undervalued)\n\nRobinhood Ventures invests $25M in design platform Canva\n\n[View all comments (0)0](#comments-4761104)\n\n## Latest comments\n\nPost\n\nComment Guidelines\n\n## Industry Spotlight\n\n[5 Things You Need to Know About the Gold and Silver Selloff](https://www.investing.com/analysis/5-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-gold-and-silver-selloff-200678742)\n\nApr 20, 2026•\n\nBy[Daniela Hathorn](https://www.investing.com/members/contributors/240862619)\n\n[Trade With A Regulated Broker](https://www.investing.com/brokers/)\n\nIndicesCommoditiesBondsStocks\n\n1D\n\n1W\n\n1M\n\n6M\n\n1Y\n\n5Y\n\nMax\n\n[US 30](https://www.investing.com/indices/us-30-futures?cid=1175152 \"US 30 Cash - (CFD)\")\n\n52,209.30\n\n+358.4\n\n+0.69%\n\n[US 500](https://www.investing.com/indices/us-spx-500-futures?cid=1175153 \"US 500 Cash - (CFD)\")\n\n7,365.10\n\n+6.6\n\n+0.09%\n\n[Dow Jones](https://www.investing.com/indices/us-30 \"Dow Jones Industrial Average\")\n\n52,221.53\n\n+372.63\n\n+0.72%\n\n[S&P 500](https://www.investing.com/indices/us-spx-500 \"S&P 500 - (CFD)\")\n\n7,367.08\n\n+8.86\n\n+0.12%\n\n[Nasdaq](https://www.investing.com/indices/nasdaq-composite \"NASDAQ Composite\")\n\n25,366.24\n\n-110.40\n\n-0.43%\n\n[S&P 500 VIX](https://www.investing.com/indices/volatility-s-p-500 \"CBOE Volatility Index - (CFD)\")\n\n18.94\n\n+0.31\n\n+1.66%\n\n[Dollar Index](https://www.investing.com/currencies/us-dollar-index \"US Dollar Index Futures - (CFD)\")\n\n101.105\n\n-0.286\n\n-0.28%\n\n[Crude Oil WTI Futures](https://www.investing.com/commodities/crude-oil \"Crude Oil WTI Futures - (CFD)\")\n\n71.58\n\n+1.24\n\n+1.76%\n\n[Brent Oil Futures](https://www.investing.com/commodities/brent-oil \"Brent Oil Futures - (CFD)\")\n\n75.07\n\n+1.20\n\n+1.62%\n\n[Natural Gas Futures](https://www.investing.com/commodities/natural-gas \"Natural Gas Futures - (CFD)\")\n\n3.292\n\n+0.031\n\n+0.95%\n\n[Gold Futures](https://www.investing.com/commodities/gold \"Gold Futures - (CFD)\")\n\n4,054.40\n\n+45.60\n\n+1.14%\n\n[Silver Futures](https://www.investing.com/commodities/silver \"Silver Futures - (CFD)\")\n\n58.84\n\n+0.753\n\n+1.30%\n\n[Copper Futures](https://www.investing.com/commodities/copper \"Copper Futures - (CFD)\")\n\n6.0838\n\n+0.1353\n\n+2.27%\n\n[US Soybeans Futures](https://www.investing.com/commodities/us-soybeans \"US Soybeans Futures - (CFD)\")\n\n1,151.63\n\n+16.63\n\n+1.46%\n\n[U.S. 10Y](https://www.investing.com/rates-bonds/u.s.-10-year-bond-yield \"United States 10-Year\")\n\n4.38\n\n-0.020\n\n-0.45%\n\n[U.S. 30Y](https://www.investing.com/rates-bonds/u.s.-30-year-bond-yield \"United States 30-Year\")\n\n4.85\n\n-0.006\n\n-0.12%\n\n[U.S. 5Y](https://www.investing.com/rates-bonds/u.s.-5-year-bond-yield \"United States 5-Year\")\n\n4.146\n\n-0.035\n\n-0.84%\n\n[U.S. 3M](https://www.investing.com/rates-bonds/u.s.-3-month-bond-yield \"United States 3-Month\")\n\n3.776\n\n-0.006\n\n-0.16%\n\n[US 10Y T-Note Futures](https://www.investing.com/rates-bonds/us-10-yr-t-note \"US 10 Year T-Note Futures\")\n\n110.17\n\n+0.17\n\n+0.16%\n\n[Euro Bund Futures](https://www.investing.com/rates-bonds/euro-bund \"Euro Bund Futures - (CFD)\")\n\n127.39\n\n+0.09\n\n+0.07%\n\n[10-2 Yield Spread](https://www.investing.com/rates-bonds/10-2-year-treasury-yield-spread \"10-2 Year Treasury Yield Spread\")\n\n31.32\n\n+4.15\n\n+15.27%\n\n[AAPL](https://www.investing.com/equities/apple-computer-inc \"Apple Inc\")\n\n277.97\n\n-15.11\n\n-5.16%\n\n[NVDA](https://www.investing.com/equities/nvidia-corp \"NVIDIA Corporation\")\n\n195.77\n\n-3.23\n\n-1.62%\n\n[GOOGL](https://www.investing.com/equities/google-inc \"Alphabet Inc Class A\")\n\n341.18\n\n-4.11\n\n-1.19%\n\n[TSLA](https://www.investing.com/equities/tesla-motors \"Tesla Inc\")\n\n375.25\n\n-0.28\n\n-0.07%\n\n[AMZN](https://www.investing.com/equities/amazon-com-inc \"Amazon.com Inc\")\n\n229.27\n\n-5.00\n\n-2.13%\n\n[NFLX](https://www.investing.com/equities/netflix,-inc. \"Netflix Inc\")\n\n72.11\n\n+0.27\n\n+0.38%\n\n[META](https://www.investing.com/equities/facebook-inc \"Meta Platforms Inc\")\n\n549.05\n\n-8.62\n\n-1.55%\n\nAdvertisement\n\nMost Popular Articles\n\nNews\n\nAnalysis\n\n[Drop-the-mic moment: Micron adds over $200B in value after blowout earnings, guide](https://www.investing.com/news/earnings/micron-posts-record-profit-as-ai-memory-demand-fuels-explosive-growth-4758914)\n\nBy Investing.co...\n\nJun 25, 2026\n\n[Stocks mixed in choppy trade as Apple slide counters Micron gain; Dow hits record](https://www.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/us-stock-futures-surge-as-micron-qualcomm-spark-chipmaker-rally-4759483)\n\nBy Investing.co...\n\nJun 25, 2026\n\n[Fed’s preferred inflation gauge posts highest annual rise since October 2023](https://www.investing.com/news/economy-news/feds-preferred-inflation-gauge-rises-in-may-matching-expectations-4760569)\n\nBy Investing.co...\n\nJun 25, 2026\n\n[Apple raises Mac and iPad prices due to chip shortage, shares plunge 5%](https://www.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/apple-raises-mac-and-ipad-prices-due-to-chip-shortage-4760686)\n\nBy Investing.co...\n\nJun 25, 2026\n\n[IBM unveils sub-1nm chip technology breakthrough; shares slip](https://www.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/ibm-surges-on-unveiling-sub1nm-chip-technology-breakthrough-4760044)\n\nBy Investing.co...\n\nJun 25, 2026\n\n[8 Mega-Caps With More Attractive Risk-Reward Than SpaceX](https://www.investing.com/analysis/8-megacaps-with-more-attractive-riskreward-than-spacex-200682602)\n\nBy David Wagner\n\nJun 23, 2026\n\n[Micron Under the Spotlight: What to Expect From Today’s Quarterly Earnings Report?](https://www.investing.com/analysis/micron-under-the-spotlight-what-to-expect-from-todays-quarterly-earnings-report-200682689)\n\nBy Matteo Farci\n\nJun 24, 2026\n\n[Is Gold’s Big Rally Over, or Just Catching Its Breath?](https://www.investing.com/analysis/is-golds-big-rally-over-or-just-catching-its-breath-200682591)\n\nBy Luis Flavio ...\n\nJun 23, 2026\n\n[Global Bonds Stumble as Surging US Dollar Piles on the Pain](https://www.investing.com/analysis/global-bonds-stumble-as-surging-us-dollar-piles-on-the-pain-200682704)\n\nBy James Picern...\n\nJun 24, 2026\n\n[9 Jesse Livermore Lessons Still Relevant in Today’s Markets](https://www.investing.com/analysis/jesse-livermores-9-old-lessons-for-todays-markets-200682698)\n\nBy Michael Lebo...\n\nJun 24, 2026\n\n[More News](https://www.investing.com/news/most-popular-news)\n\n[Market Movers](https://www.investing.com/markets/united-states)\n\nMost ActiveGainers %Losers %\n\n| Name | Last | Chg. % | Vol. |  |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| [NVDA](https://www.investing.com/equities/nvidia-corp) | 195.86 | -1.58% | 69.63M |  |\n| [INTC](https://www.investing.com/equities/intel-corp) | 129.41 | -1.70% | 67.58M |  |\n| [MU](https://www.investing.com/equities/micron-tech) | 1,200.20 | +14.47% | 46.46M |  |\n| [AAPL](https://www.investing.com/equities/apple-computer-inc) | 277.97 | -5.16% | 36.96M |  |\n| [MSFT](https://www.investing.com/equities/microsoft-corp) | 354.99 | -2.86% | 22.11M |  |\n| [AMD](https://www.investing.com/equities/adv-micro-device) | 520.84 | +0.21% | 12.92M |  |\n| [SNDK](https://www.investing.com/equities/sandisk-corp) | 2,219.99 | +15.96% | 7.29M |  |\n\n| Name | Last | Chg. % | Vol. |  |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| [TECH](https://www.investing.com/equities/techne-corp) | 70.50 | +19.74% | 34.04M |  |\n| [SNDK](https://www.investing.com/equities/sandisk-corp) | 2,219.99 | +15.96% | 7.29M |  |\n| [MU](https://www.investing.com/equities/micron-tech) | 1,200.20 | +14.47% | 46.46M |  |\n| [GLW](https://www.investing.com/equities/corning-inc) | 222.23 | +7.97% | 15.67M |  |\n| [AMAT](https://www.investing.com/equities/applied-matls-inc) | 632.99 | +7.47% | 5.32M |  |\n| [MOH](https://www.investing.com/equities/molina-healthcare-inc) | 215.04 | +6.76% | 524.00K |  |\n| [RVTY](https://www.investing.com/equities/perkinelmer) | 113.28 | +7.24% | 1.04M |  |\n\n| Name | Last | Chg. % | Vol. |  |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| [MSTR](https://www.investing.com/equities/microstrategy-inc) | 87.61 | -6.93% | 23.62M |  |\n| [DELL](https://www.investing.com/equities/dell-inc) | 407.48 | -6.12% | 6.06M |  |\n| [AKAM](https://www.investing.com/equities/akamai-technologies-inc) | 112.40 | -5.93% | 1.36M |  |\n| [PLTR](https://www.investing.com/equities/palantir-technologies-inc) | 106.99 | -5.74% | 31.31M |  |\n| [RKLB](https://www.investing.com/equities/vector-acquisition) | 80.470 | -5.78% | 14.28M |  |\n| [AAPL](https://www.investing.com/equities/apple-computer-inc) | 277.97 | -5.16% | 36.96M |  |\n| [APP](https://www.investing.com/equities/applovin) | 442.23 | -4.89% | 1.99M |  |\n\nAdvertisement\n\n## [Trending Stocks](https://www.investing.com/equities/trending-stocks)\n\n| Name | Last | Chg. % | Vol. |  |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| [MU](https://www.investing.com/equities/micron-tech) | 1,200.20 | +14.47% | 46.46M |  |\n| [SPCX](https://www.investing.com/equities/spacex) | 151.92 | -1.70% | 32.06M |  |\n| [NVDA](https://www.investing.com/equities/nvidia-corp) | 195.77 | -1.62% | 69.74M |  |\n| [SNDK](https://www.investing.com/equities/sandisk-corp) | 2,219.99 | +15.96% | 7.29M |  |\n| [MSFT](https://www.investing.com/equities/microsoft-corp) | 354.99 | -2.86% | 22.11M |  |\n\nShow more\n\nAdvertisement\n\nProPicks AI\n\nAI-powered **stock picks** with a proven track record to **beat the S&P 500**.\n\n[Tech Titans](/pro/propicks/tech-titans)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/tech-titans?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Top Value Stocks](/pro/propicks/top-value-stocks)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/top-value-stocks?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Best of Buffett](/pro/propicks/best-of-buffett)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/best-of-buffett?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Energy Elite](/pro/propicks/energy-elite)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/energy-elite?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Financial Fortresses](/pro/propicks/financial-fortresses)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/financial-fortresses?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Quality Compounders](/pro/propicks/quality-compounders)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/quality-compounders?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Small-Cap Sprinters](/pro/propicks/small-cap-sprinters)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/small-cap-sprinters?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Healthcare Heroes](/pro/propicks/healthcare-heroes)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/healthcare-heroes?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Beat the S&P 500](/pro/propicks/beat-sp-500)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/beat-sp-500?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Dominate the Dow](/pro/propicks/dominate-the-dow)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/dominate-the-dow?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Mid-Cap Movers](/pro/propicks/midcap-movers)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/midcap-movers?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Mexican Stock Exchange Leaders](/pro/propicks/beat-bmv-ipc)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/beat-bmv-ipc?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Best Brazilian Stocks](/pro/propicks/beat-bovespa)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/beat-bovespa?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Italian Market Elite](/pro/propicks/beat-ftse-italia)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/beat-ftse-italia?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n[Alpha Germany Select](/pro/propicks/beat-dax)\n\nStocks in this Strategy\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\naaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaa\n\n[Unlock Strategy](/pro/propicks/beat-dax?entry=ws_propicks)\n\n\\_undefined\\_chat\\_widget\\_header\n\n---\n\nPost\n\nComment Guidelines\n\nCalendars\n\n[Economic Calendar](/economic-calendar/)[Earnings Calendar](/earnings-calendar/)[Holiday Calendar](/holiday-calendar/)\n\nUS Economy\n\n[Fed Rate Monitor Tool](/central-banks/fed-rate-monitor)[US Treasury Yield Curve](/rates-bonds/usa-government-bonds)\n\nMore Tools\n\n[Stock Screener](/stock-screener/)[Currency Converter](/currency-converter/)\n\nMarketsAsk WarrenAI\n\nNew\n\nStocks Picked by AIWatchlistAlertsTop Brokers\n\nNew\n\nBreaking NewsTools\n\nInstall Our AppScan QR code to install app\n\n* [Google Play](https://app.appsflyer.com/com.fusionmedia.investing?pid=direct_inv&c=refactored&af_channel=%2Fnews%2Fstock-market-news%2Frobinhood-ventures-invests-25m-in-design-platform-canva-93CH-4761104&af_adset=www&af_ad=&af_pmod_priority=null&af_sub_siteid=null&click_id=null&af_sub1=null&af_ad_id=null&af_sub2=null&af_sub3=null&af_sub4=null&af_sub5=null&af_keywords=null&af_adset_id=null)\n* [App Store](https://app.appsflyer.com/id909998122?pid=direct_inv&c=refactored&af_channel=%2Fnews%2Fstock-market-news%2Frobinhood-ventures-invests-25m-in-design-platform-canva-93CH-4761104&af_adset=www&af_ad=&af_pmod_priority=null&af_sub_siteid=null&click_id=null&af_sub1=null&af_ad_id=null&af_sub2=null&af_sub3=null&af_sub4=null&af_sub5=null&af_keywords=null&af_adset_id=null)\n\nFollow us\n\n* [About Us](https://www.investing.com/about-us)\n* [Advertise](https://www.investingmediakit.com/)\n* [Help & Support](/about-us/contact-us)\n* [Authors](https://www.investing.com/lp/authors)\n\n* [Blog](https://www.investing.com/blog)\n* [Mobile](https://www.investing.com/mobile)\n* [Portfolio](https://www.investing.com/portfolio)\n* [Widgets](https://www.investing.com/webmaster-tools)\n\nRisk Disclosure: Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.  \nBefore deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.  \n**Fusion Media** would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. **Fusion Media** and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.  \nIt is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.  \n**Fusion Media** may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.\n\n© 2007-2026 - Fusion Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.\n\n* [Terms And Conditions](https://cdn.investing.com/about-us/terms_and_conditions.pdf)\n* [Privacy Policy](https://www.investing.com/about-us/privacy-policy)\n* [Risk Warning](https://cdn.investing.com/about-us/risk_warning.pdf)",
      "word_count": 1544,
      "original_language": "EN",
      "author": "",
      "countries": [],
      "industries": [
        {
          "name": "Multi-Sector / Generalist Growth Equity",
          "is_primary": true
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        {
          "name": "Equity Fund-Raising",
          "code": "CM01",
          "is_primary": true
        }
      ],
      "company_mentions": [
        {
          "uuid": "00000k7",
          "name": "Robinhood",
          "website": "https://www.robinhood.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00000l1",
          "name": "Canva",
          "website": "http://www.canva.com"
        }
      ],
      "article_type": "News analysis",
      "is_press_release": true,
      "is_opinion": false,
      "is_breaking": true,
      "iptc_codes": [],
      "iab_categories": [
        "71"
      ],
      "naics_codes": [
        "525910"
      ],
      "sic_codes": [
        "6211"
      ],
      "entities": {
        "person": [
          "kelly steckelberg",
          "sarah pinto",
          "luke juricic",
          "daniela hathorn",
          "jesse livermore",
          "michael lebo",
          "matteo farci",
          "luis flavio",
          "james picern",
          "david wagner"
        ],
        "location": [
          "new york",
          "u.s.",
          "us",
          "germany"
        ],
        "product": [
          "mac",
          "ipad",
          "canva",
          "hood",
          "aapl",
          "gold",
          "app",
          "cryptocurrencies",
          "google play",
          "appscan"
        ],
        "event": []
      },
      "newsworthiness_score": 1,
      "group_id": null
    },
    {
      "id": 26616039,
      "title": "Robinhood Ventures puts $25 million into AI design tool Canva",
      "url": "https://fxnewsgroup.com/forex-news/retail-forex/robinhood-ventures-puts-25-million-into-ai-design-tool-canva/",
      "publisher": "",
      "published_date": "2026-06-25T14:22:55",
      "sentiment": "Positive",
      "sentiment_score": 1,
      "ai_summary": "Robinhood Ventures Fund I has invested $25 million to purchase Class A Common Stock in Canva, with the transaction closing on June 24, 2026. Canva, which serves over 250 million monthly users across more than 190 countries, reported this as its biggest year yet and indicated the funds would accelerate investment in visual AI tools. The investment is accessible to retail investors through the RVI closed-end fund, which also holds stakes in companies including OpenAI, Stripe, SpaceX, and Databricks.",
      "full_text": "Robinhood Ventures puts $25 million into AI design tool Canva\n\n\n\nAfter recently investing $75 million into OpenAI, US neobroker Robinhood Markets (NASDAQ:HOOD) has announced that its Robinhood Ventures Fund I (NYSE: RVI) unit has closed an investment in online AI design and publishing tool Canva. On June 24, 2026 RVI purchased approximately $25 million of Class A Common Stock of Canva. Sarah Pinto, President of Robinhood Ventures Fund I said, “We believe Canva is one of the world’s most compelling design platforms, and this investment is a milestone we are truly thrilled about. With its mission to put the power of design in everyone’s hands, Canva represents the kind of category-defining company our investors deserve access to.” Kelly Steckelberg, Chief Financial Officer of Canva said, “We’re pleased to welcome Robinhood Ventures Fund I as an investor and to see more retail investors gain the opportunity to participate in our growth journey. This has been our biggest year yet, with more than a quarter of a billion people now using our platform every month. As we continue to accelerate our investment in building the world’s best visual AI tools, we believe we’re still in the very early stages of the opportunity ahead.” About Canva Launched in 2013, Canva is the world’s leading all-in-one platform for visual communication and collaboration. Built to empower everyone to design, Canva serves the creative and design needs of enterprises, small businesses, consumers, and students in more than 190 countries worldwide. Used by more than 250 million people every month, Canva is powered by a suite of products and proprietary AI tools that elevate how individuals and teams create, collaborate, and communicate with ease. About Robinhood Ventures Fund I Robinhood Ventures Fund I, which is the first fund from Robinhood Ventures, began trading on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) on March 6, 2026 under the symbol RVI. RVI is a closed-end fund that provides investors exposure to a concentrated portfolio of primarily private companies that now includes Airwallex, Boom, Canva, Databricks, ElevenLabs, Mercor, OpenAI, Oura, Ramp, Revolut, SpaceX and Stripe, with additional companies expected to be added over time. Unlike many traditional private market vehicles, RVI is designed to be accessible to retail investors, with no accreditation requirements, no investment minimums, a competitive management fee, and no performance fees. For too long, private markets have been out of reach to everyday investors, and RVI aims to expand access to this important and often closed-off part of the market. Giving retail investors the opportunity to get exposure to frontier companies is one of the most powerful ways RVI can help further Robinhood’s mission to democratize finance for all.\n\n",
      "word_count": 440,
      "original_language": "EN",
      "author": "Gerald Segal",
      "countries": [
        "USA"
      ],
      "industries": [
        {
          "name": "Digital/Hybrid Private Wealth (Robo-Enabled HNW Service)",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Enterprise Foundation Model Integration & APIs (Connectors, Governance, Deployment)",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        {
          "name": "Equity Fund-Raising",
          "code": "CM01",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Institutional Flows & Positioning",
          "code": "MD02",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Emerging Technologies",
          "code": "II01",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "company_mentions": [
        {
          "uuid": "00000k7",
          "name": "Robinhood",
          "website": "https://www.robinhood.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00000l1",
          "name": "Canva",
          "website": "http://www.canva.com"
        }
      ],
      "article_type": "Explainer",
      "is_press_release": true,
      "is_opinion": false,
      "is_breaking": true,
      "iptc_codes": [
        "20001158",
        "20001162"
      ],
      "iab_categories": [
        "71",
        "115",
        "414"
      ],
      "naics_codes": [
        "54151",
        "541512"
      ],
      "sic_codes": [
        "6282",
        "7371"
      ],
      "entities": {
        "person": [
          "sarah pinto",
          "kelly steckelberg"
        ],
        "location": [
          "us"
        ],
        "product": [
          "canva"
        ],
        "event": []
      },
      "newsworthiness_score": 1,
      "group_id": null
    },
    {
      "id": 26616039,
      "title": "Robinhood Ventures puts $25 million into AI design tool Canva",
      "url": "https://fxnewsgroup.com/forex-news/retail-forex/robinhood-ventures-puts-25-million-into-ai-design-tool-canva/",
      "publisher": "",
      "published_date": "2026-06-25T14:22:55",
      "sentiment": "Positive",
      "sentiment_score": 1,
      "ai_summary": "Robinhood Ventures Fund I has invested $25 million to purchase Class A Common Stock in Canva, with the transaction closing on June 24, 2026. Canva, which serves over 250 million monthly users across more than 190 countries, reported this as its biggest year yet and indicated the funds would accelerate investment in visual AI tools. The investment is accessible to retail investors through the RVI closed-end fund, which also holds stakes in companies including OpenAI, Stripe, SpaceX, and Databricks.",
      "full_text": "Robinhood Ventures puts $25 million into AI design tool Canva\n\n\n\nAfter recently investing $75 million into OpenAI, US neobroker Robinhood Markets (NASDAQ:HOOD) has announced that its Robinhood Ventures Fund I (NYSE: RVI) unit has closed an investment in online AI design and publishing tool Canva. On June 24, 2026 RVI purchased approximately $25 million of Class A Common Stock of Canva. Sarah Pinto, President of Robinhood Ventures Fund I said, “We believe Canva is one of the world’s most compelling design platforms, and this investment is a milestone we are truly thrilled about. With its mission to put the power of design in everyone’s hands, Canva represents the kind of category-defining company our investors deserve access to.” Kelly Steckelberg, Chief Financial Officer of Canva said, “We’re pleased to welcome Robinhood Ventures Fund I as an investor and to see more retail investors gain the opportunity to participate in our growth journey. This has been our biggest year yet, with more than a quarter of a billion people now using our platform every month. As we continue to accelerate our investment in building the world’s best visual AI tools, we believe we’re still in the very early stages of the opportunity ahead.” About Canva Launched in 2013, Canva is the world’s leading all-in-one platform for visual communication and collaboration. Built to empower everyone to design, Canva serves the creative and design needs of enterprises, small businesses, consumers, and students in more than 190 countries worldwide. Used by more than 250 million people every month, Canva is powered by a suite of products and proprietary AI tools that elevate how individuals and teams create, collaborate, and communicate with ease. About Robinhood Ventures Fund I Robinhood Ventures Fund I, which is the first fund from Robinhood Ventures, began trading on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) on March 6, 2026 under the symbol RVI. RVI is a closed-end fund that provides investors exposure to a concentrated portfolio of primarily private companies that now includes Airwallex, Boom, Canva, Databricks, ElevenLabs, Mercor, OpenAI, Oura, Ramp, Revolut, SpaceX and Stripe, with additional companies expected to be added over time. Unlike many traditional private market vehicles, RVI is designed to be accessible to retail investors, with no accreditation requirements, no investment minimums, a competitive management fee, and no performance fees. For too long, private markets have been out of reach to everyday investors, and RVI aims to expand access to this important and often closed-off part of the market. Giving retail investors the opportunity to get exposure to frontier companies is one of the most powerful ways RVI can help further Robinhood’s mission to democratize finance for all.\n\n",
      "word_count": 440,
      "original_language": "EN",
      "author": "Gerald Segal",
      "countries": [
        "USA"
      ],
      "industries": [
        {
          "name": "Digital/Hybrid Private Wealth (Robo-Enabled HNW Service)",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Enterprise Foundation Model Integration & APIs (Connectors, Governance, Deployment)",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        {
          "name": "Equity Fund-Raising",
          "code": "CM01",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Institutional Flows & Positioning",
          "code": "MD02",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Emerging Technologies",
          "code": "II01",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "company_mentions": [
        {
          "uuid": "00000k7",
          "name": "Robinhood",
          "website": "https://www.robinhood.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00000l1",
          "name": "Canva",
          "website": "http://www.canva.com"
        }
      ],
      "article_type": "Explainer",
      "is_press_release": true,
      "is_opinion": false,
      "is_breaking": true,
      "iptc_codes": [
        "20001158",
        "20001162"
      ],
      "iab_categories": [
        "71",
        "115",
        "414"
      ],
      "naics_codes": [
        "54151",
        "541512"
      ],
      "sic_codes": [
        "6282",
        "7371"
      ],
      "entities": {
        "person": [
          "sarah pinto",
          "kelly steckelberg"
        ],
        "location": [
          "us"
        ],
        "product": [
          "canva"
        ],
        "event": []
      },
      "newsworthiness_score": 1,
      "group_id": null
    },
    {
      "id": 26089686,
      "title": "This startup is betting GIFs and 'micro memes' will be supercharged in the AI era. Read its pitch deck.",
      "url": "https://www.businessinsider.com/meme-gif-startup-klipy-google-ai-fund-pitch-deck-2026-6",
      "publisher": "",
      "published_date": "2026-06-17T14:01:01",
      "sentiment": "Positive",
      "sentiment_score": 1,
      "ai_summary": "Klipy, a GIF and meme content startup, recently raised $3.8 million from Google's AI Futures Fund and venture capital firms to expand its platform that lets developers embed GIFs, stickers, and video clips via API. The startup has partnered with platforms including BeReal, Canva, Microsoft SwiftKey, and Intercom, and is positioning itself as an AI-enhanced alternative for Gen Z users creating 'micro memes.' The funding comes as Google's own GIF platform Tenor—cofounded by Klipy's new board director Frank Nawabi and acquired by Google in 2018—is set to shut down at the end of the month.",
      "full_text": "Memes have become a fixture in how we communicate. We're reacting with GIFs in work Slack channels and sending memes in the family group chat.\n\nKlipy, a GIF and meme content startup, thinks that we'll be sending even more of those with a boost from AI.\n\nThe startup recently raised $3.8 million from Google's AI Futures Fund and venture capital firms to grow its platform. Klipy lets people create content, like GIFs, stickers, or video clips that can easily be shared on messaging platforms or other apps.\n\n\"We raised because we are seeing insane growth in developers and in creators,\" Givi Beridze, Klipy's CEO, told Business Insider.\n\nCreators on Klipy include anyone making content, whether it's an individual, a movie studio, or a television network that owns IP.\n\nDevelopers, meanwhile, are typically websites or apps that want to integrate content like GIFs into their products. Klipy's business is built around its API, which allows developers to embed the platform's GIFs directly into their own apps. Developers can also enable monetization by allowing ads to be placed between content. (Klipy declined to share what that revenue split is.)\n\nWith the rise of vibe coding, there are more developers than ever.\n\n\"People are coding up anything,\" said Frank Nawabi, Klipy cofounder and board director. \"Now, anyone creating any app, whether they're using it for their personal life or projects, or whether they want it to grow on the app store, they're coming to Klipy to use the API to have this kind of visual expression.\"\n\nFor instance, an app developer could sign up for Klipy's API and integrate the GIF library into their app. It's free for indie and early-stage developers.\n\nThis isn't Nawabi's first rodeo working with memes.\n\nBefore joining Klipy in 2025, he cofounded Tenor, a similar meme and GIF API platform that Google acquired in 2018. Tenor's API had become a go-to tool for many apps, but Google is shutting it down at the end of the month.\n\nSince launching in 2022, Klipy has partnered with a handful of platforms, including the social media app BeReal, graphic design tool Canva, and Microsoft's AI keyboard SwiftKey. Nawabi said it's also being used by customer service providers, like Intercom, to diffuse tension between the customer and the rep. It helps the exchange be \"more lightweight, lighthearted,\" he said.\n\nPerhaps if a customer service bot sent me a meme next time I'm stressfully trying to get an answer out of it, I'd have more patience. (No promises.)\n\nMemes for the AI era\n\nWhen pitching investors, Klipy focused on how relevant GIFs and meme-making are for Generation Z and Gen Alpha.\n\nWith AI, these younger users can \"iterate on existing memes\" and make \"hyper-specific\" content, Nawabi said. These are what Klipy calls \"micro memes,\" where memes are more about inside jokes than viral trends.\n\nOther platforms, like Meta's apps and Apple's iMessage, have also tapped into people's desire to create their own emojis or stickers with AI.\n\nWhile content creation is one way to leverage AI, Klipy is also using it to improve search and content moderation.\n\nKlipy uses AI to help users find memes from its library faster, for instance. Its relationship with Google's AI Futures Fund plays a key role here: the startup gets early access to Gemini models.\n\nBeridze told Business Insider that content moderation is one of the company's top uses of AI.\n\n\"We use the combination of human moderators paired with AI tools to make sure we instantly flag the content that's not safe for work,\" Beridze said.\n\nKlipy's overall team is \"just under\" 20 staffers, per Beridze, and is split between San Francisco and the country of Georgia (its CTO, for instance, is based in Tbilisi).\n\n\"We're being really calculated on team size,\" Nawabi said. \"It's the era of efficiency.\"\n\nRead the pitch deck Klipy used to raise $3.8 million:\n\nNote: Some slides and details have been redacted by the company. The original deck has many animated GIFs.",
      "word_count": 637,
      "original_language": "EN",
      "author": "Sydney Bradley",
      "countries": [
        "USA",
        "GEO"
      ],
      "industries": [
        {
          "name": "Webhooks, Eventing & Message Streaming",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Workflow-Oriented Integration & Orchestration",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        {
          "name": "Equity Fund-Raising",
          "code": "CM01",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Partnerships & Alliances",
          "code": "SD02",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "company_mentions": [
        {
          "uuid": "00000l1",
          "name": "Canva",
          "website": "http://www.canva.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00009h2",
          "name": "BeReal.",
          "website": "https://bereal.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0004yne",
          "name": "Tenor",
          "website": "https://tenor.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0000usw",
          "name": "KLIPY",
          "website": "https://klipy.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00000d4",
          "name": "Intercom",
          "website": "https://www.intercom.com/"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "000026e",
          "name": "Microsoft",
          "website": "https://www.microsoft.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00000r9",
          "name": "Google",
          "website": "https://www.google.com"
        }
      ],
      "article_type": "Explainer",
      "is_press_release": true,
      "is_opinion": false,
      "is_breaking": true,
      "iptc_codes": [
        "20000231",
        "20001158"
      ],
      "iab_categories": [
        "52",
        "115"
      ],
      "naics_codes": [
        "5415",
        "516210"
      ],
      "sic_codes": [
        "7370"
      ],
      "entities": {
        "person": [
          "frank nawabi",
          "givi beridze"
        ],
        "location": [
          "san francisco",
          "tbilisi",
          "georgia"
        ],
        "product": [
          "bereal",
          "swiftkey",
          "canva",
          "tenor",
          "intercom",
          "imessage"
        ],
        "event": []
      },
      "newsworthiness_score": 0.8101999759674072,
      "group_id": 525254
    },
    {
      "id": 26089686,
      "title": "This startup is betting GIFs and 'micro memes' will be supercharged in the AI era. Read its pitch deck.",
      "url": "https://www.businessinsider.com/meme-gif-startup-klipy-google-ai-fund-pitch-deck-2026-6",
      "publisher": "",
      "published_date": "2026-06-17T14:01:01",
      "sentiment": "Positive",
      "sentiment_score": 1,
      "ai_summary": "Klipy, a GIF and meme content startup, recently raised $3.8 million from Google's AI Futures Fund and venture capital firms to expand its platform that lets developers embed GIFs, stickers, and video clips via API. The startup has partnered with platforms including BeReal, Canva, Microsoft SwiftKey, and Intercom, and is positioning itself as an AI-enhanced alternative for Gen Z users creating 'micro memes.' The funding comes as Google's own GIF platform Tenor—cofounded by Klipy's new board director Frank Nawabi and acquired by Google in 2018—is set to shut down at the end of the month.",
      "full_text": "Memes have become a fixture in how we communicate. We're reacting with GIFs in work Slack channels and sending memes in the family group chat.\n\nKlipy, a GIF and meme content startup, thinks that we'll be sending even more of those with a boost from AI.\n\nThe startup recently raised $3.8 million from Google's AI Futures Fund and venture capital firms to grow its platform. Klipy lets people create content, like GIFs, stickers, or video clips that can easily be shared on messaging platforms or other apps.\n\n\"We raised because we are seeing insane growth in developers and in creators,\" Givi Beridze, Klipy's CEO, told Business Insider.\n\nCreators on Klipy include anyone making content, whether it's an individual, a movie studio, or a television network that owns IP.\n\nDevelopers, meanwhile, are typically websites or apps that want to integrate content like GIFs into their products. Klipy's business is built around its API, which allows developers to embed the platform's GIFs directly into their own apps. Developers can also enable monetization by allowing ads to be placed between content. (Klipy declined to share what that revenue split is.)\n\nWith the rise of vibe coding, there are more developers than ever.\n\n\"People are coding up anything,\" said Frank Nawabi, Klipy cofounder and board director. \"Now, anyone creating any app, whether they're using it for their personal life or projects, or whether they want it to grow on the app store, they're coming to Klipy to use the API to have this kind of visual expression.\"\n\nFor instance, an app developer could sign up for Klipy's API and integrate the GIF library into their app. It's free for indie and early-stage developers.\n\nThis isn't Nawabi's first rodeo working with memes.\n\nBefore joining Klipy in 2025, he cofounded Tenor, a similar meme and GIF API platform that Google acquired in 2018. Tenor's API had become a go-to tool for many apps, but Google is shutting it down at the end of the month.\n\nSince launching in 2022, Klipy has partnered with a handful of platforms, including the social media app BeReal, graphic design tool Canva, and Microsoft's AI keyboard SwiftKey. Nawabi said it's also being used by customer service providers, like Intercom, to diffuse tension between the customer and the rep. It helps the exchange be \"more lightweight, lighthearted,\" he said.\n\nPerhaps if a customer service bot sent me a meme next time I'm stressfully trying to get an answer out of it, I'd have more patience. (No promises.)\n\nMemes for the AI era\n\nWhen pitching investors, Klipy focused on how relevant GIFs and meme-making are for Generation Z and Gen Alpha.\n\nWith AI, these younger users can \"iterate on existing memes\" and make \"hyper-specific\" content, Nawabi said. These are what Klipy calls \"micro memes,\" where memes are more about inside jokes than viral trends.\n\nOther platforms, like Meta's apps and Apple's iMessage, have also tapped into people's desire to create their own emojis or stickers with AI.\n\nWhile content creation is one way to leverage AI, Klipy is also using it to improve search and content moderation.\n\nKlipy uses AI to help users find memes from its library faster, for instance. Its relationship with Google's AI Futures Fund plays a key role here: the startup gets early access to Gemini models.\n\nBeridze told Business Insider that content moderation is one of the company's top uses of AI.\n\n\"We use the combination of human moderators paired with AI tools to make sure we instantly flag the content that's not safe for work,\" Beridze said.\n\nKlipy's overall team is \"just under\" 20 staffers, per Beridze, and is split between San Francisco and the country of Georgia (its CTO, for instance, is based in Tbilisi).\n\n\"We're being really calculated on team size,\" Nawabi said. \"It's the era of efficiency.\"\n\nRead the pitch deck Klipy used to raise $3.8 million:\n\nNote: Some slides and details have been redacted by the company. The original deck has many animated GIFs.",
      "word_count": 637,
      "original_language": "EN",
      "author": "Sydney Bradley",
      "countries": [
        "USA",
        "GEO"
      ],
      "industries": [
        {
          "name": "Webhooks, Eventing & Message Streaming",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Workflow-Oriented Integration & Orchestration",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        {
          "name": "Equity Fund-Raising",
          "code": "CM01",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Partnerships & Alliances",
          "code": "SD02",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "company_mentions": [
        {
          "uuid": "00000l1",
          "name": "Canva",
          "website": "http://www.canva.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00009h2",
          "name": "BeReal.",
          "website": "https://bereal.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0004yne",
          "name": "Tenor",
          "website": "https://tenor.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0000usw",
          "name": "KLIPY",
          "website": "https://klipy.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00000d4",
          "name": "Intercom",
          "website": "https://www.intercom.com/"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "000026e",
          "name": "Microsoft",
          "website": "https://www.microsoft.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00000r9",
          "name": "Google",
          "website": "https://www.google.com"
        }
      ],
      "article_type": "Explainer",
      "is_press_release": true,
      "is_opinion": false,
      "is_breaking": true,
      "iptc_codes": [
        "20000231",
        "20001158"
      ],
      "iab_categories": [
        "52",
        "115"
      ],
      "naics_codes": [
        "5415",
        "516210"
      ],
      "sic_codes": [
        "7370"
      ],
      "entities": {
        "person": [
          "frank nawabi",
          "givi beridze"
        ],
        "location": [
          "san francisco",
          "tbilisi",
          "georgia"
        ],
        "product": [
          "bereal",
          "swiftkey",
          "canva",
          "tenor",
          "intercom",
          "imessage"
        ],
        "event": []
      },
      "newsworthiness_score": 0.8101999759674072,
      "group_id": 525254
    },
    {
      "id": 25864088,
      "title": "AI Image Generator Market Size, Share Forecast 2035",
      "url": "https://www.marketresearchfuture.com/reports/ai-image-generator-market-22034",
      "publisher": "",
      "published_date": "2026-06-08T00:00:00",
      "sentiment": "Positive",
      "sentiment_score": 1,
      "ai_summary": "Market Research Future has published a comprehensive report on the AI Image Generator Market, estimating the market size at USD 0.42 billion in 2024 and projecting growth to USD 2.594 billion by 2035, reflecting a compound annual growth rate of 18.0% during the forecast period. North America leads the global market with approximately 45% share, driven by technological advancements and a robust startup ecosystem, while the Asia-Pacific region emerges as the fastest-growing market. Key industry developments include new product launches by Adobe, NVIDIA, Meta, and Google; strategic partnerships such as OpenAI's integration of DALL-E with Shutterstock; funding rounds including Runway's $100M Series D and Stability AI's $80M raise; and acquisitions like Canva's purchase of Kaleido AI and Adobe's acquisition of Recraft.",
      "full_text": "Market Overview\n\nMarket Trends\n\nMarket Drivers\n\nMarket Segment Insights\n\nRegional Insights\n\nKey Players and Competitive Insights\n\nIndustry Developments\n\nFuture Outlook\n\nMarket Segmentation\n\nReport Scope\n\nFAQs Buy Now Purchase Options Single User Multiple License Enterprise User Certified Researchers Share: Chat On Whatsapp Customize Report AI Image Generator Market Summary As per Market Research Future analysis, the AI Image Generator Market Size was estimated at 0.42 USD Billion in 2024. The AI Image Generator industry is projected to grow from USD 0.4956 Billion in 2025 to USD 2.594 Billion by 2035, exhibiting a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 18.0% during the forecast period 2025 - 2035 Key Market Trends & Highlights The AI Image Generator Market is experiencing robust growth driven by technological advancements and increasing demand for visual content. North America remains the largest market for AI image generators, showcasing a strong demand across various sectors.\n\nAsia-Pacific is emerging as the fastest-growing region, fueled by rapid technological adoption and innovation.\n\nThe software segment dominates the market, while the services segment is witnessing the fastest growth due to rising customization needs.\n\nKey market drivers include the rising demand for visual content and advancements in AI technology, which are propelling growth in both media & entertainment and e-commerce segments. AI Image Generator Market CAGR 18.0% Market Size & Forecast 2024 Market Size 0.42 (USD Billion) 2035 Market Size 2.594 (USD Billion) CAGR (2025 - 2035) 18.0% Major Players OpenAI (US), Adobe (US), NVIDIA (US), Stability AI (GB), DeepAI (US), Runway (US), DALL-E (US), Artbreeder (US), NightCafe (AU) Our Impact Enabled $4.3B Revenue Impact for Fortune 500 and Leading Multinationals Partnering with 2000+ Global Organizations Each Year 30K+ Citations by Top-Tier Firms in the Industry AI Image Generator Market Trends The AI Image Generator Market is currently experiencing a transformative phase, characterized by rapid advancements in technology and increasing adoption across various sectors. This market appears to be driven by the growing demand for high-quality visual content, which is essential for marketing, entertainment, and education. As businesses and individuals seek innovative ways to create images, the capabilities of AI image generators are expanding, allowing for more personalized and diverse outputs. Furthermore, the integration of machine learning algorithms enhances the efficiency and accuracy of these tools, making them more appealing to users. A detailed market share graphic highlights the distribution of software versus services, helping stakeholders visualize segment performance. In addition, the rise of social media platforms and digital marketing strategies has further fueled the need for unique and engaging visuals. Companies are increasingly leveraging AI image generators to streamline their creative processes, reduce costs, and improve turnaround times. This trend suggests a shift towards automation in content creation, where AI tools are becoming indispensable in the toolkit of designers and marketers alike. As the market evolves, it is likely that new applications and functionalities will emerge, further solidifying the role of AI in visual content generation. The market is witnessing significant image growth, as AI technologies enable the rapid generation of high-quality visuals across media, e-commerce, and entertainment sectors. Increased Customization Capabilities The AI Image Generator Market is witnessing a trend towards enhanced customization features. Users are increasingly seeking tools that allow for tailored outputs, enabling them to create images that align closely with their specific needs and preferences. This demand for personalization is prompting developers to innovate and refine their algorithms, resulting in more sophisticated and user-friendly interfaces. Integration with Other Technologies Another notable trend is the integration of AI image generators with other emerging technologies, such as augmented reality and virtual reality. This convergence appears to enhance the overall user experience, allowing for more immersive and interactive applications. As these technologies continue to evolve, the synergy between them and AI image generation could lead to groundbreaking developments in various industries. Focus on Ethical Considerations The AI Image Generator Market is also increasingly addressing ethical considerations surrounding the use of generated images. As concerns about copyright, authenticity, and misinformation grow, stakeholders are likely to prioritize transparency and responsible usage. This focus on ethics may shape the future landscape of the market, influencing regulations and best practices. AI Image Generator Market Drivers Advancements in AI Technology Technological advancements play a pivotal role in shaping the AI Image Generator Market. The continuous evolution of artificial intelligence, particularly in machine learning and deep learning, enhances the capabilities of image generation tools. These advancements enable AI systems to create more realistic and contextually relevant images, which are increasingly sought after by businesses and individuals alike. The integration of generative adversarial networks (GANs) has revolutionized the quality of generated images, making them indistinguishable from real photographs. As AI technology progresses, the market is likely to witness a proliferation of innovative applications, ranging from personalized marketing to virtual reality experiences. This technological momentum not only drives growth in the AI Image Generator Market but also opens new avenues for creative expression and commercial opportunities. Expansion of Creative Industries The expansion of creative industries serves as a vital driver for the AI Image Generator Market. As sectors such as advertising, gaming, and entertainment continue to grow, the need for high-quality visual content becomes increasingly pronounced. AI image generators provide a solution by enabling rapid production of diverse images that meet the evolving demands of these industries. The gaming industry, for instance, is projected to reach a market value of over 200 billion dollars, creating a substantial demand for unique graphics and artwork. Similarly, the advertising sector is leveraging AI-generated images to enhance campaigns and engage audiences more effectively. This expansion not only fuels the growth of the AI Image Generator Market but also fosters collaboration between technology and creativity, leading to innovative applications and artistic expressions. Rising Demand for Visual Content The AI Image Generator Market experiences a notable surge in demand for visual content across various sectors. Businesses increasingly recognize the importance of engaging visuals in marketing, advertising, and social media. This trend is driven by the need for high-quality images that can capture audience attention and enhance brand identity. According to recent data, the demand for visual content is projected to grow at a compound annual growth rate of over 20% in the coming years. As a result, companies are turning to AI image generators to produce unique and tailored images efficiently, thereby streamlining their content creation processes. This rising demand not only fuels innovation within the AI Image Generator Market but also encourages the development of more sophisticated tools that cater to diverse creative needs. Cost Efficiency and Accessibility Cost efficiency emerges as a significant driver within the AI Image Generator Market. Traditional methods of image creation often involve substantial expenses related to hiring professional photographers or graphic designers. In contrast, AI image generators offer a more affordable alternative, allowing businesses to produce high-quality images at a fraction of the cost. This accessibility democratizes the creative process, enabling small businesses and individual creators to leverage advanced image generation technology without prohibitive financial barriers. As the technology becomes more user-friendly and widely available, the market is expected to expand, attracting a diverse range of users. The potential for cost savings, combined with the ease of use, positions AI image generators as an attractive solution for various applications, from e-commerce to social media marketing. Growing Interest in Personalization Personalization is increasingly becoming a focal point in the AI Image Generator Market. Consumers today expect tailored experiences, and businesses are responding by utilizing AI image generators to create customized visuals that resonate with their target audiences. This trend is particularly evident in sectors such as e-commerce, where personalized product images can significantly enhance customer engagement and conversion rates. Data indicates that personalized marketing strategies can lead to a 20% increase in sales, underscoring the value of customized visuals. As companies strive to differentiate themselves in a competitive landscape, the ability to generate unique and relevant images on demand becomes a crucial asset. This growing interest in personalization not only drives demand for AI image generators but also encourages innovation in the development of more sophisticated algorithms that cater to individual preferences. Market Segment Insights By Component: Software (Largest) vs. Services (Fastest-Growing) The AI Image Generator Market reveals a distinctive distribution between software and services. Software holds a significant share, being the backbone of AI image generation, while services are rapidly gaining traction as businesses increasingly seek tailored solutions for their creative needs. This shift reflects a growing reliance on advanced algorithms and intuitive interfaces provided by software, which dominate market activity. Meanwhile, services are becoming a vital component as companies prioritize customization and specialized support. Component: Software (Dominant) vs. Services (Emerging) Software is the dominant player in the AI Image Generator Market, mainly due to its scalability, ease of access, and integration capabilities, making it essential for end-users in creating high-quality visuals efficiently. It facilitates the seamless generation of images through user-friendly platforms. Conversely, services represent an emerging segment, driven by heightened demand for personalized solutions. These services offer unique expertise and consultancy, helping organizations harness AI tools effectively. As businesses seek enhanced creativity and competitive advantages, the services segment is projected to expand rapidly, catering to diverse consumer requirements. Companies are increasingly adopting AI image generators for business to create personalized product visuals, marketing materials, and branded content. By End-user: Media & Entertainment (Largest) vs. E-commerce (Fastest-Growing) In the AI Image Generator Market, the distribution of market share among end-user segments reveals a prominent presence of Media & Entertainment, which dominates the landscape due to its extensive reliance on visual content. This sector leverages AI-generated images for various purposes like advertising, film production, and digital content creation, thereby fostering significant demand. Conversely, the E-commerce sector is emerging as a strong contender, driven by the need for unique and personalized product visuals that enhance online shopping experiences. As businesses increasingly recognize the impact of high-quality visuals on consumer engagement, E-commerce is rapidly gaining ground. The growth trends within the AI Image Generator Market segment highlight the strengthening position of Media & Entertainment while showcasing the remarkable rise of E-commerce. Factors propelling this growth include the rising adoption of digital platforms, the increasing demand for high-quality imagery, and the ongoing innovations in AI technologies that enable faster and more efficient image generation. Additionally, the need for personalized marketing strategies in E-commerce supports its rapid expansion. With continuous advancements in AI, both sectors are poised for transformative changes, ensuring a dynamic market landscape ahead. Media & Entertainment: Dominant vs. E-commerce: Emerging The Media & Entertainment segment in the AI Image Generator Market stands out as a dominant force, primarily due to its extensive application across film, music, gaming, and advertising industries. Companies in this sector leverage AI-driven technologies to create visually compelling content that resonates with audiences, fostering enhanced engagement and retention. The need for quick turnaround times and cost-effective solutions further fuels the adoption of AI-generated images, making it a crucial component in content creation. On the other hand, the E-commerce segment is categorized as emerging, driven by its quest for differentiation in a highly competitive space. Businesses increasingly utilize AI-generated images to produce tailored product visuals, improving customer experiences and encouraging conversions. This segment's growth is significantly fueled by the e-commerce boom, wherein AI tools help customize visual content to meet consumer demands, thereby establishing a strong foothold in the market. Get more detailed insights about AI Image Generator Market Request Free Sample Regional Insights North America : Innovation and Leadership Hub North America leads the AI image generator market, driven by technological advancements and a robust startup ecosystem. The region holds approximately 45% of the global market share, with the United States being the largest contributor, followed by Canada at around 10%. Regulatory support for AI innovation and investment in research and development are key growth drivers. The competitive landscape is characterized by major players like OpenAI, Adobe, and NVIDIA, which are at the forefront of AI technology. The presence of these companies fosters a vibrant ecosystem, encouraging collaboration and innovation. Additionally, the U.S. government's initiatives to promote AI research further enhance the region's market position. Europe : Emerging AI Powerhouse Europe is rapidly emerging as a significant player in the AI image generator market, holding about 30% of the global share. The region benefits from strong regulatory frameworks that promote ethical AI use and innovation. Countries like Germany and the UK are leading this growth, with a focus on integrating AI into various sectors, including art and design. The European Union's Digital Strategy aims to enhance AI capabilities, further driving market demand. The competitive landscape features key players such as Stability AI and various startups across the continent. The presence of established tech hubs in cities like Berlin and London fosters innovation and collaboration. European companies are increasingly focusing on user privacy and ethical considerations, setting them apart in the global market. Asia-Pacific : Rapidly Growing Market Asia-Pacific is witnessing a rapid surge in the AI image generator market, accounting for approximately 20% of the global share. Countries like China and Japan are at the forefront, driven by increasing investments in AI technology and a growing demand for creative solutions in various industries. The region's focus on digital transformation and smart city initiatives is further propelling market growth. The competitive landscape is diverse, with numerous startups and established companies like NightCafe making significant strides. The presence of a large consumer base and a tech-savvy population enhances the demand for AI-generated content. Additionally, government initiatives to support AI research and development are crucial in shaping the market dynamics in this region. Middle East and Africa : Emerging Technology Frontier The Middle East and Africa region is gradually emerging in the AI image generator market, holding about 5% of the global share. Countries like South Africa and the UAE are leading this growth, driven by increasing investments in technology and a focus on digital innovation. The region's diverse markets present unique opportunities for AI applications, particularly in sectors like entertainment and advertising. The competitive landscape is still developing, with a mix of local startups and international players entering the market. The presence of key players and government initiatives aimed at fostering technology adoption are essential for growth. As the region continues to invest in AI infrastructure, the potential for market expansion remains significant. Key Players and Competitive Insights The AI Image Generator Market is currently characterized by a dynamic competitive landscape, driven by rapid technological advancements and increasing demand for creative solutions across various sectors. Key players are driving photo AI revenue through innovative features, enterprise integrations, and consumer-focused solutions. Major players such as OpenAI (US), Adobe (US), and NVIDIA (US) are at the forefront, each adopting distinct strategies to enhance their market positioning. OpenAI (US) focuses on continuous innovation in generative models, while Adobe (US) leverages its extensive software ecosystem to integrate AI capabilities seamlessly into its products. NVIDIA (US) emphasizes hardware optimization for AI applications, ensuring that its graphics processing units (GPUs) remain essential for high-performance image generation. Collectively, these strategies foster a competitive environment that prioritizes technological prowess and user-centric solutions.\n\nIn terms of business tactics, companies are increasingly localizing their operations and optimizing supply chains to enhance efficiency and responsiveness to market demands. The AI Image Generator Market appears moderately fragmented, with a mix of established players and emerging startups. This structure allows for diverse offerings and innovation, as smaller firms often introduce niche solutions that challenge the status quo established by larger corporations.\n\nIn September OpenAI (US) announced a partnership with a leading social media platform to integrate its DALL-E technology directly into user interfaces, enabling users to generate images seamlessly within their posts. This strategic move not only enhances user engagement but also positions OpenAI (US) as a pivotal player in the social media landscape, potentially increasing its user base and application scope. The integration signifies a shift towards more interactive and creative user experiences, aligning with current digital trends.\n\nIn August Adobe (US) unveiled a new suite of AI-driven tools designed specifically for content creators, which includes advanced image generation capabilities. This launch reflects Adobe's commitment to maintaining its competitive edge by providing innovative solutions that cater to the evolving needs of digital artists and marketers. By enhancing its product offerings, Adobe (US) reinforces its market leadership and responds to the growing demand for sophisticated creative tools.\n\nIn July NVIDIA (US) introduced a new line of GPUs optimized for AI image generation, significantly improving processing speeds and rendering quality. This development underscores NVIDIA's strategic focus on hardware innovation, which is crucial for supporting the increasing computational demands of AI applications. By enhancing its product line, NVIDIA (US) not only solidifies its position in the market but also drives the overall advancement of AI technologies.\n\nAs of October the competitive trends in the AI Image Generator Market are increasingly defined by digitalization, sustainability, and the integration of AI across various platforms. Strategic alliances are becoming more prevalent, as companies recognize the value of collaboration in enhancing their technological capabilities and market reach. Looking ahead, competitive differentiation is likely to evolve from traditional price-based competition to a focus on innovation, technological advancements, and supply chain reliability. This shift suggests that companies will need to invest in research and development to stay ahead in a rapidly changing landscape. Key Companies in the AI Image Generator Market include Industry Developments Q2 2024: Stability AI launches Stable Diffusion 3, its next-generation image generator Stability AI released Stable Diffusion 3, a major upgrade to its open-source AI image generator, featuring improved image quality and enhanced safety features.\n\nStability AI released Stable Diffusion 3, a major upgrade to its open-source AI image generator, featuring improved image quality and enhanced safety features. Q2 2024: Adobe unveils Firefly Image 2, expanding generative AI capabilities in Creative Cloud Adobe announced Firefly Image 2, the latest version of its generative AI image tool, now integrated across Creative Cloud apps to enable advanced image creation for designers and marketers.\n\nAdobe announced Firefly Image 2, the latest version of its generative AI image tool, now integrated across Creative Cloud apps to enable advanced image creation for designers and marketers. Q2 2024: OpenAI partners with Shutterstock to bring DALL-E 3 image generation to stock photo platform OpenAI and Shutterstock entered a partnership to integrate DALL-E 3, OpenAI’s advanced image generator, directly into Shutterstock’s platform, allowing users to create AI-generated images for commercial use.\n\nOpenAI and Shutterstock entered a partnership to integrate DALL-E 3, OpenAI’s advanced image generator, directly into Shutterstock’s platform, allowing users to create AI-generated images for commercial use. Q2 2024: Canva acquires Kaleido AI to boost image generation features Canva acquired Kaleido AI, a startup specializing in AI-powered image editing and generation, to enhance its suite of creative tools for users worldwide.\n\nCanva acquired Kaleido AI, a startup specializing in AI-powered image editing and generation, to enhance its suite of creative tools for users worldwide. Q3 2024: Runway raises $100M Series D to expand generative AI video and image tools Runway secured $100 million in Series D funding to accelerate development of its generative AI platform, which includes advanced image and video generation capabilities.\n\nRunway secured $100 million in Series D funding to accelerate development of its generative AI platform, which includes advanced image and video generation capabilities. Q3 2024: Meta launches Imagine, a standalone AI image generator for consumers Meta introduced Imagine, a new consumer-facing AI image generator, allowing users to create custom images from text prompts outside of its social media platforms.\n\nMeta introduced Imagine, a new consumer-facing AI image generator, allowing users to create custom images from text prompts outside of its social media platforms. Q3 2024: NVIDIA debuts Picasso, a cloud-based generative AI image service for enterprises NVIDIA announced Picasso, a cloud platform offering generative AI image creation tools for enterprise customers, targeting industries such as advertising and design.\n\nNVIDIA announced Picasso, a cloud platform offering generative AI image creation tools for enterprise customers, targeting industries such as advertising and design. Q4 2024: Google launches Imagen 2, its next-gen AI image generator for Workspace Google released Imagen 2, an upgraded AI image generator, now available in Google Workspace to help users create high-quality visuals for documents and presentations.\n\nGoogle released Imagen 2, an upgraded AI image generator, now available in Google Workspace to help users create high-quality visuals for documents and presentations. Q4 2024: Midjourney appoints new CEO to drive enterprise AI image generation strategy Midjourney named a new CEO to lead its expansion into enterprise markets, focusing on advanced AI image generation solutions for business clients.\n\nMidjourney named a new CEO to lead its expansion into enterprise markets, focusing on advanced AI image generation solutions for business clients. Q1 2025: Adobe acquires AI startup Recraft to enhance generative image capabilities Adobe completed the acquisition of Recraft, an AI startup specializing in generative image technology, to strengthen its Firefly platform and Creative Cloud offerings.\n\nAdobe completed the acquisition of Recraft, an AI startup specializing in generative image technology, to strengthen its Firefly platform and Creative Cloud offerings. Q1 2025: Stability AI secures $80M in new funding to scale image generator development Stability AI raised $80 million in a new funding round to support further development and scaling of its AI image generation technologies.\n\nStability AI raised $80 million in a new funding round to support further development and scaling of its AI image generation technologies. Q2 2025: Canva launches enterprise-grade AI image generator for business users Canva introduced a new enterprise-focused AI image generator, offering advanced customization and integration features for corporate clients. Future Outlook AI Image Generator Market Future Outlook The AI Image Generator Market is projected to grow at an 18.0% CAGR from 2025 to 2035, driven by advancements in AI technology, increasing demand for personalized content, and expanding applications across industries. New opportunities lie in: Development of subscription-based AI image generation platforms for businesses. Integration of AI image generators in e-commerce for personalized marketing. Partnerships with educational institutions for AI-driven creative design courses. By 2035, the AI Image Generator Market is expected to be a pivotal component of digital content creation. Market Segmentation AI Image Generator Market End-user Outlook Media & Entertainment\n\nHealthcare\n\nFashion\n\nSocial Media\n\nE-commerce\n\nOthers AI Image Generator Market Component Outlook Software\n\nServices Report Scope MARKET SIZE 2024 0.42(USD Billion) MARKET SIZE 2025 0.4956(USD Billion) MARKET SIZE 2035 2.594(USD Billion) COMPOUND ANNUAL GROWTH RATE (CAGR) 18.0% (2025 - 2035) REPORT COVERAGE Revenue Forecast, Competitive Landscape, Growth Factors, and Trends BASE YEAR 2024 Market Forecast Period 2025 - 2035 Historical Data 2019 - 2024 Market Forecast Units USD Billion Key Companies Profiled OpenAI (US), Adobe (US), NVIDIA (US), Stability AI (GB), DeepAI (US), Runway (US), DALL-E (US), Artbreeder (US), NightCafe (AU) Segments Covered Component, End-user, Region Key Market Opportunities Integration of AI Image Generators in creative industries enhances content creation efficiency and personalization. Key Market Dynamics Rising demand for personalized content drives innovation and competition in the AI Image Generator market. Countries Covered North America, Europe, APAC, South America, MEA FAQs What is the current valuation of the AI Image Generator Market as of 2024? The AI Image Generator Market was valued at 0.42 USD Billion in 2024. What is the projected market size for the AI Image Generator Market in 2035? The market is projected to reach 2.594 USD Billion by 2035. What is the expected compound annual growth rate (CAGR) for the AI Image Generator Market from 2025 to 2035? The expected CAGR for the AI Image Generator Market during the forecast period 2025 - 2035 is 18.0%. Which companies are considered key players in the AI Image Generator Market? Key players in the market include OpenAI, Adobe, NVIDIA, Stability AI, DeepAI, Runway, DALL-E, Artbreeder, and NightCafe. What are the main components of the AI Image Generator Market? The main components are software, valued at 1.5 USD Billion, and services, valued at 1.094 USD Billion. How does the AI Image Generator Market perform in the media and entertainment sector? In 2024, the media and entertainment sector accounted for 0.78 USD Billion of the market. What is the valuation of the healthcare segment within the AI Image Generator Market? The healthcare segment was valued at 0.52 USD Billion in 2024. What is the projected growth of the fashion segment in the AI Image Generator Market? The fashion segment is expected to grow to 0.38 USD Billion by 2035. How does the e-commerce segment contribute to the AI Image Generator Market? The e-commerce segment was valued at 0.45 USD Billion in 2024 and is likely to expand further. What is the significance of social media in the AI Image Generator Market? The social media segment accounted for 0.32 USD Billion in 2024, indicating its growing relevance. Author Author Ankit Gupta Team Lead - Research Ankit Gupta is a seasoned market intelligence and strategic research professional with over six plus years of experience in the ICT and Semiconductor industries. With academic roots in Telecom, Marketing, and Electronics, he blends technical insight with business strategy. Ankit has led 200+ projects, including work for Fortune 500 clients like Microsoft and Rio Tinto, covering market sizing, tech forecasting, and go-to-market strategies. Known for bridging engineering and enterprise decision-making, his insights support growth, innovation, and investment planning across diverse technology markets. read more Get In Touch",
      "word_count": 4171,
      "original_language": "EN",
      "author": "Ankit Gupta",
      "countries": [
        "USA",
        "GBR",
        "CHN",
        "JPN",
        "DEU",
        "ZAF",
        "ARE"
      ],
      "industries": [
        {
          "name": "Pricing, Revenue Management & Promotion Optimization",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Evaluation, Benchmarking & Observability (Evals, Monitoring, Tracing)",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        {
          "name": "Sector Outlook & Forecasts",
          "code": "MM07",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Product Launches & Enhancements",
          "code": "SD01",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Partnerships & Alliances",
          "code": "SD02",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Equity Fund-Raising",
          "code": "CM01",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Mergers & Acquisitions",
          "code": "CM03",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "company_mentions": [
        {
          "uuid": "000000q",
          "name": "NVIDIA",
          "website": "https://www.nvidia.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00000l1",
          "name": "Canva",
          "website": "http://www.canva.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "003qagv",
          "name": "Meta",
          "website": "https://www.meta.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "000008l",
          "name": "Runway",
          "website": "https://runwayml.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00000r9",
          "name": "Google",
          "website": "https://www.google.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0004as1",
          "name": "Shutterstock",
          "website": "http://shutterstock.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00000h3",
          "name": "Stability AI",
          "website": "https://stability.ai"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00006bx",
          "name": "Midjourney",
          "website": "https://midjourney.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0000008",
          "name": "OpenAI",
          "website": "https://www.openai.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00008mv",
          "name": "Adobe",
          "website": "http://www.adobe.com"
        }
      ],
      "article_type": "Explainer",
      "is_press_release": true,
      "is_opinion": false,
      "is_breaking": false,
      "iptc_codes": [
        "20001298",
        "20000283",
        "20000284"
      ],
      "iab_categories": [
        "597",
        "614"
      ],
      "naics_codes": [
        "51321",
        "512110"
      ],
      "sic_codes": [],
      "entities": {
        "person": [
          "ankit gupta"
        ],
        "location": [
          "asia-pacific",
          "north america",
          "europe",
          "germany",
          "canada",
          "united states",
          "uk",
          "china",
          "japan",
          "berlin",
          "london",
          "south africa",
          "middle east and africa",
          "uae",
          "the uk",
          "us",
          "south america",
          "mea"
        ],
        "product": [
          "ai image generator",
          "ai image generators",
          "software",
          "services",
          "picasso",
          "imagine",
          "firefly image 2",
          "imagen 2",
          "kaleido ai",
          "stable diffusion 3",
          "dall-e 3",
          "firefly platform",
          "creative cloud offerings",
          "ai image generator market"
        ],
        "event": []
      },
      "newsworthiness_score": 1,
      "group_id": 385468
    },
    {
      "id": 25864088,
      "title": "AI Image Generator Market Size, Share Forecast 2035",
      "url": "https://www.marketresearchfuture.com/reports/ai-image-generator-market-22034",
      "publisher": "",
      "published_date": "2026-06-08T00:00:00",
      "sentiment": "Positive",
      "sentiment_score": 1,
      "ai_summary": "Market Research Future has published a comprehensive report on the AI Image Generator Market, estimating the market size at USD 0.42 billion in 2024 and projecting growth to USD 2.594 billion by 2035, reflecting a compound annual growth rate of 18.0% during the forecast period. North America leads the global market with approximately 45% share, driven by technological advancements and a robust startup ecosystem, while the Asia-Pacific region emerges as the fastest-growing market. Key industry developments include new product launches by Adobe, NVIDIA, Meta, and Google; strategic partnerships such as OpenAI's integration of DALL-E with Shutterstock; funding rounds including Runway's $100M Series D and Stability AI's $80M raise; and acquisitions like Canva's purchase of Kaleido AI and Adobe's acquisition of Recraft.",
      "full_text": "Market Overview\n\nMarket Trends\n\nMarket Drivers\n\nMarket Segment Insights\n\nRegional Insights\n\nKey Players and Competitive Insights\n\nIndustry Developments\n\nFuture Outlook\n\nMarket Segmentation\n\nReport Scope\n\nFAQs Buy Now Purchase Options Single User Multiple License Enterprise User Certified Researchers Share: Chat On Whatsapp Customize Report AI Image Generator Market Summary As per Market Research Future analysis, the AI Image Generator Market Size was estimated at 0.42 USD Billion in 2024. The AI Image Generator industry is projected to grow from USD 0.4956 Billion in 2025 to USD 2.594 Billion by 2035, exhibiting a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 18.0% during the forecast period 2025 - 2035 Key Market Trends & Highlights The AI Image Generator Market is experiencing robust growth driven by technological advancements and increasing demand for visual content. North America remains the largest market for AI image generators, showcasing a strong demand across various sectors.\n\nAsia-Pacific is emerging as the fastest-growing region, fueled by rapid technological adoption and innovation.\n\nThe software segment dominates the market, while the services segment is witnessing the fastest growth due to rising customization needs.\n\nKey market drivers include the rising demand for visual content and advancements in AI technology, which are propelling growth in both media & entertainment and e-commerce segments. AI Image Generator Market CAGR 18.0% Market Size & Forecast 2024 Market Size 0.42 (USD Billion) 2035 Market Size 2.594 (USD Billion) CAGR (2025 - 2035) 18.0% Major Players OpenAI (US), Adobe (US), NVIDIA (US), Stability AI (GB), DeepAI (US), Runway (US), DALL-E (US), Artbreeder (US), NightCafe (AU) Our Impact Enabled $4.3B Revenue Impact for Fortune 500 and Leading Multinationals Partnering with 2000+ Global Organizations Each Year 30K+ Citations by Top-Tier Firms in the Industry AI Image Generator Market Trends The AI Image Generator Market is currently experiencing a transformative phase, characterized by rapid advancements in technology and increasing adoption across various sectors. This market appears to be driven by the growing demand for high-quality visual content, which is essential for marketing, entertainment, and education. As businesses and individuals seek innovative ways to create images, the capabilities of AI image generators are expanding, allowing for more personalized and diverse outputs. Furthermore, the integration of machine learning algorithms enhances the efficiency and accuracy of these tools, making them more appealing to users. A detailed market share graphic highlights the distribution of software versus services, helping stakeholders visualize segment performance. In addition, the rise of social media platforms and digital marketing strategies has further fueled the need for unique and engaging visuals. Companies are increasingly leveraging AI image generators to streamline their creative processes, reduce costs, and improve turnaround times. This trend suggests a shift towards automation in content creation, where AI tools are becoming indispensable in the toolkit of designers and marketers alike. As the market evolves, it is likely that new applications and functionalities will emerge, further solidifying the role of AI in visual content generation. The market is witnessing significant image growth, as AI technologies enable the rapid generation of high-quality visuals across media, e-commerce, and entertainment sectors. Increased Customization Capabilities The AI Image Generator Market is witnessing a trend towards enhanced customization features. Users are increasingly seeking tools that allow for tailored outputs, enabling them to create images that align closely with their specific needs and preferences. This demand for personalization is prompting developers to innovate and refine their algorithms, resulting in more sophisticated and user-friendly interfaces. Integration with Other Technologies Another notable trend is the integration of AI image generators with other emerging technologies, such as augmented reality and virtual reality. This convergence appears to enhance the overall user experience, allowing for more immersive and interactive applications. As these technologies continue to evolve, the synergy between them and AI image generation could lead to groundbreaking developments in various industries. Focus on Ethical Considerations The AI Image Generator Market is also increasingly addressing ethical considerations surrounding the use of generated images. As concerns about copyright, authenticity, and misinformation grow, stakeholders are likely to prioritize transparency and responsible usage. This focus on ethics may shape the future landscape of the market, influencing regulations and best practices. AI Image Generator Market Drivers Advancements in AI Technology Technological advancements play a pivotal role in shaping the AI Image Generator Market. The continuous evolution of artificial intelligence, particularly in machine learning and deep learning, enhances the capabilities of image generation tools. These advancements enable AI systems to create more realistic and contextually relevant images, which are increasingly sought after by businesses and individuals alike. The integration of generative adversarial networks (GANs) has revolutionized the quality of generated images, making them indistinguishable from real photographs. As AI technology progresses, the market is likely to witness a proliferation of innovative applications, ranging from personalized marketing to virtual reality experiences. This technological momentum not only drives growth in the AI Image Generator Market but also opens new avenues for creative expression and commercial opportunities. Expansion of Creative Industries The expansion of creative industries serves as a vital driver for the AI Image Generator Market. As sectors such as advertising, gaming, and entertainment continue to grow, the need for high-quality visual content becomes increasingly pronounced. AI image generators provide a solution by enabling rapid production of diverse images that meet the evolving demands of these industries. The gaming industry, for instance, is projected to reach a market value of over 200 billion dollars, creating a substantial demand for unique graphics and artwork. Similarly, the advertising sector is leveraging AI-generated images to enhance campaigns and engage audiences more effectively. This expansion not only fuels the growth of the AI Image Generator Market but also fosters collaboration between technology and creativity, leading to innovative applications and artistic expressions. Rising Demand for Visual Content The AI Image Generator Market experiences a notable surge in demand for visual content across various sectors. Businesses increasingly recognize the importance of engaging visuals in marketing, advertising, and social media. This trend is driven by the need for high-quality images that can capture audience attention and enhance brand identity. According to recent data, the demand for visual content is projected to grow at a compound annual growth rate of over 20% in the coming years. As a result, companies are turning to AI image generators to produce unique and tailored images efficiently, thereby streamlining their content creation processes. This rising demand not only fuels innovation within the AI Image Generator Market but also encourages the development of more sophisticated tools that cater to diverse creative needs. Cost Efficiency and Accessibility Cost efficiency emerges as a significant driver within the AI Image Generator Market. Traditional methods of image creation often involve substantial expenses related to hiring professional photographers or graphic designers. In contrast, AI image generators offer a more affordable alternative, allowing businesses to produce high-quality images at a fraction of the cost. This accessibility democratizes the creative process, enabling small businesses and individual creators to leverage advanced image generation technology without prohibitive financial barriers. As the technology becomes more user-friendly and widely available, the market is expected to expand, attracting a diverse range of users. The potential for cost savings, combined with the ease of use, positions AI image generators as an attractive solution for various applications, from e-commerce to social media marketing. Growing Interest in Personalization Personalization is increasingly becoming a focal point in the AI Image Generator Market. Consumers today expect tailored experiences, and businesses are responding by utilizing AI image generators to create customized visuals that resonate with their target audiences. This trend is particularly evident in sectors such as e-commerce, where personalized product images can significantly enhance customer engagement and conversion rates. Data indicates that personalized marketing strategies can lead to a 20% increase in sales, underscoring the value of customized visuals. As companies strive to differentiate themselves in a competitive landscape, the ability to generate unique and relevant images on demand becomes a crucial asset. This growing interest in personalization not only drives demand for AI image generators but also encourages innovation in the development of more sophisticated algorithms that cater to individual preferences. Market Segment Insights By Component: Software (Largest) vs. Services (Fastest-Growing) The AI Image Generator Market reveals a distinctive distribution between software and services. Software holds a significant share, being the backbone of AI image generation, while services are rapidly gaining traction as businesses increasingly seek tailored solutions for their creative needs. This shift reflects a growing reliance on advanced algorithms and intuitive interfaces provided by software, which dominate market activity. Meanwhile, services are becoming a vital component as companies prioritize customization and specialized support. Component: Software (Dominant) vs. Services (Emerging) Software is the dominant player in the AI Image Generator Market, mainly due to its scalability, ease of access, and integration capabilities, making it essential for end-users in creating high-quality visuals efficiently. It facilitates the seamless generation of images through user-friendly platforms. Conversely, services represent an emerging segment, driven by heightened demand for personalized solutions. These services offer unique expertise and consultancy, helping organizations harness AI tools effectively. As businesses seek enhanced creativity and competitive advantages, the services segment is projected to expand rapidly, catering to diverse consumer requirements. Companies are increasingly adopting AI image generators for business to create personalized product visuals, marketing materials, and branded content. By End-user: Media & Entertainment (Largest) vs. E-commerce (Fastest-Growing) In the AI Image Generator Market, the distribution of market share among end-user segments reveals a prominent presence of Media & Entertainment, which dominates the landscape due to its extensive reliance on visual content. This sector leverages AI-generated images for various purposes like advertising, film production, and digital content creation, thereby fostering significant demand. Conversely, the E-commerce sector is emerging as a strong contender, driven by the need for unique and personalized product visuals that enhance online shopping experiences. As businesses increasingly recognize the impact of high-quality visuals on consumer engagement, E-commerce is rapidly gaining ground. The growth trends within the AI Image Generator Market segment highlight the strengthening position of Media & Entertainment while showcasing the remarkable rise of E-commerce. Factors propelling this growth include the rising adoption of digital platforms, the increasing demand for high-quality imagery, and the ongoing innovations in AI technologies that enable faster and more efficient image generation. Additionally, the need for personalized marketing strategies in E-commerce supports its rapid expansion. With continuous advancements in AI, both sectors are poised for transformative changes, ensuring a dynamic market landscape ahead. Media & Entertainment: Dominant vs. E-commerce: Emerging The Media & Entertainment segment in the AI Image Generator Market stands out as a dominant force, primarily due to its extensive application across film, music, gaming, and advertising industries. Companies in this sector leverage AI-driven technologies to create visually compelling content that resonates with audiences, fostering enhanced engagement and retention. The need for quick turnaround times and cost-effective solutions further fuels the adoption of AI-generated images, making it a crucial component in content creation. On the other hand, the E-commerce segment is categorized as emerging, driven by its quest for differentiation in a highly competitive space. Businesses increasingly utilize AI-generated images to produce tailored product visuals, improving customer experiences and encouraging conversions. This segment's growth is significantly fueled by the e-commerce boom, wherein AI tools help customize visual content to meet consumer demands, thereby establishing a strong foothold in the market. Get more detailed insights about AI Image Generator Market Request Free Sample Regional Insights North America : Innovation and Leadership Hub North America leads the AI image generator market, driven by technological advancements and a robust startup ecosystem. The region holds approximately 45% of the global market share, with the United States being the largest contributor, followed by Canada at around 10%. Regulatory support for AI innovation and investment in research and development are key growth drivers. The competitive landscape is characterized by major players like OpenAI, Adobe, and NVIDIA, which are at the forefront of AI technology. The presence of these companies fosters a vibrant ecosystem, encouraging collaboration and innovation. Additionally, the U.S. government's initiatives to promote AI research further enhance the region's market position. Europe : Emerging AI Powerhouse Europe is rapidly emerging as a significant player in the AI image generator market, holding about 30% of the global share. The region benefits from strong regulatory frameworks that promote ethical AI use and innovation. Countries like Germany and the UK are leading this growth, with a focus on integrating AI into various sectors, including art and design. The European Union's Digital Strategy aims to enhance AI capabilities, further driving market demand. The competitive landscape features key players such as Stability AI and various startups across the continent. The presence of established tech hubs in cities like Berlin and London fosters innovation and collaboration. European companies are increasingly focusing on user privacy and ethical considerations, setting them apart in the global market. Asia-Pacific : Rapidly Growing Market Asia-Pacific is witnessing a rapid surge in the AI image generator market, accounting for approximately 20% of the global share. Countries like China and Japan are at the forefront, driven by increasing investments in AI technology and a growing demand for creative solutions in various industries. The region's focus on digital transformation and smart city initiatives is further propelling market growth. The competitive landscape is diverse, with numerous startups and established companies like NightCafe making significant strides. The presence of a large consumer base and a tech-savvy population enhances the demand for AI-generated content. Additionally, government initiatives to support AI research and development are crucial in shaping the market dynamics in this region. Middle East and Africa : Emerging Technology Frontier The Middle East and Africa region is gradually emerging in the AI image generator market, holding about 5% of the global share. Countries like South Africa and the UAE are leading this growth, driven by increasing investments in technology and a focus on digital innovation. The region's diverse markets present unique opportunities for AI applications, particularly in sectors like entertainment and advertising. The competitive landscape is still developing, with a mix of local startups and international players entering the market. The presence of key players and government initiatives aimed at fostering technology adoption are essential for growth. As the region continues to invest in AI infrastructure, the potential for market expansion remains significant. Key Players and Competitive Insights The AI Image Generator Market is currently characterized by a dynamic competitive landscape, driven by rapid technological advancements and increasing demand for creative solutions across various sectors. Key players are driving photo AI revenue through innovative features, enterprise integrations, and consumer-focused solutions. Major players such as OpenAI (US), Adobe (US), and NVIDIA (US) are at the forefront, each adopting distinct strategies to enhance their market positioning. OpenAI (US) focuses on continuous innovation in generative models, while Adobe (US) leverages its extensive software ecosystem to integrate AI capabilities seamlessly into its products. NVIDIA (US) emphasizes hardware optimization for AI applications, ensuring that its graphics processing units (GPUs) remain essential for high-performance image generation. Collectively, these strategies foster a competitive environment that prioritizes technological prowess and user-centric solutions.\n\nIn terms of business tactics, companies are increasingly localizing their operations and optimizing supply chains to enhance efficiency and responsiveness to market demands. The AI Image Generator Market appears moderately fragmented, with a mix of established players and emerging startups. This structure allows for diverse offerings and innovation, as smaller firms often introduce niche solutions that challenge the status quo established by larger corporations.\n\nIn September OpenAI (US) announced a partnership with a leading social media platform to integrate its DALL-E technology directly into user interfaces, enabling users to generate images seamlessly within their posts. This strategic move not only enhances user engagement but also positions OpenAI (US) as a pivotal player in the social media landscape, potentially increasing its user base and application scope. The integration signifies a shift towards more interactive and creative user experiences, aligning with current digital trends.\n\nIn August Adobe (US) unveiled a new suite of AI-driven tools designed specifically for content creators, which includes advanced image generation capabilities. This launch reflects Adobe's commitment to maintaining its competitive edge by providing innovative solutions that cater to the evolving needs of digital artists and marketers. By enhancing its product offerings, Adobe (US) reinforces its market leadership and responds to the growing demand for sophisticated creative tools.\n\nIn July NVIDIA (US) introduced a new line of GPUs optimized for AI image generation, significantly improving processing speeds and rendering quality. This development underscores NVIDIA's strategic focus on hardware innovation, which is crucial for supporting the increasing computational demands of AI applications. By enhancing its product line, NVIDIA (US) not only solidifies its position in the market but also drives the overall advancement of AI technologies.\n\nAs of October the competitive trends in the AI Image Generator Market are increasingly defined by digitalization, sustainability, and the integration of AI across various platforms. Strategic alliances are becoming more prevalent, as companies recognize the value of collaboration in enhancing their technological capabilities and market reach. Looking ahead, competitive differentiation is likely to evolve from traditional price-based competition to a focus on innovation, technological advancements, and supply chain reliability. This shift suggests that companies will need to invest in research and development to stay ahead in a rapidly changing landscape. Key Companies in the AI Image Generator Market include Industry Developments Q2 2024: Stability AI launches Stable Diffusion 3, its next-generation image generator Stability AI released Stable Diffusion 3, a major upgrade to its open-source AI image generator, featuring improved image quality and enhanced safety features.\n\nStability AI released Stable Diffusion 3, a major upgrade to its open-source AI image generator, featuring improved image quality and enhanced safety features. Q2 2024: Adobe unveils Firefly Image 2, expanding generative AI capabilities in Creative Cloud Adobe announced Firefly Image 2, the latest version of its generative AI image tool, now integrated across Creative Cloud apps to enable advanced image creation for designers and marketers.\n\nAdobe announced Firefly Image 2, the latest version of its generative AI image tool, now integrated across Creative Cloud apps to enable advanced image creation for designers and marketers. Q2 2024: OpenAI partners with Shutterstock to bring DALL-E 3 image generation to stock photo platform OpenAI and Shutterstock entered a partnership to integrate DALL-E 3, OpenAI’s advanced image generator, directly into Shutterstock’s platform, allowing users to create AI-generated images for commercial use.\n\nOpenAI and Shutterstock entered a partnership to integrate DALL-E 3, OpenAI’s advanced image generator, directly into Shutterstock’s platform, allowing users to create AI-generated images for commercial use. Q2 2024: Canva acquires Kaleido AI to boost image generation features Canva acquired Kaleido AI, a startup specializing in AI-powered image editing and generation, to enhance its suite of creative tools for users worldwide.\n\nCanva acquired Kaleido AI, a startup specializing in AI-powered image editing and generation, to enhance its suite of creative tools for users worldwide. Q3 2024: Runway raises $100M Series D to expand generative AI video and image tools Runway secured $100 million in Series D funding to accelerate development of its generative AI platform, which includes advanced image and video generation capabilities.\n\nRunway secured $100 million in Series D funding to accelerate development of its generative AI platform, which includes advanced image and video generation capabilities. Q3 2024: Meta launches Imagine, a standalone AI image generator for consumers Meta introduced Imagine, a new consumer-facing AI image generator, allowing users to create custom images from text prompts outside of its social media platforms.\n\nMeta introduced Imagine, a new consumer-facing AI image generator, allowing users to create custom images from text prompts outside of its social media platforms. Q3 2024: NVIDIA debuts Picasso, a cloud-based generative AI image service for enterprises NVIDIA announced Picasso, a cloud platform offering generative AI image creation tools for enterprise customers, targeting industries such as advertising and design.\n\nNVIDIA announced Picasso, a cloud platform offering generative AI image creation tools for enterprise customers, targeting industries such as advertising and design. Q4 2024: Google launches Imagen 2, its next-gen AI image generator for Workspace Google released Imagen 2, an upgraded AI image generator, now available in Google Workspace to help users create high-quality visuals for documents and presentations.\n\nGoogle released Imagen 2, an upgraded AI image generator, now available in Google Workspace to help users create high-quality visuals for documents and presentations. Q4 2024: Midjourney appoints new CEO to drive enterprise AI image generation strategy Midjourney named a new CEO to lead its expansion into enterprise markets, focusing on advanced AI image generation solutions for business clients.\n\nMidjourney named a new CEO to lead its expansion into enterprise markets, focusing on advanced AI image generation solutions for business clients. Q1 2025: Adobe acquires AI startup Recraft to enhance generative image capabilities Adobe completed the acquisition of Recraft, an AI startup specializing in generative image technology, to strengthen its Firefly platform and Creative Cloud offerings.\n\nAdobe completed the acquisition of Recraft, an AI startup specializing in generative image technology, to strengthen its Firefly platform and Creative Cloud offerings. Q1 2025: Stability AI secures $80M in new funding to scale image generator development Stability AI raised $80 million in a new funding round to support further development and scaling of its AI image generation technologies.\n\nStability AI raised $80 million in a new funding round to support further development and scaling of its AI image generation technologies. Q2 2025: Canva launches enterprise-grade AI image generator for business users Canva introduced a new enterprise-focused AI image generator, offering advanced customization and integration features for corporate clients. Future Outlook AI Image Generator Market Future Outlook The AI Image Generator Market is projected to grow at an 18.0% CAGR from 2025 to 2035, driven by advancements in AI technology, increasing demand for personalized content, and expanding applications across industries. New opportunities lie in: Development of subscription-based AI image generation platforms for businesses. Integration of AI image generators in e-commerce for personalized marketing. Partnerships with educational institutions for AI-driven creative design courses. By 2035, the AI Image Generator Market is expected to be a pivotal component of digital content creation. Market Segmentation AI Image Generator Market End-user Outlook Media & Entertainment\n\nHealthcare\n\nFashion\n\nSocial Media\n\nE-commerce\n\nOthers AI Image Generator Market Component Outlook Software\n\nServices Report Scope MARKET SIZE 2024 0.42(USD Billion) MARKET SIZE 2025 0.4956(USD Billion) MARKET SIZE 2035 2.594(USD Billion) COMPOUND ANNUAL GROWTH RATE (CAGR) 18.0% (2025 - 2035) REPORT COVERAGE Revenue Forecast, Competitive Landscape, Growth Factors, and Trends BASE YEAR 2024 Market Forecast Period 2025 - 2035 Historical Data 2019 - 2024 Market Forecast Units USD Billion Key Companies Profiled OpenAI (US), Adobe (US), NVIDIA (US), Stability AI (GB), DeepAI (US), Runway (US), DALL-E (US), Artbreeder (US), NightCafe (AU) Segments Covered Component, End-user, Region Key Market Opportunities Integration of AI Image Generators in creative industries enhances content creation efficiency and personalization. Key Market Dynamics Rising demand for personalized content drives innovation and competition in the AI Image Generator market. Countries Covered North America, Europe, APAC, South America, MEA FAQs What is the current valuation of the AI Image Generator Market as of 2024? The AI Image Generator Market was valued at 0.42 USD Billion in 2024. What is the projected market size for the AI Image Generator Market in 2035? The market is projected to reach 2.594 USD Billion by 2035. What is the expected compound annual growth rate (CAGR) for the AI Image Generator Market from 2025 to 2035? The expected CAGR for the AI Image Generator Market during the forecast period 2025 - 2035 is 18.0%. Which companies are considered key players in the AI Image Generator Market? Key players in the market include OpenAI, Adobe, NVIDIA, Stability AI, DeepAI, Runway, DALL-E, Artbreeder, and NightCafe. What are the main components of the AI Image Generator Market? The main components are software, valued at 1.5 USD Billion, and services, valued at 1.094 USD Billion. How does the AI Image Generator Market perform in the media and entertainment sector? In 2024, the media and entertainment sector accounted for 0.78 USD Billion of the market. What is the valuation of the healthcare segment within the AI Image Generator Market? The healthcare segment was valued at 0.52 USD Billion in 2024. What is the projected growth of the fashion segment in the AI Image Generator Market? The fashion segment is expected to grow to 0.38 USD Billion by 2035. How does the e-commerce segment contribute to the AI Image Generator Market? The e-commerce segment was valued at 0.45 USD Billion in 2024 and is likely to expand further. What is the significance of social media in the AI Image Generator Market? The social media segment accounted for 0.32 USD Billion in 2024, indicating its growing relevance. Author Author Ankit Gupta Team Lead - Research Ankit Gupta is a seasoned market intelligence and strategic research professional with over six plus years of experience in the ICT and Semiconductor industries. With academic roots in Telecom, Marketing, and Electronics, he blends technical insight with business strategy. Ankit has led 200+ projects, including work for Fortune 500 clients like Microsoft and Rio Tinto, covering market sizing, tech forecasting, and go-to-market strategies. Known for bridging engineering and enterprise decision-making, his insights support growth, innovation, and investment planning across diverse technology markets. read more Get In Touch",
      "word_count": 4171,
      "original_language": "EN",
      "author": "Ankit Gupta",
      "countries": [
        "USA",
        "GBR",
        "CHN",
        "JPN",
        "DEU",
        "ZAF",
        "ARE"
      ],
      "industries": [
        {
          "name": "Pricing, Revenue Management & Promotion Optimization",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Evaluation, Benchmarking & Observability (Evals, Monitoring, Tracing)",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        {
          "name": "Sector Outlook & Forecasts",
          "code": "MM07",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Product Launches & Enhancements",
          "code": "SD01",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Partnerships & Alliances",
          "code": "SD02",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Equity Fund-Raising",
          "code": "CM01",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Mergers & Acquisitions",
          "code": "CM03",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "company_mentions": [
        {
          "uuid": "000000q",
          "name": "NVIDIA",
          "website": "https://www.nvidia.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00000l1",
          "name": "Canva",
          "website": "http://www.canva.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "003qagv",
          "name": "Meta",
          "website": "https://www.meta.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "000008l",
          "name": "Runway",
          "website": "https://runwayml.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00000r9",
          "name": "Google",
          "website": "https://www.google.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0004as1",
          "name": "Shutterstock",
          "website": "http://shutterstock.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00000h3",
          "name": "Stability AI",
          "website": "https://stability.ai"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00006bx",
          "name": "Midjourney",
          "website": "https://midjourney.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0000008",
          "name": "OpenAI",
          "website": "https://www.openai.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00008mv",
          "name": "Adobe",
          "website": "http://www.adobe.com"
        }
      ],
      "article_type": "Explainer",
      "is_press_release": true,
      "is_opinion": false,
      "is_breaking": false,
      "iptc_codes": [
        "20001298",
        "20000283",
        "20000284"
      ],
      "iab_categories": [
        "597",
        "614"
      ],
      "naics_codes": [
        "51321",
        "512110"
      ],
      "sic_codes": [],
      "entities": {
        "person": [
          "ankit gupta"
        ],
        "location": [
          "asia-pacific",
          "north america",
          "europe",
          "germany",
          "canada",
          "united states",
          "uk",
          "china",
          "japan",
          "berlin",
          "london",
          "south africa",
          "middle east and africa",
          "uae",
          "the uk",
          "us",
          "south america",
          "mea"
        ],
        "product": [
          "ai image generator",
          "ai image generators",
          "software",
          "services",
          "picasso",
          "imagine",
          "firefly image 2",
          "imagen 2",
          "kaleido ai",
          "stable diffusion 3",
          "dall-e 3",
          "firefly platform",
          "creative cloud offerings",
          "ai image generator market"
        ],
        "event": []
      },
      "newsworthiness_score": 1,
      "group_id": 385468
    }
  ],
  "credits_consumed": 0.2
}

{
  "total": 501,
  "limit": 10,
  "offset": 0,
  "count": 10,
  "data": [
    {
      "id": 24888584,
      "title": "Energy News Monitor | Volume XXII, Issue 41",
      "url": "https://www.orfonline.org/research/energy-news-monitor-volume-xxii-issue-41",
      "publisher": "",
      "published_date": "2026-05-18T00:00:00",
      "sentiment": "Negative",
      "sentiment_score": 0.1340000033378601,
      "ai_summary": "Global oil supply disruptions stemming from the Strait of Hormuz instability have pushed oil prices sharply higher, producing record profits estimated at US$916 billion globally for publicly listed oil and gas firms while simultaneously accelerating energy transition investment, with clean energy spending outpacing fossil fuel investment for a second consecutive year. The crisis has triggered divergent responses—advanced economies are doubling down on renewables and electrification, while energy-importing developing nations face increased oil dependency and economic strain. For India specifically, disruptions have widened current account deficit concerns, prompted strategic recalibration of import sources away from Russia toward Venezuela and the Middle East, and renewed focus on energy security infrastructure including strategic petroleum reserves and domestic refining capacity expansion.",
      "full_text": "Quick Notes\n\nHormuz Blockade: Catalyst for Transition?\n\nSource: IEA & Statistical Review of World Energy\n\nThe current oil supply and price crisis is producing two simultaneous and seemingly contradictory outcomes. On the one hand, it is accelerating investment in renewables, electrification, and energy diversification in advanced economies. On the other, it is reminding governments and industries that oil remains deeply embedded in the structure of modern economies and that rapid substitution is far more difficult than many transition scenarios assumed. The crisis is therefore not simply driving the World away from oil. It is simultaneously accelerating the structural shift towards renewables in advanced economies while reinforcing the systemic lock-in of oil in critical economic sectors in developing economies. Energy security and energy transition, once viewed as competing priorities, are merging into a single policy objective in mature energy-importing economies. The case of developing countries is more nuanced.\n\nRecent disruptions linked to instability in the Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz that arrested the flow of over 20-25 percent of oil and natural gas supplies have pushed oil prices sharply higher, produced record profits estimated at US$916 billion globally for publicly listed oil and gas firms, increased inflation expectations, and weakened growth forecasts across major economies. This reflects the continuing macroeconomic centrality of oil. Despite decades of transition discourse, oil still underpins transportation, petrochemicals, aviation, shipping, agriculture, construction, mining, and military logistics. Oil remained the largest single source of energy, meeting 34 percent of total global demand in 2024, while global oil demand stayed above 103 mb/d (million barrels per day).\n\nThe global economy remains extraordinarily sensitive to disruptions in oil and gas supply because no other energy carrier currently matches oil’s combination of energy density, storability, transportability, and integration into existing infrastructure. Even highly electrified economies remain dependent on diesel-based freight, oil-derived aviation fuel, and oil-based petrochemical feedstocks. The US Federal Reserve’s 2026 financial stability report identified geopolitical oil shocks as one of the largest threats to global financial stability, while the IMF (International Monetary Fund) warned that sustained oil prices around US$125/barrel (bbl) could reduce global growth to nearly 2 percent while sharply increasing inflation. High fuel prices contributed nearly 7 percent to the consumer price index (CPI) in major economies between February and March 2026. The current global trade and food supply chains are still indexed to oil. The crisis has seen a sharp surge in \"middle distillate\" prices (diesel, jet fuel). The short-term effect of the oil and gas supply shocks is thus a renewed appreciation of oil’s strategic importance. In some regions, the crisis has perversely provided a lifeline to older fossil fuels such as coal. For instance, parts of Europe and many regions of Asia have temporarily ramped up coal production to shield households from astronomical gas price spikes that influence electricity tariffs.\n\nOil import bills have increased for economies like India, potentially widening its current account deficit to 2-2.5 percent of GDP. Standard models show that a 25 percent oil price increase can reduce GDP by 0.5 percent, and that Asia's oil burden could hit 6.3 percent of regional GDP at US$120/bbl. Global merchandise trade is expected to slow sharply from 4.7 percent growth in 2025 to 1.5–2.5 percent in 2026. Energy shocks are pushing up prices and increasing the cost of living. Investors are pulling back from developing countries, weakening currencies and raising borrowing costs. 3.4 billion people live in countries already spending more on debt than on health or education.\n\nIn oil-importing developing countries like India, the evidence suggests oil shocks mainly hurt growth through short-run macro channels rather than permanent structural damage, which is exactly why policymakers are pushing diversification and energy-security buffers. For energy-importing developing countries, the crisis is thus not replacing oil’s economic importance but quantifying its cost.\n\nFor developing nations in Asia and Africa, the priority is energy addition. The crisis has fuelled a pragmatic reassessment, with major industry voices calling for an \"energy addition\" approach—scaling up both conventional and low-carbon energy systems in parallel to manage risk and meet demand. They need to power growing economies and lift citizens out of poverty, expanding all available energy sources, including oil and coal. For major fossil fuel producers outside West Asia, the crisis is a reminder of oil's enduring value. The crisis has therefore reinforced the strategic value of oil security. Governments are once again emphasising strategic petroleum reserves, diversified crude suppliers, refinery resilience, and maritime security. The IEA (International Energy Agency) itself, despite being one of the strongest advocates of clean energy transition, recently stressed that “oil supply security” remains high on the global policy agenda and released strategic reserves to stabilise markets during the present disruptions. For producers, high prices mean record revenues, which fund national budgets and sovereign wealth funds.\n\nHistorically, high oil prices have been among the strongest catalysts for energy transition. The oil shocks of the 1970s stimulated nuclear power, fuel efficiency standards, public transport expansion, and North Sea oil development. Similarly, the current crisis is strengthening the economic attractiveness of EVs, renewable electricity, battery storage, heat pumps, and alternative fuels in affluent economies.\n\nThe single most powerful structural headwind for oil is the unstoppable rise of EVs (electric vehicles). In 2025, global EV sales surged by over 20 percent to over 20 million units. This technological shift has a compounding effect, permanently destroying demand for transport fuel year after year. The structural shift from internal combustion engines to EVs, especially in China, is permanently dampening the link between oil prices and passenger mobility. The country’s oil demand growth slowed sharply from 8.7 percent in 2023 to only 0.8 percent in 2024 due to rapid EV adoption, high-speed rail expansion, and increased use of natural gas trucks. In advanced economies overall, oil demand remains below pre-pandemic levels because efficiency gains and electrification are offsetting economic growth.\n\nPeer-reviewed research supports the price-to-transition link directionally. A study on China's energy mix found that a 1 percent increase in oil prices results in a 0.16 percent increase in renewable energy consumption, modest per-unit, but significant at scale. A 30-country panel study found significant asymmetric impacts. Oil-exporting countries demonstrate a strong, positive long-run response to volatility, with price uncertainty acting as a catalyst for economic diversification and sustainable investment in renewables as a strategic risk management tool. The sectoral composition of that investment is telling. Solar energy remains the largest single recipient of clean energy funds, attracting US$450 billion, nearly double the amount five years ago. Investments in electricity, including generation, grids, and storage, are now expected to be 50 percent higher than those for oil, gas, and coal combined. Ten years ago, fossil fuel investments exceeded spending on electricity infrastructure by 30 percent. That structural inversion is arguably the most important energy statistic of the decade. In 2025, global energy transition investment hit a record US$2.3 trillion, with clean energy supply. According to the IEA, total global energy investment was about US$3.3 trillion, with roughly US$2.2 trillion going to clean energy and about US$1.1 trillion to fossil fuels. For a second consecutive year, clean energy spending in 2025 outpaced fossil fuel investment, with the gap widening to over US$100 billion from US$85 billion in 2024. Fossil fuel supply investment fell for the first time since 2020, declining US$9 billion year-on-year.\n\nAccording to the IEA, oil demand growth was already decelerating well before the crisis, growing by just 0.7 percent in 2025, with demand in advanced economies continuing a structural decline. Global oil demand is forecast to rise only 2.5 mb/d from 2024 to 2030, reaching a plateau around 105.5 mb/d, with a small decline expected in 2030. EVs are set to displace 5.4 mb/d of global oil demand by the end of the decade. In power, renewables added a record 585 GW in 2024 and accounted for over 90 percent of new global power capacity, while low-carbon sources reached 40.9 percent of global electricity generation.\n\nModern economies are less oil-intensive than they were in the 1970s. Global oil intensity has fallen dramatically since the 1970s. In 1970, the world used about 0.12 tons of oil equivalent (toe) per unit of GDP, while by 2022 this had dropped to around 0.05 toe per unit of GDP, less than half that in the 1970s. The US is a net exporter of oil now, unlike the 1970s when it was a net importer.\n\nOil crises do not automatically destroy oil demand, but they do change capital allocation. Several recent analyses suggest high oil prices can discourage conventional fuel use and strengthen the economic case for renewable investment over time, even if the effect is uneven across countries and often delayed. That is why the current shock is being described by many energy-transition analysts as a security crisis as much as a climate one. Countries want insulation from geopolitics, shipping chokepoints, and imported fuel volatility.\n\nThe World economy is showing that it can grow while using less oil. The clean-energy response is now large enough to be economically meaningful. The most powerful argument for acceleration is that energy security has now replaced climate anxiety as the dominant political driver of renewables policy, a far more durable political force.\n\nThe crisis has triggered a dual response that reflects a world of divergent priorities and capabilities. The broader economic lesson is that oil crises tend to strengthen both transition policies and fossil fuel realism simultaneously. It is a geopolitical rupture with structural implications, and it is producing sharply divergent outcomes depending on whether the country is affluent, less affluent, energy importing or energy exporting.\n\nFor advanced, import-dependent economies, the crisis is acting as a powerful accelerator of the energy transition and is acting as proof of concept for their energy independence strategies, further doubling down on renewables, electrification, and diversification away from unstable regions. For energy-poor developing nations, it's a trap that makes transition harder, not easier.\n\nMonthly News Commentary: OIL\n\nMonetary Benefits of Strategic Oil Reserves\n\nIndia\n\nStrategic Reserves\n\nIndia’s strategic petroleum reserve can last 74 days to meet the demand arising out of any global turbulence. For any country like India, which is growing at a phenomenal pace, there must be a very viable and secure reserve, so that it is not in a vulnerable situation in the case of global turbulence. India has several refineries both in the West coast as well as the East. Taking advantage of low crude oil prices in April/May 2020, Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPR) were filled to full capacity, leading to notional savings of approximately INR50 billion (US$0.53 bn). The weighted average procurement cost of crude oil filled in SPRs from Government Budgetary Support is still half of the currently prevailing crude oil prices.\n\nDemand\n\nAccording to the World Oil Outlook 2025, India is projected to be the largest contributor to global oil demand growth till 2050. As per OPEC’s flagship long-term outlook, India alone is expected to add 8.2 million barrels per day (bpd) of oil demand by 2050, with growth “driven primarily by transportation, petrochemicals and industrial activity.” The outlook projects India as the “largest and most stable contributor” to global primary energy demand growth. India’s total primary energy demand is expected to almost double from around 22 million barrels of oil equivalent (mboe) per day in 2024 to about 43.6 mboe per day by 2050. As per the outlook, demographic and economic trends would consolidate India’s central role in future energy demand. India’s urbanisation rate is projected to rise from 37 percent to 53 percent by 2050, while the country’s passenger car fleet is expected to expand from around 50 million in 2024 to more than 240 million by 2050.\n\nLPG\n\nBharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd (BPCL) has launched Bharatgas Lite, an innovative LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) cylinder made from advanced composite materials, aimed at providing safer, lighter, and more user-friendly cooking energy solutions for households in Goa. Bharatgas Lite, branded as “Naye Bharat Ka Naya Cylinder,” is over 50 percent lighter than traditional mild steel cylinders, facilitating easier handling, transportation, and installation. Its translucent design allows users to see LPG levels clearly, assisting in refill planning and preventing unexpected runouts. Additionally, the rust-free construction fosters a clean kitchen environment and eliminates corrosion issues typically linked to steel cylinders. Its explosion-resistant features provide enhanced safety under extreme conditions, reflecting BPCL’s commitment to innovation and improved safety standards in the domestic LPG market. Bharatgas Lite improves safety by minimising leakage risks and damage, featuring enhanced handling and a modern design suitable for contemporary kitchens. The cylinder is available for new domestic non-subsidised LPG connections and through a cylinder swapping scheme for existing customers, with an incremental deposit of INR300 for exchanges. New customers can directly opt for Bharatgas Lite with a security deposit of INR2,500.\n\nIndia’s energy infrastructure offers potential investment opportunities worth up US$500 bn in the South Asian nation’s quest to become independent in production of energy. India is building energy infrastructure to meet demand, looking towards affordable refining and transport options. The South Asian nation aims to become the world’s No. 1 in refining capacity. India is currently the third largest energy consumer and importer of crude. It aims to boost to US$100 bn the opportunities on offer in oil exploration, in the effort to lift the area under exploration to 1 million square kilometre (386,000 square miles).\n\nImports\n\nIndian refiners are avoiding Russian oil purchases for delivery in April and are expected to stay away from such trades for longer, a move that could help New Delhi seal a trade pact with Washington. The US (United States) and India moved closer to a trade pact, announcing a framework for a deal they hope to conclude by March that would lower tariffs and deepen economic cooperation. Indian Oil Corporation (IOC), BPCL and Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL), are not accepting offers from traders for Russian oil loading in March and April. These refiners, however, had already scheduled some deliveries of Russian oil in March. Most other refiners have stopped buying Russian crude. Indian refiners may change their plan and place orders for Russian oil only if advised by the government. Indian refiners have been buying more oil from Middle Eastern, African and South American countries as they scale back Russian oil purchases.\n\nBPCL, one of India’s leading refiners, and Trafigura, a market leader in the global commodities industry, announced a new crude oil supply agreement signed. Under the agreement, Trafigura has been awarded a tender to supply Iraqi Basrah and Oman crude oil to BPCL on term basis. Delivery will begin in April 2026. This marks the first agreement of its kind for BPCL for imports of Basrah crude, representing a strategic milestone in the company's procurement approach and strengthening India’s energy security framework.\n\nAs India seeks to diversify their avenues for oil import, BPCL, would enhance their term contract to procure crude oil from Brazil’s Petrobras, according to the government. The latest deal would have the Indian state-owned refiner procuring 12 million barrels of Brazilian crude from the state-owned entity for US$780 million (mn) in the upcoming financial year. IOC also maintains a commercial agreement with the Brazilian state-owned oil entity for procurement of crude oil. Other than the Bharat Petroleum-Petrobras deal, state-owned upstream major Oil India (OIL) along with their Navaratna subsidiary Numaligarh Refinery would be inking a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with French major TotalEnergies for LNG sourcing.\n\nIndia’s Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd (MRPL) is exploring purchases of Venezuelan oil as it halts imports of Russian oil to comply with Western sanction. The refiner, which operates a 500,000 barrel per day (bpd) refinery in the southern state of Karnataka, exports about 40 percent of its refined fuel output. Higher margins on refined fuel exports are offsetting the loss of Russian oil. The refiner meets about 40 percent of its crude needs through purchases from the Middle East, in addition to sourcing from spot markets and processing domestic oil. MRPL is actively considering purchases of Venezuelan oil if commercial terms, including freight rates, are favourable. India refiners are considering buying Venezuelan oil. To boost its profits, MRPL has turned its focus to direct retail sales instead of selling refined fuels to other refiners. The company plans to expand its retail fuel network to 500 outlets within three years from 200 and aims to operate 1,000 fuel stations within five years.\n\nExports\n\nIOC expects its annual diesel exports to rise sharply to up to 5 million metric tonnes (mt) from 2027 as it expands refining capacity. IOC is raising its annual refining capacity to 98 mt in a year and a half from 80 mt currently. The company operates nearly 41,000 retail fuel stations in India, but IOC’s retail network would be expanded to more than 44,000 over the next two years.\n\nIndia stopped exporting diesel to the European Union (EU) due to the European Union’s ban on fuel derived from Russian crude and instead sent a record amount to West Africa, while Turkey’s diesel exports to the EU slowed in recent months. The developments highlight that the EU policy, aimed at punishing Russia over its 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine, is prompting a further reordering of intercontinental oil flows, forcing India’s oil refineries to seek new markets and disrupting Turkey's lucrative trade in supplying fuel to the EU. Russian crude made up 30 percent of India’s seaborne crude imports in 2025, while it represented 48 percent for Turkey’s seaborne crude imports last year. India has not sent any diesel to the EU so far in January, having exported a monthly average of 137,000 bpd in 2025, making it the third biggest diesel exporter to the bloc. In India, RIL has been the biggest fuel exporter to the EU in recent years, while Turkey’s Star oil refinery, owned by Azerbaijan state-owned Socar, was the biggest Turkish exporter. India’s diesel exports to West Africa were on track to reach an all-time high in December at around 155,000 bpd, which showed January exports were on pace to reach 84,000 bpd.\n\nProduction\n\nAsian Energy Services has discovered oil at the onshore Mevad field in Gujarat following the drilling and testing of a new well with expected peak production of about 125-130 barrels of oil per day (bopd). The well NM-01 was drilled to a total depth of 1,650 metres, encountering three hydrocarbon-bearing sand intervals—Mandhali, Sobhasan and Kalol. The zones are being evaluated sequentially. The well is currently producing about 100 bopd in the testing phase from Sobhasan sand, with data indicating potential production rates of 125-130 bopd.\n\nThe partnership between Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd (ONGC) and global major BP has led to a crude oil output increase of over 3,500-4,000 bpd to date from Mumbai High, bringing the total production to 126,000 bpd from the block. For ONGC’s Krishna Godavari (KG) block, oil production has stabilised at around 27,000 bpd, compared to the peak production estimates of 45,000 bpd earlier. The company has onboarded a subject matter expert to boost production from ONGC’s KG-98/2 block. Crude oil output from ONGC’s KG-98/2 block has been sliding since production commenced in January 2024. The firm’s crude output from the block was around 35,000 bpd in 2024, declining currently to 26,500 bpd.\n\nIOC’s overseas joint venture (JV) with Bharat PetroResources, a wholly owned subsidiary of BPCL, has made a new oil discovery in Abu Dhabi’s Onshore Block 1. The block is operated through Urja Bharat Pte Ltd (UBPL), a 50:50 venture between IOCL and Bharat PetroResources. UBPL won the concession in Abu Dhabi’s 2019 bid round. Testing of the exploratory well XN79-02S resulted in a flow of light crude oil, marking the first oil find in the Habshan reservoir within the concession area. The discovery will now be appraised and assessed for potential development. The latest find comes after UBPL’s first discovery in the same block in early 2024, when oil was struck in the \"unconventional Shilaif play\" at the XN-76 well.\n\nRest of the World\n\nWorld\n\nAccording to Citi bank, oil prices may stay elevated due to rising geopolitical risks, US restrictions on Russian oil purchases and continued Chinese buying, even as markets entered the year expecting a large oversupply. Citi noted that Kazakhstan production outages, severe cold weather in the US, geopolitical tensions in the Middle East and tightening US restrictions on Russian oil purchases helped keep prices above US$60 a barrel. As per Citi potential for Iran getting attacked has escalated the geopolitical premium of oil prices by potentially US$3 to US$4 a barrel, adding that any further ratcheting up of tensions would lift the premium higher. It highlighted that Chinese buying may help explain oil’s unexpected price strength, noting continued inventory-driven imports. Citi estimated apparent crude stock builds averaged around 0.7 million bpd in 2025.\n\nOil prices gained further ground as supply concerns lingered after a winter storm disrupted US crude output and exports, while Middle East tensions lent additional support. US producers lost up to 2 million bpd or roughly 15 percent of national output over the weekend, analysts and traders estimated, as the storm strained energy infrastructure and power grids. Crude and liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports from US Gulf Coast ports tumbled to zero, ship tracking service Vortexa said.\n\nAccording to the International Energy Agency (IEA), global oil market will be in deep surplus in the first quarter of 2026, as so far excess supplies have offset the geopolitical risk of disruption. The IEA, which advises industrialised countries, in its oil report projected global oil supply would exceed demand by 4.25 million bpd in the first quarter. A surplus of that size would be about 4 percent of world demand and is larger than other predictions. Oil prices have risen about 6 percent since the start of the year, as concerns about geopolitics and possible oil market disruption drove buying. The IEA said it is too early to assess the full implications of all the latest geopolitical developments on the oil market, but said the US blockade on Venezuelan oil shipments had lowered exports by 580,000 bpd from December to early January.\n\nAfrica & Middle East/ OPEC\n\nOrganization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC)’s oil output fell in January due to lower supply from Nigeria and Libya, a survey found, which offset increases in members including Venezuela after the US capture of Nicolas Maduro and the ending of an oil blockade. The OPEC pumped 28.34 million bpd in January, down 60,000 bpd from December's total, the survey showed, with Nigeria posting the largest decline. OPEC+, comprising OPEC and allies including Russia, in January began a first-quarter pause of its monthly output increases amid concerns of a supply glut. Under an agreement by eight OPEC+ members covering January output, the five of them that are OPEC members - Algeria, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the UAE - were to keep output unchanged before the effect of compensation cuts totaling 130,000 bpd for Iraq and the UAE. The survey showed that they increased output by 60,000 bpd month on month, but total output remained below their targets. Nigeria had OPEC's largest output decline, and Libyan supply also fell as bad weather impacted loadings, the survey found.\n\nChevron and TotalEnergies are among the oil majors snapping up offshore blocks in West and Southern Africa as compelling geology, regulatory reforms, and the need to restock spur a hunt for the next Brazil. Companies are restocking their oil and gas assets given prospects for fossil fuel demand to stay higher for longer than predicted just a few years ago. With growth in US shale topping out, other regions are drawing fresh attention, including West and South Africa, with Shell, for example, returning to offshore Angola after a 20-year absence. Of the oil and gas discovered since 2020, some 11 percent, or about 8.7 billion barrels of oil equivalent (boe), has been found along West Africa, most of it oil, African upstream regional research director for S&P Global Commodity Insights Justin Cochrane said.\n\nOilfield services provider SLB said it has been awarded a US$1.5 bn contract over five years by Kuwait Oil Company for the development of the Mutriba field in the country. Oil producers in the Middle East, Africa and Asia are seeking to boost inventories, which is driving exploration and drilling activity in the region and with it demand for oilfield services.\n\nThe head of the Syrian Petroleum Company, Youssef Qeblawi, said that oil major Shell had asked to withdraw from the al-Omar oilfield and transfer its share to Syria’s state-owned operators but that US (United States) companies were interested in the country’s energy sector. The al-Omar oilfield, Syria’s largest, came under government control at the weekend after a lightning offensive against Kurdish forces who had held the site for nearly a decade and used it as a military base. Qeblawi said the field had operated as a joint venture between the Syrian Petroleum Company and Shell. The London-listed oil major had suspended all of its activities in Syria, including exploration and production activities, in December 2011 after the outbreak of Syria’s war and European Union sanctions on Syria’s oil sector.\n\nRussia/Central Asia\n\nRussian oil production dipped around 0.7 percent last year to 9.129 million bpd, OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) data showed. Russia has managed to keep broadly steady its oil output, which together with natural gas accounts for around a quarter of federal budget tax proceeds, despite drone attacks by Ukraine on energy infrastructure and lower crude prices. Russia is a member of the OPEC+ group of leading oil producers which decided to keep its output steady. Oil prices fell more than 18 percent in 2025 - their steepest yearly drop since 2020 - amid growing oversupply concerns. Russian oil production in December declined by 73,000 bpd to 9.304 million bpd, according to OPEC. In its report, OPEC said Kazakhstan’s oil output last month dropped by 237,000 bpd to 1.522 million bpd.\n\nRussian Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak said that there is currently a balance on the global oil market, while demand will be gradually rising in March and April, when asked about the OPEC+ group’s plans on its production policy. OPEC+ agreed to keep its oil output unchanged for March at a meeting. Novak didn’t directly say what the group’s steps could be starting from April.\n\nNorth & South America\n\nUS oil major Chevron is pushing Iraq to improve returns on the giant West Qurna 2 oil field as a condition for buying the project from Russia’s Lukoil. Iraq nationalised the oilfield after the US imposed sanctions on Lukoil to put pressure on Russia to end its war in Ukraine. The sanctions made it difficult for Lukoil to operate its international operations including West Qurna, which is one of the world’s largest oilfields, accounting for about 0.5 percent of global oil supply and nearly 10 percent of Iraq’s output. A deal for Chevron in West Qurna 2 would mark a further push into Iraq for the US oil major after it agreed to develop several fields in the country as part of an international expansion since completing a deal to acquire US oil producer Hess for US$53 bn in 2025. Iraq, the world's seventh-largest oil producer, has improved the terms of its oil contracts in deals signed with global oil majors in the past two years as it seeks to attract investment and increase output.\n\nUS shale production could fall by as much as 400,000 barrels of oil per day in 2026 if OPEC countries try to increase market share and oil prices fall to as low as US$40 a barrel, according to Rystad Energy CEO (chief executive officer) Jarand Rystad. US shale production could remain flat if prices stay close to US$60 a barrel, but that will require OPEC countries to hold production at present levels, Rystad said. The US Energy Information Administration (EIA) said last year that it expected American shale oil production to reach around 9.7 million bpd in 2025.\n\nUS Energy Secretary Chris Wright told oil company executives that Venezuela’s output can rise 30 percent from its current level of 900,000 bpd in the short- to medium-term. US President Donald Trump wants US oil executives to invest US$100 bn to fix Venezuela’s dilapidated oil industry and increase output, a key objective for Washington after US forces seized Venezuela’s leader Nicolas Maduro in a raid. Years of under-investment and sanctions have seen Venezuela’s oil output plummet. It pumped 3.5 million bpd in the 1970s when it accounted for 7 percent of global supply, but represents just 1 percent of world output. An increase of 300,000 bpd would have little impact on the global market, one person at the meeting said. Global oil supply was 106 million bpd in 2025.\n\nPresident Donald Trump has lavished the US oil industry with favourable policies since returning to the White House, but his twin demands for cheap oil and “energy dominance” are increasingly colliding with companies’ bottom lines. Over the past year, the Republican president has rolled out numerous pro‑fossil fuel measures and offered strong support for US oil firms abroad, a sharp departure from his Democratic predecessor Joe Biden’s focus on combating climate change. The price drop, and expectations of a future global supply glut, pushed US drillers to scale back operations, with the domestic oil rig count falling 15 percent over the past year, according to energy service provider Baker Hughes. That pullback is set to slow the pace of US output growth this year and next.\n\nAsia Pacific\n\nAustralia’s Woodside Energy flagged a lower production outlook for 2026, tempering stronger-than-expected fourth-quarter (Q4) revenue that was underpinned by resilient output despite weaker oil and gas prices. Output reached a record 198.8 million barrels of oil equivalent, exceeding guidance on the back of strong operating performance across key assets, including Sangomar, Shenzi and Pluto LNG.\n\nEU & UK\n\nThe European Commission proposed a sweeping ban on any services that support Russia’s seaborne crude oil exports, going far beyond previous piecemeal EU sanctions in its effort to stunt Moscow's key source of income for its war on Ukraine. Russia exports over a third of its oil in Western tankers - mostly from Greece, Cyprus and Malta - with the help of Western shipping services. The ban would end that practice, which mostly supplies India and China, and render obsolete a price cap on purchases of Russian crude oil that the Group of Seven Western powers have tried to enforce with mixed success.\n\nNews Highlights: 22 – 28 April 2026\n\nNational: Oil\n\nAndhra Pradesh CM reviews fuel shortage as 421 petrol bunks shut amid panic buying\n\n27 April: Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister (CM) N Chandrababu Naidu reviewed the fuel shortage situation following panic buying that led to the temporary closure of 421 petrol bunks. Out of 4510 fuel outlets in the state, the shutdowns were due to supply constraints triggered by a sharp surge in demand for petrol and diesel. Fuel supply has increased by nearly 10 percent compared to earlier levels, but panic buying led to heavy rush at several outlets. Under normal conditions, daily sales are around 6330 kilolitres of petrol and 9048 kilolitres of diesel. Sales rose to 10345 kilolitres of petrol and 14156 kilolitres of diesel. With demand increasing by over 50 percent, stocks at fuel stations are depleting quickly, resulting in long queues. The situation is being affected by bulk purchases in the aquaculture sector, where fuel is often stored in drums.\n\nRIL navigates oil market volatility with diverse sourcing, ops shifts\n\n26 April: India’s largest private refiner Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) relied on diversified crude sourcing and operational agility to navigate a volatile energy market during the last quarter of FY26, marked by geopolitical disruptions and sharp cost swings. After the Iran war disrupted oil and gas flows from Gulf countries, RIL, which operates the world’s largest oil refining complex at Jamnagar in Gujarat -- tapped non-Persian Gulf suppliers to replace barrels lost due to the conflict, according to the company.\n\nIndia resorts to LPG spot buying to bridge West Asia supply gap\n\n25 April: With energy supplies still tight amid the West Asia conflict, India is securing LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) cargo through spot purchases to meet demand for cooking gas cylinders among households as well as commercial establishments. Oil marketing companies (OMCs) have tied up with the US to bridge the supply shortfall. Besides long-term contracts with the country, OMCs have added spot cargoes in the last few weeks, which are likely to reach India in June and July. When asked, Sujata Sharma, joint secretary in the petroleum and natural gas ministry, said India was importing nearly 60 percent of its LPG requirement before the war broke out in West Asia. According to the ministry, against a daily LPG requirement of approximately 80,000 tonnes, India has raised domestic output by nearly 20 percent to about 46,000 tonnes.\n\nOver 50k LPG holders in Bilaspur may face cylinder supply disruptions for KYC non-compliance\n\n23 April: Approximately 50,865 LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) holders in Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh, may face disruptions in their LPG cylinder supply if they do not complete the KYC process for their connections immediately. District Controller of the Department of Food, Civil Supplies, and Consumer Affairs, Bilaspur, Brijendra Pathania, informed that in accordance with directives from the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, E-KYC has been made mandatory for all active gas connections. Connections for which E-KYC remains incomplete may be blocked from booking or obtaining refills after the stipulated deadline. The deadline will expire in one week, he said.\n\nNational: Gas\n\nIndia’s Adani Total Gas posts quarterly profit rise on demand boost\n\n27 April: India’s Adani Total Gas reported a rise in fourth‑quarter profit, supported by higher compressed natural ​gas demand and steady growth in household piped ‌natural gas connections, which lifted overall volumes. The company, a joint venture of the Adani Group and French oil major TotalEnergies SE, ​said its consolidated net profit rose about 9 percent ​to INR1.68 billion (US$17.84 million) in the three ⁠months ended 31 March. CNG sales volumes, which account for ​over half of total sales, rose 17 percent during the ​quarter, driven by sustained demand from the transport segment and a rise in outlets. Piped natural gas, Adani Total’s second-biggest segment, logged a ​5 percent increase in sales volumes at 91 million standard ​cubic meter of gas per day. India in March ordered faster approvals for ‌new ⁠gas pipelines, deeming permissions granted if authorities fail to respond, helping lift household piped gas additions to about 580,000 that month from roughly 342,300 a year earlier, government ​data showed. Natural gas sourcing costs for Adani Total Gas rose 17.8 percent, contributing to an 18 percent rise ⁠in its ​total expenses to 1INR4.92 billion. Total revenue from operations rose 16.5 percent to INR16.95 billion.\n\nGadkari backs proposal to shift INR122 bn synthetic natural gas project HQ to Nagpur\n\n25 April: A renewed push to locate the headquarters of a proposed INR122.15 billion synthetic natural gas (SNG) project in Nagpur has gathered momentum, with Union Minister Nitin Gadkari urging top officials of Coal India Ltd (CIL) and Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd (BPCL) to consider the move. The proposal, led by the Association for Industrial Development (AID), seeks to relocate the project’s administrative base from Mumbai to Nagpur, arguing that proximity to the plant site and regional balance make a compelling case. AID president Ashish Kale recently submitted a representation outlining these factors, prompting Gadkari’s intervention. The SNG project, based on coal gasification technology, is planned at Majri in Bhadravati tehsil of Chandrapur district. Conceived as a joint venture between the two public sector companies, the project is expected to generate employment for around 3,000 skilled and semi-skilled workers, adding to the region’s industrial base.\n\nNational: Coal\n\nCoal India plans 10-year roadmap to slash 243 MT coal imports\n\n26 April: Coal India Ltd (CIL) is planning a comprehensive 10-year roadmap to slash the current 243 million tonnes (MT) coal import volume through ramped-up domestic production, coal quality upgrades, and logistics cost parity. The proposed roadmap targeting coal import cuts includes a detailed forensic audit of imports, backed by sector-specific policies and phased shift strategies to boost local supply. It will include the National Washery & Logistics Grid to streamline coal washing and transport, addressing key bottlenecks in the supply chain.\n\nNew Era Cleantech plans to make coal-based urea at Chandrapur plant\n\n25 April: New Era Cleantech Solutions Pvt Ltd, which held a ground-breaking for its coal gasification plant at Chandrapur, has drawn plans to make coal gas-based urea at the site on priority basis. The company, which had plans to make ammonia out of coal, wants to build the urea plant in the first phase itself. The plant is estimated to produce about 3,850 tonnes per day of urea. This is equivalent to 1.27 million metric tonnes per annum (MMTPA) based on gasification of 1.3 MMTPA of coal. If this works out, it would become the first-ever private sector coal-to-urea plant in the country. The company has written a letter to the ministry of coal seeking a clear policy framework for the coal-to-urea projects in the country, financial incentives and the viability gap funding.\n\nBharat Coking Coal announces scheme to encourage higher coal offtake, cut costs for power consumers\n\n23 April: Coal India Ltd subsidiary Bharat Coking Coal Ltd (BCCL) announced a scheme to encourage higher coal offtake and reduce costs for power consumers for buying coal during the April-June period of the current financial year. The move aims at encouraging power companies to buy more coal, speed up transport, and cut their costs. It will improve coal supply, ensure steady electricity, and support India’s self-reliance goal amid global energy issues. The scheme will apply to all eligible power sector consumers covered under the fuel supply pact, including those under the flexi-linkage scheme.\n\nNational: Power\n\nHindustan Power Receives MoEF Clearance for Proposed 2×800 MW\n\n28 April: Hindustan Power, one of India’s leading integrated power producers, has received environmental clearance from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF) for its proposed 2×800 MW (megawatt) transitional power project at Anuppur in Madhya Pradesh. The approval marks a significant milestone for the execution of the second phase for the company’s Anuppur power plant. Post this nod, the transitional energy power project will proceed to the next stage, which includes detailed engineering and execution planning, subject to applicable approvals. Hindustan Power had commissioned the first phase of the project - aggregating to 1,200 MW - between 2015 and 2016. The project has since played an important role in boosting the region’s power infrastructure with long-term capacity creation.\n\nIndia’s power demand crosses record 256 GW as mercury levels rise across India\n\n26 April: India’s peak power demand hit an all-time high of 256.11 GW (gigawatt) due to an intensifying heat wave, which increased the use of cooling devices such as air conditioners and desert coolers, according to the power ministry data. The peak power demand eclipsed the previous record of 252.07 GW, hit just a day earlier, 24 April. According to the data, peak power demand set a new high of 256.11 GW, and it was fully met. Experts stated that peak power demand is inching towards the ministry’s estimate of 270 GW for this summer season, as mercury levels have begun to rise. The country’s peak power demand has risen with temperatures in April. The highest electricity supply on 22 April was 239.70 GW which rose to 240.12 GW on 23 April 2026. In the first fortnight of this month, the peak power demand met, or the highest supply of electricity in a day, remained lower than the 235.32 GW recorded in April 2025. Experts are of the view that demand and consumption of electricity may further rise due to more intense heat waves, with more frequent use of air conditioners, air coolers, and other appliances by domestic and commercial consumers to beat rising mercury levels in the country. Last summer, the peak power demand was 242.77 GW, recorded in June, 2025, but stayed below the government's estimate of 277 GW. In May 2024, the peak power demand was 250 GW, a record at the time and exceeding the previous all-time peak of 243.27 GW set in September 2023.\n\nNo unannounced load shedding in Kerala, outages due to overload: Electricity Minister\n\n25 April: Kerala Electricity Minister K Krishnankutty said there was no unannounced load shedding in the state, attributing recent power interruptions to temporary overload caused by high consumption. Clarifying concerns raised from various parts of the state, the minister said the disruptions are not deliberate but occur when demand peaks, particularly between 10 pm and 11 pm.\n\nUPERC slaps notice on UPPCL over delay in restoring power to prepaid smart meter users\n\n24 April: The Uttar Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission (UPERC) has issued a show-cause notice to UP Power Corporation Ltd (UPPCL), seeking an explanation as to why a penalty of INR1 lakh per day should not be imposed for failure to restore electricity supply to prepaid smart meter consumers within the stipulated time frame. In its notice issued, UPERC said that UPPCL has acknowledged non-compliance with regulation 16.11.1 of the UPERC’s standards of performance regulations, 2019, which mandates restoration of power supply within two hours of recharge in the case of prepaid meters. The commission noted that as many as 1.93 lakh prepaid smart meter consumers were affected by delays beyond the prescribed two-hour limit. The notice refers to data submitted by UPPCL on 17 April, in response to an earlier notice from the commission. The data covered prepaid smart meter reconnections across 16 different dates between 13 March and 10 April. During the period, electricity supply to over 40.27 lakh prepaid consumer households was disrupted due to negative balance in their accounts. The commission has directed UPPCL to submit its reply within 15 days of receipt of the notice. Failure to provide a satisfactory explanation could result in financial penalties and further regulatory action.\n\nPower demand in Nagpur surges to 821 MW, strains infrastructure\n\n24 April: Nagpur has recorded a peak power demand of 821 MW (megawatt), the highest so far this season, as rising temperatures and increased use of cooling appliances push electricity consumption upward. The surge has come nearly a month earlier than last year’s peak, indicating an early onset of summer-driven demand pressure on the city’s power network. The sharp increase in demand has placed significant stress on the local power infrastructure, leading to frequent tripping and short-duration outages across several areas. Utilities have attributed the disruptions to load pressure on feeders and transformers, as consumption rises during both daytime and late evening hours. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd (MSEDCL) said pre-monsoon maintenance work is underway to stabilise the grid, including upgrades to feeders, transformers and distribution lines. However, delays in infrastructure upgrades have limited immediate relief, even as investments worth around INR12 billion are being undertaken to strengthen the network.\n\nNational: Non-Fossil Fuels/ Climate Change Trends\n\nIndian court pauses stricter power grid penalties for renewable firms\n\n28 April: A court in the southern Indian state of Karnataka has temporarily ​blocked new, tougher penalties for solar and ‌wind power producers for deviating from scheduled grid supply after industry bodies challenged the rules. India, ​on 32 March, increased penalties for wind and ​solar generators for deviating from their supply ⁠pledges to the power grid. Until the next hearing, ​renewable energy companies can continue using the older ​system for paying charges when their power generation differs from the schedule given to grid operators, the court order showed. The case ​was filed by the National Solar Energy Federation of India, ‌which ⁠argued that new rules issued by the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) were introduced without proper public consultation. Solar and wind power output depends on weather ​conditions and ​cannot always ⁠be controlled, the petitioners said, unlike coal or gas-based power plants. The federal ​government and power regulator have been asked ​to ⁠respond by 10 June. India aims to build 500 gigawatt (GW) of renewable energy capacity by 2030. Industry groups ⁠had ​previously said stricter regulations could lead ​to revenue loss and limit investor interest in India’s clean energy ​sector.\n\nGreater Noida plans INR800 mn biogas plant at Astauli dumpsite\n\n27 April: Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (GNIDA) is set to establish a 300 tonne per day (TPD) compressed biogas plant at Astauli dumpsite, around 20 kilometre (km) from Pari Chowk, in a major push for waste management and reduction of legacy garbage in the city. The authority has issued a request for proposal for the project, which is estimated to cost INR800 million. GNIDA will issue a request for proposal (RFP) in a few days. The project aims to process municipal solid waste and convert it into compressed biogas, a clean and sustainable fuel alternative. The proposed plant is expected to substantially ease the burden on the Astauli landfill by handling both fresh waste and legacy waste through biomining and scientific disposal methods.\n\nNPCIL advances Kudankulam Unit 3, completes key reactor flushing stage\n\n27 April: Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL) has achieved a key milestone in the development of Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant’s Unit 3, successfully completing the reactor flushing process. This step is critical in preparing the reactor systems for subsequent stages of commissioning, ensuring that all piping and components are free from impurities before operations begin. Reactor flushing is an essential pre-commissioning activity that helps maintain system integrity and operational safety by removing debris and contaminants from the primary circuit. The completion of this process indicates steady progress in Unit 3’s construction and brings the project closer to fuel loading and eventual power generation. Kudankulam Units 3 and 4 are part of India’s broader nuclear expansion programme aimed at increasing low-carbon baseload power capacity. Progress at Unit 3 reflects continued momentum in the country’s nuclear pipeline, with NPCIL focusing on meeting timelines while adhering to stringent safety and quality standards.\n\nNTPC exploring two nuclear power units of 1.4 GW in Bihar’s Banka\n\n26 April: As part of its energy diversification plan, NTPC Ltd is looking to set up two nuclear units of 700 megawatt (MW) each in the Banka district of Bihar, which could entail an investment of around INR250 billion. At present, NTPC conducting a feasibility study for two 700 MW nuclear units in the district, located around 250 km from Patna. According to industry estimates, a 1 gigawatt (GW) nuclear plant requires an investment of INR150-200 billion and typically takes at least three years from concept to commissioning.\n\nOdisha tops rooftop solar scheme in India\n\n24 April: Odisha has recorded the highest achievement in the country under the utility-led aggregation scheme, a rooftop solar initiative under the PM Surya Ghar-Muft Bijli Yojana (PMSG-MBY), reflecting its implementation strategy and risingconsumer participation in renewable energy adoption. The achievement was highlighted during the 29th board meeting of power distribution companies responsible for electricity supply in different parts of Odisha. Odisha has made encouraging progress under both rooftop solar schemes. A total of 55,888 installations have been completed under PMSG-MBY, while the ULA scheme has added 29,000 more, taking the total number of rooftop solar systems installed in the state to 84,888. Odisha targets to cover three lakh households under the scheme. Odisha has achieved 83,979 installations, showing steady progress.\n\nIndia weighs petitions on mandate for domestic solar cells\n\n23 April: India’s clean energy ministry said it was examining ​petitions from both solar manufacturers and ‌developers of clean energy over a mandate to use only domestically made solar cells in ​power projects from June. A severe shortage of solar cells ⁠looms as new rules from June ​mandate the use of domestically made cells ​in solar panels. Such mandatory use would drive up prices of solar panels and ​delay projects, manufacturers have warned the ​ministry. India’s domestic cell manufacturing capacity of about 25.6 ‌gigawatt (GW) ⁠falls short of annual demand of roughly 50 GW, with imports from China supplying more than 90 percent, the industry said. India’s tighter local sourcing rules are part of a push to ⁠build ​domestic clean energy supply ​chains and meet a net-zero emissions target by 2070.\n\nIndia needs 10 GW annual wind capacity addition over next decade to meet net zero goal: Joshi\n\n22 April: India must add nearly 10 GW (gigawatt) of wind capacity annually over the next decade to reach the nation’s larger goal of a net-zero economy, Union New & Renewable Energy Minister Pralhad Joshi said. The Minister said India’s wind energy potential is vast and still largely untapped.\n\nRajasthan ranks third in rooftop solar adoption, driven by policy push\n\n22 April: Rajasthan has emerged as the third-largest state in India in terms of rooftop solar installations, driven by rapid adoption and policy support. The state is witnessing a steady rise in consumers shifting to solar energy, with nearly 675–700 new users adopting rooftop systems every day. According to the state energy department, Rajasthan has installed 2,45,317 rooftop solar units across residential, commercial, and industrial segments, taking total installed capacity to around 2,090 MW (megawatt). The surge in installations has led to 1,43,965 consumers reducing their electricity bills to zero, reflecting the economic viability of rooftop solar adoption. The state currently ranks behind Gujarat and Maharashtra, which lead the country with rooftop solar capacities of 6,882 MW and 5,442 MW respectively. The state government expects installations to continue rising, with rooftop solar adoption projected to cross one lakh new units in the first half of the current year, supported by policy incentives and growing consumer awareness.\n\nInternational: Oil\n\nSaudi Arabia may lower June oil prices to Asia from record levels\n\n28 April: Saudi Arabia might cut its official June ​crude selling prices (OSP) to Asia from record levels as spot premiums eased and as demand ‌cooled after weeks of supply disruption from the US (United States)-Israeli war on Iran, according to a survey of industry sources. The June OSP for flagship Arab Light crude might slide to a premium of US$7.50 to US$14.50 a barrel above the average Dubai ​and Oman quotes, the survey said, US$5 to US$12 a barrel lower than the OSP for ​May. The wide range of forecasts reflects lingering uncertainty among Asian buyers whose crude supply ⁠and price expectations have varied after the war disrupted their supplies. In China, the top buyer of Saudi crude, refiners have been squeezed by weak margins as rising feedstock costs outpaced fuel price hikes while Beijing has curbed refined fuel exports. Chinese refiners planned to buy just ​20 million barrels of crude, the ​lowest volume on record, ⁠from Saudi Arabia in May after the seller hiked its price to a record high. Saudi Aramco has been using the Red Sea port of Yanbu to export Arab ​Light crude after the war restricted shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.\n\nUAE exit weakens OPEC+ power over oil market but group to stay together\n\n28 April: OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) and its allies will lose some of their power over the oil market when the United Arab Emirates (UAE) leaves the group on 1 May, but the rest of the producer alliance is likely to stick together ​and continue to coordinate on oil supply policy, OPEC+ delegates and analysts said. The UAE will become the largest oil producer to depart ​OPEC, a heavy blow to the organization and its de facto leader Saudi Arabia. Abu Dhabi pumped around 3.4 million barrels per day (bpd) or about 3 percent of the world’s crude supply before the US (United States)-Israeli war on Iran ​forced it and other Middle East Gulf producers to curb shipments and shut down some production. Once outside OPEC, the UAE will join the ranks of independent oil producers that pump at will, such as the US and Brazil.\n\nUganda to offer new oil exploration licensing round in 2026/27 financial year\n\n28 April: Uganda will offer a new oil exploration licensing round next financial year, its ​minister for energy and mineral development Ruth Nankabirwa said. The East African country, which expects to start commercial crude production later this year, is keen ​to expand its resource base through potential ​new discoveries. She said that Uganda would offer its third ​petroleum exploration licensing round in the financial year ​that starts in July. Uganda’s ​last licensing round, in which five blocks ​were on offer, was launched in 2019 and concluded in ‌2023. The ⁠country’s existing reserves, estimated at about 6.5 billion barrels, are all in the Albertine Graben, which straddles Uganda’s border with the Democratic Republic ​of Congo. The ​energy ⁠ministry says only 40 percent of that region has been explored so far. The ​government is doing preliminary exploration ​surveys in ⁠two new basins, Moroto-Kadam and Kyoga, located in the country’s north and northeast, respectively.\n\nItaly’s Eni signs agreement to relaunch heavy oil project in Venezuela\n\n28 April: Italy’s energy producer Eni signed an ​agreement with Venezuela’s oil ministry and oil company PDVSA ‌to relaunch a heavy crude project in the Orinoco Belt, the company said. PDVSA’s key partners have been signing preliminary agreements to confirm interest ​or expand their oil and gas projects as the government progresses ​in a broad review of all contracts in the industry ⁠as part on an oil reform. PDVSA and Eni, which has presence in the country since 1998, are partners in the Junin 5 ​project in the Orinoco, ​which holds ⁠some 35 billion barrels of certified oil in place, and in the Petrosucre project, where they produce ​crude in shallow waters. In 2025, Eni’s ​production in Venezuela was 64,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day, it said.\n\nDiesel, jet fuel exports from northeast Asia to recover in May\n\n27 April: Northeast Asian spot diesel and jet fuel exports are set to show a recovery ‌in May as refiners capitalise on record margins and improving crude oil supply, traders said. Data showed refiners in South Korea and Taiwan have sold more diesel and jet fuel cargoes loading in May than April although the volume ​remained below pre-Iran war levels. Refining margins in Asia soared to all-time highs of about US$60 a barrel. The rise in exports has helped ease record spot premiums of both ⁠diesel and jet fuel in the Asia Pacific which strained countries as the conflict cut most ​of the region's oil supply through the Strait of Hormuz. South Korea’s SK Energy, GS Caltex, S-Oil and Hyundai ​Oilbank sold a total of more than 10 diesel cargoes loading next month, more than twice April’s volume, data showed.\n\nRussian diesel cargoes rerouted from Brazil as global prices surge\n\n27 April: Two tankers carrying Russian ultra-low sulphur diesel (ULSD) ​were diverted mid-voyage from Brazil to alternative destinations, traders and LSEG data showed. Both ‌were loaded in March at the Russian Baltic port of Primorsk and made almost half of the trip to Brazil before the cargo buyers were switched as traders seized on a spike in global prices due to the ​Iran war, traders said. Brazil is a major diesel producer, ​but depends on imports ​to meet domestic ⁠demand, which makes up 20–30 percent of its total fuel consumption. Russian diesel exports to Brazil are not prohibited under current sanctions. Russia has emerged as the dominant diesel supplier to Brazil since March 2023, rapidly displacing US volumes ⁠after ​the European Union’s ban on Russian oil products took ​effect.\n\nIndonesia to import 150 mn barrels of crude oil from Russia this year: Deputy Energy Minister\n\n24 April: Indonesia will import 150 million barrels of ​crude oil from Russia this year, Deputy Energy ‌Minister Yuliot Tanjung said. The Southeast Asian country secured supplies of crude oil and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) from Russia amid energy ​shortages following the Middle East war. Yuliot said the import volume of LPG from Russia has ‌yet ⁠to be decided. Indonesia is seeking to secure crude oil and LPG from other countries including the United States, Yuliot said.\n\nMexico to send 1 mn barrels of crude oil to Japan: President\n\n23 April: Mexico will send one million ​barrels of crude oil to ‌Japan, President Claudia Sheinbaum said, noting that up to 1.4 million barrels per ​day (bpd) of Mexico’s total output is ​used for domestic refineries and the ⁠remainder is exported. ⁠Sheinbaum and Japan’s Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi agreed to enhance their cooperation on energy matters as the ​Iran war ​disrupts global ⁠supply. Takaichi had requested cooperation in building a favorable ​environment for Japanese companies operating ​in ⁠Mexico as both leaders agreed to strengthen trade relations. Mexico exports between 400,000 ⁠and ​500,000 bpd.\n\nSierra Leone signs US$225 mn offshore oil agreement with Nigeria’s Marginal Energy\n\n23 April: Sierra Leone said it had signed a petroleum licence agreement with Nigeria‑based ​Marginal Energy Ltd, granting the company offshore exploration ‌and production rights as the government seeks to revive interest in its under‑explored upstream sector. The licence, signed through the ​Petroleum Directorate of Sierra Leone (PDSL), covers offshore ​blocks G‑145, G‑146, G‑147, G‑160 and G‑161, spanning ⁠about 6,800 square kilometres. Marginal Energy, a Nigerian independent, has committed to ​a seismic and drilling programme with exploration spending expected to exceed US$225 million. Under the agreement, the state will hold a 10 percent ​carried interest in oil projects and 5 percent in ​gas during exploration and development, with an option to acquire an ‌additional ⁠participating interest on a paid basis of up to 9 percent once production begins.\n\nS&P Global cuts 2026 oil demand forecast by 700k bpd due to Iran war\n\n23 April: S&P Global Energy has reduced its global oil ​demand forecast for 2026 by ‌700,000 barrels per day (bpd) as the US (United States)-Iran war disrupts energy supplies from ​the Middle East and ​hits demand in the second quarter, ⁠consultant Ethan Ng said. Global oil demand growth expected ​to shrink to 400,000 bpd versus pre-war forecast of 1.1 million bpd. Oil demand ​to fall sharply in the ​Middle East and Asia in Q2. About 178 ‌refineries ⁠accounting for around 40 percent of the world’s refining capacity are affected by the closure of ​the Strait ​of Hormuz. Physical ⁠Dated Brent prices are capped by a huge ​drawdown of strategic petroleum ​reserves ⁠by countries such as Japan and South Korea to manage fuel ⁠shortages.\n\nDruzhba oil flows to Slovakia and Hungary after Ukraine war standoff\n\n23 April: Slovakia and Hungary ​said they began receiving crude oil through the Druzhba pipeline after a months-long ‌outage that had blocked European Union aid to Ukraine. The Druzhba pipeline became one of the most politically charged pieces of infrastructure in Europe after the halt in Russian oil deliveries to Hungary and Slovakia in January which Ukraine blamed on a Russian ​air strike. Oil through the Ukrainian section of the pipeline started flowing, prompting Hungary to lift ​its veto on a €90 billion (US$105.4 billion) EU loan urgently needed by Ukraine. Slovakia confirmed ⁠early that oil had reached it and Hungary’s oil group MOL confirmed that it ​had begun receiving crude oil through the pipeline. Slovakia said it expected to receive 119,000 tonnes of oil through the pipeline by the end of April.\n\nGulf oil output likely to rebound within months after Hormuz reopening: Goldman\n\n23 April: Gulf oil production, sharply curtailed by the Iran conflict, is likely to mostly recover within a few months after the Strait of ​Hormuz fully reopens, but could take significantly longer, Goldman Sachs ‌said. The bank estimated about 14.5 million barrels per day (bpd) of Gulf crude output – around 57 percent of pre‑war supply – was offline in April, largely due to ​precautionary shutdowns and stock management rather than physical damage to oilfields. The ​Strait of Hormuz handles about a fifth of global oil ⁠flows under normal conditions, so prolonged disruption has significant implications for ​global energy markets. Goldman said that a safe and ​sustained reopening of the strait in the absence of renewed attacks on oil infrastructure would allow production to return relatively quickly, supported by spare capacity in Saudi Arabia ​and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). However, any recovery will be constrained by ​logistics and well performance. Available empty tanker capacity in the Gulf has dropped by ‌about ⁠130 million barrels, or 50 percent, limiting how quickly producers can move oil once exports resume, the bank said. An average of forecasts from external agencies suggests Gulf producers could recover about 70 percent of ⁠lost ​output within three months and around 88 percent ​within six months, Goldman said, while cautioning that a prolonged closure raises the risk of lasting ​damage to supply.\n\nInternational: Gas\n\nUAE’s ADNOC to invest tens of billions to build US gas business\n\n28 April: UAE (United Arab Emirates)’s Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) is planning to invest tens ​of billions of dollars to build a natural gas business ‌in the United States (US). The ​company is reviewing 29 potential deals aimed at creating a vertically ⁠integrated global gas business. The strategy is to diversify ADNOC’s overseas ​investment arm XRG’s commodity exposure by operating ​across the entire gas value chain. XRG ​is weighing options to create a business that would meet rising global demand for liquefied natural gas (LNG) and the growing ​US (United States) demand to power data centres.\n\nJapan’s JERA secures adequate LNG stocks through July despite Iran crisis\n\n27 April: JERA, Japan’s biggest power ‌generator, has secured adequate liquefied natural gas (LNG) inventories through July to cover Middle East supply disruptions caused by the US (United States)-Israeli war with Iran. JERA handles about 35 ​million metric tonnes annually of imports and trading, of which roughly 27 million tons ​are used domestically. About 5 percent of its Japan-bound shipments pass through the ⁠Strait of Hormuz, where the conflict has disrupted shipping. In February, JERA signed a 27-year deal with QatarEnergy for 3 million tonnes per annum (mtpa) from the North Field South expansion project starting in 2028.\n\nCamuzzi, Vitol sign MoU for Argentina’s US$3.9 bn LNG del Plata project\n\n27 April: Camuzzi Gas Inversora and Vitol signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) for ​Argentina’s LNG del Plata project, the ‌Argentine firm said, with Vitol potentially acquiring up to 100 percent of production and evaluating ​an equity investment. The project, currently wholly ​owned by Camuzzi, is located at the ⁠Port of La Plata in Buenos ​Aires province and will require an investment ​of US$3.9 billion over the next 20 years.\n\nEni-Repsol JV seeking to increase gas output at Venezuela’s Cardon IV\n\n27 April: Spain’s Repsol and Italy’s Eni are seeking to increase production at Venezuela’s ​Cardon IV gas field to 645 million cubic feet per ‌day, the project manager Gonzalo ​Antonio Carrillo said. The field ​currently produces about 580 million cubic feet per day, Carrillo said. Venezuela’s vice ​minister for gas Cindy Rondon said the country needed to speed up repairs ​to gas infrastructure.\n\nCanada greenlights Enbridge gas pipeline expansion in test of Carney approval process\n\n24 April: Canada has approved a ‌C$4 billion (US$2.93 billion) expansion of Enbridge’s Westcoast natural gas pipeline system in British Columbia, the first major pipeline project to get the go-ahead under Prime Minister Mark Carney. Enbridge has ⁠been developing its Sunrise Expansion project, which will add 300 million cubic feet per day of natural gas ​capacity in B.C., since 2022, and applied for federal regulatory approval two years ago. Enbridge ​will build Sunrise to meet rising B.C. natural gas demand, including from LNG projects such as Woodfibre, which is under construction ‌on ⁠the Pacific coast and of which Enbridge owns 30 percent. Enbridge’s Westcoast natural gas pipeline system stretches ​2,900 kilometres (1,802 miles) from northeast ​British Columbia to the ⁠Canada-US (United States) border, with a current capacity of 3.6 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day. The expansion will involve constructing new pipeline segments along the existing system, additional ​gas compression capacity and upgrades and changes to existing facilities. Construction is scheduled to ​begin in July, ⁠with a targeted in-service date in late 2028.\n\nPakistan LNG seeks three spot cargoes in first tender since December 2023\n\n23 April: Pakistan LNG Ltd has issued its first spot tender for liquefied natural gas (LNG) since December 2023 amid supply ​shortfalls triggered by the US (United States)-Israeli war with Iran. The company is seeking bids from international suppliers ‌for three LNG cargoes of around 140,000 cubic metres each for delivery on 27-30 April, and on 1-7 and 8-14 May at Port Qasim in Karachi. Pakistan ​Federal Minister of Energy Awais Leghari said the LNG tender was aimed at meeting ​rising power demand and to cut reliance on costlier diesel and furnace oil. Pakistan is ⁠not sure when it will get more cargoes from Qatar, Leghari said. Pakistan has not received any LNG cargoes loaded after the Middle East war began on 28 February and Iran shut off almost all shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, which connects the Gulf to the ​Indian Ocean. Qatar depends on access through the strait to move its energy output. It supplied the bulk ​of the 6.64 million metric tonnes of LNG Pakistan imported last year, according to Kpler data. Islamabad cancelled 21 LNG cargoes for 2026–27 under a long-term deal ​with Eni, expecting slower ​demand growth and increased ⁠power supply from solar energy. Pakistan remains ​exposed to supply shocks, however, and LNG is still needed to meet peak ​summer demand ⁠and limit outages.\n\nEuropean Union not on track to fill gas storage 90 percent before winter\n\n23 April: European Union (EU) countries are set to fall short of the bloc’s requirement to fill gas storage to 90 percent of capacity before ​next winter, because of the Iran war’s disruption to global fuel ‌markets, the European energy regulators' agency ACER said. Countries should be able to reach a lower 80 percent filling level - a flexibility the EU rules allow in difficult market ​conditions, ACER said. But it said that hitting this level “will likely ​come at a premium cost” and be vulnerable to supply disruptions. Filling ⁠storage to 90 percent would require the EU to increase its LNG imports ​by 13 percent compared with 2025, ACER said. That will be difficult given tight global ​supplies. The Iran war has upended global gas markets by effectively closing the Strait of Hormuz, which usually transits around 20 percent of the world’s liquefied natural gas (LNG). While most of the EU’s gas imports come from outside the Middle East - from Norway ‌and ⁠the US (United States) - the disruption to global supplies has forced European buyers to compete with those in Asia for flexible LNG cargoes, and increased European gas prices by around 40 percent. Europe’s current reserves of stored gas are unusually low, after a ​cold winter. The current ​high prices are ⁠deterring companies from buying gas for storage. EU gas storage is currently 31 percent full, the lowest level for this time ​of year since 2022, when Russia slashed gas supplies to ​Europe, Gas Infrastructure Europe data showed. Gas from storage typically covers up to a third of EU gas demand in winter. The European Commission has urged governments to start refilling ⁠gas storage ​as soon as possible, and said it will step in to coordinate countries' efforts to avoid them rushing to buy gas at the ​same time and causing new price spikes.\n\nInternational: Coal\n\nAnglo American has at least three suitors for Australian coal business\n\n23 April: Anglo American has at least three potential buyers ‌for its Australian steelmaking coal business after its unsuccessful deal with Peabody Energy for the assets. Australian miner Stanmore Resources, Japan’s Mitsubishi Corporation and ⁠Indonesia-based PT Buma Internasional Grup, are among the ​bidders for the coal assets. Peabody withdrew ​its US$3.78 billion bid for Anglo American’s Australian coking coal assets ‌in ⁠August, and the London-listed miner initiated an arbitration against the US (United States)-based coal miner. The assets up for sale include mines in Queensland’s Bowen Basin, the world’s top steelmaking coal region, ​and are ​part of ⁠Anglo’s wider plans to divest its non-core assets.\n\nInternational: Power\n\nNigeria’s commercial capital Lagos bets on local power as grid falters\n\n28 April: Lagos is betting ‌that Nigeria’s chronic electricity shortages can be addressed outside the national grid, scaling up state-backed power generation and distribution after securing 400 megawatt (MW) of new supply, Lagos Commissioner for Energy and Mineral Resources Biodun ​Ogunleye said. Africa’s largest city is pressing ahead ​under reforms that allow sub-national governments to regulate power as Nigeria’s grid struggles. At least ​22 other states are also setting up electricity markets to reduce reliance ⁠on the centralised system in Abuja, according to the power regulator data. Nigeria’s grid delivers about 3,000 MW on a good day, far short of estimated demand of more than 30,000 MW, according to government power plans, forcing businesses ​and households to rely on diesel generators. Lagos activated its electricity regulatory regime in June 2025 ​and transferred oversight of intrastate electricity matters from the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) to the Lagos State Electricity ‌Regulatory ⁠Commission. By the end of the year, it had assumed full regulatory control of its electricity market, becoming the first Nigerian state to do so. In a circular last year, NERC said state regulators would oversee intrastate electricity matters, while it would retain responsibility for interstate ​electricity transactions, national grid ​operations and industry standards. Lagos ⁠has signed power purchase agreements with Fenchurch Power, Mainland Power and Viathan Engineering Limited to supply up to 400 MW to public facilities over ​three years. Analysts said ⁠state-level power ​markets could improve reliability but would not remove constraints ​including gas supply, foreign exchange exposure, affordability, transmission bottlenecks and weak technical capacity.\n\nEuropean grid operators seek better control of voltage surges in wake of Iberian blackout\n\n28 April: Power grid operators in the European Union (EU) want policymakers to regulate all new power plants to help control voltage swings and avoid the kind of blackouts that ​affected Spain’s power system a year ago, the chair of Europe’s power grid ‌operators' association said. A string of probes has found a voltage surge was the likely cause of the outage that plunged large parts of Spain and Portugal into darkness for up ​to 16 hours on 28 April 2025. Not all power plants can control voltage dynamically, ​which is key to keeping a grid stable. Traditionally, gas-fired and other conventional ⁠power plants are able to control voltage, while solar plants may need to be ​equipped to do that. European grid operators have urged changes to a set of rules for so-called ​connection network codes that establish requirements for power generators - both conventional and renewables - and other parts of power systems across Europe. The revised rules would ensure that when there's a swing in voltage all new power ​generators can react dynamically. After the blackout, Spain updated its rules establishing power grid voltage control obligations for power plants to expand the role played by renewable ​plants.\n\nEdison International posts steady profit growth on rising electricity rates\n\n28 April: Edison International beat expectations for first-quarter profit, as the utility benefited from higher ​electricity rates. United States (US) power companies are seeking higher ‌customer electricity rates, driven by surging demand from AI-focused data centers, increased domestic manufacturing and extreme weather events including ​wildfires. US power consumption hit a record high in 2025 ​and is projected to keep climbing through 2027, according to ‌the ⁠EIA (Energy Information Administration), driven largely by AI and crypto data centers, along with growing electrification of homes, businesses, and transportation.\n\nArgentina receives three bids for its stake in power transport firm Transener\n\n28 April: Argentina’s privatization of majority ​power transport firm ‌Transener is nearing its final stage, Economy ​Minister Luis ​Caputo said, ⁠having received three ​bids from firms ​for its stake. Transener is the South American nation’s ​main high ​voltage power transmission company, with ‌the ⁠government looking to sell off its 51 percent stake. Libertarian ​President ​Javier ⁠Milei has promised to privatize ​a number ​of ⁠state firms in his administration, including ⁠legacy ​carrier Aerolineas ​Argentinas.\n\nAshoka Buildcon wins INR6 bn Angola electricity distribution project\n\n24 April: Ashoka Buildcon Ltd said it has received a Letter of Contract Acceptance from the Ministry of Energy and Water, Republic of Angola, for an electricity infrastructure project. The contract, valued at US$72.36 million (INR6 billion), pertains to the ‘Electricity Sector Improvement and Access Project’ and involves the design, supply, installation and commissioning of rehabilitation works for distribution networks in Luanda City. The project will be executed over a period of 24 months, the company said.\n\nFrance eyes steps to speed up data centre grid connections\n\n23 April: France could allow large data centre projects to temporarily connect to underground cable systems as part ​of an overhaul of its grid connection system, as ‌it tries to cut development times and attract investment, the energy ministry said. France, like much of Europe, has struggled in recent years ​with long and cumbersome electricity connection queues as data centre operators ​race to plug into the grid and get to ⁠market. The bottlenecks have encouraged so-called \"ghost projects\", where companies secure grid ​slots for developments that may never be built, crowding out ​rivals and, in some cases, allowing slots to be traded under a first-come, first-served system. As a short-term fix, the government is considering allowing some large ​projects to connect to the underground cable network, alongside broader ​reforms to the current queuing system, the ministry said in its electrification plan. The temporary underground connection option could be available by the ​end of the ​month and ⁠would provide power to several very large projects, helping them meet tight time-to-market deadlines. A deeper overhaul of the grid queue will ​take longer. ⁠Energy regulator CRE is running a consultation, with a decision expected by the end of the year, the ministry said. The regulator aims ⁠to ​boost France’s appeal to investors by ​cutting connection costs and delays, which in some European countries can stretch to a decade ​because of clogged queues.\n\nInternational: Non-Fossil Fuels/ Climate Change Trends​\n\nSouth Africa’s Eskom, South32 collaborate on renewable power for Hillside aluminium smelter\n\n28 April: South Africa’s power utility Eskom and South32 are working on a renewable electricity plan for the Australian firm’s ​Hillside aluminium smelter, to take effect from 2031, ‌the two companies said. The 720,000 metric tonnes per year Hillside plant, located on South Africa’s east coast, is the biggest ​aluminium smelter in the southern hemisphere and has a ​10-year deal with Eskom for discounted power costs ⁠ending in 2031. South Africa grants power‑intensive smelters discounted electricity tariffs ​because the plants, which support tens of thousands of jobs, ​would likely close if forced to pay standard rates in a country with high, coal‑based generation costs. High electricity costs, which have risen roughly ​tenfold since 2008, have forced dozens of plants to ​shut. South32 placed its ​Mozal aluminium smelter in Mozambique on care and maintenance ​on 15 March, after failing to secure sufficient and affordable power supply for the plant.\n\nUS to end more offshore wind leases in exchange for fossil fuel investments\n\n27 April: President Donald Trump’s administration said that it had reached a deal to end two more ‌United States (US) offshore wind leases in exchange for US$885 million in pledged investments in domestic fossil fuels. The projects, one in the Atlantic and one in the Pacific, are managed by Ocean Winds, a joint venture between France’s ENGIE and Portugal’s EDP Renewables. Engie said that it was in talks with the administration about a possible refund for its offshore wind leases. ⁠It had ​paused three projects in development and booked impairments.\n\nNations meet to discuss fossil fuel exit as Iran war drives up prices\n\n27 April: Around 60 governments, including Brazil, Germany, Canada and Nigeria, will hold the first ‌international meeting to discuss phasing out fossil fuels, as the Iran war upends global oil and gas markets and sends prices soaring. The gathering of ministers and officials in Santa Marta, Colombia, which starts, ​will focus on practical steps to shift economies away from fossil fuels, rather than ​setting new global targets of the kind agreed at UN (United Nations) climate summits. Talks will address how to create investment conditions for industries to switch from ​gas to electricity, and how to reform fossil fuel subsidies. The meeting brings together a coalition of ​willing nations, with the world’s top two polluters - China and the US (United States) - notably absent. Saudi Arabia and other ‌major ⁠Middle Eastern oil and gas producers are not attending. The ⁠meeting reflects frustration among some governments at slow progress in annual UN climate talks, where nearly 200 countries must agree decisions by consensus. Countries agreed to transition away from fossil fuels at the ⁠COP28 climate ​summit in 2023. But subsequent COP meetings have done little ​to advance that pledge, with countries including Saudi Arabia blocking recent proposals targeting fossil fuels.\n\nCanada, Alberta close in on carbon price agreement\n\n27 April: Canada and Alberta are expected to strike a deal in ‌the next two weeks that will increase the price on carbon for the province’s industrial emitters, but a broader agreement to tackle oil sands greenhouse gases and green-light a new crude oil export pipeline remains elusive. Canada’s federal government and its main oil-producing province have been in talks since November, when both parties agreed to work ​together to boost investment in energy production. Experts said a carbon pricing deal is necessary first to make the economics of the Pathways project work. Pathways, first proposed by the companies in 2022, would be one of the world’s largest such projects, with the potential to significantly reduce emissions from the oil sands, Canada’s largest source of greenhouse gases.\n\nChina acquired capacity to build 50 nuclear power reactors simultaneously\n\n25 April: China can build up to 50 nuclear reactors simultaneously, the country’s atomic authority has said as Beijing gears up to rapidly expand the nuclear power sector to reduce dependence on fossil fuels amid the US (United States)-Iran war. China has the ability to run dozens of nuclear projects concurrently spanning the full project life cycle — from design to construction — according to a latest report released this week by the country’s Nuclear Energy Association.\n\nFrench oil major TotalEnergies approves Kazakh renewable project despite disputes\n\n24 April: French oil major TotalEnergies approved a US$1.2 billion investment in a 1 ​gigawatt (GW) wind farm in Kazakhstan, pressing ahead despite ongoing legal disputes in ​the country. The final investment decision on the Mirny project comes ⁠as TotalEnergies contests a US$4.6 billion environmental fine and a multibillion-dollar cost dispute linked to the ​giant Kashagan offshore oilfield in the Caspian Sea, which it operates in a consortium ​with several other majors. The project will be folded into a 50/50 Asian renewables partnership TotalEnergies is ‌forming ⁠with Emirati firm Masdar, allowing it to share its investment costs. About 75 percent of the project is externally financed and it is expected to reach full capacity in 2029. TotalEnergies is expanding its 31 GW renewables portfolio, already the largest ​among oil majors, and ​is targeting 100 ⁠GW of gross installed capacity by 2030. Part of that growth will come from supplying renewable systems to oil ​and gas clients, including a flagship multi-energy project in Iraq combining ​seawater desalination, ⁠solar power and flared gas recovery.\n\nBritish International Investment launches US$1.4 bn Asia climate investment push\n\n23 April: British International Investment (BII) launched a 1.1 billion-pound (US$1.48 billion) climate finance initiative, aiming to draw private capital ‌into clean energy projects across India and Southeast Asia, where coal is still dominant ​in power generation. The ​five-year programme, called British Climate Partners, ⁠will invest in developing Asian economies ​alongside private investors in equity platforms and ​mezzanine financing to scale renewable and low-carbon projects, BII said. Asia accounted for about three-quarters of ​global coal demand in 2024, underscoring ​the challenge in cutting emissions in fast-growing economies, BII ‌said.\n\nBrazil to start tests for diesel blend containing 20 percent biofuel in May\n\n23 April: Brazilian researchers at the Maua Institute of Technology will begin tests to investigate the viability of raising the blend of biodiesel in ​diesel to 20 percent in May, Renato Romio, manager of the institute’s ‌vehicles division, said. Brazil is a powerhouse producer of biofuels from raw materials soy and sugarcane, with current mandated blends of 15 percent biodiesel in diesel and 30 percent ethanol in gasoline. Global energy ​disruption caused by the US (United States)-Israeli war with Iran since February has led to calls ​in the South American country to raise those mandated blends and ⁠reduce reliance on fossil fuels and imported energy sources.\n\nUS sets preliminary antidumping duties on solar imports from India, Indonesia and Laos\n\n23 April: The United States (US) Commerce Department announced preliminary antidumping duties on solar cells and panels imported from India, Indonesia ​and Laos, the latest in a string of tariffs imposed ‌over a decade on solar imports from Asia. With the decision, federal trade officials sided with domestic solar factory owners in finding that companies operating in the three countries ​dumped cheap goods in the US market. The ​three nations last year accounted for US$4.5 billion in US solar imports, about two-thirds of the total, according to government trade data. The Commerce Department said it would announce a final decision on or around 13 July for solar cells from ⁠India ​and Indonesia, and a decision for imports ​from Laos on or around 9 September.\n\nAustralia’s Queensland invests in biodiesel to cut reliance on fuel imports\n\n22 April: The government of Australia’s Queensland state said it would invest A$25 million (US$18 million) in a renewable ​diesel project, casting the decision as the first step ‌towards reducing its reliance on imported fuel. Australia has been grappling with high fuel prices and the threat of shortages since the US (United States)-Israeli war on Iran ​curtailed the flow of oil from the Middle East. The Queensland government ​said it was investing in production at the Lytton refinery ​in Brisbane, operated by fuel producer Ampol. The project will turn waste, vegetable oils and animal fats into 20 million litres of renewable diesel a year ​starting from 2028, it said. It said that ​it had more money to invest, biofuels were one of its priorities ‌and ⁠hundreds of millions of litres could be produced by early next decade.\n\nAfrica, Southeast Asia drive China solar panel exports to record in March\n\n22 April: China’s solar panel exports soared to a record in March, China customs ‌and industry data showed, as Southeast Asia and Africa stockpiled ahead of expected price increases and fallout from the Iran war boosted demand. Panel exports surged 42.2 percent to 1.75 million metric tonnes in March, equivalent to 13.3 percent of volumes in all of 2025. The shipments were valued at US$3.61 billion, up 67 percent from ​a year earlier and 125 percent from February, Chinese customs data showed. Countries in Southeast Asia and Africa rushed to import ​panels ahead of expected price increases due to an end to China’s export tax refunds on 1 April, with the surge amplified by disruption to energy supplies due to the US (United States)-Israel war on Iran, analysts said. Investors are betting on renewable energy stocks in China, the dominant maker of solar gear, on expectations that the war will boost global demand for renewables. S&P in February had projected China’s 2026 solar exports to remain flat-to-slightly down versus 2025 because of weaker global demand before the Iran war. Import duties on Chinese panels in countries including India and the US have blunted demand there, shifting flows to markets such as Southeast Asia and Africa. Imports by the Philippines, which is targeting faster solar additions through 2030, nearly quadrupled from a year earlier ​to 109,513 tonnes valued at US$228 million.\n\nUkraine’s reliance on nuclear power increases during war\n\n22 April: Since Russia’s 2022 invasion, nuclear power ​has become the backbone of Ukraine’s energy system. After repeated airstrikes on thermal generation, it was nuclear stations ‌that began carrying Ukraine’s baseload demand. At the start of the war, Ukraine operated four nuclear power plants with a combined 15 power units. But the largest of them - the Zaporizhzhia nuclear station, which is the biggest in Europe - was occupied in 2022 and shut down several months ​later. Nuclear firm Energoatom said that even before the war, nuclear generation accounted for more than half ​of Ukraine’s electricity production. During the war, the company said, its share had risen to about 70 percent ⁠of total generation - not as the result of an expansion of the nuclear sector, but because of the destruction ​of other generating capacity. Earlier this year that nuclear generation covered up to 80 percent of local consumption.\n\nNEWS RECAP\n\nNational: OIL\n\nHormuz Blockade\n\nIndia's strategic oil reserves, designed to provide cover for about 9.5 days of supplies during disruptions or price shocks, are currently sitting at only two-thirds capacity, the government said. India, the world’s third-largest energy consumer and heavily dependent on imports for about 88 percent of its crude oil needs, has built strategic underground storage facilities with a total capacity of 5.33 million tonnes (MT) across three locations -- Visakhapatnam in Andhra Pradesh, and Mangaluru and Padur in Karnataka -- to store crude oil used for producing fuels such as petrol and diesel. Indian Strategic Petroleum Reserve Ltd (ISPRL) is the special purpose vehicle that established Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPR) facilities with a total capacity of 5.33 MT of crude oil at three locations, which can act as a buffer for short-term supply shocks. The stockpile has been in focus since the breakout of war in the Middle East snapped the supply of crude oil, natural gas and LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) from the Gulf countries to India. India spent US$110 billion in the first 11 months of the current fiscal year on importing about 226 MT (or 88.7 percent of oil needs).\n\nThe Telangana Bharat Petroleum Dealers Association (TBPDA) clarified that people should not believe false news about fuel shortage in Telangana. It said that people were unnecessarily queuing at fuel filling stations due to fake propaganda. The association’s state general secretary Surabhi Sharath Kumar said that the supply was not disrupted in Telangana. People were engaging in panic buying following the West Asia conflict. Oil companies were relentlessly trying to ensure sufficient supply of both petrol and diesel across the state, he stated. He requested the customers not to trust fake news and rumours spread on social media platforms. The association said that certain companies stopped credit facilities to traders, while customers were buying more fuel than required resulting in inconvenience to motorists and a crisis-like situation.\n\nMangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd (MRPL) declared force majeure on all gasoline export ​cargoes amid the Middle East conflict that has ​upended crude oil flows from the Gulf, traders said. The traders, who deal with the company and said they received a notice from them, said MRPL invoked force majeure, a legal term which allows a company to invoke circumstances outside of their control to not fulfil a contract, for its gasoline exports for March and April. The refiner, which operates a 500,000 barrel per day (bpd) refinery in the southern state of Karnataka, exports about 40 percent of its refined fuel output.\n\nIndia holds about 100 million barrels of commercial crude oil stocks - in storage tanks, underground strategic reserves and on ships voyaging towards the country - which could cover roughly 40-45 days of its requirement if flows through the Strait of Hormuz are disrupted, according to Kpler. India imports about 88 percent of the crude oil it needs - the raw material for fuels such as petrol and diesel - with more than 50 percent supplied by Middle Eastern countries and transiting the narrow Strait of Hormuz, flows from which have been disrupted amid the Iran crisis.\n\nRetail petrol and diesel prices in India are unlikely to be raised in the near term despite the recent surge in global crude oil. International crude prices jumped nearly 9 percent after US (United States) and Israeli military strikes on Iran and retaliatory attacks by Tehran, fuelling concerns over supply disruptions and higher fuel costs. Brent crude, the global benchmark, climbed close to US$80 per barrel, while US-traded crude rose 8.6 percent to US$72.79 from about US$67. India imports roughly 88 percent of its crude requirement, which is processed into fuels such as petrol and diesel, meaning sustained increases in global prices typically translate into a higher import bill. The three state-run fuel retailers — Indian Oil Corporation (IOC), Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd (BPCL) and Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd (HPCL) — together reported a profit of INR237.43 billion in the December quarter alone this financial year. The geopolitical flare-up has also renewed concerns around the Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint through which nearly half of India’s oil imports pass. After the latest attacks, Iran warned shipping away from the strait and insurers reportedly withdrew coverage, effectively halting tanker movements. Amid the escalating tensions, Union Petroleum and Natural Gas Minister Hardeep Singh Puri reviewed the supply situation of crude oil, LPG and other petroleum products with senior officials and public sector companies.\n\nThe government has mandated the sale of petrol blended with up to 20 percent ethanol and a minimum Research Octane Number (RON) of 95 from 1 April, according to a notification issued by the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas (MoPNG). The decision comes against the backdrop of the recent controversy over ethanol blending amid claims that blending ethanol — an agricultural by-product derived from sugar processing and feedstocks such as rice and maize — impacts vehicle efficiency and mileage. The government may, in special circumstances, permit oil marketing companies (OMCs) to sell ethanol-blended petrol meeting the RON specifications prescribed by the BIS, for a specified period and in designated regions. The government had introduced the ethanol blending programme, which targeted 20 percent ethanol blending in petrol, to reduce reliance on fossil fuels and cut down on energy imports. The country imports around 90 percent of its crude oil requirements and 50 percent of natural gas needs.\n\nIndian coastal authorities reportedly “seized three US-sanctioned tanker ships linked to Iran”. The vessel seizures follow the improvement in India-US relations with Washington announcing recently that it would cut import tariffs on Indian goods to 18 percent from 50 percent. Indian coastal authorities said that they had intercepted the three vessels about 100 nautical miles west of Mumbai after detecting suspicious activity involving a tanker in India’s exclusive economic zone.\n\nLPG\n\nAmid growing concerns over LPG supply disruption triggered by the US-Iran conflict, UP (Uttar Pradesh) government has approved the release of over INR1.93 billion for providing free LPG cylinders to beneficiaries under the Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana (PMUY). The approval, issued by the food and civil supplies department on 25 March, will facilitate the second phase of free LPG refills to eligible beneficiaries in the 2025-26 fiscal. UP has around 18 million PMUY beneficiaries—the highest in the country. PMUY provides free LPG connections to women from below-poverty-line households. Though the oil industry has been maintaining that LPG availability in the state remains stable and adequate, government appears to be taking a proactive approach to prevent distress among vulnerable sections. Analysts said that the step carries a strong electoral resonance as cooking fuel is a daily necessity and has a direct bearing on household budgets, eventually connecting with the women.\n\nProduction\n\nOil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC)’s net profit, on a standalone basis, increased 1.6 percent on a year-over-year (YoY) in the December-end quarter basis notwithstanding a lower oil price regime which led to lower crude price realisations. On a standalone basis, ONGC’s net profit increased 1.6 percent YoY tov INR83.72 billion in the third quarter of the ongoing financial year. Whereas, crude price realisation, from nominated fields, declined about 15.1 percent YoY to US$61.63 per barrel during the reported quarter. Further, price of gas produced from nominated fields increased about 1.4 percent to US$6.59 per million metric British thermal units (mmBtu).\n\nImports\n\nIndia’s recalibration of crude oil imports marks a structural shift from opportunistic discount buying to disciplined geopolitical risk management, according to analytics firm GlobalData. With oil accounting for roughly a quarter of India’s primary energy consumption and import dependence at about 87 percent, the country is prioritising compliance resilience, supply diversification and stronger US energy linkages as part of a more strategic energy security doctrine, the firm said. India, the world’s third-largest oil consumer, is projected by the International Energy Agency (IEA) to see demand rise from 5.5 million barrels per day (bpd) in 2024 to 8 million bpd by 2035. Import dependence could increase to 92 percent by 2035 despite ongoing domestic exploration, widening exposure to external supply shocks.\n\nIndia’s imports of crude oil from Russia stood at 1.1 million bpd in January 2026, marking the lowest in more than three years, as US sanctions forced domestic refiners to scale back purchases from Moscow. The International Energy Agency (IEA) said that Russian supply declined last month, by a sizeable 350,000 bpd, as key buyers faced increased pressure from Washington and broader EU sanctions.\n\nIndia’s Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd (BPCL) and HPCL Mittal Energy (HMEL) secure Venezuelan crude amid strategic shift in India’s oil import mix, signalling reduced dependence on Russian barrels and broader supply diversification. BPCL has made its inaugural purchase of crude oil from Venezuela, while private refiner HMEL has resumed Venezuelan crude procurement after a two-year hiatus. Both companies acquired one million barrels each of Venezuela’s heavy Merey crude grade through transactions arranged by global commodities trader Vitol. The cargoes are expected to be co-loaded on a very large crude carrier to optimise freight costs, boosting India’s total Venezuelan imports to at least six million barrels through April 2026. The strategic move comes as Indian refiners adjust their crude supply mix, reportedly reducing purchases of Russian oil — a shi",
      "word_count": 15423,
      "original_language": "EN",
      "author": "Observer Research Foundation",
      "countries": [
        "IND",
        "USA",
        "RUS",
        "VEN",
        "IRQ",
        "BRA",
        "CHN",
        "OPEC",
        "UAE",
        "KWT",
        "KAZ",
        "AUS",
        "GBR",
        "JPN",
        "FRA",
        "DEU",
        "NGA",
        "SLE",
        "MYS",
        "PHL",
        "IDN",
        "MEX",
        "UKR",
        "ESP",
        "PRT",
        "CAN",
        "ZAF",
        "ARE",
        "SAU"
      ],
      "industries": [
        {
          "name": "Crude Oil & Refined Products Trading & Marketing",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Biofuels & Biomass Commodities Trading & Marketing",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Unbranded/Spot Fuels Distribution (Rack Sales)",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        {
          "name": "FX & Commodity Pricing",
          "code": "MD05",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Economic Indicators",
          "code": "MM01",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Supply-Chain Disruptions",
          "code": "RK08",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "company_mentions": [
        {
          "uuid": "000071m",
          "name": "Reliance Industries",
          "website": "https://www.ril.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00009dw",
          "name": "Trafigura",
          "website": "http://www.trafigura.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0008jf9",
          "name": "Ashoka Buildcon",
          "website": "https://ashokabuildcon.com/"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0006m9x",
          "name": "Coal India",
          "website": "https://www.coalindia.in/index-hi.html"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0000j6k",
          "name": "Chevron",
          "website": "http://www.chevron.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0005ray",
          "name": "HPCL-Mittal Energy",
          "website": "https://www.hmel.in"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0003cfd",
          "name": "Oil and Natural Gas Corporation",
          "website": "https://ongcindia.com/"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0000tkf",
          "name": "TotalEnergies",
          "website": "https://www.totalenergies.com/"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0000pkp",
          "name": "SLB",
          "website": "https://www.slb.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0000aiz",
          "name": "Indian Oil Corporation",
          "website": "https://www.iocl.com/"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00004s8",
          "name": "Eni",
          "website": "https://www.eni.com/en_IT/home.html"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0000g97",
          "name": "ONGC Videsh",
          "website": "https://ongcvidesh.com/"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0000rqj",
          "name": "Adani Total Gas",
          "website": "https://www.adanigas.com/"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0007mnd",
          "name": "Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals",
          "website": "https://mrpl.co.in"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00006ib",
          "name": "Petrobras",
          "website": "http://www.petrobras.com.br/"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0004z9e",
          "name": "Repsol",
          "website": "https://www.repsol.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0000hh4",
          "name": "Bharat Petroleum Corp.",
          "website": "https://www.bharatpetroleum.in/"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0003v4g",
          "name": "Vitol",
          "website": "http://www.vitol.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00009lw",
          "name": "Woodside Energy",
          "website": "http://www.woodside.com.au"
        }
      ],
      "article_type": "News analysis",
      "is_press_release": false,
      "is_opinion": true,
      "is_breaking": true,
      "iptc_codes": [
        "20001243",
        "20000386",
        "20000261"
      ],
      "iab_categories": [
        "110",
        "83",
        "81"
      ],
      "naics_codes": [
        "32411",
        "21112",
        "2111",
        "324110"
      ],
      "sic_codes": [
        "2911",
        "1311"
      ],
      "entities": {
        "person": [
          "youssef qeblawi",
          "justin cochrane",
          "nicolas maduro",
          "alexander novak",
          "jarand rystad",
          "chris wright",
          "donald trump",
          "joe biden",
          "sujata sharma",
          "n chandrababu naidu",
          "ashish kale",
          "brijendra pathania",
          "nitin gadkari",
          "k krishnankutty",
          "minister",
          "pralhad joshi",
          "ruth nankabirwa",
          "sanae takaichi",
          "yuliot tanjung",
          "claudia sheinbaum",
          "ethan ng",
          "cindy rondon",
          "awais leghari",
          "mark carney",
          "renato romio",
          "surabhi sharath kumar",
          "hardeep singh puri"
        ],
        "location": [
          "india",
          "asia",
          "europe",
          "africa",
          "gulf",
          "strait of hormuz",
          "china",
          "west asia",
          "us",
          "north sea",
          "goa",
          "west coast",
          "east",
          "karnataka",
          "washington",
          "brazil",
          "oman",
          "new delhi",
          "middle east",
          "african",
          "south american",
          "middle eastern",
          "south asian",
          "united states",
          "west africa",
          "turkey",
          "kazakhstan",
          "abu dhabi",
          "gujarat",
          "iran",
          "mumbai",
          "sobhasan",
          "azerbaijan",
          "ukraine",
          "russia",
          "kalol",
          "habshan",
          "mandhali",
          "mevad",
          "nigeria",
          "iraq",
          "algeria",
          "libya",
          "syria",
          "kuwait",
          "saudi arabia",
          "angola",
          "venezuela",
          "uae",
          "al-omar oilfield",
          "mutriba",
          "north & south america",
          "west qurna 2",
          "cyprus",
          "greece",
          "malta",
          "andhra pradesh",
          "jamnagar",
          "gulf countries",
          "asia pacific australia",
          "uk",
          "moscow",
          "bilaspur",
          "nagpur",
          "himachal pradesh",
          "majri",
          "chandrapur",
          "chandrapur district",
          "bhadravati tehsil",
          "kerala",
          "anuppur",
          "madhya pradesh",
          "uttar pradesh",
          "pari chowk",
          "astauli dumpsite",
          "odisha",
          "rajasthan",
          "patna",
          "bihar",
          "astauli",
          "kudankulam",
          "maharashtra",
          "uganda",
          "kyoga",
          "moroto-kadam",
          "dubai",
          "yanbu",
          "albertine graben",
          "beijing",
          "middle east gulf",
          "italy",
          "red sea",
          "orinoco belt",
          "united arab emirates",
          "taiwan",
          "japan",
          "south korea",
          "indonesia",
          "mexico",
          "sierra leone",
          "primorsk",
          "asia pacific",
          "slovakia",
          "hungary",
          "argentina",
          "british columbia",
          "karachi",
          "canada",
          "islamabad",
          "b.c.",
          "qatar",
          "buenos ​aires province",
          "pakistan",
          "the pacific coast",
          "spain",
          "port qasim",
          "cardon iv",
          "indian ocean",
          "la plata",
          "norway",
          "lagos",
          "abuja",
          "hormuz",
          "queensland",
          "bowen basin",
          "portugal",
          "france",
          "luanda city",
          "republic of angola",
          "germany",
          "mozambique",
          "south africa",
          "colombia",
          "the pacific",
          "santa marta",
          "atlantic",
          "alberta",
          "european countries",
          "the us",
          "southern hemisphere",
          "australian",
          "laos",
          "caspian sea",
          "australia",
          "south american country",
          "kashagan",
          "southeast asia",
          "mangaluru",
          "visakhapatnam",
          "padur",
          "philippines",
          "brisbane",
          "lytton refinery",
          "telangana",
          "tehran"
        ],
        "product": [
          "coal",
          "diesel",
          "oil",
          "jet fuel",
          "middle distillate",
          "evs",
          "heat pumps",
          "natural gas trucks",
          "electric vehicles",
          "internal combustion engines",
          "bharatgas lite",
          "naye bharat ka naya cylinder",
          "liquefied natural gas",
          "lpg",
          "ammonia",
          "urea",
          "cng",
          "air conditioners",
          "desert coolers",
          "air coolers",
          "prepaid smart meter",
          "arab light crude",
          "liquefied petroleum gas",
          "woodfibre",
          "lng",
          "furnace oil",
          "hillside aluminium smelter",
          "mozal aluminium smelter",
          "biodiesel",
          "solar cells",
          "fossil fuels",
          "ethanol",
          "gasoline",
          "petrol",
          "brent crude",
          "natural gas",
          "crude oil",
          "gas"
        ],
        "event": [
          "winter storm",
          "fy26",
          "iran war",
          "middle east war",
          "cop28",
          "us (united states)-iran war",
          "west asia conflict",
          "iran crisis",
          "middle east conflict"
        ]
      },
      "newsworthiness_score": 1,
      "group_id": null
    },
    {
      "id": 25811252,
      "title": "Energy News Monitor | Volume XXII, Issue 43&44",
      "url": "https://www.orfonline.org/research/energy-news-monitor-volume-xxii-issue-43-44",
      "publisher": "",
      "published_date": "2026-06-10T00:00:00",
      "sentiment": "Neutral",
      "sentiment_score": 0.4697999954223633,
      "ai_summary": "The article discusses India's ongoing reliance on coal for energy security and affordability, along with investments in cleaner coal technologies and renewables. It highlights developments in coal production, imports, and infrastructure, and India's strides in renewable energy, nuclear, and green technology strategies. ",
      "full_text": "Image Source: Pexels\n\n\n\nQuick Notes\n\nEnergy Trilemma: Role of Coal\n\nSource: Statistical Review of World Energy 2025\n\nCoal continues to play a central role in both India and China, decisively delivering affordability and energy security, two of the three pillars of the energy trilemma. While the third pillar of sustainability remains a critical shortfall, India is investing in increasing thermal efficiency, carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS), and coal gasification to reduce emissions from coal consumption and consequently improve coal’s score on the sustainability metric.\n\nIndia has prioritised domestic coal production as a cornerstone of its energy security strategy. In 2024-25, domestic coal production was over 1.04 billion tonnes, a record high underpinning a 4.9 percent increase over the last financial year. Non‑coking coal imports for 2024-25 were 169 million tonnes (MT), down 8 percent compared to imports of 183 MT in 2023-24. Imported coal blending with domestic coal fell to 5.5 MT in 2024-25 compared to 12 MT in 2023-24, a substantial 54 percent reduction. Foreign exchange savings from import reduction in 2024-25 were estimated at about US$7.93 billion. India’s coal fleet accounts for about 45 percent of the installed capacity for power generation and about 75 percent of power generation.\n\nOn affordability, there is some debate. On the one hand, we have renewable advocates who use the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) metric to argue that renewable power is cheaper than coal. Others point out the shortcomings of LCOE to claim that coal power remains cheaper than renewable power at a system level, which is important for policymakers. In the context of project finance, LCOE measures the constant electricity price a single asset must achieve, under specific assumptions, to recover costs and service debt. This is precisely the variable bankers use for debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) assessments. For assets like wind or solar farms that lack a long-term market reference for fuel prices, LCOE is used as a reliable benchmark to determine whether a given power purchase agreement (PPA) price can achieve breakeven. LCOE is an asset owner perspective that tells an investor the cost of owning and operating that specific generator. LCOE ignores all additional costs required to integrate intermittent generation into the grid, such as reserve capacity, frequency regulation, transmission and distribution expansion, and storage. Policy makers face a macro, complex, and highly interconnected electricity system, not a single project. LCOE’s inability to capture system effects could lead to systematic distortions at the macro level. Research shows that at high renewable penetration, these integration costs can reach €25-30 per megawatt hour (MWh), enough to erase or even reverse the apparent cost advantage of a particular source of energy. For example, a wind generator may have an LCOE of €30/MWh, but once the cost of grid-provided spinning reserve, storage and transmission is added, the real cost can double. This additional cost is allocated by the policymaker to the ratepayer or taxpayer. The additional cost is often allocated to the taxpayer, which sustains the narrative of a low renewable tariff for the ratepayer.\n\nFor example, some studies quote coal tariff based on LCOE metric to be comparable to, or even higher than, that of recently discovered firm and dispatchable tariffs (primarily coal), which ranged between ₹4.3–5.8/kWh (kilowatt hour). The studies draw attention to recent solar and storage tenders in India priced in the range of INR2.9–3.6/kWh, much lower than coal-based firm dispatchable power. But questions have been raised over low tariffs quoted by developers in India’s rapidly expanding battery energy storage sector. In 2025, financial and execution stress due to tariffs falling below viability benchmarks is influencing nearly 75 percent of the country’s allocated two-hour standalone battery storage capacity. Aggressive bidding (not exclusive to the renewable sector; bid low and renegotiate later is a common strategy) with unviable tariffs, along with rising supply-chain costs, are squeezing project economics. India allocated around 10.4 GW (gigawatt) of standalone BESS (battery energy storage system) capacity in 2025, while cumulative energy storage tendered capacity surged more than 13 times from 6.8 GW in 2018 to 90.7 GW by 2025. Standalone storage tenders accounted for over 71 percent of total storage capacity tendered during the year, while standalone BESS projects made up around 60 percent of capacity. Between 2022 and 2025, average standalone BESS tariffs declined by nearly 79.6 percent, while battery pack prices fell only 36.5 percent during the same period, exposing developers to rising cost pressures and weak project returns. Lithium carbonate prices in China nearly doubled by December 2025, while China’s phased withdrawal of battery export rebates from April 2026 is expected to further increase landed battery costs in India. The stress is affecting financing and project execution. A critical issue is that the import of batteries compromises energy security.\n\nAnother factor that has reinforced the affordability of coal-based power is the tax reforms introduced by the Indian government in 2025. India’s coal prices fell markedly in 2025 following the move by the GST (Goods and Services Tax) council to increase the consumption levy on coal from 5 percent to 18 percent but completely remove the INR400/tonne compensation cess. The net effect was that coal prices for power utilities fell by 8.1–19.8 percent. Power generation costs dropped by approximately INR 0.17/kWh. The reduction in coal-based power generation cost is comparable to the estimated INR 0.10/kWh decline for solar power from simultaneous GST panel tax reductions.\n\nIn India, where per-person energy consumption is about a third of the global average, the cost of power is a direct determinant of industrial competitiveness and social welfare. Since, at a system level, coal remains the most cost-effective source of baseload power, coal will remain the source of affordable energy as India targets tripling its per capita energy consumption by 2047. Beyond electricity, coal is deeply embedded in heavy industrial sectors such as steel, cement, and chemical production. In these sectors, the cost-competitiveness of coal-based heat is difficult to replace with current electrification alternatives without a significant economic burden.\n\nOn sustainability, India has allocated public funds for coal gasification and for CCUS. India's national coal gasification mission, launched in 2021, targets 100 million tonnes (MT) of coal gasification annually by 2030, supported by an initial INR85 billion (US$1.02 billion) incentive scheme. This target was subsequently adjusted to 75 MT under a significantly expanded INR375 billion (US$4.52 billion) scheme approved in May 2026, designed to mobilise INR3 trillion (US$30 billion) in investment. According to government data, as of late 2025, India's actual coal gasification output was approximately 5 MT per annum in a good year, of which about 1.8 MT comes from Jindal Steel and Power's plant at Angul. China, by contrast, gasifies over 340 MT of coal annually.\n\nIndia’s Union Budget 2026–27 has earmarked INR200 billion (US$2.4 billion) over five years for CCUS. This allocation is directed at hard-to-abate sectors such as steel, cement, power, refineries, and chemicals. India’s Net Zero 2070 strategy aims to capture 750 MT of CO₂ (carbon dioxide) by 2050. The funding is intended to bridge the gap between pilot projects and commercially viable CCUS systems, supporting demonstration plants, indigenous technology development, and international collaboration.\n\nCoal’s role in India is evolving from a simple volume-driven commodity to a resilience tool. In periods of geopolitical instability or extreme weather events, the availability of domestic coal reserves acts as an insurance policy against the price volatility seen in global gas and oil markets. Consequently, coal will continue to be the backbone of India’s energy strategy for the foreseeable future, even as the scale and relative share of renewables grow.\n\nMonthly News Commentary: Coal\n\nCoal Imports to be Reduced in a Phased Manner\n\nIndia\n\nImports\n\nCoal India Ltd (CIL) is planning a comprehensive 10-year roadmap to slash the current 243 million tonnes (MT) coal import volume through ramped-up domestic production, coal quality upgrades, and logistics cost parity. The proposed roadmap targeting coal import cuts includes a detailed forensic audit of imports, backed by sector-specific policies and phased shift strategies to boost local supply. It will include the National Washery & Logistics Grid to streamline coal washing and transport, addressing key bottlenecks in the supply chain.\n\nGovernance\n\nTwo cement companies in Meghalaya have been accused of violating prescribed norms in the transport of over 2.93 lakh metric tonnes of coal, a high court (HC)-appointed committee said in its latest report. The single-member panel of retired judge B P Katakey said that the two companies transported the dry fuel from outside the state between February 2025 and February this year \"without obtaining mandatory approvals under the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP), 2024\". Justice (Retd) B P Katakey heads the committee, appointed by the HC to oversee compliance with its directions on curbing illegal coal mining and transportation.\n\nIndia’s top solar power-producing state has once again blocked approval for a proposed 3.2 gigawatt (GW) coal-fired power project, highlighting ongoing regulatory scrutiny around new thermal power capacity amid the country’s renewable energy expansion. The state regulator reportedly withheld approval for the large-scale coal power project, citing concerns related to electricity demand projections, cost implications and energy planning priorities. India has been expanding renewable energy capacity rapidly while maintaining coal power as a critical source of baseload electricity. However, rising renewable penetration, storage expansion and changing energy economics have intensified debates around the need for new coal-fired plants.\n\nThe government has approved a proposal to list Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd (MCL) and divest up to 25 percent of stake through an initial public offering (IPO), Coal India Ltd said. The listing would happen through a combination of fresh equity issuance and disinvestment by Coal India through an offer for sale.\n\nProduction\n\nCoal India Ltd (CIL), the country’s largest coal producer, reported a 9.7 percent drop in coal production to 56.1 million tonnes (MT) in April, raising concerns over meeting the country’s surging energy demands. The slump in coal production is significant as coal remains the backbone of the country’s power generation, accounting for over 70 percent of electricity output. CIL produced 62.1 MT of coal in April 2025-26.\n\nThe Pakri Barwadih coal mining project of NTPC Ltd has achieved a milestone by surpassing 100 million tonnes (MT) of coal production since inception, it announced. Coal production at the Pakri Barwadih project operating in Barkagaon block of Hazaribag district, began in Jan 2017, while the first rail rake was dispatched in Feb 2017. The project was declared commercial on April 2019.\n\nImports\n\nCoal India Ltd (CIL) is planning a comprehensive 10-year roadmap to slash the current 243 million tonnes (MT) coal import volume through ramped-up domestic production, coal quality upgrades, and logistics cost parity. The proposed roadmap targeting coal import cuts includes a detailed forensic audit of imports, backed by sector-specific policies and phased shift strategies to boost local supply. It will include the National Washery & Logistics Grid to streamline coal washing and transport, addressing key bottlenecks in the supply chain.\n\nValue Addition\n\nNew Era Cleantech Solutions Pvt Ltd, which held a ground-breaking for its coal gasification plant at Chandrapur, has drawn plans to make coal gas-based urea at the site on priority basis. The company, which had plans to make ammonia out of coal, now wants to build the urea plant in the first phase itself. The plant is estimated to produce about 3,850 tonnes per day of urea. This is equivalent to 1.27 million metric tonnes per annum (MMTPA) based on gasification of 1.3 MMTPA of coal. If this works out, it would become the first-ever private sector coal-to-urea plant in the country. The company has written a letter to the ministry of coal seeking a clear policy framework for the coal-to-urea projects in the country, financial incentives and the viability gap funding.\n\nPricing\n\nCoal India Ltd is absorbing rising input costs to protect consumers from higher coal prices, even as expenses for key inputs, such as explosives and industrial diesel, have surged sharply following the West Asia conflict. The company said it has chosen not to pass on the increase, warning that doing so could trigger a cascading impact across sectors reliant on coal.\n\nCoal India Ltd subsidiary Bharat Coking Coal Ltd (BCCL) announced a scheme to encourage higher coal offtake and reduce costs for power consumers for buying coal during the April-June period of the current financial year. The move aims at encouraging power companies to buy more coal, speed up transport, and cut their costs. It will improve coal supply, ensure steady electricity, and support India’s self-reliance goal amid global energy issues. The scheme will apply to all eligible power sector consumers covered under the fuel supply pact, including those under the flexi-linkage scheme.\n\nAuctions\n\nThe coal ministry launched the 15th round of commercial coal Mine auctions in which a total of 11 blocks are being offered, including 7 fully explored and 4 partially explored mines. Of these, 3 mines are being offered under the Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Act, 2015 (CMSP) and 8 under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (MMDR). It includes 1 coking coal block and remaining 10 are non-coking coal blocks, catering to the requirements of key sectors such as steel and power. Additionally, 6 coal mines are also being offered of 2nd attempt of the 13th round, the ministry said.\n\nCoal India Ltd (CIL) offered 30.5 million tonnes (MT) of coal through online auctions in April, marking a 6 percent decline from 32.5 MT in March. The dip comes against the backdrop of ongoing geopolitical tensions in West Asia, a key oil-producing region, which have spiked global energy prices and prompted power plants to ramp up coal usage for energy security. According to the CIL data, of the total coal on offer by the PSU in April, Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd (MCL) auctioned 9.4 MT, followed by South Eastern Coalfields Ltd (SECL) 5.6 MT, Central Coalfields Ltd (CCL) 4.6 MT, Eastern Coalfields Ltd (ECL) 4.4 MT, Bharat Coking Coal Ltd (BCCL) 3.0 MT, among others. The state-run coal producer offered coal through the Single Window Mode Agnostic (SWMA) auction. SWMA auction is a unified, simplified e-auction system launched in 2022 to consolidate multiple existing auction windows (spot, special spot, forward) into a single platform, making coal procurement easier, more transparent, and market-driven for all buyers. CIL accounts for over 80 percent of domestic coal production.\n\nDemand\n\nUnion Coal and Mines Minister G Kishan Reddy said more than 200 million tonnes (MT) of coal stock adequate for 90 days is available in the country. He said one billion tonnes coal production was achieved in the country for the second year in a row.\n\nRest of the World\n\nWorld\n\nSeaborne thermal coal prices in Asia rallied in the wake of the US (United States) and Israeli war against Iran, but the gains are modest and nowhere near the size seen during the crisis created by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. This may seem counter-intuitive at first glance, given that thermal coal is an alternative ​to liquefied natural gas (LNG) for electricity generation, and about 20 percent of global supply of the super-chilled fuel has been lost with the effective closure of the Strait ‌of Hormuz. Seaborne thermal coal prices surged as much as 78 percent in the aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, even though there was very little disruption to supply, with the main impact being a re-routing of flows as Western buyers shunned Russian cargoes. But with the prices for spot LNG and oil-linked long-term LNG rising, thermal coal is getting more competitive.\n\nChina\n\nChina’s coal output inched down 1 percent ​year-on-year in April despite lower ‌imports and a rise in coal-fired power generation during the month, the National Bureau of Statistics data showed, indicating a continued tight supply-demand ⁠balance. April output was 385.63 ​million metric tonnes, down from a ​record high of 440.62 million tonnes in March. Output over the first four months ​of the year reached ​1.58 billion metric tonnes, down 0.1 percent compared ‌with ⁠the same period in 2025. China’s thermal electricity production, which is generated mostly by coal-fired capacity, rose ​3.1 percent in ​April ⁠and rose 3.6 percent over the first four months ​as a whole. China’s coal imports ​fell ⁠14 percent year-on-year in April to 33.1 million tonnes.\n\nRest of Asia Pacific\n\nYancoal Australia said it has agreed to acquire an 80 percent stake in the Kestrel coking coal mine in Queensland for up to US$2.4 billion, a move that strengthens its position ​as one of the country’s largest coal miners. Yancoal, which has a market capitalization of ​about US$6.77 billion, will purchase the majority stake in the Bowen Basin-based mine ⁠from private equity firm EMR Capital and Alamtri Resources Indonesia. The remaining 20 percent is held by ​Japanese trading house Mitsui & Co. Kestrel, the largest producing ⁠underground coal mine in Australia, recorded saleable production of 5.9 million tonnes in 2025, Yancoal said. The deal is expected to close by the end of the third quarter of 2026. EMR and Alamtri had bought the 80 percent stake in the coal mine from mining giant Rio Tinto for US$2.25 ⁠billion ​in 2018.\n\nAnglo American said it has agreed to sell its ​steelmaking coal mines ​in Australia to United Kingdom (UK)-based ⁠miner Dhilmar for ​up to US$3.88 billion. The deal comprises US$2.3 billion ​upfront cash and ​an earnout of up to US$1.58 ‌billion ⁠linked to coal prices, with proceeds earmarked to cut debt, ​the ​company ⁠said.\n\nAnglo American has at least three potential buyers ‌for its Australian steelmaking coal business after its unsuccessful deal with Peabody Energy for the assets. Australian miner Stanmore Resources, Japan’s Mitsubishi Corporation and ⁠Indonesia-based PT Buma Internasional Grup, are among the ​bidders for the coal assets. Peabody withdrew ​its US$3.78 billion bid for Anglo American’s Australian coking coal assets ‌in ⁠August, and the London-listed miner initiated an arbitration against the US (United States)-based coal miner. The assets up for sale include mines in Queensland’s Bowen Basin, the world’s top steelmaking coal region, ​and are ​part of ⁠Anglo’s wider plans to divest its non-core assets.\n\nNorth & South America\n\nUnited States (US) lawmakers criticized Energy Secretary Chris Wright in hearings for ordering aging coal plants to stay open, saying the action stands to raise already-high ​power bills for consumers and steelmakers. Wright’s department in December ordered two Indiana coal plants, ‌that had been planning to shut permanently, to remain open, saying they would lower the risk of blackouts and ensure access to affordable power. The CenterPoint Energy and Northern Indiana Public Service Company coal plants had planned to ​be replaced by natural gas and other power sources. Wright ⁠has ordered TransAlta to keep a coal unit open at its Centralia plant in Washington state that had been planning to retire at the end of 2025.\n\nNews Highlights: 6 – 19 May 2026\n\nNational: Oil\n\nOMCs raise petrol, diesel price by 90 paise per litre, 2nd hike in a week\n\n19 May: Oil marketing companies (OMCs) increased prices of petrol and diesel by 90 paise per litre, marking the second hike in fuel prices in under a week, amid soaring losses due to elevated crude oil prices. The oil firms had increased fuel prices by INR3 a litre on 15 May. With the latest hike, petrol costs INR98.64 a litre in the national capital, from INR97.77 a litre earlier, while diesel is priced at INR91.58 per litre in Delhi, from INR90.67 a litre. According to analysts, OMCs might look at further price hikes in the coming weeks as they are still incurring steep losses on the sale of petrol, diesel, and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) cylinders. Union Oil Minister Hardeep Singh Puri had said that OMCs’ under-recoveries in the first quarter of FY27 could rise to INR2 trillion, while losses may touch INR1 trillion, as they sell fuel at comparatively lower prices in the country. The government had reduced excise duty on petrol and diesel by INR10 per litre in late March in a bid to provide relief to consumers and support OMCs. The excise duty cut, however, was not enough to significantly reduce OMCs’ losses. The government had signalled a possible fuel price increase over the past week as OMCs’ fuel prices had remained largely unchanged even as crude traded above US$100 per barrel amid escalating tensions in West Asia.\n\nRevenue loss on LPG widens in May: Indian Oil\n\n19 May: Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) is suffering a revenue loss of INR617 (US$6.39) on the sale of ​a cylinder of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) compared to INR171 in ‌April after the Iran war pushed up the prices, its finance chief Anuj Jain said. In January-March, the company suffered a revenue loss of INR100 for the sale ​of a 14.2-kilogram cylinder of LPG, mainly used as a ​cooking fuel, he said. Indian state-run fuel retailers ⁠sell LPG for households at discounted rates. India, the world’s second-largest LPG ​importer, is grappling with its worst gas crisis in decades, with the government ​cutting supplies to industry to protect household cooking fuel needs. In 2025, India consumed 33.15 million tonnes (MT) of LPG. Imports accounted for about 60 percent of demand, with 90 percent of ​those supplies coming from the Middle East. Supplies of LPG from the Middle ​East have been disrupted by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz following the US (United States)-Israeli ‌war ⁠with Iran. The closure of the Hormuz Strait has prompted IOC to diversify its sourcing of crude, LPG and liquefied natural gas (LNG) to meet local demand. The company has about a month’s crude inventory, ​he said. IOC ⁠recently bought LNG from Oman, Nigeria, Angola and Indonesia after major suppliers in the Middle East declared force majeure, he said. By the end of the ⁠year, ​IOC hopes to expand its Panipat refinery to ​500,000 barrels per day (bpd), its Gujarat refinery to 360,000 bpd, and its Barauni plant to ​180,000 bpd, he said.\n\nBharat Petroleum reviewing oil imports daily, spot buying more amid Iran war\n\n19 May: Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd (BPCL) is recalibrating its crude import strategy ​almost daily and ramping up spot purchases after the US (United States)-Israeli conflict with Iran disrupted ‌Middle East supplies, Chairman Sanjay Khanna said. India, the world’s third-largest oil importer and consumer, has been hit by rising crude prices and supply disruptions following the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. The South ​Asian nation has raised the retail prices of petrol and diesel twice in a ​week. BPCL had planned to source about 55 percent of its crude requirement for 2026/27 ⁠through annual contracts, mainly from Middle Eastern producers, and the rest through spot markets. But force ​majeure declarations by some Gulf suppliers have pushed BPCL to increase spot buying to keep refineries ​running at 115 percent capacity, Khanna said. BPCL operates three refineries in India with a capacity to process 706,000 barrels per day (bpd) of ​oil. The ​refiner has an optional annual crude purchase arrangement ​with Brazil.\n\nIndia develops indigenous cooking gas alternative at Pune laboratory\n\n18 May: Millions of Indian households depend on LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) cylinders for daily cooking, exposing the country to significant fuel import reliance. Scientists at the CSIR-National Chemical Laboratory in Pune are developing an indigenous alternative known as Dimethyl Ether (DME), which they present as a promising substitute for LPG. DME can be produced domestically utilizing resources such as coal, biomass, and methanol, potentially reducing India’s dependence on imported fuel. Scientists involved in the project described their work as part of “India’s next-generation deep-tech innovation.” The researchers highlighted that DME’s applications extend beyond household cooking fuel, including use in LPG-run autorickshaws and as a possible replacement for diesel generators. The transition to DME will begin with blending 20 percent DME with 80 percent LPG, which could be implemented without the need for consumers to change their existing stoves or cylinders. The scientists noted that even this 20 percent blend could significantly reduce India’s LPG imports and ease pressure on foreign exchange reserves.\n\n20k tonnes LPG carrier Symi arrives in Gujarat after crossing Strait of Hormuz\n\n17 May: The Marshall Islands-flagged tanker Symi, an LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) carrier transporting nearly 20,000 tonnes of liquid propane and butane, has safely docked at Deendayal Port in Kandla. The vessel crossed the Strait of Hormuz on 13 May, marking another crucial movement of energy supplies through the key maritime route amid the ongoing Middle East crisis. The vessel has 21 crew members onboard, with eight Ukrainians and 13 Filipinos. Symi was the 11th LPG tanker to cross the Strait in the current monitored operations. According to officials, these safe passages were made possible through close coordination between DG Shipping and the ministries of external affairs, defence, and petroleum and natural gas. These shipments come at a time when global energy supplies have been under pressure due to the ongoing Middle East conflict. India’s crude reserves have shrunk sharply in the months as the Strait of Hormuz has continued to see disruptions for over 75 days, with stockpiles have dropping by nearly 15 percent. Commodities analytics firm Kpler data estimates that India’s total crude stockpile, including strategic petroleum reserves, refinery holdings and commercial storage, but excluding pipeline stocks, has fallen to 91 million barrels from 107 million barrels recorded at the end of February, when the conflict began. At current consumption levels of about 5 million barrels a day, India’s available crude inventory is estimated to cover nearly 18 days of demand, according to Kpler’s calculations.\n\nDelhi cuts VAT on aviation turbine fuel to 7 percent\n\n17 May: The Delhi government reduced the value added tax (VAT) on aviation turbine fuel (ATF) from 25 percent to 7 percent for a period of six months, citing rising financial pressure on the aviation sector amid recent global geopolitical developments. Announcing the cabinet decision, Chief Minister (CM) Rekha Gupta said the move was aimed at maintaining Delhi’s economic competitiveness and supporting aviation, tourism and logistics activities in the Capital. ATF accounts for nearly 40 percent of airlines’ operational costs, with airlines currently paying both VAT and central excise duty on fuel purchases from oil companies. The government said high tax rates have a direct impact on ticket prices and the financial health of airlines. She said VAT on ATF contributes nearly INR13.68 billion annually, accounting for around 19 percent of Delhi’s total annual VAT collection.\n\nIndia, other oil importers to bilaterally negotiate transit corridors with Iran: Moody’s\n\n17 May: India and other oil importing nations are likely to negotiate bilaterally to secure energy supplies, potentially through coordinated transit corridors, but a return to pre-war traffic volumes is unlikely in 2026, Moody’s Ratings has said. In a global report on geopolitical risks, Moody’s said there is little prospect of a swift and durable settlement between the US (United States) and Iran and with it the full reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. Moody’s said the transit flows will gradually improve, but through bilateral channels rather than a general reopening. This would allow some incremental improvement in energy transit flows from near-zero now, but the process will be slow, opaque and subject to interruption.\n\nAbu Dhabi to ramp up crude storage, India’s reserve may go up 70 percent\n\n16 May: India’s crude security is all set to get a boost with its reserve likely to increase by nearly 70 percent from 5.3 million tonnes (MT), as the UAE’s Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) has agreed to ramp up crude oil storage to as much as 30 million barrels. The UAE already has leased storage capacity at Mangalore in India, where it keeps nearly 6 million barrels, or around eight lakh tonnes, of crude. Ramping up the storage to 30 million barrels will add over four million tonnes of crude to India’s overall strategic reserves. India currently has a strategic petroleum reserve of 5.3 MT at Visakhapatnam, Mangalore and Padur, which equals around 38 million barrels. ADNOC has signed an agreement with Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) to expand LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) supply and trading opportunities for the widely used cooking gas in India. The deal will be an extension of an existing LPG term contract signed between the two energy companies in 2023 and is likely to support a long-term LPG sale and purchase agreement.\n\nIndia’s Russian oil supply likely to be hit if US waiver not extended\n\n15 May: India’s crude oil supply from Russia is likely to be impacted if the US (United States) does not renew the sanctions waiver on the purchase of petroleum products from Moscow, according to industry experts and refinery executives. Under the latest US waiver, countries have been allowed to purchase Russian crude oil and petroleum products until 16 May that were loaded onto vessels on or before 17 April. The US has not renewed the waiver as of now.\n\nMaharashtra government reduces vat on jet fuel from 18 percent to 7 percent\n\n15 May: The Maharashtra government reduced value added tax (VAT) on aviation turbine fuel (ATF) or jet fuel from 18 percent to 7 percent for a period of six months. The decision comes at a time when fuel prices across the country have risen by INR3 due to elevated crude oil prices, supply disruption concerns in the Gulf region, and the weakening rupee. As per the notification issued under the Maharashtra Value Added Tax (MVAT) Act, 2002, the revised VAT rate will come into effect from 15 May 2026, and remain applicable till 14 November 2026.\n\nOMCs have reduced fuel supplies to retail outlets: Rajasthan petrol pump dealers\n\n14 May: Petrol pump dealers in Rajasthan have alleged that oil marketing companies (OMCs) have reduced fuel supplies to retail outlets and imposed informal limits on sale of petrol and diesel to consumers. They warned that the move could lead to law and order problems at fuel stations. Rajasthan Petroleum Dealers Association said dealers were being informed through mobile messages and verbal instructions to restrict fuel sales to individual consumers. According to the Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) association general secretary Shashank Korani allegedly directed dealers to limit diesel sales up to INR50,000 and petrol sales up to INR5,000 per consumer, while Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd (BPCL) allegedly capped sales at 49 litres of petrol and 200 litres of diesel. Similar restrictions were allegedly communicated by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd (HPCL), it said.\n\nConsumers lock agency over LPG shortage in Beed\n\n14 May: Agitated consumers locked an LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) agency in Beed, protesting a shortage in gas cylinder supply and not receiving refills despite booking online and making advance payments. Echoing similar concerns, a woman said she had to spend INR300 on an autorickshaw just to visit the agency. Another customer said he was initially promised delivery on 9 May but was later asked to wait till 26 May. Responding to the situation, Beed district supply officer Shivkumar Swamy said panic buying had led to temporary disruptions at some agencies. Swamy said the district had adequate LPG stocks for domestic and commercial use, urging consumers not to resort to panic buying.\n\nHimachal Pradesh governor announces ‘Petrol-Free Sundays’ at Lok Bhawan\n\n14 May: Himachal Pradesh governor Shiv Pratap Shukla has announced a ‘Petrol-Free Sunday’ initiative at Lok Bhawan as part of efforts to promote fuel conservation and encourage environmentally responsible practices. The move comes amid increasing focus on reducing fuel consumption and promoting sustainable transportation habits across government institutions. Under the initiative, the use of petrol and diesel vehicles at Lok Bhawan will be restricted on Sundays, with officials and staff encouraged to adopt alternative transport methods such as walking, cycling or electric vehicles wherever possible. The campaign is aimed at creating awareness around fuel savings and environmental sustainability. Industry experts believe awareness campaigns around fuel conservation could become increasingly important as rising fuel demand, global oil price volatility and climate concerns continue shaping India’s energy policy discussions.\n\nFuel prices may rise if West Asia war drags on: RBI governor\n\n13 May: India may need to increase retail fuel prices if the conflict in the West Asia drags on, Reserve Bank of India (RBI) governor Sanjay Malhotra said. His remarks came after Prime Minister (PM) Narendra Modi urged voluntary austerity, including cutting down on petrol and diesel use and putting off gold purchases, to preserve foreign exchange reserves. India’s inflation edged up to 3.48 percent in April from 3.40 percent in March, coming in lower than expected as the government absorbed higher crude costs. However, risks remain as rising energy prices from the West Asia conflict weigh on the outlook. Supply-chain disruptions in the region are beginning to hit India.\n\nShip with 16k MT LPG cuts through Hormuz to reach Maharashtra port\n\n9 May: Confidence Petroleum, one of the country’s largest private cooking gas bottlers, has steered one vessel with 16,000 million tonnes (MT) of LPG through the Strait of Hormuz flanked by naval boats, and is docked in Maharashtra’s Devgad port. Confidence Petroleum hopes that easing of supplies would help slash prices of auto LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) and cooking gas. The navy has so far escorted 10 Indian-flagged vessels with LPG and crude through the conflict zone. The shipping company agreed to sail through Strait of Hormuz after an assurance of naval protection, and the vessels were carefully steered out as there was a risk of being struck by warring nations. With the ship carrying cooking gas from a UAE (United Arab Emirates) company adding to the vessels reaching India, Confidence hinted at a further slashing of prices in coming days. After an initial round of hikes following the West Asia crisis, the company recently cut rates of both auto LPG and cooking gas — from INR121/ litre, the rate of auto LPG was brought down to INR99/litre. Cooking gas prices too were slashed from INR220/kilogram (kg) during the peak of the crisis to INR145/kg. The company is open to further cut rates to ease the burden on consumers. Of the 16,000 MT of LPG, around 8,000 MT would be set aside for Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd (BPCL). After that, Confidence would have enough stock to last for 10 days. Currently, two ships of Confidence Petroleum remain stranded in the Strait of Hormuz. However, vessels have now picked up speed. In March, the company brought two ships with 50,000 MT of LPG originally bound for China in a mid-sea deal, offering a hefty premium as compared to the earlier buyer. The company has purchased two vessels from the US (United States), one of which is expected to reach India this month, with the other in June.\n\nParliamentary panel to review domestic output of petroleum products on 15 May\n\n7 May: India’s parliamentary panel on petroleum and natural gas is set to review the domestic production of fuels on 15 May, as the country faces energy supply constraints amid the West Asia war-triggered disruptions. The review comes amid strained domestic availability of petroleum products, especially cooking gas. The government maintains that the availability petrol and diesel is comfortable, but liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) remains affected due to the crisis that has led to the blockage of West Asia’s crucial energy shipment pathway, the Strait of Hormuz. Concern over low stocks and anticipation of an increase in prices of petrol and diesel has led to instances of panic buying in several parts of the country. India is a major producer of petrol and diesel, and has the fourth largest refining capacity in the world. It is, however, dependent on imports for nearly 90 percent of its crude oil requirement, 60 percent for LPG and about 55 percent for liquefied natural gas (LNG). While India has significantly diversified its sourcing of crude oil over the past few years, the shortage remains severe in LPG since it imports about 90 percent of its cooking gas requirement from West Asia, and these supplies have been choked due to the Strait of Hormuz blockade for over two months. The government has put curbs to manage the LPG crunch. There is a cap in place for bookings—urban households can book a cylinder only after 25 days of the previous booking, while the gap for rural households is 45 days. The parliamentary panel will review availability of fertilizers and its required inputs amid persisting concerns over high prices and availability of fertilizers and natural gas for the production of fertilizers during the upcoming kharif crop season.\n\nIndia’s RIL to shut some units at 660k bpd refinery\n\n6 May: India’s Reliance ​Industries Ltd (RIL) will shut ‌some units at its 660,000 barrels ​per day (bpd) ​refinery for 3-4 weeks ⁠for maintenance ​after Nayara Energy ​resumes operations later this month, the petroleum ​ministry ​said. RIL plans to shut a crude unit ​and ​some ⁠secondary units at its ​660,000 bpd ⁠refinery for routine maintenance.\n\nIndia’s HPCL buys 2 mn barrels of Oman crude\n\n6 May: India’s Hindustan ​Petroleum Corporation Ltd (HPCL) has bought ‌two million barrels of Oman crude ​for delivery in ​July, traders said. HPCL bought the ​oil from Vitol ​at a discount of 10-20 cents to the ​June dated Brent ​price, traders said. The companies ‌typically ⁠do not comment on their commercial deals. Oman crude is ​exported ​from ⁠the terminal at Mina Al ​Fahal outside ​of ⁠the Strait of Hormuz.\n\nNational: Gas\n\nIGL hikes CNG prices for second time in 48 hours\n\n17 May: Indraprastha Gas Ltd (IGL) has increased CNG (compressed natural gas) prices across its network by INR1/kg (kilogram). This marks the second increase in 2 days and pushes Delhi’s CNG price past the INR80/kg mark for the first time, while rates at IGL stations in Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan have also gone up. With the latest revision, CNG in Delhi costs INR80.09/kg, up from INR79.09/kg after the earlier nationwide INR2/kg hike announced on 15 May. Following the latest revision, CNG prices now stand at INR88.70/kg in Noida, Greater Noida and Ghaziabad, while Gurugram’s revised rate is INR85.12/kg.\n\nIndia declines Russian LNG under sanctions, talks continue on permitted cargoes\n\n11 May: India has declined Russia’s offer ​to sell it liquefied natural gas (LNG) subject to US (United States) sanctions despite a shortfall driven by Middle East tensions, leaving a tanker bound for India in limbo as talks continue on permitted cargoes. The stance highlights the fine balance the world’s third-biggest oil importer and consumer is seeking to strike between securing energy supplies and avoiding LNG cargoes on which the US has ​placed sanctions, which are harder to disguise and carry greater compliance risk. It also underscores the limits of Moscow’s ability ​to pivot its LNG exports to new markets. India’s reluctance has left an LNG cargo from Russia’s US-sanctioned Portovaya ⁠plant in the Baltic Sea unable to discharge, despite indicating India as its destination in mid-April. The ​vessel was tracked despite documentation suggesting the cargo was non-Russian. India, the biggest buyer of Russian seaborne crude, conveyed its decision not to buy LNG that was under sanction to Russia’s Deputy Energy Minister Pavel ​Sorokin during his 30 April visit, when he met Indian officials including Petroleum and Natural Gas Minister Hardeep Singh Puri. It was their second meeting in as many months, and Sorokin could return in June for further talks. India’s purchases of Russian crude have meanwhile continued unabated, aided by a temporary waiver of US sanctions introduced to help countries cope with an energy crisis resulting from the US-Israeli war on Iran, which began on 28 February. India is open to buying authorised ​Russian LNG, but most of those volumes are committed to Europe. Moscow is seeking long-term deals to supply India with LNG and fertilisers such as potash, phosphorus and urea. Before the Iran conflict disrupted shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, India was meeting half of its ⁠gas consumption ​through imports, about 60 percent of which had come through the waterway. More than ​half of its crude supplies came the same way. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi urged people to conserve fuel and foreign exchange by working from home, limiting foreign ​travel and reducing imports of gold and edible oil.\n\nOdisha government notifies City Gas Distribution Policy to boost PNG, CNG infra\n\n8 May: The Odisha City Gas Distribution (CGD) Policy, 2026, notified by the state government, seeks to facilitate faster implementation of piped natural gas (PNG) and compressed natural gas (CNG) and related infrastructure through a streamlined, time-bound approval mechanism. Notified by the Housing and Urban Development department recently, the policy aims to promote natural gas as a cleaner and environment-friendly fuel for domestic, commercial, industrial and transport sectors in line with the vision of ‘Viksit Odisha’ and India’s clean energy transition goals. The policy provides for single-window clearance mechanisms, standardised permission charges, GIS-based underground utility mapping, priority allotment of land for CNG stations and City Gate stations, and inclusion of PNG pipeline provisions in building plans and urban master plans. Odisha has already authorised five CGD entities - GAIL (India) Ltd, Gail Gas Ltd, BPCL, Adani Total Gas and Megha Gas - to cover all 30 districts of the state. Around nine lakh domestic PNG connections and 271 CNG stations have been planned under the committed work programme, with an estimated investment potential of nearly INR51 billion. The policy lays down roadmap for smooth implementation of the expansion plan. To encourage rapid expansion of CGD infrastructure, the state government has waived permission and supervision charges for pipeline laying till 31 March 2027. The policy emphasises safety standards, emergency response mechanisms, uninterrupted supply of PNG and CNG as essential services and promotion of Compressed Biogas (CBG) initiatives in association with local bodies.\n\nNational: Coal\n\n3.2 GW coal project faces fresh setback as regulator withholds approval\n\n18 May: India’s top solar power-producing state has once again blocked approval for a proposed 3.2 gigawatt (GW) coal-fired power project, highlighting ongoing regulatory scrutiny around new thermal power capacity amid the country’s renewable energy expansion. The state regulator reportedly withheld approval for the large-scale coal power project, citing concerns related to electricity demand projections, cost implications and energy planning priorities. India has been expanding renewable energy capacity rapidly while maintaining coal power as a critical source of baseload electricity. However, rising renewable penetration, storage expansion and changing energy economics have intensified debates around the need for new coal-fired plants.\n\nGovernment clears proposal for MCL listing, Coal India to divest up to 25 percent stake\n\n15 May: The government has approved a proposal to list Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd (MCL) and divest up to 25 percent of stake through an initial public offering (IPO), Coal India Ltd said. The listing would happen through a combination of fresh equity issuance and disinvestment by Coal India through an offer for sale.\n\nCoal India auctions dip 6 percent to 30.5 MT in April amid West Asia energy shock\n\n11 May: Coal India Ltd (CIL) offered 30.5 million tonnes (MT) of coal through online auctions in April, marking a 6 percent decline from 32.5 MT in March. The dip comes against the backdrop of ongoing geopolitical tensions in West Asia, a key oil-producing region, which have spiked global energy prices and prompted power plants to ramp up coal usage for energy security. According to the CIL data, of the total coal on offer by the PSU in April, Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd (MCL) auctioned 9.4 MT, followed by South Eastern Coalfields Ltd (SECL) 5.6 MT, Central Coalfields Ltd (CCL) 4.6 MT, Eastern Coalfields Ltd (ECL) 4.4 MT, Bharat Coking Coal Ltd (BCCL) 3.0 MT, among others. The state-run coal producer offered coal through the Single Window Mode Agnostic (SWMA) auction. SWMA auction is a unified, simplified e-auction system launched in 2022 to consolidate multiple existing auction windows (spot, special spot, forward) into a single platform, making coal procurement easier, more transparent, and market-driven for all buyers. CIL accounts for over 80 percent of domestic coal production.\n\nNational: Power\n\nNTPC achieves 90 GW installed capacity milestone\n\n18 May: NTPC Group has crossed the milestone of 90 GW (gigawatt) in installed power generation capacity following the successful completion of trial operations of Unit 2 (800 MW) at Patratu Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd (PVUNL) in Jharkhand. The addition marks another key step in NTPC’s expansion as India continues to scale electricity generation capacity to meet rising power demand. The latest capacity addition came from PVUNL, a joint venture between an NTPC subsidiary, which holds a 74 percent stake, and Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd, which owns the remaining 26 percent. The project comprises three units of 800 MW each and is aimed at supplying reliable and affordable power using advanced technologies and improved resource efficiency. With the commissioning, NTPC Group operates more than 90 GW of installed capacity across the country and has around 32 GW under construction.\n\nChhattisgarh adds 220 kV double-circuit line, power boost for 5 districts\n\n17 May: Chhattisgarh State Power Transmission Company has energised a new 220 kilovolt (kV) double-circuit line from power grid’s 765 kV Dhamdha substation to the state grid to improve power supply capacity across five districts. The new Dhamdha-Gaindpur line will significantly increase the capacity to receive power from the central grid, making the supply more reliable and quality-driven. The move increases the number of available 220 kV lines for this network from three to five. The project will help ensure uninterrupted power supply in Rajnandgaon, Kawardha, Mungeli, Bemetara, and Balodabazar-Bhatapara districts. The system will also maintain supply continuity even during technical faults on the route, aiding industrial, agricultural, and domestic consumers.\n\nEvening peak triggers outages as Punjab power demand surges\n\n15 May: Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd (PSPCL) recorded a generation shortfall of 1,265 megawatt (MW) during peak evening hours, triggering scheduled load-shedding across parts of the state amid a sharp rise in power demand. According to PSPCL’s power supply position report for 12 May, Punjab’s peak demand touched 10,227 MW, compared with 9,143 MW on the corresponding date last year — an increase of nearly 12 percent.\n\nGERC draft rules put BESS at centre of Gujarat grid\n\n15 May: The Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission (GERC) has released draft regulations for grid-interactive Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS), formally recognizing battery storage as generation-linked, transmission-linked, distribution-linked and standalone grid assets. The draft framework allows standalone BESS developers to independently participate in energy markets, ancillary services and bilateral contracts. GERC said the regulations aim to improve grid flexibility, reliability, stability and renewable energy integration while addressing intermittency challenges associated with renewable energy sources. Under the proposed regulations, BESS may be deployed for congestion management, peak demand management, renewable energy balancing, reserve support, voltage regulation, frequency support and energy arbitrage. The draft allows multi-use battery systems supporting multiple grid functions simultaneously and permits transmission and distribution licensees to evaluate battery storage as an alternative to conventional network augmentation. The State Load Despatch Centre (SLDC) will oversee scheduling, dispatch and control of all grid-connected BESS projects. The framework formally recognises battery systems installed under net metering, gross metering and related consumer arrangements.\n\nMadhya Pradesh cabinet nod must for future power purchase deals\n\n15 May: The Madhya Pradesh Power Management Company Ltd (MPPMCL) has decided that all future long-term and medium-term power purchase agreements (PPAs) and power supply agreements (PSAs) will require prior approval from the state cabinet before implementation. The decision was taken during a recent board meeting of the power management company and is being seen as a significant policy shift aimed at increasing transparency and accountability in the energy sector. Till now, such agreements were approved at the board level of the company. The state government currently has nearly 1,795 PPAs of varying durations and capacities, with a combined contracted capacity of around 26,012 MW. The existing arrangements have helped Madhya Pradesh maintain uninterrupted power supply and function as an energy-surplus state.\n\nGHRC wants report on smart power meter rollout\n\n12 May: The Goa Human Rights Commission (GHRC) took suo motu cognisance of a news report on government’s mandatory smart electricity meter rollout and sought a report from the chief electrical engineer of the electricity department. The commission said the report prima facie raised concerns of human rights violations and directed the chief electrical engineer to submit a reply by 2 June. The electricity department and power minister recently said replacing existing digital meters with smart meters is mandatory for all consumers. The department issued a public notice urging consumers to cooperate with the installation process. The department said the upgraded meters would enable access to real-time billing data and promote efficient energy use. Several consumers have written to the department opposing the replacement of functional meters, while others have submitted representations over the installation of smart meters. Power Minister Ramkrishna Sudin Dhavalikar said the project cost exceeds INR8.90 billion, with INR8.20 billion to be borne by state government and INR700 million by central government through gross budgetary support.\n\nPrivate distribution licences could spell danger for state discoms\n\n12 May: Private power distribution licences for large commercial and industrial customers, similar to the one secured by Google’s data centre in Visakhapatnam, could be a red flag for already struggling state discoms (distribution companies). Power sector experts suggest that commercial and industrial (C&I) customers contribute about 55-60 percent of discom revenues, and though the policy in Andhra Pradesh is the first of its kind, a larger trend towards private licences could cause stress. The gross debt of state discoms stood at INR7300 billion as of March 2025, driven by working capital borrowings, losses and liquidity support schemes, ICRA data showed. While losses have improved in recent years due to higher subsidies and lower power purchase costs, the rating agency expects profitability pressures to continue in FY26 and FY27 because of inadequate tariff hikes, rising interest costs and elevated power purchase expenses, it said.\n\nAt 4.5 GW, Mumbai hits new all-time peak power demand high\n\n11 May: Days after its peak power demand hit an all-time high of 4,372 megawatt (MW) last month, Mumbai breached the record once again at 4,540 MW. Tata Power and Adani Electricity could together generate only 865 MW and the remaining 3,675 MW had to be drawn from outside the city. The sharp gap between local generation and actual demand highlights a structural challenge for Mumbai, where peak consumption has hovered between 4,000 MW and 4,400 MW in recent years and is projected to rise to 5,000 MW in the coming years. To strengthen supply reliability, a 1,000 MW high-voltage direct current link was commissioned, giving Mumbai’s transmission capacity a major boost. This increased the city’s external power intake capacity by 50 percent. Consumers have been encouraged to shift usage to non-peak hours through ‘time of day’ tariffs, a dynamic pricing model in which rates vary with demand, with a benefit of 50 paise per unit offered for off-peak consumption.\n\nJharkhand Urja Sancharan Nigam move to curb power cuts in 7 districts\n\n9 May: Residents across the Santhal Pargana, Dhanbad and Giridih areas are set to receive consistent power supply following a major infrastructure breakthrough. The Jharkhand Urja Sancharan Nigam Ltd (JUSNL) has energised a single-circuit line-in line-out (LILO) of the 220 kilovolt (kV) Govindpur-Dumka transmission line at the NKTL (North Karanpura Transmission Ltd) grid substation in Dhanbad. The commissioning is expected to provide substantial relief from power cuts in several districts, as the state is now equipped to receive up to 450 megawatt (MW) of power from the NKTL. At present, Dumka region draws around 103 MW through the link, while the Govindpur grid substation gets nearly 80 MW.\n\nUttar Pradesh government scraps smart prepaid meter system, shifts all consumers to postpaid mode\n\n8 May: The Uttar Pradesh (UP) government has decided to discontinue the smart prepaid electricity meter system across the state and convert the already-installed devices to postpaid with immediate effect, Energy Minister A K Sharma said. The move comes amid growing protests in several districts over alleged excess billing and irregularities linked to smart prepaid meters installed under the Revamped Distribution Sector Scheme (RDSS). The decision was taken following directions from Chief Minister (CM) Yogi Adityanath in view of consumer convenience and grievances.\n\nSupreme Court rules against tariff burden for unused power projects\n\n8 May: The Supreme Court of India has ruled that electricity consumers cannot be made to bear tariff liabilities for power plants that were never commissioned or failed to supply electricity. The judgment came in a case concerning recovery of charges linked to non-operational power projects and the passing of such costs to end consumers through electricity tariffs. The court observed that consumers cannot be burdened with costs for projects that did not become functional or generate electricity under the agreed framework. The ruling is expected to impact tariff recovery mechanisms adopted by power distribution companies and regulators in similar cases involving stranded or delayed projects. The matter involved fixed charges and tariff-related claims arising from power projects that remained non-operational. The court held that such financial liabilities cannot automatically be transferred to consumers where electricity supply obligations were not fulfilled. The judgment may have implications for ongoing disputes between power generators, distribution companies and regulatory bodies over recovery of costs linked to stalled infrastructure assets. Several power projects in India have faced delays due to financing issues, fuel shortages, land acquisition hurdles and regulatory clearances. The ruling is likely to influence future power purchase agreements and tariff approval processes in the sector, particularly in cases involving project delays or failure to commence operations.\n\nIndia’s power demand to rise by 5 to 5.5 percent in FY27: ICRA\n\n7 May: Rating agency ICRA said power demand will rise by 5.0-5.5 percent in 2026-27 as against a tepid one percent growth in 2025-26, supported by continued momentum in industrial and commercial activity. The country’s power demand growth in 2026-27 is likely to be supported by agricultural and household sectors given the expectation of sub-par rainfall amidst a potential El Nino, along with demand from industries as well as from emerging sources like electric vehicles and data centres, ICRA said. The book losses of the distribution companies at the all-India level improved in 2024-25 over 2023-24. The gross debt for state-owned discoms (distribution companies) reduced to INR7.1 trillion as of March 2025 from INR7.4 trillion as of March 2024, it stated. The tariff orders for 2026-27 have been issued in 17 out of 28 states as of April 2026, it noted. ICRA expects the cash gap per unit for the discoms at the all-India level could remain high at 30-33 paise per unit in 2026-27 in case of limited tariff hikes and increased power purchase costs amid addition of relatively higher tariff-based capacities, it stated. ICRA’s outlook for the power distribution segment remains Negative amid limited tariff hikes and continued loss-making operations, it stated.\n\nKPTCL sets target to complete Kadandale 400 kV power substation project by 15 July\n\n6 May: Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Ltd (KPTCL) has set a target to complete the strategically important Kadandale 400 kilovolt (kV) power substation project by 15 July, aiming to ensure uninterrupted and quality power supply to the coastal districts of Dakshina Kannada and Udupi. The target has been fixed by the KPTCL (Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited) following the directions of State Energy Minister K J George. The project, located at Kadandale village in Moodbidri taluk of Dakshina Kannada district, had remained stalled for nearly three years due to land-related litigation affecting the 400 kV transmission line works.\n\nNational: Non-Fossil Fuels/ Climate Change Trends\n\nMaharashtra signs MoUs with four companies for 25 GW nuclear power projects\n\n19 May: Maharashtra took a major step towards clean energy expansion as the state government signed memorandums of understanding (MoU) with four leading companies for 25,400 megawatt (MW) nuclear power generation projects with investments of INR6.5k billion. Chief Minister (CM) Devendra Fadnavis said the companies will conduct a survey of the project sites for which the department of the state government will cooperate and provide assistance. The government signed MoUs with NTPC Ltd, Adani Power, Reliance Industries Ltd, and Lalitpur Power Generation Company Ltd of the Bajaj Group.\n\nCentre approves INR55 bn scheme for floating solar projects with battery storage\n\n19 May: The Expenditure Finance Committee (EFC) under the finance ministry has approved a proposed INR55 billion scheme focused on floating solar projects integrated with battery energy storage systems (BESS). The proposal will be forwarded to the Union Cabinet for final approval as India accelerates efforts to strengthen energy security and expand renewable energy capacity. The initiative is aimed at encouraging states and project developers to deploy floating solar installations along with battery storage infrastructure across the country. Floating solar systems are installed on reservoirs and other water bodies, which may to help reduce pressure on land availability while improving solar generation performance due to the cooling effect of water surfaces. The approval comes amid growing concerns over global energy security linked to geopolitical tensions and ongoing instability in West Asia. Rising uncertainty around fossil fuel supplies has intensified India’s focus on scaling domestic renewable energy generation and reducing dependence on imported fuels.\n\nCentre clears 13 lakh rooftop solar installations under ULA model\n\n18 May: The government has approved the installation of nearly 13 lakh rooftop solar systems across 10 states and Union Territories under the Utility-Led Aggregation (ULA) model to accelerate residential solar adoption under the PM Surya Ghar: Muft Bijli Yojana. The approved projects are expected to add around 4.9 gigawatt (GW) of rooftop solar capacity and will be implemented through distribution companies (discoms), involving an estimated investment of around INR85 billion. The ULA model enables discoms or designated agencies to aggregate consumer demand and oversee large-scale rooftop solar deployment, helping reduce upfront complexity for households and improve implementation efficiency. The approved states and Union Territories include Jammu & Kashmir, Ladakh, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Assam, Meghalaya, Nagaland and Lakshadweep. The initiative is expected to improve electricity access and encourage renewable energy adoption, especially in regions where rooftop solar penetration has remained relatively low.\n\nKanpur to make entry in list of top solar power energy districts of India\n\n17 May: The city is heading towards marking its entry in the list of top solar power energy districts of the country. The 225 megawatt (MW) solar power project established by NTPC Green Energy at Dodwa Jamauli in Bilhaur Tehsil is a big centre of Green Energy. This project ranks among the leading solar energy initiatives in Uttar Pradesh and is generating clean energy on a large scale. It is the largest solar project in the state to be operated at a single location. According to energy experts, the clean energy generated by this project has resulted in a reduction of approximately 1.96 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions to date. This is being hailed as a major achievement in the realm of environmental conservation. Experts believe that projects of this nature will strengthen a non-fossil-fuel-based energy system in the\n\nMadhya Pradesh pushes solar beyond sunset with battery and hydro-backed storage\n\n15 May: Madhya Pradesh is betting on stored solar energy to solve one of renewable power’s biggest challenges — electricity after dark — with new battery and pumped hydro-backed projects capable of powering lakhs of homes. Rewa Ultra Mega Solar Ltd (RUMSL), the state agency developing major solar parks, invited bids for two solar projects with a combined capacity of 250 megawatt (MW). Unlike conventional solar plants that generate electricity only during daytime, the new projects are designed to provide assured power supply during evening peak hours as well. The projects are technology-agnostic, allowing developers to choose suitable storage systems and set up facilities either inside or outside the solar parks depending on technical feasibility. The projects are aimed at providing stable and reliable renewable power to Madhya Pradesh Power Management Company Ltd (MPPMCL). The state had earlier recorded low tariffs in its Morena solar-with-storage project, encouraging authorities to expand similar models further. According to RUMSL, the broader renewable energy and storage programme forms part of India’s clean energy targets under its COP-26 commitments.\n\nIndia has 11k GW geothermal heat potential, 450 GW power capacity\n\n15 May: India has an estimated geothermal heat potential of 11,000 GW (gigawatt) and a possible geothermal power generation capacity of around 450 GW, according to a report released by Project InnerSpace in partnership with the Council on Energy, Environment and Water. The report highlighted India’s untapped geothermal resources and their potential role in supporting the country’s growing industrial, cooling and electricity demand while easing pressure on the power grid. The report noted that geothermal deployment in India has so far remained limited to pilot projects due to exploration risks. However, India possesses several geothermal hotspots across regions such as Ladakh, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Chhattisgarh and parts of Gujarat and Maharashtra, which could support future clean energy development. India has primarily focused on solar, wind and hydropower expansion so far, while geothermal energy remains largely underexplored. Industry experts said large scale deployment would require stronger policy support, exploration investment and drilling infrastructure.\n\nVaranasi ranks 10th in solar rooftop installation\n\n15 May: Uttar Pradesh (UP) has emerged as a frontrunner in rooftop solar installations under the PM Surya Ghar Muft Bijli Yojana and Varanasi claimed 10th position, while Lucknow is at the top nationwide. The city is carving out a new identity in the field of green energy with rooftop solar panel installation, surpassing several major metros. A total of 39,018 rooftop solar plants have been installed in Varanasi so far.\n\nThird unit of Yadadri thermal power station gets commissioned\n\n13 May: The third unit of Yadadri thermal power station (YTPS) was successfully commissioned. The Telangana Power Generation Corporation Ltd (TG Genco) is establishing the thermal power plant with five units, each with a capacity of 800 MW and a total installed capacity of 4,000 megawatt (MW) at Veerlapalem Village, Damaracherla Mandal, Nalgonda district. The project consists of two units of 800 MW each in Stage-I and three units of 800 MW each in Stage-II. The third unit was operated continuously for 72 hours, generating an average power of 811.99 MW against the rated capacity of 800 MW, according to TG Genco.\n\nTata Power in talks with 3 states for its nuclear power project plan\n\n12 May: Tata Power is in discussions with three states over its nuclear power projects, for which it is currently undertaking a feasibility study and expects a detailed project report (DPR) in the next six months. The company is engaged with the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL) for its nuclear project plans.\n\nIndia to shrink zones around nuclear reactors to free up land\n\n11 May: India plans to reduce the size of ​exclusion zones around nuclear plants to free up significant amounts of land for reactor expansions, in a move ‌to attract private investment that is likely to face backlash from opposition parties and the public. At present, all nuclear reactors in India have a minimum buffer of about 1 kilometre (0.62 miles) around reactors where no habitation or economic activity is allowed, a provision meant to keep radiation risks at a distance. India’s atomic energy regulator and the Department of Atomic Energy have approved an \"in principle\" plan to reduce these buffers. The changes are likely to be included in final rules that are due to ​be published in the next couple of months after the country opened its nuclear generation sector to private and foreign players last year. India aims ⁠to expand nuclear capacity to 100 gigawatt (GW) by 2047 from about 8 GW at present as part of its clean energy strategy. With smaller exclusion zones, a 10-reactor nuclear ​complex with 700 megawatt (MW) of capacity each could be set up within less than 700 hectares, the presentation showed. India's existing nuclear plants typically use around 1,000 hectares of land.\n\nGovernment mulls incentives to boost floating solar panel installation\n\n11 May: The government is mulling incentives for the installation of floating solar panels to ensure that renewable energy capacity is added nationwide and does not remain concentrated in a few states. New and Renewable Energy Secretary Santosh Sarangi said that the energy transition that India has envisioned focuses on affordability, availability and sustainability. He noted that the NITI Aayog projects by 2050, we would require 1,800 gigawatt (GW) of RE (renewable energy), along with a similar quantum of battery energy storage systems (BESS), that is about 2,000 gigawatt hour (GWh) of BESS. He suggested that renewable energy installations, which are only happening in states like Rajasthan and Gujarat, need to be decentralised. Taking note of the issue of renewable energy curtailment, he said that the issue needs to be addressed on a very urgent and priority basis. India will be substantially investing in green energy corridors to tackle the issue of grid stability that is required for induction of renewable energy, he said, while emphasising the critical need to strengthen transmission infrastructure to support India’s expanding renewable energy capacity. Reducing costs will require a combination of technological innovation, improved efficiencies and scaled investments across the renewable energy value chain, he said.\n\nIndia shaping global change through renewable energy expansion: Environment Minister\n\n11 May: India is uniquely positioned to emerge as a global leader by combining innovation with resilience, economic growth with sustainability and development with social inclusion, Union Environment Minister Bhupendra Yadav said. He said that the country is the world’s fastest-growing major economy and is helping shape global change through renewable energy expansion, digital public infrastructure, start-up growth and manufacturing.\n\nNTPC to approach Centre with feasibility report for its first nuclear power plant\n\n11 May: NTPC Ltd will soon approach the Centre with the feasibility report for its first nuclear energy plant in the country, as India looks to increase its atomic power capacity from the current 9 gigawatt (GW) to 100 GW by 2047. NTPC has completed a feasibility study in one of the 14 states where it intends to set up nuclear energy plants over next few years, while work on at least two more is underway. They added that the power giant has also identified land for a nuclear power plant in Bihar’s Banka district and received state’s nod to prepare a detailed project report. NTPC has set a target of setting up 30 GW of nuclear power capacity across 14 states by 2047. Approval from the Centre will pave the way for the public sector undertaking to begin work on its first standalone nuclear project, as it aims to achieve at least 2 GW of nuclear capacity by 2032. The standing site selection committee of the department of atomic energy reviews such proposals and, if found technically feasible, forwards them to AEC (Atomic Energy Commission) for further processing.\n\nNHPC commissions fourth unit of Subansiri Lower Hydroelectric Project, reaches 1 GW\n\n9 May: Commercial operation of the fourth unit (250 MW) of NHPC’s 2,000 MW (8x250 MW) Subansiri Lower Hydroelectric Project (SLHEP) located in Arunachal Pradesh and Assam started. With the commissioning of this unit, SLHEP has achieved a total operational capacity of 1,000 megawatt (MW) out of its planned 2,000 MW capacity, marking a milestone in the project’s phased commissioning. The remaining units are expected to commissioned within the targeted timelines. The Subansiri project was initially planned to be completed by December 2012.\n\nJBVNL plans to buy additional 100 MW of wind power\n\n7 May: In an effort to enhance renewable energy sources, Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd (JBVNL) has decided to procure 100 megawatt (MW) of wind power. The project is intended to support the discom (distribution company) in satisfying its renewable purchase obligation (RPO) mandates. Under the RPO framework established by the Jharkhand State Electricity Regulatory Commission, wind energy represents a compulsory category that discoms must satisfy, based on a specific percentage of their overall energy consumption. JBVNL intends to obtain the additional capacity through either short- or long-term supply contracts with qualified developers or power traders. Based on the expression of interest (EOI), a fundamental requirement is that energy must originate from wind installations that reached their commercial operation date (COD) on or after 31 March 2024.\n\nCoal India commissions 100 MW solar power plant in Gujarat’s Banaskantha district\n\n6 May: Coal India Ltd (CIL) has successfully commissioned a 100 megawatt (MW) solar power plant in Gujarat, marking a significant step towards expanding its presence in the renewable energy sector. The company received the official commissioning certificate on 4 May 2026, from the Gujarat Energy Development Agency (GEDA). The solar project is located at Bhadramali village in Deesa taluka of Banaskantha district. As per the certification, the plant has been operational with effect from 31 March 2026. This development highlights Coal India’s ongoing efforts to diversify its energy portfolio beyond conventional coal-based power generation. With this project, CIL is taking a concrete step towards sustainability while supporting the country’s transition to greener energy sources. The move reinforces the importance of solar power in meeting rising electricity demand in an environmentally responsible manner.\n\nInternational: Oil\n\nItaly’s government to extend cut in fuel excise duty\n\n19 May: Italy will prolong a cut in fuel excise duties due ​to expire on 22 May as part of efforts to ‌curb the spike in energy prices due to the war in the Middle East, top members of Prime Minister (PM) Giorgia Meloni’s government said. The European Commission rebuffed calls from Italy for more lenient budget rules ‌on ⁠energy-related spending, saying member states should tackle the negative impact of the Iran war by using existing resources and tools. Italy has so far spent around €1 billion (US$1.16 billion) to cut excise duties on petrol ​and diesel pump ​prices. The measure ⁠was introduced in March and first extended in late April. Being highly dependent on imported energy, Italy is particularly ​vulnerable to supply disruptions linked to the U.S.-Israeli conflict ​with Iran.\n\nAustralia’s Santos achieves first oil at Alaska project\n\n18 May: Santos, ​Australia’s no.2 oil and gas producer, said it had achieved first oil from the first phase of its Pikka development project in the US (United States) state of Alaska. The Pikka project is ‌expected ⁠to reach a gross production plateau of 80,000 barrels of oil per day in the third quarter of fiscal 2026, with first sales revenue seen two to three ​months following first ​oil, Santos ⁠said.\n\nChina’s April oil throughput hits lowest since August 2022, inventories rise\n\n18 May: China’s April crude oil throughput fell to the lowest since ‌August 2022, as the Iran war curbed refinery runs in the world’s second-largest oil consumer. Refinery throughput fell 5.8 percent from a year earlier to 54.65 million metric tonnes, or about 13.3 million barrels per ​day (bpd), the National Bureau of Statistics data showed. Throughput in the first four months dropped ​0.5 percent from a year earlier to 238.95 million metric tonnes, or 14.54 million ⁠bpd, according to the data. Chinese refiners' average crude processing utilisation rate slipped to 63.59 percent in April, ​down 4.7 percentage points from a year earlier, and was down 5.13 percentage points from March, according ​to Chinese consultancy Oilchem. The run cuts were due to negative oil-processing margins, and Chinese independent refineries are expected to deepen the cuts in May despite Beijing urging small refiners to maintain fuel production. Some of the smaller refiners had to shut their plants for maintenance in May. Although ‌refinery operating ⁠rates in China declined, refiners raised gasoline and diesel yields. Combined with demand destruction from higher oil prices, this pushed gasoline and diesel inventories higher, Oilchem report said. China’s April oil imports dropped 20 percent year-on-year to 38.47 million tonnes, or 9.36 million bpd, hitting the lowest level in almost four years, a ​steeper decline than the drop in oil throughput. China’s oil production in the first four months was 72.74 million tonnes, or ⁠4.43 million ​bpd, down 0.5 percent compared with a year earlier.\n\nIraq exported 10 mn barrels of oil through Strait of Hormuz in April\n\n16 May: Iraq exported 10 million barrels of oil via the Strait of Hormuz in April, down from about 93 million ​barrels monthly before the Iran war, the country’s new Oil Minister Basim Mohammed said. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz due to the Iran war has curtailed oil exports from Saudi Arabia, the UAE (United Arab Emirates), Kuwait and Iraq, sending ​prices sharply higher. Iraq is currently producing ​1.4 million barrels per day (bpd). The country’s crude exports through the Kirkuk–Ceyhan oil pipeline resumed in ​March, after Baghdad and the Kurdistan Regional Government agreed on restarting flows. Baghdad is in talks with Ankara on a new cooperation agreement ​covering upstream and downstream projects, expanding on a previous deal that was limited to crude exports, ‌ the Minister said. Iraq plans to engage with OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) to ​boost the country’s production ​and export capacity, ⁠the Minister said. Baghdad aims to reach a production capacity of 5 million bpd through this dialogue.\n\nRising diesel costs from Iran war strain United States school budgets\n\n16 May: Soaring diesel prices since the onset of the Iran war are draining already tight US (United States) school district budgets, making it more expensive to bus students and run generators in a shock officials say they will not be ​able to afford for long. School districts from Yakima, Washington, to Waco, Texas, are tapping emergency funding reserves to keep buses running. In remote Alaska, officials are scrambling to secure enough ‌fuel to keep the lights on. The stress reflects one of many knock-on impacts of the US-Israeli war on Iran, which has disrupted the flow of around a fifth of the world’s oil supplies. US school bus ​operators are major buyers of diesel, consuming more than 800 million gallons of diesel annually, according to the American School Bus Council.\n\nUAE’s new oil pipeline push to double export capacity bypassing Hormuz\n\n15 May: The United Arab Emirates (UAE) will accelerate construction of a new ​oil pipeline to double its export capacity via the port of Fujairah by 2027, ‌vastly expanding its ability to bypass the Strait of Hormuz. Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Sheikh Khaled bin Mohamed bin Zayed directed the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) to fast-track the West-East Pipeline project during an executive committee meeting, ADMO said. The pipeline is under construction and expected to start operating next year. Since the outbreak of the Iran war, Tehran has significantly expanded its definition of the strait ​and, consequently, the maritime area it claims control over. The existing Abu Dhabi Crude Oil Pipeline (ADCOP), also known as the Habshan-Fujairah pipeline, can carry up to 1.8 million barrels per day (bpd) and has proved crucial as ​the UAE seeks to maximise exports from the Gulf of Oman coast, just outside the strait. The UAE and Saudi Arabia are the only Gulf producers with pipelines ​that export crude outside the strait. Oman has a long coastline on the Gulf of Oman, while Kuwait, Iraq, Qatar and Bahrain are almost wholly reliant on the waterway for shipments. ADNOC ​is targeting 5 million bpd of capacity ⁠by next year, a goal brought forward by three years. It said in May 2024 that capacity had reached 4.85 million bpd and has not provided an update since. The UAE produced just under 3.4 million bpd in January ​before the war, but ⁠output more than halved after the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz forced ADNOC to shut in some production.\n\nArgentina’s YPF registers US$25 bn oil project for RIGI investment scheme\n\n15 May: Argentina’s energy firm YPF said ​the company has requested a large ‌investment tax scheme known as RIGI apply to a US$25 billion oil project aimed at accelerating development ​of the Vaca Muerta shale formation. The ​project, known as LLL, represents Argentina’s ⁠most significant oil export program and is ​the largest to be submitted under the ​Incentive Regime for Large Investments (RIGI), according to CEO (chief executive officer) Horacio Marin. LLL Oil targets production of 240,000 ​barrels of crude per day from ​2032 with drilling 1,152 wells, with all output directed ‌for ⁠export.\n\nAngola aims to hold oil output steady over next year: Petroleum Minister\n\n14 May: Angola aims to hold its oil output steady over the next year, its Petroleum Minister Diamantino Azevedo said. Higher prices from its crude exports due ‌to the Iran war are helping to offset increased costs for imported fuels. The African nation left producer group OPEC in 2024 over a disagreement about output ​quotas, although production since has fallen from 1.16 million barrels per ​day (bpd) in 2024 to 1.07 million bpd in 2025, ⁠according to the International Energy Agency (IEA). Angola is developing more oil refining capacity that will help it become self-sufficient and turn into an exporter of fuels, he said. The Cabinda refinery is working at 30,000 ​bpd and another 30,000 bpd of capacity at the ​plant will ⁠be added later, he said. Construction of the Lobito refinery, being developed by state oil company Sonangol and due to be ⁠the country’s ​largest at 200,000 bpd, is about half ​complete and expected to be finished by 2029, he said.\n\nRussia’s oil output down 460k bpd year-on-year in April: IEA\n\n13 May: Russia’s crude oil production declined by 460,000 barrels per day (bpd) in April from the same month a year ago to around 8.8 million bpd, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said, as Ukraine ramped ​up drone attacks on energy targets. Crude exports, meanwhile, increased by 250,000 bpd from ​March to 4.9 million bpd, as disruptions in Gulf supplies caused by ⁠the Iran war attracted new buyers for Russian oil. Since March, Ukraine has unleashed waves of drone ​strikes on some of Russia’s biggest oil ports and attacked refineries in an effort to ​drain Moscow’s war economy. Russian oil output peaked in the late 1980s but cratered after the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union due to a lack of investment. It recovered in ​the 2000s and 2010s reaching a post-Soviet peak in 2019 just before the COVID-19 pandemic. The IEA said the rebound was driven by higher seaborne shipments via the Baltic Sea - an increase of ​190,000 bpd from March - and a partial resumption of Druzhba pipeline flows ​to Hungary ⁠and Slovakia, which reached 60,000 bpd in the final week of April.\n\nVietnam imports more fuel to offset oil shortfall amid Iran war\n\n13 May: Vietnam ramped up imports of refined oil products after the outbreak of the Iran war ‌to offset a drop in crude supplies for the country’s refineries, customs data shows. The shift helped the Southeast Asian industrial hub cushion the impact of the Gulf crisis. But it also contributed to an unusual trade deficit for the export-reliant economy and a sharp rise in consumer prices, which jumped 5.46 percent in April, ​above the 4.5 percent target set by the government. In the March to April period, Hanoi increased its imports of refined oil ​products by nearly 17 percent from a year earlier by volume and by 144 percent in dollar terms, ⁠according to data. The country purchased more from Malaysia and South Korea to offset falling fuel ​shipments from Singapore and China. Imports of Malaysian oil products nearly doubled to 403,000 tons, surpassing China as Vietnam’s third-largest provider of refined oil products. Vietnam’s imports of refined oil products after the outbreak of the Iran war increased from South Korea and Malaysia, more than offsetting drops in shipments from Singapore and China\n\nLibya aims to restart Ras Lanuf oil refinery within a year: NOC\n\n13 May: Libya aims to restart its 220,000 barrel per day (bpd) Ras ​Lanuf oil refinery within six to 12 months ‌to supply the domestic market, National Oil Corporation (NOC) chairman Masoud Suleman said. The refinery, Libya’s largest, ​has been idle since 2013 amid an arbitration ​dispute between NOC and its Emirati partner in ⁠the plant Trasta. NOC said it had signed ​a final agreement with Trasta to end the partnership, ​transferring the Ras Lanuf complex and refinery to full Libyan ownership and control. Libya’s oil sector, the ‌country’s ⁠main source of income, has faced repeated disruption from local and wider political unrest since the 2011 NATO-backed uprising that toppled Muammar Gaddafi. The 120,000 ​bpd Zawiya refinery ​shut due ⁠to nearby clashes. Suleman said output from Ras Lanuf would mainly serve the domestic market ​and be marketed by NOC subsidiary Brega ​Oil ⁠Company. NOC expects initial run rates of about 200,000 bpd, gradually ramping up to full capacity, he added. The ⁠refinery ​will run on Libya’s Amna crude ​grade.\n\nGlobal oil supply to plunge below demand this year due to Iran war: IEA\n\n13 May: Global oil supply will fall short of ‌total demand this year as the Iran war wreaks havoc on Middle East oil production and drains inventories at an unprecedented pace, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said, upending its earlier outlook calling for a surplus. The US (United States) and Israel’s war with Iran, subsequent damage to Iran and its Gulf neighbours' oil infrastructure and the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz have caused the largest oil supply crisis ​in history in the IEA’s view, sending oil prices skyrocketing. OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) in a report highlighted falling output as the Iran war constrains exports from some of its top producers in the Middle East. The ​IEA forecasts imply that supply will come in 1.78 million bpd below total demand in 2026, erasing a 410,000 bpd surplus projected in last month’s report and a close to 4 million bpd surplus in its December report.\n\nSouth Korea’s SK Energy advances crude unit turnaround to mid-May\n\n11 May: South Korea’s SK Energy has brought forward the maintenance of a crude ​unit at its Ulsan refinery to mid-May ‌from end-May. The No. 5 crude distillation ​unit (CDU), with a processing capacity of ​260,000 barrels per day (bpd), will be shut ⁠for about a month. SK Energy’s Ulsan refinery complex consists of five ‌CDUs ⁠with a total processing capacity of 840,000 bpd. Two other CDUs at the site are currently shut. The company plans to restart the 170,000 bpd ​No. 3 ​CDU in ⁠mid-May, which was shut in early April after the refinery’s crude ​supply was disrupted by the US (United States)-Israeli ​war ⁠with Iran. Works on the 60,000 bpd No. 1 CDU, which was shut in ⁠late ​March, will last until mid-June.\n\nJapan to receive first Central Asian crude oil since Iran war started\n\n11 May: Japan’s ‌industry ministry said a tanker carrying Azerbaijani crude oil was set to arrive as early as with the first cargo of oil received from Central Asia since the Iran war began in February. Before the US (United States)-Israeli war with Iran ​broke out in late February, Japan relied on the Middle East for ​about 95 percent of its crude oil imports. Iran’s retaliatory shutting ⁠of most tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz has curtailed those shipments, ​requiring the country to seek alternative supply. Japan’s refineries were largely designed to process ​Gulf crude to meet growing fuel demand during its economic expansion after World War Two. Japan has imported oil from Azerbaijan before but the cargo arriving at Yokohama and ​bound for Eneos would be the first since the Iran war started, Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry said. Japan has turned to the US, aside from other sources, and imported a crude oil cargo from Russia’s Sakhalin-2 project that was exempted from sanctions. Japan largely stopped importing crude oil from Russia and joined sanctions against it ​after Moscow’s full-scale invasion ​of Ukraine in ⁠2022. Japan has opened its oil stockpiles to deal with the Middle East shortfall, releasing enough for about 50 ​days of consumption on 16 March, later adding around five days' ​worth of ⁠consumption from joint stockpiles and tapping another 20 days' worth from 1 May.\n\nStrait of Hormuz disruption could push oil market recovery into 2027: Saudi Aramco CEO\n\n11 May: Disruption to oil exports ​via the Strait of Hormuz is threatening to delay the market’s return to normal until 2027, ‌Saudi Aramco CEO (chief executive officer) Amin Nasser warned. The recovery could drag ​into 2027 if the situation continues until mid-June, Nasser said. The impact of the Iran ⁠war, including the effective closure of the strait, has already been called the biggest disruption to the energy ​market in history. The market is losing around 100 million barrels of oil a week, Nasser said. Aramco has ramped up exports via the East-West ​pipeline to the Red Sea port of Yanbu to help sustain some 60-70 percent of its crude export volumes.\n\nTurkey set to receive its first shipment from US emergency oil stash\n\n11 May: A cargo of crude oil loaded from the United States (US) Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) is ​heading to Turkey, the first shipment of US emergency ‌reserve oil to the Mediterranean country, ship tracking data showed. The US is in the process of releasing 172 million barrels from the SPR ​in a bid to combat spiking crude prices, as ​the war in Iran has upended global supplies with the ⁠critical chokepoint, the Strait of Hormuz, remaining largely closed. ​The move is part of a coordinated effort by the International Energy ​Agency to release a record 400 million barrels of oil to quell rising prices.\n\nOPEC oil output hits new low in April on Hormuz export disruption\n\n11 May: The Organization ​of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) oil output dropped further in April to the lowest ‌in more than two decades, a survey found, as the US (United States)-Israeli war with Iran effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz and forced export cuts. Crude output by the 12-member OPEC in April fell by 830,000 barrels ​per day (bpd) month-on-month to 20.04 million bpd, the survey found. Eight members of the OPEC+ producer group, which includes OPEC plus allies ​including Russia, had agreed to resume oil production hikes in April, although the outbreak of the Iran war on 28 February and effective Hormuz closure made it impossible to deliver on ​the agreement. Kuwait experienced the group’s biggest drop in production in April, reflecting ​a whole month of disruption to exports, the survey found. Saudi Arabia and Iraq had ‌further ⁠declines, although the United Arab Emirates (UAE) was the only Gulf member able to increase production. Like Saudi Arabia, the UAE has an export route bypassing Hormuz and tanker data shows higher UAE exports in April. April’s output is the lowest ​by OPEC since ​at least 2000, ⁠excluding membership changes since then according to surveys, and is significantly below the levels reached during the COVID-19 pandemic ​in 2020 when demand collapsed. Besides the UAE, which left OPEC ​with effect ⁠from 1 May, Venezuela and Libya raised output during April, the survey found.\n\nTwo more crude oil tankers exit Strait of Hormuz with trackers switched off\n\n11 May: Two more tankers laden with crude exited the Strait of Hormuz with trackers switched off to avoid ‌Iranian attacks, Kpler shipping data showed, underscoring a rising trend to sustain Middle East oil exports. The very large ​crude carrier (VLCC) Basrah Energy loaded 2 million ​barrels of Upper Zakum crude from Abu Dhabi ⁠National Oil Company (ADNOC)’s Zirku terminal on 1 May and exited the Strait of Hormuz on 6 May, the data showed. The Panama-flagged vessel offloaded its cargo at the Fujairah Oil Tanker Terminals on 8 May, according to the data. ADNOC and its buyers have recently sailed several tankers loaded ​with crude through ​the Strait ⁠of Hormuz in a bid to move oil stranded in the Gulf ​by the Middle East conflict.\n\nUS issues new sanctions over Iran's oil shipments to China\n\n11 May: The United States (US) government announced sanctions against three people and ​nine companies, including four based in Hong Kong and four in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), for ‌aiding Iran’s shipment of oil to China. The ninth company is based in Oman. The US Treasury move follows sanctions announced on individuals and companies aiding Iranian purchases of weapons and components used to make drones and ballistic missiles. It comes days before US President Donald Trump’s planned ​meeting with Xi Jinping, where he is expected to press the Chinese leader to help resolve the standoff ​with Iran and reopen the critical Strait of Hormuz. Treasury said the new designations by the Office ⁠of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) were aimed at individuals and entities that helped Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps sell and ​ship its allotment of Iranian oil to China using a series of front companies. Treasury ‌said ⁠the IRGC relies on shell companies to arrange and receive payment for its allotment of Iranian oil shipments. It said action builds on sanctions imposed in July 2025 on Golden Globe, a Turkey-based company that Treasury said handles hundreds of millions of dollars in IRGC oil sales annually. Dubai-based ​Ocean Allianz Shipping LLC and Sharjah-based Atic Energy FZE, which facilitated shipments of Iranian ​oil on five ⁠sanctioned shadow fleet tankers in 2025.\n\nLibya’s Zawiya oil refinery shut due to nearby clashes\n\n8 May: Libya’s largest functioning oil refinery has been closed and ‌an emergency declared after clashes erupted near the facility in Zawiya, west of the capital Tripoli, the refinery’s operator said. The refinery, around ​40 km (25 miles) west of Tripoli, has a capacity of 120,000 ​barrels per day (bpd). It is connected to the country’s 300,000 ⁠bpd Sharara oilfield. Operator Azzawiya Oil Refining Company said ​it was forced to shut the plant completely and evacuate all tankers ​from the port after heavy shelling linked to the clashes struck multiple locations inside the facility. Libya’s National Oil Corporation (NOC) said that several heavy-calibre projectiles landed ​in various parts of the oil complex but there had been no ​significant damage so far. Clashes had intensified and spread into the residential area adjacent to ‌the ⁠refinery, increasing risks to the facility and surrounding areas, NOC said. NOC said the refinery had been shut and all tankers evacuated from the port as a precautionary measure, and that fuel supplies to Tripoli and surrounding ​areas had not ​been affected.\n\nAsia gets first Mexican fuel oil cargo in 9 months after Mideast disruption\n\n8 May: Asia received its first fuel oil cargo from Mexico in nine months, with more to follow, as higher Asian prices draw supply after the loss of Middle East cargoes due to the Iran war, according to shipping data. The incoming cargoes from Mexico will ease some concerns about declining ​inventories in Asia’s trading and bunkering hub Singapore, after the Iran conflict choked off most ​fuel oil supplies from key exporters in the Middle East like Iraq and ⁠Kuwait via the Strait of Hormuz. Fuel oil traders said that strong Asian prices are pulling cargoes to Asia while ‌there is ⁠excess supply in the Americas.\n\nSingapore’s oil product stocks hit over nine-month lows as US-Iran war cuts supply\n\n7 May: Oil product stocks in Asia’s oil hub Singapore hit their lowest in more ​than nine months after the US (United States)-Iran war curtailed Middle East crude and fuel exports. Combined ‌onshore oil product stocks totalled 44.83 million barrels in the week to 6 May, the lowest since late July 2025, Enterprise Singapore data showed. Stocks for light and middle distillates - gasoline, diesel and jet fuel - slid while residual fuel inventories held near a one-year low as imports from the Middle ​East remained near zero. Residual fuel inventories - the most stored oil product in Singapore storage tanks that typically goes into ​ships as marine fuel - totalled 19.88 million barrels, up 387,000 barrels on the week, hovering near the 50-week ⁠low of 19.488 million barrels in the previous week. Fuel oil traders have been sourcing more supplies from the West after the war crimped shipments from key Middle Eastern exporters such as Iraq and Kuwait. Middle distillates stocks fell 844,000 barrels to 10.077 million barrels from, though they held above last ​year’s average of 9.55 million barrels. The city-state turned into a net gasoil importer for the first time in almost three months, as total imports rose ‌more ⁠than two times from a week earlier, while total exports fell by 5 percent from a week earlier.\n\nKentucky governor to cut gasoline tax as war-driven price surge continues\n\n6 May: Kentucky governor Andy Beshear has moved to reduce the state’s gasoline tax by 10 cents as residents continue to ​grapple with rising prices at the pump as a result ‌of the US (United States)-Israeli conflict with Iran. The Democratic governor said he would postpone a 0.6 cent per gallon increase in the state’s current 26.4 cent tax, which had ​been due to take effect July 1, and that together ​the moves will save state residents roughly US$1.7 million a month. Kentucky residents ​pay US$4.317 on average at the pump, according to the American Automobile ​Association. A month ago, during the early stages of the Iran conflict, they were ‌paying US$3.910 ⁠on regular gasoline. The national average retail price of gasoline surpassed US$4.50 a gallon for the first time since July 2022, GasBuddy data showed.\n\nInternational: Gas\n\nUS LNG export plant gas flows set to hit 16-week low despite expected return of Golden Pass\n\n19 May: The amount of natural gas flowing to the nine big United States (US) liquefied natural gas (LNG) export plants ‌looked set to hit a 16-week low even though QatarEnergy/Exxon Mobil’s Golden Pass plant in Texas was on track to return, according to financial company LSEG data. The US became the world’s biggest LNG exporter in 2023, surpassing Australia and Qatar, as surging global prices fed ​demand for more low-cost US gas. That US gas has become increasingly important in meeting growing demand for energy around ​the world in recent years as supply disruptions linked to Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine and the ⁠US-Israeli war with Iran caused global gas prices to spike. Average gas flows to US LNG export plants fell from a monthly ​record high of 18.8 billion cubic feet per day (bcfd) in April to 16.9 bcfd so far in May, according to data, ​due to spring maintenance reductions at several plants, including the Golden Pass and Freeport LNG’s export plant in Texas. On a daily basis, LNG feedgas was on track to fall from 16.3 bcfd to 15.1 bcfd, the lowest since 27 January. One billion cubic feet is enough ​gas to supply around five million US homes for a day.\n\nNorway’s Equinor sign’s 5-year gas supply deal for Germany with Eneco\n\n19 May: Norway’s Equinor said it has signed a five-year ​gas supply agreement with Dutch ‌energy firm Eneco for deliveries to its Germany subsidiary. The agreement to supply Eneco’s German ​subsidiary LichtBlick covers an annual ​vol",
      "word_count": 15540,
      "original_language": "EN",
      "author": "Observer Research Foundation",
      "countries": [
        "IND"
      ],
      "industries": [
        {
          "name": "Coal Ash & Byproducts Management (CCRs, Fly Ash, Bottom Ash, Gypsum)",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Cross-Border Trading & Interconnector Access (Congestion, Nominations, Wheeling)",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        {
          "name": "Consumer Behaviour & Spending",
          "code": "MM05",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Geopolitical Risk",
          "code": "RK01",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Operational Milestones",
          "code": "SD04",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Policy & Legislative Changes",
          "code": "RC02",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "company_mentions": [
        {
          "uuid": "00007wu",
          "name": "Adani Power",
          "website": "http://www.adanipower.com/"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "000071m",
          "name": "Reliance Industries",
          "website": "https://www.ril.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00061ms",
          "name": "Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited",
          "website": "https://www.hindustanpetroleum.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0006ci9",
          "name": "GAIL",
          "website": "http://www.gailonline.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0000aiz",
          "name": "Indian Oil Corporation",
          "website": "https://www.iocl.com/"
        }
      ],
      "article_type": "News analysis",
      "is_press_release": true,
      "is_opinion": false,
      "is_breaking": true,
      "iptc_codes": [
        "20000258",
        "20000261",
        "20000387",
        "20000386"
      ],
      "iab_categories": [
        "110",
        "81"
      ],
      "naics_codes": [
        "212115",
        "22",
        "523160"
      ],
      "sic_codes": [
        "1220",
        "4900",
        "6221"
      ],
      "entities": {
        "person": [
          "b p katakey",
          "g kishan reddy",
          "anuj jain",
          "chris wright",
          "hardeep singh puri",
          "sanjay khanna",
          "rekha gupta",
          "shashank korani",
          "sanjay malhotra",
          "shiv pratap shukla",
          "shivkumar swamy",
          "narendra modi",
          "ramkrishna sudin dhavalikar",
          "yogi adityanath",
          "a k sharma",
          "devendra fadnavis",
          "k j george",
          "santosh sarangi",
          "bhupendra yadav",
          "surya ghar muft bijli yojana",
          "giorgia meloni",
          "basim mohammed",
          "diamantino azevedo",
          "horacio marin",
          "sheikh khaled bin mohamed bin zayed",
          "admo",
          "masoud suleman",
          "muammar gaddafi",
          "amin nasser",
          "xi jinping",
          "donald trump",
          "andy beshear"
        ],
        "location": [
          "india",
          "china",
          "meghalaya",
          "angul",
          "chandrapur",
          "hazaribag district",
          "barkagaon block",
          "west asia",
          "pakri barwadih",
          "queensland",
          "ukraine",
          "asia",
          "us",
          "russia",
          "iran",
          "united states",
          "the world",
          "delhi",
          "indiana",
          "australia",
          "washington state",
          "united kingdom",
          "bowen basin",
          "centralia",
          "uk",
          "indonesia",
          "japan",
          "north & south america",
          "nigeria",
          "oman",
          "gujarat",
          "middle east",
          "angola",
          "brazil",
          "kandla",
          "panipat",
          "strait of hormuz",
          "pune",
          "barauni",
          "gulf",
          "deendayal port",
          "mangalore",
          "visakhapatnam",
          "padur",
          "abu dhabi",
          "moscow",
          "maharashtra",
          "uae",
          "beed",
          "lok bhawan",
          "hormuz",
          "rajasthan",
          "himachal pradesh",
          "gulf region",
          "united arab emirates",
          "devgad port",
          "haryana",
          "noida",
          "uttar pradesh",
          "ghaziabad",
          "gurugram",
          "europe",
          "odisha",
          "baltic sea",
          "portovaya",
          "mina al ​fahal",
          "jharkhand",
          "chhattisgarh",
          "dhamdha",
          "kawardha",
          "rajnandgaon",
          "mungeli",
          "punjab",
          "bemetara",
          "madhya pradesh",
          "balodabazar-bhatapara",
          "dhanbad",
          "mumbai",
          "giridih",
          "santhal pargana",
          "andhra pradesh",
          "dumka region",
          "udupi",
          "dakshina kannada",
          "moodbidri taluk",
          "union territories",
          "kadandale village",
          "ladakh",
          "assam",
          "jammu & kashmir",
          "nagaland",
          "lakshadweep",
          "uttarakhand",
          "varanasi",
          "kanpur",
          "dodwa jamauli",
          "bilhaur tehsil",
          "lucknow",
          "damaracherla mandal",
          "nalgonda district",
          "veerlapalem village",
          "italy",
          "arunachal pradesh",
          "deesa taluka",
          "bhadramali village",
          "banaskantha district",
          "14 states",
          "banka district",
          "bihar",
          "iraq",
          "alaska",
          "kuwait",
          "saudi arabia",
          "waco, texas",
          "baghdad",
          "yakima, washington",
          "ankara",
          "beijing",
          "qatar",
          "bahrain",
          "argentina",
          "cabinda",
          "gulf of oman",
          "lobito",
          "fujairah",
          "tehran",
          "vaca muerta",
          "washington",
          "yakima",
          "libya",
          "malaysia",
          "singapore",
          "south korea",
          "hungary",
          "vietnam",
          "slovakia",
          "hanoi",
          "israel",
          "yokohama",
          "ulsan",
          "turkey",
          "yanbu",
          "red sea",
          "mediterranean",
          "central asia",
          "azerbaijan",
          "venezuela",
          "hong kong",
          "tripoli",
          "zawiya",
          "zirku",
          "sharara",
          "kentucky",
          "mexico",
          "texas",
          "americas",
          "golden pass",
          "sharara oilfield",
          "germany",
          "norway",
          "dutch"
        ],
        "product": [
          "lithium carbonate",
          "coal",
          "cement",
          "steel",
          "urea",
          "ammonia",
          "kestrel coking coal mine",
          "liquefied natural gas",
          "lng",
          "petrol",
          "diesel",
          "liquefied petroleum gas",
          "lpg",
          "kestrel",
          "crude",
          "dimethyl ether",
          "butane",
          "symi",
          "dme",
          "methanol",
          "liquid propane",
          "autorickshaws",
          "atf",
          "aviation turbine fuel",
          "jet fuel",
          "petroleum products",
          "gold",
          "cooking gas",
          "auto lpg",
          "fertilizers",
          "natural gas",
          "potash",
          "cng",
          "phosphorus",
          "png",
          "edible oil",
          "piped natural gas",
          "compressed natural gas",
          "bess",
          "electric vehicles",
          "subansiri lower hydroelectric project",
          "slhep",
          "gasoline",
          "lll",
          "azerbaijani crude oil",
          "drones",
          "ballistic missiles",
          "gasoil",
          "lichtblick"
        ],
        "event": [
          "west asia conflict",
          "israeli war against iran",
          "iran war",
          "west asia war",
          "us-israeli war on iran",
          "war in the middle east",
          "world war two",
          "us-iran war",
          "us-israeli war with iran"
        ]
      },
      "newsworthiness_score": 1,
      "group_id": 364242
    },
    {
      "id": 25319863,
      "title": "EOG Resources (EOG) boosts Q1 2026 earnings and output with strong U.S. growth",
      "url": "https://www.stocktitan.net/sec-filings/EOG/10-q-eog-resources-inc-quarterly-earnings-report-dd9955541eea.html",
      "publisher": "",
      "published_date": "2026-05-05T20:25:14",
      "sentiment": "Positive",
      "sentiment_score": 1,
      "ai_summary": "EOG Resources reported strong Q1 2026 financial results, with total operating revenue of $6,921 million, a 22% increase from $5,669 million in Q1 2025, driven by higher crude oil, NGL, and natural gas revenues. Net income rose to $1,980 million ($3.70 diluted EPS) from $1,463 million ($2.65) in the prior-year period, while total production increased to 124.5 MMBoe from 98.1 MMBoe, reflecting growth from the Utica and Permian Basin. The company declared a quarterly cash dividend of $1.02 per share and maintained a debt-to-total-capitalization ratio of 20%.",
      "full_text": "EOG Resources (EOG) boosts Q1 2026 earnings and output with strong U.S. growth\n\nKey Figures Total operating revenue: $6,921 million Net income: $1,980 million Diluted EPS: $3.70 per share +5 more 8 metrics Total operating revenue $6,921 million Three months ended March 31, 2026; up from $5,669 million in 2025 Net income $1,980 million Three months ended March 31, 2026; versus $1,463 million in 2025 Diluted EPS $3.70 per share Q1 2026 diluted earnings per share; $2.65 in Q1 2025 Operating cash flow $2,966 million Net cash provided by operating activities in Q1 2026 Exploration and development spend $1,603 million Exploration and development expenditures in Q1 2026 Total production 124.5 MMBoe Crude oil equivalent volumes for three months ended March 31, 2026 Cash and cash equivalents $3,849 million Balance at March 31, 2026 Debt-to-total-capitalization 20% Ratio at March 31, 2026; 21% at December 31, 2025 Key Terms mark-to-market financial commodity and other derivative contracts, Total Debt-to-Total Capitalization, Performance Units, asset retirement obligations, +2 more 6 terms mark-to-market financial commodity and other derivative contracts financial \"EOG recognized net gains on the mark-to-market financial commodity and other derivative contracts of $113 million\" Total Debt-to-Total Capitalization financial \"a financial covenant for the maintenance of a ratio of Total Debt-to-Total Capitalization of no greater than 65%\" Performance Units financial \"EOG grants restricted stock units with performance-based conditions (Performance Units) annually to its executive officers\" Performance units are company awards that become valuable only if specified business targets are met; they typically convert into shares or cash when performance goals are achieved. Think of them like a conditional bonus that turns into stock only if the company hits agreed milestones, so they align managers’ incentives with shareholders’ interests and can affect future share count, executive pay expense, and investor returns. asset retirement obligations financial \"legal obligations associated with the retirement of property, plant and equipment for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2026 and 2025\" Asset retirement obligations are a company’s recorded promise to pay for dismantling, cleaning up, or restoring property when a long-lived asset is retired — for example decommissioning a plant or removing equipment. Companies estimate the future cleanup cost today and book it as a liability (and add the cost to the asset), so it affects the balance sheet, reported profits over time, and future cash needs; investors watch it like a planned bill that can reduce cash available for returns. Brent Linked Gas Sales Contract financial \"Brent Crude Oil (Brent) Linked Gas Sales Contract - Noncurrent Portion\" cash return framework financial \"a commitment to return a minimum of 70% of annual net cash provided by operating activities less total capital expenditures\"\n\nFind StockTitan more easily in Google Search and AI answers. Adds StockTitan as a preferred source · opens Google Add on Google Not now\n\n05/05/2026 - 10:25 PM\n\n⛶ Fullscreen 0000821189 2026 Q1 FALSE P3Y xbrli:shares iso4217:USD iso4217:USD xbrli:shares xbrli:pure utr:MMBTU iso4217:USD utr:bbl iso4217:USD eog:mMBTu utr:bbl 0000821189 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 2026-04-28 0000821189 us-gaap:OilAndCondensateMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:OilAndCondensateMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 srt:NaturalGasLiquidsReservesMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 srt:NaturalGasLiquidsReservesMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:NaturalGasProductionMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:NaturalGasProductionMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:GainsLossesOnMarkToMarketCommodityAndOtherDerivativeContractsMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:GainsLossesOnMarkToMarketCommodityAndOtherDerivativeContractsMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:NaturalGasGatheringTransportationMarketingAndProcessingMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:NaturalGasGatheringTransportationMarketingAndProcessingMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:OtherNetMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:OtherNetMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 2026-03-31 0000821189 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommonStockMember 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:AdditionalPaidInCapitalMember 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:AccumulatedOtherComprehensiveIncomeMember 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:RetainedEarningsMember 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:TreasuryStockCommonMember 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:RetainedEarningsMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:AccumulatedOtherComprehensiveIncomeMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:TreasuryStockCommonMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:AdditionalPaidInCapitalMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommonStockMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:AdditionalPaidInCapitalMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:AccumulatedOtherComprehensiveIncomeMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:RetainedEarningsMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:TreasuryStockCommonMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommonStockMember 2024-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:AdditionalPaidInCapitalMember 2024-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:AccumulatedOtherComprehensiveIncomeMember 2024-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:RetainedEarningsMember 2024-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:TreasuryStockCommonMember 2024-12-31 0000821189 2024-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:RetainedEarningsMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:TreasuryStockCommonMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:AdditionalPaidInCapitalMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommonStockMember 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:AdditionalPaidInCapitalMember 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:AccumulatedOtherComprehensiveIncomeMember 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:RetainedEarningsMember 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:TreasuryStockCommonMember 2025-03-31 0000821189 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:RevolvingCreditFacilityMember eog:RevolvingCreditAgreementNewFacilityMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:RevolvingCreditFacilityMember us-gaap:SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrMember eog:RevolvingCreditAgreementNewFacilityMember us-gaap:LineOfCreditMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:RevolvingCreditFacilityMember us-gaap:BaseRateMember eog:RevolvingCreditAgreementNewFacilityMember us-gaap:LineOfCreditMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 2021-11-30 0000821189 2024-11-07 0000821189 us-gaap:SubsequentEventMember 2026-05-05 2026-05-05 0000821189 eog:LeaseAndWellMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:LeaseAndWellMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:GatheringProcessingAndTransportationCostsMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:GatheringProcessingAndTransportationCostsMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:ExplorationCostsMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:ExplorationCostsMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:GeneralAndAdministrativeExpenseMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:GeneralAndAdministrativeExpenseMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:StockOptionsSARsAndESPPMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:StockOptionsSARsAndESPPMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:RestrictedStockAndRestrictedStockUnitsMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:RestrictedStockAndRestrictedStockUnitsMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:RestrictedStockAndRestrictedStockUnitsMember 2025-12-31 0000821189 eog:RestrictedStockAndRestrictedStockUnitsMember 2024-12-31 0000821189 eog:RestrictedStockAndRestrictedStockUnitsMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:RestrictedStockAndRestrictedStockUnitsMember 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:PerformanceSharesMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 srt:MinimumMember us-gaap:PerformanceSharesMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 srt:MaximumMember us-gaap:PerformanceSharesMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:PerformanceSharesMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:PerformanceSharesMember 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:PerformanceSharesMember 2024-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:PerformanceSharesMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:PerformanceSharesMember 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:PerformanceSharesMember 2026-02-28 0000821189 us-gaap:PerformanceSharesMember 2025-02-28 0000821189 eog:StockOptionsAndSARsMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:StockOptionsAndSARsMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:RestrictedStockRestrictedStockUnitsandPerformanceUnitsMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:RestrictedStockRestrictedStockUnitsandPerformanceUnitsMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:EncinoMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:OilAndCondensateMember eog:UnitedStatesOfAmericaSegmentMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:OilAndCondensateMember eog:TrinidadMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:OilAndCondensateMember eog:OtherInternationalMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 srt:NaturalGasLiquidsReservesMember eog:UnitedStatesOfAmericaSegmentMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 srt:NaturalGasLiquidsReservesMember eog:TrinidadMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 srt:NaturalGasLiquidsReservesMember eog:OtherInternationalMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:NaturalGasProductionMember eog:UnitedStatesOfAmericaSegmentMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:NaturalGasProductionMember eog:TrinidadMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:NaturalGasProductionMember eog:OtherInternationalMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:GainsLossesOnMarkToMarketCommodityDerivativeContractsAndOtherDerivativeContractsNetMember eog:UnitedStatesOfAmericaSegmentMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:GainsLossesOnMarkToMarketCommodityDerivativeContractsAndOtherDerivativeContractsNetMember eog:TrinidadMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:GainsLossesOnMarkToMarketCommodityDerivativeContractsAndOtherDerivativeContractsNetMember eog:OtherInternationalMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:GainsLossesOnMarkToMarketCommodityDerivativeContractsAndOtherDerivativeContractsNetMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:NaturalGasGatheringTransportationMarketingAndProcessingMember eog:UnitedStatesOfAmericaSegmentMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:NaturalGasGatheringTransportationMarketingAndProcessingMember eog:TrinidadMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:NaturalGasGatheringTransportationMarketingAndProcessingMember eog:OtherInternationalMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:UnitedStatesOfAmericaSegmentMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:TrinidadMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:OtherInternationalMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:OtherNetMember eog:UnitedStatesOfAmericaSegmentMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:OtherNetMember eog:TrinidadMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:OtherNetMember eog:OtherInternationalMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:UnitedStatesOfAmericaSegmentMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:TrinidadMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:OtherInternationalMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:OilAndCondensateMember eog:UnitedStatesOfAmericaSegmentMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:OilAndCondensateMember eog:TrinidadMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:OilAndCondensateMember eog:OtherInternationalMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 srt:NaturalGasLiquidsReservesMember eog:UnitedStatesOfAmericaSegmentMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 srt:NaturalGasLiquidsReservesMember eog:TrinidadMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 srt:NaturalGasLiquidsReservesMember eog:OtherInternationalMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:NaturalGasProductionMember eog:UnitedStatesOfAmericaSegmentMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:NaturalGasProductionMember eog:TrinidadMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:NaturalGasProductionMember eog:OtherInternationalMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:GainsLossesOnMarkToMarketCommodityDerivativeContractsAndOtherDerivativeContractsNetMember eog:UnitedStatesOfAmericaSegmentMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:GainsLossesOnMarkToMarketCommodityDerivativeContractsAndOtherDerivativeContractsNetMember eog:TrinidadMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:GainsLossesOnMarkToMarketCommodityDerivativeContractsAndOtherDerivativeContractsNetMember eog:OtherInternationalMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:GainsLossesOnMarkToMarketCommodityDerivativeContractsAndOtherDerivativeContractsNetMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:NaturalGasGatheringTransportationMarketingAndProcessingMember eog:UnitedStatesOfAmericaSegmentMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:NaturalGasGatheringTransportationMarketingAndProcessingMember eog:TrinidadMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:NaturalGasGatheringTransportationMarketingAndProcessingMember eog:OtherInternationalMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:UnitedStatesOfAmericaSegmentMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:TrinidadMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:OtherInternationalMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:OtherNetMember eog:UnitedStatesOfAmericaSegmentMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:OtherNetMember eog:TrinidadMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:OtherNetMember eog:OtherInternationalMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:UnitedStatesOfAmericaSegmentMember 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:TrinidadMember 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:OtherInternationalMember 2025-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsJanuaryThroughAprilYearOneMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsJanuaryThroughAprilYearOneMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsMayThroughJuneYearOneMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsMayThroughJuneYearOneMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsJulyThroughDecemberYearOneMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsJulyThroughDecemberYearOneMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsJanuaryThroughAprilYearOneMember eog:CollarMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsJanuaryThroughAprilYearOneMember eog:CollarMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsMayThroughJuneYearOneMember eog:CollarMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsMayThroughJuneYearOneMember eog:CollarMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsJulyThroughDecemberYearOneMember eog:CollarMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsJulyThroughDecemberYearOneMember eog:CollarMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsJanuaryThroughDecemberYearTwoMember eog:CollarMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsJanuaryThroughDecemberYearTwoMember eog:CollarMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsJanuaryThroughMarchYearOneMember us-gaap:SwapMember eog:EthaneMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsJanuaryThroughMarchYearOneMember us-gaap:SwapMember eog:EthaneMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsAprilThroughDecemberYearOneMember us-gaap:SwapMember eog:EthaneMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsAprilThroughDecemberYearOneMember us-gaap:SwapMember eog:EthaneMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsJanuaryThroughMarchYearOneMember us-gaap:SwapMember eog:PropaneMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsJanuaryThroughMarchYearOneMember us-gaap:SwapMember eog:PropaneMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsAprilThroughDecemberYearOneMember us-gaap:SwapMember eog:PropaneMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0000821189 eog:DerivativeContractsAprilThroughDecemberYearOneMember us-gaap:SwapMember eog:PropaneMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:PriceRiskDerivativeMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:PriceRiskDerivativeMember 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:OtherContractMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:OtherContractMember 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel1Member 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel2Member 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel3Member 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember eog:NaturalGasCollarsMember eog:NaturalGasCollarsMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel1Member 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember eog:NaturalGasCollarsMember eog:NaturalGasCollarsMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel2Member 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember eog:NaturalGasCollarsMember eog:NaturalGasCollarsMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel3Member 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember eog:NaturalGasCollarsMember eog:NaturalGasCollarsMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasLiquidsReservesMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel1Member 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasLiquidsReservesMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel2Member 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasLiquidsReservesMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel3Member 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasLiquidsReservesMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember eog:BrentLinkedGasSalesContractMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel1Member 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember eog:BrentLinkedGasSalesContractMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel2Member 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember eog:BrentLinkedGasSalesContractMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel3Member 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember eog:BrentLinkedGasSalesContractMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember 2026-03-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel1Member 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel2Member 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel3Member 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember eog:NaturalGasCollarsMember eog:NaturalGasCollarsMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel1Member 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember eog:NaturalGasCollarsMember eog:NaturalGasCollarsMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel2Member 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember eog:NaturalGasCollarsMember eog:NaturalGasCollarsMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel3Member 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember eog:NaturalGasCollarsMember eog:NaturalGasCollarsMember 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasLiquidsReservesMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel1Member 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasLiquidsReservesMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel2Member 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasLiquidsReservesMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel3Member 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember us-gaap:SwapMember srt:NaturalGasLiquidsReservesMember 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember eog:BrentLinkedGasSalesContractMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel1Member 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember eog:BrentLinkedGasSalesContractMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel2Member 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember eog:BrentLinkedGasSalesContractMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel3Member 2025-12-31 0000821189 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember eog:BrentLinkedGasSalesContractMember srt:NaturalGasReservesMember 2025-12-31 0000821189 eog:NorthMidlandBasinMember 2026-02-18 2026-02-18 0000821189 eog:EncinoMember 2025-08-01 2025-08-01 0000821189 us-gaap:RevolvingCreditFacilityMember eog:EncinoMember 2025-08-01 2025-08-01 0000821189 us-gaap:SeniorNotesMember 2025-08-01 0000821189 eog:EncinoMember us-gaap:GeneralAndAdministrativeExpenseMember 2025-08-01 2025-08-01 0000821189 eog:EncinoMember us-gaap:InterestExpenseMember 2025-08-01 2025-08-01 0000821189 eog:EncinoMember 2025-08-01 0000821189 eog:EncinoMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-Q (Mark One)\n\n☒ QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the quarterly period ended or ☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 Commission File Number: 1-9743 EOG RESOURCES, INC. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) Delaware 47-0684736 (State or other jurisdiction\n\nof incorporation or organization) (I.R.S. Employer\n\nIdentification No.) 1111 Bagby , Sky Lobby 2 , Houston , Texas 77002 (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)\n\n713 - 651-7000 (Registrant's telephone number, including area code)\n\nSecurities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of each class Trading symbol(s) Name of each exchange on which registered Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share EOG New York Stock Exchange\n\nIndicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒ No ☐\n\nIndicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes ☒ No ☐\n\nIndicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of \"large accelerated filer,\" \"accelerated filer,\" \"smaller reporting company,\" and \"emerging growth company\" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. Large accelerated filer ☒ Accelerated filer ☐ Non-accelerated filer ☐ Smaller reporting company ☐ Emerging growth company ☐\n\nIf an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐\n\nIndicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ☐ No ☒\n\nIndicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant's classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date. Title of each class Number of shares Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share 532,628,530 (as of April 28, 2026)\n\nEOG RESOURCES, INC.\n\nTABLE OF CONTENTS\n\n\n\nPART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION Page No. ITEM 1. Financial Statements (Unaudited) Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income and Comprehensive Income - Three Months Ended March 31, 2026 and 2025 3 Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets - March 31, 2026 and December 31, 2025 4 Condensed Consolidated Statements of Stockholders' Equity - Three Months Ended March 31, 2026 and 2025 5 Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows - Three Months Ended March 31, 2026 and 2025 6 Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements 7 ITEM 2. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations 21 ITEM 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk 35 ITEM 4. Controls and Procedures 35 PART II. OTHER INFORMATION ITEM 1. Legal Proceedings 36 ITEM 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds 36 ITEM 5. Other Information 37 ITEM 6. Exhibits 38 SIGNATURES 40 2\n\nPART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS EOG RESOURCES, INC. CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (In Millions, Except Per Share Data) (Unaudited) Three Months Ended\n\nMarch 31, 2026 2025 Operating Revenues and Other Crude Oil and Condensate $ 3,577 $ 3,293 Natural Gas Liquids 664 572 Natural Gas 1,021 637 Gains (Losses) on Mark-to-Market Financial Commodity and Other Derivative Contracts, Net 113 ( 191 ) Gathering, Processing and Marketing 1,496 1,340 Gains (Losses) on Asset Dispositions, Net 31 ( 1 ) Other, Net 19 19 Total 6,921 5,669 Operating Expenses Lease and Well 462 401 Gathering, Processing and Transportation Costs 654 440 Exploration Costs 45 41 Dry Hole Costs 23 34 Impairments 39 44 Marketing Costs 1,384 1,325 Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization 1,193 1,013 General and Administrative 185 171 Taxes Other Than Income 338 341 Total 4,323 3,810 Operating Income 2,598 1,859 Other Income, Net 23 65 Income Before Interest Expense and Income Taxes 2,621 1,924 Interest Expense, Net 66 47 Income Before Income Taxes 2,555 1,877 Income Tax Provision 575 414 Net Income $ 1,980 $ 1,463 Net Income Per Share Basic $ 3.72 $ 2.66 Diluted $ 3.70 $ 2.65 Average Number of Common Shares Basic 532 550 Diluted 535 553 Comprehensive Income Net Income $ 1,980 $ 1,463 Other Comprehensive Income Foreign Currency Translation Adjustments 1 — Other Comprehensive Income 1 — Comprehensive Income $ 1,981 $ 1,463\n\nThe accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements. 3\n\nEOG RESOURCES, INC. CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS (In Millions, Except Share Data) (Unaudited)\n\nMarch 31, 2026 December 31, 2025 ASSETS Current Assets Cash and Cash Equivalents $ 3,849 $ 3,396 Accounts Receivable, Net 3,597 2,681 Inventories 955 1,014 Other 562 565 Total 8,963 7,656 Property, Plant and Equipment Oil and Gas Properties (Successful Efforts Method) 90,786 89,857 Other Property, Plant and Equipment 6,942 6,832 Total Property, Plant and Equipment 97,728 96,689 Less: Accumulated Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization ( 55,054 ) ( 54,348 ) Total Property, Plant and Equipment, Net 42,674 42,341 Deferred Income Taxes 30 39 Other Assets 1,711 1,763 Total Assets $ 53,378 $ 51,799 LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY Current Liabilities Accounts Payable $ 3,186 $ 2,904 Accrued Taxes Payable 766 299 Dividends Payable 541 544 Current Portion of Long-Term Debt 27 27 Current Portion of Operating Lease Liabilities 375 472 Other 329 445 Total 5,224 4,691 Long-Term Debt 7,904 7,909 Other Liabilities 2,476 2,512 Deferred Income Taxes 6,866 6,854 Commitments and Contingencies (Note 5) Stockholders' Equity Common Stock, $ 0.01 Par, 1,280,000,000 Shares Authorized and 589,044,385 Shares Issued at both March 31, 2026 and December 31, 2025 206 206 Additional Paid in Capital 6,026 6,027 Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss ( 6 ) ( 7 ) Retained Earnings 31,200 29,765 Common Stock Held in Treasury, 54,193,530 Shares at March 31, 2026 and 51,374,169 Shares at December 31, 2025 ( 6,518 ) ( 6,158 ) Total Stockholders' Equity 30,908 29,833 Total Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity $ 53,378 $ 51,799\n\nThe accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements. 4\n\nEOG RESOURCES, INC. CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY (In Millions, Except Per Share Data) (Unaudited) Common\n\nStock Additional Paid-In Capital Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss Retained Earnings Common Stock Held in Treasury Total Stockholders’ Equity Balance at December 31, 2025 $ 206 $ 6,027 $ ( 7 ) $ 29,765 $ ( 6,158 ) $ 29,833 Net Income — — — 1,980 — 1,980 Common Stock Dividends Declared, $ 1.02 Per Share — — — ( 545 ) — ( 545 ) Other Comprehensive Income — — 1 — — 1 Treasury Stock Repurchased — — — — ( 405 ) ( 405 ) Change in Treasury Stock - Stock Compensation Plans, Net — ( 29 ) — — 15 ( 14 ) Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock Units, Net — ( 30 ) — — 30 — Stock-Based Compensation Expenses — 58 — — — 58 Balance at March 31, 2026 $ 206 $ 6,026 $ ( 6 ) $ 31,200 $ ( 6,518 ) $ 30,908\n\nCommon\n\nStock Additional Paid-In Capital Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss Retained Earnings Common Stock Held in Treasury Total Stockholders’ Equity Balance at December 31, 2024 $ 206 $ 6,090 $ ( 4 ) $ 26,941 $ ( 3,882 ) $ 29,351 Net Income — — — 1,463 — 1,463 Common Stock Dividends Declared, $ 0.975 Per Share — — — ( 535 ) — ( 535 ) Treasury Stock Repurchased — — — — ( 796 ) ( 796 ) Change in Treasury Stock - Stock Compensation Plans, Net — ( 9 ) — — ( 8 ) ( 17 ) Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock Units, Net — ( 36 ) — — 36 — Stock-Based Compensation Expenses — 50 — — — 50 Balance at March 31, 2025 $ 206 $ 6,095 $ ( 4 ) $ 27,869 $ ( 4,650 ) $ 29,516\n\nThe accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.\n\n\n\n5\n\nEOG RESOURCES, INC. CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (In Millions) (Unaudited) Three Months Ended\n\nMarch 31, 2026 2025 Cash Flows from Operating Activities Reconciliation of Net Income to Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities: Net Income $ 1,980 $ 1,463 Items Not Requiring (Providing) Cash Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization 1,193 1,013 Impairments 39 44 Stock-Based Compensation Expenses 58 50 Deferred Income Taxes 18 44 (Gains) Losses on Asset Dispositions, Net ( 31 ) 1 Other, Net 15 11 Dry Hole Costs 23 34 Mark-to-Market Financial Commodity and Other Derivative Contracts (Gains) Losses, Net ( 113 ) 191 Net Cash Payments for Settlements of Commodity Derivative Contracts ( 53 ) ( 38 ) Changes in Components of Working Capital and Other Assets and Liabilities Accounts Receivable ( 907 ) 48 Inventories 21 76 Accounts Payable 279 ( 129 ) Accrued Taxes Payable 467 ( 339 ) Other Assets 55 ( 43 ) Other Liabilities ( 123 ) ( 96 ) Changes in Components of Working Capital Associated with Investing Activities 45 ( 41 ) Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities 2,966 2,289 Investing Cash Flows Additions to Oil and Gas Properties ( 1,491 ) ( 1,381 ) Additions to Other Property, Plant and Equipment ( 153 ) ( 102 ) Proceeds from Sales of Assets 144 12 Changes in Components of Working Capital Associated with Investing Activities ( 45 ) 41 Net Cash Used in Investing Activities ( 1,545 ) ( 1,430 ) Financing Cash Flows Dividends Paid ( 544 ) ( 538 ) Treasury Stock Purchased ( 418 ) ( 806 ) Proceeds from Stock Options Exercised and Employee Stock Purchase Plan 1 — Repayment of Finance Lease Liabilities ( 7 ) ( 8 ) Net Cash Used in Financing Activities ( 968 ) ( 1,352 ) Increase (Decrease) in Cash and Cash Equivalents 453 ( 493 ) Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Period 3,396 7,092 Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Period $ 3,849 $ 6,599\n\nThe accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements. 6 EOG RESOURCES, INC. NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited)\n\n1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies\n\nGeneral. The condensed consolidated financial statements of EOG Resources, Inc., together with its subsidiaries (collectively, EOG), included herein have been prepared by management without audit pursuant to the rules and regulations of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. Accordingly, they reflect all normal recurring adjustments which are, in the opinion of management, necessary for a fair presentation of the financial results for the interim periods presented. Certain information and notes normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (U.S. GAAP) have been condensed or omitted pursuant to such rules and regulations. However, management believes that the disclosures included either on the face of the financial statements or in these notes are sufficient to make the interim information presented not misleading. These Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and the notes thereto included in EOG's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2025, filed on February 24, 2026 (EOG's 2025 Annual Report).\n\nThe preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The operating results for the three months ended March 31, 2026, are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the full year.\n\n2. Long-Term Debt\n\nEOG currently has a $ 3.0 billion senior unsecured Revolving Credit Agreement (Agreement) with domestic and foreign lenders (Banks). The Agreement has a scheduled maturity date of December 3, 2030, and includes an option for EOG to extend, on up to two occasions, the term for successive one-year periods subject to certain terms and conditions. The Agreement (i) commits the Banks to provide advances up to an aggregate principal amount of $ 3.0 billion outstanding at any given time, with an option for EOG to request increases in the aggregate commitments to an amount not to exceed $ 4.0 billion, subject to certain terms and conditions, and (ii) includes a swingline subfacility and a letter of credit subfacility.\n\nAdvances under the Agreement will accrue interest based, at EOG's option, on either the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR) plus an applicable margin, or the Base Rate (as defined in the Agreement) plus an applicable margin. The applicable margin used in connection with interest rates and fees will be based on EOG’s credit rating for its senior unsecured long-term debt at the applicable time.\n\nThe Agreement contains representations, warranties, covenants and events of default that EOG believes are customary for investment-grade, senior unsecured commercial bank credit agreements, including a financial covenant for the maintenance of a ratio of Total Debt-to-Total Capitalization (as such terms are defined in the Agreement) of no greater than 65 %.\n\nAt March 31, 2026, EOG was in compliance with this financial covenant. At March 31, 2026 and December 31, 2025, there were no borrowings or letters of credit outstanding under the Agreement. The SOFR and Base Rate (inclusive of the applicable margins), had there been any amounts borrowed under the Agreement at March 31, 2026, would have been 4.56 % and 6.75 %, respectively.\n\n\n\n7 EOG RESOURCES, INC. NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued) (Unaudited)\n\n3. Stockholders' Equity\n\nCommon Stock. In November 2021, the Board of Directors (Board) established a new share repurchase authorization allowing for the repurchase by EOG of up to $ 5 billion of its common stock and, in November 2024, increased such share repurchase authorization from $ 5 billion to $ 10 billion, effective November 7, 2024 (Share Repurchase Authorization).\n\nUnder the Share Repurchase Authorization, EOG may repurchase shares from time to time, at management's discretion, in accordance with applicable securities laws, including through open market transactions, privately negotiated transactions or any combination thereof. The timing and amount of repurchases is at the discretion of EOG's management and depends on a variety of factors, including the trading price of EOG's common stock, corporate and regulatory requirements, other market and economic conditions, the availability of cash to effect repurchases and EOG's anticipated future capital expenditures and other commitments requiring cash. Repurchased shares are held as treasury shares and are available for general corporate purposes. The Share Repurchase Authorization has no time limit, does not require EOG to repurchase a specific number of shares and may be modified, suspended, or terminated by the Board at any time. During the three months ended March 31, 2026, EOG repurchased 3.2 million shares of common stock for approximately $ 402 million (inclusive of transaction fees and commissions) pursuant to the Share Repurchase Authorization. As of March 31, 2026, approximately $ 2.9 billion remained available for repurchases under the Share Repurchase Authorization. Included in the Treasury Stock Repurchased amounts on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Stockholders' Equity for the three months ended March 31, 2026, is $ 3.7 million of estimated federal excise tax.\n\nOn February 24, 2026, the Board declared a quarterly cash dividend on the common stock of $ 1.02 per share paid on April 30, 2026, to stockholders of record as of April 16, 2026.\n\nOn May 5, 2026, the Board declared a quarterly cash dividend on the common stock of $ 1.02 per share to be paid on July 31, 2026, to stockholders of record as of July 17, 2026.\n\n4. Employee Benefit Plans\n\nAs more fully discussed in Note 7 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in EOG's 2025 Annual Report, EOG maintains various stock-based compensation plans. Stock-based compensation expense is included on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income and Comprehensive Income based upon the job function of the employees receiving the grants as follows (in millions): Three Months Ended\n\nMarch 31, 2026 2025 Lease and Well $ 20 $ 17 Gathering, Processing and Transportation Costs 1 1 Exploration Costs 7 7 General and Administrative 30 25 Total $ 58 $ 50\n\nAt March 31, 2026, approximately 11 million common shares remained available for grant under the EOG Resources, Inc. 2021 Omnibus Equity Compensation Plan (2021 Plan). EOG's policy is to issue shares related to the 2021 Plan grants from previously authorized unissued shares or treasury shares to the extent treasury shares are available.\n\nStock Options and Stock-Settled Stock Appreciation Rights and Employee Stock Purchase Plan . The fair value of stock option grants and of stock-settled stock appreciation rights (SARs) grants was estimated using the Hull-White II binomial option pricing model. The fair value of Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP) grants is estimated using the Black-Scholes-Merton model. Stock-based compensation expense related to stock option, SAR and ESPP grants totaled $ 2 million and $ 1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2026 and 2025, respectively.\n\nEOG has not granted any stock options or SARs since February 2022.\n\n8 EOG RESOURCES, INC. NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued) (Unaudited)\n\nRestricted Stock and Restricted Stock Units. Employees may be granted restricted (non-vested) stock and/or restricted stock units, which generally \"cliff\" vest three years from the date of grant in accordance with each grant agreement, without cost to them. Stock-based compensation expense related to restricted stock and restricted stock units totaled $ 53 million and $ 47 million for the three months ended March 31, 2026 and 2025, respectively.\n\nThe following table sets forth restricted stock and restricted stock unit transactions for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2026 and 2025 (shares and units in thousands):\n\nThree Months Ended March 31, 2026 Three Months Ended March 31, 2025 Number of Shares and Units Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value Number of Shares and Units Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value Outstanding at January 1 5,281 $ 4,699 $ Granted 136 41 Released (1) ( 59 ) ( 39 ) Forfeited ( 37 ) ( 36 ) Outstanding at March 31 (2) 5,321 $ 4,665 $ (1) The total intrinsic value of restricted stock and restricted stock units released during the three months ended March 31, 2026 and 2025, was $ 7 million and $ 5 million, respectively. The intrinsic value is based upon the closing price of the Common Stock on the date the restricted stock and restricted stock units are released. (2) The total intrinsic value of restricted stock and restricted stock units outstanding at March 31, 2026 and 2025, was $ 769 million and $ 598 million, respectively.\n\nAt March 31, 2026, unrecognized compensation expense related to restricted stock and restricted stock units totaled $ 342 million. Such unrecognized expense will be amortized on a straight-line basis over a weighted average period of 1.7 years.\n\nPerformance Units. EOG grants restricted stock units with performance-based conditions (Performance Units) annually to its executive officers and from time to time to other officers, without cost to them. As more fully discussed in the grant agreements, the applicable performance metrics are 1) EOG's TSR over the Performance Period relative to the TSR over the same period of a designated group of peer companies and 2) EOG's average return on capital employed (ROCE) over the Performance Period. At the end of the Performance Period, a performance multiple based on EOG's relative TSR ranking will be determined, with a minimum performance multiple of 0 % and a maximum performance multiple of 200 %. A specified modifier ranging from - 70 % to +70 % will then be applied to the performance multiple based on EOG's average ROCE over the Performance Period, provided that in no event shall the performance multiple, after applying the ROCE modifier, be less than 0 % or exceed 200 %. Furthermore, if EOG's TSR over the Performance Period is negative (i.e., less than 0 %), the performance multiple will be capped at 100 %, regardless of EOG's relative TSR ranking or average ROCE over the Performance Period.\n\nThe fair value of the Performance Units is estimated using a Monte Carlo simulation. Stock-based compensation expense related to the Performance Unit grants totaled $ 3 million and $ 2 million for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2026 and 2025, respectively.\n\n\n\n9 EOG RESOURCES, INC. NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued) (Unaudited)\n\nThe following table sets forth the Performance Unit transactions for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2026 and 2025 (units in thousands):\n\nThree Months Ended March 31, 2026 Three Months Ended March 31, 2025 Number of Units Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value Number of Units Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value Outstanding at January 1 493 $ 559 $ Granted 2 8 Granted for Performance Multiple (1) — 54 Released (2) ( 122 ) ( 267 ) Outstanding at March 31 (3) 373 (4) $ 354 $ (1) Upon completion of the Performance Period for the Performance Units granted in 2022, a performance multiple of 0 % was applied to each of the grants resulting in no additional grants of Performance Units in February 2026. Upon completion of the Performance Period for the Performance Units granted in 2021, a performance multiple of 125 % was applied to each of the grants resulting in additional grants of Performance Units in February 2025. (2) The total intrinsic value of Performance Units released was $ 15 million and $ 34 million for the three months ended March 31, 2026 and 2025, respectively. The intrinsic value is based upon the closing price of the Common Stock on the date the Performance Units are released. (3) The total intrinsic value of Performance Units outstanding at March 31, 2026 and 2025, was $ 54 million and $ 45 million, respectively. (4) Upon the application of the relevant performance multiple at the completion of each of the remaining Performance Periods, a minimum of zero and a maximum of 747 Performance Units could be outstanding.\n\nAt March 31, 2026, unrecognized compensation expense related to Performance Units totaled $ 26 million. Such unrecognized expense will be amortized on a straight-line basis over a weighted average period of 2.0 years.\n\n5. Commitments and Contingencies\n\nThere are currently various suits and claims pending against EOG that have arisen in the ordinary course of EOG's business, including contract disputes, personal injury and property damage claims and title disputes. While the ultimate outcome and impact on EOG cannot be predicted, management believes that the resolution of these suits and claims will not, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on EOG's consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flow. EOG records reserves for contingencies when information available indicates that a loss is probable and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated.\n\n10 EOG RESOURCES, INC. NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued) (Unaudited)\n\n6. Net Income Per Share\n\nThe following table sets forth the computation of Net Income Per Share for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2026 and 2025 (in millions, except per share data): Three Months Ended\n\nMarch 31, 2026 2025 Numerator for Basic and Diluted Earnings Per Share - Net Income $ 1,980 $ 1,463 Denominator for Basic Earnings Per Share - Weighted Average Shares 532 550 Potential Dilutive Common Shares - Stock Options/SARs/ESPP — 1 Restricted Stock/Units and Performance Units 3 2 Denominator for Diluted Earnings Per Share - Adjusted Diluted Weighted Average Shares 535 553 Net Income Per Share Basic $ 3.72 $ 2.66 Diluted $ 3.70 $ 2.65 The diluted earnings per share calculation excludes stock option, SAR and ESPP grants that were anti-dilutive. Shares underlying the excluded stock option, SAR and ESPP grants were zero for all periods presented.\n\n7. Supplemental Cash Flow Information\n\nNet cash paid for interest and income taxes was as follows for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2026 and 2025 (in millions): Three Months Ended\n\nMarch 31, 2026 2025 Interest (1) $ 82 $ 11 Income Taxes, Net of Refunds Received $ 4 $ 732 (1) Net of capitalized interest of $ 37 million and $ 12 million for the three months ended March 31, 2026 and 2025, respectively.\n\nEOG's accrued capital expenditures and amounts recorded within accounts payable at March 31, 2026 and 2025 were $ 800 million and $ 695 million, respectively.\n\nNon-cash investing activities for the three months ended March 31, 2026 and 2025, included additions of $ 52 million and $ 9 million, respectively, to EOG's oil and gas properties as a result of property exchanges. In addition, non-cash investing activities for the three months ended March 31, 2026, included $ 15 million related to revisions to the Encino purchase price allocation.\n\n\n\n\n\n11 EOG RESOURCES, INC. NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued) (Unaudited)\n\n8. Business Segment Information\n\nEOG's operations are all crude oil, NGLs and natural gas exploration and production-related. The Segment Reporting Topic of the Financial Accounting Standards Board's (FASB) Accounting Standard Codification (ASC) establishes standards for reporting information about operating segments in annual and interim financial statements. Operating segments are defined as components of an enterprise about which separate financial information is available and evaluated regularly by the chief operating decision maker (CODM) in deciding how to allocate resources and in assessing performance. EOG's CODM is the Chief Executive Officer.\n\nThe CODM routinely reviews and makes operating decisions related to significant issues associated with each of EOG's major producing areas (including in the United States and in Trinidad) and its exploration programs both inside and outside the United States. For segment reporting purposes, the CODM considers the major United States producing areas to be one operating segment . The CODM uses operating income (loss) to assess performance and allocate resources.\n\nFinancial information by reportable segment is presented below as of and for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2026 and 2025 (in millions):\n\nUnited States Trinidad Other International Total Three Months Ended March 31, 2026 Crude Oil and Condensate $ 3,564 $ 12 $ 1 $ 3,577 NGLs 664 — — 664 Natural Gas 934 84 3 1,021 Gains on Mark-to-Market Financial Commodity and Other Derivative Contracts, Net 113 — — 113 Gathering, Processing and Marketing 1,493 3 — 1,496 Gains on Asset Dispositions, Net 31 — — 31 Other, Net 19 — — 19 Operating Revenues and Other 6,818 99 4 6,921 Lease and Well 446 10 6 Gathering, Processing and Transportation Costs 653 1 — Marketing Costs 1,384 — — Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization 1,152 41 — General and Administrative 175 3 7 Taxes Other Than Income 335 2 1 Other Segment Items (1) 96 2 9 Operating Income (Loss) 2,577 40 ( 19 ) 2,598 Interest Income 31 Other Expense ( 8 ) Interest Expense, Net ( 66 ) Income Before Income Taxes $ 2,555 Other Segment Disclosures: Additions to Oil and Gas Properties, Excluding Dry Hole Costs 1,431 40 49 1,520 Total Property, Plant and Equipment, Net 41,977 543 154 42,674 Total Assets 51,774 1,201 403 53,378 Interest Expense, Net 66 — — 66 Interest Income 28 2 1 31 12 EOG RESOURCES, INC. NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued) (Unaudited)\n\nUnited States Trinidad Other International Total Three Months Ended March 31, 2025 Crude Oil and Condensate $ 3,286 $ 7 $ — $ 3,293 Natural Gas Liquids 572 — — 572 Natural Gas 554 83 — 637 Losses on Mark-to-Market Financial Commodity and Other Derivative Contracts, Net ( 191 ) — — ( 191 ) Gathering, Processing and Marketing 1,340 — — 1,340 Gains (Losses) on Asset Dispositions, Net 3 — ( 4 ) ( 1 ) Other, Net 19 — — 19 Operating Revenues and Other 5,583 90 ( 4 ) 5,669 Lease and Well 385 14 2 Gathering, Processing and Transportation Costs 440 — — Marketing Costs 1,325 — — Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization 963 50 — General and Administrative 162 4 5 Taxes Other Than Income 340 1 — Other Segment Items (1) 82 33 4 Operating Income (Loss) 1,886 ( 12 ) ( 15 ) 1,859 Interest Income 68 Other Expense ( 3 ) Interest Expense, Net ( 47 ) Income Before Income Taxes $ 1,877 Other Segment Disclosures: Additions to Oil and Gas Properties, Excluding Dry Hole Costs 1,358 ( 2 ) — 1,356 Total Property, Plant and Equipment, Net 34,156 450 26 34,632 Total Assets 45,652 1,133 197 46,982 Interest Expense, Net 47 — — 47 Interest Income 64 3 1 68 (1) Other Segment Items include Exploration Costs, Dry Hole Costs and Impairments. Other Segment Items primarily relate to impairments, exploration and dry hole costs in the United States, and exploration costs in Other International and Trinidad for the three-month period ended March 31, 2026. Other Segment Items primarily relate to impairments and exploration costs in the United States, dry hole costs in Trinidad and exploration costs in Other International for the three-month period ended March 31, 2025.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n13 EOG RESOURCES, INC. NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued) (Unaudited)\n\n9. Risk Management Activities\n\nCommodity Price Risk . As more fully discussed in Note 12 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in EOG's 2025 Annual Report, EOG engages in price risk management activities from time to time. These activities are intended to manage EOG's exposure to fluctuations in commodity prices for crude oil, NGLs and natural gas. EOG utilizes financial commodity derivative instruments, primarily price swap, option, swaption, collar and basis swap contracts, as a means to manage this price risk. EOG has not designated any of its financial commodity and other derivative contracts as accounting hedges and, accordingly, accounts for financial commodity and other derivative contracts using the mark-to-market accounting method.\n\nFinancial Commodity Derivative Contracts. Presented below is a comprehensive summary of EOG's financial commodity derivative contracts settled during the three-month period ended March 31, 2026 (closed) and outstanding as of March 31, 2026. Natural gas volumes are presented in million British thermal units per day (MMBtud) and prices are presented in dollars per million British Thermal Units ($/MMBtu). NGL volumes are presented in thousand barrels per day (MBbld) and prices are presented in dollars per barrel ($/Bbl).\n\nNatural Gas Financial Price Swap Contracts Contracts Sold Period Settlement Index Volume\n\n(MMBtud in thousands) Weighted Average Price ($/MMBtu) January - April 2026 (closed) NYMEX Henry Hub 460 $ 3.78 May - June 2026 NYMEX Henry Hub 460 3.78 July - December 2026 NYMEX Henry Hub 450 3.79\n\nNatural Gas Collar Contracts Contracts Sold Weighted Average Price\n\n($/MMBtu) Period Settlement Index Volume\n\n(MMBtud in thousands) Ceiling Price Floor Price January - April 2026 (closed) NYMEX Henry Hub 80 $ 4.28 $ 3.72 May - June 2026 NYMEX Henry Hub 80 4.28 3.72 July - December 2026 NYMEX Henry Hub 70 4.23 3.71 January - December 2027 NYMEX Henry Hub 120 4.41 3.42\n\nEthane Financial Price Swap Contracts Contracts Sold Period Settlement Index Volume\n\n(MBbld) Weighted Average Price ($/Bbl) January - March 2026 (closed) Mont Belvieu Ethane (non-Tet) 11 $ 10.94 April - December 2026 Mont Belvieu Ethane (non-Tet) 11 10.94\n\n14 EOG RESOURCES, INC. NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued) (Unaudited)\n\nPropane Financial Price Swap Contracts Contracts Sold Period Settlement Index Volume\n\n(MBbld) Weighted Average Price ($/Bbl) January - March 2026 (closed) Mont Belvieu Propane (Tet) 1 $ 30.24 April - December 2026 Mont Belvieu Propane (Tet) 1 30.24\n\nFinancial Commodity and Other Derivative Instruments Location on Balance Sheet. The following table sets forth the amounts and classification of EOG's outstanding financial commodity and other derivative instruments at March 31, 2026 and December 31, 2025. Certain amounts may be presented on a net basis on the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements when such amounts are with the same counterparty and subject to a master netting arrangement (in millions):\n\nFair Value at Description Location on Balance Sheet March 31, 2026 December 31, 2025 Asset Derivatives NGLs and natural gas financial derivative contracts - Current Portion Other Current Assets (1) $ 60 $ 18 Noncurrent Portion Other Assets 4 — Brent Crude Oil (Brent) Linked Gas Sales Contract - Noncurrent Portion Other Assets 152 31 Liability Derivatives Brent Crude Oil (Brent) Linked Gas Sales Contract - Current portion Other Current Liabilities $ 2 $ — NGLs and natural gas derivative contracts - Noncurrent Portion Other Liabilities — 2 (1) The current portion of Assets from Price Risk Management Activities consists of gross assets of $ 61 million, partially offset by gross liabilities of $ 1 million at March 31, 2026.\n\n15 EOG RESOURCES, INC. NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued) (Unaudited)\n\nCredit Risk. Notional contract amounts are used to express the magnitude of a derivative. The amounts potentially subject to credit risk, in the event of nonperformance by the counterparties, are equal to the fair value of such contracts (see Note 10). EOG evaluates its exposures to significant counterparties on an ongoing basis, including those arising from physical and financial transactions. In some instances, EOG renegotiates payment terms and/or requires collateral, parent guarantees or letters of credit to minimize credit risk.\n\nAll of EOG's financial commodity derivative instruments are covered by International Swap Dealers Association Master Agreements (ISDAs) with counterparties. The ISDAs may contain provisions that (i) require EOG, if it is the party in a net liability position, to post collateral with the counterparty when the amount of the net liability exceeds the threshold level specified for EOG's then-current credit ratings or (ii) require the counterparty, if it is in a net liability position, to post collateral with EOG when the amount of the net liability exceeds the threshold level specified for the counterparty's then-current credit ratings. In addition, the ISDAs may also provide that as a result of certain circumstances, including certain events that cause EOG's credit ratings to become materially weaker than its then-current ratings, the counterparty may require all outstanding financial derivatives under the ISDA to be settled immediately. See Note 10 for the aggregate fair value of all financial derivative instruments that were in a net liability position at March 31, 2026 and December 31, 2025. EOG had no collateral posted and no collateral held at March 31, 2026 and December 31, 2025.\n\n10. Fair Value Measurements\n\nRecurring Fair Value Measurements. As more fully discussed in Note 13 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in EOG's 2025 Annual Report, certain of EOG's financial and nonfinancial assets and liabilities are reported at fair value on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. The following table provides fair value measurement information within the fair value hierarchy for certain of EOG's financial assets and liabilities carried at fair value on a recurring basis at March 31, 2026 and December 31, 2025 (in millions):\n\nFair Value Measurements Using: Quoted\n\nPrices in\n\nActive\n\nMarkets\n\n(Level 1) Significant\n\nOther\n\nObservable\n\nInputs\n\n(Level 2) Significant\n\nUnobservable\n\nInputs\n\n(Level 3) Total Balance at March 31, 2026 Financial Assets: Natural Gas Swaps $ — $ 53 $ — $ 53 Natural Gas Collars — 11 — 11 NGL Swaps — 1 — 1 Brent Linked Gas Sales Contract — — 152 152 Financial Liabilities: Natural Gas Collars $ — $ 1 $ — $ 1 Brent Linked Gas Sales Contract — — 2 2 Balance at December 31, 2025 Financial Assets: Natural Gas Swaps $ — $ 12 $ — $ 12 Natural Gas Collars — 4 — 4 NGL Swaps — 2 — 2 Brent Linked Gas Sales Contract — — 31 31 Financial Liabilities: Natural Gas Swaps $ — $ 1 $ — $ 1 Natural Gas Collars — 1 — 1\n\n16 EOG RESOURCES, INC. NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued) (Unaudited)\n\nSee Note 9 for the balance sheet amounts and classification of EOG's financial commodity and other derivative instruments at March 31, 2026 and December 31, 2025.\n\nThe estimated fair value of financial commodity and other derivative contracts was based upon forward commodity price curves based on quoted market prices. For the Brent Linked Gas Sales Contract, the estimated fair value was based on EOG's estimates of (and assumptions regarding) significant Level 3 inputs, as defined by the FASB Fair Value Measurement Topic of the ASC (ASC 820), including future crude oil and natural gas prices. These Level 3 inputs are immaterial to the financial statements. Financial commodity and other derivative contracts were valued utilizing an independent third-party derivative valuation provider who uses various types of valuation models, as applicable.\n\nNon-Recurring Fair Value Measurements. The initial measurement of asset retirement obligations at fair value is calculated using discounted cash flow techniques and is based on internal estimates of future retirement costs associated with property, plant and equipment. Significant Level 3 inputs used in the calculation of asset retirement obligations include plugging costs and reserve lives. A reconciliation of EOG's asset retirement obligations is presented in Note 11.\n\nWhen circumstances indicate that proved oil and gas properties may be impaired, EOG compares expected undiscounted future cash flows at a depreciation, depletion and amortization group level to the unamortized capitalized cost of the group. If the expected undiscounted future cash flows, based on EOG's estimate of (and assumptions regarding) future crude oil, NGLs and natural gas prices, operating costs, development expenditures, anticipated production from proved reserves and other relevant data (all Level 3 inputs as defined by ASC 820) are lower than the unamortized capitalized cost, the capitalized cost is reduced to fair value. Fair value is generally calculated using the Income Approach described in ASC 820. In certain instances, EOG utilizes accepted offers from third-party purchasers as the basis for determining fair value.\n\nEOG utilized average prices per acre from comparable market transactions and estimated discounted cash flows as the basis for determining the fair value of unproved and proved properties, respectively, received in non-cash property exchanges. See Note 7.\n\nIn 2025, EOG accounted for its acquisition of Encino Acquisition Partners, LLC (Encino) as a business combination under FASB Topic ASC 805 using the acquisition method with EOG as the acquirer. Under the acquisition method, the consideration transferred is allocated to the identifiable assets acquired and liabilities assumed based on their estimated fair values. See Note 12 for further discussion.\n\nFair Value Disclosures. EOG's financial instruments, other than financial commodity and other derivative contracts, consist of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable and current and long-term debt. The carrying values of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable and accounts payable approximate fair value.\n\nAt both March 31, 2026 and December 31, 2025, EOG had an aggregate principal amount of $ 7,890 million senior notes outstanding, with estimated fair values of $ 7,742 million and $ 7,849 million, respectively. The estimated fair value of debt was based upon quoted market prices and, where such prices were not available, other observable (Level 2) inputs regarding interest rates available to EOG at the end of each respective period.\n\n17 EOG RESOURCES, INC. NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued) (Unaudited)\n\n11. Asset Retirement Obligations\n\nThe following table presents the reconciliation of the beginning and ending aggregate carrying amounts of short-term and long-term legal obligations associated with the retirement of property, plant and equipment for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2026 and 2025 (in millions):\n\nThree Months Ended\n\nMarch 31, 2026 2025 Carrying Amount at January 1 $ 1,570 $ 1,460 Liabilities Incurred 10 8 Liabilities Settled (1) ( 22 ) ( 17 ) Accretion 16 14 Revisions — 2 Carrying Amount at March 31 $ 1,574 $ 1,467 Current Portion $ 47 $ 66 Noncurrent Portion $ 1,527 $ 1,401 (1) Includes settlements related to asset sales and property exchanges.\n\nThe current and noncurrent portions of EOG's asset retirement obligations are included in Current Liabilities - Other and Other Liabilities, respectively, on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.\n\n12. Acquisitions and Divestitures\n\nIn January 2026, EOG signed a purchase and sale agreement for the sale of its entire interest and related fixed assets in the northern Midland Basin for $ 165 million. The transaction closed on February 18, 2026.\n\nEncino Acquisition . On August 1, 2025, EOG acquired all of the outstanding equity interest in Encino, an independent oil and gas exploration and production company with operations in the Utica play, for cash consideration of $ 4,471 million and the assumption of Encino's senior notes in an aggregate principal amount of $ 1,200 million. The cash consideration included $ 392 million to repay Encino's revolving credit facility. In connection with the completion of the acquisition, EOG repaid and redeemed Encino's senior notes in full, utilizing aggregate cash of approximately $ 1,292 million (inclusive of applicable redemption premiums and accrued and unpaid interest). In connection with the acquisition, EOG issued $ 3,500 million of Senior Notes.\n\nThe assets of Encino principally include producing wells and developed and undeveloped acreage in the Utica play.\n\nIn connection with this transaction, EOG incurred acquisition-related costs in 2025 of approximately $ 58 million, of which $ 52 million were recorded as General and Administrative Expense and $ 6.5 million were recorded as Interest Expense.\n\nEOG accounted for this transaction as a business combination under FASB Topic ASC 805 using the acquisition method with EOG as the acquirer. Under the acquisition method, the consideration transferred is allocated to the identifiable assets acquired and liabilities assumed based on their estimated fair values, with any excess of the consideration transferred over the estimated fair value of the identifiable net assets acquired recorded as goodwill. EOG did not record goodwill in connection with this transaction.\n\nCertain data necessary to complete the purchase price allocation is preliminary including the valuations of oil and gas properties and the calculation of deferred taxes based upon the underlying tax basis of assets acquired and liabilities assumed. EOG believes the estimates used are reasonable, but are subject to change as additional information becomes available. Fair value measurements were applied to the acquired assets and liabilities. These measurements may be adjusted up to one year from the acquisition date if new information becomes available regarding facts and circumstances that existed as of such date. 18 EOG RESOURCES, INC. NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued) (Unaudited)\n\n\n\nThe fair value measurements of Oil and Gas Properties and Asset Retirement Obligations are based on inputs that are not observable in the market and therefore represent Level 3 inputs as defined by ASC 820. The fair values of Proved Oil and Gas Properties and the majority of Unproved Oil and Gas Properties were measured using the Income Approach. Significant inputs to the valuation of Proved and Unproved Oil and Gas Properties included EOG's estimate of future crude oil, NGLs and natural gas prices, anticipated production from reserves, a weighted average cost of capital rate, and risk adjustment factors for proved undeveloped, probable and possible reserves. The valuation of a portion of the Unproved Oil and Gas Properties were valued using the Market Approach using prices per acre of comparable transactions as inputs. These inputs required significant judgments, assumptions and estimates by management at the time of the valuation, are the most sensitive and may be subject to change. The senior notes assumed were measured using observable market prices. The fair values of working capital items were determined to be equivalent to the carrying value as they are short-term in nature.\n\nThe following table summarizes the preliminary allocation of the consideration to the fair values of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed (in millions):\n\nTotal Consideration $ 4,471 Fair Value of Assets Acquired: Cash and Cash Equivalents $ 20 Accounts Receivable, Net 323 Inventories 9 Assets from Price Risk Management Activities (1) 26 Other Current Assets 23 Oil and Gas Properties (Successful Efforts Method) 6,718 Other Property, Plant and Equipment 52 Other Assets 68 Amount Attributable to Assets Acquired $ 7,239 Fair Value of Liabilities Assumed: Accounts Payable $ 622 Accrued Taxes Payable 22 Liabilities from Price Risk Management Activities (2) 15 Current Portion of Operating Lease Liabilities 23 Other Current Liabilities 47 Senior Notes 1,266 Asset Retirement Obligations 52 Other Liabilities 72 Deferred Income Taxes 649 Amount Attributable to Liabilities Assumed $ 2,768 Net Assets Acquired and Liabilities Assumed $ 4,471 (1) Within Other Current Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet. (2) Within Other Current Liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.\n\n\n\n19 EOG RESOURCES, INC. NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Concluded) (Unaudited) The following table details unaudited supplemental pro forma financial information for Encino as if EOG had completed the acquisition on January 1, 2025 (in millions):\n\nThree Months Ended March 31, 2025 Operating Revenues and Other $ 6,259 Net Income 1,411 20\n\n\n\nPART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION\n\nITEM 2. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS EOG RESOURCES, INC.\n\nOverview\n\nEOG Resources, Inc., together with its subsidiaries (collectively, EOG), is one of the largest independent (non-integrated) crude oil and natural gas companies in the United States of America (United States) with proved reserves in the United States and the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad). EOG is focused on being among the highest return and lowest cost producers, committed to strong environmental performance and playing a significant role in the long-term future of energy. EOG operates under a consistent business and operational strategy that focuses on a comprehensive approach to developing acreage through industry cycles. EOG evaluates rate of return, net present value, margins, payback period and other key metrics. This strategy is intended to enhance the generation of cash flow and earnings from each unit of production on a cost-efficient basis, allowing EOG to maximize long-term growth in shareholder value and maintain a strong balance sheet. EOG implements its strategy primarily by emphasizing the drilling of internally generated prospects in order to find and develop low-cost reserves. Maintaining the lowest possible operating cost structure, coupled with efficient and safe operations and robust environmental stewardship practices and performance, is integral in the implementation of EOG's strategy.\n\nCommodity Prices . Prices for crude oil and condensate, natural gas liquids (NGLs) and natural gas have historically been volatile. This volatility is expected to continue due to the many uncertainties associated with the world political and economic environment (e.g., the ongoing conflict in the Middle East and the related disruption of maritime transportation routes for these commodities), the global supply of, and demand for, crude oil, NGLs and natural gas, the availability of other energy supplies and other factors, including tariffs, trade policies and agreements and trade barriers or other restrictions imposed by the U.S. government or other governments and the related impact of such measures on commodity and financial markets. Compared to its expectations at the beginning of 2026, EOG realized higher crude oil prices in the first quarter of 2026 and anticipates realizing higher crude oil prices for the full-year 2026, in each case as a result of the ongoing conflict in the Middle East.\n\nThe market prices of crude oil and condensate, NGLs and natural gas impact the amount of cash generated from EOG's operating activities, which, in turn, impact EOG's financial position and results of operations.\n\nFor the first three months of 2026, the average U.S. New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX) crude oil and natural gas prices were $72.17 per barrel and $4.96 per million British thermal units (MMBtu), respectively, representing an increase of 1% and an increase of 36%, respectively, from the average NYMEX prices for the same period in 2025. Market prices for NGLs are influenced by the components extracted, including ethane, propane and butane and natural gasoline, among others, and the respective market pricing for each component.\n\nIncluding the impact of EOG's NGL financial derivative contracts and based on EOG's tax position, EOG's price sensitivity as of March 31, 2026, for each $1.00 per barrel increase or decrease in crude oil and condensate price, combined with the estimated change in NGL price, is approximately $174 million for net income and $223 million for pretax cash flows from operating activities, in each case for the full-year 2026.\n\nIncluding the impact of EOG's natural gas financial derivative contracts and based on EOG's tax position and the portion of EOG's anticipated natural gas volumes for which prices have not (as of March 31, 2026) been determined under long-term marketing contracts, EOG's price sensitivity as of March 31, 2026, for each $0.10 per thousand cubic feet increase or decrease in natural gas price, is approximately $61 million for net income and $78 million for pretax cash flows from operating activities, in each case for the full-year 2026.\n\n\n\n21\n\n\n\nOperating Efficiencies. EOG has undertaken (and continues to undertake) initiatives to increase its drilling, completion and operating efficiencies and improve the performance of its wells. Such initiatives include (among others): (i) EOG's downhole drilling motor program, which has resulted in increased footage drilled per day and, in turn, reduced drilling times; (ii) enhanced techniques for completing its wells, which have resulted in increased footage completed per day and pumping hours per day; (iii) drilling extended laterals, which has resulted in a decrease in cost per foot drilled; and (iv) EOG's self-sourced sand program, which has provided supply certainty and resulted in operational efficiencies in its well completion operations. In addition, EOG has entered into agreements with its service providers from time to time, when available and advantageous, to secure the costs and availability of certain drilling and completion services it utilizes as part of its operations.\n\nEOG plans to continue with these initiatives and actions, though there can be no assurance that such efforts will be successful and sufficient to offset the impacts of any future inflationary pressures (such as from tariffs, other trade barriers, the ongoing conflict in the Middle East, or other macroeconomic factors) on EOG's operating costs and capital expenditures, cash flows and results of operations. Further, there can be no assurance that any such pressures or factors will not impact EOG's ability to conduct its future day-to-day drilling, completion and production operations.\n\nUnited States. EOG's efforts to identify plays with large reserve potential have proven to be successful. EOG continues to drill numerous wells in large acreage plays, which in the aggregate have contributed substantially to, and are expected to continue to contribute substantially to, EOG's crude oil and condensate, NGLs and natural gas production. EOG has placed an emphasis on applying its horizontal drilling and completion expertise to unconventional crude oil plays and natural gas plays.\n\nDuring the first three months of 2026, EOG continued to focus on initiatives to increase its drilling, completion and operating efficiencies and improve well performance. In addition, EOG continued to evaluate certain potential crude oil and condensate, NGLs and natural gas exploration and development prospects and to look for opportunities to add drilling inventory through leasehold acquisitions, farm-ins, exchanges or tactical or bolt-on acquisitions. On a volumetric basis, as calculated using a ratio of 1.0 barrel of crude oil and condensate or NGLs to 6.0 thousand cubic feet of natural gas, crude oil and condensate and NGLs production accounted for approximately 66% and 71% of EOG's United States production during the first three months of 2026 and 2025, respectively. During the first three months of 2026, EOG's drilling and completion activities occurred primarily in the Delaware Basin, Utica and the Eagle Ford play. EOG's major producing areas in the United States are in New Mexico, Texas and Ohio.\n\nIn January 2026, EOG signed a purchase and sale agreement for the sale of its entire interest and related fixed assets in the northern Midland Basin for $165 million. The transaction closed on February 18, 2026. Crude oil production attributable to EOG's interest was approximately 2 MBbld for the quarter ended March 31, 2026.\n\nTrinidad . In Trinidad, EOG continues to produce natural gas which is sold to the National Gas Company of Trinidad and Tobago Limited under existing supply contracts. Crude oil and condensate are sold to both Heritage Petroleum Company Limited and BP Trinidad and Tobago LLC.\n\nDuring the first three months of 2026, EOG completed its drilling program in the Mento Field located in the Ska, Mento and Reggae Area and continued construction of the Coconut offshore platform.\n\nOther International. As discussed in EOG's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2025, filed on February 24, 2026 (EOG's 2025 Annual Report), EOG entered into exploration programs in both the Kingdom of Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. EOG expects to advance both programs throughout 2026.\n\nEOG continues to evaluate other select crude oil and natural gas opportunities outside the United States, primarily by pursuing exploration opportunities in countries where crude oil and natural gas reserves have been identified.\n\n22\n\n\n\n2026 Capital and Operating Plan . Total 2026 capital expenditures are estimated to range from approximately $6.3 billion to $6.7 billion, including exploration and development drilling, facilities, leasehold acquisitions, capitalized interest, dry hole costs and other property, plant and equipment and excluding property acquisitions, asset retirement costs, non-cash exchanges and transactions and exploration costs incurred as operating expenses. EOG plans to continue to focus a substantial portion of its exploration and development expenditures in its major producing areas in the United States. In particular, EOG will be focused on United States drilling activity in its plays where it generates the highest rates of return - specifically, in the Delaware Basin, Utica and Eagle Ford. To further enhance the economics of these plays, EOG expects to continue to improve well performance and to focus on improving operating efficiencies; see the above related discussion. Relative to 2025, full-year oil production for 2026 is expected to increase by approximately 5% and full-year total crude oil, NGLs and natural gas production for 2026 is expected to increase by approximately 13%. In addition, EOG plans to continue to spend a portion of its anticipated 2026 capital expenditures on leasing acreage and evaluating new prospects.\n\nManagement continues to believe EOG has one of the strongest prospect inventories in EOG's history. When it fits EOG's strategy, EOG will make acquisitions that bolster existing drilling programs or offer incremental exploration and/or production opportunities.\n\nCapital Structure . One of management's key strategies is to maintain a strong balance sheet. EOG's debt-to-total capitalization ratio was 20% at March 31, 2026 and 21% at December 31, 2025. As used in this calculation, total capitalization represents the sum of total current and long-term debt and total stockholders' equity.\n\nEOG has significant flexibility with respect to financing alternatives, including borrowings under its commercial paper program, bank borrowings, borrowings under its senior unsecured revolving credit facility, joint development agreements and similar agreements and issuances of additional equity and/or debt securities. For related discussion, see ITEM 7, Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Capital Resources and Liquidity included in EOG's 2025 Annual Report.\n\nCash Return Framework. In November 2023, EOG announced an increase in its cash return commitment - specifically, a commitment, effective beginning with fiscal year 2024, to return a minimum of 70% of annual net cash provided by operating activities before certain balance sheet-related changes, less total capital expenditures, to stockholders, through a combination of regular dividends, special dividends and share repurchases.\n\nFor discussion regarding EOG's payment of dividends and share repurchases, see ITEM 1A, Risk Factors and ITEM 5, Market for Registrant's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities in EOG's 2025 Annual Report and Part II, Item 2, Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.\n\nDividend Declarations. On February 24, 2026, the Board declared a quarterly cash dividend on the common stock of $1.02 per share paid on April 30, 2026, to stockholders of record as of April 16, 2026.\n\nOn May 5, 2026, the Board declared a quarterly cash dividend on the common stock of $1.02 per share to be paid on July 31, 2026, to stockholders of record as of July 17, 2026.\n\n23\n\n\n\nResults of Operations\n\nThe following review of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2026 and 2025 should be read in conjunction with the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements of EOG and notes thereto included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10‑Q.\n\nThree Months Ended March 31, 2026 vs. Three Months Ended March 31, 2025\n\nOperating Revenues and Other. During the first quarter of 2026, total operating revenues increased $1,252 million, or 22%, to $6,921 million from $5,669 million for the same period of 2025. Total revenues from sales of EOG's production of crude oil and condensate, NGLs and natural gas for the first quarter of 2026 increased $760 million, or 17%, to $5,262 million from $4,502 million for the same period of 2025. EOG recognized net gains on the mark-to-market of financial commodity and other derivative contracts of $113 million for the first quarter of 2026 compared to net losses of $191 million for the same period of 2025. Gathering, processing and marketing revenues for the first quarter of 2026 increased $156 million, or 12%, to $1,496 million from $1,340 million for the same period of 2025. EOG recognized net gains on asset dispositions of $31 million for the first quarter of 2026 compared to net losses on asset dispositions of $1 million for the same period of 2025.\n\n\n\n\n\n24\n\n\n\nVolume and price statistics for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2026 and 2025 were as follows (see Note 8 for segment financial information): Three Months Ended\n\nMarch 31, 2026 2025 Crude Oil and Condensate Volumes (MBbld) (1) United States 546.5 500.9 Trinidad 1.9 1.2 Other International (2) 0.1 — Total 548.5 502.1 Average Crude Oil and Condensate Prices ($/Bbl) (3) United States $ 72.48 $ 72.90 Trinidad 68.91 61.12 Other International (2) 89.12 — Composite 72.47 72.87 Natural Gas Liquids Volumes (MBbld) (1) United States 332.1 241.7 Total 332.1 241.7 Average Natural Gas Liquids Prices ($/Bbl) (3) United States $ 22.20 $ 26.29 Natural Gas Volumes (MMcfd) (1) United States 2,769 1,834 Trinidad 239 246 Other International (2) 12 — Total 3,020 2,080 Average Natural Gas Prices ($/Mcf) (3) United States $ 3.75 $ 3.36 Trinidad 3.91 3.78 Other International (2) 3.26 — Composite 3.76 3.41 Crude Oil Equivalent Volumes (MBoed) (4) United States 1,340.1 1,048.3 Trinidad 41.7 42.1 Other International (2) 2.0 — Total 1,383.8 1,090.4 Total MMBoe (4) 124.5 98.1 (1) Thousand barrels per day or million cubic feet per day, as applicable. (2) Production volumes from Bahrain operations; natural gas realized price represents contract price less partner's processing and distribution costs. (3) Dollars per barrel or per thousand cubic feet, as applicable. Excludes the impact of financial commodity and other derivative instruments (see Note 9 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements). (4) Thousand barrels of oil equivalent per day or million barrels of oil equivalent, as applicable; includes crude oil and condensate, NGLs and natural gas. Crude oil equivalent volumes are determined using a ratio of 1.0 barrel of crude oil and condensate or NGLs to 6.0 thousand cubic feet of natural gas. MMBoe is calculated by multiplying the MBoed amount by the number of days in the period and then dividing that amount by one thousand.\n\nCrude oil and condensate revenues for the first quarter of 2026 increased $284 million, or 9%, to $3,577 million from $3,293 million for the same period of 2025, primarily due to an increase of 46.4 MBbld, or 9%, in crude oil and condensate deliveries ($304 million), partially offset by a lower composite average price ($20 million). Increased production was primarily from the Utica. EOG's composite crude oil and condensate price for the first quarter of 2026 decreased 1% to $72.47 per barrel compared to $72.87 per barrel for the same period of 2025.\n\n25\n\n\n\nNGL revenues for the first quarter of 2026 increased $92 million, or 16%, to $664 million from $572 million for the same period of 2025 due to an increase of 90.4 MBbld, or 37%, in NGL deliveries ($215 million), partially offset by a lower composite average price ($123 million). Increased production was primarily from the Utica and Permian Basin. EOG's composite NGL price for the first quarter of 2026 decreased 16% to $22.20 per barrel compared to $26.29 per barrel for the same period of 2025.\n\nNatural gas revenues for the first quarter of 2026 increased $384 million, or 60%, to $1,021 million from $637 million for the same period of 2025, primarily due to an increase of 940 MMcfd, or 45%, in natural gas deliveries ($289 million) and a higher composite average price ($95 million). Increased deliveries were primarily from the Utica and Permian Basin. EOG's composite natural gas price for the first quarter of 2026 increased 10% to $3.76 per Mcf compared to $3.41 per Mcf for the same period of 2025.\n\nDuring the first quarter of 2026, EOG recognized net gains on the mark-to-market of financial commodity and other derivative contracts of $113 million compared to net losses of $191 million for the same period of 2025. The net gains of $113 million included gains of $119 million related to the Brent crude oil (Brent) linked gas sales contract. During the first quarter of 2026, net cash paid for settlements of financial commodity derivative contracts was $53 million compared to net cash paid for settlements of financial commodity derivative contracts of $38 million for the same period of 2025.\n\nGathering, processing and marketing revenues are revenues generated from sales of third-party crude oil, NGLs and natural gas, as well as fees associated with gathering third-party natural gas and revenues from sales of EOG-owned sand. Purchases and sales of third-party crude oil and natural gas may be utilized in order to balance firm capacity at third-party facilities with production in certain areas and to utilize excess capacity at EOG-owned facilities. Marketing costs represent the costs to purchase third-party crude oil, natural gas and sand and the associated transportation costs, as well as costs associated with EOG-owned sand sold to third parties.\n\nGathering, processing and marketing revenues less marketing costs for the first three months of 2026 increased $97 million as compared to the same period of 2025 primarily due to higher margins on crude oil marketing activities.\n\nOperating and Other Expenses. For the first quarter of 2026, operating expenses of $4,323 million were $513 million higher than the $3,810 million incurred during the first quarter of 2025. The following table presents the costs per barrel of oil equivalent (Boe) for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2026 and 2025:\n\nThree Months Ended\n\nMarch 31, 2026 2025 Lease and Well $ 3.71 $ 4.09 Gathering, Processing and Transportation Costs (GP&T) 5.25 4.48 Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization (DD&A) - Oil and Gas Properties 9.03 9.71 Other Property, Plant and Equipment 0.55 0.61 General and Administrative (G&A) 1.49 1.74 Interest Expense, Net 0.53 0.48 Total (1) $ 20.56 $ 21.11 (1) Total excludes exploration costs, dry hole costs, impairments, marketing costs and taxes other than income.\n\nThe primary factors impacting the cost components of per-unit rates of lease and well, GP&T, DD&A, G&A and interest expense, net for the three months ended March 31, 2026, compared to the same period of 2025, are set forth below. See \"Operating Revenues and Other\" above for a discussion of volumes.\n\n\n\n26\n\n\n\nLease and well expenses include expenses for EOG-operated properties, as well as expenses billed to EOG from other operators where EOG is not the operator of a property. Lease and well expenses can be divided into the following categories: costs to operate and maintain crude oil and natural gas wells, the cost of workovers and lease and well administrative expenses. Operating and maintenance costs include, among other things, pumping services, produced water disposal, equipment repair and maintenance, compression expense, lease upkeep, fuel and power. Workovers are operations to restore or maintain production from existing wells.\n\nEach of these categories of costs individually fluctuates from time to time as EOG attempts to maintain and increase production while maintaining efficient, safe and environmentally responsible operations. EOG continues to increase its operating activities by drilling new wells in existing and new areas. Operating and maintenance costs within these existing and new areas, as well as the costs of services charged to EOG by vendors, fluctuate over time.\n\nLease and well expenses of $462 million for the first quarter of 2026 increased $61 million from $401 million for the same prior year period primarily due to increased operating and maintenance costs in the United States ($44 million) and increased lease and well administrative expenses ($19 million).\n\nGP&T costs represent costs to process and deliver hydrocarbon products from the lease to a downstream point of sale. GP&T costs include operating and maintenance expenses from EOG-owned assets, fees paid to third-party operators and administrative expenses associated with operating EOG's GP&T assets. EOG pays third parties to process the majority of its natural gas production to extract NGLs.\n\nGP&T costs of $654 million for the first quarter of 2026 increased $214 million from $440 million for the same prior year period primarily due to increased GP&T costs related to increased production in the Utica ($221 million) and Permian Basin ($11 million), partially offset by decreased costs in the Eagle Ford play ($15 million).\n\nDD&A of the cost of proved oil and gas properties is calculated using the unit-of-production method. EOG's DD&A rate and expense are the composite of numerous individual DD&A group calculations. There are several factors that can impact EOG's composite DD&A rate and expense, such as field production profiles, drilling or acquisition of new wells, disposition of existing wells and reserve revisions (upward or downward) primarily related to well performance, economic factors and impairments. Changes to these factors may cause EOG's composite DD&A rate and expense to fluctuate from period to period. DD&A of the cost of other property, plant and equipment is generally calculated using the straight-line depreciation method over the useful lives of the assets.\n\nDD&A expenses for the first quarter of 2026 increased $180 million to $1,193 million from $1,013 million for the same prior year period. DD&A expenses associated with oil and gas properties for the first quarter of 2026 were $172 million higher than the same prior year period. The increase primarily reflects increased production in the United States ($248 million), partially offset by decreased unit rates in the United States ($69 million) and Trinidad ($9 million). DD&A expenses associated with other property, plant and equipment for the first quarter of 2026 were $8 million higher than the same prior year period primarily related to GP&T assets and equipment.\n\nG&A expenses of $185 million for the first quarter of 2026 increased $14 million from $171 million for the same prior year period primarily due to increased employee-related costs.\n\nInterest expense, net of $66 million for the first quarter of 2026 increased $19 million compared to the same prior year period primarily due to the issuance in July 2025 of the $1,250 million aggregate principal amount of 5.350% Senior Notes due 2036 ($17 million), $1,250 million aggregate principal amount of 5.000% Senior Notes due 2032 ($16 million), $500 million aggregate principal amount of 5.950% Senior Notes due 2055 ($7 million) and $500 million aggregate principal amount of 4.400% Senior Notes due 2028 ($6 million), and the issuance in November 2025 of the $750 million aggregate principal amount of 4.400% Senior Notes due 2031 ($9 million) and $250 million aggregate principal amount of 5.950% Senior Notes due 2055 ($4 million), partially offset by increased capitalized interest ($25 million), the repayment in December 2025 of the $750 million aggregate principal amount of 4.15% Senior Notes due 2026 ($8 million), and the maturity in April 2025 of the $500 million aggregate principal amount of 3.15% Senior Notes due 2025 ($4 million).\n\n27\n\n\n\nImpairments include: amortization of individually insignificant unproved oil and gas property costs as well as impairments of proved oil and gas properties; other property, plant and equipment; individually significant unproved oil and gas property costs; and other assets. Unproved properties with acquisition costs that are not individually significant are aggregated, and the portion of such costs estimated to be nonproductive is amortized over the remaining lease term. Unproved properties with individually significant acquisition costs are reviewed individually for impairment.\n\nThe following table sets forth impairments for the first quarter of 2026 and 2025 (in millions):\n\nThree Months Ended\n\nMarch 31, 2026 2025 Proved properties $ — $ 32 Unproved properties 19 12 Inventories 20 — Total $ 39 $ 44\n\nOther income, net of $23 million for the first quarter of 2026 decreased $42 million from $65 million for the same prior year period primarily due to decreased interest income ($37 million) and an increase in deferred compensation expense ($6 million).\n\nIncome taxes of $575 million for the first quarter of 2026 increased from $414 million for the first quarter of 2025 primarily due to increased pretax income. The net effective tax rate for the first quarter of 2026 increased to 23% from 22% for the first quarter of 2025.\n\nCapital Resources and Liquidity\n\nLiquidity Overview. At March 31, 2026, EOG maintained a strong financial and liquidity position, including $3.8 billion of cash and cash equivalents on hand and $3.0 billion of availability under its senior unsecured revolving credit facility (which remained undrawn).\n\nThe primary source of cash for EOG during the three months ended March 31, 2026, was funds generated from operations. The primary uses of cash were funds used in operations; exploration and development expenditures; dividend payments to stockholders; and share repurchases and other purchases of treasury stock. During the first three months of 2026, EOG's cash balance increased $453 million to $3,849 million from $3,396 million at December 31, 2025.\n\nSee Notes 2 and 10 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion on our debt obligations, including the fair value of our senior notes.\n\nCash Flow. Net cash provided by operating activities of $2,966 million for the first three months of 2026 increased $677 million compared to the same period of 2025 primarily due to an increase in revenues from sales of crude oil and condensate, NGLs and natural gas ($760 million), a decrease in net cash paid for income taxes ($728 million) and an increase in gathering, processing and marketing revenues less marketing costs ($97 million), partially offset by an increase in net cash used in working capital and other assets and liabilities ($386 million), an increase in cash operating expenses ($282 million) and an increase in interest paid ($71 million).\n\nNet cash used in investing activities of $1,545 million for the first three months of 2026 increased $115 million compared to the same period of 2025 primarily due to an increase in additions to oil and gas properties ($110 million), an increase in cash used in working capital associated with investing activities ($86 million) and an increase in additions to other property, plant and equipment ($51 million), partially offset by an increase in proceeds from sales of assets ($132 million).\n\n\n\n28\n\n\n\nNet cash used in financing activities of $968 million for the first three months of 2026 included dividend payments to stockholders ($544 million) and share repurchases and other purchases of treasury stock ($418 million). Net cash used in financing activities of $1,352 million for the first three months of 2025 included share repurchases and other purchases of treasury stock ($806 million) and dividend payments to stockholders ($538 million).\n\nTotal Expenditures. For the full-year 2026, EOG's updated budget for exploration and development and other property, plant and equipment expenditures is estimated to range from approximately $6.3 billion to $6.7 billion, including exploration and development drilling, facilities, leasehold acquisitions, capitalized interest, dry hole costs and other property, plant and equipment and excluding property acquisitions, asset retirement costs, non-cash exchanges and transactions and exploration costs incurred as operating expenses. The table below sets out the components of total expenditures for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2026 and 2025 (in millions):\n\nThree Months Ended\n\nMarch 31, 2026 2025 Expenditure Category Capital Exploration and Development Drilling $ 1,280 $ 1,152 Facilities 118 145 Leasehold Acquisitions (1) 77 48 Property Acquisitions (2) 23 (1) Capitalized Interest 37 12 Subtotal 1,535 1,356 Exploration Costs 45 41 Dry Hole Costs 23 34 Exploration and Development Expenditures 1,603 1,431 Asset Retirement Costs 12 13 Total Exploration And Development Expenditures 1,615 1,444 Other Property, Plant and Equipment 153 102 Total Expenditures $ 1,768 $ 1,546 (1) Leasehold acquisitions included $52 million and $9 million for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2026 and 2025, respectively, related to non-cash property exchanges. (2) Property acquisitions for the three-month period ended March 31, 2026 included $15 million related to revisions to the Encino purchase price allocation.\n\nExploration and development expenditures of $1,603 million for the first three months of 2026 were $172 million higher than the same period of 2025 primarily due to increased exploration and development drilling expenditures ($128 million) and increased capitalized interest ($25 million). Exploration and development expenditures for the first three months of 2026 of $1,603 million consisted of $1,339 million in development drilling and facilities, $204 million in exploration, $37 million in capitalized interest and $23 million in property acquisitions. Exploration and development expenditures for the first three months of 2025 of $1,431 million consisted of $1,317 million in development drilling and facilities, $103 million in exploration and $12 million in capitalized interest.\n\nThe level of exploration and development expenditures, including acquisitions, will vary in future periods depending on energy market conditions and other economic factors. EOG believes it has significant flexibility and availability with respect to financing alternatives and the ability to adjust its exploration and development expenditure budget as circumstances warrant. While EOG has certain continuing commitments associated with expenditure plans re",
      "word_count": 13500,
      "original_language": "EN",
      "author": "Stock Titan",
      "countries": [
        "USA",
        "TTO"
      ],
      "industries": [],
      "tags": [
        {
          "name": "Earnings Releases",
          "code": "FR01",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Shareholder Returns (Buybacks & Dividends)",
          "code": "CM08",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "company_mentions": [
        {
          "uuid": "00062jq",
          "name": "EOG Resources",
          "website": "http://www.eogresources.com/"
        }
      ],
      "article_type": "News analysis",
      "is_press_release": true,
      "is_opinion": false,
      "is_breaking": true,
      "iptc_codes": [
        "20001243",
        "20000386",
        "20000395",
        "20000179"
      ],
      "iab_categories": [
        "110",
        "81"
      ],
      "naics_codes": [
        "523160"
      ],
      "sic_codes": [
        "6221"
      ],
      "entities": {
        "person": [],
        "location": [
          "u.s.",
          "washington, d.c.",
          "houston",
          "delaware",
          "texas",
          "united states of america",
          "trinidad",
          "united states",
          "other international",
          "northern midland basin",
          "utica play",
          "middle east",
          "new mexico",
          "ohio",
          "utica",
          "kingdom of bahrain",
          "delaware basin",
          "united arab emirates",
          "eagle ford play",
          "mento field",
          "eagle ford",
          "bahrain",
          "permian basin",
          "utica and permian basin"
        ],
        "product": [
          "brent crude oil",
          "encinomember",
          "common stock",
          "encino",
          "natural gas",
          "ngls",
          "nymex henry hub",
          "mont belvieu ethane",
          "mont belvieu propane",
          "ngl",
          "ethane",
          "brent",
          "propane",
          "crude oil",
          "butane",
          "condensate",
          "natural gasoline",
          "mento",
          "third-party crude oil"
        ],
        "event": []
      },
      "newsworthiness_score": 0.9383000135421753,
      "group_id": null
    },
    {
      "id": 24186550,
      "title": "Strengthening India’s Position in a Globalised Edible Oil Market",
      "url": "https://www.orfonline.org/research/strengthening-india-s-position-in-a-globalised-edible-oil-market",
      "publisher": "",
      "published_date": "2026-04-26T00:00:00",
      "sentiment": "Neutral",
      "sentiment_score": 0.41200000047683716,
      "ai_summary": "This ORF Occasional Paper analyzes India's edible oil sector, which imports over 56 percent of its consumption (approximately 16 million tonnes annually) despite strong agricultural capacity, with demand projected to nearly double by 2040. The paper identifies structural vulnerabilities including yields below world averages, limited global value chain integration, persistent price volatility for farmers, and India's role as a price-taker in international markets—importing crude oils worth over US$16 billion annually. The authors propose a three-pillar strategy including deeper GVC integration to become a value-added exporter of non-GMO products, institutionalised risk management through sliding-scale tariffs, and fuller utilisation of secondary oils like rice bran and cottonseed oil through modernised processing.",
      "full_text": "Strengthening India’s Position in a Globalised Edible Oil Market Rishi Kant\n\nParul Jain India’s edible oil sector stands at a crossroads, shaped by shifting global dynamics, rising domestic consumption, and persistent import dependence. Despite strong agricultural capacity, India imports over half of its edible oil, and consumption is projected to nearly double by 2040. Although domestic oilseed production has grown substantially, it remains insufficient, exposing the economy to price volatility, foreign exchange pressure, and geopolitical risks. Stagnant yields, weak global value chain (GVC) integration, and limited pricing power further constrain resilience. Smallholder farmers face income volatility due to uneven price transmission and volatile by-product markets. This paper proposes deeper GVC integration, Special Economic Zone (SEZ)-based processing, South–South cooperation, trade recalibration, and investments in sustainable farming, risk management, and value-chain modernisation to build a competitive, resilient, and farmer-centric oilseed economy. Attribution: Rishi Kant and Parul Jain, “Strengthening India’s Position in a Globalised Edible Oil Market,” ORF Occasional Paper No. 540, Observer Research Foundation, April 2026. Introduction Oilseeds are a cornerstone of India’s agri-food system, contributing to food security through dietary energy and essential fatty acids. Soybean, groundnut, mustard, sunflower, and other oilseeds support crop diversification and improve farm incomes, particularly in rain-fed and resource-poor regions. Strengthening domestic oilseed production aligns with Sustainable Development Goal 2 (Zero Hunger) by promoting resilient agricultural practices and crop diversification, reducing rural poverty, enhancing nutrition, and improving access to safe and affordable food. Despite gains in production, expanded cultivation, and greater farmer participation, the sector continues to exhibit structural and economic vulnerabilities. A key concern is the sharp rise in import dependence, which now accounts for over 56 percent of domestic consumption—approximately 16 million tonnes annually—up from about 15 percent in 1995–96.[1] Edible oil demand has consistently outpaced domestic production, driven by population growth, rapid urbanisation, rising per capita incomes, evolving dietary preferences, emerging demand centres such as China and India, and growing demand for biofuels. Per capita edible oil consumption in India has increased from 3.2 kg per annum in 1960–61 to 3.8 kg in 1980–81, 8.2 kg in 2000–01, 15.8 kg in 2012–13, and further to 19.7 kg per annum in recent years.[2] While demand has grown at an average annual rate of 4.3 percent, oilseed production has expanded at a comparatively modest rate of 2.2 percent, widening the supply–demand gap and increasing reliance on imports. This persistent shortfall has heightened India’s exposure to global price volatility and supply disruptions.[3] At the international level, this vulnerability is accentuated by exchange-rate fluctuations that transmit external shocks into domestic markets, impacting millions of Indian oilseed farmers. A strategic realignment that capitalises on evolving global dynamics is critical to reposition India in the oils and derivative products market—not just for self-reliance, but to unlock export opportunities, increase farmer incomes, and build economic resilience. Although a substantial body of research examines India’s edible oil economy—covering yield gaps, rain-fed vulnerabilities, Minimum Support Price (MSP) effectiveness, import dependence, and market volatility—much of it is confined to a domestic production-focused lens. Existing studies predominantly emphasise improving productivity, enhancing procurement mechanisms, and reducing import reliance through horizontal or vertical expansion of oilseed crops. This paper extends the research by adopting a globally contextualised perspective that situates India’s oilseed sector within the evolving global edible oil market. By analysing India’s structural position in global value chains (GVCs), it demonstrates how limited upstream integration contributes to chronic price-taking behaviour and heightened vulnerability to geopolitical and market shocks, an analytical approach that remains underexplored in Indian policy scholarship. The second contribution lies in a crop-specific, value-chain framework that departs from the conventional ‘one-sector, one-policy’ narrative. Rather than treating oilseeds as a homogeneous category, the paper distinguishes between different oilseeds, highlighting their distinct agronomic characteristics, value-chain bottlenecks, by-product market dynamics, and export opportunities. This granular approach underscores the need for differentiated strategies rather than generic interventions, thereby enriching the ongoing discourse on oilseed sector reforms. Finally, this paper proposes a forward-looking, outward-oriented strategy for India’s oilseed sector grounded in global competitiveness and value addition, rather than mere import substitution alone. The recommendations—such as establishing Special Oil Zones (SOZs), non-GMO traceability systems, plant-based protein value chains, price-triggered sliding tariffs, and offshore edible oil partnerships—move beyond traditional policy prescriptions focused on MSP, input subsidies, and productivity enhancements. In doing so, the paper reframes India’s edible oil challenge as both a structural vulnerability and a global market opportunity, offering an integrated policy vision that bridges GVC participation, institutional innovation, sustainability, and farmer-centric risk management. This holistic approach represents a substantive contribution to the scholarship on agricultural transformation and edible oil policy in India. Current State of Institutional Support for Oilseeds India’s experience with oilseed development reflects a shift from focused technology missions to large integrated national programmes. It began with the launch of the Technology Mission on Oilseeds (TMO) in 1986, aimed at raising production through improved agronomic practices and better seed varieties, and moving from fragmented interventions to a mission-mode approach. Empirical studies and official assessments suggest that TMO contributed to increases in yields and output during its active phases, particularly in regions with strong adoption of improved technologies. However, its impact remained uneven across states and was limited by its relatively narrow geographic coverage and dependence on short-term subsidies and demonstration-led approaches. This was followed by the Integrated Scheme of Oilseeds, Pulses, Oil Palm, and Maize (ISOPOM) in 2004, which sought to provide flexibility to states in implementing region-specific strategies. In 2014, the government launched the National Mission on Oilseeds and Oil Palm (NMOOP), focusing on area expansion and productivity enhancement. In 2018, this was subsumed under the National Food Security Mission (NFSM)–Oilseeds and Oil Palm, marking a transition towards wider coverage and more structured targeting. Oilseeds were formally brought within the NFSM to replicate earlier mission-mode gains at a national scale through district-level interventions. While the NFSM contributed to incremental improvements in oilseeds output, its oilseeds component often competed for resources and attention with cereals and pulses, limiting its transformative impact. Nonetheless, it laid the groundwork for better monitoring systems, clearer physical targets, and convergence with state-level schemes. Table 1: Programmes Promoting Oilseeds Production Mission Year Achievements[4] Technology Mission on Oilseeds (TMO) 1986–2004 Year Area (Lakh Ha) Production (LT) Yield (Kg/Ha) 1986–87 186.26 112.70 605 2004–05 275.23 243.54 885 Integrated Scheme on Oilseeds, Pulses, Oil Palm, and Maize (ISOPOM) 2004–2014 Year Area (Lakh Ha) Production (LT) Yield (Kg/Ha) 2004–05 275.23 243.54 885 2014–15 255.96 275.11 1075 National Mission on Oilseeds and Oil Palm (NMOOP) 2014–2018 Year Area (Lakh Ha) Production (LT) Yield (Kg/Ha) 2014–15 255.96 275.11 1075 2018–19 247.94 315.22 1271 National Food Security Mission (NFSM)–Oilseeds and Oil Palm 2018–2023/24 Year Area (Lakh Ha) Production (LT) Yield (Kg/Ha) 2018–19 247.94 315.22 1271 2023–24 301.92 396.69 1314 National Mission on Edible Oils–Oil Palm (NMEO–OP) 2021–present Year Area (Lakh Ha) FFB Production (LT) CPO Production (LT) 2021–22 3.70 20.51 3.48 2023–24 4.97 22.44 3.95 Source: Authors’ own, using sources as cited. In 2021, the National Mission on Edible Oils–Oil Palm (NMEO–OP) was launched with an outlay of INR 11,040 crore, targeting a cumulative 10 lakh hectares under oil-palm cultivation. It is being implemented in 15 states and provides financial assistance to farmers at every stage of cultivation. The mission aims to boost productivity by aiding critical inputs like drip irrigation, water-harvesting structures, pumps, vermicompost units, and essential tools. The Northeast receives additional support for land clearing, bio-fencing, and processing units. Given the high perishability of fresh fruit bunches, the scheme prioritises the development of processing and logistics infrastructure, anchored through public–private partnerships to support farmers. Through tripartite Memoranda of Understanding (MoU) between farmers, processors, and state governments, procurement of fresh fruit bunches is assured at transparent, remunerative prices. A price-gap funding mechanism has been built in to protect farmers from market volatility.[5] In October 2024, the National Mission on Edible Oils–Oilseeds (NMEO–OS) was launched with an outlay of INR 10,103 crore.[6] The mission targets increasing oilseed production from 39.2 million tonnes to 69.7 million tonnes by 2030–31, along with substantial yield and area expansion. Together with the NMEO–OP, it seeks to increase domestic edible oil production to 25.45 million tonnes by 2030–31, meeting around 72 percent of the projected domestic requirement. The TMO focused largely on production technologies, but the NMEO focuses on the entire value chain, which combines on-farm productivity measures with efforts to expand oil palm cultivation, improve extraction from primary and secondary oilseeds, and strengthen processing and marketing linkages. Since 2021, India has recorded its highest levels of oilseeds production and productivity, reflecting the combined effects of favourable weather, improved price incentives, and sustained government support under these missions. This suggests that integrated scale-neutral programmes can deliver measurable gains at the national level. Overall, the comparison highlights that technology missions were effective as catalytic technology-driven interventions, while the NFSM and NMOOP/NMEO represent a more mature integrated policy framework aimed at sustained national-scale impact. The policy lesson is not to view these approaches as substitutes but as sequential stages: early missions built the technological and institutional base, while current programmes seek to consolidate gains through value-chain integration and clearer accountability. Going forward, the NMEO’s effectiveness will depend on rigorous impact evaluation, improved extraction efficiency, and ensuring that productivity gains translate into stable, remunerative outcomes for farmers. In addition to these initiatives, the Government of India has introduced the Pradhan Mantri Annadata Aay Sanrakshan Abhiyan (PM-AASHA) in 2018 to ensure price protection for farmers through mechanisms such as public procurement and price differential payments.[7] Under this scheme, procurement of oilseeds is facilitated by agencies such as the National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India (NAFED) and various state-level bodies. These agencies are entrusted with the procurement of 22 mandated crops (including oilseeds) at MSP, with the objective of reducing market uncertainty for farmers.[8] To streamline procurement and enhance transparency, digital platforms such as NAFED’s e-Samridhi portal and the National Cooperative Development Corporation’s (NCDC) Central Public Procurement Portal have been developed for farmer registration and transaction facilitation. Furthermore, states have the option to adopt a price differential payment mechanism, wherein the difference between the MSP and the prevailing market price is directly transferred to farmers through Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) if the market price falls below the MSP, without undertaking physical procurement through central agencies. Core Issues Faced by India’s Edible Oil Sector India’s edible oil sector is characterised by a persistent and widening gap between domestic production and consumption, resulting in high imports. Despite steady growth in oilseed production, structural constraints—yields below the world average, high production risk, price volatility, global market exposure, underdeveloped hedging mechanisms, inconsistent trade policy, and weak integration into GVCs—have collectively prevented the country from achieving even modest self-sufficiency. This section examines these interlocking challenges in a logical sequence: 1) the demand–supply imbalance and import dependence; 2) the structural divide in production stability between cereals and oilseeds; 3) price-risk exposure and limited hedging; 4) pressures transmitted from downstream value-chain nodes; 5) India’s marginal role in GVCs; 6) the lack of a counter-cyclical trade policy; and 7) crop-specific constraints that necessitate differentiated policy approaches. Oil Demand Rising Faster than Oilseed Yield, Leading to Import Dependency Although domestic oilseed production has increased steadily, it has not kept pace with rising consumption. Yields grew at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 1.9 percent between 1980 and 2022, insufficient to match India’s expanding demand for edible oils. India’s average oilseed yield stands at 1,294 kg/hectare, while countries like the United States (US) and Brazil regularly achieve more than 3,000 kg/hectare for soybean.[9] With limited scope for horizontal expansion (given that agricultural land across the country is more or less saturated), the persistent gap between domestic production and consumption has paved the way for a heavy increase in imports of edible oils, resulting in huge import dependence of around 56 percent to meet domestic needs. Table 2: Production and Yield Trends of Oilseeds Year Area (in Lakh Ha) Production (in Lakh Tonnes) Yield (Kg/Ha) 2011–12 263.08 297.99 1133 2012–13 264.84 309.41 1168 2013–14 280.53 327.54 1168 2014–15 255.98 275.11 1075 2015–16 260.87 252.51 968 2016–17 261.77 312.76 1195 2017–18 245.08 314.59 1284 2018–19 247.94 315.22 1271 2019–20 271.39 332.19 1224 2020–21 288.34 359.46 1247 2021–22 289.45 379.63 1312 2022–23 302.39 413.55 1368 2023–24 301.92 396.69 1314 2024–25 304.40 429.89 1412 2025–26* 294.29 409.98 1393 Source: Department of Agriculture & Farmers’ Welfare.[10] Note: Excludes summer season as the estimates have not been released. Table 3: Oilseeds Production: Top 10 Countries and India Country Yield Area Production (Kg/Ha) (Lakh Ha) (Lakh Tonnes) Germany 3,475 10.26 35.67 United States 3,320 359.86 1,194.57 Brazil 3,243 378.13 1,226.26 France 2,862 19.39 55.51 Argentina 2,760 185.6 512.3 Paraguay 2,554 35.79 91.38 China 2,419 222.35 537.86 Ukraine 2,349 87.88 206.47 Canada 2,234 113.79 254.21 Bolivia 2,199 14.13 31.08 India 1,294 275.98 357.09 Source: FAOSTAT Database, 2025 [11] *Average of Area, Production, and Yield from 2018–19 to 2022–23. Table 4: Per Capita Oil Consumption Over the Years in India Edible Oil Year Rural Urban Groundnut Oil 1993–1994 1.44 2.88 1999–2000 1.44 2.76 2004–2005 0.84 1.92 2009–2010 0.65 1.51 2022–2023 0.25 0.57 Refined Oil 2011–2012 2.72 4.80 Coconut Oil 2009–2010 0.19 0.21 2011–2012 0.18 0.19 2022–2023 0.16 0.34 Mustard Oil 1993–1994 2.04 1.80 1999–2000 2.88 3.00 2004–2005 2.64 2.40 2009–2010 3.44 2.76 2011–2012 3.65 2.90 2022–2023 4.79 3.46 Vanaspati 1993–1994 0.36 0.72 1999–2000 1.08 0.72 2004–2005 0.36 0.60 2009–2010 0.43 0.43 2011–2012 0.24 0.25 2022–2023 0.03 0.05 Edible Oil (Others) 1993–1994 0.60 1.32 1999–2000 1.08 2.04 2004–2005 1.68 3.00 2009–2010 2.92 4.89 2011–2012 0.83 1.13 2022–2023 0.39 0.58 Source: NSSO Household Consumption Expenditure Survey.[12] Import volumes have risen from 1.47 MMT in 1986–87 to 14.19 MMT in 2021–22 to 16 MMT in 2024–25.[13] Of the total edible-oil imports, 55–57 percent comprises palm oil, with the rest consisting of soybean oil and sunflower oil. Over the past decade, the imports of vegetable oils[a] have increased from 10.5 million tonnes in 2011–12 to 16 million tonnes in 2024–25,[14] making India the world’s largest edible-oil importer, leaving behind even the US and China, with imports costing over US$16 billion annually,[15] draining foreign exchange. This dependence heightens vulnerability to global supply shocks, currency fluctuations, and geopolitical events, undermining food security and fiscal stability. Table 5: Trends in Edible-Oil Self-Sufficiency in India Year Domestic Availability of Edible Oils Imports of Edible Oils Total Availability/ Consumption % Self Sufficiency % Share of Imports (November– October) 1995–96 64.68 11.61 76.29 84.78 15.22 1996–97 71.27 14.06 85.33 83.52 16.48 1997–98 60.58 12.66 73.24 82.71 17.29 1998–99 69.6 26.22 95.82 72.64 27.36 1999–2000 60.15 41.96 102.11 58.91 41.09 2000–01 54.99 41.77 96.76 56.83 43.17 2001–02 61.46 43.22 104.68 58.71 41.29 2002–03 46.64 43.65 90.29 51.66 48.34 2003–04 71.4 52.9 124.3 57.44 42.56 2004–05 72.47 45.42 117.89 61.47 38.53 2005–06 83.16 42.88 126.04 65.98 34.02 2006–07 73.7 47.15 120.85 60.98 39.02 2007–08 86.54 56.08 142.62 60.68 39.32 2008–09 84.56 81.83 166.39 50.82 49.18 2009–10 79.46 88.23 167.69 47.39 52.61 2010–11 97.82 72.42 170.24 57.46 42.54 2011–12 89.6 99.4 189.0 47.41 52.59 2012–13 92.2 106 198.2 46.5 53.5 2013–14 101.9 109.8 211.7 48.1 51.9 2014–15 92 138.5 230.5 40 60 2015–16 86.3 148.5 234.8 36.8 63.2 2016–17 100.99 153.17 254.16 39.7 60.3 2017–18 103.8 145.92 249.72 41.6 58.4 2018–19 103.52 155.7 259.22 40 60 2019–20 106.55 134.16 240.71 44.3 55.7 2020–21 111.51 134.52 246.03 45.3 54.7 2021–22 116.5 141.93 258.44 45.1 54.9 2022–23 124.23 165 289.23 42.95 57.04 2023–24 121.75 156.55 278.3 43.74 56.25 2024–25 125.18 160 285.18 43.89 56.11 Source: Authors’ calculations.[16] Figure 1: Trends in Edible Oil Availability in India Source: Authors’ calculations.[17] The Cereal–Oilseed Stability Divide A comparison of cropped area between 2000–01 and 2024–25 reveals clear regional patterns in the growth and decline of oilseed cultivation in India. Although total cropped area has expanded across most regions, this expansion has been driven primarily by cereals and cash crops, with oilseeds showing uneven and regionally concentrated growth. Table 6: Regional Dynamics of Area Under Different Crops (2000–25) Region[b] Area (2000–01) (Lakh/Ha) Area (2024–25) (Lakh/Ha) Central India 287.14 471.08 Cash Crops[c] 10.97 12.77 Cereals[d] 157.28 242.21 Oilseeds[e] 73.98 130.4 Pulses[f] 44.91 85.7 Eastern India 205.25 214.82 Cash Crops 17.89 28.3 Cereals 169.07 166.06 Oilseeds 6.71 8.99 Pulses 11.58 11.47 Northern India 358.96 392.94 Cash Crops 33.59 35.49 Cereals 283.51 307.11 Oilseeds 15.88 28.93 Pulses 25.98 21.41 Southern India 250.15 265.78 Cash Crops 26.93 37.1 Cereals 141.02 161.01 Oilseeds 25.35 13.65 Pulses 56.85 54.02 Western India 234.72 293.53 Cash Crops 38.5 54.79 Cereals 120.69 99.64 Oilseeds 39.15 78.9 Pulses 36.38 60.2 Grand Total 1367.36 1665.93 Source: Agriculture Statistics at a Glance, 2025–26.[18] Central India, comprising Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan, stands out as the principal region where oilseed cultivation has expanded in absolute terms. The total cropped area increased from about 287 to 471 lakh hectare, with oilseed area rising from roughly 74 to 130 lakh hectare. This growth is attributable to soybean expansion in Madhya Pradesh and mustard in Rajasthan, supported by agro-climatic, suitability, and MSP signals. However, cereals expanded even more rapidly, indicating that oilseed growth has occurred alongside, rather than in place of, cereal expansion. This points to area expansion and land reallocation, rather than a fundamental shift towards oilseeds as the dominant crop. Eastern India, including Bihar, Odisha, and West Bengal, shows near-stagnation in overall cropped area, increasing only marginally from about 205 to 215 lakh hectare. Oilseeds remain a miniscule component of the regional cropping pattern, increasing slightly from around 7 to 9 lakh hectare. The region continues to be dominated by rice-based systems, with limited diversification. Weak processing infrastructure, limited market depth, and strong cultural and policy preferences for cereals have prevented oilseeds from emerging as a viable alternative. Northern India, comprising Punjab, Haryana, and Uttar Pradesh, experienced moderate growth in total cropped area, from about 359 to 393 lakh hectare. Oilseed area nearly doubled from around 16 to 29 lakh hectare, largely reflecting mustard expansion in Uttar Pradesh and Haryana. Despite this increase, oilseeds continue to occupy a small share of the regional crop portfolio. The wheat–rice MSP and procurement regime remains the dominant determinant of land use, with oilseeds largely confined to rotational roles rather than cultivated as primary income crops. Southern India, including Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, and Telangana, exhibits the clearest structural decline in oilseed cultivation. While total cropped area rose modestly from about 250 to 266 lakh hectare, oilseed area fell sharply from around 25 to 14 lakh hectare. This decline reflects a sustained shift toward irrigated cereals, maize, cotton, and other cash crops. Rising labour costs, price volatility, and higher yield risk have rendered traditional oilseeds such as groundnut increasingly uncompetitive in this region. Western India, comprising Gujarat and Maharashtra, recorded a substantial increase in total cropped area from about 235 to 294 lakh hectare. Oilseed area increased from roughly 39 to 79 lakh hectare, though this growth was uneven and state specific. Gujarat continues to maintain groundnut and mustard cultivation in certain pockets, while Maharashtra’s oilseed area remains volatile and increasingly crowded out by cotton and other cash crops. The regional increase thus reflects localised competitiveness rather than a broad-based structural shift. Overall, although oilseed area has expanded in absolute terms in parts of Central and Western India, it has declined or stagnated in others and has failed to keep pace with the faster expansion of cereals and cash crops nationwide. The net outcome is a relative decline of oilseeds in India’s cropping pattern, driven by policy-induced cereal dominance, higher risk, lower relative returns in oilseeds, and region-specific crop competition. Oilseed cultivation in India remains structurally constrained by limited access to assured irrigation, restricting both acreage expansion and yield growth. Almost 72 percent of the area under oilseeds is rain-fed, which has held back yield improvement by discouraging investment in yield-enhancing inputs.[19],[20] Paradoxically, the expansion of irrigation infrastructure itself has further marginalised oilseeds by reinforcing cropping patterns biased towards water-intensive crops such as rice and sugarcane. In irrigated regions, assured water availability, combined with policy incentives—including MSP, subsidised electricity, and well-established procurement mechanisms—has encouraged farmers to allocate irrigated land to crops offering higher and more stable returns.[21] In contrast, oilseeds lack comparable procurement support and are subject to pronounced price volatility, leading to their exclusion from irrigated systems despite their relatively lower water requirements. This price instability is further compounded by yield fluctuations, resulting in heightened revenue volatility that increases production risk and discourages farmers from allocating land and capital to oilseed cultivation. Such volatility directly affects farm incomes, price formation, and cropping decisions, particularly in predominantly rain-fed production systems. To capture yield instability, this study employs both the Coefficient of Variation (CV) and the Cuddy–Della Valle-Instability Index (CDVI). While the CV measures relative dispersion, the CDVI adjusts for underlying time trends, thereby providing a more robust estimate of ‘true’ instability.[22] Price Instability Table 7 and Figure 2 illustrate the divergence in risk profiles of cereals and oilseeds. While cereals show high R2 values (>0.85) and low CDVI values, indicating stable and predictable growth, oilseeds exhibit much higher CDVI values. Table 7: Instability Parameters of Agricultural Prices (2011–2025) Category Crop Mean (Rs/Qtl) CV (%) R2 CDVI (%) Cereals Wheat 1,943 17.81 0.86 6.62 Rice 2,162 13.95 0.89 4.62 Oilseeds Soybean 4,059 24.40 0.35 19.67 Sunflower 4,199 24.32 0.74 12.40 Groundnut 4,876 17.85 0.66 10.41 Rapeseed-Mustard 4,524 25.24 0.68 14.28 Source: Agmarknet Database.[23] Note: All values rounded to two decimal places. Figure 2: Instability Parameters of Agricultural Prices (2011–2025) The results point to a pronounced structural divide between cereals and oilseeds. Table 8: High Yield Instability in Oilseeds vs Cereals (1984–2025) Crop Period Mean Yield Std Dev CV (%) R-Squared CDVI (%) Wheat 1984–94 2126.5 190.3 8.95 0.84 3.58 1994–2004 2673.7 109 4.08 0.37 3.24 2004–14 2888.7 213 7.37 0.93 1.95 2014–25 3381.5 268.3 7.93 0.73 4.12 Overall 2767.6 487.1 17.6 0.93 4.66 Rice 1984–94 1612.3 154.6 9.59 0.83 3.95 1994–2004 1933.3 133.6 6.91 0.2 6.18 2004–14 2244.7 156.4 6.97 0.85 2.70 2014–25 2650 182.7 6.89 0.97 1.19 Overall 2110.1 418.1 19.82 0.95 4.43 Groundnut 1984–94 891.3 114.6 12.86 0.16 11.79 1994–2004 998.6 189.4 18.97 0.01 18.87 2004–14 1333.3 299.7 22.48 0.24 19.60 2014–25 1797.1 292.7 16.29 0.6 10.30 Overall 1255.1 414.5 33.02 0.7 18.09 Soybean 1984–94 838.5 167.4 19.96 0.45 14.80 1994–2004 1007.4 140 13.9 0 13.90 2004–14 1137.9 149 13.09 0.23 11.49 2014–25 1030.1 137.8 13.38 0.15 12.34 Overall 1003.5 182.1 18.14 0.29 15.29 Sunflower 1984–94 473.3 87.3 18.45 0.29 15.55 1994–2004 620.5 62 9.99 0.35 8.05 2004–14 671.4 79 11.77 0.37 9.34 2014–25 954.5 193.1 20.23 0.88 7.01 Overall 680 201.5 29.64 0.73 15.40 Source: Agricultural Statistics at a Glance, 2025–26[24] As shown in Table 7 and summarised across decades in Table 8, cereals—specifically rice and wheat—exhibit consistently low instability, with overall CDVI values below 5 percent. This reflects the cumulative impact of assured irrigation, widespread adoption of high-yielding varieties, and strong institutional support through public procurement and price guarantees. Rice, in particular, shows a marked decline in instability over time, with the CDVI falling to negligible levels in the most recent decade. Table 9: CDVI (%) Across Four Decades Crop Category Crop 1984–94 1994–2004 2004–14 2014–25 Overall Stability Status Cereals Wheat 3.58 3.24 1.95 4.12 4.66 Stable Rice 3.95 6.18 2.70 1.19 4.43 Stable Oilseeds Groundnut 11.79 18.87 19.60 10.30 18.09 Unstable Rapeseed-Mustard 8.36 12.84 4.61 6.87 8.56 Unstable Soybean 14.80 13.90 11.49 12.34 15.29 Unstable Sunflower 15.55 8.05 9.34 7.01 15.40 Unstable Source: Authors’ own calculations[25] In contrast, oilseeds display higher and persistent volatility. Figure 3 illustrates that their average yield instability is nearly three times that of cereals. Groundnut emerges as the most volatile crop in the study, with an overall CDVI of 18.09 percent, followed by sunflower (15.40 percent) and soybean (15.29 percent). The high instability reflects their cultivation environment. Unlike cereals, oilseeds are primarily grown on rain-fed and marginal lands, making productivity highly sensitive to monsoon variability and the absence of the protective ‘irrigation shield’ enjoyed by cereals. Figure 3: Yield Instability Index (CDVI): Cereals vs Oilseeds, 1984–2025 Source: Pictorial representation of Table 9, based on authors’ own calculations.[26] Economic Return and Revenue Stability Revenue per hectare, the product of yield per hectare and price, is the ultimate indicator of farmer welfare. Table 10 highlights that although oilseeds can yield high nominal returns, their income stability is compromised by volatility. Table 10: Economic Return and Revenue Instability Analysis (2011–25) Crop Metric Mean Value* CV (%) R2 CDVI (%) Stability Profile Rice Price 2,161.90 13.95 0.892 4.63 Stable Revenue 57,753.00 20.57 0.933 5.32 Stable Wheat Price 1,943.65 17.81 0.862 6.66 Stable Revenue 65,744.09 23.59 0.914 6.91 Stable Groundnut Price 4,876.17 17.85 0.660 10.41 Volatile Revenue 87,945.58 29.53 0.738 15.11 Volatile Rapeseed-Mustard Price 4,523.95 25.24 0.682 14.28 Volatile Revenue 62,713.18 32.50 0.747 16.34 Volatile Soybean Price 4,059.42 24.40 0.354 19.67 Volatile Revenue 42,051.11 28.56 0.448 21.21 Volatile Sunflower Price 4,199.40 24.32 0.742 12.40 Volatile Revenue 38,110.66 39.99 0.867 14.58 Volatile Source: Calculated by cross-referencing annual yield averages with mandi modal prices. Mean values represent the arithmetic average for the 2011–25 period. Revenue is expressed in INR per hectare (calculated as Price*Yield /100) Figure 4: Revenue-Earning Potential vs Income Risk (CDVI) Source: Authors’ own calculations.[27] The analysis confirms a structural divide. Cereals offer a low-risk, trend-positive earning model, largely insulated by domestic policy support. Oilseeds, particularly soybean and groundnut, offer higher potential peaks but suffer from random volatility, driven by global market linkages. For the Indian farmer, ‘stable earnings’ are associated with the cereal sector, whereas oilseeds represent an ‘unhedged’ economic venture. Limited Hedging Against Price Risks and Price-Taker Status India’s persistent import dependence and its downstream role (importing crude oils for refining rather than influencing upstream production) leave it effectively a price-taker in global edible-oil markets. The combination of 1) heavy reliance on a small set of exporting countries, 2) limited upstream integration into estate-scale plantation or crushing/export positions held by global commodity players, and 3) the absence of substantial trade leverage in any single oil market means that India cannot meaningfully influence benchmark prices on Bursa Malaysia or global oilseed/oil markets. The empirical and institutional record supports the conclusion that India operates as a price-taker with limited bargaining power, constrained to reactive tariff changes and import policy adjustments. This is further attributed to its low import share in overall exports of edible oils (see Table 11). Table 11: Top Exporters and Importers of Edible Oils Oil (HS6) Top Exporters (2023) Export Qty (Mt) Top Importers (2023) Import Qty (Mt) World Imports (Mt) Import Share (%) Palm Oil (151190) Indonesia 22.5 China 5.6 47.6 11.8 Malaysia 9.9 Pakistan 2.9 6.1 Netherlands 0.57 European Union (EU) 2.25 4.7 Djibouti 0.42 India 2.25 4.7 Germany 0.29 USA 1.8 3.8 Soy Oil (150710) Argentina 1.57 India 3.5 11.6 29.9 Brazil 1.33 Morocco 0.47 4.1 Russia 0.18 Peru 0.44 3.8 Paraguay 0.11 EU 0.44 3.8 China 0.38 3.3 Sunflower and Safflower Oil (Excl. Crude) (151219) Turkey 0.75 Belgium 0.28 4.00 7.2 EU 0.38 EU 0.29 7.5 Ukraine 0.55 Djibouti 0.27 6.7 France 0.23 France 0.14 3.7 Hungary 0.26 United States 0.11 2.8 Source: ITC Trade Map Database.[28] Price risks in the edible oil sector, driven by global dynamics, affect stakeholders in multiple and asymmetric ways. Farmers face pronounced output-price volatility at the farm gate as international shocks transmit incompletely and with a lag. By-product markets (oil cakes and meal) also fluctuate independently, amplifying income risk for smallholders. Empirical work on international-to-domestic transmission shows partial and asymmetric pass-through in developing country markets: domestic prices tend to fall quickly when international prices decline but rise more slowly when they increase, leaving producers exposed when cost pressures persist. Processors and traders face import-price volatility and margin risk, as India sources a large share of its crude oils from a few exporting countries. Policy shifts abroad—such as export restrictions or taxes—and changes in freight or freight on board (FOB) prices can sharply alter landed costs. Finally, consumers are vulnerable to the transmission of global shocks into retail food inflation. In short, the edible oil system exhibits ‘three-way’ price uncertainty—farmers face output and by-product price risk; processors confront import and landed-cost risk; and consumers bear retail price volatility. The asymmetric nature of transmission tends to disadvantage smallholder producers. The exchange rate channel further compounds these pressures. The rupee’s nominal depreciation against the US dollar (see Figure 5) has raised the import bill and widened the current account deficit. Figure 5: Exchange Rate Trends (2010–25) Source: RBI Reference Rates.[29] During the 2022 global spike in palm and sunflower oil prices, mandi prices for mustard seed rose only modestly (about 5–7 percent), even though global vegetable oil prices increased by more than 25 percent in the same quarter. Processors, however, saw the landed cost of crude palm oil increase by over US$300/tonne within weeks due to Indonesia’s export restrictions. Meanwhile, retail refined oil prices for consumers jumped immediately, demonstrating rapid downstream transmission and slower upstream transmission that leaves farmers most exposed. Figure 6: Price Trends of Oilseeds and Edible Oils (March 2018–February 2026) Source: DOCA Database[30] Source: Agmarknet Database[31] Table 12: Trends in Procurement of Major Oilseeds in India Groundnut Sunflower Soybean Mustard Year Proc Prod % Proc Proc Prod % Proc Proc Prod % Proc Proc Prod % Proc 2012–13 0.00 48.95 0 0.00 5.44 0 0.00 146.68 0 0.00 80.29 0 2013–14 3.41 97.14 4 0.04 5.09 1 0.00 118.61 0 0.00 78.77 0 2014–15 0.08 74.02 0 0.04 4.34 1 0.00 103.74 0 0.01 62.82 0 2015–16 0.00 67.33 0 0.04 2.98 1 0.00 85.70 0 0.00 67.97 0 2016–17 2.11 74.82 3 0.06 2.51 2 0.00 131.59 0 0.38 79.17 0 2017–18 10.51 92.53 11 0.00 2.22 0 0.72 109.33 1 8.73 84.30 10 2018–19 7.17 67.77 11 0.03 2.16 1 0.19 132.68 0 10.88 92.58 12 2019–20 7.23 99.52 7 0.05 2.13 2 0.10 112.28 0 8.03 91.24 9 2020–21 2.88 102.44 3 0.03 2.28 1 0.00 128.10 0 0.00 102.10 0 2021–22 1.49 101.35 1 0.01 2.50 0 0.00 129.87 0 0.00 119.83 0 2022–23 0.07 102.97 0 0.08 3.63 2 0.00 149.85 0 11.14 128.43 9 2023–24 0.74 101.80 1 0.08 1.73 5 0.08 130.62 0 10.42 132.59 8 2024–25 18.02 119.42 15 0.17 2.36 7 19.95 152.68 13 5 128.67 4 Source: DA&FW.[32] Unit: LMT. Empirical research consistently affirms that agricultural commodity derivatives markets play a pivotal role in price discovery and hedging, offering farmers and other stakeholders transparent, forward-looking price signals. Internationally, countries such as the US, Brazil, China, and Malaysia have developed robust futures markets for oilseeds and edible oils, ensuring transparent price signals, efficient hedging, and greater market stability. In contrast, India remains largely a price-taker in global edible oil markets. A vibrant commodity derivatives market can also strengthen the oilseed value chain by improving linkages among producers, processors, traders, and exporters; encouraging private investment; enabling warehouse receipt financing; and aligning Indian prices with global benchmarks. Such mechanisms can stabilise supply–demand flows, reduce speculative distortions, and ultimately help lower dependence on edible oil imports, thereby protecting farmer livelihoods and fostering a more self-reliant oilseed economy. With saturated export markets and reduced global demand depressing oilseed prices and processor margins, farmers face declining realisations. Studies stress that resuming derivatives trading is crucial for providing forward-looking price signals and breaking this cycle.[33] Encouragingly, some progress is evident. In 2025–26, more than 700 Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs), representing 1.16 million farmers and traded commodities such as cotton, castor, and turmeric on the National Commodity and Derivatives Exchange Limited (NCDEX), realised prices nearly 10 percent higher than local traders.[34] Despite these gains, India’s commodity derivatives markets remain underdeveloped. Trading in several key agri-commodities—including mustard, soybean, and palm oil—continues to be suspended by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI). In the absence of reliable forward prices, farmers remain trapped in a classic cobweb cycle, where production decisions are guided by past price movements rather than future expectations. Consequently, India’s oilseed sector faces chronic income insecurity driven by persistent price volatility, market inefficiencies, weak procurement support, and exposure to global edible oil price fluctuations. Limited access to storage infrastructure and opaque price discovery mechanisms further compels farmers to engage in distress sales, exacerbating income instability. Pressures from Forward Nodes of Oilseeds Value Chain Figure 7: All India Soy Oil Price Trends Source: Department of Consumer Affairs on the UPAg Portal.[35] Indian oilseed farmers today face a steady erosion of bargaining power and profitability as crop prices become increasingly decoupled from production costs and more closely tied to global market volatility. A striking example emerged during the Russia–Ukraine war in 2022, when retail soybean oil prices surged to INR 170/kg, fuelling food inflation for consumers but offering little benefit to farmers, who saw no proportional rise in farm-gate prices (see Figure 7). Further, when global prices fall, domestic markets tend to depress farm-gate prices quickly; yet, when prices rise, smallholder farmers rarely benefit proportionately due to long, inefficient value chains and their weak negotiating position vis-à-vis traders and processors. This structural imbalance creates a double blow: farmers are penalised in both declining and rising market cycles, further aggravating the income insecurity embedded in oilseed production. The vulnerability of farmers is compounded by the volatility of by-product markets linked to oilseed processing. By-products such as oilseed cake or meal, which form an important share of farm income, are themselves subject to unpredictable swings in demand and prices, often tied to livestock feed or export markets. This amplification of exposure means that oilseed farmers are not only affected by edible oil price fluctuations but also face risks from dependent markets. The inability to forecast returns with any degree of certainty makes oilseed cultivation a highly precarious venture, deepening the financial fragility of farmers who rely on it as a key source of livelihood. A soybean case study is discussed in the box below. Soybean Dynamics: Disruption in Oilseed Sector due to Soymeal India produces 11–13 million tonnes of soybean annually (around 4–5 percent of global output). Soybean yields approximately 18–20 percent oil and 40–45 percent protein, supporting a wide range of industries, from edible oil and human nutrition to animal feed, plastics, adhesives, and other industrial applications. The price dynamics of soybean are heavily influenced by its processed products, particularly soymeal, an important source of animal feed globally. Lately, a global glut in soymeal production from Brazil, Argentina, and the US; declining demand from a top importing country, China; and rising availability of Distillers Dried Grains with Solubles (DDGS) from maize and rice as a cheaper alternative to soymeal have depressed domestic soymeal prices. This has weakened the economics of oilseeds, including soybean, groundnut, and rapeseed.[36],[37] India’s Limited and Concentrated Role in Edible Oil GVCs India operates primarily at the downstream end of the GVC, importing crude oils for refining and domestic consumption. With limited influence over global pricing, it remains a price-taker vulnerable to international market volatility and geopolitical shocks, such as the Russia–Ukraine war or Indonesia’s 2022 export ban. Oil Type India’s Biggest Exporters Implication for Price Risk Palm Oil Indonesia, Malaysia Highly concentrated suppliers → vulnerability to policy/production shocks in Southeast Asia Soy Oil Argentina, Brazil South American supply risk; freight cost exposure Sunflower Oil Ukraine, Russia Geopolitical risk evident in 2022 While India has untapped potential in value chain associations with non-GMO soybeans, rice bran, cottonseed, and oil palm (with 28 lakh hectares identified for cultivation), its export presence is marginal, constrained by underdeveloped commodity markets, less efficient value chains, and a lack of integration into upstream segments like processing and value-added products (e.g., tofu, soy milk). Countries like Brazil and the US have leveraged integrated production and advanced processing to dominate the global trade in soybean oil and its derivatives, while Malaysia and Indonesia have built competitive advantages in palm oil through estate-scale cultivation and aggressive value-chain development. India, in contrast, has remained confined to low-value activities, limiting both competitiveness and resilience. The implications of India’s limited GVC role are twofold. First, the economy suffers a substantial foreign exchange outflows each year, while farmers remain vulnerable to volatile global prices that directly transmit into domestic markets. Second, India’s lack of bargaining power leaves it exposed to supply disruptions from a handful of exporting nations. Asymmetric Effects of Duty Adjustments India’s edible oil trade policy has been used primarily as a flexible instrument to respond to evolving market conditions, especially during periods of heightened price pressure. The main tool has been adjustments in import duties. These measures have allowed policymakers to respond quickly to inflationary concerns, with a clear emphasis on protecting consumers during episodes of sharp global price increases. The timing of tariff interventions has often been linked to global disruptions affecting edible oil markets. During 2021–22, duty reductions coincided with exceptional shocks such as the Russia–Ukraine conflict, Indonesia’s palm oil export restrictions, and weather-related supply constraints. In this context, lowering import duties helped moderate the pass-through of international price spikes to domestic retail prices. However, because these adjustments were driven by global developments rather than domestic crop calendars, they sometimes overlapped with peak marketing periods for oilseeds, increasing price sensitivity for farmers during those months. The experience of the mustard market during 2021–22 illustrates these dynamics. Between October 2021 and June 2022, import duties on crude palm oil were significantly reduced even as global prices remained elevated. This facilitated faster transmission of lower landed import costs into domestic markets, including during the mustard harvest in Rajasthan (a high mustard producer). While the primary objective was to ease pressure on consumers, price signals in domestic mandis softened during the harvest window. Table 13: India’s Edible Oil Import Duty Trends (2021–24) Date (W.E.F.) Crude Palm Oil Duty Crude Soy and Sunflower Oil Refined Oils Duty Remarks 20 August 2021 30.25 38.50 41.25 Pre-tariff cuts: high protection pre-global price spike 14 October 2021 8.25 5.50 19.25 Large cuts to cool inflation ahead of festive season 20 December 2021 8.25 5.50 19.25 Duty cuts continued, refined duty reduced further 13 February 2022 5.50 5.50 13.75 Duty cuts maintained as global prices rise 24 May 2022 5.50 5.50 13.75 Free import approved to contain inflation 15 June 2023 5.50 5.50 13.75 Duty regime maintained into 2023 14 September 2024 27.50 27.50 35.75 Tariff hiked to support farmers Source: Authors’ own calculations.[38] Note: % totals include Basic Customs Duty + Agriculture Infrastructure & Development Cess + other levies where applicable. A similar balancing act was visible in 2024, when import duties on edible oils were raised to support domestic oilseed prices and reinforce production incentives. As market conditions evolved and inflation concerns re-emerged, elements of this stance were subsequently recalibrated. This sequence reflects the challenge of simultaneously addressing consumer price stability and producer remuneration in a market that is highly exposed to global shocks. Figure 8: Rapeseed and Mustard Oilseed Price Trends (Mar 2021–Feb 2026) Source: Agmarknet Database[39] Overall, the tariff record points to an approach that prioritises responsiveness and adaptability in the face of global uncertainty, with consumer price stabilisation as an important consideration during crisis periods. When viewed alongside external shocks and domestic production cycles, these interventions underline the complexity of using trade policy as a stabilisation tool. Oilseed-Specific Issues The oilseed sector in India is inherently diverse, with each crop’s behaviour differing in agronomy, processing characteristics, end uses, and market demand. As primary sources of edible oil, seven oilseed crops—rapeseed and mustard, soybean, groundnut, sunflower, safflower, sesamum, and niger seed—are widely cultivated. Secondary sources include crops like oil palm, coconut, cottonseed, corn, rice bran, and Tree-Borne Oilseeds (TBOs). A list of major edible oil sources is provided in the table below. Table 14: Major Sources of Edible Oil Primary Sources Other classification[40] Major Oil Rapeseed and Mustard Soybean Groundnut Minor Oil Sesame Sunflower Safflower Niger Seed Oil Palm Coconut Cottonseed Rice Bran Corn Oil TBOs Source: Authors’ own using sources as cited. While there is some degree of interchangeability across oilseeds and their derivative products—such as blending oils or substituting varieties in industrial applications—there is no complete substitutability. This largely reflects differences in culinary traditions, taste preferences, nutritional perceptions, and industrial applications. Consequently, a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach to policymaking in the sector is likely to yield limited results. Instead, crop-specific strategies are needed to address the unique challenges and opportunities associated with each oilseed. For instance, groundnut has strong regional consumption preferences in Gujarat and Tamil Nadu, where its oil is considered a premium edible oil. Groundnut and its derivatives encompass a wide range of food and non-food items, including peanut butter, peanut oil, roasted peanuts, peanut cake, groundnut chikki, peanut milk, and industrial products like paint and varnish. India is the second-largest producer of groundnut in the world after China, accounting for 14.28 percent of global production. Despite high production, India’s productivity (1.36 tonnes/ha) remains much lower than that of other big producers such as China (3.71 tonnes/ha), the US (4.49 tonnes/ha), and Argentina (2.27 tonnes/ha).[41] Groundnut cultivation employs millions of smallholder farmers, particularly in Gujarat, Rajasthan, Andhra Pradesh, and Tamil Nadu, where production reached about 8.44 million metric tonnes in 2024–25.[42] The industry contributes to value addition through oil extraction, meal for animal feed, and exports valued at around 680,000 metric tonnes in 2023–24.[43] However, the groundnut oil industry faces formidable challenges. Productivity remains low due to the predominance of rain-fed cultivation (over 80 percent of the cultivated area) and vulnerability to droughts and climate variability, which limit yields. Table 15: Groundnut Yield in India: Actual vs Potential Yield Type for Groundnut Value (kg/ha) Description Actual Average Yield (2020–25) 1,700 Average yield in India for peanuts (groundnut) over 2020–21 to 2024–25 Potential Yield (Irrigated) 4,000 ICAR-DGR target under irrigated conditions Potential Yield (Rain-fed) 3,000 National target by ICAR-DGR Source: ICAR-DGR[44] Groundnut is also vulnerable to aflatoxin contamination, resulting from improper storage and handling, which poses health risks and creates barriers for exports. Fluctuating prices, high input costs for seeds and fertilisers, and competition from cheaper imported oils like palm and soybean, further aggravate market instability. Supply-chain inefficiencies, limited access to quality seeds, and inadequate processing infrastructure lead to substantial post-harvest losses, with only a fraction of groundnut output converted into high-quality oil. These challenges are compounded by regulatory hurdles related to quality standards and labelling. Similarly, while the area under soybean cultivation has risen from 64.17 LHa in 2000–01 to 132.55 LHa in 2023–24, more than doubling over the 24-year span, the yield has not mirrored this trend. Yield increased from 823 kg/ha in 2000–01 to a peak of 1,353 kg/ha in 2012–13, after which it experienced volatility, ultimately declining to 985 kg/ha in 2023–24[45]. India’s soybean yield is the lowest among the top soybean producers in the world. Further, its actual yield is also much lower than its potential yield, as reflected in high yield gaps. Figure 9: Soybean and Its Uses: India vs Others Source: Our World in Data[46] However, Indian soybeans are naturally non-GMO, a premium trait in high-value markets like Europe, Japan, and potentially China. Most global exports (from Argentina, Brazil, and the US) are GMO-based, giving India an untapped market edge. Globally, non-GMO soy fetches 10–20 percent price premiums due to consumer health concerns and labelling regulations.[47] Further, soybean has a wide range of high-value derivative products, including tofu, soy milk, and textured vegetable protein, which face strong and rising demand in East Asian markets such as China, Korea, and Japan, as well as among vegan consumers. Lately, soybean has also emerged as an important source of nutrition for both humans and animals, providing high-quality protein with minimum saturated fat. About 250g of soybean is equivalent to 3 litres of milk or 24 eggs. Further, soy oil is also rich in Omega-3 and -6 fatty acids. Globally, soybean is increasingly being used in processed products. However, in India, most of soybean goes into animal feed with a declining share of processing (see Figure 9). Case Study of Brazil: From Net Importer of Soybean to Soybean Powerhouse Brazil is the world’s largest soybean producer, with an annual output exceeding 150 million metric tonnes. Average yields are about 3.4 t/ha, supported by the adoption of GMO and herbicide-tolerant seeds; large-scale mechanised farming, state-supported R&D through EMBRAPA (Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation), and sustainable practices in the Cerrado region, such as no-till farming. Integration with GVCs: Along with strides in production, Brazil exports 70 percent of its soybean output primarily to China, the EU, and the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN). Brazil has been able to integrate its soybean ecosystem across the value chain, encompassing production (large commercial farms), processing (crushing units near ports), logistics (dedicated rail and port corridors), and trade finance (via commodity giants like Cargill, ADM, and Bunge). Finally, strong public-private coordination has facilitated alignment with sanitary, traceability, and sustainability standards demanded by international buyers. Net Impact Summary Indicator 1990s 2023 Soybean Production[48] 19.89 million tonnes 152.14 million tonnes Average Yield[49] 1.7 t/ha 3.4 t/ha Export Value[50] USD 957 million USD 51 billion Export Markets EU, small Asian countries China (80%+), EU, ASEAN Note: The export value figure for 1990 pertains to the year 1995. India’s own non-GMO niche, combined with smart logistics and value-added export strategies, can help replicate this success—especially in soy, groundnut, and castor. Figure 10: Oil Yields by Crop Type In comparison with oilseed crops like soybean and groundnut, oil palm exhibits very different dynamics. It offers high yield potential but comes with a 4–5-year gestation period and is concentrated in specific agro-climatic zones. Globally, palm oil is the most traded and consumed edible oil, accounting for over 35 percent of total global vegetable oil trade. With yields higher than other oilseed crops (see Figure 10), a long productive life (typically over 25 years), and consistent harvesting cycles, oil palm provides a reliable source of edible oil. Its cost competitiveness and usage versatility across food, cosmetics, and biofuels make it a vital commodity in global trade. Of the total 78 million metric tonnes of palm oil produced globally, 60 percent and 25 percent come from Indonesia and Malaysia, respectively.[51] These countries also dominate the global exports, supplying to the biggest importers such as India, China, and the EU. India alone imports 8–9 million tonnes annually, making it the world’s largest importer of palm oil. For India, this continued dependence exposes the country to geopolitical and supply-chain shocks, as seen during the Indonesia export ban in 2022. This seems paradoxical, since India has vast untapped potential for domestic palm cultivation. The Indian Institute of Oil Palm Research, in its study, has identified 28 lakh hectares as a potential area for oil palm plantations in 22 states of the country, including the Northeastern states.[52] At present about 6 lakh-hectare area is under oil palm cultivation, leaving ample scope for further expansion in the country. As far as other secondary sources are concerned, rice bran oil and cottonseed oil industries are worth exploring. Cottonseed Oil Cottonseed oil represents one of India’s most important secondary edible oil sources, derived as a by-product of cotton cultivation. Although cotton is primarily grown for fibre, cottonseed accounts for nearly two-thirds of the total biomass of the cotton plant and offers substantial potential for augmenting domestic edible oil availability. Historically, cottonseed oil production in India dates back to the early twentieth century, with the establishment of the first cottonseed oil mill at Navsari in 1914. Annual cottonseed oil production is estimated at 1.3–1.4 million tonnes, accounting for a large share of the indigenous edible oil basket. Consumption is geographically concentrated in cotton-producing states, particularly Gujarat, where the oil is preferred for its high smoke point and suitability for deep frying and food processing applications. Despite its long presence, the sector continues to face structural, technological, and market-related constraints that limit its full contribution to national edible oil self-sufficiency. Processing Structure and Technological Constraints: Cottonseed oil in India is extracted through two broad processing routes: direct crushing and scientific processing. The majority of cottonseed is processed through direct crushing of ginned, un-decorticated seeds in mechanical expellers. While this method is widely adopted due to its simplicity, low capital requirements, and assured market for un-decorticated cottonseed cake as cattle feed, it is technically inefficient. A substantial proportion of oil remains trapped in the cake, leading to lower oil recovery and suboptimal resource utilisation. Scientific processing, by contrast, involves de-linting and dehulling or decortication, followed by oil extraction using expellers and/or solvent extraction methods. This approach enables higher oil recovery and generates valuable co-products such as cotton linters, a high-purity form of cellulose, and de-oiled cake with higher protein and lower fibre content. Despite these advantages, scientific processing has not gained wide adoption in India. High initial investment costs, increased operating expenses, limited domestic demand for linters, and weak acceptance of de-oiled cottonseed meal by dairy farmers have constrained the diffusion of advanced processing technologies. Concerns related to genetically modified cotton, pesticide residues, and refining standards have also influenced consumer perceptions, necessitating stricter quality assurance and regulatory compliance. These factors increase compliance costs for processors while simultaneously affecting consumer trust and market expansion. Despite these challenges, cottonseed oil holds considerable untapped potential. Industry estimates suggest that with wider adoption of scientific processing, India’s cottonseed oil production could reach about 1.8 million tonnes annually, representing nearly a 50 percent increase over current levels. Such gains could be achieved without expanding cotton acreage, solely through improved processing efficiency and value recovery[53][54] Rice Bran Oil (RBO) RBO occupies a strategically important position in India’s edible oil landscape as a value-added by-product of rice milling. Given India’s status as the world’s second-largest producer of rice, RBO represents a substantial yet underutilised domestic resource for enhancing edible oil self-sufficiency. Extracted from the outer layer of the rice grain, RBO is recognised for its favourable fatty acid profile, high smoke point, and the presence of bioactive compounds such as oryzanol, tocopherols, and tocotrienols, which have contributed to its growing acceptance among health-conscious consumers. India produces approximately 9–10 million tonnes of rice bran annually, of which nearly 60–65 percent is theoretically oil-bearing. However, only about 5 million tonnes of rice bran are currently processed, resulting in an annual RBO production of around 1.2–1.6 million tonnes.[55] This indicates that less than half of the available rice bran is effectively utilised for oil extraction, leading to significant foregone domestic edible oil output. RBO is classified as a ‘secondary source’ edible oil, similar to cottonseed oil, but its potential contribution to edible oil self-sufficiency is comparatively larger due to the scale of rice cultivation and milling operations across the country.[56] Despite these constraints, the growth prospects for RBO in India are substantial. The global RBO market was valued at US$6.8 billion in 2024 and is projected to reach US$12.1 billion by 2031, growing at a CAGR of 7.3 percent.[57],[58] If existing rice bran availability were fully utilised, India could potentially produce over 2.5 million tonnes of RBO annually, enhancing domestic edible oil supply. Technological interventions such as decentralised stabilisation units, energy-efficient extrusion systems, and improved logistics integration between rice mills and oil extractors could unlock this potential. RBO production also contributes to rural value addition by transforming an agricultural by-product into a high-value edible oil, generating employment and income across the rice value chain. Processing and Technological Challenges: A defining challenge in RBO production is the rapid deterioration of raw rice bran due to the activity of lipase enzymes. Once rice is milled, lipase initiates the hydrolysis of triglycerides, causing a rapid increase in free fatty acid (FFA) content within a few hours. Elevated FFA levels reduce oil recovery and increase refining losses, thereby raising production costs and lowering profitability. To mitigate this problem, bran stabilisation technologies—such as heat treatment, extrusion, or chemical stabilisation—are required immediately after milling. However, the adoption of stabilisation infrastructure remains limited, particularly among small and medium rice mills, due to high capital costs and energy requirements. As a result, a large proportion of rice bran is diverted to low-value uses such as cattle feed rather than oil extraction. Additionally, the refining of RBO is more complex compared to other edible oils because of its higher wax and gum content. This necessitates advanced refining technologies, further increasing operational costs and acting as a barrier to entry for new processors.[59] Repositioning Edible Oils: From Passive Price-Taking to Strategic Value Creation The sectoral dynamics of edible oils today are heavily influenced by supply-side factors such as agricultural practices, climate conditions, and geopolitical developments, especially in leading producing countries. The recent supply-chain disruptions on account of the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia–Ukraine war testify to the sector’s volatility. Further, countries like Indonesia and Malaysia (the large producers of palm oil) are increasingly diverting palm oil to the production of biodiesel, thereby creating a void in the palm oil markets.[60] On the demand side, global vegetable oil consumption for food is anticipated to grow around 3 percent annually, fuelled by population growth, urbanisation, rising incomes, and dietary shifts, especially in developing economies like China and India.[61] These developments, along with the existing challenges, present not only strategic risks but also potential opportunities waiting to be capitalised on. The emerging strategy for the oilseed sector is increasingly shifting towards an outward-looking approach that seeks deeper integration with GVCs, in contrast to the inward-looking model traditionally followed. For such a strategy to succeed, however, an enabling ecosystem is essential—one that ensures predictability and stability through rule-based trade policy rather than knee-jerk responses, safeguards the interests of small and marginal farmers to prevent their exclusion from the benefits of global integration, and complements these measures with supportive actions such as investment in research and development, infrastructure strengthening, risk management mechanisms, and promotion of sustainable production practices. The following section therefore sets out specific policy prescriptions aimed at translating these opportunities into concrete avenues of growth and prosperity for India’s oilseed sector. 1. Crop-Specific Interventions 1) Building Processing Infrastructure and Brand Repositioning RBO and Cottonseed Oil Achieving fuller utilisation of RBO and cottonseed oil will lead to a systematic integration of secondary edible oil sources into India’s self-sufficiency framework. A core strategic priority should be the modernisation of processing infrastructure through focused capital support for rice bran stabilisation units and scientifically designed cottonseed processing plants. A dedicated incentive for decentralised rice bran stabilisation at or near rice mills and for de-linting–decortication–solvent extraction systems in cotton-growing regions could substantially improve oil recovery rates without increasing cultivated area. Such investments would directly address technological inefficiencies, reduce post-harvest losses, and enhance value realisation from existing agricultural output. Equally important is strengthening supply chain integration and market development. The NMEO framework could facilitate structured linkages between rice mills, oil extractors, and refiners to ensure timely bran collection and stabilisation, thereby mitigating lipase-induced degradation in rice bran. Parallel consumer-side interventions—such as quality certification, awareness campaigns on functional and health attributes, and the inclusion of rice bran and cottonseed oils in public procurement and institutional feeding programmes—can expand demand beyond traditional markets and improve price stability. Finally, the strategic utilisation of RBO and cottonseed oil must be embedded within the broader goals of import substitution, rural value addition, and environmental sustainability. Since both oils are derived from agricultural by-products, their expansion aligns with resource efficiency and circular economy principles while minimising land-use trade-offs. A coordinated approach that combines technology deployment, policy incentives, and market facilitation can enable these secondary oils to collectively contribute several million tonnes of additional domestic edible oil, thereby strengthening India’s resilience to global price volatility and advancing long-term edible oil self-sufficiency. 2) Sharpening Focus on Derivative Products and Developing Supply Chains for Groundnut Promoting high-yield, drought-resistant groundnut varieties and expanding micro-irrigation can boost yields by 20–30 percent, while FPO-led cluster farming ensures stable supply chains.[62] Modernising processing through solvent extraction and cold-pressing units, alongside improved aflatoxin control technologies, can increase oil recovery and output. Developing organic and fortified groundnut oil, branded as heart-healthy, taps into the global organic oil market and urban India’s growing health consciousness. Export potential to the US and the EU, where organic oil demand is substantial, can be unlocked with quality certifications and Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA) support. 3) Promoting Value Chain Diversification in Soybean To capture the broad range of premium derivative products, a targeted domestic value-addition strategy may be adopted. The US has developed a robust export ecosystem for soymeal, tofu, and Textured Vegetable Protein (TVP), while Brazil has expanded soy protein and biodiesel exports. India may incentivise processing infrastructure for tofu, soy milk, and TVP to reduce raw export dependency by launching a soy export strategy targeting tofu and soymeal. A Soy Innovation Fund could also be established to promote plant-based protein startups, particularly targeting urban and health-conscious consumers, with support through Startup India and MoFPI incubation grants. In parallel, initiatives to promote behavioural shifts in consumption toward soy-based products could help expand the domestic market. There is also a need to develop a National Certification and Traceability System for non-GMO soymeal exports, which fetch a 15–20 percent premium over GMO meal in the East Asian markets. The India Soy Alliance may also be established with top exporters (e.g., Brazil, Argentina) to shape global norms and hedge against supply risks. This alliance also works towards exploring new export markets. Appointment of agricultural attachés in trade missions will also aid in integrating soymeal/oil promotion into Make in India diplomacy. 4) Towards Sustainable and Health Oil Production With increasing incomes, there is also increased health consciousness and rising demand for healthy oils and non-GMO products like soymeal, tofu, and tempeh, fetching 10–20 percent premiums in health-conscious markets like Japan, Korea, and the EU. Increased environmental awareness in European countries (the EUDR norms)[63] for palm oil imports presents an export opportunity for India, which has 28 lakh hectare non-forest degraded land suitable for palm cultivation. To add to this, the recent rise in demand for biofuels globally is also contributing to increased demand for oilseeds India possesses natural advantages in cultivating non-GMO soybeans, groundnut, mustard, and even oil palm. Trade realignment can make India a value-added exporter while continuing to import raw oils, especially in non-GMO soy oil, RBO, and groundnut oil. As part of a long-term strategy to position itself within the global oil value chain, India must prioritise developing its own sustainability standards. This will not only safeguard market access in high-value export destinations but also enhance India’s credibility as a responsible producer, mitigating concerns over deforestation and environmental degradation. 2. Trade-Side Interventions 1) A Dynamic but Stable Trade Policy A sliding-scale import duty system that adjusts based on pre-defined international price triggers and domestic harvesting cycles will act as a counter-cyclical tariff policy that stabilises domestic prices. When international prices fall below a benchmark (e.g., a moving average of past prices or a cost-of-production-plus margin), duties would rise to protect domestic producers from import surges. Conversely, during sharp global price spikes, duties could be temporarily lowered to protect consumers. 2) Recalibrating FTAs To protect farmers, FTAs should incorporate calibrated tariff safeguards and import-price mechanisms, such as a Minimum Import Price linked to the domestic MSP. This could prevent disruptive dumping via preferential routes like the South Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA) countries (e.g., Nepal) that lack oilseed capacity while still preserving liberalised access elsewhere. Moreover, renegotiating existing FTAs (e.g., ASEAN–India and India–Malaysia CECA) to selectively phase liberalisation or allow temporary safeguard triggers in times of domestic price stress could help balance competitiveness with farm stability. 3) Developing Special Oil Zones A dedicated ‘Special Oil Zone (SOZ)’, crafted on the blueprint of India’s successful Special Economic Zones (SEZs), could enhance the export potential of oil and its derivative products. Internationally, petrochemical clusters—like those in Singapore and Korea—have thrived with such frameworks, benefiting from agglomeration economies, shared infrastructure, and export‑led scale. In the Indian context, Andhra Pradesh’s PCPIR‑linked Visakhapatnam SEZ and the Mangalore SEZ operated by the Oil and Natural Gas Company (ONGC)—demonstrate how combining port access, refineries, and petrochemical capacities within a customs‑special enclave can generate high value-chain integration and export capacity. 4) Enhancing Edible Oil Production within Offshore Farming Frameworks India can also explore establishing agro-processing hubs for edible oil production in other countries by leveraging a comprehensive model that combines technology transfer, strategic partnerships, and integrated value-chain development, similar to China’s Agricultural Technology Demonstration Centres approach but adapted to India’s specific agricultural expertise. A strong potential is evident for India–Africa cooperation.[64] India's successful cooperative models, such as Amul, contract farming frameworks, and ICT-based agricultural solutions (e-Choupal), provide proven templates for establishing processing centres that can achieve a 30–60 percent yield improvement, as demonstrated by similar technology transfer initiatives. 3. Deploying Firewalls for Price Discovery and Risk Management India’s oilseed sector requires the development of a robust commodity derivatives market where price discovery and risk management function in tandem to protect farmers and strengthen value chains. Such markets, when aligned with MSP, warehousing, and crop insurance, can generate transparent, forward-looking price signals while enabling farmers to hedge against volatility, thereby preventing the cobweb cycle of boom-bust production. Resuming commodity trading in key oilseeds and expanding participation of the FPOs can provide farmers with reliable price benchmarks, reduce speculative distortions, and stabilise incomes. 4. Reforming Agricultural Incentives to Internalise Negative Environmental Externalities Transition from crop-specific input subsidies (often skewed towards grains like paddy and wheat, leading to resource imbalances) to climate-resilient, crop-neutral, and outcome-based incentives should lead to desirable outcomes like improved water-use efficiency, enhanced soil health, increased carbon sequestration, and biodiversity promotion. Instead of subsidising electricity or fertilisers, which encourages their overuse, DBTs or payments for ecosystem services could be provided to farmers who adopt verifiable sustainable practices. Conclusion: Towards a Resilient and Integrated Oilseed Economy India’s edible oil sector currently operates under a ‘three-way’ uncertainty, where farmers, processors, and consumers remain vulnerable to the volatile ebbs and flows of the global market. This study has demonstrated that while domestic production has achieved high growth, a structural ‘stability divide’ persists between the heavily supported cereal sector and the largely ‘unhedged’ oilseed sector. The weakest link in this system remains India's smallholder oilseed farmers, whose livelihoods are intrinsically linked to global edible oil price movements and the structure of domestic agricultural policy. The current model of passive price-taking, characterised by high import dependence (56 percent) and asymmetric price transmission, is no longer sustainable for a nation aspiring towards agricultural self-reliance. Additionally, India lacks influence on global commodity exchanges like Bursa Malaysia or the Chicago Board of Trade, where benchmark prices for palm and soybean oil are set. It also has little control over external factors such as export restrictions by producing countries, adverse weather in South America, or geopolitical disruptions like the Russia–Ukraine conflict. While India can tweak import duties or provide domestic incentives, these are reactive tools that do not influence global price trends. To transition from a vulnerable importer to a strategic global player, India must move beyond traditional ‘production-only’ missions. Going forward, greater predictability—such as clearer signalling on the conditions under which tariffs may be adjusted—could complement this flexibility and help align short-term market management with the longer-term objective of strengthening domestic oilseed production. This paper advocates for a three-pillar strategic reorientation: GVC Integration and Value Creation: Rather than pursuing mere import substitution, India should leverage its unique non-GMO niche to become a value-added exporter of high-value derivatives like soy protein, tofu, and heart-healthy oils. Institutionalised Risk Management: The ‘random-volatility’ inherent in rain-fed oilseed cultivation requires more than just MSP; it necessitates the implementation of ‘sliding-scale’ tariffs and price-triggered firewalls to protect domestic producers from international shocks. Harnessing Secondary Potentials: Fully utilising under-tapped resources like rice bran and cottonseed oil through modernised scientific processing could add millions of tonnes to the domestic basket without requiring additional land—critical in a land-saturated economy. By integrating these strategies, India can reposition itself within the global value chain, not just as a consumer, but as a resilient, competitive, and farmer-centric oilseed powerhouse. The path to self-sufficiency lies in transforming the edible oil challenge from a structural vulnerability into a global market opportunity. This ‘Yellow Revolution 2.0’ is outward-oriented, brand-driven, and rooted in global demand cues. Rishi Kant is an Indian Economic Service (IES) officer of the 2012 batch. Currently, he is director in the Department of Agriculture & Farmers’ Welfare, Government of India. Parul Jain is an IES officer of the 2021 batch, currently posted as deputy director in the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade, Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Government of India. All views expressed in this publication are solely those of the authors, and do not represent the Observer Research Foundation, either in its entirety or its officials and personnel. Endnotes [a] Vegetable oils comprise the single-largest commodity in India’s total agriculture imports, with an estimated share of 42.3 percent in 2023–24. [b] Central India: Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh. Northern India: Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh. Eastern India: Bihar, Odisha, West Bengal. Western India: Maharashtra, Gujarat. Southern India: Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu. [c] Cash Crops= cotton, sugarcane [d] Cereals= wheat, rice, maize and nutria-cereals [e] Oilseeds= groundnut, soybean, rapeseed mustard and sunflower [f] Pulses= tur, gram, urad, lentil [1] Authors’ own calculations based on import data from the Directorate General of Commercial Intelligence and Statistics, and agricultural production data from the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare, Government of India. [2] NITI Aayog, Government of India, Pathways and Strategy for Accelerating Growth in Edible Oil towards the Goal of Atmanirbharta (New Delhi: NITI Aayog, 2024), https://www.niti.gov.in/sites/default/files/2024-08/Pathways_and_Strategy_for_Accelerating_Growth_in_Edible_Oil_towards_Goal_of_Atmanirbharta_August%2028_Final_compressed.pdf. [3] NITI Aayog, Pathways and Strategy for Accelerating Growth in Edible Oil towards the Goal of Atmanirbharta. [4] Department of Agriculture & Farmers' Welfare, Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers' Welfare, Government of India, Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2024–25 (New Delhi: Department of Agriculture & Farmers' Welfare, 2025), https://desagri.gov.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Agricultural-Statisitcs-at-a-Glance-2024-25_%E0%A4%95%E0%A5%83%E0%A4%B7%E0%A4%BF-%E0%A4%B8%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%82%E0%A4%96%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%95%E0%A5%80-%E0%A4%8F%E0%A4%95-%E0%A4%9D%E0%A4%B2%E0%A4%95-2024%E2%80%9325.pdf. [5] ‘A Push Towards Edible Oil Security’, Financial Express, 8 July 2025. https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/a-push-towards-edible-oil-security/3907351/ [6] Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers' Welfare, Government of India, https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2061646. [7] Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers' Welfare, Government of India. https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2085530. [8] Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers' Welfare, Government of India. https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2085530. [9] B. Yogesh Bhatt and Pramesh Jit, Estimating and Bridging the Yield Gaps in Oilseeds for Atmanirbhar Bharat (Vallabh Vidyanagar: Agricultural Economics Research Centre, 2022), https://desagri.gov.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/2022-23-Estimating-and-Bridging-the-Yield-Gaps-in-Oilseeds-for-Atma-Nirbhar-Bharat.pdf. [10] Department of Agriculture & Farmers’ Welfare (DAFW), Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers’ Welfare, Government of India, Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2025–26 (New Delhi: Department of Agriculture & Farmers' Welfare, 2026), https://desagri.gov.in/. [11] Food and Agriculture Organization, FAOSTAT Database, “Crops and Livestock Products—Oilseeds,” 2025, https://www.fao.org/faostat. [12] National Sample Survey Office, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI), Government of India, Household Consumption Expenditure Survey 2022–23 (New Delhi: MoSPI, 2024), https://mospi.gov.in/sites/default/files/publication_reports/Report_HCES_2022-23.pdf. [13] NITI Aayog, Pathways and Strategy for Accelerating Growth in Edible Oil towards the Goal of Atmanirbharta. [14] Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices, Questionnaire: Marketing Season 2023 (New Delhi: Government of India, 2024). [15] “India Aims to Double Edible Oil Output to Trim Reliance on Imports,” Reuters, October 3, 2025, https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/india-aims-double-edible-oil-output-trim-reliance-imports-2024-10-03/ [16] Based on import data from Directorate General of Commercial Intelligence and Statistics and agricultural production data from Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare, Government of India. [17] Authors’ own calculations based on import data from Directorate General of Commercial Intelligence and Statistics and agricultural production data from Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare, Government of India. [18] DAFW, Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2025–26. [19] R.K.Singh, S.S.Rathore, Kapila Shekhawat, P.K.Upadhyay, and V.K.Singh, “Best Management Practices for Doubling Oilseed Productivity: Aiming India for Self‑Reliance in Edible Oil,” Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences (2019). [20] S.K. Srivastava, S. Ghosh, A. Kumar, P.S.B.A. Pothula, and S.S. Raju, “Trends in Irrigation Development and Its Impact on Agricultural Productivity in India,” Agricultural Economics Research Review 26, no. 2 (2013): 213–229. [21] P.S. Birthal, Digvijay S. Negi, Rajesh K. Singh, and Shikha Aggarwal, “Crop Diversification in India: Trends, Determinants and Policy Implications,” Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics 70, no. 2 (2015): 185–202. [22] John D.A. Cuddy and P.A. Della Valle, “Measuring the Instability of Time Series Data.” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 40, no. 1 (1978): 79–85. [23] Directorate of Marketing and Inspection, Government of India, “AGMARKNET Database: Market-wise Prices and Arrivals,” https://agmarknet.gov.in. [24] DAFW, Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2025–26. [25] Authors’ own calculations based on yield data from 1984–2025 from Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2025–26. [26] Authors’ own calculations based on yield data from 1984–2025 from Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2025–26. [27] Authors’ own calculations by cross-referencing annual yield averages with mandi modal prices from Agmarknet. Mean values represent the arithmetic average for the 2011–25 period. Revenue is expressed in INR per hectare (calculated as Price*Yield /100). [28] International Trade Centre, Trade Map: Trade Statistics for International Business Development (Geneva: International Trade Centre) https://www.trademap.org. [29] Reserve Bank of India, “RBI Reference Rate Database,” https://www.rbi.org.in. [30] Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, “DOCA Database: Wholesale Prices,” https://doca.gov.in. [31] AGMARKNET Database: Market-wise Prices and Arrivals.” [32] DAFW, Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2025–26. [33] Anirudh Burman, Ila Patnaik, Ajay Shah, and Shubho Roy, “Diagnosing and Overcoming Sustained Food Price Volatility: Enabling a National Market for Food”, Working Paper, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy, 2018. [34] Sandip Das, “Farm Futures Make Headway, as FPOs Keen on Better Price Discovery,” Financial Express, August 10, 2025, https://www.financialexpress.com/policy/economy-farm-futures-make-headway-as-fpos-keen-on-better-price-discovery-3942249/ [35] Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, “Soy Oil Prices—Wholesale and Retail,” UPAg Portal, https://www.upag.gov.in. [36] “India’s Ethanol Drive Imperils Its Push for Edible Oil Self-Sufficiency,” Reuters, August 12, 2025, https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/indias-ethanol-drive-imperils-its-push-edible-oil-self-sufficiency-2025-08-12/. [37] “DDGS Has Become a Headache for the Poultry, Animal Feed, Edible Oil, Sugar, and Oilmeals Industries,” Igrain India, December 2, 2024, https://igrain.in/posts/ddgs-has-become-a-headache-for-the-poultry. [38] Authors’ own calculations based on data on custom duties on edible oils from CBIC. [39] AGMARKNET Database: Market-wise Prices and Arrivals. [40] Bhatt and Jit, Estimating and Bridging the Yield Gaps in Oilseeds for Atmanirbhar Bharat. [41] V.K. Gondalia, Jignesh Macwan, and K.S. Jadav, Emerging Trends in Export of Groundnut, Sesame and Castor from India (Anand: Anand Agricultural University, 2020). [42] DAFW, Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2025–26. [43] Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority, Government of India, Groundnuts: Production and Exports, 2023–24 (New Delhi: Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority, 2024). [44] Indian Council of Agricultural Research–Directorate of Groundnut Research, https://icar-iigr.org.in/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/AICRP-G-Varieties.pdf [45] DAFW, Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2025–26. [46] Hannah Ritchie, Pablo Rosado, and Max Roser, “Soybean Production and Use,” Our World in Data, 2023, https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/soybean-production-and-use. [47] US Soybean Export Council, 2024 Non-GMO Acreage Report, (St. Louis: USSEC, 2025), https://solutions.ussec.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/20241015_USSEC-2024-Non-GMO-Acreage-Report-v2.pdf. [48] FAOSTAT Database, 2025. [49] FAOSTAT Database, 2025. [50] Harvard Growth Lab, Atlas of Economic Complexity (Harvard University: Harvard Growth Lab) https://atlas.hks.harvard.edu/explore/treemap?exporter=country-76&year=1995. [51] World Food and Agriculture – Statistical Yearbook 2022 (Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization, 2022), https://doi.org/10.4060/cc2211en. [52] Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers' Welfare, Government of India. https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1783878®=3&lang=2. [53] Indian Cotton Association, Cotton and Cottonseed Outlook in India (Mumbai, Indian Cotton Association, 2024). [54] Persistent Market Research, “Rice Bran Oil Market Forecasted to Attain US$ 12.1 Bn by 2031 Driven by Growing Preference for Heart-Healthy Cooking Oils,” Open PR, 22 March 2025, https://www.openpr.com/news/3930732/rice-bran-oil-market-forecasted-to-attain-us-12-1-bn-by-2031. [55] Mohan R. Kumar and Boraiah B. Yamanura, “Rice Bran Oil: A Silver Lining to Indian Edible Oil Economy,” Agricultural Reviews 43, no. 4 (2022): 469–474. [56] Solvent Extractors' Association of India, Status Paper on Rice Bran Oil Industry in India, (Mumbai: Solvent Extractors' Association of India, 2024). [57] Persistence Market Research, “Rice Bran Oil Market.” [58] Anjani Kumar and Haruhiko Yamanura, \"Rice Bran Utilization and Edible Oil Security in India,\" Agricultural Economics Research Review 35, no. 2 (2022): 145–158. [59] Kumar and Yamanura, \"Rice Bran Utilization and Edible Oil Security in India.\" [60] Rajendra Jadhav, Bernadette Christina, and Ashley Tang, \"The End of Cheap Palm Oil? Output Stalls as Biodiesel Demand Surges,\" Reuters, March 9, 2025, https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/end-cheap-palm-oil-output-stalls-biodiesel-demand-surges-2025-03-09/. [61] NITI Aayog, Pathways and Strategy for Accelerating Growth in Edible Oil towards the Goal of Atmanirbharta. [62] P.S. Reddy and M.S. Basu, “Groundnut Varieties of India,” Technical Bulletin (Junagadh: National Research Centre for Groundnut, ICAR, 1989). [63] “Regulation (EU) No 2023/1115 on the Making Available on the Union Market and Export from the Union of Certain Commodities and Products Associated with Deforestation and Forest Degradation,” Official Journal of the European Union (2023). [64] Pricewaterhouse Coopers India, India–Africa Partnership in Agriculture: Current and Future Prospects (New Delhi: PwC India, 2016). Further Reading: Ashok Gulati and Shweta Saini, From Food Scarcity to Surplus: Transforming India’s Edible Oil Economy (New Delhi: Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, 2022). Ashok Gulati, Rahul Sharma, and Purnendu Banerjee, From Plate to Plough: Agricultural Transformation in India (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2018). Gupta and S. Tiwari, “By-product Market Volatility and Its Impact on Oilseed Farmers in India,” Journal of Agricultural Economics 73, no. 4 (2022): 112–130. Kumar and A. Gupta, “Global Market Shocks and Indian Agriculture: A Case Study of Oilseed Markets,” Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 92, no. 5 (2022): 645–652. Joe Parcell, Alice Roach, Yasutomo Kojima, and Wayne Kayne, “Global Vegetable Oil Market Trends,” Biomedical Journal of Scientific and Technical Research, no. 2 (2018). Suresh and R.K. Mathur, “Crop Diversification through Oilseeds for Enhancing Productivity and Profitability,” Indian Farming 75, no. 2 (2025): 15–19. The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews. PREV NEXT",
      "word_count": 12197,
      "original_language": "EN",
      "author": "Observer Research Foundation",
      "countries": [
        "IND"
      ],
      "industries": [
        {
          "name": "Vegetable Oil Crushing & Refining (Soy, Canola/Rapeseed, Sunflower, Corn, Cottonseed)",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Palm Oil Milling, Refining & Fractionation",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Mixed Oilseed & Pulse Farming (Multi-crop rotations/combined operations)",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        {
          "name": "Sector Outlook & Forecasts",
          "code": "MM07",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Trade, Tariffs & Sanctions",
          "code": "MM04",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Economic Indicators",
          "code": "MM01",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "company_mentions": [],
      "article_type": "Academic",
      "is_press_release": false,
      "is_opinion": true,
      "is_breaking": false,
      "iptc_codes": [
        "20000389",
        "20000210",
        "20000344"
      ],
      "iab_categories": [
        "102",
        "96",
        "81"
      ],
      "naics_codes": [
        "1111",
        "311224",
        "311225"
      ],
      "sic_codes": [
        "100",
        "2070",
        "2870"
      ],
      "entities": {
        "person": [
          "parul jain",
          "rishi kant",
          "a. kumar",
          "sandip das",
          "r.k.singh",
          "ajay shah",
          "anirudh burman",
          "s.s.rathore",
          "s. ghosh",
          "pramesh jit",
          "v.k.singh",
          "rajesh k. singh",
          "p.k.upadhyay",
          "ila patnaik",
          "shubho roy",
          "s.s. raju",
          "p.s. birthal",
          "kapila shekhawat",
          "s.k. srivastava",
          "shikha aggarwal",
          "john d.a. cuddy",
          "p.a. della valle",
          "b. yogesh bhatt",
          "digvijay s. negi",
          "niti aayog",
          "ashok gulati",
          "max roser",
          "boraiah b. yamanura",
          "hannah ritchie",
          "haruhiko yamanura",
          "anjani kumar",
          "rajendra jadhav",
          "k.s. jadav",
          "pablo rosado",
          "ashley tang",
          "shweta saini",
          "yasutomo kojima",
          "mohan r. kumar",
          "m.s. basu",
          "rahul sharma",
          "v.k. gondalia",
          "wayne kayne",
          "purnendu banerjee",
          "p.s. reddy",
          "joe parcell",
          "alice roach",
          "jignesh macwan",
          "r.k. mathur",
          "a. gupta",
          "bernadette christina",
          "s. tiwari",
          "suresh",
          "gupta",
          "kumar",
          "bhatt",
          "jit"
        ],
        "location": [
          "india",
          "china",
          "northeast",
          "states",
          "germany",
          "brazil",
          "united states",
          "ukraine",
          "france",
          "paraguay",
          "bolivia",
          "rajasthan",
          "argentina",
          "madhya pradesh",
          "canada",
          "us",
          "odisha",
          "maharashtra",
          "haryana",
          "karnataka",
          "gujarat",
          "punjab",
          "uttar pradesh",
          "tamil nadu",
          "bihar",
          "telangana",
          "andhra pradesh",
          "west bengal",
          "northern india",
          "netherlands",
          "morocco",
          "indonesia",
          "hungary",
          "djibouti",
          "peru",
          "belgium",
          "turkey",
          "usa",
          "malaysia",
          "russia",
          "pakistan",
          "southeast asia",
          "the us",
          "andhra",
          "japan",
          "europe",
          "korea",
          "cerrado region",
          "navsari",
          "northeastern states",
          "eu",
          "singapore",
          "nepal",
          "european countries",
          "africa",
          "east asian markets",
          "south america",
          "new delhi",
          "geneva",
          "vallabh vidyanagar",
          "rome",
          "mumbai",
          "st. louis",
          "junagadh",
          "anand"
        ],
        "product": [
          "sunflower",
          "soybean",
          "groundnut",
          "mustard",
          "edible oil",
          "oilseeds",
          "biofuels",
          "pulses",
          "maize",
          "cereals",
          "vanaspati",
          "mustard oil",
          "coconut oil",
          "sunflower oil",
          "soybean oil",
          "vegetable oils",
          "palm oil",
          "refined oil",
          "cash crops",
          "groundnut oil",
          "cotton",
          "sugarcane",
          "rice",
          "wheat",
          "rapeseed-mustard",
          "soy oil",
          "mustard seed",
          "crude oils",
          "vegetable oil",
          "turmeric",
          "castor",
          "crude palm oil",
          "edible oils",
          "retail refined oil",
          "oilseed cake",
          "rapeseed",
          "soymeal",
          "meal",
          "cottonseed",
          "tofu",
          "plastics",
          "animal feed",
          "adhesives",
          "livestock feed",
          "soy milk",
          "oil palm",
          "distillers dried grains",
          "non-gmo soybeans",
          "oil",
          "safflower",
          "peanut butter",
          "coconut",
          "peanut milk",
          "peanut cake",
          "paint",
          "rice bran",
          "peanut oil",
          "corn",
          "niger seed",
          "varnish",
          "roasted peanuts",
          "sesamum",
          "tree-borne oilseeds",
          "tbos",
          "groundnut chikki",
          "palm",
          "textured vegetable protein",
          "cottonseed oil",
          "rice bran oil",
          "soy",
          "biodiesel",
          "rbo",
          "linters",
          "de-oiled cottonseed meal",
          "genetically modified cotton",
          "soy protein",
          "tvp",
          "tempeh",
          "soy-based products",
          "healthy oils",
          "non-gmo soy oil",
          "raw oils",
          "gmo meal",
          "lentil",
          "tur",
          "gram",
          "urad",
          "paddy",
          "rapeseed mustard",
          "nutria-cereals",
          "heart-healthy oils",
          "ethanol",
          "sugar",
          "poultry",
          "sesame",
          "oilmeals",
          "groundnuts",
          "oilseed"
        ],
        "event": [
          "russia–ukraine war",
          "russia–ukraine conflict"
        ]
      },
      "newsworthiness_score": 1,
      "group_id": 776972
    },
    {
      "id": 25007219,
      "title": "Economic Survey, Spring 2026",
      "url": "https://vm.fi/en/economic-survey-spring-2026",
      "publisher": "",
      "published_date": "2026-04-30T00:00:00",
      "sentiment": "Negative",
      "sentiment_score": 0.011099999770522118,
      "ai_summary": "Finland's Ministry of Finance released its Spring 2026 Economic Survey projecting that the country's economic recovery will be delayed due to the Middle East crisis and rising energy prices, with GDP growth expected at only 0.6% in 2026 before accelerating to 1.7% in 2027-2028. The general government deficit is forecast to reach 4.6% of GDP in 2026-2029, while the debt-to-GDP ratio will exceed 91% this year and approach 99% by 2030. The report includes an alternative scenario showing potential economic stagnation if the Middle East crisis prolongs and oil prices rise an additional 30%, and notes risks that Finland may breach EU excessive deficit procedure recommendations in 2027.",
      "full_text": "PUBLICATIONS OF THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE 2026:15 Economic Survey\n\nSpring 2026 The recovery of the Finnish economy will be delayed because of the crisis in the Middle East and rising energy prices. GDP will grow by only 0.6 per cent in 2026, but growth is expected to accelerate to 1.7 per cent in 2027 and 2028. Rising oil prices will weaken external demand and households’ purchasing power, which will slow both exports and private consumption. Defence and energy transition projects will support investments, but housing construction will remain at a subdued level. Unemployment remains high, and the improvement in employment is delayed, which slows the recovery of domestic demand. Despite sluggish economic growth, the general government deficit narrowed to 3.4 per cent of GDP in 2025. Although the adjustment measures will strengthen general government finances, the recording of fighter jet purchases as expenditure will increase the general government deficit this year. At the same time, the economic impacts of the crisis in the Middle East will also be gradually felt in Finland’s general government finances. In 2026–2029, the deficit will be 4.6 per cent of GDP. The deficit will gradually narrow towards the end of the outlook period but will remain high. Defence and interest expenditures are growing rapidly, while economic growth will be sluggish. As a result, the deficit will still amount to 4.4 per cent of GDP in 2030. The debt-to-GDP ratio is expected to reach about 91 per cent this year, and in 2030, the debt is expected to exceed 99 per cent of GDP. The publication in PDF Link to an external website Opens in a new tab File opens in a new tab pdf 1MB Skip table of contents Hide table of contents Text search Search Sisältö-osan elementtien täysi korkeus: true Contents Show full publication Economic Survey, Spring 2026 To the reader Preface Summary 1 Economic Outlook 1.1 Global Economy 1.1.1 Growth prospects 1.1.2 Financial markets and commodities 1.1.3 Global trade 1.2 Foreign Trade 1.2.1 Exports and imports 1.2.2 Current account 1.3 Prices and costs 1.4 Wages and incomes 1.4.1 Wages 1.4.2 Households’ incomes 1.5 Consumption 1.6 Investments 1.7 Domestic production 1.7.1 GDP and productivity 1.7.2 Sectors 1.8 Labour market 1.9 Medium-term outlook for 2029–2030 2 General Government Finances 2.1 General government 2.2 General government debt 2.3 Central government 2.4 Municipal administration 2.5 Wellbeing services counties 2.6 Social security funds 2.6.1 Employment pension schemes 2.6.2 Other social security funds 2.7 Long-term sustainability of public finances Appendices Themes\n\nBack to table of contents To the reader This Economic Survey offers projections of economic developments in 2026–2028. In addition to short-term prospects, it includes a medium-term economic outlook extending to 2030. The forecast and trend projections in the survey are prepared independently by the Ministry of Finance Economics Department based on the Act on the implementation of the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union and on multi-annual budgetary frameworks (869/2012). In addition, in accordance with Act 1441/2025, the Finnish Economic Policy Council endorses the macroeconomic forecast prepared by the department responsible for forecasting at the Ministry of Finance, which serves as the basis for the government budget proposal and the planning of public finances. The forecasts are based on national accounts data published by Statistics Finland in March 2026 and on other public statistical sources, which have been available by 16 March 2026 for the forecast of the real economic developments presented in chapter 1 and by 25 March 2026 for the forecast of public finances presented in chapter 2. Helsinki, April 2026, Ministry of Finance Economics Department Mikko Spolander, Director General Janne Huovari, Senior Financial Advisor, Head of Macro Forecasting Jenni Pääkkönen, Senior Financial Advisor, Head of Public Finance The Finnish Economic Policy Council has endorsed the spring 2026 macroeconomic forecast presented in this Survey in a confirmation letter signed 10 April 2026. Preface The air has been thick with questions ever since the crisis in the Middle East blew up in March. The economy was well on its way to recovery, and the prolonged recession seemed to be finally passing, but what will happen now? The only thing that is certain is that the crisis increases instability and uncertainty, as well as slows economic growth and accelerates inflation. The depth and duration of the impact of the crisis on Finland’s economy depends on several factors. How long will the Strait of Hormuz remain closed? How much productive capacity will be destroyed? How high will oil and natural gas prices rise, and how long will they remain high? How quickly and broadly will the oil and natural gas prices be passed on to the prices of other goods and services, to price increase expectations and to demands for wage rises that would compensate for the price increases? How swiftly and extensively will central banks increase their policy rates in order for inflation expectations to be anchored to price stability? How will the increased uncertainty be reflected in consumption, saving and investments by households and companies? When no answers are readily available, prices in the financial and raw material markets can provide some indications. The baseline of the Ministry of Finance’s forecast assumes that the crisis in the Middle East will be fairly short-lived and will not spread materially outside the Persian Gulf, and that once the crisis has blown over, the economy will start recovering quickly. This assumption is reflected in the prices in the financial and raw material markets. The prices indicate that the actual increase in oil and natural gas prices will not be passed on to the prices of other commodities, goods and services, the inflation expectations of households and companies will not materially deviate from the European Central Bank’s price stability anchor, and the increase in prices will not be passed on to wage rise demands. The markets expect that the European Central Bank will take only moderate measures that tighten the financing situation. According to our forecast, with this potential course of events, the economy would grow by 0.6 per cent this year, and growth would be boosted to 1.7 per cent in 2027–2028. The Economic Policy Council confirmed the macroeconomic forecast in a confirmation letter on 10 April 2026. Apart from the baseline, we prepared an alternative scenario of a less favourable development, in which the crisis would be prolonged, the oil and natural gas prices would rise higher, and the increase would be passed on to other prices, and the European Central Bank would therefore increase interest rates slightly more than is presented in the baseline. The alternative outlined in the scenario is not particularly unfavourable or implausible. Nevertheless, the economy would not grow at all this year according to the scenario. It is quite possible that the economy will end up somewhere between the baseline and the scenario. Continued uncertainty will weaken households’ and companies’ outlook concerning their own economic situation in the future and their overall confidence in the future. Especially if it is prolonged, the crisis already lends itself to making stronger the brakes that have slowed economic recovery in Finland during the past couple of years in particular. Higher interest rates than before will continue to burden Finnish households and companies, and there is a threat of interest rates rising again. Households will see prices increasing quickly again, and the expectations of faster price increases and a decreased purchasing power will grow. Households will fear that the decline in the prices of housing will continue, which will drive them to patch their decreasing net worth by saving. The deepening plight of general government finances will cause households to be proactive and prepare to save for a bill that will fall due in the future. The brakes are a risk that may postpone economic recovery, even if the crisis gradually subsides. At the same time, citizens crave positive surprises. If the crisis is resolved quickly, demand in the export markets, as well as investments, consumption and employment, may also recover more briskly than forecast. There is no way of knowing which direction the crisis will eventually take. A weakening of the economy will weaken general government finances, deepen deficits and accelerate general government debt. In the forecast, the general government deficits will remain around 4.5 per cent in relation to GDP and the combined debt-accumulating deficit of central and local government will be 5.5 per cent throughout the decade. General government debt will reach 99 per cent in relation to GDP in 2030. The persistent general government deficits stem from the rapidly increasing public expenditure in particular – defence, care, interest rates and so on – which is further increased by the rise in prices and expenses caused by the crisis in the Middle East. According to the Ministry of Finance’s forecast, net expenditure in general government finances will grow faster in 2027 and 2028 than the net expenditure path set for Finland in the excessive deficit procedure would allow. If the forecast’s estimate of the net expenditure increase proves correct, there is a risk that Finland will be found to be in breach of the recommendations issued to it in the excessive deficit procedure in 2027. Finland should correct the excessive deficit by 2028, but according to the forecast, it will not happen. Obtaining an extension to the deadline for correcting the excessive deficit will require compliance with net expenditure path. If net expenditure grows as forecast in 2027 and 2028, there is a substantial risk that Finland will not be given a deadline extension. The outlook places great demands on the next parliamentary term and the efforts to exit the excessive deficit procedure and for the goal that has been tentatively set by the Parliamentary Working Group on Fiscal Policy for the combined budgetary position of central and local government in relation to GDP in 2031. Finland certainly did not need this exacerbation of its already difficult general government finances by a crisis in the Middle East. Summary Economic Outlook 2026–2028 Economic recovery in Finland will be delayed as a result of the crisis in the Middle East. The global economy was growing more strongly than expected before the crisis in the Middle East came to a head. The Finnish economy was also on a growth path during the last months of 2025, and the gradual economic recovery was expected to continue in 2026. However, rising oil prices will substantially slow economic growth. GDP will grow by only 0.6 per cent in 2026. Economic output is below its potential level, which together with the subsequent fall in oil prices will support economic growth towards the end of the outlook period. GDP growth is expected to accelerate to 1.7 per cent in 2027 and 2028. It is assumed in the forecast that the crisis in the Middle East will be short-lived, will not spread, will not have any major multiplier effects on commodity prices, will not lead to significantly higher inflation expectations and will not result in major fiscal tightening in the euro area. The forecast is accompanied by an alternative scenario presenting a more unfavourable outlook, in which an additional rise of 30 per cent in oil prices would result in economic growth stagnating this year. Rising oil prices will slow global economic growth The crisis in the Middle East has led to significant increases in oil prices. Based on the future prices used in the forecast, average oil prices will be almost 30 per cent higher in 2026 than in 2025. However, the rise will be followed by a rapid decline, and in 2027, oil prices will be lower – but still above 2025 levels. Rising oil prices will slow economic growth in Finland and at a global level, and the crisis will also have a direct negative impact on global trade. More sluggish growth in the export markets will also adversely affect Finnish exports this year. Next year, exports will recover at the same rate as the markets, but the impact of net exports on economic growth will remain negative in the outlook period. This is because imports, which are primarily boosted by investments, will grow at a more rapid rate than exports. Rising energy prices will boost inflation and curb purchasing power Driven primarily by rising energy prices, inflation will accelerate this year. The impacts on other prices will remain fairly limited, and core inflation will remain below two per cent. With the exception of energy prices, price pressures are dampened by protracted economic stagnation and capacity underutilisation. The rise in service prices has slowed, demand remains weak, and no major changes are expected in electricity prices. Dampened by price rises and the weak employment situation, households’ purchasing power will grow only slowly this year, even though tax cuts and pay rises will boost the disposable income of wage earner households. Uncertainty about the economic outlook and the adjustment of general government finances has made households more cautious, which will manifest itself in postponed consumption and higher savings rates. Private consumption will grow at a slow rate in 2026, but growth will pick up in 2027 as purchasing power increases, and savings rates gradually fall. Investments will be boosted by energy, technology and defence projects This year, investments will be primarily boosted by defence purchases such as the deliveries of fighter jets. Investments in energy and technology transition will also support growth in machinery and equipment investments. At the same time, however, the recovery of housing construction will be further delayed as a result of sluggish demand. In the labour market, the supply of labour has been boosted by employment measures and immigration. The number of employed persons has remained stable since the autumn of 2024, but unemployment has exceeded 10 per cent. According to projections, the employment rate will only start rising in 2027, and no decline in unemployment is expected before that year. Because of protracted sluggish growth, economic output remains well below the potential level. The economic recovery will continue in 2029 (growth rate about 1.5%) and 2030 (about 1.3%). Growth will be supported in particular by private investments in the energy and technology transition and the increased defence expenditure. The employment rate will increase to 72.8 per cent by 2030 and the unemployment rate will decrease to 8.2 per cent. The crisis in the Middle East will have a multitude of impacts on general government finances, but the effects have been limited thus far Despite sluggish economic growth, the general government deficit narrowed to 3.4 per cent of GDP in 2025. The improvement was primarily the result of the adjustment measures introduced last year. In 2026, the deficit will reach 4.6 per cent of GDP as the crisis in the Middle East will slow economic growth, the fighter jet purchases are recorded as expenditure, and the pace of adjustment slows. The crisis in the Middle East is only expected to have a limited impact on general government expenditure this year. The unfavourable effects of the crisis on general government finances will be more strongly felt next year, as price rises will have a delayed impact on public-sector prices and costs, and the crisis will manifest itself more clearly in consumption and taxes collected from the wage bill. The assumption in the projection for general government finances is that the crisis will not substantially reduce property income, which is a major source of revenue for pension funds. The general government deficit remains deep throughout the forecast period, standing at 4.6 percent of GDP in 2026–2029 and improving only slightly toward the end of the period. Defence and interest expenditure will grow rapidly while the economy will stagnate, and the deficit-to-GDP ratio will therefore still be 4.4 per cent in 2030. The central government deficit will remain high. The deficit will reach five per cent this year, as the expenditure on F-35 fighter jets will boost spending by more than two billion euros. This year’s tax revenue will be reduced by cuts in income taxation; at the same time, one-off items will also increase revenue. An additional transfer of one billion euros from the State Pension Fund will narrow the central government deficit next year. Adjustments will also affect central government expenditure in 2026 and 2027. In the following years, the deficit will remain at about five per cent. Local government will remain in deficit throughout the outlook period. Growth in local government expenditure is mainly driven by a rapid rise in prices and wages. The budgetary position of the wellbeing services counties will remain roughly balanced in 2026 and 2027, even though it will gradually weaken from 2027 onwards as a result of increasing expenditure. At the same time, growth in wellbeing services counties’ revenue will be slowed by the overhaul of the Act on the Funding of Wellbeing Services Counties and the fact that the retrospective review is based on the projected sum allocated in the spending limits, which will remain below what was estimated in the pressure calculation for the period 2028–2030. In 2026 and 2027, the municipal administration deficit will amount to 0.4 per cent of GDP and will narrow slightly by 2030. In local government, the impacts of the crisis in the Middle East will primarily manifest themselves in higher prices and costs. Overall, social security funds will remain in surplus, particularly due to the strong financial position of the employment pension institutions. The surplus is mainly based on property income and employment pension contribution revenue. Other social security funds will gradually recover from this year’s deficit and will become balanced during the outlook period. The crisis in the Middle East is expected to slow growth in property income. The crisis is only expected to have a limited impact on unemployment expenditure and social security contribution revenue. The increase in general government net expenditure has been set as a key indicator for the EU’s fiscal policy monitoring in the Union’s overhauled fiscal policy rules. Factors such as the adjustment measures already carried out and changes in the timing of defence expenditure decreased net expenditure by 0.6 per cent last year. Net expenditure is projected to grow by 4.4 per cent in 2026 and by 3.3 per cent in 2027. The assessment of Finland’s compliance with the EU’s fiscal policy rules will be presented in the General Government Fiscal Plan 2027–2030. Debt-to-GDP ratio exceeded 88 per cent in 2025, and it will exceed 91 per cent this year. The debt ratio will continue to grow throughout the outlook period and will reach 99 per cent in 2030. The general government sustainability gap will be about 3 per cent of GDP, or about EUR 9.5 billion at 2030 levels. Key risks in the outlook The forecast involves an exceptional degree of uncertainty, especially in the short term. A worsening of the crisis in the Middle East may lead to further rises in the prices of oil, gas, plastics and other raw materials, and in the worst case, it may set off an upward spiral in prices and wages. All this may cause a sharp slowdown in economic growth. At the same time, a rapid cooling of the situation would lower energy prices and support growth. The oil price is therefore the key factor for inflation and economic prospects. Moreover, the global economic risks arising from the Russian aggression against Ukraine, US tariff policy and investments in AI have not disappeared. Growth based on domestic demand involves both upside and downside risks. Households’ income and savings may boost consumption, but uncertainty and the weak employment situation may encourage savings and slow consumption. Even though the investment outlook is upbeat, it remains unclear how many of the envisaged projects will actually be implemented and when. A protracted crisis in the Middle East will inevitably weaken Finland’s general government finances more than forecast as rising prices are passed on to public-sector costs, and the revenue base erodes. Moreover, if there are strong fluctuations in the valuation of shares and government bonds in the financial markets, and a reassessment and pricing of risks in general, the value of the employment pension institutions’ assets and property income (which are part of general government) will suffer. In this case, general government revenue would grow more slowly than projected. Property expenses and social security expenditure also involve a significant downside risk. The uncertainty of the economic forecast can be illustrated with the confidence intervals based on previous forecasting errors and built around the forecast. Confidence intervals describe the range within which actual figures have fallen in previous forecasts with an 80 per cent probability. However, these confidence intervals only reflect the normal uncertainty involved in forecasts, and they do not take into account the special risk factors present in each instance of forecasting. Table 1. Key forecast figures 2024 2025 2026* 2027* 2028* Change in volume, % GDP at market prices 0.4 0.2 0.6 1.7 1.7 Imports -0.8 1.7 3.3 2.7 2.7 Total supply 0.0 0.6 1.4 2.0 2.0 Exports 1.8 3.4 0.5 2.4 2.5 Consumption 0.5 -0.2 0.2 1.0 1.3 private -0.2 -0.2 0.7 1.4 1.6 public 2.0 -0.2 -0.8 0.2 0.7 Investment -5.0 0.8 7.3 4.5 3.6 private -8.2 0.4 2.3 7.0 4.6 public 10.2 2.4 27.1 -3.2 0.2 Total demand 0.4 0.8 1.4 2.0 2.0 domestic demand -0.1 -0.3 1.8 1.8 1.8 Table 2. Key public finance forecast figures 2024 2025 2026* 2027* 2028* Relative to GDP, % General government expenditure 57.7 57.5 58.4 57.5 57.0 Tax ratio 42.3 42.6 42.8 42.2 42.0 General government net lending -4.4 -3.4 -4.6 -4.6 -4.6 Central government net lending -3.7 -3.9 -5.2 -4.7 -5.2 General government debt 82.4 88.5 91.2 92.8 94.7 Central government debt 61.4 66.9 69.4 71.2 73.5 Table 3. Other key forecast figures 2024 2025 2026* 2027* 2028* GDP, nominal, EUR bn 276 281 290 300 313 GDP deflator, change, % 0.7 1.5 2.6 2.1 2.4 Services, change in volume, % -0.1 -0.2 0.5 1.2 1.3 Industry, change in volume, % 3.8 1.6 1.8 2.4 2.4 Labour productivity, change, % 1.2 1.4 0.9 1.0 1.1 Employed labour force, change, % -1.0 -0.5 -0.1 0.9 0.7 Employment rate (20–64 yrs), % 76.7 76.0 75.6 76.1 76.4 Unemployment rate, % 8.4 9.7 9.8 9.4 9.0 Consumer price index, change, % 1.6 0.3 2.0 1.4 1.9 Index of wage and salary earnings, change, % 3.4 3.0 3.6 3.2 3.4 Current account, EUR bn -1.2 3.5 -0.9 -0.8 -0.9 Current account, relative to GDP, % -0.4 1.3 -0.3 -0.3 -0.3 Short-term interest rates (3-month Euribor), % 3.6 2.2 2.1 2.1 2.1 1 Economic Outlook 1.1 Global Economy The outlook is exceptionally uncertain as the crisis in the Middle East has cast a shadow over the global economy. The impacts of the current energy crisis on the basic outlook are moderate, but if prolonged, the crisis may have considerable global impacts on inflation and economic growth. Global trade in goods will be disturbed due to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Global economic growth has been fairly strong, but the crisis in the Middle East has radically changed the outlook. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz in particular has resulted in enormous disturbances in the energy market, raised interest rates and inflation expectations, and increased uncertainty globally. If the crisis remains short, its impacts on the global economy will be limited. However, a prolongation of the crisis and the impacts thus being long-term and massive cannot be ruled out. In the basic outlook, global economic growth will slow from last year’s 3.4 per cent to 2.8 per cent in the current year. Growth will recover to 3.4 per cent in 2027. 1.1.1 Growth prospects Growth in the euro area was fairly rapid in 2025 but slowed towards the end of the year. The growth prospect for the current year has weakened since the crisis in the Middle East broke out. Although the volume of crude oil imported to the euro area from the Persian Gulf is minimal, the steep increase in the price of Brent crude oil will accelerate inflation. The increase in the price of natural gas important for many economies in the euro area will also generate cost pressures. The latest leading indicators suggest a weakening outlook for service companies. The upturn in new orders in German industry seemed to indicate a brighter outlook, but the energy crisis has dimmed the prospects again. Economic growth in the euro area will slow to 1.0 per cent in 2026 but will pick up to 1.6 per cent in 2027. The US economy has been performing strongly despite political turmoil, with private consumption supporting economic growth. The outlook in the US has also weakened since the energy crisis broke out. The US is largely self-sufficient in crude oil, but the price of WTI crude oil has increased and generated cost pressures. Purchasing Managers’ Indices indicate a weakening outlook. Consumers are pessimistic regarding the expectations in particular. Their view of the current situation is also declining. Government bond yields have increased as a result of the inflation outlook and the increased uncertainty. Somewhat unexpectedly, the US dollar exchange rate has strengthened, reflecting the currency’s position as a safe haven. The trade policy is also giving rise to concern, and there are global worries concerning potential new tariffs. Growth will slow to 1.5 per cent this year but will again recover to 2.0 per cent next year. The outlook in China is challenging. Growth has remained rapid, supported primarily by exports, while growth in domestic consumption continues to be modest. The government supports export companies extensively. China is fairly dependent on oil from the Middle East, but it does have sizeable emergency stockpiles. The rise in consumer prices has been near zero for an extended period, but prices have recently increased. Consumer confidence continues to be low. The confidence of both service and export companies has unexpectedly improved during the first months of the year, probably reflecting the strong performance of exports. The weak exchange rate of the yuan is supporting exports. Growth will slow to four per cent in 2026 but will increase to 4.2 per cent in 2027. Growth in India will remain relatively rapid, and growth prospects are supported by the closer economic relationships with the EU and other economies. The energy crisis is hitting Japan’s economy hard, where outlook was otherwise improving, supported by a stimulating fiscal policy. The nascent recovery in the United Kingdom may also come to a halt due to the cost increases resulting from the energy crisis. It is estimated that the pressure of cost increases is higher than in the euro area. Surprisingly, the economic outlook in Russia has improved with the increase in the price of crude oil, but the burden caused by the war of aggression on the federation’s economy is still massive. Fast inflation is weakening the position of consumers. The outlook in Sweden is also overshadowed by the energy crisis, although growth remains fairly rapid and broad-based. The outlook presented above includes considerable, mainly downside, risks. A prolonged crisis in the Middle East is a tangible risk. The prices of oil and natural gas remaining high for an extended period would cause large-scale negative impacts on the global economy. A prolonged closure of the Strait of Hormuz would worsen the energy crisis. Additionally, a potential closure of the Bab el-Mandeb Strait by the Houthi rebels would stop marine transports through the Suez Canal, resulting in considerable costs in world trade. The geopolitical tensions related to US trade and foreign policy are still in the background, and their exacerbation is a potential risk. Russia’s war of aggression ending unfavourably for Ukraine would increase uncertainty in Europe in particular. The artificial intelligence sector is associated with short-term risks which would have large-scale impacts on investments. At the same time, the crisis in the Middle East ending sooner than expected and the impacts of the crisis not being as severe as feared can be considered an upside risk. The reconstruction of Ukraine would improve sentiments in Europe. The positive productivity-increasing impacts of artificial intelligence may support growth more than expected on a global scale. 1.1.2 Financial markets and commodities The financial markets have reacted strongly to the energy shock caused by the crisis in the Middle East. Stocks and interest rates have fluctuated strongly with changes in prices of crude oil. There has been a steep increase in government bond yields in particular, reflecting an increase in inflation expectations. Monetary policy is expected to start tightening in many areas. In the currency market, the increase in the US dollar exchange rate is noteworthy, reflecting the position of the dollar as a safe haven. The uncertainty related to the sustainability of the financing of other than listed companies in the US is a new cause for concern. In the commodities markets, the main focus is on the increase of the prices of crude oil and natural gas. Their futures have increased steeply, although their trend is downward, which indicates that there are expectations that the crisis will end. However, the crisis may have longer-term repercussions if the energy infrastructure of the Persian Gulf countries suffers large-scale damage. The prices of industrial raw materials were increasing even before the crisis broke out. The global trade in fertilisers has been disrupted by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, and this may have serious impacts on agriculture globally. In addition, the global trade in the helium required for the manufacture of semiconductors and in the pharmaceutical industry is suffering from the closure. 1.1.3 Global trade Global trade in goods declined at the end of 2025, and the outlook for the current year is subdued. Imports in the euro area in particular are growing slowly due to the global political situation. In the US, the erratic trade policy is slowing trade in goods. Trade in the emerging economies remains reasonable, largely driven by China. Growth in the trade in goods will slow to 0.5 per cent in 2025 and pick up to 2.7 per cent in 2026. The outlook for the global trade in services was positive at the beginning of the year, largely supported by trade related to artificial intelligence and other digital services. However, marine transports and travel have been hit hard by the crisis. Trade in services will grow by 4.1 per cent in the current year, but growth will slow to 3.6 per cent next year, reflecting consumers’ caution in the tense geopolitical situation. Table 4. Gross domestic product 2024 2025 2026* 2027* 2028* Change in volume, % World (PPP) 3.3 3.4 2.8 3.4 3.0 Euro area 0.8 1.5 1.0 1.6 1.5 EU 0.9 1.5 1.1 1.6 1.5 Germany -0.5 0.4 0.6 1.6 1.2 France 1.1 0.9 0.9 1.5 1.5 Sweden 1.0 1.8 1.7 2.3 2.2 United Kingdom 1.1 1.3 0.5 1.6 1.5 United States 2.8 2.2 1.5 2.0 2.1 Japan -0.2 1.1 0.0 1.2 0.8 China 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.2 4.2 India1 6.5 7.5 6.1 6.4 6.3 Russia 4.9 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.0 1 Fiscal year (April 1st to March 31st) Sources: Statistical authorities, MoF Table 5. Background assumptions 2024 2025 2026* 2027* 2028* World trade in goods, change in volume, % 2.3 4.2 0.5 2.7 3.0 World trade in services, change in volume, % 3.8 5.1 4.1 3.6 4.3 USD/EUR 1.08 1.13 1.16 1.18 1.19 Industrial raw material price index, % 3.5 -1.0 11.7 0.7 0.7 Crude oil (Brent), $/barrel 79.7 68.0 85.6 75.4 69.3 3-month Euribor, % 3.6 2.2 2.1 2.1 2.1 Government bonds (10-year), % 2.9 3.0 3.2 3.0 3.0 Import prices, change, % -1.0 -1.2 3.1 1.0 1.6 Sources: CPB, Macrobond, HWWI, WTO, national statistical authorities, MoF Rise in oil prices as a result of the crisis in the Middle East and its impacts on output and inflation Rise in oil prices Crude oil prices have risen as a result of the crisis in the Middle East, and the prices have fluctuated substantially. At the end of 2025, the per-barrel price of Brent crude was just over USD 60, and the average price last year was about 68 dollars. At one point, the price climbed to almost USD 120 within a period of 24 hours (9 March 2026). However, the highest daily price has been slightly lower, at about USD 112, and on average, crude oil prices since the beginning of the crisis have been around 100 dollars (by 24th April 2026). Based on futures, the assumption in the market has been that the price rises will be relatively short-lived, and that a decline will soon follow. The forecast has been made based on the information available on 16 March 2026. Based on the futures of the preceding market day (13 March 2026), average oil prices in 2026 will be almost 30 per cent higher than in 2025, and in 2027 just over 10 per cent lower than in 2026. In spite of fluctuation of prices, the path of futures prices has not changed substantially from the baseline path of the forecast, at least by week 17 (by 24th April 2026). Despite the rapid increase, oil prices have been surprisingly low so far given the intensity of the conflict and the fact that it has also hit oil production and transports. The Persian Gulf region accounts for about 20 per cent of global oil output. Nominal oil prices have been higher on several occasions over the last two decades. In real terms, since the outbreak of the crisis, average oil prices have been only slightly above the average of the last two decades (USD 93). Impact of oil prices on total output A rise in oil prices has a negative impact on economic growth. It weakens households’ purchasing power and drives up costs for companies. The impacts are first felt in purchasing power because rising crude oil prices are quickly passed on to fuel prices and prices of fresh food products. Weakening of purchasing power dampens household consumption. If oil prices remain high for a prolonged period, the price rises will also be gradually reflected in other prices and expectations of prices rises. As a result, interest rates will also go up, which will further slow economic growth. Based on the empirical literature, a ten per cent rise in crude oil prices will have a negative impact of between 0.1 and 0.3 per cent on GDP. The impact is non-linear: if the shock is short-lived, the impact will be at the lower end of the range; in a prolonged shock, the impacts will be at the upper end of the range or even beyond it. The Ministry has made model-based estimates of similar magnitude in conjunction of the forecast. The survey presents one such estimate in the theme A scenario of less favourable development in the impacts of the crisis in the Middle East at the end of chapter 1. Impact of oil prices on inflation Oil prices have a direct and quick impact on inflation. A rise in oil prices has an immediate impact on consumers’ energy basket (as higher prices of fuels and heating oil). Moreover, rising gas prices impact the daily lives of many consumers in the euro area, even though the impacts are only indirectly felt in Finland. These are the ‘first-round impacts’, which are quickly passed on to inflation (typically within one to three months). Oil is a key raw material and an intermediate product for many sectors. When the price of energy goes up, companies’ production costs rise, which will be gradually passed on to the prices of end products. Prices of transports and agricultural products will go up first, while the prices of services will be slower to react. These indirect impacts are slower; they emerge with a delay of 6 to 18 months. However, they are more extensive and can also have an impact on core inflation (HICP excl. energy and food). If the assumption is that the increases in energy and other prices are permanent, wage earners will demand compensation to secure their real pay levels. The emergence of a price-wage spiral is the most important of the factors that may trigger permanent inflation. Moreover, the unanchoring of inflation expectations from the ECB’s target could intensify this spiral. 1.2 Foreign Trade In 2025, Finland’s net exports grew, and the current account was in considerable surplus. At the beginning of 2026, in addition to the crisis in the Middle East, the uncertainty caused by other geopolitical tensions is high, which is why the growth prospects for both exports and imports have been lowered. Export growth is weak in 2026 but will recover during 2027. Import growth is strong, as the fighter aircraft deliveries in 2026 will increase imports of goods. In addition, investments will grow, and domestic consumption will recover towards the end of the forecast period. The current account will revert to deficit in 2026, but foreign trade will be close to being balanced. 1.2.1 Exports and imports In 2025, external demand was stronger than anticipated. The global economy and trade grew reasonably well, although trade in goods decreased during the last quarter of the year. Companies operating in the US quickly increased imports at the beginning of the year by replenishing their inventories in anticipation of the tariffs taking effect. Elsewhere in the world, companies prepared by mapping new market areas. Global trade in services grew powerfully, and the volume of services imported to Europe, in particular, was high. However, domestic demand in Finland was weak, as consumption did not pick up despite the increase in income, and growth in imports was slower than exports in 2025. In Finnish exports, the outgoing annual ship deliveries in 2025–2028 were reflected in strong growth in 2025. As a result of the ship deliveries, the level of exports will remain high in 2026–2027, but the deliveries will no longer affect the growth figures. The crisis in the Middle East has negative impacts on the availability and prices of not only oil and gas but also many raw materials, as well as on travel and transports, and this will be reflected in both exports and imports in 2026. The availability of containers in maritime transport has weakened, and traffic in the Suez Canal has not recovered since the end of 2023, which increases the prices of transports and affects transport times in Europe as well. The impacts of the crisis will mostly target trade in goods, but growth in the foreign trade of services will also become slower. Export growth is weak in 2026, amounting to only 0.5 per cent, but will recover to 2.4 per cent during 2027. Export growth was expected to slow even before the crisis in the Middle East as geopolitical tensions remained high at the beginning of the year. At the same time, there were also signs of improvement in industrial demand in the first months of the year, and technology industry companies reported stronger order books. It is therefore expected that Finland’s export demand will strengthen and drive growth in exports from 2027 onwards. Import growth is strong in the outlook period, although the forecast has been lowered due to the crisis in the Middle East. However, defence materiel purchases will increase imports considerably in 2026, as the fighter aircraft deliveries planned for 2025 were postponed to this year and will continue in the coming years. Additionally, data centre investments and intangible investments in digitalisation and artificial intelligence will increase imports. Domestic consumption is expected to grow towards the end of the outlook period and support import growth. Imports will grow by 3.3 per cent in 2026 and settle at 2.7 per cent in 2027. Table 6. Foreign Trade 2024 2025 2026* 2027* 2028* Change, % Export volume 1.8 3.4 0.5 2.4 2.5 Import volume -0.8 1.7 3.3 2.7 2.7 Export prices1 -2.7 -0.7 3.0 1.3 1.5 Import prices1 -1.0 -1.2 3.1 1.0 1.6 1 As calculated in the national accounts 1.2.2 Current account In 2025, the current account was in considerable surplus, at approximately EUR 3.5 billion, as the surplus in trade balance increased, driven by growth in the value of exports. However, during the outlook period foreign trade is nearly balanced, and the current account will show a deficit of EUR -0.9 billion in 2026. This year, the delivery of the fighter aircraft purchases contributes to the weakening of the surplus in foreign trade, which was strong in 2025. However, in exports, the considerable annual ship deliveries will keep foreign trade balanced until the end of the outlook period. The increase in the prices of oil and raw materials will increase the prices of goods in foreign trade in particular, but the prices will also increase in service imports and exports. In 2026, the prices of goods will increase for the first time in three years, but the acceleration of growth will not be as fast as in 2021–2022, when price increases were attributable to both the recovery from the coronavirus pandemic and the impacts of Russia’s war of aggression from the beginning of 2022. The increase in prices in foreign trade will slow from 2027 onwards, but no return to decreasing prices is expected. Table 7. Current Account 2024 2025 2026* 2027* 2028* EUR bn Balance of goods and services 1.0 3.5 0.2 0.3 -0.2 Factor incomes and income transfers, net -2.2 -0.0 -1.1 -1.1 -0.7 Current account -1.2 3.5 -0.9 -0.8 -0.9 Relative to GDP, % Current account -0.4 1.3 -0.3 -0.3 -0.3 1.3 Prices and costs Inflation will accelerate in the current year due to the increased prices of energy in particular. Otherwise, price pressures are moderate, and at the beginning of the year, Finland had the slowest core inflation in the euro area. However, due to the uncertainty caused by the crisis in the Middle East, there are risks of inflation accelerating. As a result of the crisis in the Middle East, the price of oil has increased considerably. In the forecast, average price of oil is expected to be 26 per cent higher this year than last year. This will have an increasing direct impact on fuel prices and will also be reflected to a certain extent in other consumer prices such as those for unprocessed food. However, according to the forecast, the duration of the crisis is expected to be short, and the increase in the price of oil will therefore not be passed on to other consumer prices on a large scale. Core inflation will thus remain at 1.7 per cent this year and increase moderately to 2 per cent next year. The prolongation of the crisis is a risk. Should this happen, oil prices being passed on to other prices would increase inflation considerably more than forecast. Before the crisis in the Middle East, price pressures were very moderate. In services in particular, the increase in prices had slowed, as the greatest impacts of the value added tax increases were no longer included in the comparison, the increase in the prices of healthcare services was slower, and demand remained weak. The increase in the prices of goods was also very moderate, and import prices decreased as a result of the strong euro, among other things. Core inflation in Finland was thus the slowest in the euro area overall in January–February. The increase in the prices of processed food slowed at the end of the year and was very close to the long-term average in the first months of the year. Global food prices had also started to decrease. Electricity was expensive at the beginning of the year due to the cold weather, which is why energy had an accelerating impact on inflation even before the crisis in the Middle East broke out. This also increased the price of unprocessed food. However, the price surges in the winter were not considered to be an indication of the future development of the price of electricity. At the beginning of the year, different inflation indicators offered a very different picture of the increase in prices, but the difference will be evened out during the current year. The annual change in the consumer price index (CPI) was only an average of 0.2 per cent in January–February, whereas at the same time, the harmonised index of consumer prices (HICP) indicated that prices had increased by 1.4 per cent in a year. This difference is largely explained by the downward impact of housing loan and consumer credit interest rates. The interest rates are included in the CPI but not in the HICP. This impact, which slows the CPI, will gradually dissipate during the current year because the decrease in short market interest rates ended last year, and the rates increased in March as a result of the crisis in the Middle East. In other words, the CPI will increase in the current year not only due to energy prices but also because interest rates are no longer slowing inflation. At the beginning of the outlook period, inflation is maintained specifically by the more expensive energy, but as early as next year, inflation will be slowed by the decrease in energy prices. The price of oil is expected to decrease by 12 per cent in 2027 and another 8 per cent in 2028. In 2028, the decrease in the prices of fuels will be slowed by the increase in the distribution obligation and the expansion of the emissions trading system (ETS2). The prices of electricity futures have not increased considerably in Finland, although in Europe, natural gas prices have increased; in this respect, the impact on inflation will remain low. The increase in the prices of goods is expected to be very moderate, although no return to the previous downward trend is anticipated. The increase in the producer prices of services has slowed to the low levels before the pandemic. The general line for wage increases agreed earlier in the negotiations on collective agreements and the gradually increasing demand will nevertheless maintain the increase in service prices in the outlook period. Inflation measured by the CPI will average 2.0 per cent in 2026, 1.4 per cent in 2027 and 1.9 per cent in 2028. In the current year, inflation is accelerated by the increase in the prices of energy and by the negative effect from owner-occupied housing disappearing as the decline in interest rates ended. By contrast, inflation measured by the HICP will increase to 2.6 per cent. Energy prices decreasing next year from the current year’s high level will slow inflation, but core inflation will accelerate slightly as current year’s energy price increases are passed on moderately to other prices. Due to the crisis in the Middle East, there are risks that inflation will accelerate. If energy prices increase more and over a longer term than assumed in the forecast, they will be passed on to other commodities more broadly. For example, global fertiliser prices have increased, which will raise the prices of food if the high price level is prolonged. Despite the progress of the green transition, oil continues to be a key raw material and an intermediate product for many sectors. When the price of energy increases, companies’ production costs rise, which will be gradually passed on to the prices of end products. This happens fastest in transport and agriculture prices, while this impact is slowest in the prices of goods and services. Otherwise, the risks are mainly skewed to the downside. Prices may certainly be pushed up by the changes in US trade policy becoming increasingly abrupt, the increase in defence spending in Europe and the reconstruction in Ukraine, but for the time being, the considerable uncertainty has decreased demand and dampened inflation. Domestically, the risks are skewed to the downside. Demand is still dampened by the weak employment situation. Additionally, consumer perceptions of inflation differ significantly from actual inflation, which curbs demand. If this continues, demand may decline more than expected, further slowing price increases as well. Over the longer term, factors such as a further slowdown in globalisation, efforts to improve the resilience of supply chains and the economic impacts of climate change mitigation could drive prices higher than usual. Table 8. Price indices 2024 2025 2026* 2027* 2028* Change, % Export prices1 -2.7 -0.7 3.0 1.3 1.5 Import prices1 -1.0 -1.2 3.1 1.0 1.6 Consumer price index 1.6 0.3 2.0 1.4 1.9 Harmonised index of consumer prices 1.0 1.8 2.6 1.4 2.0 Core inflation2 2.2 2.4 1.7 2.0 1.9 Basic price index for domestic supply, including taxes -1.2 -0.4 2.6 1.1 2.0 Building cost index 0.0 0.9 1.3 1.0 1.7 1 As calculated in the National Accounts 2 Harmonised index of consumer prices, excluding energy and food 1.4 Wages and incomes 1.4.1 Wages Collective agreements will lead to higher wage rises this year. Real wages are expected to reach 2021 levels in 2027, but the real wage bill reached the 2021 level last year. The rate of increase in nominal wages slowed by half a percentage point (to 3.0 per cent) compared with the previous year. This was the result of lower negotiated wages compared with the previous year. The rate of increase in negotiated wages slowed as much as that of the index of wage and salary earnings; in other words, wage drifts were maintained at approximately half a percent across the economy. Changes in performance-based bonuses had little impact on earnings growth, in contrast to the situation in the previous year. The rate of increase in earnings last year was fastest in certain public administration sectors, especially in wellbeing services counties, where earnings rose by 6.1 per cent from the previous year. In other local government, the rate of increase in earnings was approximately the same as across the economy on average. The rise in private sector earnings fell short of this, which was 2.8 per cent, as did the rise in earnings in the government, which was 2.0 per cent. These differences are partly due to the timing of agreed pay rises and to the local government sector’s pay structure reform. In addition to the public sector, earnings grew above the average in the forest industry, wholesale and retail trade, transport, and in parishes. In contrast, wage growth fell below the average in the construction sector, metal industry, hotel and restaurant sector, information and communication services, and in financing and the real estate and entertainment sectors. The current collective agreements are generally for three years, with the possibility of cancelling the contracts of final year, that is, conditions of next year. The local government sector is an exception; there the agreement duration is longer. The total cost impact of the agreed wage increases, taking last year into account, averages out at around 2.5 per cent per year, with the largest increases scheduled for 2026 in many sectors. The retail sector is an exception; there the highest increases already occurred last year. In 2026, the impact of local government wage increases will diminish compared with this year. Wage drift has averaged approximately 0.4 per cent per year in recent years, and this level is expected to continue. Nominal earnings will therefore increase by an average of 3.6 per cent across the economy this year. In 2027, agreed increases in other sectors, with the exception of local government, will be smaller, and the pace of wage growth will slow to an average of less than 3 per cent. Thus far, there are few private sector collective agreements for 2028. Typically, the agreed increases for the first year of a new agreement period are larger than those in the preceding year, as is assumed in the forecast for 2028. The local government agreements provide for increases of more than three per cent, and the rate of increase in negotiated wages across the economy is therefore expected to be approximately three per cent. Considering the average wage drift of 0.4 per cent, nominal earnings are expected to increase by about 3.5 per cent in 2028. Between 2021 and 2023, real wages fell by a total of 6.6 per cent. Last year, real earnings rose for the second consecutive year, as the rate of increase in nominal wages was higher than inflation. Although the increase in wages will accelerate, and inflation will remain close to the official monetary target over the next few years, the 2021 level of real wages will not yet be reached in 2026. Only in 2027 are real wages expected to recover to their 2021 level. Taking the development of employment into account, the real wage bill across the economy reached the 2021 level last year because the real wage bill decreased by 1.7 per cent between 2021 and 2023. In addition to nominal earnings growth, the wage bill is influenced by the general development of employment and the sectoral distribution of wage earners. In 2026, employment will decline, and as a result, the wage bill will grow by approximately 3.5 per cent. In 2027, both higher earnings and an improvement in employment will drive the wage bill up by approximately four per cent, and the situation will be the same in 2028. Table 9. Index of wage and salary earnings and labour costs per unit of output 2024 2025 2026* 2027* 2028* Change, % Index of negotiated wage rates 2.7 2.5 3.2 2.8 3.0 Wage drift, etc. 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 Index of wage and salary earnings 3.4 3.0 3.6 3.2 3.4 Real earnings1 1.8 2.7 1.6 1.8 1.5 Sum of wages and salaries 2.0 1.6 3.6 4.2 4.1 Average earnings2 2.5 3.0 3.8 3.5 3.4 Labour costs per unit of output whole economy3 0.8 1.9 3.0 2.4 2.3 1 The index of wage and salary earnings divided by the consumer price index. 2 Computed by dividing the national wage bill by the number of hours worked by wage and salary earners. The figures are affected by structural changes in the economy. 3 Compensation of employees divided by gross value added in volume at basic prices. 1.4.2 Households’ incomes Households' purchasing power will grow slowly in 2026 due to the weak employment and the increase in fuel prices, although lower income taxation will slightly increase disposable income. In 2027, purchasing power is projected to improve more briskly as a result of slower inflation and the rising wage bill. Real disposable income, measuring households’ combined purchasing power, decreased by 0.1 per cent in 2025. Purchasing power fell as a result of the decrease in the number of hours worked in particular. The increases in the value added tax rates in September 2024 and January 2025 raised private consumption prices, thus reducing real disposable income. Households' real disposable income In 2026, purchasing power is forecast to increase by approximately half a per cent, with average earnings growing faster than consumer prices. Employment is no longer expected to decrease considerably, but the increase in consumer prices resulting from the war in Iran will slow down purchasing power growth. In 2026, the reduction in earned income taxation will also raise disposable incomes, but at the same time, the increase in the unemployment insurance contribution and the discontinuation of the eligibility to receive tax deductions on trade union membership fees will weaken wage earners’ purchasing power. Growth in social benefits is slow in the outlook period due to the indexation freeze in unemployment, housing, student and childcare benefits in 2024–2027. In 2027, real disposable income is forecast to grow by 1.3 per cent as the employment situation improves and inflation slows. Purchasing power will be boosted by wage increases under collective agreements. Net property income is also expected to grow, as the average interest rate on housing loans is not expected to increase considerably during the outlook period. 1.5 Consumption The weak employment situation and uncertainties related to the geopolitical situation and to the ongoing consolidation of public finances have been weighing down consumer confidence for an exceptionally long period. The caution of consumers is not expected to dissipate during the spring, which is why growth in private consumption in 2026 will be slower than previously expected. The rise in real income will boost private consumption in 2027–2028, and the saving rate will gradually decrease. Public consumption is expected to decrease in the current year but will take a slight upward turn starting in 2027 as the government’s adjustment measures are reduced. Last year, private consumption decreased by 0.2 per cent. Consumption of non-durables declined for a fourth consecutive year, and the growth in the consumption of services was also minimal. The outlook for private consumption for 2026 has again weakened compared with the previous forecast, and consumption is now forecast to grow only 0.7 per cent this year. Consumer confidence has declined in the first months of the year, and due to the war in Iran, it is unlikely that it will increase in the coming months. High unemployment lowers households' incomes and confidence. The increase in energy prices resulting from the war in Iran is slowing the growth of households’ real incomes in the current year, but purchasing power is still expected to grow by approximately half a percent as a result of the increases in negotiated wages and the reduction in the tax rates on wage earnings. In 2027, growth in private consumption will accelerate as the unemployment starts to decrease, and the wage increases negotiated in collective agreements increase disposable income. The saving rate is expected to decrease to a level of approximately three per cent in 2028, with consumption growing faster than incomes. Prices in private consumption are expected to increase by 2.4 per cent in 2025 as the war in Iran increases the prices of energy. The increase in prices is expected to slow to 1.4 per cent in 2027 as energy prices decrease. The confidence of consumers in both their own economic situation and the Finnish economy declined considerably in February. The high electricity prices in January–February, among other things, may have contributed to the decline. For a long time, consumer confidence has been weighed down by the threat of unemployment, which is clearly above average. Additionally, the completed and future consolidation measures in general government finances may have decreased consumer confidence and/or increased saving: although the confidence of senior salaried employees and entrepreneurs has been restored to the level preceding Russia’s invasion, the confidence of groups receiving social benefits, such as students, pensioners and workers, has remained lower than average. According to the consumer confidence statistics, consumers’ intentions of purchasing durable goods have remained lower than average in the first months of the year. First registrations of passenger cars remained low in January–February 2026, and the sale of used cars has not grown either. At the same time, retail sales increased slightly in November–January. The consumption of durable goods in 2026 is expected to grow by approximately one per cent. Most of this growth, however, is passed through from last year. In recent years, the consumption of durable goods in relation to disposable income has reached its lowest level in the 2000s. The consumption of non-durables such as food, energy and fuels decreased by half a percent in 2025. The war in Iran will increase the prices of energy considerably this year, which will reduce the consumption of fuel in particular. We forecast, that the consumption of non-durables will not increase in 2026. Service consumption increased by only 0.1 per cent in 2025. The volume of services was increasing in December–January in the hotel and restaurant sector, and in information and communications services. This year, the slight increase in real incomes is expected to be reflected in the consumption of services, which is forecast to grow by just under one per cent. Next year, the increase in the consumption of services will accelerate slightly as a result of the increase in employment and real incomes. Households’ net saving rate rose to 4.1 per cent in 2025. Saving is at the same level as during the 2009–2010 financial crisis or the second year of the coronavirus pandemic in 2021. Consumers clearly consider the economy to be in a some kind of crisis and prepare for the threat of unemployment by saving a higher share of their income than before. Due to the war in Iran, the geopolitical situation and the global economy will also remain unstable this year, and the saving rate is not expected to decrease markedly in 2026. In Finland, the consolidation measures of general government will also continue in the coming years, which may slow the decrease in the saving rate. As the employment situation improves, the saving rate will decrease gradually towards the end of the outlook period, although it is still expected to remain higher than average. The household debt ratio declined to 121.6 per cent last year. The value of new mortgages purchased by households has not taken an upward turn in the first months of the year, and the household loan stock has remained stable for the last 12 months. The debt ratio is expected to decrease to approximately 120 per cent this year, as the loan stock will grow more slowly than disposable income. Debt ratio is expected to remain at a level of approximately 120 per cent in 2027–2028, as the loan stock will grow at the same pace as disposable income. Public consumption fell by 0.2 per cent in 2025 due to the government’s adjustment measures, among other things. In addition, the adjustment measures implemented by municipalities and wellbeing services counties slowed the growth of consumption expenditure. Although the ageing of the population increases the need for health and social services, and defence investments are higher than before, total public consumption is expected to decrease further by 0.8 per cent in 2026. Expenditure growth will be slowed by the spending cut measures by local government, in addition to the Government’s spending cuts. However, consumption will grow slightly by 0.2 per cent in 2027 and accelerate to 0.7 per cent in 2028, as the impact of the adjustment measures decreases, and defence expenditure increases. The value of public consumption will grow in the outlook period as the price of consumption will increase. The rise in consumption prices will be accelerated by the wage increases agreed in the public sector. Due to the pay system development programmes in the municipal and welfare sector, local government earnings will continue to develop more rapidly than general earnings. Additionally, the increase in the price of energy caused by the crisis in the Middle East will accelerate inflation, which will increase cost pressures in general government finances. Table 10. Consumption 2024 2025 2026* 2027* 2028* 2025 Share, % Change in volume, % Private consumption -0.2 -0.2 0.7 1.4 1.6 100.0 Households -0.3 -0.2 0.7 1.4 1.6 96.0 Durables -1.7 0.5 1.0 1.6 1.7 6.9 Semi-durables 0.0 1.0 1.7 1.3 1.7 6.9 Non-durable goods -0.5 -0.5 0.0 1.2 1.7 28.8 Services -0.1 0.1 0.9 1.5 1.5 53.4 Consumption by non-profit institutions 1.8 -1.4 1.0 1.4 1.5 3.6 Public consumption 2.0 -0.2 -0.8 0.2 0.7 Total 0.5 -0.2 0.2 1.0 1.3 Change, % Private consumption deflator 1.0 1.1 2.4 1.4 2.0 Public consumption deflator 0.7 1.8 3.8 3.5 3.6 Households´ disposable income 2.9 1.0 2.9 2.7 2.9 Households´ real disposable income 1.8 -0.1 0.5 1.3 0.9 Percent Consumption in relation to GDP (at current prices) 77.2 76.8 76.7 76.2 76.0 Household savings ratio 3.9 4.1 3.9 3.9 3.3 Household debt ratio1 122.8 121.6 120.5 120.5 120.5 1 Household debt at end-year in relation to disposable income 1.6 Investments Construction will take a cautious upward turn in 2026, driven by construction of business premises, and a more extensive upward turn in the sector will start as the housing production recovers in 2027–2028. At the same time, investments will be accelerated by an exceptional growth boost, as the deliveries of the F-35 fighter aircraft will result in an increase of more than 20 per cent in machinery and equipment investments. Despite these positive signals, the investment outlook continues to be overshadowed by the considerable uncertainty generated by the geopolitical crises and the development of interest rates. Total investments are forecast to grow rapidly in 2026, and substantial growth is also expected in the following years. Public defence expenditure accounts for by far the single greatest growth boost. In the construction sector, the turnaround will be maintained by the building of data centres and security of supply. A clearer boost in residential construction and the infrastructure sector will not take place until 2027 and 2028. Although the green transition, the stable strengthening of R&D activities and defence materiel purchases provide a solid foundation for growth in the coming years, obstacles to a more broad-based recovery remain. Subdued consumer confidence, a volatile interest rate level and the repercussions of the geopolitical tensions in energy prices will maintain uncertainty in the markets throughout the outlook period. Although the change in the total volume of construction was slightly negative in 2025, the year-end indicators are showing cautious signs of a turnaround. Geopolitical risks such as the crisis in the Middle East and the resulting increase in energy prices still create considerable uncertainty in the recovery. Despite the uncertainties, it is expected that construction will take an upward turn in 2026 and strengthen in 2027 and 2028. Growth in 2026 will rely heavily on the construction of business premises. The outlook for residential construction continues to be weak in the near future. Investments in residential construction have hit an exceptional low. The volume of new housing starts has fallen by more than 60 per cent from the peak levels of 2021 by 2025. The share of new housing in the total amount of money spent on construction has halved from 22 per cent in 2022 to 11 per cent in 2025. The focus of production is mainly on state-subsidised construction, which accounted for more than 65 per cent of new apartment building starts in 2025. The recovery in the housing market is hindered by the oversupply of housing, the large reserves of completed unsold housing, and the considerable difference between the price of new and old housing. In addition, consumer confidence is low and undermined by uncertainty about the interest rate level. Prices of previously owned housing are expected to decrease slightly further in 2026. The demand basis is supported by population growth in large cities, but at the same time, housing allowance cuts have slowed the generation of new households. Although the number of new apartment starts is low, production volume is supported by the increased average size of apartments. The apartments being currently built and completed are larger in their floor area than before. New housing construction is forecast to increase slightly from the preceding year in 2026, and stronger growth is expected for 2027 and 2028. Other building construction – in other words, the construction of business premises – has been the driver of construction overall, and its volume has not decreased nearly as steeply as that of housing construction. The construction of business premises is driven by the rapidly increasing construction of data centres, but industrial and commercial construction are also on the rise. In addition, Finland’s NATO membership has increased the volume of construction and infrastructure projects by the Finnish Defence Forces and the defence industry. Civil engineering volume is forecast to remain at the preceding year’s level in 2026. Zero growth is due to several concurrent factors that hinder growth. One of the most significant factors is the significant winding down of the construction of onshore wind power from the peak levels of previous years. Additionally, the prolonged subdued building construction, and housing production in particular, is directly reflected in infrastructure construction. When no new residential areas are started, the need for foundation engineering, new municipal engineering and street networks is also minimal. The situation in the sector is also burdened by the strict spending cuts by the Government and municipalities, which will result in postponed new transport infrastructure and other infrastructure projects. In addition, orders by public-sector clients in the maintenance and paving of roads are reduced due to the perpetually high cost level. However, slight growth is again expected in civil engineering in the next couple of years (2027–2028). The upward turn is driven by the major investments required by the energy transition in particular, including the extensive strengthening of the main electricity grid, industrial-scale solar farms, and the launch of the construction of a national hydrogen infrastructure. In addition, the forecast gradual recovery of housing construction will begin to generate new demand for basic infrastructure with a delay. The sector’s moderate growth path is also supported in part by the needs of the defence administration and security infrastructure that will increase as a result of the NATO membership. The energy transition and the changed geopolitical operating environment are significantly boosting machinery and equipment investments. The availability of clean and reliable energy has made Finland an attractive destination for new industrial investments. However, the overall growth in machinery and equipment investments will be dominated by public-sector defence expenditure in the coming years. In 2026, the estimated growth is as much as more than 20 per cent as the first deliveries of the F-35 multirole fighter aircraft begin. Additionally, investments are supported by the powerful inputs in the green transition and data centres, among other things. Solid growth will continue in immaterial investments such as research and development (R&D). This development is significantly affected by Finland’s strategic objective of increasing R&D expenditure to four per cent of GDP by 2030. Reaching this objective is secured by means of the Act on Research and Development Funding, which secures long-term growth of public funding, as well as the R&D tax incentive targeting businesses and EU-level innovation funding. Public investments grew moderately, by slightly over two per cent, last year. This year, investments are expected to grow by a quarter. The awaited start of the deliveries of the major defence materiel purchases is the factor behind growth. The deliveries of the new multirole fighter aircraft and ships will maintain a high level of public investments for the next five years. In addition, the general increase in defence expenditure, which accounts for a large share of investment expenditure, contributes to the high level of investments. The R&D expenditure will also increase public investments until 2030. In local government, investment prospects vary regionally. Investment pressures in growth centres will remain high, keeping municipal investments at a high level. However, rising financing expenses and challenges in municipal finances may slow down the implementation of investments. Government decisions play a central role in the development of public investments. The timing of large investments and deliveries may cause variation in the number of investments during the outlook period. In addition, defence materiel purchases may be divided into investments and consumption differently than estimated. Table 11. Fixed investment by type of capital asset 2024 2025 2026* 2027* 2028* 2025 Share, % Change in volume, % Buildings -9.5 -0.4 2.9 7.0 5.8 41.9 Residential buildings -17.7 0.3 1.0 6.0 7.5 20.1 Non-residential buildings 1.1 -1.2 5.0 8.0 4.0 20.5 Civil engineering construction -8.9 1.6 0.0 1.0 1.0 9.5 Machinery and equipment 5.3 0.3 20.7 3.5 2.0 26.3 Intangible investments1 -5.1 3.2 3.0 3.0 3.0 22.3 Total -5.0 0.8 7.3 4.5 3.6 100.0 Private -8.2 0.4 2.3 7.0 4.6 79.9 Public 10.2 2.4 27.1 -3.2 0.2 20.1 Investment deflator 0.3 -0.1 1.6 2.0 2.2 Investment to GDP ratio (at current prices) Fixed investment 22.1 21.8 23.1 23.7 24.1 Private 17.6 17.4 17.5 18.4 18.9 Public 4.4 4.5 5.5 5.3 5.2 1 Includes also R&D-investments. 1.7 Domestic production Growth of total output is picking up. This is a result of the continued growth in manufacturing, and of the improving development of construction and services. 1.7.1 GDP and productivity Value added across the economy grew by 0.3 per cent in 2025. Primary production and industrial production increased, while services and construction decreased. Value added grew on a large scale in the subsectors of both primary production and industrial production. The forest and metal industries, which decreased in 2024, also took an upward turn last year. In the service industries, there was a large-scale decrease in the commerce, transport, finance and insurance sectors. Value added in construction has been declining for seven years, and its level was slightly more than 22 per cent lower than in 2018. Productivity growth in the Finnish economy has been weak in recent years. Between 2021 and 2025, value added per hour worked improved by an average of 0.3 per cent. On average, productivity fell in construction and manufacturing in particular, whereas in service sectors it improved slightly. In 2026–2028, however, productivity is expected to grow by approximately one per cent per year as economic growth begins. Productivity is expected to improve in all main industries. The growth prospects for total output for 2026 are modest, as the crisis in the Middle East overshadows the development of the global economy and export demand, which is important for Finland. Additionally, consumption demand in Finland is subdued. The total value added will grow by approximately 0.5 per cent this year. Industrial output will benefit from the recovery of the order book. In other sectors, demand continues to be so modest that growth will remain meagre this year. In 2027, construction will become a key driver of economic growth as increasing confidence and pent-up demand will boost output in the sector. Service provision will also grow faster due to consumption demand. In 2027–2028, the annual growth rate of total output is expected to be slightly more than 1.5 per cent per year, which is more than double the average growth rate in the 2010s. 1.7.2 Sectors The volume of value added increased in all sectors of industrial output in 2025. Growth in the chemical industry and the electrical and electronic industry continued to be strong. The volume of value added in the forest industry and metal industry took an upward turn after the decrease in recent years. Although the outlook in the first months of the year was positive, the crisis in the Middle East has lowered growth prospects. The value added across industry is expected to grow by 1.8 per cent this year, after which growth will accelerate to 2.4 per cent in 2027 and 2028. The industry turnover grew in 2025, driven by demand from abroad. The export turnover grew well, but domestic turnover continued to decrease, although only slightly. Turnover in 2025 was about one per cent higher than in the previous year. The strong growth in the electrical and electronic industry turnover continued, but the metal and chemical industries also experienced good growth. Forest industry turnover decreased despite the growth in the value-added volume. New orders in industry grew during 2025. At the end of the year, growth in orders was strong in the metal and chemical industries. The first months of 2026 have also been strong for the metal industry. During the winter, the Helsinki and Rauma shipyards received icebreaker orders. According to the TechnoBaro Technology Industry Barometer in March, the accumulation of new orders and the order books have strengthened. The nadir in the economic situation in construction has been passed. The outlook continues to be overshadowed by considerable uncertainties, the situation continues to be weaker than normal, and recovery is slow. In 2026, value added in construction is forecast to grow only moderately, but growth is expected to become brisk in the following years. The development is supported in particular by energy transition investments, construction related to security of supply, and the recovery of housing construction. In the trade sector, the volume of value added decreased by one per cent in 2025. However, in January 2026, the trend volume of trade had taken a slight upwards turn. The confidence indicator for retail was significantly above its average in February, but the war in Iran may weaken the outlook during the spring. In other private services, value-added volume grew by 0.7 per cent in 2025. The confidence indicator for the service industries continued to be at a slightly lower than average level in February 2026 (the average of the balance figure shown in the graph is 11), but was still above zero. In 2026, the value added in services (including trade and public services) is expected to grow by half a percent, as the value added in public services will continue to decrease, and the value added in private services will grow by approximately one per cent. In 2027, services will grow by about one per cent, as the growth in manufacturing and construction will increase the demand for private services. Table 12. Production by industry 2024 2025 2026* 2027* 2028* 2025 Share, %1 Change in volume, % Manufacturing 3.8 1.6 1.8 2.4 2.4 20.4 Construction -6.7 -1.5 1.5 6.4 5.0 5.7 Agriculture and forestry -1.7 3.8 -5.7 0.5 0.6 2.8 Manufacturing and construction 1.4 0.9 1.7 3.2 3.0 26.1 Services -0.1 -0.2 0.5 1.2 1.3 71.1 Total production at basic prices 0.3 0.2 0.6 1.7 1.7 100.0 GDP at market prices 0.4 0.2 0.6 1.7 1.7 Labour productivity in the whole economy 1.2 1.4 0.9 1.0 1.1 1 Share of total value added at current prices 1.8 Labour market A turnaround in the labour market seems possible next year. Unemployment will remain significantly above its structural level in 2028. A turn for the better in the labour market will again be postponed. In 2025, the number of employed people decreased for a second consecutive year, although by only half the previous year’s number. At the same time, the number of unemployed increased at the same pace as in the previous year, and the unemployment rate increased to nearly ten per cent. As the number of persons not included in the labour force has decreased, there is now an abundance of labour force in the labour market, and the participation rate is nearly at the highest level in its history. Last year, the greatest reduction in employment occurred in primary production, the forest and chemical industries and in the trade and information and communications service sectors. At the same time, the number of employed people increased considerably in the food industry, logistics, hotel and restaurant services, and in property management and arts and entertainment. The number of hours worked decreased more than twice as much as the number of employed people, which means that the average hours worked per employed person decreased. An increase in the number of part-time wage earners and a decrease in the number of full-timers contributed to this trend. The employment trend in the 20–64 age group was 75.8 per cent in February, which was the same as in December 2025. The subdued economic growth will only have a minimal increasing impact on demand for labour force this year. The weak development of the number of employed people at the beginning of the year and the continued decrease in the number of available jobs indicate continued weak development in employment. The private sector’s intentions of providing employment demand have not yet improved broadly, although there already seems to be a clear need for increasing personnel in industry. At the same time, the value of new orders in industry decreased at the turn of the year, so it is unlikely that demand for labour force will increase considerably in the first months of the year. Intentions of providing employment will be scarce in the service sector and construction. As the number of part-time jobs increases, the number of hours worked will fall more considerably than employment levels. Immigration contributes to the supply of labour. At the same time, growth in labour input will increase the number of unemployed people. The number of employed people will decrease by an average of 0.1 per cent this year. In 2027–2028, the economy will grow faster, and employment will increase by an average of just under one per cent annually. Growth will be broad-based and also supported by the measures taken by the Government since 2024 to promote the supply of the labour force. The employment rate (20–64 age group) will rise to approximately 76.5 per cent but will still remain below the peak level of nearly 78.1 per cent in 2022. Employment will also be boosted by growth in the working-age population, which is due to immigration in particular: it is estimated that there will be nearly 28,000 more people aged 20–64 in 2028 than in 2025. Last year, the number of unemployed people continued to rise broadly and substantially. Unemployment among women in particular rose by 20 per cent. Unemployment rose particularly sharply among those aged 35–44. Among the occupational groups, the increase in unemployment affected those in specialist and service and sales occupations in particular. In contrast, unemployment fell in primary production occupations. The unemployment trend increased to 10.5 per cent in February, which was slightly higher than at the end of last year. During the first months of the year, unemployment among men increased more than unemployment among women, in particular in the age groups of the young and approximately 50-year-olds. In 2026, unemployment will continue to grow, as the number of employed people will decrease. In particular, the public sector’s saving needs are slowing employment growth and contributing to rising unemployment. The unemployment rate will therefore rise to an average of nearly 10 per cent. In 2027–2028, the economic recovery will help reduce unemployment as demand for labour force increases, but higher competence requirements for skilled employees will slow this development. In 2028, the unemployment rate will remain at nine per cent, well above the estimated level of approximately 8 per cent in structural unemployment in Finland that year. Table 13. Labour market 2024 2025 2026* 2027* 2028* Annual average, 1,000 persons Population of working age (15–74 yrs) 4 153 4 167 4 179 4 187 4 195 Population of working age (15–64 yrs) 3 473 3 493 3 506 3 517 3 524 Labour force (15–74 yrs) 2 841 2 868 2 867 2 880 2 885 Employed (15–74 yrs) 2 602 2 590 2 586 2 608 2 626 of which 15–64 yrs 2 504 2 495 2 491 2 513 2 530 Unemployed (15–74 yrs) 238 278 280 271 259 Change in volume, 1,000 persons Population of working age (15–64 yrs) 31 20 13 11 7 Employed (15–64 yrs) -28 -9 -4 21 18 Percent Employment rate (15–64 yrs) 72.1 71.4 71.1 71.4 71.8 Employment rate (20–64 yrs) 76.7 76.0 75.6 76.1 76.4 Unemployment rate (15–74 yrs) 8.4 9.7 9.8 9.4 9.0 1,000 persons per annum Immigration, net 47 35 35 33 30 1.9 Medium-term outlook for 2029–2030 Finland’s economy is expected to grow by 1.5 per cent in 2029 and by 1.3 per cent in 2030. The employment rate will rise to 72.8 per cent in 2030. In the outlook period, gross domestic product will grow faster than potential output. The medium-term projection is based on an estimate of the potential output growth, which is considered to determine the growth potential of the Finnish economy after the economic cycle. Potential output refers to the economy’s long-term growth path, or a sustainable level of output that ensures stable inflation, which is achievable when economic capacity is in normal use. In the medium term, the Finnish economy is expected to grow moderately. In 2029 and 2030, GDP growth is expected to be 1.5 and 1.3 per cent per year respectively. Growth will be supported by the strong development of private investment, boosted by the investments required by the green transition. GDP growth will also be supported by the public defence spending increases for 2029 in particular. The employment rate (15–64 age group) is expeced to increase to 72.3 per cent in 2029 and to 72.8 per cent in 2030. The development of employment is affected by both the economic cycle and the Government’s structural policy measures. At the same time, the unemployment rate is projected to fall moderately, and the unemployment gap is expected to close in 2030, when the unemployment rate is forecast to be 8.2 per cent. The increase in consumer prices is projected to reach the 2 per cent inflation target set by the European Central Bank as early as 2029 and to remain at that level in 2030 as well. In 2026–2030, potential output is projected to grow by an average of 0.8 per cent per year. The growth will consist of the development of labour input, capital stock and total factor productivity. The impact of labour input is projected to be 0.1 percentage points on average per year. The growth contribution of labour input is weakened by the long-standing negative development in the growth impact of hours worked per employed person. The positive growth impact of the working-age population will also fade towards the end of the outlook period. The development of the capital stock will support potential output growth by an average of 0.4 percentage points per year in 2026–2030. The growth contribution of capital stock has been fairly stable throughout the 2000s. The third source of growth is total factor productivity (TFP), which is expected to pick up towards the end of the forecast period compared with the early 2020s. However, TFP growth will remain modest relative to the early 2000s. The sluggish growth is partly explained by structural changes in the economy, where the contraction of high-productivity sectors and increasing service orientation have slowed TFP growth. Similar developments have also been observed in other advanced economies, but in Finland, productivity growth has been particularly slow. In 2026–2030, the contribution of total factor productivity to growth is estimated to be about 0.3 percentage points per year on average, compared with an average of around two percentage points per year in the early 2000s. Table 14. Key forecast figures for the medium term 2024 2025 2026* 2027* 2028* 2029* 2030* GDP at market prices, change in volume, % 0.4 0.2 0.6 1.7 1.7 1.5 1.3 GDP, nominal, EUR bn 276 281 290 300 313 325 337 Consumer price index, change, % 1.6 0.3 2.0 1.4 1.9 2.0 2.0 Unemployment rate, % 8.4 9.7 9.8 9.4 9.0 8.5 8.2 Employment rate, % 72.1 71.4 71.1 71.4 71.8 72.3 72.8 Output gap, % of potential output1 -2.3 -2.5 -2.5 -1.5 -0.7 -0.3 0.0 Potential output growth, %1 0.5 0.3 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.0 1 Estimated according the method developed jointly by the EU Commission and Member States Table 15. Key public finance forecast figures for the medium term Relative to GDP, % 2024 2025 2026* 2027* 2028* 2029* 2030* General government net lending -4.4 -3.4 -4.6 -4.6 -4.6 -4.6 -4.4 Central government -3.7 -3.9 -5.2 -4.7 -5.2 -5.2 -5.0 Municipal finances -0.3 -0.3 -0.4 -0.4 -0.3 -0.3 -0.2 Wellbeing services counties -0.6 0.0 0.1 -0.1 -0.2 -0.2 -0.3 Social security funds 0.3 0.7 0.9 0.6 1.1 1.2 1.2 Financial balance of of central and local government -4.7 -4.2 -5.4 -5.3 -5.7 -5.7 -5.6 Structural balance -3.0 -2.0 -3.1 -3.7 -4.2 -4.4 -4.4 General government debt 82.4 88.5 91.2 92.8 94.7 97.0 99.3 Central government debt 61.4 66.9 69.4 71.2 73.5 76.0 78.4 A scenario of less favourable development in the impacts of the crisis in the Middle East This calculation presents a scenario in which Finland’s economic growth comes to a halt in 2026. The goal of the calculation is to illustrate what kind of development in the international economy could slow Finland’s GDP growth to zero, and how it would affect general government finances in Finland. The real economy calculation has been prepared using the KOOMA model developed at the Economics Department of the Ministry of Finance. In the model, the impacts of the crisis have been modelled by means of price, interest rate and demand shocks. The response of general government finances to the economic development presented in the scenario is assessed through the general government finances scenario model. In the scenario, it is anticipated that new fiscal policy decisions will not be made. Changes in public sector finances and expenditure will follow macroeconomic changes, and the functioning of automatic stabilisers will be unrestricted. In the calculation, the price of oil will rise higher than anticipated in the Ministry of Finance’s spring forecast. The assumption in the Ministry of Finance’s forecast is that the average dollar price of crude oil per barrel will be slightly less than 30 per cent higher in 2026 than in 2025. An alternative scenario assumes that the impacts of the crisis will intensify in 2026 in relation to this baseline, meaning the price of oil will be 30 per cent higher than the baseline price. This would mean that the price of oil per barrel would be approximately 110 dollars on average in 2026. The crisis will have prolonged impacts on the price, and the price of oil will therefore also be significantly higher than the baseline in 2027. Shocks affecting the prices of oil and other imported raw materials increase the import sector prices in the model. Additionally, Finland’s export prices will increase, which is why external competitiveness does not change in the scenario. The higher price of oil and the weakening of the availability of raw materials produced in the Middle East will be broadly passed on to other prices, and interest rates are also expected to respond to this development. The nominal interest rate will first rise by 0.25 percentage points higher, and from mid-2026 by 0.5 percentage points above the baseline, curbing inflation but also weakening economic growth. However, the interest rate will return to the baseline level in 2028. The impacts of the crisis will spread to Finland not only through the price shocks but also through demand shocks, as both international and domestic demand will weaken. In the calculation, the world trade will decline 1.1 per cent more than in the baseline in the first year. As a result, demand for Finnish products of companies linked to foreign trade will decline. The greatest impact in the calculation will thus be felt in foreign trade, which is typical of a small open economy such as Finland. The calculation also assumes that consumer confidence will weaken during 2026, and this will decrease domestic consumption. Table 1 provides a summary of the impacts of the scenario compared with the baseline, the spring 2026 forecast by the Economics Department of the Ministry of Finance. Due to the disturbances in the global economy, Finland’s GDP will decrease and will be 0.6 percentage points lower than in the forecast. In other words, GDP growth will come to a halt in 2026. As a result of the price shocks, the prices of domestic end products such as consumer goods will increase. Inflation will accelerate by 1 percentage point in relation to the baseline, and the annual change in the consumer price index will be three per cent in 2026. Employment will decrease as a result of the shocks, and the unemployment rate will increase to 10.2 per cent in 2026. Despite the declining trend in the price of oil in 2027, the price level will be higher in relation to the baseline. As a result, GDP growth will be slower and inflation faster than in the baseline. Table 1 Baseline and scenario variables Baseline 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Oil price on average, $/barrel 85.6 75.4 69.3 69.3 69.3 Interest rate 3 mths, % 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 GDP volume, change % 0.6 1.7 1.7 1.5 1.3 GDP price, change % 2.6 2.1 2.4 2.3 2.3 Private consumption volume, change % 0.7 1.4 1.6 1.4 1.5 Private consumption price, change % 2.4 1.4 2.0 2.0 2.0 Consumer price index, change % 2.0 1.4 1.9 2.0 2.0 Index of wage and salary earnings, change % 3.6 3.2 3.4 3.0 3.0 Wage bill, change % 3.6 4.2 4.1 3.9 3.8 Operating surplus, change % 2.8 4.3 4.9 3.8 3.6 Unemployment rate, % 9.8 9.4 9.0 8.5 8.2 General government (consolidated) revenue, relative to GDP, % 53.8 52.9 52.4 52.5 52.2 General government (consolidated) expenditure, relative to GDP, % 58.3 57.5 57.0 57.0 56.6 General government budgetary position, relative to GDP, % -4.6 -4.6 -4.6 -4.6 -4.4 General government debt-to-GDP ratio, % 91.2 92.8 94.7 97.0 99.3 Scenario 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Oil price on average, $/barrel 111.0 103.3 83.3 75.0 71.7 Interest rate 3 mths, % 2.4 2.5 2.1 2.1 2.1 GDP volume, change % 0.0 1.6 2.1 1.7 1.4 GDP price, change % 3.2 2.2 2.0 2.1 2.2 Private consumption volume, change % -0.1 1.0 2.1 1.8 1.6 Private consumption price, change % 3.3 1.6 1.3 1.7 1.9 Consumer price index, change % 3.0 1.6 1.3 1.7 2.0 Index of wage and salary earnings, change % 3.5 2.7 3.4 3.3 3.3 Wage bill, change % 2.8 3.8 4.5 4.3 4.0 Operating surplus, change % 0.2 3.1 7.3 5.1 3.7 Unemployment rate, % 10.2 9.6 8.8 8.2 8.0 General government (consolidated) revenue, relative to GDP, % 53.4 52.5 52.0 52.2 52.0 General government (consolidated) expenditure, relative to GDP, % 58.6 57.8 57.0 56.8 56.5 General government budgetary position, relative to GDP, % -5.1 -5.3 -5.0 -4.6 -4.5 General government debt-to-GDP ratio, % 91.4 93.4 95.6 97.9 100.1 Difference 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Oil price on average, $/barrel 25.5 27.9 14.0 5.7 2.3 Interest rate 3 mths, % 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 GDP volume, change % -0.6 -0.1 0.4 0.2 0.1 GDP price, change % 0.6 0.2 -0.4 -0.2 -0.1 Private consumption volume, change % -0.8 -0.4 0.5 0.4 0.2 Private consumption price, change % 1.0 0.2 -0.6 -0.3 0.0 Consumer price index, change % 1.0 0.2 -0.7 -0.3 0.0 Index of wage and salary earnings, change % -0.1 -0.5 0.0 0.3 0.3 Wage bill, change % -0.8 -0.4 0.4 0.4 0.2 Operating surplus, change % -2.6 -1.2 2.4 1.3 0.1 Unemployment rate, % 0.4 0.2 -0.2 -0.3 -0.2 General government (consolidated) revenue, relative to GDP, % -0.3 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.2 General government (consolidated) expenditure, relative to GDP, % 0.2 0.3 0.0 -0.2 -0.1 General government budgetary position, relative to GDP, % -0.6 -0.7 -0.4 -0.1 -0.1 General government debt-to-GDP ratio, % 0.2 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.9 Economic development in accordance with the scenario would weaken the general government budgetary position and increase the general government debt-to-GDP ratio compared with the baseline (see Table 1). In the scenario, the general government finances remain smaller than the baseline throughout the period under review. In turn, public-sector expenditure will grow compared with the baseline in 2026–2027. Towards the end of the period under review, the general government debt-to-GDP ratio will nevertheless develop more moderately than the baseline, as the economy recovers from the recession caused by the shocks. In the scenario, economic activity will slow compared with the baseline, which will, in particular, result in the tax revenue collected by the general government growing more slowly than in the baseline. At the same time, the rapid increase in prices and the unemployment rate will increase general government expenses. Social benefits and grants paid by the social security funds will increase as a result of the increase in unemployment and prices. In turn, the change in the interest rates and the development of the financial markets will affect the revenues of employment pension funds. The change in the interest rates will also have an impact on the costs of general government debt. According to the scenario, the weaker development in general government finances and public expenditure growth, which will be faster than in the baseline in 2026–2028, will weaken the general government budgetary position at the beginning of the period under review, especially compared with the baseline. In the scenario, the estimated general government deficit is just over five per cent relative to GDP in 2026–2027, around five per cent in 2028, and about 4.5 per cent relative to GDP in 2029–2030. However, the weakening of the budgetary position will increase the general government debt-to-GDP ratio fairly moderately, as the recovery of the economy from the crisis is stronger in the scenario than in the baseline. In the scenario, the general government debt-to-GDP ratio is slightly over 91 per cent (about 0.2 percentage points higher than in the baseline) in 2026, and it will be just over 100 per cent (about 0.9 percentage points higher than in the baseline) in 2030. References: Koponen, Niemeläinen, Elmgren, Pönkä 2026, “KOOMA: A DSGE Model of the Finnish Economy”, Publications of the Ministry of Finance, 2026:4, https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-367-425-7 2 General Government Finances 2.1 General government General government deficits will persist. Expenditure will be driven by defence and interest expenditure, and the impacts of the adjustment measures will decrease as the tax cuts take effect. General government debt will increase steadily. It will exceed 90 per cent this year and be over 99 per cent of GDP in the early 2030s. The general government deficit narrowed to 3.4 per cent of GDP in 2025. Economic growth remained sluggish, but the adjustment measures strengthened general government finances compared with 2024. General government expenditure grew by just over one per cent. This was the slowest growth rate since 2017. The combined central government and local government deficit amounted to 4.2 per cent of GDP. The debt-to-GDP ratio reached 88.5 per cent. This year, the deficit is expected to widen again, to 4.6 per cent of GDP. Defence equipment purchases are the main factor behind this development, but tax cuts will also slow tax revenue growth. Expenditure growth will be slowed by adjustment measures introduced to balance the increases in defence spending. The delivery of the F-35 fighter jets is the main factor driving growth in defence spending, and as they will be delivered to the Finnish Air Force, they will be entered as expenditure. Economic growth will remain sluggish, but price rises will ensure an increase in consumption tax revenue. Defence expenditure will remain high next year. The lowering of corporation tax will slow growth in tax revenue. With private consumption stagnating, VAT revenue will also grow at a slow rate. The deficit will remain at 4.6 per cent. In comparison, a deficit of about 3½ per cent is projected for the euro area. The state of general government finances will remain unchanged between 2028 and 2030. Economic growth will pick up, but growth in tax revenue can only cover expenditure growth. Interest expenditure will grow throughout the outlook period, and defence spending will grow at a particularly rapid rate in 2029. The central government deficit will remain high. in 2025, it amounted to 3.9 per cent. The deficit will reach over five per cent this year, as the expenditure on F-35 fighter jets will boost spending by more than two billion euros. This year’s tax revenue will be reduced by cuts in income taxation; at the same time, one-off items will also increase revenue. An additional transfer of one billion euros from the State Pension Fund will ",
      "word_count": 16474,
      "original_language": "EN",
      "author": "",
      "countries": [
        "FIN"
      ],
      "industries": [
        {
          "name": "Economic & Macroeconomic Research",
          "is_primary": true
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        {
          "name": "Fiscal Policy",
          "code": "MM03",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Economic Indicators",
          "code": "MM01",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Trade, Tariffs & Sanctions",
          "code": "MM04",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Geopolitical Risk",
          "code": "RK01",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "company_mentions": [],
      "article_type": "Academic",
      "is_press_release": true,
      "is_opinion": false,
      "is_breaking": true,
      "iptc_codes": [
        "20000357",
        "20000370",
        "20000344",
        "20000346",
        "20000745",
        "20000383",
        "20000365",
        "20000358",
        "20000368"
      ],
      "iab_categories": [
        "80",
        "83",
        "81",
        "88",
        "89"
      ],
      "naics_codes": [
        "92113",
        "521110",
        "5211"
      ],
      "sic_codes": [],
      "entities": {
        "person": [
          "mikko spolander",
          "jenni pääkkönen",
          "janne huovari",
          "niemeläinen",
          "koponen",
          "elmgren",
          "pönkä"
        ],
        "location": [
          "finland",
          "middle east",
          "helsinki",
          "strait of hormuz",
          "persian gulf",
          "ukraine",
          "us",
          "euro area",
          "sweden",
          "china",
          "india",
          "russia",
          "japan",
          "europe",
          "united kingdom",
          "suez canal",
          "bab el-mandeb strait",
          "france",
          "germany",
          "united states",
          "persian gulf countries",
          "persian gulf region",
          "iran",
          "large cities",
          "rauma"
        ],
        "product": [
          "natural gas",
          "oil",
          "f-35 fighter jets",
          "fighter jets",
          "brent crude oil",
          "wti crude oil",
          "semiconductors",
          "crude oil",
          "fertilisers",
          "pharmaceutical industry",
          "services",
          "fighter aircraft",
          "heating oil",
          "goods",
          "gas",
          "electricity",
          "unprocessed food",
          "healthcare services",
          "processed food",
          "food",
          "electricity futures",
          "fuels",
          "passenger cars",
          "used cars",
          "durable goods",
          "f-35 fighter aircraft",
          "f-35 multirole fighter aircraft",
          "f-35",
          "ships",
          "consumer goods"
        ],
        "event": [
          "war of aggression",
          "russia’s war of aggression",
          "war in iran"
        ]
      },
      "newsworthiness_score": 1,
      "group_id": null
    },
    {
      "id": 25814953,
      "title": "Live Updates: US-Israeli Attacks on Iran and Global Energy Impacts - Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University SIPA",
      "url": "https://www.energypolicy.columbia.edu/us-israeli-attacks-on-iran-and-global-energy-impacts/",
      "publisher": "",
      "published_date": "2026-04-28T00:00:00",
      "sentiment": "Negative",
      "sentiment_score": 0.050999999046325684,
      "ai_summary": "The article reports on the escalation of the Middle East conflict, particularly the US-Israeli attacks on Iran, and its impact on global energy markets. Disruptions to oil transit through the Strait of Hormuz and damage to critical infrastructure have caused oil prices to rise, with potential for extended market instability. ",
      "full_text": "April 28, 2026, 2:26 pm EDT Daniel Sternoff What factors drove the UAE’s withdrawal from OPEC, and what are the implications for oil markets? In the short-term, the UAE’s withdrawal from OPEC is more important as a political signal than as a change in oil market fundamentals. The UAE is in no position to raise oil output because the closure of the Strait of Hormuz is limiting UAE oil production to around 1.6 million barrels per day (mb/d), less than half its full OPEC quota of 3.4 mb/d and well below its sustainable production capacity of 4.7-4.8 mb/d. When the Strait eventually reopens, OPEC quotas are unlikely to be a constraint on UAE output, because even Saudi Arabia is likely to suspend OPEC discipline to support replenishing depleted global inventories as quickly as possible. But politically, the UAE is capitalizing on the current moment to free itself from constraints it has complained about for years. It is alone among major OPEC producers for having invested to increase production capacity and has chafed at bearing what it sees as a disproportionate share of successive OPEC cuts since the pandemic. Although the UAE threatened to exit OPEC in 2021 and 2024, it remained in the group despite frustration at being pressed into “compensation cuts” for past overproduction, in addition to earlier voluntary reductions, creating a double constraint. (The UAE’s voluntary cuts are some 100,000 b/d below its formal OPEC quota, and compensation cuts require the UAE to withhold an additional 300,000 b/d from April–June 2026). OPEC withdrawal frees Abu Dhabi of both the compensation cuts and broader OPEC limits when the Strait reopens, and the UAE has not ruled out future cooperation with OPEC in the event of a severe market collapse. If both the UAE and Saudi Arabia were to maximize production after the war, global spare capacity would be limited, which could amplify price strength in tight markets but also exacerbate price weakness in oversupplied conditions. In the immediate term, the UAE’s withdrawal will have no impact on oil markets but potentially carries massive political significance, particularly given that it appears to have occurred without prior consultation with Saudi Arabia. Prominent former UAE officials have said that Abu Dhabi feels that countries like the United States, Israel, France, and South Korea have proven to be more reliable wartime partners than its neighbors, and is contemplating withdrawal from the Gulf Cooperation Council and the Arab League. Pulling out of OPEC may allow the UAE to signal its discontent without incurring the political costs of withdrawing from those regional bodies. Show more Show less\n\nApril 28, 2026, 10:45 am EDT Karen E. Young Why did the United Arab Emirates choose this moment to leave OPEC? The UAE had been hinting at a major announcement, and senior officials have been voicing frustration with regional organizations for some time now. We might see more independence and movement from the UAE across a number of issues beyond oil production. This is a moment of staking themselves as leaders and independent actors—there is a chance the UAE could also decide to exit the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). The Emirati’s OPEC announcement seems to be part of a broader energy strategy to be able to move volumes and products (oil, gas, renewables) when and how they see fit and to prepare themselves for a new era of global energy security conflict and partnerships. New announcements that UAE state-owned oil company ADNOC/XRG is planning to invest in a US gas business can also be read in this light. This exit from OPEC fits into the UAE’s need for flexibility with key energy consumers as well, including a future relationship with China and a more competitive relationship with Saudi Arabia. In the near term, the Strait of Hormuz being blocked and controlled by Iran has not changed export capacity for the UAE at all—the Fujairah pipeline is at capacity. But it signals that regional cooperation and coordination is weak, as is the GCC as a unit. Above all, this war has demonstrated a failure of mutual defense. Show more Show less\n\nApril 16, 2026, 12:15 pm EDT Chris Bataille Will cleaner, more dispersed industrial production get a boost from the Iran war? One of the ways the oil shock caused by the latest Persian Gulf crisis differs from earlier ones is that for the first time, cleaner substitutes exist not just for power and transport, but for the traded commodities underpinning the global economy — ammonia fertilizers, methanol, and plastics feedstocks (olefins). Industrial decarbonization has been harder to pursue than power and transport sector decarbonization because it’s more trade-exposed and less amenable to unilateral policy – in other words, countries that are among the first to shift to producing more costly but cleaner commodities are likely to lose market share. That’s unlikely to change in a more politically fragmented world. But supply security may prove a stronger motivation than climate policy, and the Iran crisis makes it an even more compelling concern. Ammonia fertilizer is particularly exposed to geopolitical risk as 35 percent of global supply comes from the Gulf. In the case of methanol, while the Gulf produces only 12 percent of global output, it accounts for 39 percent of global trade, making the Strait of Hormuz a critical chokepoint. The most plausible near-term substitutes for ammonia fertilizer, methanol, and olefins are geographically dispersed gas-based facilities — potentially drawing on the vast volumes of wasted associated gas currently flared at oil fields globally. Renewable-powered production with alternative carbon sources, already emerging in western China, is also becoming increasingly viable over time. More broadly, sustained high and volatile oil, gas, and liquefied natural gas prices may create additional incentives to diversify supply across both conventional and clean-energy pathways. China, for example, will likely swing toward increased coal use initially, but as the world’s largest oil importer, it has powerful reasons to accelerate supply diversification. Given China’s manufacturing scale, it is well positioned to become the dominant exporter of modular ammonia and Haber Bosch catalyzers; methane-to-methanol and methanol-to-olefins reformers; coal and biomass gasifiers; solar photovoltaics; electrolyzers and other equipment needed to diversify global supplies. China can thus create demand and supply-side pressure to reduce dependence on the Gulf while also presenting potential opportunities for a clean industrial transition. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 20, 2026, 3:02 pm EDT Ira Joseph What impact, if any, does the US-Iran crisis have on the US gas industry? The escalation of the 2026 U.S.-Iran crisis has fundamentally shifted the risk profile for global energy and digital infrastructure. For the U.S. gas industry, the conflict acts as a powerful catalyst for two divergent trends: a rush to establish new LNG export projects and a strategic reshoring of data center infrastructure. In both bases, this will mean higher U.S. gas demand. U.S. LNG exports will be extremely profitable as long as Qatar LNG is off the market. Even before that loss, the Russian invasion of Ukraine had taken 15 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) of Russian pipeline exports off the market, which had supported strong U.S. export prices. The disruptions from these two major gas exporters will likely embolden U.S. LNG project developers to build out additional LNG capacity that could be pitched as a secure and flexible alternative supply to buyers. But now, importing countries may be reconsidering increasing dependence on LNG. Supplies that might have once been considered secure may appear far less so, and the flexibility offered by LNG means that in a tight market, the fuel needed in one market can wind up in another one offering higher profits. Security and flexibility are also two selling points for increasing U.S. data center construction. The current conflict undermines Mideast sitings for data production and management, despite low regional electricity prices. Countries may consider data siting within their own borders for security reasons. Drone attacks were well behind cyber attacks and physical perimeter security in assessing appropriate siting for data centers. Not anymore. AWS (Amazon Web Services) reports confirmed that two facilities, one in the UAE and one in Bahrain, were hit by Iranian drone and missile strikes in early March. Millions of people across Dubai and Abu Dhabi were reportedly unable to pay for taxis, order food, or access mobile banking as outages rippled through payments apps, ride-hailing platforms, and major banks. A widespread delay in gas turbine manufacturing globally makes the immediate impact of data centers on gas demand less of an issue. Estimates of how much additional U.S. gas demand will come from data center use range widely, from 3 to 10 Bcf/d by the early 2030s, according to different predictions. This type of demand is particularly attractive to gas producers, as it is believed to have low price sensitivity, even though its initial appeal to producers was as a way to sell gas that might otherwise not have been marketable. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 20, 2026, 3:01 pm EDT Ira Joseph The United States has several LNG projects nearing completion that could potentially help ease global prices later this year. Are US natural gas upstream and midstream industries ready to meet the challenge created by recent developments in the Mideast? The United States is currently in the midst of an expansion of liquefied natural gas (LNG) export capacity that will require a surge in U.S. gas production to feed it. Disruptions to global oil trade in the Middle East are driving up oil prices, creating incentives for companies to increase production. In certain parts of the United States, higher oil output means more natural gas production. As U.S. shale oil production has matured, the gas-to-oil ratio of production from shale fields has also increased significantly, meaning new oil wells drilled in areas such as the Permian Basin in Texas are producing more incremental gas than previous oil fields. Indeed, more gas than oil is produced every time a new well is drilled there. The additional U.S. gas associated with increased oil production should keep U.S. gas prices low relative to other regions. With U.S. benchmark gas prices hovering around $3 per MMBtu compared to over $20 per MMBtu in Europe and Asia, sellers of U.S. LNG are currently making at least $40 million per cargo compared to less than $5 million per cargo prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. With U.S. LNG production now approaching 18 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d), sellers of U.S. LNG are generating revenues of $190-220 million per day. In short, if LNG companies in the United States could export more LNG right now, they would. New production trains at Golden Pass, Calcasieu Pass, and Corpus Christi are all scheduled to ramp up this year, adding 3.5 Bcf/d of new LNG production by the end of 2026. This assumption is based on a 6-month ramp-up estimate for each train. Due to fuel consumption and process loss, about 4.0 Bcf/d of gas will be needed to feed these projects, an increase of roughly 15 percent from the current 21 Bcf/d. Most of this incremental gas production is expected to come from a combination of fields in the Permian and Haynesville gas basins, where companies are increasing pipeline takeaway capacity to reach markets. It should be noted that adding 3.5 Bcf/d of LNG production would eventually replace only a portion of the 10 Bcf/d of Qatari production currently disrupted by the crisis. Will there be enough pipeline capacity ready to move U.S. gas to new LNG export plants to help ease global markets? Despite rising gas production in the region, the Permian basin is struggling to provide enough pipeline capacity to take incremental gas to U.S. Gulf Coast LNG export facilities. Since early September, prices at the Waha Hub in West Texas have been mostly negative, dropping as low as -$7.79/MMBtu in mid-March, due to the increasing gas-to-oil production ratios in Permian fields. These volumes have emerged ahead of several planned pipeline expansions that would deliver additional gas supplies to market. The pipeline expansions include the 0.6 Bcf/d Gulf Coast Express addition, scheduled for mid-2026, and the 2.5 Bcf/d Blackcomb expansion, scheduled to start by the end of the year. Note that the Gulf Coast Express expansion will increase capacity immediately upon completion, as it only requires adding compression capacity. Blackcomb will take longer, as it requires a new pipeline and needs to ramp up throughput incrementally. Note that Mexico’s 3.25 million ton per year (MTPA) Costa Azul project is also scheduled to start in Q3 2026 and will be fed by an additional 0.5 Bcf/d of gas production from West Texas once it is operating at capacity. Pipeline constraints are not an issue at this time for U.S. gas flowing west and south into Mexico. So, while gas prices are surging into double digits in Europe and Asia, prices in West Texas will remain negative until the new pipeline capacity is brought online. The negative prices in the Permian Basin could drop even further if high crude oil prices prompt more drilling to capitalize on rising oil prices abroad. The growing output of oil and associated gas that lacks pipeline capacity to reach markets could also lead to more flaring and venting of gas in the Permian, driven by economic incentives. In a global market desperate for LNG to make up for supply losses in the Middle East, U.S. producers could face no choice but to release unmarketable natural gas into the air. If gas from the Permian Basin cannot immediately meet the demand from new LNG projects, Haynesville gas production will likely step in to fill the hole. Connectivity between Haynesville and the various LNG export points is not a constraint on the system. However, Haynesville gas is largely dry gas (not associated with oil production) and located in deeper underground pockets, so the incremental cost of producing that gas is higher than the cost of using associated gas from the Permian Basin. This could lead to higher gas prices. Appalachian gas is shallower than both Permian and Haynesville gas but constrained by a lack of pipeline capacity to bring it to the major LNG-producing facilities on the U.S. Gulf Coast. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 19, 2026, 3:17 pm EDT Luisa Palacios Could the US’s new license for investing in Venezuela’s oil production alleviate rising oil prices related to the Middle East conflict? The US Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued on March 18 its most expansive license yet for US companies to operate in Venezuela’s oil sector. General License 52 authorizes any US company to transact, contract, or operate with Venezuela’s national oil and gas company, PDVSA, which will allow PDVSA to sell oil to more US companies (though proceeds from such sales need to be deposited in a US-government-controlled account). Notably, the license also allows US-based companies to enter into new investment contracts in the oil industry or joint ventures with PDVSA and perform any necessary due diligence. Such an expansive, blanket license—as the Middle East conflict escalates to oil and gas infrastructure—is intended to accelerate investments and production in Venezuela’s oil and gas sector. With Venezuela holding 17% of the world’s oil reserves and 3.3% of natural gas reserves, few countries outside of the Middle East have the resource base to grow its hydrocarbon production in a substantial way. Critically for oil markets, though, will be how quickly production growth can come online. While the aim of this license is to get more Venezuelan oil to market, a question remains about how much more oil the country can pump in the near term. Venezuela’s vast onshore Orinoco oil resources are the type of short-cycle brownfield oil resources needed at the moment. And oil prices above $100 per barrel might help offset the still-high level of operational, safety, and governance risks. A recovery of Venezuela’s oil production to pre-sanctions levels of 1.5 million or more barrels per day (b/d) over the next 18–24 months seems more possible now, particularly with this new license for US operators, but it is not yet clear how much of that production increase could happen this year. And rebuilding Venezuela’s oil and gas industry to reach its historically high production level of more than 3 million b/d would take time, significant investments, human capital, and infrastructure improvements, among other things. While this license improves the investment outlook in the country, what will matter more for Venezuela’s near-term production are the plans of the country’s existing private operators, Chevron, ENI, Maurel & Prom, Repsol, and Shell. These companies had already received a specific license granting this type of expansive operational coverage. Reportedly, Chevron and Shell have been negotiating with the Venezuelan government to expand into new oil production areas, as confirmed during US Interior Secretary Doug Burgum’s visit to Caracas in early March. The challenge for Venezuela is whether and how it might seize this moment for its own development. Strengthening the rule of law and the Venezuelan government’s institutional capacity is key to rebuilding the country’s oil and gas sector and expanding production. A first test of this could be oil contract negotiations following recent changes to the hydrocarbon law, which opens the door for better fiscal and contractual terms in the oil sector. Existing operators will be eligible to convert their existing contracts, seeking to improve from the maximum royalty rate of 30% and new Hydrocarbons Tax capped at 15% of gross revenues, given the government’s significant discretion to lower them. Such negotiations face at least two unknowns: Is the Venezuelan government going to improve the fiscal terms given where oil prices are at the moment? And how are these contracts going to satisfy the OFAC license requirement that US laws govern the contracts and their dispute resolution? A good indicator of whether more oil production can be expected in Venezuela—and how soon it might counteract higher oil prices from the Iran war—will be whether Chevron, the country’s largest private oil producer, finalizes its contract negotiations with the Venezuelan government satisfactorily and within a reasonable timeframe, given that an expansion of its producing areas is on the table. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 19, 2026, 9:09 am EDT Karen E. Young How do the energy strategy and development approaches of GCC countries compare with those of the United States, and how have these differences shaped the resilience of these countries to the Iran crisis? Gulf states—including their national oil companies and sovereign and related entities—are energy giants. They understand the risks of a prolonged threat from Iran and did not choose this war. They also recognize the risks of their geographic location, should the region endure another bout of instability and dislocation from a fragmented and collapsing neighbor. For years, they have been thinking systemically about their role in energy markets, not only for oil and gas but also for renewables. The Gulf states have worked hard to diversify their economies, including in broadening their exposure and ownership within the energy system. They have invested in US liquefied natural gas, solar, storage, and refineries across Asia, and have backed corporates such as Masdar, owned by ADNOC, and Saudi Arabia’s ACWA, partially owned by the PIF, which supply renewable power and water to the world’s fastest-growing energy markets. They have also invested at home in AI and carbon capture and storage to make their oil and gas production cleaner and more efficient. The approach of these countries to strategic partnerships is characterized by central decision making—the hallmark of state capitalism. They see China as a reliable partner—not only as a consumer of the oil and gas they produce, but also as a provider of both an affordable supply chain for their renewable projects and technology transfer and manufacturing capacity for domestic application. The Gulf states understand the ticking clock of oil and gas demand, and they are methodical about finding ways to ensure their products last in a more discerning market of the future. That is an “all of the above strategy.” That is energy dominance—not policy ideology. By comparison, US policy is less strategic, more partisan, and less driven by empirical evidence of demand. Another difference relates to ownership structure. In the United Arab Emirates, ADNOC can be an owner of Masdar and gas powerhouse XRG, while parallel investment vehicles can oversee AI allocations and coordinate power demand and gas/electricity delivery. In the United States, experiments with state direction are moving towards stockpiling rather than synergy. (And on the stockpiling idea, the United States did not do itself any favors by selling off parts of the SPR as a piggy bank.) Beyond energy, Gulf industries in tourism, manufacturing (including aluminum powered by domestic gas resources), financial services, technology and AI, real estate, and construction are growing. But the Gulf is still not firmly entrenched as a major global trading partner or re-exporter. The non-energy trade of the GCC states is just 1 percent of global trade. So, while the crisis clearly affects global oil and gas prices, the availability of refined fuel products like diesel and jet fuel, and prices of second order products like petrochemicals and fertilizer, the global economic impact is somewhat contained. This is not necessarily a major alarm for global inflation or recession, with some analysts projecting a roughly 0.3 percent hit to global GDP this year, assuming the conflict can be contained and transit restored by May. That assumption is key. Whereas the global economy can absorb some inflationary pressure from higher energy costs in the short term, the stakes are higher for the Gulf states, whose continued economic development depends on energy diversification, investment abroad, and maintaining national political economies that support large foreign worker populations, tourists, and safe logistics hubs. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 19, 2026, 9:09 am EDT Karen E. Young What vulnerabilities has the Iran crisis exposed in GCC economies, and what broader economic and geopolitical reverberations might flow from those vulnerabilities? The economic stress points vary considerably across the Gulf. Assuming a resumption of exports by May, Kuwait, Iraq, Bahrain, and Qatar still face sharply declining revenues and contracting GDP—as much as 14 percent in Kuwait and Qatar—because of shut ins, time to restart, and lack of alternative delivery routes.[i] After the Iranian attacks on Ras Laffan, Qatar’s economic outlook and time to recovery look much more difficult. Iraq relies on oil exports for 90 percent of government revenue, and is beginning to export through a pipeline in Iraqi Kurdistan, but volumes will be low (approximately 250,000 barrels per day), and the opening depends on a delicate political agreement between the regional and central governments. In addition to blocked oil exports, Iraq also now faces a lack of gas supply to its electricity sector following Israeli attacks on Iran’s gas supply, which has flowed to Iraq. Bahrain does not export crude but does export refined products, and direct attacks on its refining capacity, along with its lack of transit access, will make recovery difficult and slow. Oman will likely see a very small contraction in GDP, given its location outside the Strait of Hormuz, but it, too, has been a target of Iranian attacks on port infrastructure. The picture is somewhat less precarious for the larger Gulf economies, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), which invested heavily in pipelines and ports. If the conflict and blockage of the Strait of Hormuz continues through April, they face the prospect of declines of 3 percent and 5 percent, respectively, in real GDP this year. But given that pre-crisis growth expectations for Saudi Arabia and the UAE were roughly equal to that in positive terms, and they will be earning much higher prices on the exports they do manage to get to market, their fiscal positions may be bearable by comparison to other regional states. Saudi Arabia faces greater stress points in domestic spending commitments than the UAE, but it had already embarked on a reform program and the crisis could help legitimate broader fiscal tightening. The destabilization of the Gulf, especially the UAE, as a financial center and deployer of capital may pose the greatest risk to the many emerging market economies that rely on Gulf capital to fuel development, from grants that support solar power plants to FDI in Africa and investments in AI. It will also challenge Gulf countries’ relationships with strategic partners. Indeed, the US relationship may in many ways prove the most difficult to manage. Saudi, Qatari and Emirati commitments of foreign direct investment to the United States were already hard to quantify amid existing defense procurement and aspirational nuclear and technology cooperation. That investment calculus, and the prospect of synergy, may become more difficult to justify. [i] Farouk Soussa, “Value at Risk: Quantifying Losses to GCC Economic Output in a Prolonged War Scenario,” Goldman Sachs Research, March 11, 2026. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 17, 2026, 11:40 am EDT Robin Mills How are GCC countries managing domestic energy and water needs during the current conflict? The six Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries have planned for and anticipated risks in the Gulf, but the current crisis poses a huge test for their domestic energy systems. They have to ensure the provision of fuel, electricity, and water to their populations and industries in the face of major disruption. Problems with delivering these services fall into a couple of groups. First is physical damage to facilities by Iranian attack. So far this has been limited, and shutdowns of refineries have been mainly precautionary. A strike on a desalination plant in Bahrain on March 9 caused concern about whether it would set a precedent, but so far it has not been repeated. However, drone hits on fuel storage tanks at airports in Dubai, Bahrain, and Kuwait have caused fires and could interrupt operations. On March 16, a drone attack caused a fire at the Shah oil and gas field in Abu Dhabi. Second is the near-total closure of the Strait of Hormuz, which in turn has required GCC countries to cut back sharply on oil and gas production because they cannot export it and storage is filling up. If the interruption of shipping continues much longer, oil production will have to be reduced to levels that can be exported through bypass pipelines (by Saudi Arabia and the UAE), sent on any tankers that are able to run the gauntlet of the Strait of Hormuz, or refined domestically. In December 2025, 1.33 million barrels per day (bbl/d) of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and 2.89 million bbl/d of refined oil products (gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, and others) were exported through the Strait. But Bahrain’s Sitra refinery (with 405,000 bbl/d capacity following a recent upgrade), the UAE’s Ruwais (922,000 bbl/d), and Saudi Arabia’s Ras Tanura (550,000 bbl/d) all closed down following attacks, although there has been no confirmation of serious damage. Oman’s Duqm refinery (255,000 bbl/d), located well outside the Strait, ran last year on 54% Kuwaiti crude, and also sourced volumes from Iraq and Qatar, all of which are now not available. Shutdowns or runs at reduced rates as storage fills up, combined with the difficulty of importing products, may make it challenging to provide the right mix of products for the domestic market. Jet fuel demand, for example, is likely to be substantially reduced because of interruptions to air travel. Diesel demand, conversely, might rise if required for power generation and for more transport of goods by truck. Electricity The reductions in oil output also cut the supply of associated gas, which is a by-product of oil production. This is a key part of domestic natural gas supply in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE in particular (and in Oman, but Oman’s oil production has not been affected so far, as it exports from outside the Strait). Gas is the main source of electricity generation across the GCC. Demand is seasonally low currently but will increase into summer, as the requirement for air-conditioning increases. On the other hand, the interruption to normal travel and tourism may cut electricity demand, particularly in the UAE. The stoppage of gas is most serious in the case of Kuwait, which consumed 2.4 billion cubic feet per day of it in 2024, of which 40% was liquefied natural gas (LNG) imports, mostly from Qatar (now stopped) and 35% was domestic associated gas. Even if Kuwait can run its refineries at their full 1.4 million bbl/d capacity, oil production would fall from the pre-war 2.57 million bbl/d (as of January 2026), and proportionately associated gas output would be cut by about 46% and overall available gas by 56%. In fact, it already had to reduce refinery output by nearly 0.6 million bbl/d as of March 8, making the situation even more serious. This will require Kuwait’s already overstretched power plants to run primarily on liquid fuels (crude oil, fuel oil, and diesel), especially if the crisis continues into the summer. The gas and power problem is less acute in Saudi Arabia and the UAE, which have large production of non-associated gas (produced independently from oil) and also significant and growing renewable energy sectors. Saudi Arabia retains the option to burn more fuel oil and crude oil for power generation (34% of generation was from oil in 2024), while the UAE has the Baraka nuclear power plant, which produces almost a quarter of its electricity. Dubai’s Hassyan power plant, converted to run on natural gas, could possibly return to burning coal if it has stocks. It is not clear whether the important gas deliveries from Qatar to the UAE and Oman via the Dolphin pipeline will continue. The extent of damage at the Shah field from the March 16 drone attack has not been publicly disclosed, but the field is an important one, producing about 0.7 billion cubic feet (Bcf) per day of treated gas, from the UAE’s total output of 5.9 Bcf/d (2024). Its sour gas (hydrogen sulfide–bearing) production could be dangerous to health in the locality in case of leaks. For now, Qatar’s power sector appears to be running normally on its non-associated gas production, despite the shut-down of its LNG plants and much of its gas-based industry. Bahrain also relies mostly on domestic non-associated gas. Water GCC countries obtain most of their potable water from desalination, more than 90% in general. Desalination plants could be affected by military attacks or by sabotage, cyberattacks, or oil spills near their intakes. The desalination plants run either on waste heat from thermal power plants, or on electricity for reverse osmosis. Balancing their output is another critical task. Qatar has four months of emergency water storage and the UAE 45 days, whereas other countries may only have a few days. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 16, 2026, 11:55 am EDT Robin Mills How is the Iran conflict reshaping Iraq’s oil production and export outlook? Iraq has the capacity to store only about six days of oil production, so it quickly had to cut back oil output after exports were interrupted by the start of the conflict. The country’s production dropped from 4.42 million bbl/day in February to 1.5–1.7 million bbl/day by March 8, and further to 1.4 million bbl/day by March 12. The loss of about 3 million bbl/day represents the largest production reduction of any country as a result of the war and the blockage of the Strait of Hormuz. The reduced level of production is equivalent to what Iraq’s refining sector can absorb, about 1.1 million bbl/day, plus minor exports. Major international oil and service companies responsible for most of Iraq’s oil and gas output, including BP, TotalEnergies, Halliburton, KBR, and SLB, have withdrawn nonessential personnel. This will halt ongoing field development activities, which could in turn significantly delay crucial projects aimed at maintaining and expanding oil and gas output. The war will also disrupt negotiations by ExxonMobil and Chevron to reenter Iraq, advance major field developments, and take over the operations of Russia’s Lukoil after it was forced by US sanctions to exit the country. In any case, Iraq’s ability to export oil, already constrained and vulnerable to technical breakdowns in normal times, is now highly limited. The country exports most of its oil by sea through the Gulf, and its maritime routes are very exposed due to the conflict, as evidenced by attacks on oil tankers in Iraqi waters, most recently on March 12. Unlike Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, Iraq does not have a large-scale alternative export route. Even Iraq’s more limited pipeline exports are facing constraints. On March 3, the Iraq–Turkey Crude Oil Pipeline (ITP), which had been carrying about 200,000 bbl/day, was shut down. It appears this shutdown is being used by the Kurdistan Regional Government to pressure Baghdad into making concessions over salaries and customs revenues. Around the same time, several fields in the semi-autonomous Kurdistan region were closed down as a precaution. In the months before the current full-scale conflict, they were the targets of sporadic drone and rocket attacks, which some Kurdish officials have blamed on Iran-aligned groups in Iraq seeking to exert pressure on Kurdish political parties. On March 5, the Sarsang field, operated by the US firm HKN, was hit by a drone. Iraq hopes to divert 200,000–300,000 bbl/day of crude from its southern fields to the northern refinery of Baiji, allowing 200,000 bbl/day of northern (Kirkuk-area) production to be exported through the ITP. But its actual capacity to move oil to Baiji may only be about 80,000 bbl/day. Oil minister Hayan Abdel-Ghani said that 200,000 bbl/day were being transported by truck through Turkey, Syria, and Jordan, but this appears to be either an aspiration or heavily overstated. Iraq has long-standing plans to boost the capacity of the Strategic Pipeline (which moves oil between southern and northern Iraq), construct an export pipeline with 1–2.25 million bbl/day capacity to the port of Aqaba in Jordan, rehabilitate the ITP to carry larger volumes, and reactivate the Kirkuk-Baniyas pipeline through Syria (300,000 bbl/day capacity). But none of these projects have progressed, primarily due to indecision and, in the case of the Jordan pipeline, opposition from Iran-linked militias. What could be the domestic implications of Iraq’s diminished oil outlook? Oil is the backbone of Iraq’s economy, representing 88 percent of its 2025 government budget, 99.6 percent of 2024 exports, and about 40 percent of its GDP, so the implications are significant. Revenues from recent oil sales should cover salaries and other major government expenditures until April. If large-scale oil exports do not resume by then, Iraq will face a growing budgetary and balance of payments crisis. Total government debt (61 percent of GDP) and external debt (20.8 percent) were moderate at the end of 2025, but even before the war, both were expected to rise sharply in 2026 because of a large budget deficit. The IMF expected Iraq would earn $79 billion in 2026 from oil exports projected to average 3.5 million bbl/day. At assumed prewar prices, it now faces a loss of about $6.6 billion for each month of near-zero exports. In the optimistic case that it manages to use the ITP to export a combination of 200,000 bbl/day from the Kurdish region plus 200,000 bbl/day of “federal” crude, and to truck 10,000 bbl/day to Jordan as in previous years, it may earn $1.25–1.5 billion at current elevated crude oil prices. At the current, significantly lower level of oil production, Iraq also faces a severe electricity crunch. Nearly all of its natural gas supplies are associated (produced as a byproduct of oil extraction). Despite efforts to prioritize production from fields with higher associated gas levels and operational gas processing facilities, the closure of oil production has reduced available gas by at least 0.5 billion cubic feet per day. Gas supplies from Iran, crucial for Iraqi power generation, were cut off in December as Iran itself ran short, before resuming on February 25, just before the war, at a rate of about 0.25 billion cubic feet per day. It is not clear if they have ceased again, but continuation is doubtful. Even in normal times, Iraq has a huge gas and power deficit, especially in summer. With generation at about 20 gigawatts, peak summer demand is estimated at 45–55 GW. The country suffered a massive power outage on March 4 as gas supplies dropped unexpectedly. Large-scale solar power is just beginning to come online, but installation may be interrupted by the war. If the situation does not improve by summer, Iraq will attempt to offset part of the gas deficit by burning crude oil directly, as well as fuel oil that it cannot currently export. By contrast, the Kurdistan Region has much better provision of gas and power, and can reach near 24-hour service, as long as its key field, Khor Mor, remains operating. But Khor Mor production was halted on March 2, more out of concern about possible renewed strikes from Iran-aligned groups within Iraq than out of fear of direct attacks by Iran. Nevertheless, drones from Iran have struck various sites in and around the Kurdish capital of Erbil, including the airport, hotels, and Western military bases. Even absent these disruptions, the pipeline capacity to export gas to the rest of Iraq is currently extremely limited, although electricity transfer does occur, reaching up to 1.2 GW recently. The state of Iraqi politics makes it hard to act decisively amid this crisis. Following elections in November 2025, Iraq entered its usual lengthy process of government formation. Incumbent and caretaker prime minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani hopes to secure a second term, after the US strongly lobbied against the return of Nouri al-Maliki (prime minister from 2006 to 2014), seen as close to Iran. The US-Iran war has further highlighted divisions within the country, as several political parties and associated militias are aligned with Iran. If the crisis continues into summer, austerity measures, such as public-sector salary cuts, and further electricity outages are likely. These pressures could trigger further public anger and even a domestic political crisis in Iraq itself. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 13, 2026, 2:55 pm EDT Richard Nephew What impact will oil export sanctions relief have on Russia, the Iran conflict, and broader oil market dynamics? Thus far, the announcement has had no effect in moderating oil prices. To some extent, this could be due to the temporary nature of the relief – it is only allowable for 30 days per the license granted by the Treasury Department – or due to the relatively small amount of oil involved. Press reports indicate that approximately 120-130 million barrels of Russian oil would be affected by this sanctions relief, which equates to around 8-10 days’ worth of the supply that normally transits the Strait of Hormuz. Even assuming the redirection of some of that oil through the East-West pipeline in Saudi Arabia, the overall reassurance provided by Russian oil sanctions relief to a suddenly jittery market does not seem substantial. The geopolitical effects are more serious. For Russia, this constitutes some degree of rehabilitation of Russian oil, even if only on a temporary basis, and sends a signal that Russian oil is a necessary stabilizer for global economics. It may be difficult to persuade countries to take a stiffer line on Russian oil exports if, in the end, other conflicts make this source of supply appear more important. This decision undermines Ukraine’s position, even if only rhetorically, and may embolden Russian policymakers in the on/off negotiations that have taken place. Russia may not derive immediate economic benefits from the oil already on the water being finally sold, as it primarily collects taxes when the oil is produced, though there are also some taxes on oil profits, and some of these cargoes are still under the control of Russian companies. Russia’s entire posture on the conflict has been ambiguous. Notionally an ally of Iran, Russia abstained on a vote at the UN Security Council that condemned Iran’s strikes on Gulf States. Yet, perversely, Russia is reportedly giving Iran advice on its drone strikes and other military activities. With sanctions relief, Russia now has a confirmed incentive to keep the conflict going in the Middle East, perhaps including more destructive strikes on Gulf States’ oil infrastructure. After all, this license is temporary but could be extended should the Iran crisis continue. To that point, if new production and exports are eventually greenlit, Russia’s economic benefits would be substantial unless additional sanctions measures are put in place to prevent Russian access to oil revenues. Such sanctions concepts exist and have been used against Iran, but thus far have not been adopted against Russia. More importantly, this decision will do nothing to hasten the end of the conflict. It is too small and too slight to shift oil market dynamics, and Iran itself will still see value in targeting Straits’ traffic. This, in turn, will keep production shut-in and ships bottled up. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 13, 2026, 10:17 am EDT Robin Mills What effect will the Middle East conflict have on commodities beyond oil and gas? Shipments of many essential materials from the Gulf have been disrupted. The supply of various commodities has faced disruption either because the transit of ships carrying the commodity out of the Gulf has been blocked or because gas production required as an input for manufacturing the commodity has been shut down. On March 3, following an Iranian drone attack, QatarEnergy announced it was stopping liquefied natural gas (LNG) production at its Ras Laffan complex, and that output of downstream products based on gas—including urea, polymers, methanol, and aluminum—would be halted. Although the drone attack itself may not have caused serious damage, and the shutdown was more precautionary, ceasing production was required because of the inability to export LNG and the related by-products, condensate, and natural gas liquids and because available storage was imminently filling up. Commodities from Oman ship from Sohar, Salalah, and other ports outside the Gulf, but as the March 11 drone attack on Salalah shows, these ports are not immune from disruption either. Iran is an important supplier of some of these commodities, notably methanol, and it might be assumed that it will not target its own ships. However, its exports are likely to be disrupted by war activities, sanctions, and shortages of gas. Table 1 shows key materials and commodities for which the Gulf is an important global exporter, other than oil and natural gas. Table 1: Main non-energy materials and commodities exported from the Gulf Commodity Gulf share of world production Main regional exporters Uses Ammonia and urea 35%–45% (urea), 30% (ammonia) (of world exports) Bahrain, Iran, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE Fertilizer, basic chemical input Helium 38.8% Qatar Chip-making, medical imaging Sulfur 21.6% (45% of exports) Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE Fertilizer, mining and metals processing, uranium extraction Methanol 32%–35% (of world exports) Bahrain, Iran, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia Fuel, basic chemical input, biodiesel manufacturing Polyethylene 15% (capacity) Iran, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE Packaging, pipes, bottles, electrical insulation Polypropylene 9% (capacity) Iran, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE Packaging, automotive manufacture, consumer goods Aluminum 9% (22% of non-China supply) Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE Key industrial metal Phosphate 3.9% Saudi Arabia Fertilizer Aluminum Qatar’s Qatalum aluminum smelter announced on March 12 that instead of a complete shutdown it will run at 60% of its total capacity of 648,000 tons per year. Aluminum smelters will be keen to continue operating if at all possible, even at reduced rates, because if they have to shut down completely a restart is a long and complex process: it costs from $10–$50 million, can take from 6–12 months, and risks permanent damage to equipment. Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE all contain world-class aluminum smelters, while Iran also exports the commodity. In the case of aluminum, smelters require alumina as an input, usually imported from countries such as Australia, Guinea, and Brazil (directly or as bauxite, which is then processed in-country), although Saudi Arabia does mine bauxite itself. These inputs will be interrupted because of the danger to ships entering the Gulf. Smelters typically have 30–45 days of alumina inventory for full operations, so they should be able to continue operating at reduced rates for 1.5–2 months, if new alumina imports are not possible. Fertilizers The Gulf accounts for 63% of India’s import of nitrogen fertilizers, 52% of Australia’s, 24% of Brazil’s, and 21% of the US’s. Saudi Arabia also provides 32% of India’s imports of diammonium phosphate (a fertilizer) and 33% of the US’s. The northern hemisphere is approaching planting season, making a loss of fertilizer particularly critical. LNG from the Gulf is also a key part of gas supply for several Asian countries, such as India and Pakistan, where it is used to make nitrogen fertilizers. Rising natural gas prices have already caused Slovakia’s largest fertilizer plant to reduce operations. The impact of a disruption of these materials depends on the state of the world market, the potential to substitute other inputs or cut back on low-value uses, the ability of other producers to increase output, and the quantity of stocks held. In the case of aluminum, for example, the market was already very tight in January. For sulfur, Canada (11.7 million tons as of July 2025) and Kazakhstan (at least 0.38 million tons as of April 2025) have large stocks compared to annual Gulf exports of 12–13 million tons, although it would take time to move these to market. The sulfur market was already in deficit of about 2 million tons in 2025. For helium, South Korean chipmakers are reported to have about six months of inventory. Proposals to escort oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz have been announced. They do not appear to be ready, and extending this to other ships would considerably raise the military and logistical burden. Some of these vessels, such as methanol carriers, also contain a volatile, flammable cargo, which poses serious risks to crew in case of an attack. In some cases, it might be possible to export materials by road or rail to ports outside the Gulf, although volumes are likely to be constrained. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 12, 2026, 12:26 pm EDT Ira Joseph How will LNG importers be affected by the Middle East conflict? The indefinite loss of Qatari liquefied natural gas (LNG) to the global gas market due to a precautionary shutdown creates problems for buyers in need of alternatives. Once turned into gas, LNG can be used as fuel or feedstock and in some industrial cases both. While replacing imported LNG as a feedstock in making petrochemicals or fertilizer is nearly impossible in the short term, substituting it as fuel in power generation is realistic and achievable. Based on my analysis of existing LNG contracts and spot sales, roughly 40% of the world’s LNG ends up in power generation, which equates to roughly 160 million tons per year (MTPA), or over twice the loss of current Qatari LNG capacity. Not all this LNG can be substituted—markets such as Japan, Korea, and Taiwan have limited domestic alternatives. But I would estimate that 80–90 MT of LNG is likely substitutable in power generation. Three countries/regions can substitute LNG with alternatives or simply make gas demand disappear temporarily. China, which uses most of its 60 MTPA of gas in power generation for peaking, has a high reserve capacity margin in power generation. Two-thirds of total gas use in power generation in China is realistically substitutable. Its coal fleet, which is utilized at under 50% capacity, is rapidly becoming more flexible in terms of its ability to ramp up and down on short notice due to improved design in new plant construction and retirement of older, more rigid plants. Where it remains rigid, more coal could instead be burned due to a surge in battery storage for peak power use. Renewables are also increasingly available. Another 20–30 MTPA of gas used for power in South and Southeast Asia could drop precipitously due to higher prices in Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Thailand. Industrial use could cease and therefore not need to be replaced. Coal will provide some ability to replace gas in the power sector, but most of the loss of gas will likely be managed by lower use in power and industry. In Europe, 20–25 MT of gas use in power can be eliminated with higher use of coal, whereas any major shifts in nuclear, hydro, renewables, and even oil is extremely limited. Prices for power are likely to climb depending on solar and wind availability on any given day. Some power demand will also be lost due to higher prices and buyers’ choice to ration. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 12, 2026, 12:27 pm EDT Ira Joseph How might LNG importers react over time to their experiences during this Middle East conflict? Recent events suggest that European and Asia LNG importers might consider a transition from emergency “fuel switching” to a more permanent reduction in gas-fired power dependency. The emergence of LNG as a less-secure source for power generation raises the question of why any lost LNG demand during this crisis would return. Qatar had always billed itself as a security-of-supply option within the LNG space and the broader energy complex. This image has now been tarnished by the events of last week, along with the idea that long-term contracts are dependable at moments when reliability is needed most. Qatar’s misfortune opens the door for policymakers to focus on alternatives to LNG, which is now both a high-cost and less-reliable option. More coal now and more renewables later will emerge as a credible alternative in many markets. New coal plants are becoming increasingly flexible in their use of coal, and the rapid deployment of batteries will allow all forms of generation to operate at a higher load. The use of gas as a peaking fuel is particularly vulnerable in an increasingly competitive power generation landscape. LNG does have a future in industry. Its use as a feedstock in petrochemicals and fertilizer is difficult and costly to replace, as other forms of producing hydrogen or biomethane for this purpose remain cost prohibitive. Imported LNG use in the residential/commercial sector, such as for home heating or cooking, is also fairly stable, although growth prospects outside of China are limited by cost. The decision ahead for policymakers is how much LNG to cut from the energy mix on a sustained basis when so many low-cost alternatives have gained traction. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 12, 2026, 11:04 am EDT Neelesh Nerurkar Why didn’t oil prices drop after the IEA’s strategic release announcement? In response to oil market disruptions caused by the Iran conflict, the International Energy Agency (IEA) announced on March 11 that it would make available 400 million barrels from strategic stockpiles—the largest strategic stock release in history. IEA members collectively hold about 1.8 billion barrels in emergency reserves, including 1.2 billion barrels of government-owned oil and 600 million barrels in industry stock holding obligations imposed by some countries. The announcement offered few details, notably omitting a drawdown timeframe or rate. Oil prices increased on March 12, the day after the announcement, with Brent up about $10 to near $100/bbl. This may reflect that a release was already baked into expectations and that the oil’s delivery rate is likely limited relative to the shortfall. Several IEA members have provided additional details about the volume of their releases. Japan intends to release 80 million barrels starting March 16. Asia faces the most direct impacts since it receives 84 percent of the oil that typically flows through the Strait of Hormuz. Many Asian and European IEA members have industry stockholding requirements. Relaxing those requirements would quickly make available fuel already in the system, should commercial parties choose to drawdown those stockpiles. Late on March 11, the US Department of Energy announced it would release 172 million barrels from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) over 120 days—a 1.4 million barrels per day (Mb/d) rate. The SPR currently holds 415 million barrels of government-owned oil, including 155 million barrels of sweet crude and 260 million barrels of sour crude. It has a nameplate drawdown capacity of 4.4 Mb/d. Actual deliveries to market, however, are constrained, since rising shale production increasingly utilizes the same pipelines and ports that the SPR relies on to reach customers. SPR releases can reach customers via competitive sales in as few as 13 days. The announced US drawdown rate is above the 1 Mb/d that some market watchers expected based on the rate achieved in 2022 in response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The United States tends to be the largest source of oil in IEA coordinated releases. Even if IEA members match or go as far as doubling the US release rate, the incremental ~3-4.5 Mb/d remains far short of the 16 Mb/d gap from lost Persian Gulf supply. Consequently, oil market participants remain focused on the potential duration and outcome of the conflict. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 11, 2026, 5:17 pm EDT Anne-Sophie Corbeau How does this crisis differ from 2022? It differs in many ways. First, gas prices were already very high before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, ranging between $20 and $40/mmBtu since September 2021, reflecting unprecedented tightness in global gas markets. By contrast, spot prices were only $10-11/mmBtu before the conflict in the Middle East started, reflecting a progressive rebalancing of the market. The volumes at stake are also very different, as mentioned above, although it is worth noting that the exact volume lost in 2026 will only be known once this crisis is over. The market is currently losing around 10 bcm per month at the current rate of disruption of the Strait, and volumes will remain reduced for a while after Qatar LNG restarts as the project ramps back up. Another major difference is that supply was lost immediately in February 2026, whereas the drop in Russian pipeline gas to EU countries was much more gradual, accelerating between April and June 2022 due to supply cuts to several European buyers and declining volumes through Nord Stream 1. Additionally, Europe was the main market affected in 2022, with other LNG importers impacted mainly indirectly through high gas prices. This time, all LNG importers, notably in Asia but also in Europe, are directly impacted. But the endgame is fundamentally different. In March 2022, most European countries were adamant that Europe would never again be so dependent on Russian gas. The REPowerEU strategy called for a complete halt to Russian fuel imports by 2027. In the present case, all LNG importers want exports from Qatar and the UAE to resume as soon as possible. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 10, 2026, 5:23 pm EDT Richard Nephew What is the state of Iran’s nuclear program right now? Iran simultaneously has virtually no nuclear fuel cycle yet the ability to quickly produce nuclear weapons. Iran cannot produce enriched uranium from natural uranium because its uranium mines, mills, conversion facilities, and enrichment plants were destroyed. Iran may have reserves of uranium gas or centrifuges that were not destroyed that could form the basis of a reconstituted nuclear program, though it would take Iran potentially 1–2 years to rebuild from the damage done to the program over the last year. Iran’s residual centrifuges could support clandestine enrichment. Iran had a stock of highly enriched uranium (HEU) in excess of 400 kilograms as of June 2025, the last date the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was able to verify the quantity. This material could be further enriched quite quickly and then turned into uranium metal using small scale production equipment; IAEA reports on Iran are replete with mentions of undeclared equipment that could support this effort. Iran could manufacture nuclear weapons using the resulting uranium metal. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 10, 2026, 3:58 pm EDT Karen E. Young How are the Gulf Arab states evaluating economic risk in the current crisis? First and foremost, this is a crisis of energy product delivery to market for Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE, and even Oman, which sits outside the Strait of Hormuz. Like all of its Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) neighbors and Iraq, Oman has been targeted by Iran’s missiles and drones. The Gulf’s economic resilience depends on oil and gas export revenue, and countries that are already experiencing shut-ins to production or calling force majeure on their product deliveries are paying a heavy price economically for the US and Israeli war with Iran. Iran immediately targeted the Gulf Arab states to widen the conflict and inflict a heavy cost on these states’ exports as well as their domestic non-hydrocarbon economies. Saudi Arabia, with its more extensive energy storage capacity and its East-West pipeline, has more runway before shut-ins have to occur. But successive attacks on energy infrastructure, including a BABCO refinery in Bahrain and an ADNOC refinery in Abu Dhabi at Ruwais, heighten the threat of longer-term damage to energy output. Amin Nasser, CEO of Aramco, warned of “catastrophic consequences” to the oil sector but also to second-order economic effects, as a chain reaction of this crisis. The second-order effects of reduced crude oil, refined oil products, and natural gas getting to markets are critical. Given the Gulf states’ integration into the global economy, the duration of the conflict and the duration of the active threat from Iran, which could persist even after the United States decides to end its military operations, will determine how energy markets and associated risk endure. Though President Donald Trump seemed able to manipulate oil prices with comments on March 9 that the end of the conflict was near, after which oil prices fell from $120 per barrel of Brent to $92 per barrel, this effect is not a fair barometer of risks to investment and to rising material costs for oil- and gas-derived products. For example, the input costs to fertilizer, paint, cement, and plastics are considerably higher as oil, gas, and refined fuels are blocked from exiting the Strait of Hormuz. Investment risk to Asia will be the first affected because of the region’s heavy reliance on Middle East oil and gas as a proportion of imports and on the petrochemicals and refined products central to industrial production in Asia. Companies like Sumitomo Chemical Asia and Formosa Petrochemical Corp of Taiwan are already calling force majeure in their ability to deliver their products, for lack of access to refined fuels. Inside the GCC, risks to businesses that are associated with large construction projects—which will have difficulty accessing materials from ports and will face rising material costs—will start to affect project delivery timelines and payments. Associated industries new to the Gulf are also at risk, as direct attacks on Amazon data centers in Bahrain and the UAE threaten communications inside the region and beyond, in reservation systems, banking systems, and software applications. Tourism is clearly suffering now, and the duration of the conflict and the extent of civilian targeting could sharply impact how foreigners view the region as a luxury haven as well as a site for medical tourism and second homes—impacting the real estate markets key to GCC growth. Again, threats from the war hit the GCC hard but extend beyond it: Egyptian tourism bookings, for example, have already been implicated in the regional crisis. Finally, and more long term, is the role that Gulf sovereign investment will play as a source of capital for new technology and renewable energy on a global scale. While there is reporting that some Gulf state investment may be reallocated to meet domestic defense spending needs, a concern is how the Gulf states see their future relationship with the United States. This will depend on US decisions around when and how to exit the conflict, and on which acceptable risks the US perceives it can leave for its Gulf partners. The Gulf states will be thinking long term about the US partnership, which appears increasingly transactional as Trump is clearly not putting Gulf security first, second, or third in his wartime calculations. These countries may begin to see China as providing a better future synergy of economic and security interests. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 10, 2026, 11:00 am EDT Daniel Sternoff How severe is the disruption to oil traveling through the Strait of Hormuz? The disruption of roughly 15 million barrels per day (bpd) in crude oil and 5 million bpd in oil production through the Strait of Hormuz is the largest volumetric supply shock in the history of the modern oil market. Roughly 20 percent of global supply and 31 percent of seaborne oil trade have effectively halted, compared with 7 percent during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, 6 percent in the 1990 Gulf war, 4 percent during the 1979 Iranian Revolution, and 3 percent at the outset of the 2022 Russia-Ukraine war. While the volumes affected are far larger, the 40 percent rise in oil prices (from $70 per barrel to $100/bbl for Brent) since the start of the war, the US-Israeli campaign is (so far) less than those prior oil shocks. Transport disruptions through the Strait have quickly overwhelmed storage capacity among most Gulf producers, forcing them to shut down some oil production. As of March 10, cumulative production shut-ins by Iraq, Qatar, Kuwait and the UAE 6 million bpd, according to market sources, and are likely to rise the longer Hormuz remains shut. While crude and refined products currently in tankers on water will quickly come to market as soon as the Strait is passable, shut-in production can take days to weeks to resume, depending on the field. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 10, 2026, 11:00 am EDT Daniel Sternoff What alternative sources of near-term supply are available to the market? Saudi Arabia is implementing contingency plans to re-route crude oil from the Gulf to the Red Sea port of Yanbu, which has nameplate loading capacity of 4.3 million bpd but may be able to handle as much as 5.5 million bpd. The UAE’s Fujairah terminal can carry 1.5 million bpd to the Gulf of Oman. Neither of these outlets is immune to Houthis and Iranian missile and drone threats, however. Beyond re-routed production, some 50 million barrels of unsold sanctioned Russian crude is available to the market, with volumes already flowing to China and India, which received a one-month U.S. waiver. More than 45 million barrels of Iranian floating storage is on tankers in Asian waters, available to Chinese private refiners.\n\nChina has some 1.46 billion barrels of oil in its enormous commercial and strategic reserves. The United States has 411 million barrels in its strategic petroleum reserve (SPR), and IEA member countries have a collective 1.2 billion barrels in strategic reserves of crude oil and oil products. China has halted filling its SPR and may already be drawing down commercial storage, and G7 countries have discussed a possible coordinated SPR release, which could be on the order of 300-400 million barrels. While there are ample reserves to cover an extended disruption in the Strait of Hormuz, logistical constraints mean the flow rate from government stockpiles may only cover a fraction of the 20 million bpd in disrupted volumes. U.S. oil production may also increase in response to higher prices, although the increase would not be immediate. The rise in deferred oil prices down the crude futures curve has created hedging opportunities for U.S. shale and other producers to lock in prices in the high $60s and low-$70s for later in 2026 and 2027. Over $70 per barrel will likely see production in the lower 48 states, which is currently flat, return to growth. But this will be slow to develop and is unlikely to exceed more than a couple of hundred thousand barrels per day. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 10, 2026, 11:01 am EDT Daniel Sternoff Have major oil producers suffered any lasting damage? To date, the most critical oil production and export facilities have been spared. There has been damage reported to Bahrain’s BAPCO refiner, Saudi Aramco’s Ras Tanura refinery, Oman’s Duqm port, and Iran’s Jask oil terminal, but irreplaceable facilities such as Aramco’s Abqaiq, the world’s largest crude oil processing and stabilization plant, and Kharg Island, Iran’s main oil storage and export terminal, have been spared. So far, all parties appear to be adhering to red lines around attacks on these facilities, given the high likelihood of mutual attacks across critical Gulf infrastructure. Damage to such critical facilities would point to long-lasting disruptions, even if Hormuz is re-opened, and add significant further upside pressure to oil prices. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 10, 2026, 11:02 am EDT Daniel Sternoff What will it take to get oil flowing again through the Strait of Hormuz? The Trump administration has said it will organize naval escorts to accompany commercial ships through the Strait as soon as it is reasonable to do so. Unlike U.S.-led naval convoys during the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war, the United States is now a combatant. Organizing armed escorts would require diverting U.S. Navy destroyers and littoral combat ships from other missions to protect commercial ships, and U.S. and allied forces remain vulnerable to Iranian drones, short-range missiles, torpedoes, and sea mines in the Strait’s narrow sea lanes. It will likely require further suppression of Iran’s retaliatory capacity and the organization of an allied naval task force, possibly involving Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries and European naval forces modelled on past task forces to safeguard shipping in the Red Sea. Even with armed naval escorts, many commercial vessels, their crews, or insurers may not be willing to risk transiting the Strait without a significant reduction in hostilities or a formal cease-fire. President Trump’s March 9 remarks that the war will be over “very soon” signal he has the flexibility to halt the campaign should he declare the United States has sufficiently met core war objectives, including the destruction of Iran’s ballistic missile arsenal, residual nuclear program, and navy. Transit through Hormuz is unlikely to normalize without a cease-fire agreed by all sides. But that alone may not end threats to shipping through the Strait, depending on developments in Iran. If the war ends with Iran’s Revolutionary Guards battered but still in control, it is difficult to see Israel in particular being comfortable with a resumption in Iranian oil flows that could give Tehran revenues to try to rebuild. In addition, any sustained blockage of Iran’s 1.5 million bpd of oil exports would likely see continued Iranian threats to GCC oil transit. Indeed, it is far from certain when — or even if — Middle East oil market flows will return to the pre-war status quo ante. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 4, 2026, 12:00 pm EST Erica Downs How much oil and gas does China import from the Middle East? In 2025, China imported about half of its crude oil and almost one-third of its liquefied natural gas from the Middle East. According to China’s General Administration of Customs (GAC), China imported 42 percent of its crude oil – 4.9 million barrels per day (bpd) – from Saudi Arabia (14 percent), Iraq (11 percent), United Arab Emirates (7 percent), Oman (6 percent), Kuwait (3 percent), and Qatar (1 percent). China’s GAC has not reported any crude oil imports from Iran since 2022. However, according to analytics firm Kpler, which tracks tankers, China imported 1.38 million bpd of crude from Iran in 2025, accounting for 12 percent of China’s total crude oil imports. While most of these barrels were almost certainly relabeled as Malaysian to disguise their origins, some may have been rebranded as Indonesian, Iraqi, Omani, or Emirati. China also imported 31 percent of its LNG from the Middle East. Qatar supplied 28 percent, with the remainder shipped from Oman and the United Arab Emirates. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 4, 2026, 12:00 pm EST Erica Downs How is the closure of the Strait of Hormuz likely to affect China’s energy supply security? Although 45-50 percent of China’s crude oil imports transit the Strait of Hormuz, China is well-prepared to weather a multi-month disruption of its crude oil supplies from the Middle East because of its substantial oil stockpiles, the large volume of Iranian barrels on the water and in bonded storage in China. As of March 2, China had 1.39 billion barrels of oil in storage, according to Kayrros, a geospatial analytics company, which would cover 120 days of net crude oil imports at the 2025 level.[1] There are also more than 46 million barrels of Iranian oil in floating storage in Asia and more in bonded storage in the ports of Dalian and Zhoushan, where the National Iranian Oil Company leases tanks. (Oil in bonded storage has not been cleared by customs.) Additionally, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have the capacity to reroute a combined 5 million bpd to avoid the Strait of Hormuz, and some of that oil will likely flow to China. China’s options for addressing a disruption of the 30 percent of its LNG imports that arrive via the Strait of Hormuz (supplies from Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, but not Oman), especially in the short term, are limited to consuming less or paying more, with lower consumption likely to be the dominant approach given the limited appetite for higher import bills. Consuming Less: China is likely to consider measures such as voluntary demand reduction or replacing LNG with other fuels in the power sector to lower LNG use. State-owned energy companies are also considering raising prices to limit use. The fact that China is currently transitioning away from the winter heating season should also help. Paying More: Chinese buyers are likely to be reluctant to pay the higher prices needed to compete against other LNG importers, especially in Europe, for LNG supplies that do not transit the Strait of Hormuz. Traders at state-owned companies told S&P Global that there currently is little appetite for spot cargoes due to high prices, but that they can’t be ruled out in the longer term, given the paramount importance of supply security. Although China’s pipeline gas imports are cheaper than its LNG imports, increasing pipeline gas deliveries from Russia is unlikely to be an option before 2027, when the Far Eastern Route becomes operational. The Power of Siberia pipeline is already operating slightly above capacity. Similarly, increasing pipeline gas imports from Central Asia is also challenging due to supply and infrastructure bottlenecks. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 4, 2026, 12:00 pm EST Erica Downs What do the US-Israeli attacks on Iran mean for China’s teapot refineries? The attacks are more bad news for China’s independent teapot refineries, which operate on thin margins and purchase most of the sanctioned crudes that China imports because of the discounts available. After the United States removed Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro from power, the teapots began to purchase more Iranian heavy crude, the cheapest available substitute. As the conflict in the Middle East threatens the flow of Iranian oil to China, these teapot refiners are unlikely to face an immediate shortfall in sanctioned crudes because they can purchase Iranian and Russian oil in floating storage in Asia and bonded storage in Chinese ports. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 4, 2026, 12:00 pm EST Erica Downs What are the implications of the conflict in the Middle East for China’s approach to energy security? A prolonged disruption of China’s Qatari LNG imports might prompt China to reconsider the role of LNG in China’s natural gas import portfolio. The disruption may make the proposed Power of Siberia 2 pipeline from Russia more attractive, especially if China can secure a lower price than what it pays for gas delivered via the Power of Siberia 1 pipeline and flexibility on volumes. To be sure, a hallmark of China’s approach to supply security is avoiding becoming too dependent on any single supplier, and 30 percent of China’s natural gas imports (LNG and pipeline gas combined) came from Russia last year. But if LNG imports that transit the Strait of Hormuz prove less reliable than pipeline gas from Russia, Beijing’s concerns about overreliance on Russia might take a back seat to supply security. More broadly, the conflict is likely to reinforce China’s commitment to increase its reliance on domestic energy sources. While China’s leader Xi Jinping called for China to “firmly hold the energy rice bowl in its own hands” while visiting the Shengli oil field in 2021, China’s push to become more self-sufficient in energy involves not only producing more oil and natural gas domestically but also continuing with its orderly transition away from fossil fuels. This transition entails the ongoing transformation of China’s power system to better integrate more renewables and improve flexibility. To cite just one example, China plans to more than double its energy storage capacity from 73.8 GW in 2024 to 180 GW in 2027. The conflict is likely to reaffirm Beijing’s commitment to transforming China into an “energy superpower” that derives strength from its leading role in deploying green energy technologies at home and abroad. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 2, 2026, 12:00 pm EST Richard Nephew Where is this crisis headed, and how might it end? Frustrating as it is, no one knows, partly because neither the United States nor Israel has provided a clear and consistent strategic objective. In a recorded address released shortly after the first missiles struck Iran, President Donald Trump invoked Iran’s nuclear program, its missile capabilities, and its repression of protesters earlier this year. But subsequent US and Israeli messages have varied in their description of the objectives of the attacks. While Trump called on Iran’s population to rise up against the Islamic Republic, strongly implying regime change was the real goal, he has also indicated a willingness to cut a deal with remaining elements of the Iranian government. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine said on March 2 that “the objectives are to eliminate Iran’s ability to project power beyond its borders, eliminate its missile capabilities, and destroy its Navy.” Despite Khamenei’s death, the Iranian state still seems intact: President Masoud Pezeshkian is alive as of this writing and, together with the remaining leadership, has formed a temporary leadership council to govern Iran during the transition to a new Supreme Leader. If Trump is prepared to talk with the Iranian government, then he’ll be dealing with this council—suggesting he’s not conditioning an end to hostilities on regime change beyond the need for a successor to Khamenei. As for whether a deal could be struck, an eventual ceasefire is probable as Iran, the United States, and Israel all exhaust their stockpiles of munitions and, in the case of the latter two, missile defense interceptors. But it will likely take time to unfold since the United States and Israel have a lengthy list of targets in Iran and the Iranians have shown no signs of abandoning their retaliation. A more durable agreement on major issues like the nuclear or missile programs is unlikely. An Israeli source alleged that the date of the operation was set weeks ago, suggesting that the entire negotiations process over the last month was a ruse—a claim that was also made about the negotiations preceding the twelve-day war in June. Even if this is not true, there are already enough complications in the negotiations to make a deal difficult to envision. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 2, 2026, 12:00 pm EST Richard Nephew What is Iran’s strategy going forward? Unlike with Venezuela, the Iranian government is prepared to continue the fight. In fact, it is notable that Khamenei died in the first blows from the United States and Israel. So, all of Iran’s retaliatory strikes have taken place after his death. This strongly suggests that Iran’s government has no intention of folding with Khamenei’s end. Iran has demonstrated a willingness to expand the war through its targeting of Gulf Arab and fixed energy assets such as Ras Tanura (Saudi Arabia) and Ras Laffan (Qatar). Any halt to this activity will likely be tied to an Iranian effort to get Gulf Arab states and outside actors (like China) to pressure the United States to end hostilities. Although no one wants to see energy flows interrupted (including Iran, which is dependent on the associated revenue), the tacit bargain against targeting these assets appears to be breaking down. Likewise, with the expansion of the conflict into Lebanon following Hezbollah’s attacks on Haifa on March 1, it seems most likely that Iran is committed to creating enough chaos and threat that the United States and Israel stop their attacks. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 2, 2026, 12:00 pm EST Karen E. Young What about the impact on Gulf Arab states? All six of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states are under direct attack from Iran. Iranian officials have said they are targeting US bases, but the attacks (or their falling debris) have hit energy infrastructure, a data center, airports, ports, hotels, and civilian apartment buildings. In the United Arab Emirates (UAE), three people were killed and airports were attacked. In Bahrain, Iranian barrages have targeted US and British bases as well as residential buildings. In Kuwait, a US base was targeted. Across the GCC, Iraq, and Jordan, injuries and damage have mostly been due to falling debris from intercepted missiles, though drone attacks have been frequent, especially in the UAE where the government reported that 506 of 541 Iranian drones on its territory had been intercepted as of early Sunday, March 1. If the goal of these attacks was to move the GCC states to push the US and Israel to conclude their attacks on Iran, the opposite has occurred. As in June 2025, the GCC states share a sense of collective anger and distrust of Iran. There have been no counter-attacks yet against Iran from any of the Gulf states, but there is a growing frustration that Iran has abused mediation efforts—especially by Oman—and is purposefully regionalizing the conflict by threatening the security and economic vitality of the entire Gulf. DP World reportedly suspended operations at the Jebel Ali port in Dubai temporarily as a precautionary measure. Traffic in the Strait of Hormuz is not blocked, but it is severely limited and slowed, raising questions about both the volume of energy exports as well as imports of food and necessities to the Gulf states. Bourse and Bazaar, a regional consultancy, estimates that within twenty days, fresh fruits, fish, dairy, beef, and other food items will be in shortage if maritime capacity in the Strait of Hormuz drops by 50 percent and air freight imports are unavailable. Shipping in the Red Sea corridor is also at risk, causing Danish shipping company Maersk to pause trips through the Bab Al Mandeb strait temporarily. The Iran-aligned Yemeni Houthis threatened to start attacks on Saturday night, but have not yet engaged, instead encouraging their supporters to hold mass rallies in the capital Sanaa in support of Iran. Aviation, logistics, and tourism are critical economic drivers across the GCC, and the current attacks have both disrupted trade, air, and maritime traffic and threatened citizens and non-citizens alike, with foreigners accounting for all casualties so far. Gulf regional stock markets have been mixed, with the Boursa Kuwait suspended on Sunday and equity markets closed in the UAE and Qatar. In Saudi Arabia, the Tadawul fell Sunday by nearly 5 percent before paring losses (though Aramco shares gained 3.7 percent), with declines also in Oman and Bahrain. These losses seem relatively modest given the unprecedented nature of Iran’s simultaneous attacks on the GCC states. Two lingering questions are how long the Iranian retaliations will continue and whether the Gulf states will join the war in an offensive capacity. That uncertainty will be destabilizing, as foreign direct investment may delay allocations, and non-oil economic activity, including tourism, may decline sharply. Even if oil prices spike only briefly, the economic impacts will pose sustained challenges to diversification and the ecosystem of multinational, multicultural population centers. The region will want to portray these attacks as limited shocks, but the newly formed provisional government in Iran gives no illusion of moderation. Show more Show less\n\nMarch 2, 2026, 12:00 pm EST Daniel Sternoff What is the effect on global oil markets? Brent crude oil prices jumped $10/bbl to just below $80/bbl on the first trading day since the war erupted, up almost $20/bbl since Iranian protests intensified in late January. At the time of writing, there are widespread disruptions to energy transit through the Strait of Hormuz. A handful of oil tankers have been attacked, carriers are suspending shipments, risk insurance underwriters are canceling coverage, and freight rates are skyrocketing. Whether the price gains are sustained or extended depends heavily on the conflict’s path and duration, and on the extent of any actual disruptions to physical supplies. The conflict is widening to energy infrastructure, and substantial damage to critical production and export facilities would have longer-lasting fundamental impacts. At the time of writing, the most prominent piece of oil infrastructure to be struck is Saudi Arabia’s 550,000 b/d Ras Tanura refinery. There are no reports of attacks on upstream facilities, though there have been precautionary shutdowns of small fields in northern Iraq. In 2019, Iran targeted Saudi Arabia’s irreplaceable Abqaiq oil processing and export hub; damage there would create an extended disruption to oil markets. With Tehran targeting energy infrastructure, there is a high risk that Iran’s key export facilities at Kharg Island will be struck. The Strait of Hormuz is an irreplaceable chokepoint for nearly 15 million barrels per day (mb/d) of crude and condensate and over 4 mb/d of oil products, and there will be significant impacts on world oil balances if current disruptions last more than several days. These figures include between 1.3 and 1.5 mb/d in Iranian crude exports that the US and/or Israel may elect to impede to increase financial pressure on Tehran. If the Iranian regime survives the current conflict, the United States and/or Israel may be tempted to cripple the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps’ (IRGC) ability to finance itself through oil revenues. Together, Saudi Arabia and the UAE can reroute roughly a quarter of the volumes transiting the Strait, with a combined 5 mb/d in capacity that avoids Hormuz via the UAE port of Fujairah and Saudi outlets on the Red Sea. In the run-up to the war, Iran moved an estimated 25 mb of floating storage to Asia, Saudi Arabia filled inventories in Japan and Egypt, and Saudi Arabia and the UAE preemptively increased crude exports in February by an estimated 0.5 mb/d – 1.0 mb/d. But these inventory buffers will be swiftly worked through if Hormuz is disrupted for an extended period of time. On March 1, OPEC+ decided to resume the unwinding of past production cuts, boosting supplies by 210,000 b/d from April 1. This move is more symbolic than substantive: most OPEC countries lack spare capacity to increase output, and such small production hikes are meaningless if the oil cannot move to market. Extended disruptions will likely require major consumers, including the US and China, to release strategic stockpiles. Many oil traders have assumed this conflict will play out like last June’s war, in which oil prices saw a short, sharp spike before swiftly falling when it became clear the conflict would end without meaningful supply disruptions. As such, the current geopolitical risk premium could quickly evaporate if President Trump signals he will abandon maximalist regime change objectives, preferring to negotiate an off-ramp or declare victory as a result of severe damage to Iran’s missile capabilities. The crisis is occurring at the weakest part of the year seasonally for an oversupplied oil market, which has prevented even larger price increases. At the same time, the market is not positioned for extended disruptions, so lasting damage or a long conflict could push prices higher. The current spike in oil prices, as with last June, will create opportunities for US shale producers to hedge 2026 and 2027 prices, which could bring some selling pressure to the back end of the crude futures curve and lock in somewhat higher US supplies late this year and next year. Show more Show less",
      "word_count": 14019,
      "original_language": "EN",
      "author": "April",
      "countries": [
        "SAU",
        "IRN",
        "USA"
      ],
      "industries": [
        {
          "name": "Crude Oil & Refined Products Trading & Marketing",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Exploration & Prospecting (Geology, Geophysics, Seismic)",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        {
          "name": "Geopolitical Risk",
          "code": "RK01",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Supply-Chain Disruptions",
          "code": "RK08",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Market Indices Performance",
          "code": "MD01",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Consumer Behaviour & Spending",
          "code": "MM05",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "company_mentions": [
        {
          "uuid": "0006wjd",
          "name": "PDVSA",
          "website": "http://www.pdvsa.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0008zuh",
          "name": "Maurel & Prom",
          "website": "http://www.maureletprom.fr/en/"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00000go",
          "name": "Masdar",
          "website": "https://masdar.ae"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "000031j",
          "name": "BP",
          "website": "https://www.bp.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0002os6",
          "name": "KBR",
          "website": "https://www.kbr.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0004a3s",
          "name": "Halliburton",
          "website": "https://www.halliburton.com/"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0000j6k",
          "name": "Chevron",
          "website": "http://www.chevron.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00004s8",
          "name": "Eni",
          "website": "https://www.eni.com/en_IT/home.html"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0000pkp",
          "name": "SLB",
          "website": "https://www.slb.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00009if",
          "name": "ADNOC",
          "website": "https://www.adnoc.ae/en/"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00005ls",
          "name": "ACWA Power",
          "website": "https://www.acwapower.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0000a4i",
          "name": "Saudi Aramco",
          "website": "https://www.aramco.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0004z9e",
          "name": "Repsol",
          "website": "https://www.repsol.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0004vwa",
          "name": "TotalEnergies",
          "website": "https://www.totalenergies.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0004mqu",
          "name": "QatarEnergy",
          "website": "https://www.qatarenergy.qa/"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0000if8",
          "name": "ExxonMobil",
          "website": "https://corporate.exxonmobil.com"
        }
      ],
      "article_type": "News analysis",
      "is_press_release": true,
      "is_opinion": true,
      "is_breaking": true,
      "iptc_codes": [
        "20001243",
        "20000344",
        "20000386"
      ],
      "iab_categories": [
        "81",
        "86"
      ],
      "naics_codes": [
        "32411",
        "21112"
      ],
      "sic_codes": [
        "2911",
        "1311"
      ],
      "entities": {
        "person": [
          "daniel sternoff",
          "chris bataille",
          "karen e. young",
          "ira joseph",
          "luisa palacios",
          "doug burgum",
          "farouk soussa",
          "robin mills",
          "hayan abdel-ghani",
          "nouri al-maliki",
          "mohammed shia al-sudani",
          "richard nephew",
          "neelesh nerurkar",
          "amin nasser",
          "anne-sophie corbeau",
          "donald trump",
          "president trump",
          "xi jinping",
          "nicolas maduro",
          "khamenei",
          "masoud pezeshkian",
          "dan caine"
        ],
        "location": [
          "abu dhabi",
          "saudi arabia",
          "uae",
          "iran",
          "china",
          "israel",
          "france",
          "strait of hormuz",
          "south korea",
          "united states",
          "united arab emirates",
          "us",
          "fujairah pipeline",
          "dubai",
          "bahrain",
          "mideast",
          "ukraine",
          "u.s.",
          "qatar",
          "persian gulf",
          "gulf",
          "europe",
          "calcasieu pass",
          "mexico",
          "texas",
          "golden pass",
          "corpus christi",
          "asia",
          "permian basin",
          "middle east",
          "haynesville",
          "gulf coast",
          "waha hub",
          "venezuela",
          "west texas",
          "appalachian",
          "orinoco",
          "caracas",
          "gulf states",
          "iraq",
          "kuwait",
          "oman",
          "africa",
          "iraqi kurdistan",
          "gcc states",
          "gulf countries",
          "baghdad",
          "russia",
          "shah field",
          "turkey",
          "jordan",
          "syria",
          "baiji",
          "khor mor",
          "aqaba",
          "kurdistan region",
          "kirkuk-area",
          "iraqi waters",
          "sarsang",
          "erbil",
          "kurdistan",
          "salalah",
          "sohar",
          "guinea",
          "australia",
          "india",
          "brazil",
          "slovakia",
          "pakistan",
          "straits",
          "northern hemisphere",
          "asian countries",
          "ras laffan",
          "japan",
          "korea",
          "canada",
          "taiwan",
          "bangladesh",
          "kazakhstan",
          "thailand",
          "european",
          "asian",
          "abu dhabi at ruwais",
          "gulf arab states",
          "gcc",
          "ruwais",
          "yanbu",
          "kharg island",
          "hormuz",
          "red sea",
          "gulf of oman",
          "fujairah",
          "asian waters",
          "jask",
          "lower 48 states",
          "dalian",
          "zhoushan",
          "tehran",
          "indonesian",
          "emirati",
          "malaysian",
          "beijing",
          "shengli oil field",
          "lebanon",
          "haifa",
          "gulf arab",
          "ras tanura",
          "sanaa",
          "bab al mandeb strait",
          "red sea corridor",
          "jebel ali port",
          "egypt",
          "northern iraq"
        ],
        "product": [
          "methanol",
          "lng",
          "ammonia fertilizer",
          "olefins",
          "ammonia fertilizers",
          "electrolyzers",
          "gas",
          "coal",
          "liquefied natural gas",
          "plastics feedstocks",
          "solar photovoltaics",
          "biomass gasifiers",
          "gas turbine",
          "fertilizer",
          "aluminum",
          "diesel",
          "petrochemicals",
          "jet fuel",
          "liquefied petroleum gas",
          "associated gas",
          "gasoline",
          "fuel oil",
          "oil tankers",
          "urea",
          "polyethylene",
          "polypropylene",
          "diammonium phosphate",
          "polymers",
          "sulfur",
          "ammonia",
          "helium",
          "natural gas",
          "phosphate",
          "bauxite",
          "condensate",
          "nitrogen fertilizers",
          "alumina",
          "oil",
          "fuel",
          "qatari liquefied natural gas",
          "renewables",
          "hydrogen",
          "biomethane",
          "batteries",
          "nuclear weapons",
          "brent",
          "paint",
          "plastics",
          "cement",
          "crude",
          "pipeline gas"
        ],
        "event": [
          "persian gulf crisis",
          "iran war",
          "2026 u.s.-iran crisis",
          "us-iran crisis",
          "iran crisis",
          "blackcomb expansion",
          "coast express addition",
          "iran conflict",
          "us-iran war",
          "elections",
          "drone attack",
          "middle east conflict",
          "2022 russia-ukraine war",
          "1990 gulf war",
          "1979 iranian revolution",
          "1973 arab oil embargo",
          "us-israeli campaign",
          "1980-1988 iran-iraq war",
          "twelve-day war"
        ]
      },
      "newsworthiness_score": 1,
      "group_id": 365241
    },
    {
      "id": 25119997,
      "title": "Stock Market Highlights, May 25: Sensex jumps over 1,000 points as easing crude prices lift Nifty above 24,000",
      "url": "https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/markets/sensex-nifty50-today-stock-market-highlights-25th-may-2026/article71018298.ece",
      "publisher": "",
      "published_date": "2026-05-25T10:30:18",
      "sentiment": "Positive",
      "sentiment_score": 1,
      "ai_summary": "Indian benchmark indices rallied sharply on Monday, May 25, 2026, with the Sensex surging over 1,000 points and the Nifty crossing the 24,000 mark, driven by easing crude oil prices and improving global sentiment amid expectations of progress in a potential US-Iran peace deal. The rally was led by large-cap stocks and financial companies, supported by attractive valuations and strong quarterly earnings, while the rupee also strengthened. Market breadth remained firmly positive with advancing stocks outpacing losers, though analysts cautioned that sustaining the rally would depend on continued de-escalation in geopolitical tensions and crude oil price stability.",
      "full_text": "Home Markets Sensex today | Stock Market Highlights: Sensex jumps over 1,000 points as easing crude prices lift Nifty above 24,000 Sensex, Nifty, Share Prices LIVE :Indian benchmark indices surged on Monday, with the Sensex soaring over 1,000 points and the Nifty crossing 24,000, driven by easing crude oil prices, improving global sentiment, strong financial stocks and optimism surrounding a potential US-Iran deal. By Team BLKS Badri Narayanan\n\nSensex Today, Nifty 50 | Stock Market Live Updates - Find here all the live updates related to Sensex, Nifty, BSE, NSE, share prices and Indian stock markets for 25th May 2026. Indian benchmark indices rallied sharply on Monday, with the Nifty surging 312.40 points, or 1.32%, to close at 24,031.70, while the Sensex jumped 1,073.61 points, or 1.42%, to end at 76,488.96. Market breadth remained firmly positive as advancing stocks outpaced losers. Analysts attributed the rally to easing crude oil prices and improving global sentiment amid expectations of progress in a possible US-Iran deal. Large-cap stocks led the gains, supported by attractive valuations and strong quarterly earnings from financial companies. Auto and realty stocks also witnessed buying interest. According to Geojit Investments’ Vinod Nair, softer global bond yields and signs of stability in the rupee further supported sentiment. However, he noted that sustaining the rally would depend on easing geopolitical tensions and continued stability in crude oil prices. FILTERS UPDATES ALL commodities stock market companies quarterly results economy gold silver banking forex stock up May 25, 2026 16:00 The live blog is now closed.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 16:00 Commodities update: Gold futures rise to ₹1.59 lakh/10g on weak dollar, US-Iran peace deal hopes Gold futures rise to ₹1.59 lakh/10g on weak dollar, US-Iran peace deal hopes Gold futures rise to ₹1.59 lakh/10g, driven by weak dollar and US-Iran peace deal optimism, boosting precious metals sentiment.\n\nMay 25, 2026 15:59 The live blog is now closed.\n\nMay 25, 2026 15:54 Currency market live: Oil slump, RBI support manifest in rupee’s three-day winning streak Oil slump, RBI support manifest in rupee’s three-day winning streak The rupee gains for three days amid RBI support and falling oil prices, closing at 95.23 per dollar.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 15:44 Stock Market Live: Markets rally on lower crude and US–Iran deal hopes; large caps and financials lead gains Vinod Nair, Head of Research, Geojit Investments Limited “Markets witnessed strong positive momentum, driven by a correction in crude oil prices amid rising expectations of a potential US–Iran deal. Global sentiment improved on reports of progress towards reopening the Strait of Hormuz, although credibility remains uncertain given frequent shifts in developments. The rally was led by large caps, supported by relatively attractive valuations versus long-term averages. On the sectoral front, financials outperformed on the back of strong Q4 earnings, while autos remained constructive. Realty also saw renewed interest following its recent sharp correction. On the macro front, global yields softened modestly, while rupee depreciation appears to have stabilised, aided by RBI commentary highlighting that the INR is undervalued, though it is early to confirm a sustained trend. Sustainability of this momentum will depend on a credible de-escalation in geopolitical tensions and continued stability in crude oil prices.”\n\nMay 25, 2026 15:42 Stock Market Live: ONGC floats global tender for technical partner to boost Western Offshore oil, gas output ONGC decided to engage a Technical Services Provider for the entire Western Offshore (excluding the Mumbai High field) in line with the existing TSP engaged for the MH field. Accordingly, ONGC issued an International Competitive Bidding (ICB) Tender for engagement of a TSP to enhance production from mature offshore oil and gas fields in the Mumbai Offshore Basin (excluding Mumbai High) through the induction of global technology, expertise, and best-in-class operational and management practices. All the major International Oil Companies were invited to participate.\n\nMay 25, 2026 15:41 Share market live: DDEV Plastiks Q4 profit rises to Rs 54.5 crore on higher revenue; EBITDA margin slips to 9.7% DDEV PLASTIKS: Q4 EBITDA 743M RUPEES VS 765M (YOY) || Q4 EBITDA MARGIN 9.7% VS 10.38% (YOY) DDEV PLASTIKS: Q4 REVENUE 7.65B RUPEES VS 7.4B (YOY) DDEV PLASTIKS: Q4 SL NET PROFIT 545M RUPEES VS 517M (YOY)\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 15:40 Stock Market Live: Elin Electronics swings to Rs 76 lakhs Q4 net loss; EBITDA margin drops to 1.8% ELIN ELECTRONICS: Q4 EBITDA 60M RUPEES VS 202M (YOY) || Q4 EBITDA MARGIN 1.84% VS 6.4% (YOY) ELIN ELECTRONICS: Q4 CONS NET LOSS 7.6M RUPEES VS PROFIT 172M (YOY)\n\nMay 25, 2026 15:39 Stock market live: Fresh Admissions Ease in FY26, While Delays Continue in Existing Cases: CareEdge on IBC cases * The aggregate recovery rate under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) remained range-bound, easing marginally to 30.6% in Q4FY26 from 31.6% in Q3FY26, reflecting a haircut of around 69% on admitted claims. * In Q4FY26, the number of cases admitted witnessed an uptick by 8.0% year-on-year (y-o-y). However, total admissions through FY26 remained below 700, indicating relatively subdued levels over the past five years. Extended resolution timelines have led to a sectoral distribution that has remained largely consistent with previous periods. * The number of ongoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRPs) declined to 1,885 cases in FY26 from 1,891 cases in FY25, remaining broadly around the 1,900 level, with the manufacturing sector continuing to account for the largest share of cases (36%).\n\nMay 25, 2026 15:38 Share market updates: Shriram General Insurance and Piramal Finance Join Hands for Strategic Partnership Shriram General Insurance (SGI) today announced a strategic corporate agency partnership with Piramal Finance, a leading retail-focused upper-layer NBFC in India, to improve access to insurance solutions, particularly across semi-urban and rural markets. Under the partnership, SGI will leverage Piramal Finance’s extensive branch network and customer outreach to offer its wide range of insurance products across 701 branches of Piramal Finance spanning 26 states and over 13,000 pin codes. The partnership reflects the shared commitment of both organisations to make insurance solutions more accessible and meaningful for customers, helping them safeguard their assets, livelihoods and long-term financial well-being. By combining Shriram General Insurance’s long-standing industry experience, customer-centric approach, and the trust it has built over the years with Piramal Finance’s innovative ‘High Tech + High Touch’ approach, the partnership aims to create seamless and convenient access to protection solutions across diverse geographies.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 15:37 Stock market live updates: Jyoti Global Plast forays into aerial media through JV to introduce Aerial Out-of-Home (AOOH) advertising in Maharashtra Jyoti Aeronext, a joint venture between Jyoti Global Plast and Drone IQ Aeronext LLP, is set to enter the emerging aerial media segment and introduce Aerial Out-of-Home (AOOH) advertising in Maharashtra through a managed Drone Advertising-as-a-Service (DAAS) model. The venture aims to establish a new media layer within India’s evolving out-of-home (OOH) ecosystem by enabling brands to execute high-visibility, experience-led and digitally amplifiable campaigns through aerial display formats. As brands increasingly compete for consumer attention in cluttered urban environments, media investments are shifting towards immersive formats that combine visibility, engagement and shareability. AOOH seeks to respond to this shift by introducing an event-led and location-responsive advertising format that extends beyond conventional static outdoor inventory. Structured as a managed services platform rather than a standalone drone deployment offering, the business will offer end-to-end campaign execution spanning design, aerial display operations, content management, flight planning, permissions support, event execution and campaign reporting. The platform is expected to support automotive launches, premium real estate showcases, retail activations, public events, entertainment experiences and large-format brand campaigns. The concept material outlines an aerial LED display format designed for event-led activations and end-to-end managed execution. Unlike conventional outdoor formats, AOOH enables temporary, location-responsive and experience-led campaign execution – offering brands an additional layer of engagement for premium activations and high-attention environments. Karan Shah, Chief Financial Officer, Jyoti Global Plast, said: “Outdoor advertising is undergoing a visible shift towards more immersive and outcome-oriented formats. Through this venture, we aim to introduce aerial media as a structured and accessible category for brands while combining technology, managed execution and experiential engagement. We believe AOOH can complement India’s evolving media mix.”\n\nMay 25, 2026 15:37 Share market live today: Headsup B2B Deepens Vertical Integration Play, Targets ₹400 crore for the current fiscal year Headsup B2B, a one-stop pan-India procurement and supply chain platform serving the infrastructure, industrial and renewable energy sectors, is targeting ₹400 crore in revenue this fiscal year, building on over 2,200 transactions worth ₹250 crore executed in the previous financial year. While allied infrastructure services accounted for nearly 80% of revenue during that period, renewable energy, industrial automation and road safety solutions have emerged as the fastest-growing categories, driving the company’s next phase of expansion. Infrastructure and industrial projects in India typically involve multiple suppliers and service partners across different stages, which can lead to coordination gaps and delays. The initiative is aimed at helping customers manage sourcing and on-ground execution through a more integrated operating model, reducing reliance on multiple vendors and service providers across projects. It builds on the company’s presence in procurement-led infrastructure categories, where customer requirements often extend beyond sourcing into installation, deployment, and project execution. Commenting on the development, Sumit Kumar, Founder & Director, Headsup B2B, said, “Over the past year, we have seen customers seek support not only for procurement, but also for execution-related requirements linked to infrastructure projects. Since we already operate in these categories, this expansion allows us to extend our role in areas where customer requirements continue after sourcing is completed.”\n\nMay 25, 2026 15:36 Share market live: OmneNEST Technologies undertakes multi-location expansion, enters growth mode OmneNEST Technologies, India’s leading end-to-end software product and services provider for the securities industry, has embarked on a major multi-location expansion to strengthen its capabilities and accelerate innovation in trading technology. The expansion is aimed at better serving the rapidly evolving needs of India’s securities trading ecosystem through an enhanced suite of products and services. As part of this growth strategy, the company is significantly scaling its infrastructure footprint. OmneNEST is doubling the size of its Mumbai office in the key business district of Lower Parel from 4500 square feet to 9100 square feet, reinforcing its presence in the country’s financial capital. Simultaneously, its Mangaluru facility—its core technology development centre—has also been expanded by over 50% to 9500 square feet to support increased R&D and product engineering efforts. “At OmneNEST we have been redefining the future of trading with cutting edge tech solutions for the securities markets. As part of our vision to democratise investing for the masses we are going in for a major expansion of our facilities. The expanded facilities will help us to boost the strength of our intellectual capital, to develop world leading, Made in India software products that redefine the future of investing for institutional and retail customers alike,” says Paresh Hede, CEO, OmneNEST Technologies. OmneNEST counts the entire gamut of the broking fraternity; from discount broking giants to research-based brokers to institutional trading giants and foreign brokerages as customers, for its market leading multi exchange and multi asset, order and risk management systems for securities trading. OmneNEST’s flagship order management, execution, and risk management platform, NEST, is scalable enough to process as many as two crore trades daily for the largest brokers in equities, commodities, futures and options and exchange traded funds across BSE, NSE and all commodity exchanges in India. The platform has become a backbone of India’s trading infrastructure powering nearly two out of every three active trading and demat account holders in India.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 15:35 Currency Market Live: Rupee gains 0.45% on US-Iran peace hopes, softer crude; outlook cautious pending final agreement Jateen Trivedi, VP Research Analyst - Commodity and Currency, LKP Securities “Rupee traded strongly positive near 95.22, gaining around 0.45%, as improving sentiment around the US–Iran conflict supported risk assets and eased pressure on crude oil prices. Reports suggesting progress towards a possible peace framework and reopening of the Strait of Hormuz helped strengthen the rupee and other emerging market currencies. However, uncertainty still remains elevated after US President Donald Trump stated that the Hormuz blockade would continue until a final agreement is formally signed, keeping markets cautious despite positive negotiations. The rupee recovery is also being aided by softer crude prices and improving sentiment in global markets, though movement ahead will continue to depend heavily on final developments in US–Iran negotiations and energy market stability.”\n\nMay 25, 2026 15:16 Share market live today: Puravankara acquires 15 acre land in Bengaluru for housing project, eyes Rs 2,300 cr revenue ) Realty firm Puravankara Ltd has acquired a 14.57-acre land parcel in Bengaluru to develop a housing project with a revenue potential of around Rs 2,300 crore. In a regulatory filing on Monday, the company said it has secured a 14.57-acre land parcel located in Mandur, Budigere, in Bengaluru. Out of the total area, 7.92 acre is part of a joint development agreement (JDA), while 6.65 acre has been purchased by Puravankara, as per the filing. - PTI\n\nMay 25, 2026 15:12 Stock market live: ICRA downgrades Dwarikesh Sugar Industries’ long- and short-term ratings ICRA has downgraded the long-term credit rating of Dwarikesh Sugar Industries Limited for bank facilities worth Rs 600 crore to [ICRA]A+ (Stable) from [ICRA]AA-, while revising the outlook to Stable from Negative. The rating agency also lowered the short-term rating on the company’s Rs 300 crore commercial paper programme to [ICRA]A1 from [ICRA]A1+. The action follows ICRA’s periodic review based on the company’s Q4FY26 and FY26 financial performance.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 14:50 Abcoffee raises ₹61 crore in funding round led by Kliff Ventures Abcoffee raises ₹61 crore in funding round led by Kliff Ventures The fresh capital will be used to accelerate abcoffee's disciplined, cluster-led expansion across existing and new markets, as per the statement\n\nMay 25, 2026 14:47 Cyient Semiconductors raises $30 million from Edelweiss at $500 million valuation Cyient Semiconductors raises $30 million from Edelweiss at $500 million valuation Cyient Semiconductors secures $30 million from Edelweiss at a $500 million valuation to enhance its global semiconductor business.\n\nMay 25, 2026 14:46 India turns to Latin American, African oil after Hormuz disruption India turns to Latin American, African oil after Hormuz disruption In April and May, ‌Indian refiners raised imports from Venezuela, Brazil, Angola and Nigeria to ‌make ⁠up the shortfall, as well as continuing to buy Russian ⁠oil\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 14:26 NBCC Q4 profit rises 37% to ₹241 cr; FY26 net at ₹720 cr NBCC Q4 profit rises 37% to ₹241 cr; FY26 net at ₹720 cr NBCC reports a 37% Q4 profit increase to ₹241 crore, with FY26 net profit at ₹720 crore.\n\nMay 25, 2026 14:25 We are the largest oncology player in India, says Zydus MD; eyes US speciality push We are the largest oncology player in India, says Zydus MD; eyes US speciality push Zydus’ oncology business is supported by early entry into complex biologics and targeted therapies, along with structured patient support programmes that have improved access across treatment lines\n\nMay 25, 2026 14:21 In FY26, five listed REITs distribute over ₹8,900 cr to unitholders In FY26, five listed REITs distribute over ₹8,900 cr to unitholders In FY26, India's five listed REITs distributed over ₹8,900 crore to unitholders, highlighting strong demand for commercial real estate.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 14:10 Kalpataru expects ₹1,250 crore revenue from new cluster redevelopment project in Mumbai Kalpataru expects ₹1,250 crore revenue from new cluster redevelopment project in Mumbai In a regulatory filing, the company said it has signed a large cluster redevelopment project comprising five adjacent societies in Ashok Nagar, Kandivali East, Mumbai (Ashokgram Cluster)\n\nMay 25, 2026 13:44 Truecaller today announced the appointment of Sandeep Bhushan to its Board of Directors Truecaller, the leading global communications platform, today announced the appointment of Sandeep Bhushan to its Board of Directors, bringing in a seasoned leader with deep expertise in technology businesses, monetisation, and consumer trust at scale. Bhushan brings in over 25 years of experience across consumer, digital, and media businesses. He most recently served as India Director of Global Marketing Solutions at Meta, where he built and led a multi-billion-dollar business, helping catalyse broader digital economic participation in the company’s largest and most complex market.\n\nMay 25, 2026 13:44 Q4 Results live today: Greenlam Industries Greenlam Industries reported a strong performance in Q4FY26, with consolidated net revenues growing 25.8% year-on-year to ₹857.7 crore. The company also crossed ₹3,000 crore in annual consolidated revenues during FY26, reflecting sustained momentum across business segments and markets. During the quarter, the laminate business witnessed healthy growth across domestic and international markets, while the plywood & allied products segment continued to see strong traction. The company also reported significant improvement in EBITDA, which grew 57.1% year-on-year to ₹107.4 crore.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 13:43 Q4 results live today: SK Minerals & Additives SK Minerals & Additives posts robust 65.69% YoY growth in net profit to ₹ 18.12 Crore in FY26, driven by better execution and improvement in economics of scale. Revenue from operations increased by 50.18% at ₹ 317.89 crore in FY26. EBITDA up 68.27% at ₹ 32.14 crore in FY26 Expects halogen-free flame-retardant to contribute significantly to its topline and bottom-line moving forward\n\nMay 25, 2026 13:43 Q4 results live today: Belrise Belrise has announced its audited financial results for the quarter and financial year ended 31st March 2026, reporting strong growth momentum with Adj. PAT rising 17.2% YoY in Q4 FY26 and 41.2% YoY in FY26. The company also witnessed healthy revenue growth, strategic OEM order wins, and further strengthened its aerospace business through its international acquisition of Chester Hall Precision Engineering in the UK.\n\nMay 25, 2026 13:42 5 publicly listed Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) in India collectively distributed over Rs. 2,566 crores to more than 4.25 lakh unitholders during Q4 The five publicly listed Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) in India collectively distributed over Rs. 2,566 crores to more than 4.25 lakh unitholders during the fourth quarter ended March 31, 2026. For the full financial year 2025–26, the cumulative distribution by these REITs exceeded Rs. 8,900 crores. The five listed REITs are Brookfield India Real Estate Trust, Embassy Office Parks REIT, Knowledge Realty Trust, Mindspace Business Parks REIT, and Nexus Select Trust.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 13:41 SEBI bans 7 individuals in ₹20-cr stock manipulation case SEBI bans 7 individuals in ₹20-cr stock manipulation case SEBI bans seven individuals, including finfluencer Hemant Gupta, in a ₹20-crore stock manipulation scheme involving misleading recommendations.\n\nMay 25, 2026 13:41 Remsons Industries net profit up 5 times in Q4 on robust demand Remsons Industries net profit up 5 times in Q4 on robust demand Remsons Automotive (UK) has secured ₹300 crore, 7-year order from Stellantis NV for the supply of control cables — one of the largest in the company’s history. Deliveries are set to begin in FY27\n\nMay 25, 2026 13:25 SEBI bans 7 individuals in ₹20-cr stock manipulation case Capital markets regulator Sebi has barred seven individuals from securities markets for allegedly running a coordinated pump-and-dump scheme across social media platforms and making unlawful gains of over Rs 20.25 crore. Apart from the debarment, the regulator has also directed finfluencer Hemant Gupta and his sons, Rohan Gupta and Aniket Gupta, to immediately cease and desist from offering unregistered research analyst services or from portraying themselves as research analysts. In a 234-page interim order passed on May 22, Sebi alleged that Hemant, Rohan and Aniket acted as “Operators” who first accumulated positions in thinly traded SME stocks and later circulated bullish stock recommendations on social media platforms to inflate prices, before selling their holdings at a profit. Four other family members – Sharon, Leana, Rajani and Purvangi Gupta – allegedly facilitated the operation by allowing the use of their trading accounts or by executing trades on the operators’ instructions, the order said. - PTI\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 13:23 IIT Madras launches maritime research facility with ₹4.5 crore in CSR funding from Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders IIT Madras launches maritime research facility with ₹4.5 crore in CSR funding from Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders IIT Madras unveils a ₹4.5 crore maritime research facility, enhancing studies in marine vehicles, offshore systems, and fluid dynamics.\n\nMay 25, 2026 13:16 Commodities West Asia Conflict: Austerity measures to impact diesel, petrol demand growth West Asia Conflict: Austerity measures to impact diesel, petrol demand growth The austerity measures activated by the government to preserve economic stability, reign-in inflation and ensure energy security is putting pressure on India’s demand growth for key transport fuels—diesel and petrol.\n\nMay 25, 2026 13:13 Stock market OMC stocks rally 5.8% as crude slips below $100; fuel prices raised for fourth time in two weeks OMC stocks rally 5.8% as crude slips below $100; fuel prices raised for fourth time in two weeks OMC stocks rise 5.8% as crude prices fall below $100, amid fourth fuel price hike in two weeks.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 13:04 Stock market Markets at 1 pm At 1:02 pm, Nifty was up 228.70 pts (0.96%) to 23,948.00, while Sensex rose 899.25 pts (+1.19%) to 76,314.60\n\nMay 25, 2026 12:55 Companies Ola Electric set for sharp Q1 rebound as registrations cross Q4 levels Ola Electric set for sharp Q1 rebound as registrations cross Q4 levels Ola Electric anticipates a strong Q1 recovery, with registrations exceeding Q4 levels, signaling growing demand and operational improvements.\n\nMay 25, 2026 12:50 Quarterly results Blue Jet Healthcare Q4 results Blue Jet Healthcare Ltd reported a March-quarter profit of ₹64.34 crore, while revenue from operations came in at ₹235 crore. The company also approved fundraising of up to ₹1000 crore through securities issuance to support future growth initiatives. In addition, the board announced a dividend of ₹1.2 per share.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 12:47 Economy India turns net importer of finished steel in April\n\nMay 25, 2026 12:46 CPCL reworks ₹45,000-crore Cauvery Basin project in Nagapattinam; IOC to hold 75% in joint venture CPCL reworks ₹45,000-crore Cauvery Basin project in Nagapattinam; IOC to hold 75% in joint venture CPCL revamps ₹45,000-crore Cauvery Basin project in Nagapattinam, shifting focus to petrochemicals with IOC as major partner.\n\nMay 25, 2026 12:43 Stock market Nifty holds near 24,000, Sensex above 76,200 at midday; Eicher Motors, Wipro lead gains Markets held firm in afternoon trade on Monday, May 25, 2026, consolidating the sharp gap-up gains seen at the open, though momentum eased from morning highs as investors turned cautious near key resistance levels. The BSE Sensex was trading at 76,254.90, up 839.55 points or 1.11 per cent, as of 12.30 pm. The NSE Nifty 50 was at 23,954.25, a gain of 234.95 points or 0.99 per cent at the same time, after briefly testing the psychological 24,000 mark in early trade before facing selling pressure. Read more here\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 12:39 Quarterly results GAIL FY26 PAT down 38% to ₹6,968 crore in FY26 amid global geopolitical headwinds GAIL FY26 PAT down 38% to ₹6,968 crore in FY26 amid global geopolitical headwinds Energy major reports resilient operations despite softer profitability and geopolitical challenges.\n\nMay 25, 2026 12:39 Quarterly results Captain Polyplast net up 91% in Q4 on robust demand Captain Polyplast net up 91% in Q4 on robust demand Revenue jumps 80 per cent to ₹142 crore on strong demand; orders secured under PM-KUSUM scheme\n\nMay 25, 2026 12:33 GAIL net profit reached ₹6,968 crore in FY26 amid global geopolitical headwinds GAIL’s report profit after tax (PAT) stood at Rs 6,968 crore for FY2025-26, as profitability moderated amid global headwinds and operations remained resilient. According to the company, standalone Revenue from Operations reached Rs 1,38,697 crore for the full fiscal year 2025-26, compared to Rs 1,37,288 crore recorded in the previous fiscal year. However, standalone PAT fell by approximately 38 per cent from Rs 11,312 crore in the previous fiscal.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 12:29 Why This Nifty 50-Midcap-Smallcap Mix Crushes the Nifty 500 Why This Nifty 50-Midcap-Smallcap Mix Crushes the Nifty 500 Discover why a strategic mix of Nifty 50, Midcap, and Smallcap outperforms the Nifty 500 for long-term investment success.\n\nMay 25, 2026 12:24 Companies CPCL reworks ₹45,000-crore Nagapattinam CBRL project Chennai Petroleum Corporation’s ₹45,000 crore Cauvery Basin Refinery and Petrochemicals Limited (CBRL) project in Nagapattinam has changed its key focus to emerge as a petrochemical complex tuned towards meeting Indias rising petrochem demand compared to plans for a conventional refinery. Earlier, the project was conceived with CPCL and IOC share being 25 per cent each and the balance 50 per cent from investors. However, the project is currently structured as a joint venture with IOC holding 75 per cent and CPCL 25 per cent, CPCL Managing Director H Shankar said in an interaction with Businessline. CPCL, along with parent IOC is revisiting the project configuration after the originally proposed refinery-cum-petrochemical complex faced internal rate of return (IRR) challenges, he told businessline.\n\nMay 25, 2026 12:20 Quarterly results Pudumjee Paper Products Ltd Q4 profit edges up to ₹20 crore Pudumjee Paper Products has reported that its net profit in the March quarter was up marginally at ₹20 crore against ₹19 crore logged in the same period last year. Revenue increased to ₹201 crore (₹190 crore). The company has announced a dividend of ₹0.60 a share. Read more here\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 12:15 Industry update Kalpataru Ltd to redevelop Kandivali East cluster Kalpataru Ltd signs Kandivali East cluster redevelopment project. Company expands Mumbai redevelopment portfolio with major new housing initiative. Project carries ₹1,250 crore GDV potential.\n\nMay 25, 2026 12:13 Industry update Shah Metacorp Ltd announces ₹49.8 crore rights issue Company plans capital raise to support growth and expansion initiatives. Board clears investment in Shah Metacorp Holdings USA Inc.\n\nMay 25, 2026 12:12 Companies K2 Infragen Ltd bags ₹56.91 crore order from RRVPNL Company wins transmission project from Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 12:08 Stock market Top gainers and losers of BSE Sensex Screenshot 2026-05-25 120720.png\n\nMay 25, 2026 12:05 Quarterly results Omnitech Engineering Q4 results Omnitech Engineering posts ₹29.31 crore consolidated profit in Q4FY26. Revenue from operations stands at ₹149 crore. Shares down 20.60 pts (-4.59 %) to 428.00 at Nifty 50\n\nMay 25, 2026 12:01 Stock market Markets at noon: Sensex, Nifty above 1% At 12 pm, Sensex was up 916.33 points or 1.22% at 76,331.68, while Nifty rose 270.00 pts (1.14%) at 23,989.30\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 11:58 Stock market Top Gainers and losers at Nifty 50 Gainers: Eicher Motors - 5.49% Eternal - 2.93% Adani Enterprises - 2.87% Shriram Finance - 2.74% Laggards: Max Health: -2.4% Hindalco: -2.26% ONGC: -1.43% Bajaj Auto: -0.61% Dr Reddy: - 0.11%\n\nMay 25, 2026 11:51 Quarterly results Q4 Results Today Live: Hitachi Energy, Suzlon Energy, Rail Vikas Nigam, Sundaram Finance, CONCOR, NBCC, Pine Labs, Poly Medicure to announce Q4 results Follow our live coverage here\n\nMay 25, 2026 11:49 Gold silver Gold offered at ₹450/g discount to Indian consumers after import duty hike Gold prices in the Indian domestic market are trading at a discount of over ₹450 per g to the landed prices, including import taxes, after the Government more than doubled the Customs duty to 15 per cent from 6 per cent on May 13. The discount is being offered to spur demand, which has been hit after Prime Minister Narendra Modi asking the people not to buy the precious metal for a year. Read more here\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 11:48 Banking Should investors buy HDFC Bank now? Should investors buy HDFC Bank now? Explore whether now is the right time for investors to buy HDFC Bank, given its solid fundamentals and current stock weakness.\n\nMay 25, 2026 11:47 Stock market US Market Outlook: Bullish bias intact US Market Outlook: Bullish bias intact US market outlook remains bullish as benchmark indices rise, with potential gains for the Dow, S&P 500, and NASDAQ.\n\nMay 25, 2026 11:41 Commodities Malaysian palm oil futures fall over 1% on weaker edible oil cues Malaysian palm oil futures fell on Monday, tracking weakness in rival edible oils on the Dalian market ‌andin crude oil, while the expectation of lower exports from the key producer also weighed ⁠on sentiment. The benchmark palm oil contract for August delivery on the Bursa Malaysia Derivatives Exchange lost 48 ringgit, or 1.07%, ‌to 4,438 ringgit ($1,122.69) a metric ton by the midday break.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 11:39 Puravankara buys 14.57-acre land parcel, capitalising on the emerging Budigere-Mandur micro market Real estate developer Puravankara has bought a 14.57-acre land parcel in Mandur, an area off Budigere Road, with a potential GDV (Gross development value) of ₹2,300 crore and saleable land of 1.8 million square feet. The parcel will be divided with 7.92 acres under a JDA (Joint development agreement) while 6.65 acres is purchased by Puravankara. Read more here\n\nMay 25, 2026 11:34 Forex Rupee gains 35 paise as crude oil prices fall below $100 The Rupee opened 35 paise stronger on Monday as crude oil prices declined on prospects of the US and Iran reaching a peace deal brightened and RBI Governor Sanjay Malhotra reportedly stating that the Rupee may be undervalued. The Indian currency opened at 95.34/35 per US Dollar against the previous close of 95.69/70. The Rupee is currently trading at 95.29. In intraday trading so far, it hit a high of 95.20 and a low of 95.44, per CCIL data. Read more here\n\nMay 25, 2026 11:27 Stock market Oil marketing companies rally; HPCL shares climb nearly 6% Shares of oil marketing companies surged on Monday, with HPCL climbing nearly 6 per cent, following a fresh hike in petrol and diesel prices. The stock of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd (HPCL) jumped 5.86 per cent to hit the day’s high of Rs 412.55 on the BSE. Read more here\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 11:23 Cyient Ltd unit to raise ₹200 crore via NCD issuance Company arm plans debt raise through non-convertible debentures to support funding needs. Securities to be placed with EAAA as part of strategic fundraising.\n\nMay 25, 2026 11:21 Puravankara secures 14.57-acre land parcel in Bengaluru Developer strengthens pipeline with project having ₹23 billion GDV.\n\nMay 25, 2026 11:20 Park Medi World approves acquisition Of V3 Healthcare Pvt Ltd Park Medi World Ltd approves ₹177 crore acquisition of V3 Healthcare. Company moves to expand healthcare portfolio through strategic buyout.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 11:17 Stock market Markets update: Nifty climbs past 23,980 as bulls take charge At 11:15 am, Sensex was up 937.99 pts or 1.24% to 76,353.34, while Nifty rose 267.60 pts (1.13%) to 23,986.90\n\nMay 25, 2026 11:11 Crisil upgrades Vodafone Idea Ltd Credit rating to ( A-/ stable) on continued support by ABG, strategic market position and improved business operations Key points to note: The ratings factor in the strategic importance of VIL for the Aditya Birla Group and the financial, operational and managerial support to be provided by the group to VIL. ABG sees VIL as a strategically important entity and the recent appointment of Mr. Kumar Mangalam Birla as VIL’s chairman highlights strong management control of the group. The ratings also reflect VIL’s meaningful market position in the Indian mobile services market with a subscriber market share of 15.68% as of March 2026 (based on data from TRAI) and its presence across all the 22 telecom circles. Planned capex of Rs 45,000 crore, to be incurred over fiscal 2027 to 2029, should increase operating revenues, earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, amortisation and rentals (EBTIDAR) and hence higher cash flow generation. The capex will be prioritised in 17 circles so as to enhance the 4G network coverage and add5G sites. For the planned capex of Rs 45,000 crore over fiscal 2027 to fiscal 2029, the debt funding tie-ups are at advanced stages. With expected improvement in business, resolution of AGR dues, along with presence of ABG and its financial flexibility is expected to help the company tie-up finance on competitive terms. Notes the subscriber loss has reduced significantly during fiscal 2026 with net additions in the last two months of fiscal 2026. Crisil Ratings also takes note of the recent announcement on resolution of AGR dues by the DoT. The liabilities pertaining to AGR have reduced to Rs 64,046 crore from Rs 87,695 crore with minimal repayments till fiscal 2035. This should ease pressure on cash flow position over the near to medium term.\n\nMay 25, 2026 11:10 Expert View | Akshay Chinchalkar, Managing Partner and Head of Market Strategy, The Wealth Company “Talking domestic stocks, and the nifty ended 0.3% higher at 23719, but not before retreating from its intraday highs for a second straight day. The India VIX finished flat. Both the front-month nifty and bank nifty saw short covering. Mid- and small-caps finished mixed. Advancers balanced decliners on the NSE500. Five of the main NSE sectors rose, with financial services becoming the best performers as they gained 1.2%. Media stocks performed the worst as they slipped 1.5%. Like we have been saying, bulls remain in the game with support in the 23100 - 23300 zone protected and all they need to do now is get the nifty to close above 23800 first, and then rebound beyond 24300 before critical resistance at 24800 begins to matter again. On the downside, a break below 23400 will weaken the current bull case. Last week’s price action has become an “inside bar”, which means a trending move is likely to begin shortly. Now, coming to flows, based on provisional data, foreigners withdrew around 4440 cr while domestic players invested just over 6000 cr. Speaking index options positioning, foreigners and prop traders switched to bullish, while retail investors turned negative.”\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 11:07 Market analysis by Vikram Subburaj, CEO, Giottus.com Bitcoin recovered to around $77,000 on May 25 after US President Trump said on May 23 that a US-Iran peace framework was ‘largely negotiated’ and that the Strait of Hormuz could reopen. BTC rose about 0.6% to $77,043 and Brent crude fell more than 5% to below $99. Also, the dollar weakened as global risk appetite improved. The recovery, however, remained limited. Bitcoin still has to defend the $76,000-$76,650 support band and reclaim the $78,000-$79,000 resistance zone before the market can treat the move as a genuine reversal rather than a geopolitical relief bounce. Bitcoin’s consolidation came after a volatile three-week stretch that saw the asset lose nearly 39% from its October 2025 peak of $1,26,287. The market is no longer reacting primarily to crypto-native triggers. ETF demand has weakened materially through May. US spot Bitcoin ETF flows have turned from a support to a pressure point. During the May correction, investors pulled about $1.26 billion from these ETFs over five trading sessions. This included a $635 million to $648 million single-day outflow around May 13. For context, Bitcoin was still holding near $77,000 on May 25, but the ETF tape showed that institutional buyers were not defending every dip. This matters because spot ETFs had absorbed a large part of the new Bitcoin demand since the 2024 launch (of Spot BTC ETFs). When a $1.5 trillion asset class sees five straight sessions of ETF redemptions, the signal is not panic. It is allocation discipline. Investors are waiting for clearer inflation data, lower bond-yield pressure, or a stronger reclaim of the $78,000-$79,000 resistance band before adding fresh exposure. On-chain positioning also reflects a market that is neither fully bullish nor in capitulation. Analysts’ desks place the active-investor equilibrium zone near the upper-$70,000 range. Bitcoin trading slightly below that band indicates that newer holders are still under pressure. However, the deeper long-term support remains far lower near realised-price territory around the mid-$50,000s. The market is therefore trading in a transition phase rather than a clear breakout cycle. Bitcoin’s next move is tied to macro data more than token-specific news. The market is awaiting the US April PCE inflation print on May 28 and the next US Fed decision on June 17. Until then, BTC has to defend the $76,000-$76,650 support band and reclaim the $78,000-$79,000 resistance zone. If inflation stays sticky and US yields remain firm, a move below $75,000 becomes more likely. If PCE cools, ETF flows improve, and BTC closes above $79,000, the market gets a cleaner path back towards $80,000-$82,000. Altcoins continue to lag Bitcoin in relative strength. Ethereum traded near $2,101 on May 25 and remained under pressure after failing to reclaim the $2,300 zone. Solana traded near $85.35 after remaining nearly 30% below its late-2025 levels. XRP held near $1.35, while BNB traded around $657 with relatively lower volatility. TRON continued to show relative resilience near the $0.36 range. CoinMarketCap’s Altcoin Season Index remained at just 37/100. This confirms that capital rotation into higher-beta assets has not yet meaningfully resumed. Our advice: For investors, the cleaner signal is not a single geopolitical bounce. The stronger confirmation would come from three things happening together: Bitcoin reclaiming $79,000, ETF flows turning positive again, and softer US inflation data reducing pressure from yields and the dollar. Till then, keep allocations modest and measured.\n\nMay 25, 2026 11:02 MCX Natural Gas futures breaks a key support MCX Natural Gas futures breaks a key support MCX Natural Gas futures break key support, potentially dropping to ₹255; traders advised to short with specified stop-loss strategies.\n\nMay 25, 2026 10:30 Nifty Prediction Today – May 25, 2026: Nifty 50 Futures: Breaks a key resistance. Can go higher Nifty Prediction Today – May 25, 2026: Nifty 50 Futures: Breaks a key resistance. Can go higher Nifty 50 outlook for May 25, 2026: bullish potential if resistance at 24,015 is breached; supports at 23,920, 23,850.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 10:23 Gold silver Chennai: Opening bullion (gold) rates Opening bullion rates on Monday. 1 Gm Gold 22 Kt ₹14,780.00 1 Gm Gold 18 Kt ₹12,400.00 1 Gm Silver ₹295.00\n\nMay 25, 2026 10:17 AI rally drives best run in global momentum stocks on record AI rally drives best run in global momentum stocks on record Bulls say the AI frenzy can continue luring money into the market’s biggest winners, though some caution that the scale of the outperformance is a warning sign\n\nMay 25, 2026 10:15 Commodities Copper gains on US-Iran peace deal hopes Copper rose on Monday as the dollar and oil prices fell on hopes of a potential peace deal between the ‌United States and Iran, easing fears of inflation and a global economic ⁠slowdown. Three-month copper on the London Metal Exchange rose 0.90% to $13,624.32 a metric ton by 0419 GMT. The ‌most-traded copper contract on the Shanghai Futures Exchange gained 1.1% to 105,590 ‌yuan ($15,539.93) a ton.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 10:13 Stock up Stock market LIVE: Eicher Motors surges 5% on record Q4 profit Shares of Eicher Motors climbed sharply on Monday after the Royal Enfield parent reported its best-ever quarterly earnings on Friday, with most brokerages reaffirming buy calls even as one analyst flagged mounting margin pressure. Eicher Motors stock was trading around ₹7,355, up ₹374 or 5.36 per cent on the NSE as of Monday morning, against a previous close of ₹6,981.50. The stock hit an intraday high of ₹7,388.50 and has now delivered returns of over 36 per cent in the past year, comfortably outpacing the Nifty 50’s near 4 per cent decline over the same period. Market capitalisation stood at roughly ₹2.01 lakh crore at the time of writing, with traded value already crossing ₹514 crore for the session. Read more here\n\nMay 25, 2026 10:11 Call money, TREPS rates ease Overnight call ‌money rate was at 5.45%, and the overnight TREPS rate was at 5.26%\n\nMay 25, 2026 10:10 Stock market Bonds: 10-year bond yield falls below 7.03% as oil prices tumble The benchmark 10-year bond was ‌quoted at ₹96.27, with the yield down 7 bps at 7.0293%, after oil prices tumbled on rising U.S.-Iran peace deal hopes.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 10:09 New Issue: Bajaj Housing to issue 5-year bonds Bajaj Housing Finance plans ‌to raise ₹2000 crore ($209.61 ⁠million), including a greenshoe option of ₹1500 crore, by selling ‌bonds maturing in ‌five ⁠years, three ⁠bankers said on Monday. The company has invited coupon ‌and commitment bids from investors on Tuesday, they said (Reuters)\n\nMay 25, 2026 10:05 Stock market Japan's Nikkei 225 surges past 65,000 for the first time on Hormuz reopening hopes Japanese stocks hit a record high on Monday as the Nikkei 225 surged past the record 65,000 mark for the first time as investors latched on to hopes of the Strait of Hormuz reopening after positive signals from the Trump administration on a peace deal with Iran. Global crude oil prices fell 5%, driving Brent below the psychological $100 levels while the US dollar slid as investors rushed out of safe havens.\n\nMay 25, 2026 10:02 Stock market China Stocks Rise: Shanghai Composite and CSI300 rises nearly 1% as commodity-linked sectors rally strongl Mainland China stocks climbed on Monday, lifted by gains in the coal sector after the country’s worst mine disaster in 17 years raised expectations that stricter ‌safety scrutiny would tighten supply, while semiconductor shares also aided the market. ** Chinese coking coal prices ⁠soared to their highest in nearly two weeks and a sub-index tracking the coal industry jumped 2.4% after the accident late on Friday. ** ‌Brokerage shares also advanced after China announced a major crackdown on cross-border investment and said it ‌would punish brokers it accused of illegally moving money ‌to ⁠foreign markets. ** CSI all share investment banking and brokerage trimmed ⁠earlier gains to trade 0.1% higher, while major Chinese brokerages China Merchants and CITIC Securities edged higher. ** By the midday break, the benchmark Shanghai Composite index inched higher by ‌0.6%, while China’s blue-chip CSI300 Index rose 0.9%. (Reuters)\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 10:00 Stock market Asian shares jump, S&P 500 futures hit record levels while Brent crude drops over 5%. Global stocks climbed to approach a record high as crude oil fell after officials signaled the US was nearing a deal with Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and restore oil flows. The dollar weakened. The MSCI All Country World Index, the broadest measure of global equities, rose 0.3% to trade near an all-time high reached earlier this month. A gauge of Asian shares gained 1.2%. Japan’s Nikkei index jumped over 3% to a record, with tech stocks rallying. The moves came as Brent dropped over 5% to $97.60 a barrel, the lowest in more than two weeks, amid optimism a deal will help resume the flow of energy through the vital Middle East artery. Cheaper oil prices and lower inflation expectations helped lift Treasury futures, with cash trading closed Monday due to a US holiday. Government bond yields in Japan and Australia also fell. Markets in Hong Kong and London are also shut. Futures contracts for the S&P 500 rose 0.9% to a record, after the underlying gauge climbed for eight straight weeks in the longest winning run since 2023. The dollar weakened against all of its Group-of-10 peers. Non-interest-bearing assets such as gold and silver climbed as lower inflation lifts chances for interest-rate cuts.\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:56 Companies PVV Infra eyes 13 wayside amenities projects on national highways PVV Infra eyes 13 wayside amenities projects on national highways PVV Infra targets 13 wayside amenities projects on national highways, enhancing travel services across key Indian corridors.\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:53 Forex Rupee climbs 0.4% to 95.3425 on oil relief, RBI valuation comment Rupee climbs 0.4% to 95.3425 on oil relief, RBI valuation comment Rupee rises 0.4% to 95.3425 as oil prices drop and RBI hints at currency undervaluation amid market challenges.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:52 Events Update As of 08:32 AM Monday 25 May 2026 Can set alert for them at www.researchbytes.com 9:30 AM Concord Enviro Dial: +91 22 6280 1107 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/4ddzm85w 10:00 AM Yatra.com Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/nhbj84p9 10:00 AM Sandhar Technol Dial: +91 22 6280 1116 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/mjtuk9yh 10:00 AM Rainbow Childrens Medica Dial: +91 22 6280 1259 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/5dse2fy5 11:00 AM Duroply Industr Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/3enybj5n 11:00 AM Sarda Energy Dial: +91 22 6280 1102 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/r4puarvw 11:00 AM Indigo Paint Dial: +91 22 6280 1144 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/4nm3fe9a 11:00 AM Fortis Health Dial: +91 22 6280 1307 11:00 AM Belrise Industr Dial: +91 22 6280 1309 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/ykrdfxpe 11:30 AM Gokaldas Export Dial: +91 22 6280 1523 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/55re3cet 12:00 PM Forcas Studio Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/3h6247zs 12:00 PM Tarsons Product Dial: +91 22 6280 1309 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/2s766b44 12:00 PM NGL Fine Chem Dial: +91 22 6280 1341 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/4jm2erys ( Hosted by Investment Lab ) 12:00 PM Ganesh Consumer Products Dial: 022 6280 1386 12:30 PM S Chand and Co Dial: +91226280 1231 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/22x63uuu 1:00 PM India Pesticide Dial: +91 22 6280 1116 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/ms2vncew 2:00 PM Aelea Commoditi No Contact Available Please check again for details @ www.researchbytes.com 2:00 PM Excelsoft Techn Dial: +91 22 6280 1102 2:00 PM Gabion Techno Dial: +91 22 6280 1446 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/3mexdwmm 2:30 PM Prostarm Info S Dial: +91 22 6280 1466 3:00 PM Star Imaging an Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/5n7mh6mm 3:00 PM MMP Industries Limited Dial: +91 22 6280 1256 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/yc4khhta 3:00 PM All Time Plasti Dial: +91 22 6280 1309 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/5ymymm3n 3:30 PM Zota Healthcare Dial: +91 22 6280 1107 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/4ay627ba 3:30 PM Studds Accessories Dial: +91 22 6280 1309 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/47r35wxm 3:30 PM GSFC Dial: +91 22 6280 1328 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/3ye8zd4w 3:30 PM Ircon International Dial: +91 22 6280 1341 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/m439r5n9 3:30 PM CenturyPlyboard Dial: +91 22 6280 1480 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/ms5zhauc 4:00 PM EllenIndlGas Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/47sbbptz 4:00 PM Dollar Ind Dial: 022 6280 1386 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/jmka82tv 4:00 PM Blue Jet Health Dial: +91 22 6280 1107 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/3fkxybw9 4:00 PM J. K. Cement Dial: +91 22 6280 1143 4:00 PM Captain Poly Dial: +91 22 6280 1239 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/2ax54h6b 4:00 PM Surya Roshni Dial: +91 22 6280 1309 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/7trwrptt 4:00 PM TVS Elec Dial: +91 22 6280 1341 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/yfrjjsy9 ( Hosted by Valorem ) 4:00 PM Marushika Techn Dial: +91 22 6280 1341 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/2tbjvs7f ( Hosted by Rik Capital ) 4:00 PM Excel Dial: +91 22 6280 1550 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/2nhrzfsy 4:00 PM Paramount Comm Dial: +91 86 3416 8918 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/5f6jns2a 4:30 PM Va Tech Wabag Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/mrxh7upz 4:30 PM ICRA Dial: +91 22 6280 1159 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/mvc8fayw 4:30 PM Shriram Properties Dial: +91 22 6280 1309 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/53yvvjbu 5:00 PM Campus Active Dial: +91 22 6280 1341 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/4t35utm7 ( Hosted by E & Y ) 5:00 PM Tinna Rubber an Dial: +91 22 6280 1557 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/ycr5jsm9 5:30 PM Awfis Space Sol Dial: +91 22 6280 1317 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/n74js6dt 5:30 PM Anupam Rasayan India Dial: +91 22 6280 1488 Weblink: https://tinyurl.com/ycypp9w9\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:40 Stock market Sensex, Nifty surge over 1% as crude tumbles on US–Iran deal hopes; Eicher Motors leads gainers Sensex, Nifty surge 1% as crude drops; Eicher motors tops gainer Sensex rises over 850 points in early trade; rupee recovers and auto, financial stocks lead gains\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:32 Commodities Petrol, diesel prices raised by over ₹2.50/litre in fourth hike in 10 days Petrol, diesel prices raised by over ₹2.50/litre in fourth hike in 10 days Petrol and diesel prices rise by over ₹2.50/litre, marking the fourth increase in ten days amid global oil market pressures.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:26 Stock market Sensex Surges Over 850 Points; Nifty Nears 24,000 at Open Benchmarks opened sharply higher on Monday, May 25, 2026, as a steep fall in global crude oil prices and improving signals from U.S.–Iran negotiations lifted investor sentiment across sectors. The BSE Sensex, which closed at 75,415.35 on Friday, opened at 76,135.82 and was trading at 76,271.78, up 856.43 points or 1.14 per cent, as of 9.18 am. The NSE Nifty 50, which ended its previous session at 23,719.30, opened at 23,940.25 and was trading at 23,973.15, a gain of 253.85 points or 1.07 per cent, at the same time.\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:24 Vedanta Aluminum Metal Limited (VAML)- Market expects it to list at ~Rs550/ share - VAML business will consist of alumina refining, aluminum smelting, captive coal & bauxite mines and value-added downstream products. Management emphasized cost leadership, vertical integration, and scale expansion. * Capacity expansion overview: BALCO aluminum smelter capacity to increase from 0.59mtpa to 1mtpa post expansion. Total aluminum production capacity is expected to rise from 2.4mtpa in FY25 to 2.88mtpa in FY27 and 3mtpa by FY28. Management has set a medium to long term target to increase captive coal mining capacity from ~2.6mtpa to 40+ mtpa. Captive bauxite mining would add 9-12mtpa with 25+ years of mine life. - Financial outlook: EBITDA is expected to improve from USD 2.9bn in FY26 to USD 4.5-5.8bn by FY29. Aluminum volumes are expected to increase from 2.4mt in FY26 to 3mt by FY29. Hot metal cost is expected to reduce from ~USD 1,752/t in FY26 to ~USD 1,550-1,600/t by FY29. The company targets to maintain leverage (net debt/EBITDA) below ~1.5x. Value-added products (VAP) market share is targeted to increase from 71% to 90%. * Key strategic strengths: Captive coal and bauxite security, integrated refinery with efficient smelter operations, higher value-added product mix, and strong logistics advantage from eastern India footprint\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:24 Ratings update CLSA on NTPC O-P, TP Rs 459 FY26 rec. PAT (consolidated) grew 18% despite a decline in its generation while its peer JSW was in losses and Adani Power’s recurring PBT was down 4% FY26 Consolidated PAT was up 18% YoY driven by regulated equity (RegEq) growth of 11% YoY (parent: up 4% YoY), operational efficiency with a 17bp YoY rise in coal PAF and a supportive FY25-29 regulatory regime for energy security Key was its US$31bn Capex plan over FY27-29 (c.2x) led by under construction of 19GW in regulated and 15GW of non-fossil (NFE) projects for an installed 89GW, plus its entry into BESS. It now has 59% of its 60GW NFE vision operating or under construction, solidifying its transition path Expect PAT growth to drive up its ROE 130bps over FY26-29CL. Jefferies on NTPC Buy TP Rs 470 NTPC did a one-time remeasurement of deferred taxes in March Qtr, hence YoY numbers are not comparable. FY26 PAT was 14% above estimates led by 8.1 GW capacity addition vs 7.1 GW estimate Raise FY27E-28E EPS by 6-8% to factor the beat. Management retained 9.6 GW FY27E addition guidance but lowered FY28E from 10.6 GW to 10 GW Lower FY27E-28E addition to 8.1-10.2 GW from 9.1-12.1 GW. Capacity ramp-up is a key re-rating driver ahead. Bernstein On NTPC Recommendation Outperform; Target ₹430 Execution in line with our expectation One of the few reasonably valued utilities left Renewables - Big target for FY27 but grid could be a limitation Concerns is that NTPC might be ceding ground to private players and is going slow on new thermal award JPM on LTM Downgrade to N, TP cut to Rs 4500 from Rs 5100 LTM announced that it has issued an offer to acquire Randstad’s technology and consulting services business in Europe and Australia. Revenues of these entities (€469m) have declined sharply in the past two years while estimate business operates at much lower 4-5% Ebitda margins, given its onshore-heavy nature, which should be materially margin-dilutive. LTM has also announced concomitant contracts to take over and build a GCC for Randstad in India and a reverse contract to Randstad to support LTM’s subcon needs While, across three contracts, management doesn’t see any EPS dilution, estimate acquisition alone could drive 2% EPS dilution due to amortization costs and lower interest income. Moreover, don’t see obvious horizontal service line or vertical synergies, given its focus on digital engineering and cybersecurity rather than core IT Services, which LTM focuses on. Cross-sell opportunities as they exist should be limited by different buying centers for engineering and IT services Acquisition price appears to be modest at €160m on a EV/Sales basis (0.34x), but not on implied profit multiples (8x EBITDA, 13-15x EBIT), given global/EU peer multiples. More than price paid, see this acquisition as a sign that organic growth opportunities are drying up and management is being forced to evaluate unusual acquisitions to bulk up rather than thoughtfully add capabilities. Fear management distraction, due to closure of the acquisition by 3Q27 and ekeing out of synergies after that, could weigh on execution. Moderate organic revenues/EPS by 1-2%, cut target PE multiple from 21x to 19x HSBC On LTIMindtree Recommendation Buy; Target ₹5250 Management expects limited margin impact Europe business scale-up and stronger presence in Australia banking aiding medium-term growth Acquisition aligned with LTIM’s five-year strategy CLSA On Sterlite Tech Recommendation Outperform; Target ₹655, Earlier Target ₹405 $1 billion order from US hyperscaler Win for STL’s AI DC optical products; offers 49% EBITDA CAGR Multi-year datacentre boom in North America and India Significant increases to forecast growth\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:23 Stock market Crude oil futures fall on hopes of US-Iran deal Crude oil futures fall on hopes of US-Iran deal Crude oil futures dip amid cautious market response to US-Iran deal negotiations, signaling potential impact on global oil supply.\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:22 Cement stocks in focus Kotak Inst Eqt on Ramco Cements Sell, TP Rs 690 QFY26 EBITDA missed estimates on lower volumes and margins Co’s next phase of expansion to 31 mtpa should be in place by end of March 2027, largely via debottlenecking and brownfield expansions. However, capex of Rs10 bn in FY2026 substantially undershot company guidance of Rs12 bn at start of year. Capex guidance of Rs8 bn for FY2027 suggests cautious approach to further expansion Expect co to focus on debt reduction in interim amid sustained competitive intensity Exposure to regional dynamics makes earnings region-dependent and more volatile to peers. Jefferies on Ramco Cements Hold, TP Rs 920 Q4 EBITDA at Rs3.7bn (+16% YoY) missed ests on weak vols/ unit EBITDA. Vols grew +4% YoY vs est of +7%; FY26/FY25 vols have been flattish YoY, indicating sustained share losses following UTCEM/ACEM growing foothold in South. Co has guided for Rs500+/T cost inflation related to war, with some price hike (insufficient) taken in April. In past 2 yrs, Co has monetised non-core assets/lowered Capex to contain leverage. Nomura on Dalmia Buy, TP Rs 2500 Dalmia acquires JAL cement assets; positive surprise versus expectations Strategically compelling; materially strengthens Central India footprint and panIndia ambitions Economics appear attractive, though execution details remain key STK currently trading at 10.9x one-year-forward EV/EBITDA HSBC on Dalmia Buy, TP Rs 2490 Dalmia acquires Jaiprakash Associates’ cement assets at USD68/t, well below replacement cost of USD100/t Acquisition addresses key investor concerns around growth and expensive M&A Dalmia’s valuation (10.3x EV/EBITDA) and regional exposure (South, East) are key positives CLSA on Dalmia O-P, TP Rs 2240 Announced acquisition of a 5.2mt cement asset from Adani Group in central India for a consideration of ~US$70/T Find deal valuations attractive compared to cost of setting up organic capacity and recent deals in sector This provides Dalmia with immediate growth and geographical diversification Do not see any meaningful medium-term disruption because of this deal, given asset was defunct so far; however, immediate increase in supply could disturb demand-supply balance in near term. CITI on Dalmia Buy, TP Rs 2450 DBL Acquires JPA’s Central India Assets for ~$60/t This acquisition helps: DBL’s expansion targets and India diversification. Further, any progress on their goals – maximizing ROCE from all assets, improving utilization, price and product premiumization focus, continued cost reduction could yield favorable returns. EV/t at $60 is inexpensive Concerns around MF units have resurfaced, which could keep stock range bound pending clarity. Jefferies on Dalmia Buy, TP Rs 2445 Dalmia has signed an agreement to acquire 5.2MTPA/3.3MTPA Cement/ Clinker assets from Jaypee/Adani at an implied EV/T of ~USD70 Deal revives Dec-22 agreement & is likely to increase competition in Central region While assets are old & require refurbishment, the M&A provides Dalmia entry into a new region. Mgmt expects faster ramp-up aided by prior exposure; Adani’s decision to divest, rather than house assets in Ambuja, appears balance-sheet driven.\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:20 Stock market Markets open in green Sensex opens up 800 pts, Nifty above 23,900 on Iran-US peace deal hopes; Brent crude slips 2.5%, WTI crashes 6%\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:18 Stock in focus: Colgate HSBC on Colgate Hold, TP Rs 2150 Q4FY26 sales were up 9% y-o-y (2yr CAGR: 3.5%), a 4% beat; topline split equally between volume and value Colgate saw positive impact on premium portfolio, and premiumization remains the key long-term driver Lift FY27e EBITDA by 1%, don’t see growth trajectory changing Nomura on Colgate Upgrade to Buy, TP Rs 2500 Core returning to normal levels; doubling down on premiumization to aid growth/margins See Colgate’s core portfolio returning back to normative levels vs below-normal levels seen in FY26 CLGT is also doubling down on premiumization, with premium saliency increasing by 35% over the past two years Expect revenue growth momentum to improve and return to near-double-digits in FY27F vs flat in FY26 This should be led by an improvement in volume growth which witnessed a revival in 4Q to 4.5% y-y after seeing four quarters of declines Expect favorable base to be supportive and drive mid-single-digit volume growth Also expect the return of pricing growth back to mid-single-digit after low-single-digit growth in FY26, & don’t expect any volume backlash Jefferies on Colgate Buy, TP Rs 2600 While core product has sticky customer behaviour, revenue growth is more variable, with Colgate’s FY26 quarterly ranging from -6% to +9% in 4Q Presentation focused heavily on oral care, but little beyond - think parent could take cues from Indian franchises like Marico & Tata Consumer Favourable base in FY27 should propel EPS growth to D/D, a first after a three-year hiatus, which should bring some investor interest back to name CITI on Colgate Sell. TP Rs 2050 4Q performance (~9% revenue growth, with a balanced mix of volume and pricing) and management commentary indicate a gradual recovery in growth, supported by improving category trends (post GST-led affordability benefits), a pickup in urban demand and a favourable base That said, volume recovery is likely to remain steady rather than sharp Co continues to rely on premiumisation as key growth lever, with premium mix (Colgate Total, Visible White, therapeutics) up 35% over the past two years, supported by elevated media investments and favourable e-commerce mix. However, margin outlook suggests increasing pressure, driven by higher advertising intensity, GST-related headwinds (160bps impact from the inverted duty structure) and sustained competitive intensity. Kotak Inst Eqt on Colgate Reduce, TP Rs 2025 CLGT reported 9% yoy growth in revenues (KIE: 5%), ahead of peers (high single digits/low single digits for Dabur/HUVR) Print was driven by a balanced volume and pricing growth. EBITDA margin contracted 210 bps yoy to 31.9% (KIE: 32.8%) on account of GM decline and inverted duty structure impact (~160 bps). While CLGT management expects growth momentum to sustain, it has called out EBITDA margin pressure in near term, given lack of GM tailwinds, step-up in A&P spends & continued impact of inverted duty structure.\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:17 Pharma stocks in focus MS on Torrent Pharma EW. TP Rs 4580 F4Q26 EBITDA was in line with MSe, marking first quarter of JB Pharma consolidation. Ex-JB, revenue and EBITDA increased 16% YoY, led by India and sema. Torrent’s India base business grew 15%, above IPM growth; semaglutide launch gained 38% generic market share. Torrent expects F27 semaglutide sales of Rs2-2.5bn, making it its biggest product launch opportunity yet JB Pharma merger is nearing final NCLT approval; cost synergies of Rs4-4.5bn remain on track over the next three years. Jefferies on Torrent Pharma Buy, TP Rs 5350 Mar-Q included 2 months of JB Pharma integration, on alike for like basis, its results were in-line with est. India continued its growth momentum (15% YoY) and Torrent expects FY27 to be a similar or better year. JB Pharma integration is progressing well and Torrent is on track to achieve first year of cost synergy benefits. Goldman Sachs On Max Healthcare Maintain Buy, Target price cut to ₹1,250 from ₹1,300 Q4 EBITDA grows 16% YoY with margins ahead of estimates at ~27% Growth impacted by CGHS changes and delayed bed commissioning Brokerage expects topline and EBITDA CAGR of 19% and 22% over FY26-29 FY27-29 EBITDA estimates cut by up to 6% Brownfield expansion monetisation expected in FY27 Citi On Fortis Health Recommendation Buy; Target ₹1120 Q4: Strong Quarter With Steady Growth in Hospitals Despite bed expansion, margins remained resilient Healthy momentum in hospitals business Sustained traction in diagnostics\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:16 Rating update: Aurobindo pharma CLSA on Aurobindo Downgrade to hold, TP raised Rs 1490 from Rs1370 Reported an in-line quarter driven by strong revenue growth in Europe; US declined YoY. Margins (in line) were lower YoY owing to higher opex. It expects US$2bn revenue from the US in two years (vs. US$1.6bn in FY26), double-digit growth in Europe in FY27, and 21% consolidated margin in FY27 While it expects new launches, portfolio expansion and acquisitions to lead overall growth, expect the full impact of these initiatives only from FY28 BoFA Sec on Aurobindo Buy, TP Rs 1700 While ARBP’s US sales were 8% lower QoQ (vs BofAe flattish) on soft seasonality, company reported an inline EBITDA of Rs17.5Bn (20% margin). This was supported by the 160bps QoQ gross margin expansion largely on Pen-G plant ramp-up. While $2Bn US revenue run-rate (vs $1.6Bn in FY26) depends on Lannett deal closure (2QFY27), 21% margin guidance is 50-100bps higher than street/BofA estimates. GS on Aurobindo Buy, TP Rs 1550 4Q broadly in line with estimates (+2% vs. GSe), with sales/EBITDA growing by +6%/+1% yoy driven by strong growth in Europe (+29% yoy) and growth markets (+25% yoy) partially offset by a slower US which is still seeing impacts of the gRevlimid ramp-down (-13% yoy). EBITDA margin came in steady at 20.3% (-16bps vs. GSe), as higher GMs (+216bps yoy) were offset by higher employee costs Co aspires to achieve high single digit topline growth (ex-gRevlimid) while guiding to maintain margins at 21%+ mark in FY27 Nuvama on Aurobindo Buy, TP Rs 1680 Reported in-line revenue/EBITDA, but a 5% miss on PAT Gross margin was better than estimate, while EBTDA margin was broadly in-line Weak US growth was offset by strong growth in Europe and growth markets Remain optimistic on Aurobindo’s growth/margin prospects as the company is nearing an inflection point of operating leverage in Pen-G and TheraNym CMO unit. Aurobindo is also set to benefit from growth in Europe and Lannett closure DAM Cap on Aurobindo Buy, TP Rs 1767 Co’s steady operating performance over multiple qtrs. reinforces view that it is best placed to any leverage generic industry tailwinds. Aurobindo is stepping on gas with growing investments in biosimilars, peptides, injectables, etc. Innovative biologics CMO for MSD adds another medium-term growth engine. Recent Lannett acquisition seems to be another value accretive M&A Anticipate meaningful impact of recent big-ticket investments (PenG, China, granulation, injectables) to be visible in coming quarters along with capex intensity easing.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:15 Rating Agencies on Sun Pharma Kotak Securities On Sun Pharma Target ₹1960 Recommendation Add Growth guidance cools even as levers hold firm Misses the mark in Q4FY26; FY27E topline guidance is bit of a dampener too Despite the Q4 dip, specialty progress on track Expect SUN to report a robust ~16% EPS CAGR over FY26-29 CLSA On Sun Pharma Recommendation Outperform; Target ₹2020, Earlier Target ₹1920 Moderate guidance Innovative drugs, India, other regions continue to offset tepid US generic Moderate overall guidance amid uncertainty Goldman Sachs On Sun Pharma Not Rated 4Q sales and EBITDA grow 13% and 6% YoY respectively India and emerging markets continue to drive growth Global Innovative Medicines sales rise 20% YoY to $354 mn EBITDA margin at ~27% lower than estimates due to higher operating costs Brokerage tweaks FY27-29 EPS estimates by up to 3% Morgan Stanley On Sun Pharma EBITDA miss on higher spend Delivered strong growth in India and global innovative medicines in Q4 Ilumya and new launches led growth Higher R&D and operating costs pressured margins Long-term growth remains supported by specialty expansion and its dominant India franchise\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:14 Stock in focus: Divis Labs Jefferies on Divis Labs Buy, TP Rs 7950 Q4 largely in line, with strong 21% yoy growth from Custom Synthesis (CS) and nutraceuticals (+17% YoY); however, generics reported a 7% yoy sales decline despite forex benefit Divi’s guided for continued double-digit growth (in INR) in coming years & has plans to be a large peptide manufacturer going forward Timelines for key CS projects remain unclear due to regulatory approvals Kotak Inst Eqt on Divis Labs Sell, TP Rs 5850 Delivered a 4% operating miss in 4QFY26, largely on account of a tad lower CSM growth amid muted, albeit in-line, generic API sales. Within CSM, Divi’s ability to swiftly compensate for potentially lower Entresto sales in EU with commercial molecules will be a monitorable. On a positive note, Divi’s client engagement stays high with multiple projects, including peptides, at various stages of development. After having significantly upped ante on capex in FY2026 (Rs25.2 bn versus Rs14.4 bn in FY2025 and Rs10 bn in FY2024), it is guiding for capex intensity to stay elevated in FY2027E as well. However, at 49X FY2028E P/E, valuations already bake in anticipated CSM uptick. Morgan Stanley On Divis Lab Recommendation Overweight; Target ₹7904 Custom Synthesis to drive next leg of growth Aims to be one of the largest players in peptides globally Currently has the largest SPPS scale in India Capex uptrend should lead to a revenue pickup in H2FY27 Citi On Divis Lab Recommendation Buy; Target ₹9140 Transient Q4 Softness; Capex Ramp Up and Pipeline Strengthen Growth Outlook Management reiterated double-digit revenue growth for FY27 Continue to view Divi’s as top pick in India pharma Strong pipeline visibility and step-up in capex position the company well for accelerating near- to medium-term growth\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:14 Stock in focus: Eicher Motors CLSA on Eicher Motors O-P, TP Rs 7651 Consolidated Ebitda margin was in line at 24.9% (down 57bps QoQ), with Royal Enfield (RE) facing c.90bps of commodity inflation in 4Q and a further 3.5% in 1QFY27 RE implemented price hikes of c.70bps in Jan and 170bps in Apr to partly offset the impact. With cost optimisation and operating leverage benefits, RE remains confident in offsetting the bulk of the impact. With utilisation nearing 90%, RE is expanding capacity via brownfield and greenfield expansion Expect RE to outperform industry volume growth, driven by strong 350cc+ demand, & build in a 12% volume Cagr in FY26-28. On VECV, turn cautiously optimistic on back of tough macroeconomic conditions amid ongoing Middle East crisis GS on Eicher Motors Buy TP Rs 8400 from Rs8000 Reported an in-line 4Q. Revenue/EBITDA were +2%/+1% vs GSe Gross margins were flat qoq with -90bps of commodity headwind offset by +70bps of price hike in Jan and +20bps of mix + value engineering. Management highlighted production issues from labor & raw material/gas shortage, impacting May volumes, which are now resolved. Current Inventory levels are thin at 7-8 days with dealer inventory running even lower. 175bps of price hike in April can offset 50% of ~300-350bps commodity impact with more offsets possible above this. Management indicated that inquiries in May continue to be strong at +23% yoy HSBC on Eicher Motors Buy, TP Rs 8200 Management expects demand momentum to persist in export and domestic markets; inflation remains a near-term headwind RE announced a greenfield expansion beyond the 2m units of annual capacity added by ongoing Cheyyar’s brownfield project Stronger growth trajectory than industry justifies premium valuation Morgan Stanley On Eicher Motors Recommendation Equal-weight; Target ₹7763 Q4 – inline with estimates Eicher expects growth momentum to continue in FY27 On exports, the company remained cautiously optimistic Capacity enhancement - debottlenecking efforts aim to improve capacity to 1.6 million units from 1.4 million CITI on Eicher Motors Buy, TP Rs 8350 4Q slightly above estimates on better ASP and gross margin. Mgmt outlook is positive for mid-segment bikes in India (Royal Enfield dominates the segment). Healthy demand trends are manifested in strong growth in enquiry, even as Apr deliveries were impacted by manpower unavailability and LPG supply disruption. Significant capacity addition is planned for RE- 1) current capacity is 1.46mn units/year, 2) post brownfield expansion capacity will be 2mn units by 2QFY28, 3) a greenfield facility is planned for Rs25bn VECV demand trends are steady & new financing JV with Volvo should augment volumes That said, cost pressures are rising, and RE price hikes undertaken thus far cover only 50% of impact\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:12 Stock market Asian shares edge up, oil prices fall after Trump says peace talks on Iran war proceeding Asian shares mostly rose Monday and oil prices plunged after US President Donald Trump said talks on ending the war with Iran are progressing. Japan’s benchmark Nikkei 225 surged 3.1 per cent in morning trading to 65,321.56. Australia’s S&P/ASX 200 added 0.4 per cent to 8,692.70. The Shanghai Composite edged up 0.4 per cent to 4,127.53. Trading was closed in South Korea and Hong Kong for holidays marking Buddha’s birthday. Trading will be closed in the US on Monday for Memorial Day. ​Read the full story here​\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:12 Stock in focus: Hindalco CITI on Hindalco Neutral, TP Rs 1170 At Rs101.8bn (6% ahead), 4Q consol EBITDA rose 6% yoy/28% qoq QoQ increase is attributed to better performance across divisions. India upstream: Rs54.5bn vs. Rs48.3bn in 3Q; India downstream: Rs2.6bn vs. Rs2.3bn; Copper: Rs9bn vs. Rs6bn; Novelis: Rs42bn vs. Rs31bn. India upstream EBITDA/t was $1,756 vs. $1,572 in 3Q and should continue to rally (spot $3,650), offset partly by 5% higher costs Est debt should peak at $8.2bn in FY27 & fall thereafter ($6.8bn as of Mar26); estimate net D/EBITDA at 1.6x vs. 1.8x in Mar26 Global team is structurally bullish aluminium; CY27 estimate is $3,800 Maintain Neutral, given LME upside from spot may not be significant Potential upsides such as (1) Bay Minette profitability, (2) higher India smelting capacity, and (3) captive coal are back-ended. Kotak Inst Eqt on Hindalco Reduce, TP Rs 1100 from Rs1000 4QFY26 consolidated EBITDA beat estimates across both copper and aluminum divisions. Novelis’ reported EBITDA remains impacted by Oswego, which should restart hot mill ops in early June 2026—with normalization likely in 2HFY27E. Margins should further increase in the aluminum division on elevated LME in 1QFY27E, only partially offset by higher input costs. Coal mine cost benefit is likely to accrue only from FY2028. Commodity price tailwind should offset project execution risks and back-ended growth over FY2027-29E. HSBC on Hindalco Buy, TP Rs 1430 India aluminum EBITDA +13% q-o-q; earnings across businesses should further improve FY26 net debt increase partially driven by one-time factors; debt should decline materially from FY27 year-end Increase EBITDA estimates by 2-6% CLSA On Hindalco Recommendation Outperform; Target ₹1240, Earlier Target ₹1035 Strong tailwinds; Strong beat in India Guidance: High cost and hedging to partly offset strong LME Novelis drives high leverage\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:09 Commodities WTI crashes over 6%, Brent falls over 2.5% Crude oil futures traded lower on Monday morning after some reports indicated that the proposed deal between the US and Iran to end the war could lead to the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. At 9.06 am on Monday, August Brent oil futures were at $97.38, down by 2.62 per cent, and July crude oil futures on WTI (West Texas Intermediate) were at $90.47, down by 6.34 per cent. June crude oil futures were trading at ₹8668 on Multi Commodity Exchange (MCX) during the initial hour of trading on Monday against the previous close of ₹9168, down by 5.45 per cent, and July futures were trading at ₹8436 against the previous close of ₹8893, down by 5.14 per cent.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:07 Forex Rupee opens up 0.3% at 95.34 per US dollar Previous close: 95.69\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:06 Global bits Argentina — Gradually removing taxes on selected industrial exports to boost manufacturing competitiveness. Brazil — Development bank BNDES reduced stakes in Petrobras and Axia Energia amid portfolio restructuring. Mexico — Economy contracted in Q1, though the slowdown was milder than the worst forecasts. United States — Dow Jones hit a fresh intraday record high as easing Middle East tensions improved investor sentiment. India — RBI signaled it will maintain forex market stability without aggressive rate hikes, prioritizing inflation control. China — Officials denied forcing tech firms to reject foreign investment amid global scrutiny. Indonesia — Coal export policy changes created uncertainty for miners and commodity traders, Q1 current account deficit widened to 1.09% of GDP. South Korea — Korea Post increased investments in AI data centers and real estate to improve returns. Singapore — Q1 economic growth accelerated to 6%, though external risks remain elevated. Japan — Core inflation eased to a four-year low, though energy-related price pressures may rebound. Bangladesh — Central bank launched a $4.9 billion stimulus package to support slowing economic growth. United Kingdom — Retail sales recorded the sharpest decline in nearly a year as consumers cut fuel spending, Rising living costs continue to pressure households and challenge the government politically. Spain — New migrant job-matching initiatives aim to address labor shortages and regularize workers. Source: Reuters\n\nMay 25, 2026 09:05 Stock market Sensex jumps 800 pts in pre-open Sensex jumps 800 pts, Nifty up 250 pts in pre-open on Iran-US peace deal hopes; Nasdaq futures up 1.2%, Nikkei jumps 3%\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 08:45 Today’s Stock Pick, May 25, 2026: Saregama India Today’s Stock Recommendation: May 25, 2026 Discover today's stock recommendation: Saregama India, with a positive outlook following a recent breakout. Learn more in our latest episode.\n\nMay 25, 2026 08:42 Forex Rupee to extend rally on US-Iran deal hopes, RBI Governor's remarks aid sentiment The Indian rupee is set to build on its two-session rally on Monday as hopes of a deal to end the Iran war boosted risk appetite, ‌while the central bank governor’s remarks on the currency are expected to aid sentiment as well. Reserve Bank of ⁠India Governor Sanjay Malhotra told the Mint newspaper that the central bank will do “whatever is required” to ensure orderly movements in the foreign exchange market ‌and that following its recent fall, the rupee appears undervalued. Malhotra’s remarks follow two consecutive days of firm central ‌bank intervention, per traders, in the foreign exchange market, which ‌helped ⁠the rupee recover from its record low of near ⁠97 per dollar hit on Wednesday last week. On Monday, the rupee is expected to open around 95.50 per dollar, up from its close around 95.69 on Friday. The currency is ‌down 6% over 2026 is so far. Traders expect the currency to hold a slightly positive bias through the session as Brent crude oil prices retreated below $100 per barrel for ‌the first time in over two weeks on optimism that the U.S. and Iran are moving closer to a peace deal. (Reuters)\n\nMay 25, 2026 08:40 Stock market Bond investors tap soaring swap rates to juice returns Bond investors tap soaring swap rates to juice returns Multi-year high swap rates are driving some Indian debt fund managers into trades aimed at boosting fixed-income returns.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 08:33 Central Bank of India Ltd (CENTRALBK)- Offer for Sale Issue Period:- 22- May-26 to 25- May-26 For Non- Retail ( QIB +HNI ) open & close date :- 22- May-26 For Retail open & close date – 25- May-26 (Today) Floor Price: RS. “31.00” Closing Price on date of announcement: Rs. 33.92\\u0009 Current Market Price: Rs. 31.22 Base Issue size: 36.21 Crs Shares – 4.00% of O/S Capital Green Shoe Issue size: 36.21 Crs Shares – 4.00% of O/S Capital Total Issue Size: 72.41 Crs equity shares (RS. 2,241.75 Cr) – 8.00% of O/s Capital Non-Retail Portion (QIB + HNI) - 90% of Offer Size - Bidding on :- 22- May-26 Total Issue Size: 65.17 Crs shares (Rs. 2,020.27 Cr) Non- Retail Clearing Price: Rs 31.00. Retail Portion - 10% of Offer Size - Bidding on 25- May-26 (Today) Total Issue Size: 7.24 Crs equity shares (Rs. 224.47 Cr) Note : Upto Rs 2 lacs bids are classified as Retail and above non retail ( QIB + HNI ) Note : Based on clearing price discovered for Non retail bids, the minimum price to bid for Retail portion will be Rs. 31.00\n\nMay 25, 2026 08:25 Fuel Price Hike: Petrol, diesel prices raised by ₹2.61-2.71; hikes top ₹7.5/litre within two weeks Petrol and diesel prices were raised by ₹2.61-2.71 per litre on Monday, marking the fourth increase in less than two weeks as state-owned fuel retailers continued to pass on rising international oil prices to consumers. With the latest revision, cumulative increases in petrol and diesel prices have nearly touched Rs 7.5 per litre since fuel price revisions resumed on May 15 after a prolonged freeze, stoking concerns over inflationary pressures and higher transportation costs across the economy. The latest revision pushed petrol prices higher by ₹2.61 per litre and diesel by ₹2.71, according to industry sources. Read the full story here\n\nMay 25, 2026 08:23 Gold silver Gold rises nearly 1% on easing oil as investors assess US-Iran deal prospects Gold rises on weaker dollar, easing oil as investors assess US-Iran deal prospects Gold prices rose more ​than 1% on Monday, supported by a weaker ⁠dollar and easing oil prices, as investors weighed prospects of a breakthrough in U.S.-Iran peace negotiations.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 08:14 Stock market Global Markets | Stocks rise sharply, oil and dollar slip on Iran peace hopes Stocks surged on Monday while the U.S. dollar and oil prices ‌slid as the prospect of a deal to end the Iran war buoyed risk appetite although a lack of clarity over when the Strait of Hormuz would open kept enthusiasm in ⁠check. The nearly three-month-long conflict in the Middle East has driven energy prices sharply higher and reshaped the global rates outlook, as inflation concerns intensify following Tehran’s effective shutdown of the key strait through which a significant share of the world’s energy flows. U.S. ‌President Donald Trump said on Sunday he had told his representatives not to rush into any deal with Iran, as his administration played down hopes of an imminent breakthrough. On Monday, oil prices hit two-week lows to kickstart the week with Brent crude futures down over 4% to $98.83 ‌a barrel, while U.S. West Texas Intermediate was at $92.03 a barrel, also down over 4%. The euro was up 0.33% at $1.1646, while the Japanese yen firmed to 158.85 per U.S. dollar as the safe-haven dollar gave up some of its recent gains. Nasdaq futures were 1.2% higher and S&P ⁠futures were up 0.7%. Japan’s Nikkei jumped 3% to roar past the 65,000 level for the first time. MSCI’s broadest index of Asia-Pacific shares outside Japan rose 1%. (Reuters)\n\nMay 25, 2026 08:12 Stock market Stock Markets on Friday Stock markets recovered on Friday with the benchmark Sensex closing higher by nearly 232 points following buying in blue-chip bank shares amid positive global trends. The 30-share BSE Sensex climbed 231.99 points, or 0.31 per cent, to settle at 75,415.35. During the day, it surged 627.61 points, or 0.83 per cent, to 75,810.97. The 50-share NSE Nifty edged higher by 64.60 points or 0.27 per cent to end at 23,719.30.\n\nMay 25, 2026 08:09 Commodities Crude Oil Drops as US Touts Progress on Deal Toward Reopening Strait Oil dropped as the US and Iran edged toward a deal, although President Donald Trump said that Washington’s blockade of the Strait of Hormuz would remain until an agreement was completed. Global crude benchmark Brent fell as much as 5.7% to $97.64 a barrel, while West Texas Intermediate was below $92. Trump said in social-media posts he wouldn’t “rush” into a deal, which “isn’t even fully negotiated yet.” Any final approval may take several days, according to senior US officials.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 08:02 Japan's Nikkei jumps past 65,000 mark for first time on Iran talks optimism Japan’s Nikkei share average surged past the 65,000 level for the first time on ‌Monday, as optimism for a deal to end the war in Iran boosted demand ⁠for risk assets. The benchmark Nikkei 225 Index rose 3.12% to 65,316.79 and touched an all-time intraday record of 65,408.57. The broader Topix ‌climbed 1.39% to 3,946.67. Japan’s dependence on imported energy has made its economy vulnerable to ‌a surge in oil prices caused by the ‌nearly three-month ⁠conflict between the United States, Israel ⁠and Iran. U.S. President Donald Trump said over the weekend that Washington and Iran had “largely negotiated” a memorandum of understanding on a peace deal that would reopen ‌the Strait of Hormuz shipping lane for petroleum. He later said he had told his representatives not to rush into any deal. (Reuters)\n\nMay 25, 2026 07:39 Stock market Nifty may open with 200-point gain as crude slips sharply Nifty may open with 200-point gain as crude slips sharply Domestic markets are likely to open strongly higher on Monday as crude oil prices fell sharply on hopeful that Iran and US sign deal is likely to happen soon. Gift Nifty at 23,985 signals that Nifty may open with gains of 200 points. Asian stocks opened sharply higher in early deal on Monday.\n\nMay 25, 2026 07:29 Forex US-Iran deal optimism offers rupee, bonds a breather The Indian rupee and government bonds are likely to kick off the week on firmer footing as expectations rise that a breakthrough might be imminent in the three-month-old U.S.-Iran war after U.S. President Donald Trump said the Iran deal is “largely negotiated”. The rupee fell ‌to a record low of 96.96 per dollar last week before being shored up by firm central bank intervention, which helped it close stronger at 95.69 on ⁠Friday. “RBI’s aggressive intervention may keep upside in USD/INR capped for a few sessions if crude remains below $110 per barrel,” FX advisory firm IFA Global said in a note. Traders expect the currency to hover between 95 and ‌96 this week, with headlines surrounding the Iran war likely to dictate directional momentum. Read more here\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 07:20 EARNINGS (net income adj. ests. in INR where available): * Aditya Birla Fashion & Retai (ABFRL IN) 4Q 2.39b loss (10 analysts) * Amara Raja Energy & Mobility L (ARENM IN) 4Q 1.82b (10) * Blue Jet Healthcare Ltd. (BLUEJET IN) 4Q 533m (3) * Campus Activewear Ltd. (CAMPUS IN) 4Q 425m (6) * Container Corp. Of India (CCRI IN) 4Q 3.37b (8) * FIEM Industries Ltd. (FIEM IN) 4Q 664m (4) * HeidelbergCement India Ltd. (HEIM IN) 4Q 371.6m (5) * Hitachi Energy India Ltd. (POWERIND IN) 4Q 3.12b (8) * IFB Industries Ltd. (IFBI IN) 4Q 213m (3) * NBCC India Ltd. (NBCC IN) 4Q * Poly Medicure Ltd. (PLM IN) 4Q 821m (3) * Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd. (RVNL IN) 4Q * Sundaram Finance Ltd. (SUF IN) 4Q 5.23b (5) * Suzlon Energy Ltd. (SUEL IN) 4Q 7.37b (7) * Techno Electric & Engineering (TECHNOE IN) 4Q\n\nMay 25, 2026 07:20 Stock market EQUITY PREVIEW: * Century Ply (CPBI): 4Q Net Income 774.7M Rupees Vs. 711.2M Rupees Y/y * Colgate-Palmolive (CLGT): 4Q Net Income -0.6% Y/y to INR3.53b, Misses Estimates * Divi’s Labs (DIVI): 4Q Net Income 7.51B Rupees Vs. 6.62B Rupees Y/y * Eicher Motors (EIM): 4Q Net Income +12% Y/y to INR15.2b, Beats Estimates (1) * Hindalco Industries (HNDL): 4Q Consolidated Net Misses Estimates (2) * ICICI Bank (ICICIBC): Reappoints CEO Sandeep Bakhshi for Another Two Years * Indraprastha Gas (IGL): Raises CNG Prices by 1% Across Markets * Indian Railway Finance Corp.(IRFC): Signs Loan Deal With Consortium of Banks to Raise $1.1B ECB * JK Cement (JKCE): 4Q Net Income -16% Y/y to INR3.45b, Beats Estimates * Jubilant Pharmova (JUBLPHAR): 4Q Net Income -23& Y/y to 1.19B Rupees (1) * Lupin (LPC): Gets China Approval for Influenza Treatment * Maruti Suzuki (MSIL): Recall 26 Super Carry vehicles made between Feb. 17-Feb. 21, 2026 * NTPC (NTPC): 4Q Net Income +51% Y/y to INR87.5b, Beats Estimates * NTPC Green (NTPCGREE): Approves fundraising up to INR50b; approves incorporation of jv with CTRLS Datacenters * Ramco Cements (TRCL): 4Q Net Income INR1.46b vs. 309.9m, Beats Estimates * Sterlite Technologies (SOTL): Gets $1.11 Billion Three-Year Supply Contract * Sun Pharmaceutical (SUNP): Sun Pharma 4Q Net Income +26% Y/y to INR27.1b, Misses Estimates (1) * Torrent Pharma (TRP): 4Q Net Income -22% Y/y to INR3.89b, Misses Estimates * Torrent Pharma approves fund raise via equity, convertible bonds\n\nMay 25, 2026 07:13 Stock market Buzzing stocks: Anupam Rasayan, Bliss GVS, Oil India, NBCC, RVNL, Lupin, Aurobindo Pharma, Goodluck, PNC Infra, Sterlite Tech, CBI and others Buzzing stocks today: Anupam Rasayan, Bliss GVS, Oil India, NBCC, RVNL, Lupin, Aurobindo Pharma, Goodluck, PNC Infra, Sterlite Tech, CBI and others Explore major stock developments involving Anupam Rasayan, Bliss GVS, Oil India, and more in this concise market overview.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 06:56 Retail participation reduced significantly in several popular stocks during Q4 FY26 ♦️Major Decline in Retail Holding: 🔻PB Finetech -6.4% 🔻Bajaj Consumer Care -5.4% 🔻Mastek -4.1% 🔻Anthem Biosciences -3.9% 🔻Suven Life Sciences -3.9% 🔻Aditya Infotech -3.7% 🔻BSE -3.3% 🔻MTAR Technologies -2.6% 🔻Zen Technologies -2.6% 🔻Bandhan Bank -2.6% 🔻Aarti Industries -2.6% 🔻Data Patterns -2.3% 🔻Premier Energies -2.2% 🔻Natco Pharma -2.2% 🔻Indusind Bank -2.1% 🔻SCI -1.9% 🔻Birlasoft -1.9% 🔻Salzer Electronics -1.9% 🔻GE Shipping -1.8% 🔻GE Power -1.8% 🔻ICICI Bank -1.8% 🔻Jindal Saw -1.7% 🔻GMR Airport -1.6% 🔻JK Tyre -1.6% 🔻Piramal Finance -1.6% 🔻Tata Elxsi -1.6% 🔻RBL Bank -1.6% 🔻Waaree Energies -1.6% 🔻GMDC -1.5% 🔻Tata Motors -1.4%\n\nMay 25, 2026 06:56 BIGGEST COMEBACK STOCKS OF THE YEAR 🚀📈 Top Performers - Sterlite Technologies: +522% - MTAR Technologies: +472% - Bajaj Consumer Care: +225% - Quality Power Electrical: +212% - Venus Remedies: +211% Strong Gainers - Ather Energy: +195% - GE Power: +193% - TD Power: +187% - Acutaas Chemicals: +183% - GE Vernova T&D: +173% Other Major Movers - MCX: +166% - Lumax Auto Technologies: +160% - Hindustan Copper: +148% - Sansera Engineering: +139% - HFCL: +137% Key Trend - Rally led by power, defence, EMS, railways, capital goods and manufacturing themes - Several stocks more than doubled from yearly lows.... In Railway Sector Govt Investment arround 12 Lacks Cr in next 5 years Investment... Visibility in the sector Check all Govt Railway stock it next Power\n\nMay 25, 2026 06:53 Quarterly results SPIC Q4 Consolidated Net Profit Rises 51.5% YoY to ₹29.49 Crore Southern Petrochemical Industries Corporation Ltd. (SPIC) reported a consolidated net profit of ₹29.49 crore for the quarter ended March 2026, registering a growth of 51.5% year-on-year compared with ₹19.47 crore in the corresponding quarter last year, aided by operational efficiencies and contribution from equity-accounted investees. Consolidated profit before tax rose 53.7% YoY to ₹45.98 crore from ₹29.91 crore in the year-ago period. Revenue from operations stood at ₹584.15 crore during the quarter compared with ₹754.37 crore in the corresponding period last year. Total income for the quarter was ₹595.73 crore, while profit from operations before share of profit from equity-accounted investees and tax stood at ₹41.82 crore. Standalone Performance On a standalone basis, the company reported a net profit of ₹26.15 crore for the March quarter compared with ₹13.09 crore in the corresponding period last year. Standalone profit before tax stood at ₹41.82 crore against ₹20.64 crore a year ago. Standalone revenue from operations stood at ₹584.15 crore compared with ₹754.37 crore in the same quarter last year. Full-Year Performance (FY26) For the full year ended March 2026, consolidated net profit increased 35.9% YoY to ₹211.48 crore compared with ₹155.62 crore in the previous year. Revenue from operations during the period stood at ₹2,955.97 crore. On a standalone basis, net profit for the full year rose to ₹186.16 crore from ₹130.84 crore in the previous year, while revenue from operations stood at ₹2,955.97 crore.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 06:52 WIPRO Limited Buyback Record Date Announced Buyback Price : 250 ₹ Today’s Closing Price : 203.11 Buyback Size ₹ : 15,000 Crore ₹ Buyback Size in Shares : 60,00,00,000 Shares Retail Quota : 9,00,00,000 Shares Record Date for Buyback : 05 June, 2026\n\nMay 25, 2026 06:51 Quarterly results Ramco Cements Q4 results: Net income 1.46 billion rupees vs. 309.9 million rupees y/y, estimate 1.06 billion rupees (Bloomberg Consensus) Revenue 26.06 billion rupees, +9% y/y, estimate 26.14 billion rupees Total costs 25.16 billion rupees, +6.2% y/y Other income 121.8 million rupees, -5.9% y/y Dividend per share 2.50 rupees\n\nMay 25, 2026 06:51 Stock market Some Global Markets will remain Closed on Monday (May 25, 2026) United States: The New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and Nasdaq are closed for Memorial Day. United Kingdom: * The London Stock Exchange (LSE) is closed for the Spring Bank Holiday. Hong Kong: * The Hong Kong Stock Exchange (HKEX) is closed for the Birthday of the Buddha.\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 06:45 Gold silver Gold rises on weaker dollar as investor weigh US-Iran peace deal prospects Gold prices rose more than 1% on Monday, supported by a weaker dollar and lower oil prices, as investors weighed prospects ‌of a breakthrough in U.S.-Iran peace negotiations. FUNDAMENTALS * Spot gold rose 1.4% to $4,570.88 ⁠per ounce by 0045 GMT. U.S. gold futures for June delivery gained 1.1% to $4,572.90. * The dollar fell, ‌making greenback-priced bullion more affordable for holders of other currencies. * U.S. President ‌Donald Trump said on Sunday he ‌had ⁠told his representatives not to rush into ⁠any deal with Iran, as his administration played down hopes of an imminent breakthrough in the three-month-old war that had been raised ‌a day earlier. (Reuters)\n\nMay 25, 2026 06:45 Petrol, diesel prices raised by ₹2.61-2.71; hikes top ₹7.5/litre within two weeks Petrol, diesel prices raised by ₹2.61-2.71; hikes top ₹7.5/litre within two weeks Petrol and diesel prices were raised by ₹2.61-2.71 per litre on Monday, marking the fourth increase in less than two weeks, as state-owned firms continued to pass on rising international prices to consumers.\n\nMay 25, 2026 06:37 Stock market Nifty & Bank Nifty இந்த வாரம் (25 May’26 to 29 May’26) என்ன ஆகும்? எங்கு செல்லும்?\n\n\n\nMay 25, 2026 06:36 Stock market Nifty and Bank Nifty Predictions for the week: May 25-29, by BL GURU\n\nMay 25, 2026 06:32 Stock market Stock to buy today: Saregama India (₹402.70) Stock to buy today: Saregama India (₹402.70) After the breakout, the scrip has been trading flat. However, it sustains well above ₹370, and the chart shows that the stock has formed a new higher base at ₹390 Published on May 25, 2026",
      "word_count": 14953,
      "original_language": "EN",
      "author": "Team Blks Badri Narayanan",
      "countries": [
        "IND"
      ],
      "industries": [
        {
          "name": "Equity Market Making & Liquidity Provision (Cash Equities)",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Equity Derivatives Trading (Options/Single-Stock & Index)",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        {
          "name": "Market Indices Performance",
          "code": "MD01",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "FX & Commodity Pricing",
          "code": "MD05",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Geopolitical Risk",
          "code": "RK01",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "company_mentions": [],
      "article_type": "News analysis",
      "is_press_release": true,
      "is_opinion": false,
      "is_breaking": true,
      "iptc_codes": [
        "20001141",
        "20000173",
        "20000391",
        "20000386"
      ],
      "iab_categories": [
        "414",
        "86",
        "81",
        "82"
      ],
      "naics_codes": [
        "523",
        "523150"
      ],
      "sic_codes": [
        "6211",
        "6199"
      ],
      "entities": {
        "person": [
          "vinod nair",
          "badri narayanan",
          "karan shah",
          "sumit kumar",
          "paresh hede",
          "jateen trivedi",
          "donald trump",
          "sandeep bhushan",
          "aniket gupta",
          "hemant gupta",
          "rohan gupta",
          "purvangi gupta",
          "rajani",
          "leana",
          "sharon",
          "h shankar",
          "narendra modi",
          "sanjay malhotra",
          "akshay chinchalkar",
          "kumar mangalam birla",
          "aditya birla",
          "vikram subburaj",
          "us president trump",
          "trump",
          "sandeep bakhshi"
        ],
        "location": [
          "strait of hormuz",
          "mumbai high",
          "mumbai offshore basin",
          "maharashtra",
          "india",
          "pan-india",
          "bengaluru",
          "mumbai",
          "mangaluru",
          "lower parel",
          "brazil",
          "venezuela",
          "budigere",
          "angola",
          "nigeria",
          "mandur",
          "kandivali east",
          "ashok nagar",
          "us",
          "iran",
          "latin american",
          "uk",
          "nagapattinam",
          "dalian",
          "budigere road",
          "kandivali east cluster",
          "indias",
          "japan",
          "china",
          "london",
          "shanghai",
          "hong kong",
          "australia",
          "middle east",
          "europe",
          "north america",
          "ambuja",
          "south",
          "panindia",
          "east",
          "eu",
          "south korea",
          "mexico",
          "spain",
          "indonesia",
          "singapore",
          "bangladesh",
          "argentina",
          "united kingdom",
          "korea",
          "oswego",
          "united states",
          "u.s.",
          "tehran",
          "washington",
          "israel",
          "asia-pacific",
          "u",
          "s"
        ],
        "product": [
          "nifty",
          "elin electronics",
          "gold futures",
          "rupee",
          "nest",
          "hormuz",
          "petrol",
          "diesel",
          "crude",
          "marine vehicles",
          "fy26",
          "wipro",
          "malaysian palm oil",
          "bajaj auto",
          "gold",
          "dr reddy",
          "hindalco",
          "vil",
          "bitcoin",
          "tron",
          "solana",
          "ethereum",
          "xrp",
          "bnb",
          "btc",
          "etf",
          "brent crude",
          "dollar",
          "financial services",
          "nse500",
          "mcx natural gas futures",
          "copper",
          "brent",
          "nikkei 225",
          "csi300",
          "nifty 50 futures",
          "nifty 50",
          "shanghai composite",
          "treps",
          "gold silver chennai",
          "us dollar",
          "greenshoe",
          "india pesticide",
          "silver",
          "s&p 500",
          "captain poly",
          "aluminum",
          "dollar ind",
          "colgate",
          "visible white",
          "dabur",
          "huvr",
          "marico",
          "max healthcare",
          "torrent pharma",
          "tata",
          "semaglutide",
          "therapeutics",
          "aurobindo",
          "grevlimid",
          "injectables",
          "peptides",
          "peng",
          "sun pharma",
          "pen-g",
          "biosimilars",
          "nutraceuticals",
          "granulation",
          "theranym",
          "ilumya",
          "vecv",
          "wti",
          "aluminium",
          "cy27",
          "novelis",
          "sensex",
          "green shoe",
          "brent crude oil",
          "indian rupee",
          "nikkei",
          "government bonds",
          "west texas intermediate",
          "japanese yen",
          "topix",
          "oil",
          "super carry vehicles",
          "gift nifty",
          "venus remedies",
          "bajaj consumer care",
          "mastek",
          "ge vernova t&d",
          "tata motors",
          "aditya infotech",
          "quality power electrical",
          "anthem biosciences",
          "natco pharma",
          "salzer electronics",
          "jk tyre",
          "saregama india"
        ],
        "event": [
          "us-iran peace deal",
          "us-iran deal",
          "us–iran conflict",
          "us–iran negotiations",
          "west asia conflict",
          "us fed decision",
          "iran-us peace deal",
          "memorial day",
          "iran war",
          "u.s.-iran war",
          "three-month-old war"
        ]
      },
      "newsworthiness_score": 1,
      "group_id": 191850
    },
    {
      "id": 24307716,
      "title": "EOG Resources Q1 net income $2.0B, lifts oil output guidance",
      "url": "https://www.stocktitan.net/news/EOG/eog-resources-reports-first-quarter-2026-qx6ebu78vzpu.html",
      "publisher": "",
      "published_date": "2026-05-05T20:15:00",
      "sentiment": "Positive",
      "sentiment_score": 1,
      "ai_summary": "EOG Resources reported first quarter 2026 net income of $2.0 billion ($3.70 per share), with adjusted net income of $1.8 billion ($3.41 per share), exceeding Wall Street expectations. The company generated $1.5 billion in free cash flow and returned nearly $950 million to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases while beating guidance on oil, gas, and NGL production volumes. EOG raised its full-year 2026 oil and NGL production guidance, reallocating capital within its unchanged budget toward liquids assets to capture current commodity price dynamics.",
      "full_text": "EOG Resources Reports First Quarter 2026 Results\n\n05/05/2026 - 08:15 PM\n\nHOUSTON , May 5, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- EOG Resources, Inc. (EOG) today reported first quarter 2026 results. The attached schedules for the reconciliation of Non-GAAP measures to GAAP measures, along with a related presentation, are also available on EOG's website at http://investors.eogresources.com/investors. First Quarter Highlights Earned net income of $2.0 billion , or $3.70 per share, and adjusted net income of $1.8 billion , or $3.41 per share\n\n, or per share, and adjusted net income of , or per share Delivered net cash provided by operating activities of $3.0 billion and Adjusted CFO 1 of $3.1 billion\n\nand Adjusted CFO of Generated $1.5 billion of free cash flow\n\nDeclared regular quarterly dividend of $1.02 per share\n\nper share Paid $544 million in regular dividends and repurchased $402 million of shares\n\nin regular dividends and repurchased of shares Volumes better than guidance midpoints with in-line capital expenditures\n\nTotal per-unit cash operating costs and DD&A better than guidance midpoints\n\nOil and natural gas price realizations better than guidance midpoints\n\nIncreasing full year oil and NGL production guidance reflecting reallocation of capital program CEO Commentary \"EOG delivered exceptional results in the first quarter, with oil, gas, and NGL volumes exceeding the midpoints of guidance while maintaining rigorous cost discipline - total per-unit cash operating costs and DD&A both came in better than guidance midpoints. Operational excellence translated into robust financial performance: we generated $1.5 billion in free cash flow and returned nearly $950 million to shareholders through our regular dividend and share repurchases. Our first quarter results reflect strong execution and progress towards our full-year objectives. We are reallocating some capital for the remainder of this year to liquids assets while keeping our capital budget unchanged. This drives a modest increase in oil and NGL production this year versus our prior guidance while providing optionality for future growth. This change reflects the flexibility to invest across our high-return, multi-basin portfolio with differentiated exposure to natural gas, liquids, conventionals, and unconventionals. EOG is well positioned to thrive in the current dynamic macro environment. Our competitive advantages drive differentiated performance: a best-in-class balance sheet providing financial strength and flexibility to invest through cycles; premium pricing exposure in key markets enhancing revenue realizations; differentiated exploration expertise driving low-cost, high-quality inventory across multiple basins; vertical integration and in-house technology strengthening our operational efficiency and cost structure; and a unique culture that empowers our teams to innovate and execute at the highest level. EOG has never been stronger. Our multi-basin portfolio, operational excellence, and financial strength provide unmatched flexibility to deliver superior returns and significant cash to shareholders across commodity price cycles.\" Return of Capital\n\nThe Board of Directors today declared a dividend of $1.02 per share on EOG's common stock. The dividend will be payable July 31, 2026, to stockholders of record as of July 17, 2026. The indicated annual rate is $4.08 per share. During the first quarter, the company repurchased 3.2 million shares for $402 million under its share repurchase authorization, at an average purchase price of $125 per share. As of March 31, 2026, EOG had $2.9 billion remaining on its current repurchase authorization. Key Financial Results\n\nIn millions of USD, except per-share, per-Boe and ratio data\n\n\n\n\n\nGAAP 1Q 2026 4Q 2025 3Q 2025 2Q 2025 1Q 2025\n\nTotal Revenue 6,921 5,638 5,847 5,478 5,669\n\nNet Income 1,980 701 1,471 1,345 1,463\n\nNet Income Per Share 3.70 1.30 2.70 2.46 2.65\n\nNet Cash Provided by Operating Activities 2,966 2,612 3,111 2,032 2,289\n\nTotal Expenditures 1,768 1,730 8,544 1,883 1,546\n\nCurrent and Long-Term Debt 7,931 7,936 7,694 4,236 4,744\n\nCash and Cash Equivalents 3,849 3,396 3,530 5,216 6,599\n\nDebt-to-Total Capitalization 20.4 % 21.0 % 20.3 % 12.7 % 13.8 %\n\nCash Operating Costs ($/Boe) 10.45 10.28 10.50 10.05 10.31\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nNon–GAAP\n\n\n\n\n\nAdjusted Net Income 1,825 1,222 1,472 1,268 1,586\n\nAdjusted Net Income Per Share 3.41 2.27 2.71 2.32 2.87\n\nAdjusted CFO1 3,129 2,617 3,031 2,496 2,813\n\nCapital Expenditures 1,636 1,639 1,648 1,523 1,484\n\nFree Cash Flow 1,493 978 1,383 973 1,329\n\nNet Debt 4,082 4,540 4,164 (980) (1,855)\n\nNet Debt-to-Total Capitalization 11.7 % 13.2 % 12.1 % (3.5 %) (6.7 %)\n\nCash Operating Costs ($/Boe)2 10.45 10.22 9.93 9.94 10.31\n\nKey Operational Results\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nVolumes 1Q 2026 4Q 2025 3Q 2025 2Q 2025 1Q 2025\n\nCrude Oil and Condensate (MBod) 548.5 546.1 534.5 504.2 502.1\n\nNatural Gas Liquids (MBbld) 332.1 342.1 309.3 258.4 241.7\n\nNatural Gas (MMcfd) 3,020 3,065 2,745 2,229 2,080\n\nTotal Crude Oil Equivalent (MBoed) 1,383.8 1,399.0 1,301.2 1,134.1 1,090.4\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCash Operating Costs ($/Boe)\n\n\n\n\n\nLease & Well 3.71 3.47 3.60 3.84 4.09\n\nGathering, Processing & Transportation Costs 5.25 5.07 4.90 4.41 4.48\n\nGeneral & Administrative (GAAP) 1.49 1.74 2.00 1.80 1.74\n\nGeneral & Administrative (Non-GAAP) 2 1.49 1.68 1.43 1.69 1.74\n\nCash Operating Costs (GAAP) 10.45 10.28 10.50 10.05 10.31\n\nCash Operating Costs (Non-GAAP)2 10.45 10.22 9.93 9.94 10.31\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDepreciation, Depletion & Amortization ($/Boe) 9.58 9.53 9.77 10.20 10.32\n\nFirst Quarter 2026 Results vs Guidance\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1Q 2026\n\n(Unaudited) 1Q 2026 Guidance\n\nMidpoint4 Variance 4Q 2025 3Q 2025 2Q 2025 1Q 2025\n\nCrude Oil and Condensate Volumes (MBod)\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States 546.5 544.7 1.8 544.5 532.9 503.1 500.9\n\nTrinidad 1.9 1.8 0.1 1.5 1.6 1.1 1.2\n\nOther International5 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0\n\nTotal 548.5 546.5 2.0 546.1 534.5 504.2 502.1\n\nNatural Gas Liquids Volumes (MBbld)\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal 332.1 330.0 2.1 342.1 309.3 258.4 241.7\n\nNatural Gas Volumes (MMcfd)\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States 2,769 2,750 19 2,859 2,511 1,977 1,834\n\nTrinidad 239 235 4 195 230 252 246\n\nOther International5 12 0 12 11 4 0 0\n\nTotal 3,020 2,985 35 3,065 2,745 2,229 2,080\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Crude Oil Equivalent Volumes (MBoed) 1,383.8 1,374.0 9.8 1,399.0 1,301.2 1,134.1 1,090.4\n\nTotal MMBoe 124.5 123.7 0.8 128.7 119.7 103.2 98.1\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBenchmark Price\n\n\n\n\n\nOil (WTI) ($/Bbl) 72.17\n\n\n\n59.17 64.95 63.71 71.42\n\nNatural Gas (HH) ($/Mcf) 4.96\n\n\n\n3.55 3.07 3.44 3.66\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCrude Oil and Condensate - above (below) WTI6($/Bbl)\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States 0.31 (0.25) 0.56 0.37 1.02 1.13 1.48\n\nTrinidad (3.26) (4.00) 0.74 (2.10) (7.21) (9.21) (10.30)\n\nOther International5 16.95 0.00 16.95 4.81 0.00 0.00 0.00\n\nNatural Gas Liquids - Realizations as % of WTI\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal 30.8 % 31.0 % (0.2 %) 35.7 % 32.7 % 35.6 % 36.8 %\n\nNatural Gas - above (below) NYMEX Henry Hub7($/Mcf)\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States (1.21) (1.30) 0.09 (0.61) (0.36) (0.57) (0.30)\n\nNatural Gas Realizations ($/Mcf)\n\n\n\n\n\nTrinidad 3.91 3.50 0.41 3.94 3.80 3.65 3.78\n\nOther International5 3.26 0.00 3.26 3.29 3.27 0.00 0.00\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Expenditures (GAAP) ($MM) 1,768\n\n\n\n1,730 8,544 1,883 1,546\n\nCapital Expenditures (Non-GAAP) ($MM) 1,636 1,625 11 1,639 1,648 1,523 1,484\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOperating Unit Costs ($/Boe)\n\n\n\n\n\nLease and Well 3.71 3.75 (0.04) 3.47 3.60 3.84 4.09\n\nGathering, Processing and Transportation Costs 5.25 5.20 0.05 5.07 4.90 4.41 4.48\n\nGeneral & Administrative (GAAP) 1.49\n\n\n\n1.74 2.00 1.80 1.74\n\nGeneral & Administrative (Non-GAAP)2 1.49 1.55 (0.06) 1.68 1.43 1.69 1.74\n\nCash Operating Costs (GAAP) 10.45\n\n\n\n10.28 10.50 10.05 10.31\n\nCash Operating Costs (Non-GAAP)2 10.45 10.50 (0.05) 10.22 9.93 9.94 10.31\n\nDepreciation, Depletion and Amortization 9.58 9.60 (0.02) 9.53 9.77 10.20 10.32\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nExpenses ($MM)\n\n\n\n\n\nExploration and Dry Hole 68 50 18 54 71 85 75\n\nImpairment (GAAP) 39\n\n\n\n689 71 39 44\n\nImpairment (excluding certain impairments (Non-GAAP))8 39 70 (31) 43 71 28 44\n\nCapitalized Interest 37 37 0 36 27 11 12\n\nNet Interest (GAAP) 66\n\n\n\n66 71 51 47\n\nNet Interest (Non-GAAP)9 66 67 (1) 66 71 45 47\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTOTI (% of revenues from sales of crude oil and\n\ncondensate, NGLs and natural gas)\n\n\n\n\n\n(GAAP) 6.4 %\n\n\n\n6.3 % 6.8 % 7.3 % 7.6 %\n\n(Non-GAAP) 6.4 % 7.0 % (0.6 %) 6.3 % 6.8 % 7.3 % 7.6 %\n\nIncome Taxes\n\n\n\n\n\nEffective Rate 22.5 % 23.0 % (0.5 %) 22.8 % 19.4 % 23.2 % 22.1 %\n\nCurrent Tax Expense ($MM) 557 280 277 293 75 301 370\n\nSecond Quarter and Full-Year 2026 Guidance10\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n(Unaudited) 2Q 2026 Guidance Range 2Q 2026 Midpoint FY 2026 Guidance Range FY 2026 Midpoint Crude Oil and Condensate Volumes (MBod)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States 544.2 - 548.8 546.5 544.7 - 549.3 547.0 Trinidad 1.8 - 2.2 2.0 1.3 - 1.7 1.5 Total 546.0 - 551.0 548.5 546.0 - 551.0 548.5 Natural Gas Liquids Volumes (MBbld)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal 327.0 - 347.0 337.0 331.0 - 351.0 341.0 Natural Gas Volumes (MMcfd)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States 2,735 - 2,835 2,785 2,760 - 2,860 2,810 Trinidad 240 - 260 250 220 - 240 230 Total 2,975 - 3,095 3,035 2,980 - 3,100 3,040 Crude Oil Equivalent Volumes (MBoed)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States 1,327.0 - 1,368.3 1,347.7 1,335.7 - 1,377.0 1,356.3 Trinidad 41.8 - 45.5 43.7 38.0 - 41.7 39.8 Total 1,368.8 - 1,413.8 1,391.4 1,373.7 - 1,418.7 1,396.1\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCrude Oil and Condensate - above (below) WTI6 ($/Bbl)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States 5.00 - 6.50 5.75 2.25 - 4.25 3.25 Trinidad (1.75) - (0.25) (1.00) (1.00) - 1.00 0.00 Natural Gas Liquids - Realizations as % of WTI\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal 22.0 % - 32.0 % 27.0 % 24.5 % - 34.5 % 29.5 % Natural Gas - above (below) NYMEX Henry Hub7 ($/Mcf)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States (0.50) - 0.20 (0.15) (1.30) - 0.70 (0.30) Natural Gas Realizations ($/Mcf)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTrinidad 3.40 - 4.10 3.75 3.25 - 4.25 3.75\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCapital Expenditures11 ($MM) 1,575 - 1,675 1,625 6,300 - 6,700 6,500\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOperating Unit Costs ($/Boe)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLease and Well 3.45 - 3.95 3.70 3.45 - 3.95 3.70 Gathering, Processing and Transportation Costs 5.05 - 5.55 5.30 5.05 - 5.55 5.30 General & Administrative 1.35 - 1.65 1.50 1.40 - 1.70 1.55 Cash Operating Costs 9.85 - 11.15 10.50 9.90 - 11.20 10.55 Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization 9.20 - 10.20 9.70 9.35 - 10.35 9.85\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nExpenses ($MM)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nExploration and Dry Hole 45 - 85 65 205 - 245 225 Impairment (excluding certain impairments)8 40 - 120 80 190 - 370 280 Capitalized Interest 35 - 39 37 147 - 151 149 Net Interest 66 - 70 68 267 - 271 269\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTOTI (% of revenues from sales of crude oil and condensate, NGLs and natural gas) 6.0 % - 8.0 % 7.0 % 5.8 % - 7.8 % 6.8 %\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nIncome Taxes\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nEffective Rate 20.0 % - 25.0 % 22.5 % 20.0 % - 25.0 % 22.5 % Current Tax Expense ($MM) 525 - 625 575 2,120 - 2,420 2,270 First Quarter 2026 Results Webcast\n\nWednesday, May 6, 2026, 9:00 a.m. Central time (10:00 a.m. Eastern time) Webcast will be available on EOG's website for one year. https://investors.eogresources.com/Investors About EOG\n\nEOG Resources, Inc. (NYSE: EOG) is one of the largest crude oil and natural gas exploration and production companies in the United States with proved reserves in the United States and Trinidad . To learn more visit https://www.eogresources.com/ Investor Contacts\n\nPearce Hammond 713-571-4684\n\nNeel Panchal 713-571-4884\n\nShelby O'Connor 713-571-4560\n\nCameron Hughes 713-571-3724 Media Contact\n\nKimberly Ehmer 713-571-4676 Endnotes 1) Cash flow from operations before changes in working capital and certain acquisition-related costs. 2) Cash Operating Costs consist of LOE, GP&T and G&A. Non-GAAP G&A excludes Encino acquisition-related G&A costs of $8 million for 4Q 2025, $68 million for 3Q 2025 and $12 million for 2Q 2025, as reflected in the accompanying reconciliation schedules (see \"Revenues, Costs and Margins Per Barrel of Oil Equivalent\"). The per-Boe impact of such Encino acquisition–related costs on G&A and total Cash Operating Costs for 4Q 2025 was ( $0.06 ), for 3Q 2025 was ( $0.57 ) and for 2Q 2025 was ( $0.11 ) as set forth in \"First Quarter 2026 Results vs Guidance\" above. 3) Other includes gathering, processing and marketing revenue, gains (losses) on asset dispositions (for GAAP earnings per share only), other revenue, exploration costs, dry hole costs, impairments, marketing costs, taxes other than income, other income (expense), interest expense, the impact of changes in the effective income tax rate and the impact of share repurchases on diluted shares. 4) GAAP and Non-GAAP distinctions apply solely to actual results and do not pertain to EOG's first quarter 2026 guidance midpoint disclosures. 5) Production volumes from Bahrain operations; natural gas realized price represents contract price less partner's processing and distribution costs. 6) EOG bases United States and Trinidad crude oil and condensate price differentials upon the West Texas Intermediate crude oil price at Cushing, Oklahoma , using the simple average of the daily settlement prices for the prompt-month NYMEX futures contract for each of the applicable calendar months. 7) EOG bases United States natural gas price differentials upon the natural gas price at Henry Hub, Louisiana , using the NYMEX Last Day Settle price for each of the applicable months. 8) In general, EOG excludes impairments which are (i) attributable to declines in commodity prices, (ii) related to sales of certain oil and gas properties or (iii) the result of certain other events or decisions (e.g., a periodic review of EOG's oil and gas properties or other assets). EOG believes excluding these impairments from total impairment costs is appropriate and provides useful information to investors, as such impairments were caused by factors outside of EOG's control (versus, for example, impairments that are due to EOG's proved oil and gas properties not being as productive as it originally estimated). Impairments (Non-GAAP) for 4Q 2025 are adjusted from Impairments (GAAP) for 4Q 2025 by excluding $646 million of impairments, primarily associated with the write-down to fair value of natural gas and crude oil assets in the Barnett Shale and Woodford Oil Window (mainly driven by play-specific economics and resource allocation). 9) Net interest expense (Non-GAAP) excludes Encino acquisition-related financing commitment costs of $6 million in 2Q 2025. 10) The forecast items for the second quarter and full year 2026 set forth above for EOG are based on currently available information and expectations as of the date of this press release. EOG undertakes no obligation, other than as required by applicable law, to update or revise this forecast, whether as a result of new information, subsequent events, anticipated or unanticipated circumstances or otherwise. This forecast, which should be read in conjunction with this press release and EOG's related Current Report on Form 8-K filing, replaces and supersedes any previously issued guidance or forecast. 11) The forecast includes expenditures for Exploration and Development Drilling, Facilities, Leasehold Acquisitions, Capitalized Interest, Dry Hole Costs and Other Property, Plant and Equipment. The forecast excludes Property Acquisitions, Asset Retirement Costs, Non-Cash Exchanges and Transactions and exploration costs incurred as operating expenses. Cautionary Notice This press release and any accompanying disclosures may include forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements, other than statements of historical facts, including, among others, statements and projections regarding EOG's future financial position, operations, performance, business strategy, goals, returns and rates of return, budgets, reserves, levels of production, capital expenditures, operating costs and asset sales, statements regarding future commodity prices, statements regarding the plans and objectives of EOG's management for future operations and statements and projections regarding the strategic rationale for, and anticipated benefits of, EOG's acquisition of Encino Acquisition Partners, LLC ( Encino ) are forward-looking statements. EOG typically uses words such as \"expect,\" \"anticipate,\" \"estimate,\" \"project,\" \"strategy,\" \"intend,\" \"plan,\" \"target,\" \"aims,\" \"ambition,\" \"initiative,\" \"goal,\" \"may,\" \"will,\" \"focused on,\" \"should\" and \"believe\" or the negative of those terms or other variations or comparable terminology to identify its forward-looking statements. In particular, statements, express or implied, concerning (i) EOG's future financial or operating results and returns, (ii) EOG's ability to replace or increase reserves, increase production, generate returns and rates of return, replace or increase drilling locations, reduce or otherwise control drilling, completion and operating costs and capital expenditures, generate cash flows, pay down or refinance indebtedness, achieve, reach or otherwise meet initiatives, plans, goals, ambitions or targets with respect to emissions, other environmental matters or safety matters, pay and/or increase regular and/or special dividends or repurchase shares or (iii) the successful integration of Encino's assets and operations or the strategic rationale for, or anticipated benefits of, EOG's acquisition of Encino , in each case are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of performance. Although EOG believes the expectations reflected in its forward-looking statements are reasonable and are based on reasonable assumptions, no assurance can be given that such assumptions are accurate or will prove to have been correct or that any of such expectations will be achieved (in full or at all) or will be achieved on the expected or anticipated timelines. Moreover, EOG's forward-looking statements may be affected by known, unknown or currently unforeseen risks, events or circumstances that may be outside EOG's control. Important factors that could cause EOG's actual results to differ materially from the expectations reflected in EOG's forward-looking statements include, among others: the timing, magnitude and duration of changes in prices for, supplies of, and demand for, crude oil and condensate, natural gas liquids (NGLs), natural gas and related commodities;\n\nthe extent to which EOG is successful in its efforts to acquire or discover additional reserves;\n\nthe extent to which EOG is successful in its efforts to (i) economically develop its acreage in, (ii) produce reserves and achieve anticipated production levels and rates of return from, (iii) decrease or otherwise control its drilling, completion and operating costs and capital expenditures related to, and (iv) maximize reserve recoveries from, its existing and future crude oil and natural gas exploration and development projects and associated potential and existing drilling locations;\n\nthe success of EOG's cost-mitigation initiatives and actions in offsetting the impact of any inflationary or other pressures on EOG's operating costs and capital expenditures;\n\nthe extent to which EOG is successful in its efforts to market its production of crude oil and condensate, NGLs and natural gas;\n\nsecurity threats, including cybersecurity threats and disruptions to our business and operations from breaches of our information technology systems, physical breaches of our facilities and other infrastructure or breaches of the information technology systems, facilities and infrastructure of third parties with which we transact business, and enhanced regulatory focus on the prevention of, and disclosure requirements relating to, cyber incidents;\n\nthe availability, proximity and capacity of, and costs associated with, appropriate gathering, processing, compression, storage, transportation, refining, liquefaction and export facilities and equipment;\n\nthe availability, cost, terms and timing of issuance or execution of mineral licenses, concessions and leases and governmental and other permits and rights-of-way, and EOG's ability to retain mineral licenses, concessions and leases;\n\nthe impact of, and changes in, government policies, laws and regulations, including climate change-related regulations, policies and initiatives (for example, with respect to air emissions); tax laws and regulations (including, but not limited to, carbon tax or other emissions-related legislation); environmental, health and safety laws and regulations relating to disposal of produced water, drilling fluids and other wastes, hydraulic fracturing and access to and use of water; laws and regulations affecting the leasing of acreage and permitting for oil and gas drilling and the calculation of royalty payments in respect of oil and gas production; laws and regulations imposing additional permitting and disclosure requirements, additional operating restrictions and conditions or restrictions on drilling and completion operations and on the transportation of crude oil, NGLs and natural gas; laws and regulations with respect to financial commodity and other derivative instruments and hedging activities; laws and regulations with respect to the import and export of crude oil, natural gas and related commodities; and trade policies, tariffs, trade agreements and other trade restrictions;\n\nthe impact of climate change-related legislation, policies and initiatives; climate change-related political, social and shareholder activism; and physical, transition and reputational risks and other potential developments related to climate change;\n\nthe extent to which EOG is able to successfully and economically develop, implement and carry out its emissions and other environmental or safety-related initiatives and achieve its related targets, goals, ambitions and initiatives;\n\nEOG's failure to realize, in full or at all, the anticipated benefits of its acquisition of Encino and/or business disruptions resulting from the acquisition (e.g., relating to the integration of Encino's assets and operations into EOG's operations) that could harm EOG's business operations (including current plans and operations and the diversion of management's attention from EOG's ongoing business operations);\n\nand/or business disruptions resulting from the acquisition (e.g., relating to the integration of assets and operations into EOG's operations) that could harm EOG's business operations (including current plans and operations and the diversion of management's attention from EOG's ongoing business operations); EOG's ability to effectively integrate acquired crude oil and natural gas properties into its operations, identify and resolve existing and potential issues with respect to such properties and accurately estimate reserves, production, drilling, completion and operating costs and capital expenditures with respect to such properties;\n\nthe extent to which EOG's third-party-operated crude oil and natural gas properties are operated successfully, economically and in compliance with applicable laws and regulations;\n\ncompetition in the oil and gas exploration and production industry for the acquisition of licenses, concessions, leases and properties;\n\nthe availability and cost of, EOG's ability to retain, and competition in the oil and gas exploration and production industry for, employees, labor and other personnel, facilities, equipment, materials (such as water, sand, fuel and tubulars) and services;\n\nthe accuracy of reserve estimates, which by their nature involve the exercise of professional judgment and may therefore be imprecise;\n\nweather and natural disasters, including its impact on crude oil and natural gas demand, and related delays in drilling and in the installation and operation (by EOG or third parties) of production, gathering, processing, refining, liquefaction, compression, storage, transportation, and export facilities;\n\nthe ability of EOG's customers and other contractual counterparties to satisfy their obligations to EOG and, related thereto, to access the credit and capital markets to obtain financing needed to satisfy their obligations to EOG;\n\nEOG's ability to access the commercial paper market and other credit and capital markets to obtain financing on terms it deems acceptable, if at all, and to otherwise satisfy its capital expenditure requirements;\n\nthe extent to which EOG is successful in its completion of planned asset dispositions;\n\nthe extent and effect of any hedging activities engaged in by EOG;\n\nthe timing and extent of changes in foreign currency exchange rates, interest rates, inflation rates, global and domestic financial market conditions and global and domestic general economic conditions;\n\ngeopolitical factors and political conditions and developments around the world (such as the imposition of tariffs or trade or other economic sanctions, political instability and armed conflicts), including in the areas in which EOG operates;\n\nthe extent to which EOG incurs uninsured losses and liabilities or losses and liabilities in excess of its insurance coverage; and\n\nthe other factors described under ITEM 1A, Risk Factors of EOG's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2025 and any updates to those factors set forth in EOG's subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q or Current Reports on Form 8-K. In light of these risks, uncertainties and assumptions, the events anticipated by EOG's forward-looking statements may not occur and, if any of such events do, we may not have anticipated the timing of their occurrence or the duration or extent of their impact on our actual results. Accordingly, you should not place any undue reliance on any of EOG's forward-looking statements. EOG's forward-looking statements speak only as of the date made, and EOG undertakes no obligation, other than as required by applicable law, to update or revise its forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, subsequent events, anticipated or unanticipated circumstances or otherwise. Historical Non-GAAP Financial Measures:\n\nReconciliation schedules and definitions for the historical non-GAAP financial measures included or referenced herein as well as related discussion can be found on the EOG website at www.eogresources.com. Cautionary Notice Regarding Forward-Looking Non-GAAP Financial Measures:\n\nIn addition, this press release and any accompanying disclosures may include or reference certain forward-looking, non-GAAP financial measures, such as free cash flow, adjusted cash flow from operations and return on capital employed, and certain related estimates regarding future performance, commodity prices and operating and financial results. Because we provide these measures on a forward-looking basis, we cannot reliably or reasonably predict certain of the necessary components of the most directly comparable forward-looking GAAP measures, such as future changes in working capital and future impairments. Accordingly, we are unable to present a quantitative reconciliation of such forward-looking, non-GAAP financial measures to the respective most directly comparable forward-looking GAAP financial measures without unreasonable efforts. The unavailable information could have a significant impact on our ultimate results. However, management believes these forward-looking, Non-GAAP measures may be a useful tool for the investment community in comparing EOG's forecasted financial performance to the forecasted financial performance of other companies in the industry. Any such forward-looking measures and estimates are intended to be illustrative only and are not intended to reflect the results that EOG will necessarily achieve for the period(s) presented; EOG's actual results may differ materially from such measures and estimates. Oil and Gas Reserves:\n\nThe United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) permits oil and gas companies, in their filings with the SEC, to disclose not only \"proved\" reserves (i.e., quantities of oil and gas that are estimated to be recoverable with a high degree of confidence), but also \"probable\" reserves (i.e., quantities of oil and gas that are as likely as not to be recovered) as well as \"possible\" reserves (i.e., additional quantities of oil and gas that might be recovered, but with a lower probability than probable reserves). Statements of reserves are only estimates and may not correspond to the ultimate quantities of oil and gas recovered. Any reserve or resource estimates provided in this press release or any accompanying disclosures that are not specifically designated as being estimates of proved reserves may include \"potential\" reserves, \"resource potential\" and/or other estimated reserves or estimated resources not necessarily calculated in accordance with, or contemplated by, the SEC's latest reserve reporting guidelines. Investors are urged to consider closely the disclosure in EOG's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2025 (and any updates to such disclosure set forth in EOG's subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q or Current Reports on Form 8-K), available from EOG at P.O. Box 4362, Houston, Texas 77210-4362 (Attn: Investor Relations). You can also obtain this report from the SEC by calling 1-800-SEC-0330 or from the SEC's website at www.sec.gov. Income Statements\n\nIn millions of USD, except share data (in millions) and per share data (Unaudited)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n2025\n\n2026\n\n\n\n1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Year\n\n1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Year\n\nOperating Revenues and Other\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCrude Oil and Condensate 3,293 2,974 3,243 2,991 12,501\n\n3,577\n\n\n\n\n\n3,577\n\nNatural Gas Liquids 572 534 604 666 2,376\n\n664\n\n\n\n\n\n664\n\nNatural Gas 637 600 707 847 2,791\n\n1,021\n\n\n\n\n\n1,021\n\nGains (Losses) on Mark-to-Market Financial Commodity and Other Derivative Contracts, Net (191) 107 116 (19) 13\n\n113\n\n\n\n\n\n113\n\nGathering, Processing and Marketing 1,340 1,247 1,178 1,149 4,914\n\n1,496\n\n\n\n\n\n1,496\n\nGains (Losses) on Asset Dispositions, Net (1) — (18) (16) (35)\n\n31\n\n\n\n\n\n31\n\nOther, Net 19 16 17 20 72\n\n19\n\n\n\n\n\n19\n\nTotal 5,669 5,478 5,847 5,638 22,632\n\n6,921\n\n\n\n\n\n6,921\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOperating Expenses\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLease and Well 401 396 431 447 1,675\n\n462\n\n\n\n\n\n462\n\nGathering, Processing and Transportation Costs 440 455 587 652 2,134\n\n654\n\n\n\n\n\n654\n\nExploration Costs 41 74 71 50 236\n\n45\n\n\n\n\n\n45\n\nDry Hole Costs 34 11 — 4 49\n\n23\n\n\n\n\n\n23\n\nImpairments 44 39 71 689 843\n\n39\n\n\n\n\n\n39\n\nMarketing Costs 1,325 1,216 1,134 1,120 4,795\n\n1,384\n\n\n\n\n\n1,384\n\nDepreciation, Depletion and Amortization 1,013 1,053 1,169 1,226 4,461\n\n1,193\n\n\n\n\n\n1,193\n\nGeneral and Administrative 171 186 239 224 820\n\n185\n\n\n\n\n\n185\n\nTaxes Other Than Income 341 301 309 283 1,234\n\n338\n\n\n\n\n\n338\n\nTotal 3,810 3,731 4,011 4,695 16,247\n\n4,323\n\n\n\n\n\n4,323\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOperating Income 1,859 1,747 1,836 943 6,385\n\n2,598\n\n\n\n\n\n2,598\n\nOther Income, Net 65 55 59 33 212\n\n23\n\n\n\n\n\n23\n\nIncome Before Interest Expense and Income Taxes 1,924 1,802 1,895 976 6,597\n\n2,621\n\n\n\n\n\n2,621\n\nInterest Expense, Net 47 51 71 66 235\n\n66\n\n\n\n\n\n66\n\nIncome Before Income Taxes 1,877 1,751 1,824 910 6,362\n\n2,555\n\n\n\n\n\n2,555\n\nIncome Tax Provision 414 406 353 209 1,382\n\n575\n\n\n\n\n\n575\n\nNet Income 1,463 1,345 1,471 701 4,980\n\n1,980\n\n\n\n\n\n1,980\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDividends Declared per Common Share 0.9750 1.9950 — 1.0200 3.9900\n\n1.0200\n\n\n\n\n\n1.0200\n\nNet Income Per Share\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBasic 2.66 2.48 2.72 1.31 9.17\n\n3.72\n\n\n\n\n\n3.72\n\nDiluted 2.65 2.46 2.70 1.30 9.12\n\n3.70\n\n\n\n\n\n3.70\n\nAverage Number of Common Shares\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBasic 550 543 541 537 543\n\n532\n\n\n\n\n\n532\n\nDiluted 553 546 544 539 546\n\n535\n\n\n\n\n\n535\n\nVolumes and Prices\n\n(Unaudited)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n2025\n\n2026\n\n\n\n1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Year\n\n1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Year\n\nCrude Oil and Condensate Volumes (MBbld) (A)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States 500.9 503.1 532.9 544.5 520.5\n\n546.5\n\n\n\n\n\n546.5\n\nTrinidad 1.2 1.1 1.6 1.5 1.4\n\n1.9\n\n\n\n\n\n1.9\n\nOther International (B) — — — 0.1 —\n\n0.1\n\n\n\n\n\n0.1\n\nTotal 502.1 504.2 534.5 546.1 521.9\n\n548.5\n\n\n\n\n\n548.5\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAverage Crude Oil and Condensate Prices ($/Bbl) (C)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States $ 72.90 $ 64.84 $ 65.97 $ 59.54 $ 65.65\n\n$ 72.48\n\n\n\n\n\n$ 72.48\n\nTrinidad 61.12 54.50 57.74 57.07 57.59\n\n68.91\n\n\n\n\n\n68.91\n\nOther International (B) — — — 63.98 —\n\n89.12\n\n\n\n\n\n89.12\n\nComposite 72.87 64.82 65.95 59.54 65.63\n\n72.47\n\n\n\n\n\n72.47\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nNatural Gas Liquids Volumes (MBbld) (A)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States 241.7 258.4 309.3 342.1 288.2\n\n332.1\n\n\n\n\n\n332.1\n\nTotal 241.7 258.4 309.3 342.1 288.2\n\n332.1\n\n\n\n\n\n332.1\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAverage Natural Gas Liquids Prices ($/Bbl) (C)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States $ 26.29 $ 22.70 $ 21.25 $ 21.15 $ 22.58\n\n$ 22.20\n\n\n\n\n\n$ 22.20\n\nComposite 26.29 22.70 21.25 21.15 22.58\n\n22.20\n\n\n\n\n\n22.20\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nNatural Gas Volumes (MMcfd) (A)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States 1,834 1,977 2,511 2,859 2,299\n\n2,769\n\n\n\n\n\n2,769\n\nTrinidad 246 252 230 195 230\n\n239\n\n\n\n\n\n239\n\nOther International (B) — — 4 11 4\n\n12\n\n\n\n\n\n12\n\nTotal 2,080 2,229 2,745 3,065 2,533\n\n3,020\n\n\n\n\n\n3,020\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAverage Natural Gas Prices ($/Mcf) (C)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States $ 3.36 $ 2.87 $ 2.71 $ 2.94 $ 2.94\n\n$ 3.75\n\n\n\n\n\n$ 3.75\n\nTrinidad 3.78 3.65 3.80 3.94 3.78\n\n3.91\n\n\n\n\n\n3.91\n\nOther International (B) — — 3.27 3.29 3.28\n\n3.26\n\n\n\n\n\n3.26\n\nComposite 3.41 2.96 2.80 3.00 3.02\n\n3.76\n\n\n\n\n\n3.76\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCrude Oil Equivalent Volumes (MBoed) (D)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States 1,048.3 1,090.9 1,260.7 1,363.0 1,191.8\n\n1,340.1\n\n\n\n\n\n1,340.1\n\nTrinidad 42.1 43.2 39.8 34.2 39.8\n\n41.7\n\n\n\n\n\n41.7\n\nOther International (B) — — 0.7 1.8 0.6\n\n2.0\n\n\n\n\n\n2.0\n\nTotal 1,090.4 1,134.1 1,301.2 1,399.0 1,232.2\n\n1,383.8\n\n\n\n\n\n1,383.8\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal MMBoe (D) 98.1 103.2 119.7 128.7 449.8\n\n124.5\n\n\n\n\n\n124.5\n\n(A) Thousand barrels per day or million cubic feet per day, as applicable. (B) Production volumes from Bahrain operations; natural gas realized price represents contract price less partner's processing and distribution costs. (C) Dollars per barrel or per thousand cubic feet, as applicable. Excludes the impact of financial commodity and other derivative instruments (see Note 9 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements in EOG's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2026). (D) Thousand barrels of oil equivalent per day or million barrels of oil equivalent, as applicable; includes crude oil and condensate, NGLs and natural gas. Crude oil equivalent volumes are determined using a ratio of 1.0 barrel of crude oil and condensate or NGLs to 6.0 thousand cubic feet of natural gas. MMBoe is calculated by multiplying the MBoed amount by the number of days in the period and then dividing that amount by one thousand. Balance Sheets\n\nIn millions of USD (Unaudited)\n\n\n\n2025\n\n2026\n\n\n\nMAR JUN SEP DEC\n\nMAR JUN SEP DEC\n\nCurrent Assets\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCash and Cash Equivalents 6,599 5,216 3,530 3,396\n\n3,849\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAccounts Receivable, Net 2,621 2,504 2,680 2,681\n\n3,597\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nInventories 897 934 945 1,014\n\n955\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOther (A) 563 591 665 565\n\n562\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal 10,680 9,245 7,820 7,656\n\n8,963\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nProperty, Plant and Equipment\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOil and Gas Properties (Successful Efforts Method) 78,432 80,139 88,301 89,857\n\n90,786\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOther Property, Plant and Equipment 6,510 6,616 6,772 6,832\n\n6,942\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Property, Plant and Equipment 84,942 86,755 95,073 96,689\n\n97,728\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLess: Accumulated Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization (50,310) (51,394) (52,488) (54,348)\n\n(55,054)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Property, Plant and Equipment, Net 34,632 35,361 42,585 42,341\n\n42,674\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDeferred Income Taxes 44 39 37 39\n\n30\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOther Assets 1,626 1,639 1,757 1,763\n\n1,711\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Assets 46,982 46,284 52,199 51,799\n\n53,378\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCurrent Liabilities\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAccounts Payable 2,353 2,266 2,944 2,904\n\n3,186\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAccrued Taxes Payable 668 348 392 299\n\n766\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDividends Payable 534 1,081 550 544\n\n541\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCurrent Portion of Long-Term Debt 1,280 778 27 27\n\n27\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCurrent Portion of Operating Lease Liabilities 318 360 433 472\n\n375\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOther (A) 566 342 469 445\n\n329\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal 5,719 5,175 4,815 4,691\n\n5,224\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLong-Term Debt 3,464 3,458 7,667 7,909\n\n7,904\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOther Liabilities 2,368 2,398 2,496 2,512\n\n2,476\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDeferred Income Taxes 5,915 6,015 6,936 6,854\n\n6,866\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCommitments and Contingencies (B)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nStockholders' Equity\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCommon Stock, $0.01 Par 206 206 206 206\n\n206\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAdditional Paid in Capital 6,095 6,153 5,978 6,027\n\n6,026\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAccumulated Other Comprehensive Loss (4) (7) (5) (7)\n\n(6)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nRetained Earnings 27,869 28,131 29,603 29,765\n\n31,200\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCommon Stock Held in Treasury (4,650) (5,245) (5,497) (6,158)\n\n(6,518)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Stockholders' Equity 29,516 29,238 30,285 29,833\n\n30,908\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity 46,982 46,284 52,199 51,799\n\n53,378\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n(A) Effective January 1, 2026, EOG combined Price Risk Management Activities into the Other line item. This presentation has been conformed for all periods presented and had no impact on previously reported Total Assets and Total Liabilities and Stockholders's Equity. (B) See Note 5 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements in EOG's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2026. Cash Flow Statements\n\nIn millions of USD (Unaudited)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n2025\n\n2026\n\n\n\n1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Year\n\n1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Year\n\nCash Flows from Operating Activities\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nReconciliation of Net Income to Net Cash\n\nProvided by Operating Activities:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nNet Income 1,463 1,345 1,471 701 4,980\n\n1,980\n\n\n\n\n\n1,980\n\nItems Not Requiring (Providing) Cash\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDepreciation, Depletion and Amortization 1,013 1,053 1,169 1,226 4,461\n\n1,193\n\n\n\n\n\n1,193\n\nImpairments 44 39 71 689 843\n\n39\n\n\n\n\n\n39\n\nStock-Based Compensation Expenses 50 53 53 60 216\n\n58\n\n\n\n\n\n58\n\nDeferred Income Taxes 44 105 278 (84) 343\n\n18\n\n\n\n\n\n18\n\n(Gains) Losses on Asset Dispositions, Net 1 — 18 16 35\n\n(31)\n\n\n\n\n\n(31)\n\nOther, Net 11 11 2 3 27\n\n15\n\n\n\n\n\n15\n\nDry Hole Costs 34 11 — 4 49\n\n23\n\n\n\n\n\n23\n\nMark-to-Market Financial Commodity and Other\n\nDerivative Contracts (Gains) Losses, Net 191 (107) (116) 19 (13)\n\n(113)\n\n\n\n\n\n(113)\n\nNet Cash Received from (Payments for)\n\nSettlements of Financial Commodity\n\nDerivative Contracts (38) (24) 27 (21) (56)\n\n(53)\n\n\n\n\n\n(53)\n\nOther, Net — — — (1) (1)\n\n—\n\n\n\n\n\n—\n\nChanges in Components of Working Capital and\n\nOther Assets and Liabilities\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAccounts Receivable 48 122 133 (3) 300\n\n(907)\n\n\n\n\n\n(907)\n\nInventories 76 (45) 4 (84) (49)\n\n21\n\n\n\n\n\n21\n\nAccounts Payable (129) (107) 5 (40) (271)\n\n279\n\n\n\n\n\n279\n\nAccrued Taxes Payable (339) (321) 28 (103) (735)\n\n467\n\n\n\n\n\n467\n\nOther Assets (43) (43) (28) 97 (17)\n\n55\n\n\n\n\n\n55\n\nOther Liabilities (96) (52) 155 10 17\n\n(123)\n\n\n\n\n\n(123)\n\nChanges in Components of Working Capital\n\nAssociated with Investing Activities (41) (8) (159) 123 (85)\n\n45\n\n\n\n\n\n45\n\nNet Cash Provided by Operating Activities 2,289 2,032 3,111 2,612 10,044\n\n2,966\n\n\n\n\n\n2,966\n\nInvesting Cash Flows\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAcquisition of Encino Acquisition Partners, LLC,\n\nNet of Cash Acquired — — (4,464) 13 (4,451)\n\n—\n\n\n\n\n\n—\n\nAdditions to Oil and Gas Properties (1,381) (1,699) (1,492) (1,543) (6,115)\n\n(1,491)\n\n\n\n\n\n(1,491)\n\nAdditions to Other Property, Plant and Equipment (102) (94) (171) (112) (479)\n\n(153)\n\n\n\n\n\n(153)\n\nProceeds from Sales of Assets 12 4 5 3 24\n\n144\n\n\n\n\n\n144\n\nChanges in Components of Working Capital\n\nAssociated with Investing Activities 41 8 159 (123) 85\n\n(45)\n\n\n\n\n\n(45)\n\nNet Cash Used in Investing Activities (1,430) (1,781) (5,963) (1,762) (10,936)\n\n(1,545)\n\n\n\n\n\n(1,545)\n\nFinancing Cash Flows\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLong-Term Debt Borrowings — — 3,472 999 4,471\n\n—\n\n\n\n\n\n—\n\nLong-Term Debt Repayments — (500) (1,266) (750) (2,516)\n\n—\n\n\n\n\n\n—\n\nDividends Paid (538) (528) (545) (550) (2,161)\n\n(544)\n\n\n\n\n\n(544)\n\nTreasury Stock Purchased (806) (602) (479) (677) (2,564)\n\n(418)\n\n\n\n\n\n(418)\n\nProceeds from Stock Options Exercised and\n\nEmployee Stock Purchase Plan — 11 — 12 23\n\n1\n\n\n\n\n\n1\n\nDebt Issuance and Other Financing Costs — (7) (7) (11) (25)\n\n—\n\n\n\n\n\n—\n\nRepayment of Finance Lease Liabilities (8) (9) (8) (7) (32)\n\n(7)\n\n\n\n\n\n(7)\n\nNet Cash Used in Financing Activities (1,352) (1,635) 1,167 (984) (2,804)\n\n(968)\n\n\n\n\n\n(968)\n\nEffect of Exchange Rate Changes on Cash — 1 (1) – —\n\n—\n\n\n\n\n\n—\n\nIncrease (Decrease) in Cash and Cash Equivalents (493) (1,383) (1,686) (134) (3,696)\n\n453\n\n\n\n\n\n453\n\nCash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Period 7,092 6,599 5,216 3,530 7,092\n\n3,396\n\n\n\n\n\n3,396\n\nCash and Cash Equivalents at End of Period 6,599 5,216 3,530 3,396 3,396\n\n3,849\n\n\n\n\n\n3,849\n\nNon-GAAP Financial Measures\n\nTo supplement the presentation of its financial results prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America (GAAP), EOG's quarterly earnings releases and related conference calls, accompanying earnings presentation slides and presentation slides for investor conferences contain certain financial measures that are not prepared or presented in accordance with GAAP. These non-GAAP financial measures may include, but are not limited to, Adjusted Net Income (Loss), Adjusted Cash Flow from Operations, Free Cash Flow, Net Debt and related statistics.\n\nA reconciliation of each of these measures to their most directly comparable GAAP financial measure and related discussion is included in the tables on the following pages and can also be found in the \"Reconciliations & Guidance\" section of the \"Investors\" page of the EOG website at www.eogresources.com.\n\nAs further discussed in the tables on the following pages, EOG believes these measures may be useful to investors who follow the practice of some industry analysts who make certain adjustments to GAAP measures (for example, to exclude non-recurring items) to facilitate comparisons to others in EOG's industry, and who utilize non-GAAP measures in their calculations of certain statistics (for example, return on capital employed and return on equity) used to evaluate EOG's performance.\n\nEOG believes that the non-GAAP measures presented, when viewed in combination with its financial results prepared in accordance with GAAP, provide a more complete understanding of the factors and trends affecting the company's performance. As is discussed in the tables on the following pages, EOG uses these non-GAAP measures for purposes of (i) comparing EOG's financial performance with the financial performance of other companies in the industry and (ii) analyzing EOG's financial performance across periods.\n\nThe non-GAAP measures presented should not be considered in isolation, and should not be considered as a substitute for, or as an alternative to, EOG's reported Net Income (Loss), Long-Term Debt (including Current Portion of Long-Term Debt), Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities and other financial results calculated in accordance with GAAP. The non-GAAP measures presented should be read in conjunction with EOG's consolidated financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP.\n\nIn addition, because not all companies use identical calculations, EOG's presentation of non-GAAP measures may not be comparable to, and may be calculated differently from, similarly titled measures disclosed by other companies, including its peer companies. EOG may also change the calculation of one or more of its non-GAAP measures from time to time – for example, to account for changes in its business and operations or to more closely conform to peer company or industry analysts' practices.\n\nDirect ATROR\n\nThe calculation of EOG's direct after-tax rate of return (ATROR) is based on EOG's net estimated recoverable reserves for a particular well(s) or play, the estimated net present value of the future net cash flows from such reserves (for which EOG utilizes certain assumptions regarding future commodity prices and operating costs) and EOG's direct net costs incurred in drilling or acquiring such well(s). As such, EOG's direct ATROR for a particular well(s) or play cannot be calculated from EOG's consolidated financial statements. Adjusted Net Income\n\nIn millions of USD, except share data (in millions) and per share data (Unaudited)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThe following tables adjust reported Net Income (Loss) (GAAP) to reflect actual net cash received from (payments for) settlements of financial commodity derivative contracts by eliminating the net unrealized mark-to-market (gains) losses from these and other derivative transactions, to eliminate the net (gains) losses on asset dispositions, to add back impairment charges related to certain of EOG's assets (which are generally (i) attributable to declines in commodity prices, (ii) related to sales of certain oil and gas properties or (iii) the result of certain other events or decisions (e.g., a periodic review of EOG's oil and gas properties or other assets)), to add back costs associated with the Encino acquisition and to make certain other adjustments to exclude non-recurring and certain other items as further described below. EOG believes this presentation may be useful to investors who follow the practice of some industry analysts who adjust reported company earnings to match hedge realizations to production settlement months and make certain other adjustments to exclude non-recurring and certain other items. EOG management uses this information for purposes of comparing its financial performance with the financial performance of other companies in the industry.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1Q 2026\n\n\n\nBefore\n\nTax\n\nIncome Tax\n\nImpact\n\nAfter\n\nTax\n\nDiluted\n\nEarnings per\n\nShare\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nReported Net Income (GAAP) 2,555\n\n(575)\n\n1,980\n\n3.70\n\nAdjustments:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nGains on Mark-to-Market Financial Commodity and Other Derivative Contracts, Net (113)\n\n24\n\n(89)\n\n(0.17)\n\nNet Cash Payments for Settlements of Financial Commodity Derivative Contracts (1) (53)\n\n11\n\n(42)\n\n(0.08)\n\nLess: Gains on Asset Dispositions, Net (31)\n\n7\n\n(24)\n\n(0.04)\n\nAdjustments to Net Income (197)\n\n42\n\n(155)\n\n(0.29)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAdjusted Net Income (Non-GAAP) 2,358\n\n(533)\n\n1,825\n\n3.41\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAverage Number of Common Shares\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBasic\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n532\n\nDiluted\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n535\n\n(1) Consistent with its customary practice, in calculating Adjusted Net Income (Non-GAAP), EOG subtracts from reported Net Income (GAAP) the total net cash paid for settlements of financial commodity derivative contracts during such period. For the three months ended March 31, 2026, such amount was $53 million . Adjusted Net Income (Continued)\n\nIn millions of USD, except share data (in millions) and per share data (Unaudited)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n4Q 2025\n\n\n\nBefore\n\nTax\n\nIncome Tax\n\nImpact\n\nAfter\n\nTax\n\nDiluted\n\nEarnings per\n\nShare\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nReported Net Income (GAAP) 910\n\n(209)\n\n701\n\n1.30\n\nAdjustments:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLosses on Mark-to-Market Financial Commodity and Other Derivative Contracts, Net 19\n\n(4)\n\n15\n\n0.03\n\nNet Cash Payments for Settlements of Financial Commodity Derivative Contracts (1) (21)\n\n4\n\n(17)\n\n(0.03)\n\nAdd: Losses on Asset Dispositions, Net 16\n\n(4)\n\n12\n\n0.02\n\nAdd: Certain Impairments (2) 646\n\n(140)\n\n506\n\n0.94\n\nAdd: Acquisition-Related Costs (3) 8\n\n(3)\n\n5\n\n0.01\n\nAdjustments to Net Income 668\n\n(147)\n\n521\n\n0.97\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAdjusted Net Income (Non-GAAP) 1,578\n\n(356)\n\n1,222\n\n2.27\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAverage Number of Common Shares\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBasic\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n537\n\nDiluted\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n539\n\n(1) Consistent with its customary practice, in calculating Adjusted Net Income (Non-GAAP), EOG subtracts from reported Net Income (GAAP) the total net cash paid for settlements of financial commodity derivative contracts during such period. For the three months ended December 31, 2025, such amount was $21 million . (2) Impairments primarily associated with the write-down to fair value of natural gas and crude oil assets in the Barnett Shale and Woodford Oil Window (mainly driven by play-specific economics and resource allocation). (3) Consists of Encino acquisition-related G&A costs ( $8 million ).\n\n3Q 2025\n\n\n\nBefore\n\nTax\n\nIncome Tax\n\nImpact\n\nAfter\n\nTax\n\nDiluted\n\nEarnings per\n\nShare\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nReported Net Income (GAAP) 1,824\n\n(353)\n\n1,471\n\n2.70\n\nAdjustments:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nGains on Mark-to-Market Financial Commodity and Other Derivative Contracts, Net (116)\n\n25\n\n(91)\n\n(0.16)\n\nNet Cash Received from Settlements of Financial Commodity Derivative Contracts (1) 27\n\n(5)\n\n22\n\n0.04\n\nAdd: Losses on Asset Dispositions, Net 18\n\n(6)\n\n12\n\n0.02\n\nAdd: Acquisition-Related Costs (2) 68\n\n(10)\n\n58\n\n0.11\n\nAdjustments to Net Income (3)\n\n4\n\n1\n\n0.01\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAdjusted Net Income (Non-GAAP) 1,821\n\n(349)\n\n1,472\n\n2.71\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAverage Number of Common Shares\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBasic\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n541\n\nDiluted\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n544\n\n(1) Consistent with its customary practice, in calculating Adjusted Net Income (Non-GAAP), EOG adds to reported Net Income (GAAP) the total net cash received from settlements of financial commodity derivative contracts during such period. For the three months ended September 30, 2025, such amount was $27 million . (2) Consists of Encino acquisition-related G&A costs ( $68 million ). Adjusted Net Income (Continued)\n\nIn millions of USD, except share data (in millions) and per share data (Unaudited)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n2Q 2025\n\n\n\nBefore\n\nTax\n\nIncome Tax\n\nImpact\n\nAfter\n\nTax\n\nDiluted\n\nEarnings per\n\nShare\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nReported Net Income (GAAP) 1,751\n\n(406)\n\n1,345\n\n2.46\n\nAdjustments:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nGains on Mark-to-Market Financial Commodity and Other Derivative Contracts, Net (107)\n\n23\n\n(84)\n\n(0.16)\n\nNet Cash Payments for Settlements of Financial Commodity Derivative Contracts (1) (24)\n\n5\n\n(19)\n\n(0.03)\n\nAdd: Certain Impairments 11\n\n—\n\n11\n\n0.02\n\nAdd: Acquisition-Related Costs (2) 18\n\n(3)\n\n15\n\n0.03\n\nAdjustments to Net Income (102)\n\n25\n\n(77)\n\n(0.14)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAdjusted Net Income (Non-GAAP) 1,649\n\n(381)\n\n1,268\n\n2.32\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAverage Number of Common Shares\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBasic\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n543\n\nDiluted\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n546\n\n(1) Consistent with its customary practice, in calculating Adjusted Net Income (Non-GAAP), EOG subtracts from reported Net Income (GAAP) the total net cash paid for settlements of financial commodity derivative contracts during such period. For the three months ended June 30, 2025, such amount was $24 million . (2) Consists of Encino acquisition-related G&A costs ( $12 million ) and financing commitment costs ( $6 million ).\n\n1Q 2025\n\n\n\nBefore\n\nTax\n\nIncome Tax\n\nImpact\n\nAfter\n\nTax\n\nDiluted\n\nEarnings per\n\nShare\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nReported Net Income (GAAP) 1,877\n\n(414)\n\n1,463\n\n2.65\n\nAdjustments:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLosses on Mark-to-Market Financial Commodity and Other Derivative Contracts, Net 191\n\n(41)\n\n150\n\n0.26\n\nNet Cash Payments for Settlements of Financial Commodity Derivative Contracts (1) (38)\n\n8\n\n(30)\n\n(0.05)\n\nAdd: Losses on Asset Dispositions, Net 1\n\n2\n\n3\n\n0.01\n\nAdjustments to Net Income 154\n\n(31)\n\n123\n\n0.22\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAdjusted Net Income (Non-GAAP) 2,031\n\n(445)\n\n1,586\n\n2.87\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAverage Number of Common Shares\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBasic\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n550\n\nDiluted\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n553\n\n(1) Consistent with its customary practice, in calculating Adjusted Net Income (Non-GAAP), EOG subtracts from reported Net Income (GAAP) the total net cash paid for settlements of financial commodity derivative contracts during such period. For the three months ended March 31, 2025, such amount was $38 million . Adjusted Net Income (Continued)\n\nIn millions of USD, except share data (in millions) and per share data (Unaudited)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFY 2025\n\n\n\nBefore\n\nTax\n\nIncome Tax\n\nImpact\n\nAfter\n\nTax\n\nDiluted\n\nEarnings per\n\nShare\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nReported Net Income (GAAP) 6,362\n\n(1,382)\n\n4,980\n\n9.12\n\nAdjustments:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nGains on Mark-to-Market Financial Commodity and Other Derivative Contracts, Net (13)\n\n3\n\n(10)\n\n(0.02)\n\nNet Cash Payments for Settlements of Financial Commodity Derivative Contracts (1) (56)\n\n12\n\n(44)\n\n(0.08)\n\nAdd: Losses on Asset Dispositions, Net 35\n\n(8)\n\n27\n\n0.05\n\nAdd: Certain Impairments (2) 657\n\n(140)\n\n517\n\n0.95\n\nAdd: Acquisition-Related Costs (3) 94\n\n(16)\n\n78\n\n0.14\n\nAdjustments to Net Income 717\n\n(149)\n\n568\n\n1.04\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAdjusted Net Income (Non-GAAP) 7,079\n\n(1,531)\n\n5,548\n\n10.16\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAverage Number of Common Shares\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBasic\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n543\n\nDiluted\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n546\n\n(1) Consistent with its customary practice, in calculating Adjusted Net Income (Non-GAAP), EOG subtracts from reported Net Income (GAAP) the total net cash paid for settlements of financial commodity derivative contracts during such period. For the twelve months ended December 31, 2025, such amount was $56 million . (2) Impairments primarily associated with the write-down to fair value of natural gas and crude oil assets in the Barnett Shale and Woodford Oil Window (mainly driven by play-specific economics and resource allocation). (3) Consists of Encino acquisition-related G&A costs ( $88 million ) and financing commitment costs ( $6 million ).\n\nFY 2024\n\n\n\nBefore\n\nTax\n\nIncome Tax\n\nImpact\n\nAfter\n\nTax\n\nDiluted\n\nEarnings per\n\nShare\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nReported Net Income (GAAP) 8,218\n\n(1,815)\n\n6,403\n\n11.25\n\nAdjustments:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nGains on Mark-to-Market Financial Commodity and Other Derivative Contracts, Net (204)\n\n44\n\n(160)\n\n(0.28)\n\nNet Cash Received from Settlements of Financial Commodity Derivative Contracts (1) 214\n\n(46)\n\n168\n\n0.30\n\nLess: Gains on Asset Dispositions, Net (16)\n\n3\n\n(13)\n\n(0.02)\n\nAdd: Certain Impairments (2) 291\n\n(57)\n\n234\n\n0.41\n\nLess: Severance Tax Refund (31)\n\n7\n\n(24)\n\n(0.04)\n\nAdd: Severance Tax Consulting Fees 10\n\n(2)\n\n8\n\n0.01\n\nLess: Interest on Severance Tax Refund (5)\n\n1\n\n(4)\n\n(0.01)\n\nAdjustments to Net Income 259\n\n(50)\n\n209\n\n0.37\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAdjusted Net Income (Non-GAAP) 8,477\n\n(1,865)\n\n6,612\n\n11.62\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAverage Number of Common Shares\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBasic\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n566\n\nDiluted\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n569\n\n(1) Consistent with its customary practice, in calculating Adjusted Net Income (Non-GAAP), EOG adds to reported Net Income (GAAP) the total net cash received from settlements of financial commodity derivative contracts during such period. For the twelve months ended December 31, 2024, such amount was $214 million . (2) Impairments primarily associated with the write-down to fair value of natural gas and crude oil assets in the Rocky Mountain area. Net Income Per Share\n\nIn millions of USD, except share data (in millions), per share data, production volume data and per Boe data (Unaudited)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n4Q 2025 Net Income per Share (GAAP) - Diluted\n\n\n\n1.30\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nRealized Prices\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1Q 2026 Composite Average Revenue from Sales of Crude Oil and Condensate, NGLs, and Natural Gas per Boe 42.24\n\n\n\n\n\nLess: 4Q 2025 Composite Average Revenue from Sales of Crude Oil and Condensate, NGLs, and Natural Gas per Boe (34.99)\n\n\n\n\n\nSubtotal 7.25\n\n\n\n\n\nMultiplied by: 1Q 2026 Crude Oil Equivalent Volumes (MMBoe) 124.5\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Change in Revenue 903\n\n\n\n\n\nAdd: Income Tax Benefit (Provision) Imputed (based on 22% ) (199)\n\n\n\n\n\nChange in Net Income 704\n\n\n\n\n\nChange in Diluted Earnings per Share\n\n\n\n1.32\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nVolumes\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1Q 2026 Crude Oil Equivalent Volumes (MMBoe) 124.5\n\n\n\n\n\nLess: 4Q 2025 Crude Oil Equivalent Volumes (MMBoe) (128.7)\n\n\n\n\n\nSubtotal (4.2)\n\n\n\n\n\nMultiplied by: 1Q 2026 Composite Average Margin per Boe (GAAP) (Including Total\n\nExploration Costs) (refer to \"Revenues, Costs and Margins Per Barrel of Oil Equivalent\" schedule below) 18.11\n\n\n\n\n\nChange in Margin (76)\n\n\n\n\n\nLess: Income Tax Benefit (Provision) Imputed (based on 22% ) 17\n\n\n\n\n\nChange in Net Income (59)\n\n\n\n\n\nChange in Diluted Earnings per Share\n\n\n\n(0.11)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCertain Operating Costs per Boe\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n4Q 2025 Total Cash Operating Costs (GAAP) and Total DD&A per Boe 19.81\n\n\n\n\n\nLess: 1Q 2026 Total Cash Operating Costs (GAAP) and Total DD&A per Boe (20.03)\n\n\n\n\n\nSubtotal (0.22)\n\n\n\n\n\nMultiplied by: 1Q 2026 Crude Oil Equivalent Volumes (MMBoe) 124.5\n\n\n\n\n\nChange in Before-Tax Net Income (27)\n\n\n\n\n\nAdd: Income Tax Benefit (Provision) Imputed (based on 22% ) 6\n\n\n\n\n\nChange in Net Income (21)\n\n\n\n\n\nChange in Diluted Earnings per Share\n\n\n\n(0.04)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nGains (Losses) on Mark-to-Market Financial Commodity and Other Derivative Contracts, Net\n\n\n\n\n\n1Q 2026 Net Gains (Losses) on Mark-to-Market Financial Commodity and Other Derivative Contracts 113\n\n\n\n\n\nLess: Income Tax Benefit (Provision) (24)\n\n\n\n\n\nAfter Tax - (a) 89\n\n\n\n\n\nLess: 4Q 2025 Net Gains (Losses) on Mark-to-Market Financial Commodity and Other Derivative Contracts (19)\n\n\n\n\n\nLess: Income Tax Benefit (Provision) 4\n\n\n\n\n\nAfter Tax - (b) (15)\n\n\n\n\n\nChange in Net Income - (a) - (b) 104\n\n\n\n\n\nChange in Diluted Earnings per Share\n\n\n\n0.19\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOther (1)\n\n\n\n1.04\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1Q 2026 Net Income per Share (GAAP) - Diluted\n\n\n\n3.70\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1Q 2026 Average Number of Common Shares - Diluted 535\n\n\n\n\n\n(1) Includes gathering, processing and marketing revenue, gains (losses) on asset dispositions (for GAAP earnings per share only), other revenue, exploration costs, dry hole costs, impairments, marketing costs, taxes other than income, other income (expense), interest expense, the impact of changes in the effective income tax rate and the impact of share repurchases on diluted shares. Adjusted Net Income Per Share\n\nIn millions of USD, except share data (in millions), per share data, production volume data and per Boe data (Unaudited)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n4Q 2025 Adjusted Net Income per Share (Non-GAAP) - Diluted\n\n\n\n2.27\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nRealized Prices\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1Q 2026 Composite Average Revenue from Sales of Crude Oil and Condensate, NGLs, and Natural Gas per Boe 42.24\n\n\n\n\n\nLess: 4Q 2025 Composite Average Revenue from Sales of Crude Oil and Condensate, NGLs, and Natural Gas per Boe (34.99)\n\n\n\n\n\nSubtotal 7.25\n\n\n\n\n\nMultiplied by: 1Q 2026 Crude Oil Equivalent Volumes (MMBoe) 124.5\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Change in Revenue 903\n\n\n\n\n\nAdd: Income Tax Benefit (Provision) Imputed (based on 22% ) (199)\n\n\n\n\n\nChange in Net Income 704\n\n\n\n\n\nChange in Diluted Earnings per Share\n\n\n\n1.32\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nVolumes\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1Q 2026 Crude Oil Equivalent Volumes (MMBoe) 124.5\n\n\n\n\n\nLess: 4Q 2025 Crude Oil Equivalent Volumes (MMBoe) (128.7)\n\n\n\n\n\nSubtotal (4.2)\n\n\n\n\n\nMultiplied by: 1Q 2026 Composite Average Margin per Boe (Non-GAAP) (Including Total Exploration Costs) (refer to\n\n\"Revenues, Costs and Margins Per Barrel of Oil Equivalent\" schedule below) 18.11\n\n\n\n\n\nChange in Margin (76)\n\n\n\n\n\nLess: Income Tax Benefit (Provision) Imputed (based on 22% ) 17\n\n\n\n\n\nChange in Net Income (59)\n\n\n\n\n\nChange in Diluted Earnings per Share\n\n\n\n(0.11)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCertain Operating Costs per Boe\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n4Q 2025 Total Cash Operating Costs (Non-GAAP) and Total DD&A per Boe 19.75\n\n\n\n\n\nLess: 1Q 2026 Total Cash Operating Costs (Non-GAAP) and Total DD&A per Boe (20.03)\n\n\n\n\n\nSubtotal (0.28)\n\n\n\n\n\nMultiplied by: 1Q 2026 Crude Oil Equivalent Volumes (MMBoe) 124.5\n\n\n\n\n\nChange in Before-Tax Net Income (35)\n\n\n\n\n\nAdd: Income Tax Benefit (Provision) Imputed (based on 22% ) 8\n\n\n\n\n\nChange in Net Income (27)\n\n\n\n\n\nChange in Diluted Earnings per Share\n\n\n\n(0.05)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nNet Cash Received from (Payments for) Settlements of Financial Commodity Derivative Contracts\n\n\n\n\n\n1Q 2026 Net Cash Received from (Payments for) Settlements of Financial Commodity Derivative Contracts (53)\n\n\n\n\n\nLess: Income Tax Benefit (Provision) 11\n\n\n\n\n\nAfter Tax - (a) (42)\n\n\n\n\n\nLess: 4Q 2025 Net Cash Received from (Payments for) Settlements of Financial Commodity Derivative Contracts (21)\n\n\n\n\n\nLess: Income Tax Benefit (Provision) 4\n\n\n\n\n\nAfter Tax - (b) (17)\n\n\n\n\n\nChange in Net Income - (a) - (b) (25)\n\n\n\n\n\nChange in Diluted Earnings per Share\n\n\n\n(0.05)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOther (1)\n\n\n\n0.03\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1Q 2026 Adjusted Net Income per Share (Non-GAAP)\n\n\n\n3.41\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1Q 2026 Average Number of Common Shares - Diluted 535\n\n\n\n\n\n(1) Includes gathering, processing and marketing revenue, other revenue, exploration costs, dry hole costs, impairments, marketing costs, taxes other than income, other income (expense), interest expense, the impact of changes in the effective income tax rate and the impact of share repurchases on diluted shares. Cash Flow from Operations and Free Cash Flow\n\nIn millions of USD (Unaudited)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThe following tables reconcile Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities (GAAP) to Adjusted Cash Flow from Operations (Non-GAAP). EOG believes this presentation may be useful to investors who follow the practice of some industry analysts who adjust Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities for Changes in Components of Working Capital and Other Assets and Liabilities, Changes in Components of Working Capital Associated with Investing Activities (or Investing and Financing Activities, as applicable) and certain other adjustments to exclude certain non-recurring items and other items as further described below. EOG defines Free Cash Flow (Non-GAAP) for a given period as Adjusted Cash Flow from Operations (Non-GAAP) (see below reconciliation) for such period less the Total Capital Expenditures (Non-GAAP) (see below reconciliation) during such period, as is illustrated below. EOG management uses this information for comparative purposes within the industry. As indicated in the tables below, EOG is (1) in addition to its customary working capital-related adjustments, adjusting Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities (GAAP) to add back certain non-recurring acquisition-related costs incurred during the second, third and fourth quarters of 2025 and (2) now presenting such adjusted measure as \"Adjusted Cash Flow from Operations (Non-GAAP)\" (instead of \"Cash Flow from Operations Before Changes in Working Capital (Non-GAAP)\" as reported in prior periods); the presentation below with respect to the second, third and fourth quarters of 2025 and the prior periods shown has been conformed.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n2025\n\n2026\n\n\n\n1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Year\n\n1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Year\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nNet Cash Provided by Operating Activities (GAAP) 2,289 2,032 3,111 2,612 10,044\n\n2,966\n\n\n\n\n\n2,966\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAdjustments:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nChanges in Components of Working Capital and Other Assets and Liabilities\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAccounts Receivable (48) (122) (133) 3 (300)\n\n907\n\n\n\n\n\n907\n\nInventories (76) 45 (4) 84 49\n\n(21)\n\n\n\n\n\n(21)\n\nAccounts Payable 129 107 (5) 40 271\n\n(279)\n\n\n\n\n\n(279)\n\nAccrued Taxes Payable 339 321 (28) 103 735\n\n(467)\n\n\n\n\n\n(467)\n\nOther Assets 43 43 28 (97) 17\n\n(55)\n\n\n\n\n\n(55)\n\nOther Liabilities 96 52 (155) (10) (17)\n\n123\n\n\n\n\n\n123\n\nChanges in Components of Working Capital Associated with Investing Activities 41 8 159 (123) 85\n\n(45)\n\n\n\n\n\n(45)\n\nAdd:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAcquisition-Related Costs (1), Net of Tax — 10 58 5 73\n\n—\n\n\n\n\n\n—\n\nAdjusted Cash Flow from Operations (Non-GAAP) 2,813 2,496 3,031 2,617 10,957\n\n3,129\n\n\n\n\n\n3,129\n\nLess:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Capital Expenditures (Non-GAAP) (2) (1,484) (1,523) (1,648) (1,639) (6,294)\n\n(1,636)\n\n\n\n\n\n(1,636)\n\nFree Cash Flow (Non-GAAP) 1,329 973 1,383 978 4,663\n\n1,493\n\n\n\n\n\n1,493\n\n(1) Consists of Encino acquisition-related G&A costs of $12 million , $68 million and $8 million (each before tax) for the three months ended June 30, 2025, three months ended September 30, 2025 and three months ended December 31, 2025, respectively.\n\n(2) See below reconciliation of Total Expenditures (GAAP) to Total Capital Expenditures (Non-GAAP):\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n2025\n\n2026\n\n\n\n1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Year\n\n1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Year\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Expenditures (GAAP) 1,546 1,883 8,544 1,730 13,703\n\n1,768\n\n\n\n\n\n1,768\n\nLess:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAsset Retirement Costs (13) (14) (86) (33) (146)\n\n(12)\n\n\n\n\n\n(12)\n\nNon-Cash Leasehold Acquisition Costs (3) (9) (2) (3) (10) (24)\n\n(52)\n\n\n\n\n\n(52)\n\nAcquisition Costs of Properties (3) 1 (270) (6,736) 2 (7,003)\n\n(23)\n\n\n\n\n\n(23)\n\nExploration Costs (41) (74) (71) (50) (236)\n\n(45)\n\n\n\n\n\n(45)\n\nTotal Capital Expenditures (Non-GAAP) 1,484 1,523 1,648 1,639 6,294\n\n1,636\n\n\n\n\n\n1,636\n\nCash Flow from Operations and Free Cash Flow (Continued)\n\nIn millions of USD (Unaudited)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFY 2024\n\nFY 2023\n\nFY 2022\n\nFY 2021\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nNet Cash Provided by Operating Activities (GAAP) 12,143\n\n11,340\n\n11,093\n\n8,791\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAdjustments:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nChanges in Components of Working Capital and Other Assets and Liabilities\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAccounts Receivable (101)\n\n38\n\n347\n\n821\n\nInventories (259)\n\n231\n\n534\n\n13\n\nAccounts Payable 36\n\n119\n\n(90)\n\n(456)\n\nAccrued Taxes Payable (541)\n\n(61)\n\n113\n\n(312)\n\nOther Assets (44)\n\n(39)\n\n364\n\n136\n\nOther Liabilities (23)\n\n(184)\n\n266\n\n116\n\nChanges in Components of Working Capital Associated with Investing Activities 382\n\n(295)\n\n(375)\n\n200\n\nAdjusted Cash Flow from Operations (Non-GAAP) 11,593\n\n11,149\n\n12,252\n\n9,309\n\nLess:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Capital Expenditures (Non-GAAP) (2) (6,226)\n\n(6,041)\n\n(4,607)\n\n(3,755)\n\nFree Cash Flow (Non-GAAP) 5,367\n\n5,108\n\n7,645\n\n5,554\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n(2) See below reconciliation of Total Expenditures (GAAP) to Total Capital Expenditures (Non-GAAP):\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Expenditures (GAAP) 6,653\n\n6,818\n\n5,610\n\n4,255\n\nLess:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAsset Retirement Costs 2\n\n(257)\n\n(298)\n\n(127)\n\nNon-Cash Development Drilling —\n\n(90)\n\n—\n\n—\n\nNon-Cash Leasehold Acquisition Costs (3) (85)\n\n(99)\n\n(127)\n\n(45)\n\nNon-Cash Finance Leases —\n\n—\n\n—\n\n(74)\n\nAcquisition Costs of Properties (3) (33)\n\n(16)\n\n(419)\n\n(100)\n\nAcquisition Costs of Other Property, Plant and Equipment (137)\n\n(134)\n\n—\n\n—\n\nExploration Costs (174)\n\n(181)\n\n(159)\n\n(154)\n\nTotal Capital Expenditures (Non-GAAP) 6,226\n\n6,041\n\n4,607\n\n3,755\n\n(3) Line item descriptions revised (from descriptions shown in EOG's previously published tables) to more accurately describe the costs reflected therein; previously reported cost amounts not impacted by such changes in presentation. Net Debt-to-Total Capitalization Ratio\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nIn millions of USD, except ratio data (Unaudited)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThe following tables reconcile Current and Long-Term Debt (GAAP) to Net Debt (Non-GAAP) and Total Capitalization (GAAP) to Total Capitalization (Non-GAAP), as used in the Net Debt-to-Total Capitalization ratio calculation. A portion of the cash is associated with international subsidiaries; tax considerations may impact debt paydown. EOG believes this presentation may be useful to investors who follow the practice of some industry analysts who utilize Net Debt and Total Capitalization (Non-GAAP) in their Net Debt-to-Total Capitalization ratio calculation. EOG management uses this information for comparative purposes within the industry.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nMarch 31,\n\n2026\n\nDecember 31,\n\n2025\n\nSeptember 30,\n\n2025\n\nJune 30,\n\n2025\n\nMarch 31,\n\n2025\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Stockholders' Equity - (a) 30,908\n\n29,833\n\n30,285\n\n29,238\n\n29,516\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCurrent and Long-Term Debt (GAAP) - (b) 7,931\n\n7,936\n\n7,694\n\n4,236\n\n4,744\n\nLess: Cash (3,849)\n\n(3,396)\n\n(3,530)\n\n(5,216)\n\n(6,599)\n\nNet Debt (Non-GAAP) - (c) 4,082\n\n4,540\n\n4,164\n\n(980)\n\n(1,855)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Capitalization (GAAP) - (a) + (b) 38,839\n\n37,769\n\n37,979\n\n33,474\n\n34,260\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Capitalization (Non-GAAP) - (a) + (c) 34,990\n\n34,373\n\n34,449\n\n28,258\n\n27,661\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDebt-to-Total Capitalization (GAAP) - (b) / [(a) + (b)] 20.4 %\n\n21.0 %\n\n20.3 %\n\n12.7 %\n\n13.8 %\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nNet Debt-to-Total Capitalization (Non-GAAP) - (c) / [(a) + (c)] 11.7 %\n\n13.2 %\n\n12.1 %\n\n-3.5 %\n\n-6.7 %\n\nRevenues, Costs and Margins Per Barrel of Oil Equivalent\n\nIn millions of USD, except Boe and per Boe amounts (Unaudited)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nEOG believes this presentation may be useful to investors who follow the practice of some industry analysts who review certain components and/or groups of components of revenues, costs and/or margins per barrel of oil equivalent (Boe). Certain of these components are adjusted for non-recurring and certain other items, as further discussed below. EOG management uses this information for purposes of comparing its financial performance with the financial performance of other companies in the industry.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1Q 2026\n\n4Q 2025\n\n3Q 2025\n\n2Q 2025\n\n1Q 2025\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nVolume - Million Barrels of Oil Equivalent - (a) 124.5\n\n128.7\n\n119.7\n\n103.2\n\n98.1\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Operating Revenues and Other - (b) 6,921\n\n5,638\n\n5,847\n\n5,478\n\n5,669\n\nTotal Operating Expenses - (c) 4,323\n\n4,695\n\n4,011\n\n3,731\n\n3,810\n\nOperating Income - (d) 2,598\n\n943\n\n1,836\n\n1,747\n\n1,859\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nRevenues from Sales of Crude Oil and Condensate, NGLs, and Natural Gas\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCrude Oil and Condensate 3,577\n\n2,991\n\n3,243\n\n2,974\n\n3,293\n\nNatural Gas Liquids 664\n\n666\n\n604\n\n534\n\n572\n\nNatural Gas 1,021\n\n847\n\n707\n\n600\n\n637\n\nTotal Revenues from Sales of Crude Oil and Condensate, NGLs, and Natural Gas - (e) 5,262\n\n4,504\n\n4,554\n\n4,108\n\n4,502\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOperating Costs\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLease and Well 462\n\n447\n\n431\n\n396\n\n401\n\nGathering, Processing and Transportation Costs (1) 654\n\n652\n\n587\n\n455\n\n440\n\nGeneral and Administrative (GAAP) 185\n\n224\n\n239\n\n186\n\n171\n\nLess: Certain Items (see Endnote 2 to 1Q 2026 earnings release) —\n\n(8)\n\n(68)\n\n(12)\n\n—\n\nGeneral and Administrative (Non-GAAP) (2) 185\n\n216\n\n171\n\n174\n\n171\n\nTaxes Other Than Income (GAAP) 338\n\n283\n\n309\n\n301\n\n341\n\nAdd: Severance Tax Refund —\n\n—\n\n—\n\n—\n\n—\n\nTaxes Other Than Income (Non-GAAP) (3) 338\n\n283\n\n309\n\n301\n\n341\n\nInterest Expense, Net 66\n\n66\n\n71\n\n51\n\n47\n\nLess: Acquisition-Related Financing Commitment Costs —\n\n—\n\n—\n\n(6)\n\n—\n\nInterest Expense, Net (Non-GAAP) (4) 66\n\n66\n\n71\n\n45\n\n47\n\nTotal Operating Cost (GAAP) (excluding DD&A and Total Exploration Costs) - (f) 1,705\n\n1,672\n\n1,637\n\n1,389\n\n1,400\n\nTotal Operating Cost (Non-GAAP) (excluding DD&A and Total Exploration Costs) - (g) 1,705\n\n1,664\n\n1,569\n\n1,371\n\n1,400\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDepreciation, Depletion and Amortization (DD&A) 1,193\n\n1,226\n\n1,169\n\n1,053\n\n1,013\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Operating Cost (GAAP) (excluding Total Exploration Costs) - (h) 2,898\n\n2,898\n\n2,806\n\n2,442\n\n2,413\n\nTotal Operating Cost (Non-GAAP) (excluding Total Exploration Costs) - (i) 2,898\n\n2,890\n\n2,738\n\n2,424\n\n2,413\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nExploration Costs 45\n\n50\n\n71\n\n74\n\n41\n\nDry Hole Costs 23\n\n4\n\n—\n\n11\n\n34\n\nImpairments 39\n\n689\n\n71\n\n39\n\n44\n\nTotal Exploration Costs (GAAP) 107\n\n743\n\n142\n\n124\n\n119\n\nLess: Certain Impairments (5) —\n\n(646)\n\n—\n\n(11)\n\n—\n\nTotal Exploration Costs (Non-GAAP) 107\n\n97\n\n142\n\n113\n\n119\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Operating Cost (GAAP) (including Total Exploration Costs (GAAP)) - (j) 3,005\n\n3,641\n\n2,948\n\n2,566\n\n2,532\n\nTotal Operating Cost (Non-GAAP) (including Total Exploration Costs (Non-GAAP)) - (k) 3,005\n\n2,987\n\n2,880\n\n2,537\n\n2,532\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Revenues from Sales of Crude Oil and Condensate, NGLs, and Natural\n\nGas less Total Operating Cost (GAAP) (including Total Exploration Costs (GAAP)) 2,257\n\n863\n\n1,606\n\n1,542\n\n1,970\n\nTotal Revenues from Sales of Crude Oil and Condensate, NGLs, and Natural\n\nGas less Total Operating Cost (Non-GAAP) (including Total Exploration Costs (Non-GAAP)) 2,257\n\n1,517\n\n1,674\n\n1,571\n\n1,970\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nRevenues, Costs and Margins Per Barrel of Oil Equivalent (Continued)\n\n\n\n\n\nIn millions of USD, except Boe and per Boe amounts (Unaudited)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1Q 2026\n\n4Q 2025\n\n3Q 2025\n\n2Q 2025\n\n1Q 2025\n\nPer Barrel of Oil Equivalent (Boe) Calculations (GAAP)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nComposite Average Operating Revenues and Other per Boe - (b) / (a) 55.59\n\n43.81\n\n48.85\n\n53.08\n\n57.79\n\nComposite Average Operating Expenses per Boe - (c) / (a) 34.72\n\n36.48\n\n33.51\n\n36.15\n\n38.84\n\nComposite Average Operating Income per Boe - (d) / (a) 20.87\n\n7.33\n\n15.34\n\n16.93\n\n18.95\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nComposite Average Revenue from Sales of Crude Oil and Condensate, NGLs,\n\nand Natural Gas per Boe - (e) / (a) 42.24\n\n34.99\n\n38.05\n\n39.80\n\n45.88\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Operating Cost per Boe (excluding DD&A and Total Exploration Costs) - (f) / (a) 13.69\n\n12.99\n\n13.67\n\n13.46\n\n14.26\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nComposite Average Margin per Boe (excluding DD&A and Total Exploration\n\nCosts) - [(e) / (a) - (f) / (a)] 28.55\n\n22.00\n\n24.38\n\n26.34\n\n31.62\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Operating Cost per Boe (excluding Total Exploration Costs) - (h) / (a) 23.27\n\n22.52\n\n23.44\n\n23.66\n\n24.58\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nComposite Average Margin per Boe (excluding Total Exploration Costs) -\n\n[(e) / (a) - (h) / (a)] 18.97\n\n12.47\n\n14.61\n\n16.14\n\n21.30\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Operating Cost per Boe (including Total Exploration Costs) - (j) / (a) 24.13\n\n28.29\n\n24.63\n\n24.86\n\n25.79\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nComposite Average Margin per Boe (including Total Exploration Costs) -\n\n[(e) / (a) - (j) / (a)] 18.11\n\n6.70\n\n13.42\n\n14.94\n\n20.09\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nPer Barrel of Oil Equivalent (Boe) Calculations (Non-GAAP)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Operating Cost per Boe (excluding DD&A and Total Exploration\n\nCosts) - (g) / (a) 13.69\n\n12.93\n\n13.10\n\n13.30\n\n14.26\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nComposite Average Margin per Boe (excluding DD&A and Total Exploration Costs) -\n\n[(e) / (a) - (g) / (a)] 28.55\n\n22.06\n\n24.95\n\n26.50\n\n31.62\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Operating Cost per Boe (excluding Total Exploration Costs) - (i) / (a) 23.27\n\n22.46\n\n22.87\n\n23.50\n\n24.58\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nComposite Average Margin per Boe (excluding Total Exploration Costs) -\n\n[(e) / (a) - (i) / (a)] 18.97\n\n12.53\n\n15.18\n\n16.30\n\n21.30\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Operating Cost per Boe (including Total Exploration Costs) - (k) / (a) 24.13\n\n23.21\n\n24.06\n\n24.59\n\n25.79\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nComposite Average Margin per Boe (including Total Exploration Costs) -\n\n[(e) / (a) - (k) / (a)] 18.11\n\n11.78\n\n13.99\n\n15.21\n\n20.09\n\nRevenues, Costs and Margins Per Barrel of Oil Equivalent (Continued)\n\nIn millions of USD, except Boe and per Boe amounts (Unaudited)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n2025\n\n2024\n\n2023\n\n2022\n\n2021\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nVolume - Million Barrels of Oil Equivalent - (a) 449.8\n\n388.7\n\n359.4\n\n331.5\n\n302.5\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Operating Revenues and Other - (b) 22,632\n\n23,698\n\n24,186\n\n25,702\n\n18,642\n\nTotal Operating Expenses - (c) 16,247\n\n15,616\n\n14,583\n\n15,736\n\n12,540\n\nOperating Income (Loss) - (d) 6,385\n\n8,082\n\n9,603\n\n9,966\n\n6,102\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nRevenues from Sales of Crude Oil and Condensate, NGLs, and Natural Gas\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCrude Oil and Condensate 12,501\n\n13,921\n\n13,748\n\n16,367\n\n11,125\n\nNatural Gas Liquids 2,376\n\n2,106\n\n1,884\n\n2,648\n\n1,812\n\nNatural Gas 2,791\n\n1,551\n\n1,744\n\n3,781\n\n2,444\n\nTotal Revenues from Sales of Crude Oil and Condensate, NGLs, and Natural\n\nGas - (e) 17,668\n\n17,578\n\n17,376\n\n22,796\n\n15,381\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOperating Costs\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLease and Well 1,675\n\n1,572\n\n1,454\n\n1,331\n\n1,135\n\nGathering, Processing and Transportation Costs (1) 2,134\n\n1,722\n\n1,620\n\n1,587\n\n1,422\n\nGeneral and Administrative (GAAP) 820\n\n669\n\n640\n\n570\n\n511\n\nLess: Certain Items (see Endnote 7 to Additional Key Financial Information below) (88)\n\n(10)\n\n—\n\n(16)\n\n—\n\nGeneral and Administrative (Non-GAAP) (2) 732\n\n659\n\n640\n\n554\n\n511\n\nTaxes Other Than Income (GAAP) 1,234\n\n1,249\n\n1,284\n\n1,585\n\n1,047\n\nAdd: Severance Tax Refund —\n\n31\n\n—\n\n115\n\n—\n\nTaxes Other Than Income (Non-GAAP) (3) 1,234\n\n1,280\n\n1,284\n\n1,700\n\n1,047\n\nInterest Expense, Net 235\n\n138\n\n148\n\n179\n\n178\n\nLess: Acquisition-Related Financing Commitment Costs (6)\n\n—\n\n—\n\n—\n\n—\n\nInterest Expense, Net (Non-GAAP) (4) 229\n\n138\n\n148\n\n179\n\n178\n\nTotal Operating Cost (GAAP) (excluding DD&A and Total Exploration\n\nCosts) - (f) 6,098\n\n5,350\n\n5,146\n\n5,252\n\n4,293\n\nTotal Operating Cost (Non-GAAP) (excluding DD&A and Total Exploration\n\nCosts) - (g) 6,004\n\n5,371\n\n5,146\n\n5,351\n\n4,293\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDepreciation, Depletion and Amortization (DD&A) 4,461\n\n4,108\n\n3,492\n\n3,542\n\n3,651\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Operating Cost (GAAP) (excluding Total Exploration Costs) - (h) 10,559\n\n9,458\n\n8,638\n\n8,794\n\n7,944\n\nTotal Operating Cost (Non-GAAP) (excluding Total Exploration Costs) - (i) 10,465\n\n9,479\n\n8,638\n\n8,893\n\n7,944\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nExploration Costs 236\n\n174\n\n181\n\n159\n\n154\n\nDry Hole Costs 49\n\n14\n\n1\n\n45\n\n71\n\nImpairments 843\n\n391\n\n202\n\n382\n\n376\n\nTotal Exploration Costs (GAAP) 1,128\n\n579\n\n384\n\n586\n\n601\n\nLess: Certain Impairments (5) (657)\n\n(291)\n\n(42)\n\n(113)\n\n(15)\n\nTotal Exploration Costs (Non-GAAP) 471\n\n288\n\n342\n\n473\n\n586\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Operating Cost (GAAP) (including Total Exploration Costs (GAAP)) - (j) 11,687\n\n10,037\n\n9,022\n\n9,380\n\n8,545\n\nTotal Operating Cost (Non-GAAP) (including Total Exploration Costs\n\n(Non-GAAP)) - (k) 10,936\n\n9,767\n\n8,980\n\n9,366\n\n8,530\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Revenues from Sales of Crude Oil and Condensate, NGLs, and Natural\n\nGas less Total Operating Cost (GAAP) (including Total Exploration\n\nCosts (GAAP)) 5,981\n\n7,541\n\n8,354\n\n13,416\n\n6,836\n\nTotal Revenues from Sales of Crude Oil and Condensate, NGLs, and Natural\n\nGas less Total Operating Cost (Non-GAAP) (including Total Exploration\n\nCosts (Non-GAAP)) 6,732\n\n7,811\n\n8,396\n\n13,430\n\n6,851\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nRevenues, Costs and Margins Per Barrel of Oil Equivalent (Continued)\n\n\n\n\n\nIn millions of USD, except Boe and per Boe amounts (Unaudited)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n2025\n\n2024\n\n2023\n\n2022\n\n2021\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nPer Barrel of Oil Equivalent (Boe) Calculations (GAAP)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nComposite Average Operating Revenues and Other per Boe - (b) / (a) 50.32\n\n60.97\n\n67.30\n\n77.53\n\n61.63\n\nComposite Average Operating Expenses per Boe - (c) / (a) 36.12\n\n40.18\n\n40.58\n\n47.47\n\n41.46\n\nComposite Average Operating Income (Loss) per Boe - (d) / (a) 14.20\n\n20.79\n\n26.72\n\n30.06\n\n20.17\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nComposite Average Revenue from Sales of Crude Oil and Condensate, NGLs,\n\nand Natural Gas per Boe - (e) / (a) 39.28\n\n45.22\n\n48.34\n\n68.77\n\n50.84\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Operating Cost per Boe (excluding DD&A and Total Exploration Costs) - (f) / (a) 13.54\n\n13.76\n\n14.31\n\n15.84\n\n14.19\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nComposite Average Margin per Boe (excluding DD&A and Total Exploration\n\nCosts) - [(e) / (a) - (f) / (a)] 25.74\n\n31.46\n\n34.03\n\n52.93\n\n36.65\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Operating Cost per Boe (excluding Total Exploration Costs) - (h) / (a) 23.46\n\n24.33\n\n24.03\n\n26.53\n\n26.26\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nComposite Average Margin per Boe (excluding Total Exploration Costs) - [(e) /\n\n(a) - (h) / (a)] 15.82\n\n20.89\n\n24.31\n\n42.24\n\n24.58\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Operating Cost per Boe (including Total Exploration Costs) - (j) / (a) 25.97\n\n25.82\n\n25.10\n\n28.30\n\n28.25\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nComposite Average Margin per Boe (including Total Exploration Costs) - [(e) /\n\n(a) - (j) / (a)] 13.31\n\n19.40\n\n23.24\n\n40.47\n\n22.59\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nPer Barrel of Oil Equivalent (Boe) Calculations (Non-GAAP)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Operating Cost per Boe (excluding DD&A and Total Exploration Costs) - (g) / (a) 13.34\n\n13.82\n\n14.31\n\n16.14\n\n14.19\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nComposite Average Margin per Boe (excluding DD&A and Total Exploration\n\nCosts) - [(e) / (a) - (g) / (a)] 25.94\n\n31.40\n\n34.03\n\n52.63\n\n36.65\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Operating Cost per Boe (excluding Total Exploration Costs) - (i) / (a) 23.26\n\n24.39\n\n24.03\n\n26.83\n\n26.26\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nComposite Average Margin per Boe (excluding Total Exploration Costs) - [(e) /\n\n(a) - (i) / (a)] 16.02\n\n20.83\n\n24.31\n\n41.94\n\n24.58\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal Operating Cost per Boe (including Total Exploration Costs) - (k) / (a) 24.31\n\n25.13\n\n24.98\n\n28.26\n\n28.20\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nComposite Average Margin per Boe (including Total Exploration Costs) - [(e) /\n\n(a) - (k) / (a)] 14.97\n\n20.09\n\n23.36\n\n40.51\n\n22.64\n\n\n\n\n\n(1) Effective January 1, 2024, EOG combined Transportation Costs and Gathering and Processing Costs into one line item titled Gathering, Processing and Transportation Costs. This presentation has been conformed for all periods presented and had no impact on previously reported Net Income. (2) EOG believes excluding the above-referenced items from General and Administrative Costs is appropriate and provides useful information to investors, as EOG views such items as non-recurring. (3) EOG believes excluding the above-referenced items from Taxes Other Than Income is appropriate and provides useful information to investors, as EOG views such items as non-recurring. (4) EOG believes excluding the above-referenced items from Interest Expense, Net is appropriate and provides useful information to investors, as EOG views such items as non-recurring. (5) In general, EOG excludes impairments which are (i) attributable to declines in commodity prices, (ii) related to sales of certain oil and gas properties or (iii) the result of certain other events or decisions (e.g., a periodic review of EOG's oil and gas properties or other assets). EOG believes excluding these impairments from total exploration costs is appropriate and provides useful information to investors, as such impairments were caused by factors outside of EOG's control (versus, for example, impairments that are due to EOG's proved oil and gas properties not being as productive as it originally estimated). Additional Key Financial Information\n\n(Unaudited)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSee \"Endnotes\" below for related discussion and definitions. 2025 Actual\n\n2024 Actual\n\n2023 Actual\n\n2022 Actual\n\n2021 Actual\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCrude Oil and Condensate Volumes (MBod)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States 520.5\n\n490.6\n\n475.2\n\n460.7\n\n443.4\n\nTrinidad 1.4\n\n0.8\n\n0.6\n\n0.6\n\n1.5\n\nOther International —\n\n—\n\n—\n\n—\n\n0.1\n\nTotal 521.9\n\n491.4\n\n475.8\n\n461.3\n\n445.0\n\nNatural Gas Liquids Volumes (MBbld)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal 288.2\n\n245.9\n\n223.8\n\n197.7\n\n144.5\n\nNatural Gas Volumes (MMcfd)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States 2,299\n\n1,728\n\n1,551\n\n1,315\n\n1,210\n\nTrinidad 230\n\n220\n\n160\n\n180\n\n217\n\nOther International1 4\n\n—\n\n—\n\n—\n\n9\n\nTotal 2,533\n\n1,948\n\n1,711\n\n1,495\n\n1,436\n\nCrude Oil Equivalent Volumes (MBoed)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States 1,191.8\n\n1,024.5\n\n957.5\n\n877.5\n\n789.6\n\nTrinidad 39.8\n\n37.6\n\n27.3\n\n30.7\n\n37.7\n\nOther International1 0.6\n\n—\n\n—\n\n—\n\n1.6\n\nTotal 1,232.2\n\n1,062.1\n\n984.8\n\n908.2\n\n828.9\n\nBenchmark Price\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOil (WTI) ($/Bbl) 64.78\n\n75.72\n\n77.61\n\n94.23\n\n67.96\n\nNatural Gas (HH) ($/Mcf) 3.43\n\n2.27\n\n2.74\n\n6.64\n\n3.85\n\nCrude Oil and Condensate - above (below) WTI2 ($/Bbl)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States 0.87\n\n1.70\n\n1.57\n\n2.99\n\n0.58\n\nTrinidad (7.19)\n\n(11.29)\n\n(9.03)\n\n(8.07)\n\n(11.70)\n\nOther International1 0.36\n\n—\n\n—\n\n—\n\n—\n\nNatural Gas Liquids - Realizations as % of WTI\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTotal 34.9 %\n\n30.9 %\n\n29.7 %\n\n39.0 %\n\n50.5 %\n\nNatural Gas - above (below) NYMEX Henry Hub3 ($/Mcf)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUnited States (0.49)\n\n(0.28)\n\n(0.04)\n\n0.63\n\n1.03\n\nNatural Gas Realizations4 ($/Mcf)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTrinidad 3.78\n\n3.65\n\n3.65\n\n4.43\n\n3.40\n\nOther International1 3.28\n\n—\n\n—\n\n—\n\n—\n\nTotal Expenditures (GAAP) ($MM) 13,703\n\n6,653\n\n6,818\n\n5,610\n\n4,255\n\nCapital Expenditures5 (Non-GAAP) ($MM) 6,294\n\n6,226\n\n6,041\n\n4,607\n\n3,755\n\nOperating Unit Costs ($/Boe)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLease and Well 3.72\n\n4.04\n\n4.05\n\n4.02\n\n3.75\n\nGathering, Processing and Transportation Costs6 4.74\n\n4.43\n\n4.50\n\n4.78\n\n4.70\n\nGeneral and Administrative (GAAP) 1.82\n\n1.72\n\n1.78\n\n1.72\n\n1.69\n\nGeneral and Administrative (Non-GAAP)7 1.63\n\n1.70\n\n1.78\n\n1.67\n\n1.69\n\nCash Operating Costs (GAAP) 10.28\n\n10.19\n\n10.33\n\n10.52\n\n10.14\n\nCash Operating Costs (Non-GAAP)7 10.09\n\n10.17\n\n10.33\n\n10.47\n\n10.14\n\nDepreciation, Depletion and Amortization 9.92\n\n10.57\n\n9.72\n\n10.69\n\n12.07\n\nExpenses ($MM)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nExploration and Dry Hole 285\n\n188\n\n182\n\n204\n\n225\n\nImpairment (GAAP) 843\n\n391\n\n202\n\n382\n\n376\n\nImpairment (excluding certain impairments (Non-GAAP))8 186\n\n100\n\n160\n\n269\n\n361\n\nCapitalized Interest 86\n\n45\n\n33\n\n36\n\n33\n\nNet Interest 235\n\n138\n\n148\n\n179\n\n178\n\nNet Interest (Non-GAAP)9 229\n\n—\n\n—\n\n—\n\n—\n\nTOTI (% of revenues from sales of crude oil and condensate, NGLs\n\nand natural gas)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n(GAAP) 7.0 %\n\n7.1 %\n\n7.4 %\n\n7.0 %\n\n6.8 %\n\n(Non-GAAP)7 7.0 %\n\n7.3 %\n\n7.4 %\n\n7.5 %\n\n6.8 %\n\nIncome Taxes\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nEffective Rate 21.7 %\n\n22.1 %\n\n21.6 %\n\n21.7 %\n\n21.4 %\n\nCurrent Tax Expense ($MM) 1,039\n\n1,348\n\n1,415\n\n2,208\n\n1,393\n\nAdditional Key Financial Information (Continued)\n\n\n\nEndnotes\n\n\n\n1) 2025 production volumes are from Bahrain operations; natural gas realized price represents contract price less partner's processing and distribution costs.\n\n\n\n2) EOG bases United States and Trinidad crude oil and condensate price differentials upon the West Texas Intermediate crude oil price at Cushing, Oklahoma , using the simple average of the daily settlement prices for the prompt-month NYMEX futures contract for each of the applicable calendar months.\n\n\n\n3) EOG bases United States natural gas price differentials upon the natural gas price at Henry Hub, Louisiana , using the NYMEX Last Day Settle price for each of the applicable months.\n\n\n\n4) The full-year 2022 realized natural gas price for Trinidad includes a one-time pricing adjustment of $0.76 /Mcf for prior-period production following a contract amendment with the National Gas Company of Trinidad and Tobago Limited.\n\n\n\n5) Capital Expenditures includes expenditures for Exploration and Development Drilling, Facilities, Leasehold Acquisitions, Capitalized Interest, Dry Hole Costs and Other Property, Plant and Equipment. Capital Expenditures excludes Property Acquisitions, Asset Retirement Costs, Non-Cash Exchanges and Transactions and exploration costs incurred as operating expenses.\n\n\n\n6) Effective January 1, 2024, EOG combined Transportation Costs and Gathering and Processing Costs into one line item titled Gathering, Processing and Transportation Costs. This presentation has been conformed for all periods presented and had no impact on previously reported Net Income.\n\n\n\n7) Cash Operating Costs consist of LOE, GP&T and G&A. G&A (Non-GAAP) for fiscal year 2025 excludes costs related to the Encino acquisition, as reflected in the accompanying reconciliation schedules (see \"Revenues, Costs and Margins Per Barrel of Oil Equivalent\"). In addition, TOTI (% of revenues from sales of crude oil and condensate, NGLs and natural gas) (Non-GAAP) and G&A (Non-GAAP) for fiscal year 2024 and fiscal year 2022 exclude a state severance tax refund and related consulting fees, respectively, as reflected in the accompanying reconciliation schedules (see \"Revenues, Costs and Margins Per Barrel of Oil Equivalent\"). The per-Boe impact of such acquisition-related costs and consulting fees on G&A and total Cash Operating Costs for fiscal year 2025, 2024 and 2022 was $(0.19) , $(0.02) and $(0.05) , respectively.\n\n\n\n8) In general, EOG excludes impairments which are (i) attributable to declines in commodity prices, (ii) related to sales of certain oil and gas properties or (iii) the result of certain other events or decisions (e.g., a periodic review of EOG's oil and gas properties or other assets). EOG believes excluding these impairments from total impairment costs is appropriate and provides useful information to investors, as such impairments were caused by factors outside of EOG's control (versus, for example, impairments that are due to EOG's proved oil and gas properties not being as productive as it originally estimated). Impairments (Non-GAAP) for FY 2025 are adjusted from Impairments (GAAP) for FY 2025 by excluding $657 million of impairments, primarily associated with the write-down to fair value of natural gas and crude oil assets in the Barnett Shale and Woodford Oil Window (mainly driven by play-specific economics and resource allocation). Impairments (Non-GAAP) for FY 2024 are adjusted from Impairments (GAAP) for FY 2024 by excluding $291 million of impairments, primarily associated with the write-down to fair value of natural gas and crude oil assets in the Rocky Mountain area.\n\n\n\n9) Net Interest for fiscal year 2025 excludes financing commitment costs related to the Encino acquisition, as reflected in the accompanying reconciliation schedules (see \"Revenues, Costs and Margins Per Barrel of Oil Equivalent\"). The per-Boe impact of such cost for fiscal year 2025 is $(0.01) . View original content:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/eog-resources-reports-first-quarter-2026-results-302763124.html SOURCE EOG Resources, Inc.",
      "word_count": 10788,
      "original_language": "EN",
      "author": "Stock Titan",
      "countries": [
        "USA",
        "TTO"
      ],
      "industries": [
        {
          "name": "Offshore E&P (Shallow/Deepwater, Subsea Production Systems)",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "OCIO & Multi-Asset Outsourced Portfolio Management",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        {
          "name": "Earnings Releases",
          "code": "FR01",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Guidance & Forecast Revisions",
          "code": "FR05",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Shareholder Returns (Buybacks & Dividends)",
          "code": "CM08",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "company_mentions": [
        {
          "uuid": "00062jq",
          "name": "EOG Resources",
          "website": "http://www.eogresources.com/"
        }
      ],
      "article_type": "News analysis",
      "is_press_release": true,
      "is_opinion": false,
      "is_breaking": true,
      "iptc_codes": [
        "20001243",
        "20000178"
      ],
      "iab_categories": [
        "81"
      ],
      "naics_codes": [
        "2111"
      ],
      "sic_codes": [
        "1311"
      ],
      "entities": {
        "person": [
          "kimberly ehmer",
          "neel panchal",
          "cameron hughes",
          "shelby o'connor",
          "pearce hammond"
        ],
        "location": [
          "houston",
          "trinidad",
          "united states",
          "bahrain",
          "cushing, oklahoma",
          "henry hub, louisiana",
          "texas",
          "united states of america",
          "rocky mountain area",
          "barnett shale"
        ],
        "product": [
          "ngl",
          "encino",
          "nymex",
          "woodford oil",
          "natural gas",
          "crude oil",
          "condensate",
          "ngls",
          "crude oil and condensate"
        ],
        "event": [
          "investor conferences"
        ]
      },
      "newsworthiness_score": 0.9688000082969666,
      "group_id": 756006
    },
    {
      "id": 25354779,
      "title": "NGL Energy Partners (NYSE: NGL) pivots to water focus and refinances $950M debt",
      "url": "https://www.stocktitan.net/sec-filings/NGL/10-k-ngl-energy-partners-lp-files-annual-report-e9427746f8de.html",
      "publisher": "",
      "published_date": "2026-05-28T20:25:34",
      "sentiment": "Neutral",
      "sentiment_score": 0.5159000158309937,
      "ai_summary": "NGL Energy Partners LP completed a $950 million debt refinancing on March 12, 2026, closing a new seven-year senior secured 2026 Term Loan B credit facility as part of its strategic repositioning as a pure-play water solutions company. During the fiscal year, the company completed multiple disposition transactions, including the sale of its refined products business and most of its wholesale propane business on April 30, 2025. The company stated its primary focus is to eliminate its Class D Preferred Units and reduce debt while growing its water solutions business, which handled approximately 1.063 billion barrels of produced water during the year ended March 31, 2026.",
      "full_text": "NGL Energy Partners (NYSE: NGL) pivots to water focus and refinances $950M debt\n\nKey Figures Term Loan B refinancing: $950.0 million Non-affiliate market value: $527.7 million Common units outstanding: 124,814,289 units +5 more 8 metrics Term Loan B refinancing $950.0 million Seven-year senior secured 2026 Term Loan B closed March 12, 2026 Non-affiliate market value $527.7 million Aggregate market value of common units at September 30, 2025 at $6.00 per unit Common units outstanding 124,814,289 units Common units issued and outstanding at May 26, 2026 Produced water handled 1.063 billion barrels Water Solutions system volume for year ended March 31, 2026 Water disposal capacity 6,717,800 barrels per day Total permitted processing capacity across 91 facilities and 202 wells Northern Delaware acreage dedications 766,000 acres Acreage dedicated under long-term agreements to Northern Delaware water system Crude storage at Cushing 3,626,000 barrels Storage capacity at NGL’s Cushing crude oil terminal NGL volumes sold 1.2 billion gallons Natural gas liquids sold in Liquids Logistics segment in year ended March 31, 2026 Key Terms minimum volume commitments, Class D Preferred Units, Grand Mesa Pipeline, Lea County Express Pipeline System (LEX II Expansion), +2 more 6 terms minimum volume commitments financial \"a significant portion of which contain minimum volume commitments with leading oil and gas companies\" Minimum volume commitments are contractual promises that one party will buy, sell or trade at least a set amount of a product, security or service over a defined period. For investors, these commitments matter because they create predictable baseline revenue or guaranteed demand — like a subscription minimum — but also can create liability or distort trading and liquidity if parties must meet the quota even when market conditions change. Class D Preferred Units financial \"Our primary focus is to eliminate our Class D Preferred Units and reduce debt\" Grand Mesa Pipeline technical \"Our foundational asset in this segment is the Grand Mesa Pipeline, a 550-mile pipeline\" Lea County Express Pipeline System (LEX II Expansion) technical \"we completed the expansion of our Lea County Express Pipeline System (“LEX II Expansion”)\" Underground Injection Control regulatory \"The underground injection of crude oil and natural gas wastes is regulated by the Underground Injection Control (“UIC”) Program\" New Source Performance Standards regulatory \"the EPA issued its final rule, which targets the reduction of emissions of methane and other air pollutants from oil and gas operations. Specifically, the rule establishes New Source Performance Standards\"\n\nDon't miss StockTitan's market coverage in Google Search and AI answers. Adds StockTitan as a preferred source · opens Google Add on Google Not now\n\n05/28/2026 - 10:25 PM\n\n⛶ Fullscreen 0001504461 false 2026 FY http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#GainLossOnDispositionOfAssets1 http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#GainLossOnDispositionOfAssets1 http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#AccruedLiabilitiesCurrent http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#PrepaidExpenseAndOtherAssetsCurrent P1Y P1Y P1Y P1Y P1Y P3Y11M http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#AccountsPayableAndAccruedLiabilitiesCurrentAndNoncurrent http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#OtherLiabilities http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#Revenues http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#Revenues http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#Revenues http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#GainLossOnDispositionOfAssets1 http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#GainLossOnDispositionOfAssets1 http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#GainLossOnDispositionOfAssets1 http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#GainLossOnDispositionOfAssets1 http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#GainLossOnDispositionOfAssets1 http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#GainLossOnDispositionOfAssets1 http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#GainLossOnDispositionOfAssets1 http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#GainLossOnDispositionOfAssets1 http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#GainLossOnDispositionOfAssets1 http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#GainLossOnDispositionOfAssets1 http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2025#GainLossOnDispositionOfAssets1 iso4217:USD xbrli:shares iso4217:USD xbrli:shares xbrli:pure utr:bbl utr:gal 0001504461 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember exch:XNYS 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember exch:XNYS 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember exch:XNYS 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 2025-09-30 0001504461 2026-05-26 0001504461 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CrudeOilLogisticsSegmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 2026-03-31 0001504461 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:NonrelatedPartyMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:NonrelatedPartyMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:RelatedPartyMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:RelatedPartyMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:DiscontinuedOperationsDisposedOfByMeansOtherThanSaleMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:DiscontinuedOperationsDisposedOfByMeansOtherThanSaleMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:NGLEnergyHoldingsLLCMember ngl:NGLEnergyPartnersLPMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:GeneralPartnerMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:GeneralPartnerMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:NGLLimitedPartnersMember ngl:NGLLimitedPartnersMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:ProductMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:ProductMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:ProductMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:ServiceMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:ServiceMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:ServiceMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:GeneralPartnerMember 2023-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:PreferredPartnerMember 2023-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember 2023-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:AccumulatedOtherComprehensiveIncomeMember 2023-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:NoncontrollingInterestMember 2023-03-31 0001504461 2023-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:NoncontrollingInterestMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:GeneralPartnerMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:AccumulatedOtherComprehensiveIncomeMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:GeneralPartnerMember 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:PreferredPartnerMember 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:AccumulatedOtherComprehensiveIncomeMember 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:NoncontrollingInterestMember 2024-03-31 0001504461 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:NoncontrollingInterestMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:GeneralPartnerMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:AccumulatedOtherComprehensiveIncomeMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:GeneralPartnerMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:PreferredPartnerMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:AccumulatedOtherComprehensiveIncomeMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:NoncontrollingInterestMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:NoncontrollingInterestMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:GeneralPartnerMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:AccumulatedOtherComprehensiveIncomeMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:GeneralPartnerMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:PreferredPartnerMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:AccumulatedOtherComprehensiveIncomeMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:NoncontrollingInterestMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CertainNaturalGasLiquidsTerminalAndRelatedAssetsMember 2025-04-30 2025-04-30 0001504461 ngl:CertainNaturalGasLiquidsTerminalAndRelatedAssetsMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:DomesticCountryMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:DomesticCountryMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 2025-07-04 2025-07-04 0001504461 stpr:TX 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 stpr:TX 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 stpr:TX 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 stpr:NM 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 country:CA 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 country:CA 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 country:CA 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:ButaneInventoryMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:ButaneInventoryMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:OtherNaturalGasLiquidsMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:OtherNaturalGasLiquidsMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 srt:CrudeOilMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:CrudeOilMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:ParentCoMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:NoncontrollingInterestsMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:VariableInterestEntityPrimaryBeneficiaryMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:VariableInterestEntityPrimaryBeneficiaryMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:VariableInterestEntityPrimaryBeneficiaryMember us-gaap:RelatedPartyMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:VariableInterestEntityPrimaryBeneficiaryMember us-gaap:RelatedPartyMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:VariableInterestEntityPrimaryBeneficiaryMember us-gaap:NonrelatedPartyMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:VariableInterestEntityPrimaryBeneficiaryMember us-gaap:NonrelatedPartyMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:LiabilitiesSettledMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:ValuationAdjustmentMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:LiabilitiesSettledMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:ValuationAdjustmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:InventoriesMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:PropertyPlantAndEquipmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CostOfSalesProductMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:InventoriesMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CostOfSalesProductMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 srt:MinimumMember ngl:WaterTreatmentFacilitiesAndEquipmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:MaximumMember ngl:WaterTreatmentFacilitiesAndEquipmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:WaterTreatmentFacilitiesAndEquipmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:WaterTreatmentFacilitiesAndEquipmentMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 srt:MinimumMember ngl:PipelineandRelatedFacilitiesMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:MaximumMember ngl:PipelineandRelatedFacilitiesMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:PipelineandRelatedFacilitiesMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:PipelineandRelatedFacilitiesMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 srt:MinimumMember ngl:CrudeOilTanksAndRelatedEquipmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:MaximumMember ngl:CrudeOilTanksAndRelatedEquipmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CrudeOilTanksAndRelatedEquipmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CrudeOilTanksAndRelatedEquipmentMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 srt:MinimumMember us-gaap:LeaseholdsAndLeaseholdImprovementsMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:MaximumMember us-gaap:LeaseholdsAndLeaseholdImprovementsMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:LeaseholdsAndLeaseholdImprovementsMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:LeaseholdsAndLeaseholdImprovementsMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 srt:MinimumMember ngl:NaturalGasLiquidsTerminalAssetsMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:MaximumMember ngl:NaturalGasLiquidsTerminalAssetsMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:NaturalGasLiquidsTerminalAssetsMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:NaturalGasLiquidsTerminalAssetsMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:LandMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:LandMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:TankBottomsAndLinefillMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:TankBottomsAndLinefillMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 srt:MinimumMember us-gaap:TechnologyEquipmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:MaximumMember us-gaap:TechnologyEquipmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:TechnologyEquipmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:TechnologyEquipmentMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 srt:MinimumMember us-gaap:TransportationEquipmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:MaximumMember us-gaap:TransportationEquipmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:TransportationEquipmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:TransportationEquipmentMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 srt:MinimumMember us-gaap:OtherMachineryAndEquipmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:MaximumMember us-gaap:OtherMachineryAndEquipmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OtherMachineryAndEquipmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OtherMachineryAndEquipmentMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:ConstructionInProgressMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:ConstructionInProgressMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CrudeOilLogisticsSegmentMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CrudeOilLogisticsSegmentMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:CorporateNonSegmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:CorporateNonSegmentMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:CorporateNonSegmentMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:NaturalGasLiquidsTerminalsMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CrudeOilLogisticsSegmentMember 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CrudeOilLogisticsSegmentMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CrudeOilLogisticsSegmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CrudeOilLogisticsSegmentMember 2024-12-31 0001504461 ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2024-12-31 0001504461 ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2025-01-01 0001504461 ngl:CrudeOilLogisticsSegmentMember 2024-01-01 0001504461 ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2024-01-01 0001504461 us-gaap:CustomerRelationshipsMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:CustomerRelationshipsMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:CustomerContractsMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:CustomerContractsMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:ContractBasedIntangibleAssetsMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:ContractBasedIntangibleAssetsMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:ExecutoryContractsAndOtherAgreementsMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:ExecutoryContractsAndOtherAgreementsMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:DebtIssuanceCostsMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:DebtIssuanceCostsMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:DebtIssuanceCostsMember us-gaap:RevolvingCreditFacilityMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:TradeNamesMember ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:DepreciationAndAmortizationMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:DepreciationAndAmortizationMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:DepreciationAndAmortizationMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CostOfSalesServiceMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CostOfSalesServiceMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CostOfSalesServiceMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CostOfSalesProductMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CostOfSalesProductMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CostOfSalesProductMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:InterestExpenseMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:InterestExpenseMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:InterestExpenseMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingExpenseMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingExpenseMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingExpenseMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:RevolvingCreditFacilityMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:RevolvingCreditFacilityMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:A2024TermLoanBCreditFacilityMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:A2024TermLoanBCreditFacilityMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:A2026TermLoanBCreditFacilityMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:A2026TermLoanBCreditFacilityMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:SeniorSecuredNotes8.125PercentDue2029Member 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:SeniorSecuredNotes8.125PercentDue2029Member 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:SeniorSecuredNotes8.375PercentDue2032Member 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:SeniorSecuredNotes8.375PercentDue2032Member 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:OtherLongTermDebtMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:OtherLongTermDebtMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 2026-03-12 0001504461 us-gaap:RevolvingCreditFacilityMember 2026-03-12 0001504461 us-gaap:RevolvingCreditFacilityMember 2025-06-12 0001504461 us-gaap:LetterOfCreditMember us-gaap:RevolvingCreditFacilityMember 2026-03-12 0001504461 us-gaap:LetterOfCreditMember us-gaap:RevolvingCreditFacilityMember 2025-06-12 0001504461 us-gaap:LetterOfCreditMember us-gaap:RevolvingCreditFacilityMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:RevolvingCreditFacilityMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:RevolvingCreditFacilityMember 2026-03-12 2026-03-12 0001504461 us-gaap:SecuredOvernightFinancingRateSofrOvernightIndexSwapRateMember us-gaap:RevolvingCreditFacilityMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:PrimeRateMember us-gaap:RevolvingCreditFacilityMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:A2026TermLoanBCreditFacilityMember 2026-03-12 0001504461 ngl:A2026TermLoanBCreditFacilityMember 2026-03-12 2026-03-12 0001504461 ngl:A2026TermLoanBCreditFacilityMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:MinimumMember ngl:A2026TermLoanBCreditFacilityMember 2026-03-12 0001504461 ngl:A2024TermLoanBCreditFacilityMember 2024-02-02 0001504461 ngl:A2024TermLoanBCreditFacilityMember 2024-02-02 2024-02-02 0001504461 ngl:RepurchasesMember ngl:A2024TermLoanBCreditFacilityMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:RepaymentsMember ngl:A2024TermLoanBCreditFacilityMember 2026-03-12 2026-03-12 0001504461 ngl:SeniorSecuredNotes8.125PercentDue2029Member 2024-02-02 0001504461 ngl:SeniorSecuredNotes8.375PercentDue2032Member 2024-02-02 0001504461 ngl:SeniorSecuredNotesMember 2024-02-02 2024-02-02 0001504461 ngl:RepurchasesMember ngl:SeniorSecuredNotesMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:RepurchasesMember ngl:SeniorSecuredNotes8.375PercentDue2032Member 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:RedemptionsMember ngl:SeniorSecuredNotesMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:RedemptionsMember ngl:SeniorSecuredNotes75PercentDue2026Member 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:RedemptionsMember ngl:SeniorSecuredNotes75PercentDue2026Member 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:SeniorSecuredNotes75PercentDue2026Member 2021-02-04 0001504461 ngl:SeniorNotes6125PercentDue2025Member 2017-02-22 0001504461 ngl:SeniorNotes75PercentDue2026Member 2019-04-09 0001504461 ngl:RedemptionsMember ngl:SeniorNotes75PercentDue2026Member 2024-02-02 0001504461 ngl:RepurchasesMember us-gaap:SeniorSubordinatedNotesMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:RepurchasesMember ngl:SeniorNotes6125PercentDue2025Member 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:RedemptionsMember us-gaap:SeniorSubordinatedNotesMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:RedemptionsMember ngl:SeniorNotes6125PercentDue2025Member 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:RedemptionsMember ngl:SeniorNotes6125PercentDue2025Member 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:RedemptionsMember ngl:SeniorNotes75PercentDue2026Member 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:RedemptionsMember ngl:SeniorNotes75PercentDue2026Member 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:EquipmentLoanSecuredByDenverPlaneMember 2024-06-24 0001504461 ngl:EquipmentLoanSecuredByDenverPlaneMember 2024-09-24 0001504461 ngl:EquipmentLoanSecuredByDenverPlaneMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:EquipmentLoanSecuredByTulsaPlaneMember 2024-10-01 0001504461 ngl:EquipmentLoanSecuredByTulsaPlaneMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeniorNotesMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:ServicesRenderedMember 2018-07-23 2018-08-01 0001504461 ngl:FraudulentMisrepresentationMember 2018-07-23 2018-08-01 0001504461 2023-02-06 2023-02-15 0001504461 2024-06-13 2024-06-13 0001504461 2023-04-01 2023-06-30 0001504461 srt:CrudeOilMember ngl:FixedPriceMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:NaturalGasLiquidsReservesMember ngl:FixedPriceMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:CrudeOilMember ngl:IndexPriceMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:NaturalGasLiquidsReservesMember ngl:IndexPriceMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:CrudeOilMember ngl:FixedPriceMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:NaturalGasLiquidsReservesMember ngl:FixedPriceMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:CrudeOilMember ngl:IndexPriceMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:NaturalGasLiquidsReservesMember ngl:IndexPriceMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:NGLEnergyPartnersLPMember us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:GeneralPartnerMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:ShareRepurchaseProgramMember us-gaap:GeneralPartnerMember 2024-07-01 2024-09-30 0001504461 ngl:ShareRepurchaseProgramMember us-gaap:GeneralPartnerMember 2025-04-01 2025-06-30 0001504461 ngl:ShareRepurchaseProgramMember us-gaap:GeneralPartnerMember 2025-07-01 2025-09-30 0001504461 ngl:ShareRepurchaseProgramMember us-gaap:GeneralPartnerMember 2025-10-01 2025-12-31 0001504461 ngl:ShareRepurchaseProgramMember us-gaap:GeneralPartnerMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:ShareRepurchaseProgramMember us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember 2024-06-05 0001504461 ngl:ShareRepurchaseProgramMember us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:ShareRepurchaseProgramMember us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember us-gaap:SubsequentEventMember 2026-04-08 0001504461 ngl:ShareRepurchaseProgramMember us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember 2024-07-01 2024-09-30 0001504461 ngl:ShareRepurchaseProgramMember us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember 2025-04-01 2025-06-30 0001504461 ngl:ShareRepurchaseProgramMember us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember 2025-07-01 2025-09-30 0001504461 ngl:ShareRepurchaseProgramMember us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember 2025-10-01 2025-12-31 0001504461 ngl:ShareRepurchaseProgramMember us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:RelatedPartyMember ngl:ShareRepurchaseProgramMember us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember 2025-11-22 2025-11-22 0001504461 ngl:ShareRepurchaseProgramMember us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember 2024-08-13 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:PreferredStockMember 2024-02-06 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2024-02-06 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2024-02-27 2024-02-27 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2024-04-18 2024-04-18 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2024-04-04 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2024-04-25 2024-04-25 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2024-01-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 2024-06-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2024-06-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2024-04-01 2024-06-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2024-07-15 2024-07-15 0001504461 2024-09-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2024-09-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2024-07-01 2024-09-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2024-10-15 2024-10-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2024-12-31 0001504461 2024-12-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2024-10-01 2024-12-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2025-01-15 2025-01-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2025-04-15 2025-04-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2025-06-30 0001504461 2025-06-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2025-04-01 2025-06-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2025-07-15 2025-07-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2025-09-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2025-07-01 2025-09-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2025-10-15 2025-10-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2025-12-31 0001504461 2025-12-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2025-10-01 2025-12-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2026-01-15 2026-01-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesBPreferredStockMember us-gaap:SubsequentEventMember 2026-04-15 2026-04-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2024-02-06 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2024-02-27 2024-02-27 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2024-04-18 2024-04-18 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2024-04-04 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2024-04-25 2024-04-25 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2024-01-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2024-06-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2024-04-01 2024-06-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2024-07-15 2024-07-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2024-09-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2024-07-01 2024-09-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2024-10-15 2024-10-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2024-12-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2024-10-01 2024-12-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2025-01-15 2025-01-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2025-04-15 2025-04-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2025-06-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2025-04-01 2025-06-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2025-07-15 2025-07-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2025-09-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2025-07-01 2025-09-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2025-10-15 2025-10-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2025-12-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2025-10-01 2025-12-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2026-01-15 2026-01-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesCPreferredStockMember us-gaap:SubsequentEventMember 2026-04-15 2026-04-15 0001504461 us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember 2024-11-22 2024-11-22 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2025-05-19 2025-05-19 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2025-05-19 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2025-06-23 2025-06-23 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2025-06-23 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2025-10-17 2025-10-17 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2025-10-17 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2026-03-18 2026-03-18 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2026-03-18 0001504461 ngl:PremiumWarrantsMember 2019-10-31 0001504461 ngl:ParWarrantsMember 2019-10-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2024-02-06 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2024-02-27 2024-02-27 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2024-04-04 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2024-04-18 2024-04-18 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2024-04-25 2024-04-25 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2024-01-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2024-04-01 2024-06-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2024-07-15 2024-07-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2024-09-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2024-07-01 2024-09-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2024-10-15 2024-10-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2024-12-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2024-10-01 2024-12-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2025-01-15 2025-01-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2025-04-15 2025-04-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2025-06-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2025-04-01 2025-06-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2025-07-15 2025-07-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2025-09-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2025-07-01 2025-09-30 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2025-10-15 2025-10-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2025-12-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2025-10-01 2025-12-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2026-01-15 2026-01-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2026-01-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember us-gaap:SubsequentEventMember 2026-04-15 2026-04-15 0001504461 us-gaap:SeriesDPreferredStockMember 2019-07-02 2019-10-31 0001504461 ngl:A2025PlanServiceAwardMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:A2025PlanServiceAwardMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:RestrictedStockUnitsRSUMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:A2025LongTermIncentivePlanMember ngl:A2025PlanServiceAwardMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:A2025PlanServiceAwardMember ngl:VestingIn2027Member 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:A2025PlanServiceAwardMember ngl:VestingIn2028Member 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:A2025PlanServiceAwardMember ngl:VestingIn2029Member 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:A2025PlanServiceAwardMember ngl:VestingIn2030Member 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:RestrictedStockUnitsRSUMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel1Member 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel1Member 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel2Member 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:FairValueInputsLevel2Member 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:PrepaidExpensesAndOtherCurrentAssetsMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:PrepaidExpensesAndOtherCurrentAssetsMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:AccruedLiabilitiesMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:AccruedLiabilitiesMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OtherNoncurrentLiabilitiesMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OtherNoncurrentLiabilitiesMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 srt:CrudeOilMember us-gaap:FixedPriceContractMember us-gaap:ShortMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:CrudeOilMember us-gaap:FixedPriceContractMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:PublicUtilitiesInventoryPropaneMember us-gaap:FixedPriceContractMember us-gaap:ShortMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:PublicUtilitiesInventoryPropaneMember us-gaap:FixedPriceContractMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:ButaneMember us-gaap:FixedPriceContractMember us-gaap:ShortMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:ButaneMember us-gaap:FixedPriceContractMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:InterestRateSwapMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OtherContractMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:CrudeOilMember us-gaap:FixedPriceContractMember us-gaap:LongMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 srt:CrudeOilMember us-gaap:FixedPriceContractMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:ButaneMember us-gaap:FixedPriceContractMember us-gaap:ShortMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:ButaneMember us-gaap:FixedPriceContractMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:InterestRateSwapMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OtherContractMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:CommodityContractMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:InterestRateSwapMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:InterestRateSwapMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:InterestRateSwapMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 2024-03-01 2024-04-30 0001504461 ngl:MarchInterestRateSwapMember us-gaap:InterestRateSwapMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:AprilInterestRateSwapMember us-gaap:InterestRateSwapMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:ServiceFeesMember ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:ServiceFeesMember ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:ServiceFeesMember ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember srt:CrudeOilMember ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember srt:CrudeOilMember ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember srt:CrudeOilMember ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:WaterRevenuesMember ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:WaterRevenuesMember ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:WaterRevenuesMember ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:OtherRevenuesMember ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:OtherRevenuesMember ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:OtherRevenuesMember ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember srt:CrudeOilMember ngl:CrudeOilLogisticsSegmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember srt:CrudeOilMember ngl:CrudeOilLogisticsSegmentMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember srt:CrudeOilMember ngl:CrudeOilLogisticsSegmentMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:CrudeOilTransportationAndOtherMember ngl:CrudeOilLogisticsSegmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:CrudeOilTransportationAndOtherMember ngl:CrudeOilLogisticsSegmentMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:CrudeOilTransportationAndOtherMember ngl:CrudeOilLogisticsSegmentMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:CrudeOilLogisticsSegmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:CrudeOilLogisticsSegmentMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:CrudeOilLogisticsSegmentMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:ButaneMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:ButaneMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:ButaneMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember us-gaap:PublicUtilitiesInventoryPropaneMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember us-gaap:PublicUtilitiesInventoryPropaneMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember us-gaap:PublicUtilitiesInventoryPropaneMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:OtherProductsSalesMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:OtherProductsSalesMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:OtherProductsSalesMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:OtherRevenuesMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:OtherRevenuesMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:OtherRevenuesMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:IntersegmentEliminationMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:IntersegmentEliminationMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:IntersegmentEliminationMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:NonUsMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:NonUsMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:NonUsMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:CrudeOilLogisticsSegmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:CorporateNonSegmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:NonUsMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:CrudeOilLogisticsSegmentMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:CorporateNonSegmentMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:NonUsMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:CrudeOilLogisticsSegmentMember 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:OperatingSegmentsMember 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:CorporateNonSegmentMember 2024-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:NonUsMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2024-03-31 0001504461 srt:AffiliatedEntityMember us-gaap:RelatedPartyMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:AffiliatedEntityMember us-gaap:RelatedPartyMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 srt:AffiliatedEntityMember us-gaap:RelatedPartyMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:EquityMethodInvestmentMember us-gaap:RelatedPartyMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:EquityMethodInvestmentMember us-gaap:RelatedPartyMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:EquityMethodInvestmentMember us-gaap:RelatedPartyMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 srt:AffiliatedEntityMember us-gaap:RelatedPartyMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:AffiliatedEntityMember us-gaap:RelatedPartyMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:EquityMethodInvestmentMember us-gaap:RelatedPartyMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:EquityMethodInvestmentMember us-gaap:RelatedPartyMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 us-gaap:LimitedPartnerMember us-gaap:RelatedPartyMember 2024-11-22 2024-11-22 0001504461 2026-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 2027-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 2028-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 2029-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 2030-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 2031-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:MinimumMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 srt:MaximumMember 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember us-gaap:EquipmentMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:WaterSolutionsSegmentMember us-gaap:LandMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:EagleFordAssetsMember 2023-06-21 0001504461 ngl:EagleFordAssetsMember 2023-06-21 2023-06-21 0001504461 ngl:ParentCoMember 2024-03-06 0001504461 2024-03-06 2024-03-06 0001504461 2024-04-01 2024-06-30 0001504461 ngl:EquipmentLoanSecuredByDenverPlaneMember 2024-06-04 0001504461 2024-10-01 2024-12-31 0001504461 2025-03-26 2025-03-26 0001504461 2025-03-26 0001504461 2025-03-27 2025-03-31 0001504461 2025-03-27 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:AnticlineAssetsMember 2023-07-25 0001504461 ngl:AnticlineAssetsMember 2023-07-25 2023-07-25 0001504461 ngl:PermianAssetsMember 2023-12-08 0001504461 ngl:PermianAssetsMember 2023-12-08 2023-12-08 0001504461 ngl:CertainSaltwaterDisposalAssetsMember 2024-04-15 0001504461 ngl:CertainSaltwaterDisposalAssetsMember 2023-04-01 2024-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CertainSaltwaterDisposalAssetsMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:ParentCoMember 2024-08-01 0001504461 ngl:CertainSaltwaterDisposalAssetsMember 2024-08-01 0001504461 ngl:CertainSaltwaterDisposalAssetsMember 2024-08-01 2024-08-01 0001504461 ngl:CertainFreshwaterWaterSolutionsFacilitiesMember 2024-04-05 2024-04-05 0001504461 ngl:CertainFreshwaterWaterSolutionsFacilitiesMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CertainRealEstateMember 2024-05-14 2024-05-14 0001504461 ngl:CertainRealEstateMember 2024-05-14 0001504461 ngl:CertainRealEstateMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CertainInvestmentsInUnconsolidatedEntitiesAndRelatedAssetsMember 2025-04-14 0001504461 ngl:CertainInvestmentsInUnconsolidatedEntitiesAndRelatedAssetsMember 2024-04-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CertainInvestmentsInUnconsolidatedEntitiesAndRelatedAssetsMember 2025-04-14 2025-04-14 0001504461 ngl:PacificNorthwestNaturalGasLiquidsTerminalsMember 2023-07-24 2023-07-24 0001504461 ngl:PacificNorthwestNaturalGasLiquidsTerminalsMember 2023-07-24 0001504461 ngl:OtherNaturalGasLiquidsTerminalsMember 2023-11-15 0001504461 ngl:OtherNaturalGasLiquidsTerminalsMember 2023-11-15 2023-11-15 0001504461 ngl:GreenBayWisconsinNaturalGasLiquidsTerminalsAndRelatedAssetsMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:GreenBayWisconsinNaturalGasLiquidsTerminalsAndRelatedAssetsMember 2025-03-31 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:GreenBayWisconsinNaturalGasLiquidsTerminalsAndRelatedAssetsMember us-gaap:InventoriesMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:RefinedProductsBusinessAndPortionOfWholesaleBusinessMember 2025-04-30 0001504461 ngl:RefinedProductsBusinessAndPortionOfWholesaleBusinessMember 2025-04-30 2025-04-30 0001504461 ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2025-04-30 2025-04-30 0001504461 2025-04-30 2025-04-30 0001504461 2025-01-01 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CertainRailcarsMember 2025-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CertainRailcarsMember 2025-04-01 2026-03-31 0001504461 ngl:CertainRailcarsMember 2025-05-16 2025-05-16 0001504461 ngl:CertainRailcarsMember 2025-05-16 0001504461 us-gaap:DiscontinuedOperationsDisposedOfByMeansOtherThanSaleMember ngl:LiquidsLogisticsSegmentMember 2025-03-31\n\nUNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549\n\nForm 10-K (Mark One) ☒ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended OR ☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from __________ to __________ Commission File Number: 001-35172 NGL Energy Partners LP (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter) Delaware 27-3427920 (State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization) (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) 6120 South Yale Avenue, Suite 1300 Tulsa, Oklahoma 74136 (Address of Principal Executive Offices) (Zip Code) ( 918 ) 481-1119 (Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code) Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of Each Class Trading Symbol(s) Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered Common units representing Limited Partner Interests NGL New York Stock Exchange Fixed-to-floating rate cumulative redeemable perpetual preferred units NGL-PB New York Stock Exchange Fixed-to-floating rate cumulative redeemable perpetual preferred units NGL-PC New York Stock Exchange Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☒ No ☐ Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ☐ No ☒ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒ No ☐ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes ☒ No ☐ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. Large accelerated filer o Accelerated filer x Non-accelerated filer o Smaller reporting company ☐ Emerging growth company ☐ If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☒ If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ☒ Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b). ☐ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ☐ No ☒ The aggregate market value at September 30, 2025 of the Common Units held by non-affiliates of the registrant, based on the reported closing price of the Common Units on the New York Stock Exchange on such date ($ 6.00 per Common Unit) was $ 527.7 million. For purposes of this computation, all executive officers, directors and 10% beneficial owners of the registrant are deemed to be affiliates. Such a determination should not be deemed an admission that such executive officers, directors and 10% beneficial owners are affiliates. At May 26, 2026, there were 124,814,289 common units issued and outstanding.\n\n\n\nTABLE OF CONTENTS PART I Item 1. Business 3 Item 1A. Risk Factors 21 Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments 48 Item 1C. Cybersecurity 48 Item 2. Properties 50 Item 3. Legal Proceedings 50 Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures 50 PART II Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Unitholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities 51 Item 6. [Reserved] 52 Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations 52 Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk 84 Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data 86 Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure 86 Item 9A. Controls and Procedures 86 Item 9B. Other Information 88 Item 9C. Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions that Prevent Inspections 88 PART III Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance 88 Item 11. Executive Compensation 93 Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Unitholder Matters 98 Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence 100 Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services 103 PART IV Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules 104 Item 16. Form 10-K Summary 107\n\ni\n\nForward-Looking Statements\n\nThis Annual Report on Form 10-K (“Annual Report”) contains various forward-looking statements and information that are based on NGL Energy Partners LP’s (“we,” “us,” “our,” or the “Partnership”) beliefs and those of our general partner (“GP”), as well as assumptions made by and information currently available to us. These forward-looking statements are identified as any statement that does not relate strictly to historical or current facts. Certain words in this Annual Report such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “forecast,” “goal,” “intend,” “may,” “plan,” “project,” “will,” and similar expressions and statements regarding our plans and objectives for future operations, identify forward-looking statements. Although we and our GP believe such forward-looking statements are reasonable, neither we nor our GP can assure they will prove to be correct. Forward-looking statements are subject to a variety of risks, uncertainties and assumptions. If one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or if underlying assumptions prove incorrect, our actual results may vary materially from those expected. Among the key risk factors that may affect our consolidated financial position and results of operations are:\n\n• the prices of crude oil, natural gas liquids, gasoline and energy prices generally; • the general level of demand, and the availability of supply for crude oil, natural gas liquids and gasoline; • the level of crude oil and natural gas drilling and production in areas where we have operations and facilities; • the ability to obtain adequate supplies of products if an interruption in supply or transportation occurs and the availability of capacity to transport products to market areas; • the effect of weather conditions on supply and demand for crude oil, natural gas liquids and gasoline; • the effect of natural disasters, earthquakes, hurricanes, tornados, lightning strikes, or other significant weather events; • the availability of local, intrastate, and interstate transportation infrastructure with respect to our transportation services; • the availability, price, and marketing of competing fuels; • the effect of energy conservation efforts on product demand; • energy efficiencies and technological trends; • the issuance of executive orders, changes in applicable laws, regulations and policies, including tax, environmental, transportation, and employment regulations, or new interpretations by regulatory agencies concerning such laws and regulations and the effect of such laws, regulations and policies (now existing or in the future) on our business operations; • the effect of executive orders and legislative and regulatory actions on hydraulic fracturing, water disposal and transportation, the treatment of flowback and produced water, seismic activity, and drilling and right-of-way access on federal and state lands; • delays or restrictions in obtaining, utilizing or maintaining permits and/or rights-of-way by us or our customers; • hazards or operating risks related to transporting and distributing petroleum products that may not be fully covered by insurance; • the maturity of the crude oil and natural gas liquids industries and competition from other markets; • loss of key personnel; • the impact of competition on our operations, including our ability to renew contracts with key customers; • the ability to maintain or increase the margins we realize for our services; • the ability to renew leases for our leased equipment and storage facilities; • inflation, interest rates, tariffs and general economic conditions (including recessions and other future disruptions and volatility in the global credit markets, as well as the impact of these events on customers and suppliers); • the nonpayment, nonperformance or bankruptcy by our counterparties; • the availability and cost of capital and our ability to access certain capital sources; • a deterioration of the credit and capital markets; 1\n\n• the ability to successfully identify and complete accretive organic growth projects; • the costs and effects of legal and administrative proceedings; • changes in general economic conditions, including market and macroeconomic disruptions resulting from global pandemics and related governmental responses, and international military conflicts (such as the war in Ukraine and conflicts in the Middle East); • political pressure and influence of environmental groups upon policies and decisions related to the production, gathering, refining, processing, fractionation, transportation and sale of crude oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids; • information technology risks including the risk from cyberattacks, cybersecurity breaches, and other disruptions to our information systems; and • other risks and uncertainties, including those discussed under Part I, Item 1A–“Risk Factors.”\n\nYou should not put undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. All forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this Annual Report. Except as may be required by state and federal securities laws, we undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise. When considering forward-looking statements, please review the risks discussed under Part I, Item 1A–“Risk Factors.”\n\n2\n\nPART I\n\nReferences in this Annual Report to (i) “NGL Energy Partners LP,” “we,” “us,” “our,” or the “Partnership” or similar terms refer to NGL Energy Partners LP and its operating subsidiaries, (ii) “NGL Energy Holdings LLC” or “general partner” refers to NGL Energy Holdings LLC, our general partner (“GP”), (iii) “NGL Energy Operating LLC” refers to NGL Energy Operating LLC, the direct operating subsidiary of NGL Energy Partners LP, and (iv) the “NGL Energy GP Investor Group” refers to, collectively, the 43 individuals and entities that own all of the outstanding membership interests in our GP.\n\nWe have presented operational data in Part I, Item 1–“Business” for the year ended March 31, 2026. Unless otherwise indicated, this data is as of March 31, 2026.\n\nItem 1. Business\n\nOverview\n\nOriginally formed in September 2010, we are a Delaware master limited partnership and our business is currently organized into the following three segments:\n\n• Our Water Solutions segment transports, treats, recycles and disposes of produced and flowback water generated from crude oil and natural gas production. We also sell produced water for reuse and recycle to our producer customers to be used in their crude oil exploration and production activities. As part of processing water, we aggregate and sell recovered crude oil, also known as skim oil. We also dispose of solids such as tank bottoms, drilling fluids and drilling muds and perform other ancillary services such as truck washouts. Our activities in this segment are underpinned by long-term, fixed fee contracts and acreage dedications, a significant portion of which contain minimum volume commitments with leading oil and gas companies including large, investment grade producer customers. • Our Crude Oil Logistics segment purchases crude oil from producers and marketers and transports it to refineries or for resale at pipeline injection stations, storage terminals, barge loading facilities, rail facilities and other trade hubs, and provides storage, terminaling and transportation services through its owned assets. Our activities in this segment are supported by certain long-term, fixed rate contracts with acreage dedications and which include minimum volume commitments on our storage tanks and owned and leased pipelines. • Our Liquids Logistics segment conducts supply operations for natural gas liquids to commercial, retail and industrial customers across the United States and Canada. These operations are conducted through our five owned terminals, third-party storage and terminal facilities, access to nine common carrier pipelines and a fleet of leased railcars. We also provide services for marine exports of butane through our facility located in Chesapeake, Virginia and we also own a propane pipeline in Michigan. We attempt to reduce our exposure to price fluctuations by using back-to-back physical contracts and pre-sale agreements that allow us to lock in a margin on a percentage of our winter volumes. We also enter into financially settled derivative contracts as economic hedges of our physical inventory, physical sales and physical purchase contracts.\n\nBusiness Repositioning\n\nOver the past several years, we have undertaken a number of important strategic actions in an effort to capitalize on the Partnership’s core areas of competitive strength and focus on generating stable, growing and predictable cash flows, while improving our credit profile. We believe our actions have simplified our business mix, have allowed us to focus on moving to becoming a pure play water solutions company and have improved our overall financial position. As part of these actions, we completed the below dispositions during the current fiscal year:\n\n• On April 14, 2025, we sold certain investments in unconsolidated entities, property, plant and equipment and intangible assets in our Water Solutions segment; • On April 30, 2025, we sold our refined products business, which was part of our Liquids Logistics segment, including certain working capital items; and • On April 30, 2025, we sold most of our wholesale propane business, 17 of our natural gas liquids terminals, our interest in an unconsolidated entity and working capital (“Wholesale Propane Disposition”), which was part of our Liquids Logistics segment.\n\n3\n\nFor more information regarding our results of operations and reportable segments, see Part II, Item 7–“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and Note 11 to our consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report. For more information regarding our disposition transactions and the impact to our operations, see Part II, Item 7–“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and Note 1 and Note 17 to our consolidated financial statements included in this current Annual Report and our Annual Reports on Form 10-K for the years ended March 31, 2025 and 2024 .\n\nDebt Refinancing\n\nOn March 12, 2026, we closed a debt refinancing transaction of $950.0 million consisting of a new seven-year senior secured 2026 term loan “B” credit facility (“2026 Term Loan B”).\n\nIn connection with the closing of the debt refinancing transaction, our asset-based revolving credit facility (“ABL Facility”) was amended to reduce our total commitments and to make other changes to the terms thereof.\n\nFor additional information related to the 2026 Term Loan B and ABL Facility, see Note 7 to our consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report.\n\n4\n\n\n\nPrimary Service Areas\n\nThe following map shows the primary service areas of our businesses at May 28, 2026: 5\n\nOrganizational Chart\n\nThe following chart provides a summarized overview of our legal entity structure at May 28, 2026:\n\n\n\n\n\n(1) Includes (i) NGL Water Solutions, LLC, which includes the operations of our Water Solutions segment, (ii) NGL Crude Assets and Marketing, LLC, which includes the operations of our Crude Oil Logistics segment and (iii) NGL Liquids, LLC, which includes the remaining operations of our Liquids Logistics segment.\n\n6\n\nOur Business Strategies\n\nOur principal business objectives are to maximize the profitability and stability of our businesses, grow our businesses in an accretive and prudent manner, and maintain a strong balance sheet. We intend to accomplish these business objectives by executing the following strategies:\n\n• Position the Partnership as a leading pure play produced water infrastructure platform providing water solutions to upstream customers. We currently operate the largest integrated produced water pipeline, disposal, and water handling network in the Delaware Basin, supported by long-term, fee-based producer contracts and continue to enhance our ability to transport produced water from the wellhead to treatment for disposal, recycle, or discharge through our expanding pipeline infrastructure and ongoing disposal capacity investments. While maintaining complementary crude oil and natural gas liquids logistics operations, capital allocation and strategic focus are centered on providing water solutions services, which will reduce earnings volatility and enhance cash flow stability. • Prudently managing our balance sheet to provide us with maximum financial flexibility for funding our operations, capital projects and strategic acquisitions. Our primary focus is to eliminate our Class D Preferred Units (“Class D Preferred Units”) and reduce debt, lower our leverage and maintain sufficient liquidity to finance growth projects and eventually reinstate the payment of common unit distributions. We are also focused on maintaining credit metrics to manage existing and future capital requirements as well as to take advantage of market opportunities. We expect to continue to evaluate the capital markets and may opportunistically pursue financing transactions to optimize our capital structure. • Operating in a safe and environmentally responsible manner. We seek to operate our business in a safe and environmentally responsible manner by working with our employees, customers, vendors and local communities to minimize our environmental impact and comply with local, state and federal environmental laws and regulations. • Focusing on consistent annual cash flows from operations under multi-year contracts that minimize commodity price risk and generate fee-based revenues . We intend to focus on generating revenues under long-term, fixed fee contracts in addition to back-to-back contracts which minimize commodity price exposure. We seek to continue to increase cash flows that are supported by certain fixed fee, multi-year contracts, some of which include acreage dedications or minimum volume commitments from producers. • Achieving growth by utilizing our existing footprint of assets, investing in new assets, customers and ventures that increase volume and enhance our operations, and generate attractive rates of return . We have available capacity in many of the assets that we own and operate that can be utilized to increase cash flows with minimal incremental capital investment. We have invested and expect to continue to invest within our existing businesses to capitalize on accretive, organic growth opportunities. We also continue to pursue strategic transactions and ventures that complement and enhance our existing footprint.\n\nOur Competitive Strengths\n\nWe believe that we are well positioned to successfully execute our business strategies and achieve our principal business objectives because of the following competitive strengths:\n\n• Our water processing facilities, which are strategically located near areas of high crude oil and natural gas production . Our water processing facilities are located among the most prolific crude oil and natural gas producing areas in the United States, including the Delaware Basin, the Denver-Julesburg (“DJ”) Basin and the Eagle Ford Basin. These assets are underpinned by long-term, fixed fee contracts and acreage dedications, a significant portion of which contain minimum volume commitments. Additionally, we believe that the technological capabilities of our Water Solutions business can be quickly implemented at new facilities and locations as needed. Our system located in the Northern Delaware Basin is an integrated network of large diameter produced water pipelines, recycling facilities and disposal wells that collectively provides reliable service to producer customers and would be difficult for competitors to replicate at this time. • Our network of crude oil transportation and storage assets located in the DJ Basin and Cushing, Oklahoma. Our strategically deployed terminals, as well as our owned and contracted pipeline capacity, provide access to producers in the DJ Basin. These operations are supported by certain long-term, fixed rate contracts with acreage dedications with producers, refiners and marketers and which include minimum volume commitments on our storage tanks and owned and leased pipelines. 7\n\n• Our network of natural gas liquids transportation, terminal, and storage assets, which allows us to provide multiple services across the United States and Canada. Our strategically located natural gas liquid supply terminals, propane pipeline in Michigan, large leased railcar fleet, shipper status on common carrier pipelines, and leased storage enable us to be a preferred purchaser and seller of butane and other natural gas liquids. We have a diverse base of long-standing customers and believe that our performance metrics allow us to reliably supply, store and transport products throughout the United States and Canada. • Our contracted operations allow us to generate more predictable and stable cash flows on a year-to-year basis. Our ability to provide multiple services to customers enhances our competitive position. Our three business segments are diversified by geography, customer base and commodity sensitivities, which we believe provides us with more stable cash flows through the typical commodity cycles. • Our seasoned management team with extensive midstream industry experience and a track record of acquiring, integrating, operating and growing successful businesses. Our management team has significant experience managing companies in the energy industry, including master limited partnerships. In addition, through decades of experience, our management team has developed strong business relationships with key industry participants throughout the United States. We believe that our management’s knowledge of the industry, relationships within the industry, and experience provide us with the opportunities to optimize our existing assets. Our management team also has experience in identifying and evaluating other ventures that provide us with additional opportunities to complement, grow and expand our existing operations.\n\nOur Businesses\n\nWater Solutions\n\nOverview. Our Water Solutions segment transports, treats, recycles and disposes of produced and flowback water generated from crude oil and natural gas production. We also sell produced water for reuse and recycle to our producer customers to be used in their crude oil exploration and production activities. As part of processing water, we aggregate and sell recovered crude oil, also known as skim oil. We also dispose of solids such as tank bottoms, drilling fluids and drilling muds and perform other ancillary services such as truck washouts. Our activities in this segment are underpinned by long-term, fixed fee contracts and acreage dedications, a significant portion of which contain minimum volume commitments with leading oil and gas companies including large, investment grade producer customers.\n\nWe operate in a number of the most prolific crude oil and natural gas producing areas in the United States including the Delaware Basin in New Mexico and Texas, the DJ Basin in Colorado and the Eagle Ford Basin in Texas. With a system that handled approximately 1.063 billion barrels of produced water across its areas of operation during the year ended March 31, 2026, we believe that we are the largest independent produced water transportation and disposal company in the United States. Our core asset in the Water Solutions segment is our system located in the Northern Delaware Basin, where we own and operate the largest integrated network of large diameter produced water pipelines, recycling facilities and disposal wells. This system spans six counties in New Mexico and Texas that represent one of the most prolific crude oil producing regions in the United States with some of the most economic hydrocarbon resources and lowest break-even economics for producers. Our system has approximately 840 miles of newly-built, in-service large diameter produced water pipelines connected to 59 active saltwater disposal facilities and 141 active disposal wells. We currently have approximately 766,000 acres dedicated to our Northern Delaware system under long-term agreements providing a multi-decade drilling inventory and significant growth opportunity. In addition, we have significant minimum volume commitments and other commercial agreements covering the Delaware, DJ and Eagle Ford Basins. Our focus in building our Water Solutions business has been to secure long-term, fixed fee contracts that contain minimum volume commitments, acreage dedications or similarly strong contractual relationships with large, well-capitalized producer customers.\n\nDuring the quarter ended December 31, 2024, we completed the expansion of our Lea County Express Pipeline System (“LEX II Expansion”) from a capacity of 140,000 barrels of water per day to 340,000 barrels of water per day. The addition of a second large diameter pipeline, disposal wells, and facilities has expanded the capabilities of our existing produced water super-system and created a significantly larger outlet for produced water disposal within the Delaware Basin. The 27-mile, 30-inch produced water pipeline transports water to areas outside the core of the basin thereby further diversifying the geographic location of our disposal operations. The LEX II Expansion is fully underwritten by a minimum volume commitment contract that includes an acreage dedication extension with an investment grade oil and gas producer. The LEX II Expansion includes an incremental increase in committed acreage and volumes under dedication from the producer.\n\nOn May 7, 2026, we announced a further expansion of our LEX II Pipeline System to increase capacity by 165,000 barrels of water per day with a capability to transport approximately 560,000 barrels of water per day on the LEX II system. 8\n\nThe LEX II Expansion is un derwritten by a newly executed long-term volume commitment contract that includes increased volume commitments, and an additional four township committed area in Eddy County, New Mexico . Additionally, the LEX II Expansion is expandable up to 650,000 barrels of water per day.\n\nAs part of our operations, we also recycle water, which includes the sale of produced water and recycled water for use in our customers’ completion activities. During the year ended March 31, 2026, we sold approximately 72.5 million barrels of recycled water.\n\nOperations. Our customers bring produced and flowback water generated by crude oil and natural gas exploration and production operations to our facilities for treatment through pipeline gathering systems and by truck. During the year ended March 31, 2026, in the Delaware Basin, we received approximately 99% of produced and flowback water via pipelines. Once we take delivery of the water, the level of processing is determined by the ultimate disposition of the water.\n\nOur facilities dispose of produced water primarily into deep underground formations via injection wells. At our disposal facilities, we use proprietary well maintenance programs to enhance injection rates and extend the useful lives of the wells.\n\nWe own 91 water treatment and disposal facilities, including 202 injection wells. The location and permitted processing capacities of these facilities are summarized below. Number of Number of Permitted Processing Capacity (barrels per day) Location Facilities (1) Wells Own (2) Lease (3) Total Delaware Basin (4) - Texas and New Mexico 59 141 1,479,000 3,942,300 5,421,300 Eagle Ford Basin (4)(5) - Texas 18 30 424,000 332,000 756,000 DJ Basin - Colorado 13 30 378,000 142,500 520,500 Other Basins - Texas 1 1 20,000 — 20,000 Total - All Facilities 91 202 2,301,000 4,416,800 6,717,800 (1) We own the land on which 39 of the 91 water treatment and disposal facilities are located and we either have easements or lease the land on which the remaining water treatment and disposal facilities are located. (2) These facilities are located on lands we own. (3) These facilities are located on lands we lease. (4) Certain facilities can dispose of both produced water and solids such as tank bottoms, drilling fluids and drilling muds. (5) Includes one facility with a permitted processing capacity of 40,000 barrels per day in which we own a 75% interest and two facilities, one with a permitted processing capacity of 60,000 barrels per day and the other with a permitted processing capacity of 65,000 barrels per day, in which we own a 50% interest.\n\nSee Note 17 to our consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report for all related dispositions in the current and prior years for the Water Solutions segment.\n\nCustomers. Our primary customers consist mainly of large publicly traded, oil and gas companies with diversified acreage positions across multiple leading oil and gas plays. During the year ended March 31, 2026, 78% of the revenues of our Water Solutions segment were generated from our ten largest customers of the segment. Additionally, certain key customers of the Water Solutions segment contribute significantly to the cash flows and profitability of the Partnership. Any loss of those customers or their contracts could have an adverse impact on our financial results.\n\nCompetition. The principal elements of competition are system reliability, project execution capability and reputation, system capacity and flexibility, rates for services and system location relative to the producer’s operations. Our competitors include independent produced water transportation and disposal companies and the water transportation and disposal operations owned by oil and gas production companies themselves. Location can be an important consideration for our customers, who seek to minimize the cost of transporting the produced water to disposal facilities. Many of our facilities are strategically located near areas of high crude oil and natural gas production which provides us with a distinct advantage over a competitor that must build a system that can compete with our assets.\n\nPricing Policy. We charge customers a fee per barrel of produced water received. Our contractual agreements can consist of: (a) minimum volume commitments requiring the customer to deliver a specified minimum volume of produced water over a specified period of time; (b) acreage dedications requiring the customer to deliver all volumes produced from the dedicated acreage with us; and (c) produced water pipeline and trucked disposal agreements providing interruptible service in 9\n\n\n\nexchange for a fee per barrel of produced water received. We also generate revenue from the sale of crude oil we recover in processing the produced water. In addition, we may charge fees for the sale of produced water for reuse and recycle by our customers, pipeline transportation fees, pipeline interconnection fees and solids disposal fees.\n\nTrade Names. Our Water Solutions segment operates under the NGL Water Solutions trade name.\n\nTechnology. We hold multiple patents for processing technologies. We believe that the technological capabilities of our Water Solutions business can be quickly implemented at new facilities and locations.\n\nCrude Oil Logistics\n\nOverview. Our Crude Oil Logistics segment purchases crude oil from producers and marketers and transports it to refineries or for resale at pipeline injection stations, storage terminals, barge loading facilities, rail facilities and other trade hubs, and provides storage, terminaling and transportation services through its owned assets. Our activities in this segment are supported by certain long-term, fixed rate contracts with acreage dedications and which include minimum volume commitments on our storage tanks and owned and leased pipelines. Our operations are concentrated in and around four prolific crude oil producing regions in the United States, including the DJ Basin in Colorado, the Permian Basin in Texas and New Mexico, the Eagle Ford Basin in Texas and the United States Gulf Coast.\n\nOur foundational asset in this segment is the Grand Mesa Pipeline, a 550-mile pipeline that transports crude oil from its origin in Weld County, Colorado to our terminal in Cushing, Oklahoma. The main line portion of this pipeline is comprised of a 34.09% undivided interest with Saddlehorn Pipeline Company, LLC (“Saddlehorn”) in which we have ownership of 150,000 barrels per day of capacity. During the year ended March 31, 2026, approximately 72,000 barrels per day of crude oil were transported on the Grand Mesa Pipeline. Operating costs associated with the Grand Mesa Pipeline are allocated to us based on our proportionate ownership interest and throughput. We also own and operate origin terminals at Lucerne and Riverside, Colorado, where we aggregate crude oil volumes of different types and grades and store them until they are ready for transfer to the Grand Mesa Pipeline. The Lucerne terminal has approximately 950,000 barrels of storage and a 12 bay truck loading facility. The Riverside terminal has approximately 20,000 barrels of storage and a four bay truck loading facility.\n\nThrough our ownership in the Grand Mesa Pipeline, we have sufficient capacity to service our customer contracts at the same origin and termination points with the ability to accept additional volume commitments. We retained ownership of our previously acquired easements for the potential future development of transportation projects involving petroleum commodities other than crude oil and condensate. With the consent and participation of Saddlehorn, we and Saddlehorn may consider future opportunities using these easements, to the extent such easements remain in effect, for projects involving the transportation of crude oil and condensate.\n\nWe own and operate a large scale crude oil terminal located in Cushing, Oklahoma with 3,626,000 barrels of storage capacity, seven off-loading lease automatic custody transfer units (“LACTs”), a full control room, on-site quality management building, and three 24-inch bi-directional pipelines each capable of moving 360,000 barrels per day. The terminal features advantaged connectivity to other terminals and pipelines including important connections to the Grand Mesa Pipeline and to TC Energy’s terminal with access to the United States Gulf Coast via Marketlink. Our terminal is situated on 200 acres and is designed to be expanded based on customer demand. Cushing is one of the most liquid crude oil trading hubs in the world and is the delivery point for Light Sweet Crude Oil futures contracts.\n\nWe own and operate a crude oil marine terminal in Point Comfort, Texas with 370,000 barrels of storage capacity and six off-loading LACTs. Our tanks connect to three docks at the port (two for ocean-going barges and ships and one for inland barges).\n\nWe own and operate a crude oil pipeline and marine terminal in Houma, Louisiana with 288,000 barrels of storage capacity, two off-loading LACTs, a brown water barge dock and two 12-inch bi-directional pipelines each capable of moving 120,000 barrels per day with connectivity to Shell’s Zydeco System.\n\nOperations. We purchase crude oil from producers and marketers and transport it to refineries or for resale. Our strategically deployed terminals, as well as our owned and contracted pipeline capacity, provide access to producers in the DJ Basin.\n\nWe currently transport crude oil on the Grand Mesa Pipeline, which is described above, and 19 other common carrier pipelines owned by third parties.\n\n10\n\n\n\nWe also own 25 pipeline injection stations, the locations of which are summarized below. State Number of Pipeline Injection Stations Texas 11 New Mexico 6 Oklahoma 5 Kansas 3 Total 25\n\nSee Note 17 to our consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report for all related dispositions in the current and prior years for the Crude Oil Logistics segment.\n\nCustomers. Our customers include crude oil refiners, producers, and marketers. During the year ended March 31, 2026, 79% of the revenues of our Crude Oil Logistics segment were generated from our ten largest customers of the segment. Additionally, certain key customers of the Crude Oil Logistics segment contribute significantly to the cash flows and profitability of the Partnership. Any loss of those customers or their contracts could have an adverse impact on our financial results.\n\nCompetition. Our Crude Oil Logistics segment faces significant competition, as many entities are engaged in the crude oil logistics business, some of which are larger and have greater financial resources than we do. The primary factors on which we compete are:\n\n• price; • availability of supply and refinery demand; • reliability of service; • open credit; • logistics capabilities, including the availability of railcars, proprietary terminals, and owned pipeline; and • long-term customer relationships.\n\nSupply. We obtain crude oil from a large base of suppliers, which consists primarily of crude oil producers. We currently purchase crude oil from 72 producers at 423 leases.\n\nPricing Policy. Most of our contracts to purchase or sell crude oil are at floating prices that are indexed to published rates in active markets such as Cushing, Oklahoma, St. James, Louisiana, and Magellan East Houston. We attempt to reduce our exposure to price fluctuations by using back-to-back physical contracts whenever possible. When back-to-back physical contracts are not optimal, we enter into financially settled derivative contracts as economic hedges of our physical inventory, physical sales and physical purchase contracts.\n\nOur profitability is impacted by forward crude oil prices. Crude oil markets can either be in contango (a condition in which forward crude oil prices are higher than spot prices) or can be in backwardation (a condition in which forward crude oil prices are lower than spot prices). Our Crude Oil Logistics segment benefits when the market is in contango, as increasing prices result in inventory value gains during the time between when we purchase the inventory and when we sell it. In addition, we are able to better utilize our storage assets when contango markets justify storing barrels. When markets are in backwardation, our inventory values decrease during the time period between when we purchase inventory and when we sell it and the declining prices also typically have an unfavorable impact on our storage tank lease rates. To help mitigate the impact of changing prices, we enter into derivative instruments to hedge our inventory.\n\nTrade Names. Our Crude Oil Logistics segment operates primarily under the NGL Crude Assets and Marketing, NGL Crude Transportation, NGL Crude Terminals and NGL Crude Cushing trade names.\n\nLiquids Logistics\n\nOverview . Our Liquids Logistics segment conducts supply operations for natural gas liquids to commercial, retail and industrial customers across the United States and Canada. These operations are conducted through our five owned terminals, third-party storage and terminal facilities, access to nine common carrier pipelines and a fleet of leased railcars. We also provide services for marine exports of butane through our facility located in Chesapeake, Virginia and we also own a propane 11\n\npipeline in Michigan. We attempt to reduce our exposure to price fluctuations by using back-to-back physical contracts and pre-sale agreements that allow us to lock in a margin on a percentage of our winter volumes. We also enter into financially settled derivative contracts as economic hedges of our physical inventory, physical sales and physical purchase contracts. We employ a number of contractual and hedging strategies to minimize commodity exposure and maximize earnings stability of this segment. During the year ended March 31, 2026, we sold approximately 1.2 billion gallons of natural gas liquids or 3.17 million gallons per day.\n\nOperations . We procure natural gas liquids from refiners, natural gas processing plants, producers and other resellers for delivery to leased or owned storage space, common carrier pipelines, railcar terminals, and direct to certain customers. Our customers take delivery by loading natural gas liquids into transport vehicles from common carrier pipeline terminals, private terminals, our terminals, directly from refineries and rail terminals, and by railcar.\n\nA portion of our wholesale propane gallons are presold to third-party retailers and wholesalers at a fixed price under back-to-back contracts. Back-to-back contracts, in which we balance our contractual portfolio by buying physical propane supply or derivatives when we have a matching purchase commitment from our wholesale customers, protect our margins and mitigate commodity price risk. Presales also reduce the impact of warm weather because the customer is required to take delivery of the propane regardless of the weather or any other factors. We generally require cash deposits from these customers. In addition, on a daily basis we have the ability to balance our inventory by buying or selling propane, butanes, and natural gasoline to refiners, resellers, and propane producers through pipeline inventory transfers at major storage hubs.\n\nIn order to secure consistent supply during the heating season, we are often required to purchase volumes of propane during the entire fiscal year. In order to mitigate storage costs and price risk, we may sell those volumes at a lesser margin in lower demand months than we earn in our other wholesale operations.\n\nWe purchase butane from refiners during the summer months, when refiners have a greater butane supply than they need, and sell butane to refiners during the winter blending season, when demand for butane is higher. We utilize a portion of our railcar fleet and a portion of our leased underground storage to store butane for this purpose. We also transport customer-owned natural gas liquids on our leased railcars and charge the customers a transportation service fee as well as sublease railcars to certain customers. Our owned and leased terminals and railcar fleet give us the opportunity to access markets throughout the United States, and to move product to locations where demand is highest. We provide transportation, storage, and throughput services to third parties at our facilities in Port Hudson, Louisiana, Chesapeake, Virginia and Shelton, Washington.\n\nThe following table summarizes the location of our facilities and respective storage capacity and interconnects to those facilities. Storage Capacity (in gallons) Location Number of Facilities Own (1) Lease (2) Total Terminal Interconnects Virginia 2 20,888,000 — 20,888,000 Rail, Truck and Marine Facility Louisiana 1 720,000 — 720,000 Truck Facility Michigan 1 480,000 — 480,000 Truck and Pipeline Facility Washington 1 — 120,000 120,000 Rail and Truck Facility Total 5 22,088,000 120,000 22,208,000 (1) These facilities are located on lands we own. (2) These facilities are located on lands we lease.\n\nWe own the land on which four of the five natural gas liquids terminals are located and we lease the land on which the remaining terminal is located.\n\nWe own a natural gas liquids terminal that supports refined products blending in Port Hudson, Louisiana, and a marine export/import terminal in Chesapeake, Virginia. The Port Hudson terminal is located near Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and is in proximity to other refined products infrastructure along the Colonial pipeline. This truck unloading and storage facility allows for the aggregation and supply of butane and naphtha for motor fuel blending and consists of storage tanks with a total capacity of 720,000 gallons. The Chesapeake facility is a marine export/import terminal situated upstream of Norfolk, Virginia on the Elizabeth River. The site includes a proprietary dock with the capacity to berth handy-sized vessels (a dry bulk carrier of an oil tanker with a capacity between 15,000 and 35,000 dead weight tonnage) to very large gas carriers (a carrier capable of loading anywhere between 100,000 cubic meters to 200,000 cubic meters of natural gas), truck loading and off-road racks along with 22 12\n\nrailcar spots, with service provided by Norfolk Southern Railroad. The facility has an aggregate storage capacity of 20,408,000 gallons.\n\nSee Note 1 and Note 17 to our consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report for all related dispositions in the current and prior years for the Liquids Logistics segment.\n\nWe own 29 transloading units, which enable transfer of product from railcars to trucks. These transloading units can be moved to locations along a railroad where it is most economical to transfer product at sites which otherwise would be out of reach of this product.\n\nWe own the Ambassador Pipeline, an approximately 225-mile propane pipeline, which runs from the Kalkaska gas plant in Kalkaska County, Michigan to a termination point near Marysville in St. Clair County, Michigan. The Wheeler propane terminal, in central Michigan, is located at the mid-point of the pipeline.\n\nWe utilize a fleet of approximately 3,600 high-pressure and general purpose leased railcars of which 123 railcars are subleased by third parties.\n\nWe lease storage space to accommodate the supply requirements and contractual needs of our retail and wholesale customers.\n\nThe following table summarizes our significant leased storage space at natural gas liquids storage facilities and interconnects to those facilities: Leased Storage Space\n\n(in gallons) Storage Facility Location Beginning\n\nApril 1,\n\n2026 At\n\nMarch 31,\n\n2026 Storage Interconnects Michigan 10,500,000 10,500,000 Rail and Truck Facility Mississippi 8,400,000 8,400,000 Pipeline and Rail Facility Texas 210,000 210,000 Pipeline and Rail Facility Utah — 5,880,000 Rail Facility United States Total 19,110,000 24,990,000 Alberta, Canada 1,323,420 1,323,420 Pipeline and Rail Facility Canada Total 1,323,420 1,323,420 Total 20,433,420 26,313,420\n\nCustomers . Our customers include national, regional and independent retail, industrial, wholesale, petrochemical, refiner and natural gas liquids production customers. During the year ended March 31, 2026, 45% of the revenues of our Liquids Logistics segment were generated from our ten largest customers of the segment. Additionally, certain key customers of the Liquids Logistics segment contribute significantly to the cash flows and profitability of the Partnership. Any loss of those customers or their contracts could have an adverse impact on our financial results.\n\nSeasonality . Our wholesale liquids business is largely seasonal as the primary users of propane as heating fuel generally purchase propane during the typical fall and winter heating season, while butane seasonality is driven primarily by winter gasoline blending. However, we are able to partially mitigate the effects of seasonality by preselling a portion of our wholesale volumes to retailers and wholesalers and requiring the customer to take delivery of the product regardless of the weather.\n\nCompetition. Our Liquids Logistics segment faces competition from other natural gas liquids wholesalers, trading companies and companies involved in the natural gas liquids midstream industry (such as terminal and refinery operations), some of which have greater financial resources than we do. The primary factors on which we compete are:\n\n• price; • availability of supply; • available space on common carrier pipelines; 13\n\n• storage availability; • logistics capabilities, including the availability of railcars, and proprietary terminals; and • long-term customer relationships.\n\nMarket Price Risk . Our philosophy is to maintain minimum commodity price exposure through a combination of purchase contracts, sales contracts and financial derivatives. For discretionary inventory, and for those instances where physical transactions cannot be appropriately matched, we utilize financial derivatives to mitigate commodity price exposure. Specific exposure limits are mandated in our market risk policy.\n\nPricing Policy. In our Liquids Logistics segment, we offer our customers the following categories of contracts:\n\n• customer pre-buys, which typically require deposits based on market pricing conditions; • market based, which can either be a posted price or an index to spot price at time of delivery; and • load package, a firm price agreement for customers seeking to purchase specific volumes delivered during a specific time period.\n\nWe use back-to-back contracts for many of our liquids business sales to limit commodity price exposure and protect our margins. We are able to match our supply and sales commitments by offering our customers purchase contracts with flexible price, location, storage, and ratable delivery.\n\nWe can require deposits from our customers for fixed price future delivery if the delivery date is more than 30 days after the time of contractual agreement.\n\nTrade Names. Our Liquids Logistics segment operates primarily under the Centennial Energy, Centennial Gas Liquids and NGL Supply Terminal Company trade names.\n\nHuman Capital\n\nAt March 31, 2026, we had 449 employees in 14 states and Canada. Of those employees, 214 provide work primarily for our Water Solutions segment, 55 provide work primarily for our Crude Oil Logistics segment, 60 provide work primarily for our Liquids Logistics segment, and 120 provide administrative services to the various business segments. NGL is an equal-opportunity employer, and our employee handbook underscores that commitment, with policies prohibiting discrimination, harassment, and retaliation.\n\nWe understand the importance of competitive benefits packages for the health and welfare of our employees and for our ability to recruit and retain the best talent. In that regard, at the end of fiscal year 2021, we implemented $20 per hour minimum wage for all regular, full-time employees. More than 97% of our eligible employees participated in the NGL 401(k) Plan in fiscal year 2026. As of January 1, 2023, we shortened the NGL 401(k) eligibility period from the first day after six months of employment to the first day of the month after three months of employment. In addition, we provide access to a traditional PPO or a high-deductible medical plan including a health savings account with employer contributions; a flexible spending account option for those not enrolled in the high-deductible medical plan; a dental plan; a vision plan; an Employee Assistance Plan including free counseling for employees and members of their household; company-paid short-term disability coverage; voluntary long-term disability coverage; company-paid life and AD&D coverage; and voluntary life and AD&D coverage options for employees and their family members.\n\nOur operations are guided by specific health and safety protocols. We endeavor to conduct our business in a manner that meets or exceeds applicable health and safety regulations and minimizes risk, both to our employees and the communities where we operate. Our environmental, health and safety team:\n\n• Advises on safety and industrial hygiene regulatory requirements and best practices; • Develops safety procedures and guidelines; • Conducts safety inspections; • Advises on strategies to improve health and safety performance; and • Designs and conducts safety and industrial hygiene training courses.\n\n14\n\nAs part of this effort, we have implemented an enterprise management information system designed to help us achieve a better understanding of our performance, identify root causes of incidents, and where appropriate, implement necessary mitigations.\n\nGovernment Regulation\n\nRegulation of the Oil and Natural Gas Industries\n\nRegulation of Oil and Natural Gas Exploration, Production and Sales. Sales of crude oil and natural gas liquids are not currently regulated and are transacted at market prices. In 1989, the United States Congress enacted the Natural Gas Wellhead Decontrol Act, which removed all remaining price and non-price controls affecting wellhead sales of natural gas. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”), which has authority under the Natural Gas Act to regulate the prices and o",
      "word_count": 10720,
      "original_language": "EN",
      "author": "Stock Titan",
      "countries": [
        "USA",
        "CAN"
      ],
      "industries": [
        {
          "name": "OCTG, Line Pipe & Tubular Services (Supply, Inspection, Threading)",
          "is_primary": true
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        {
          "name": "Debt Financing",
          "code": "CM02",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Divestitures & Asset Sales",
          "code": "CM04",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Product Launches & Enhancements",
          "code": "SD01",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "company_mentions": [
        {
          "uuid": "0003se7",
          "name": "NGL Energy Partners",
          "website": "http://nglenergypartners.com"
        }
      ],
      "article_type": "News analysis",
      "is_press_release": true,
      "is_opinion": false,
      "is_breaking": true,
      "iptc_codes": [
        "20001243",
        "20000386"
      ],
      "iab_categories": [
        "101",
        "94",
        "81"
      ],
      "naics_codes": [
        "213112",
        "48621",
        "423520"
      ],
      "sic_codes": [
        "1389",
        "4610",
        "1311"
      ],
      "entities": {
        "person": [],
        "location": [
          "cushing",
          "northern delaware",
          "grand mesa pipeline",
          "lea county express pipeline system",
          "ca",
          "delaware",
          "tulsa",
          "oklahoma",
          "michigan",
          "canada",
          "chesapeake, virginia",
          "ukraine",
          "united states",
          "middle east",
          "delaware basin",
          "cushing, oklahoma",
          "eagle ford basin",
          "dj basin",
          "new mexico",
          "texas",
          "colorado",
          "eddy county, new mexico",
          "lucerne",
          "riverside, colorado",
          "permian basin",
          "united states gulf coast",
          "kansas",
          "magellan east houston",
          "louisiana",
          "houma",
          "point comfort",
          "st. james",
          "shelton, washington",
          "washington",
          "virginia",
          "port hudson",
          "utah",
          "mississippi",
          "norfolk, virginia",
          "kalkaska county, michigan",
          "marysville",
          "baton rouge, louisiana",
          "elizabeth river",
          "port hudson, louisiana",
          "alberta",
          "kalkaska gas plant",
          "14 states"
        ],
        "product": [
          "stocktitan",
          "gasoline",
          "crude oil",
          "natural gas liquids",
          "natural gas",
          "butane",
          "grand mesa pipeline",
          "produced water",
          "lacts",
          "propane",
          "natural gasoline",
          "butanes",
          "naphtha"
        ],
        "event": [
          "lex ii expansion"
        ]
      },
      "newsworthiness_score": 0.9718000292778015,
      "group_id": null
    },
    {
      "id": 25812597,
      "title": "Energy News Monitor | Volume XXII, Issue 42",
      "url": "https://www.orfonline.org/research/energy-news-monitor-volume-xxii-issue-42",
      "publisher": "",
      "published_date": "2026-06-01T00:00:00",
      "sentiment": "Negative",
      "sentiment_score": 0.004699999932199717,
      "ai_summary": "India's natural gas system has experienced significant disruptions due to the geopolitical crisis in the Middle East, impacting imports, prices, and industrial supplies. The crisis has highlighted structural vulnerabilities in India's energy security, increasing support for diversification of supply routes and storage infrastructure. Several countries and companies are responding with new LNG projects, supply agreements, and policy measures to manage the supply shortfalls and rising prices. ",
      "full_text": "Quick Notes\n\nNatural Gas: Boundaries of the Bridge Fuel\n\nSource: PPAC\n\nIndia's exposure to the natural gas volume and price crisis arising from the blockade of the Hormuz Strait is acute, multi-dimensional, and largely structural - rooted in geographic concentration of import sources, inadequate storage, and price sensitivity that limits access. Over the last decade, natural gas has been promoted as a “bridge fuel” for industrial decarbonization, urban cooking, transport, and power generation. However, the Hormuz disruption has demonstrated that imported gas can simultaneously support emission reduction but increase vulnerability to geopolitical disruptions. In energy security terms, India’s gas system proved substantially more vulnerable than its oil system. The disruption, therefore, immediately translated into a physical contraction in gas availability rather than merely a price shock. The impact was magnified because LNG (liquefied natural gas) markets are less fungible than oil markets. Oil cargoes can often be rerouted relatively quickly from multiple producing regions, whereas LNG depends on long-term contracts, dedicated liquefaction capacity, regasification scheduling, and specialised shipping fleets.\n\nIndia imports roughly half of its natural gas requirement in the form of LNG. More than half of India's imports are sourced from West Asian countries (Qatar, UAE, Oman). Over 80 percent of India's LNG imports come from just five exporters from West Asia. Qatar alone accounts for nearly half of LNG imports. India’s LNG procurement strategy has shifted rapidly toward supply diversification. Additional cargoes are sought from the United States (US), Australia, Russia, and East Africa. However, these substitutions face major limitations. US LNG cargoes involve significantly longer voyage durations and higher shipping costs. Russian Arctic LNG projects remain constrained by sanctions and logistical bottlenecks. African LNG projects lack sufficient spare export capacity. Therefore, diversification could only partially offset lost West Asian volumes. The crisis has strengthened support for pipeline diversification projects, including a proposed subsea Oman–India gas pipeline intended to bypass the Strait of Hormuz chokepoint.\n\nThe crisis has exposed several longstanding structural gaps, of which the limited strategic gas storage capability is critical. Unlike crude oil, where India possesses strategic petroleum reserves, the country has minimal strategic LNG storage infrastructure. India currently has only about two to three weeks of effective LNG buffering capacity distributed across existing regasification terminals. This lack of storage is amplifying gas market volatility because disruptions are instantly translating into downstream supply stress.\n\nIndia is a highly price-sensitive LNG importer that limits spot purchases because many gas-consuming sectors cannot absorb elevated fuel costs. A significant share of India’s LNG imports is Brent-indexed with a three-month lag, which means a spike in crude oil prices simultaneously lifts oil import costs and LNG contract prices, creating a dual physical and financial shock. The Platts JKM (Japan Korea Marker) benchmark for spot LNG cargoes in Northeast Asia surged to US$15.07/MMBtu (metric million British thermal units) immediately after the conflict began, then increased by 70 percent in a single day to about US$25/MMBtu on 3 March 2026, the largest daily surge since March 2022. As of 21 May 2026, the JKM price averaged over US$18/MMBtu. With Brent crude prices increasing by over 50 percent, contract prices for Indian LNG buyers are expected to increase from June 2026 onward. Spot LNG prices around US$20/MMBtu and daily charter rates for LNG carriers exceeding US$200,000 in the Atlantic Basin are eroding natural gas’s price competitiveness compared to alternatives. India's total LNG import value reached over US$13 billion in 2025-26. Elevated prices through 2026 could increase this by 40 to 70 percent, placing additional pressure on India's current account and fiscal balances. If regulated fuel price caps are raised, it will shift the burden onto fiscal balances rather than directly onto consumers. This will cushion the impact of price increases on households but transfer the burden to corporate margins and fiscal accounts. Costly spot cargoes add to India’s fiscal burden. Eventually, gas price shocks will transmit to India's economy through a broad channel, as LNG powers fertiliser plants, city gas networks, and an expanding industrial gas user base.\n\nIn response to the crisis, India has imposed demand-side restrictions at considerable economic cost. Priority allocation of natural gas for critical sectors such as domestic LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) and domestic CNG (compressed natural gas for piped natural gas (PNG)) has come at the cost of reductions in supply to energy-intensive industrial sectors, including refining, petrochemicals, glass, and ceramics that are heavily dependent on imported LNG. Reduction of production from these industries will have a negative impact on the broader economy. Industrial fuel switching options remain unavailable to most industries.\n\nThe petrochemical sector faces a particularly severe squeeze because LNG shortages are coinciding with disruptions in LPG and naphtha flows from the Gulf. Gas-based petrochemical producers are encountering both feedstock scarcity and price inflation simultaneously. The resulting effects are propagating into fertiliser, plastics, packaging, synthetic fibres, and chemical intermediates. This is creating a “cross-fuel substitution bottleneck,” where shortages in one hydrocarbon chain amplify stress across adjacent energy and industrial systems.\n\nThe fertiliser sector is among the first to face pressure. India’s urea industry depends heavily on natural gas as feedstock, and several plants are shifting to lower utilisation rates due to uncertainty over gas supplies and elevated spot LNG prices. Industrial consumers, including ceramics, glass, petrochemicals, and small manufacturing clusters, are experiencing curtailed gas supply and sharply rising procurement costs.\n\nFor India, industrial gas curtailments are likely to persist. Physical supply constraints, elevated spot prices, and oil-indexed contract price increases from June 2026 suggest India is likely to face double-digit percentage increases in delivered LNG costs through the remainder of 2026, with consequential impacts on fertiliser subsidies, industrial competitiveness, and household LPG and CNG costs.\n\nShort-term responses such as expensive spot purchases and demand curtailment will address immediate needs but will not resolve structural vulnerabilities. Long-term remedies, including expanded strategic storage, accelerated diversification, development of domestic gas production, and reduced dependence on oil-indexed pricing, remain urgent priorities. The fundamental lesson is unambiguous. Energy security in an era of heightened geopolitical risk requires not only supply diversity but strategic reserves, pricing flexibility, and the infrastructure to withstand prolonged chokepoint closures.\n\nMonthly News Commentary: Natural Gas\n\nGas Supply and Price Crisis Affect Consumption\n\nIndia\n\nLNG\n\nIndia has marked a significant step in global energy infrastructure exports, with the first batch of specialised liquefied natural gas (LNG) storage tanks dispatched from Kandla Port for a mini-LNG terminal project in Nassau, Bahamas. The shipment, led by INOX India Ltd, highlights the country’s growing role in delivering complex, high-value engineering solutions worldwide. The tanks are part of a major project being developed for Island Power Producers in the Bahamas. Once completed, the facility will support island-based power generation using LNG, offering a cleaner and more efficient energy alternative. The consignment includes advanced cryogenic tanks designed for safe storage and handling of LNG, along with a regasification system. The project represents one of the largest installations of shop-built, double-walled vacuum-insulated LNG tanks globally. A total of 10 high-capacity tanks are being supplied under what is described as INOXCVA’s biggest LNG order to date.\n\nCGD/CNG\n\nIndia’s Adani Total Gas reported a rise in fourth‑quarter profit, supported by higher compressed natural ​gas (CNG) demand and steady growth in household piped ‌natural gas (PNG) connections, which lifted overall volumes. The company is a joint venture of the Adani Group and French oil major TotalEnergies SE. Its ​ consolidated net profit rose about 9 percent ​to INR1.68 billion (bn) (US$17.84 million (mn)) in the three ⁠months ended 31 March. CNG sales volumes, which account for ​over half of total sales, rose 17 percent during the ​quarter, driven by sustained demand from the transport segment and a rise in outlets. Piped natural gas, Adani Total’s second-biggest segment, logged a ​5 percent increase in sales volumes at 91 million standard ​cubic meter of gas per day (mmscmd). India in March ordered faster approvals for ‌new ⁠gas pipelines, deeming permissions granted if authorities fail to respond, helping lift household piped gas additions to about 580,000 that month from roughly 342,300 a year earlier. Natural gas sourcing costs for Adani Total Gas rose 17.8 percent, contributing to an 18 percent rise ⁠in its ​total expenses to 1INR4.92 bn. Total revenue from operations rose 16.5 percent to INR16.95 bn (US$179.3 mn).\n\nIndia has accelerated its shift to PNG, with more than 5.01 lakh new PNG connections gasified since March and over 5.68 lakh consumers registering for fresh connections, even as authorities manage LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) supplies amid geopolitical disruptions. With the war in West Asia disrupting cooking gas LPG supplies, the government is pushing households as well as industries to move to PNG — a more convenient alternative whose supplies have not been very badly hit. LPG users within the reach of a PNG connection have been asked to shift, while orders have been issued for expediting approvals for laying of pipelines that supply gas to burner tips.\n\nFrom police stations to fast-food outlets, Indraprastha Gas Ltd is expanding its push for PNG connections in Delhi-NCR as it looks to rapidly expand its user base to ease pressure on cooking gas LPG. Following disruptions to energy supplies from the West Asia conflict, the government is pushing wider adoption of PNG as a convenient alternative to LPG, given its more diversified sourcing and lower dependence on the Gulf region.\n\nCompressed natural gas (CNG) has become costlier across the Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR), with Mahanagar Gas Ltd (MGL) hiking the retail price by a rupee per kg (kilogram). The revision takes the CNG rate to INR82 per kg in Mumbai, Thane, Navi Mumbai and other parts of the region, impacting a large section of daily commuters as autos, taxis and buses continue to rely heavily on the fuel. As per Mumbai Rickshawmen Union, the increase in gas prices will lead to rise in operational costs as the fuel has become expensive over the past year. The union may also seek a minimum one rupee hike in autorickshaw fares, with the fuel rates going up. Over the past year, the CNG vehicle population in the Mumbai region has risen by around two lakh vehicles — a 20 percent jump — taking the total to over 12 lakh. Vehicle registrations indicate the scale of dependence on CNG in public transport and last-mile connectivity. The CNG fleet in MMR includes about 4.7 lakh auto-rickshaws and over 1.6 lakh taxis, along with more than five lakh private cars spread across Mumbai, Thane, Mira-Bhayander, Navi Mumbai and Raigad.\n\nPolicy & Governance\n\nA renewed push to locate the headquarters of a proposed INR122.15 bn (US$1.29 bn) synthetic natural gas (SNG) project in Nagpur has gathered momentum, with Union Minister Nitin Gadkari urging top officials of Coal India Ltd (CIL) and Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd (BPCL) to consider the move. The proposal, led by the Association for Industrial Development (AID), seeks to relocate the project’s administrative base from Mumbai to Nagpur, arguing that proximity to the plant site and regional balance make a compelling case. AID recently submitted a representation outlining these factors, prompting Gadkari’s intervention. The SNG project, based on coal gasification technology, is planned at Majri in Bhadravati tehsil of Chandrapur district. Conceived as a joint venture between the two public sector companies, the project is expected to generate employment for around 3,000 skilled and semi-skilled workers, adding to the region’s industrial base.\n\nRest of the World\n\nEurope\n\nAccording to the European energy regulators' agency ACER, European Union (EU) countries are set to fall short of the bloc’s requirement to fill gas storage to 90 percent of capacity before ​next winter, because of the Iran war’s disruption to global fuel ‌markets. Countries should be able to reach a lower 80 percent filling level - a flexibility the EU rules allow in difficult market ​conditions, ACER said. But it said that hitting this level “will likely ​come at a premium cost” and be vulnerable to supply disruptions. Filling ⁠storage to 90 percent would require the EU to increase its LNG imports ​by 13 percent compared with 2025, ACER said. That will be difficult given tight global ​supplies. The Iran war has upended global gas markets by effectively closing the Strait of Hormuz, which usually transits around 20 percent of the world’s LNG. While most of the EU’s gas imports come from outside the Middle East - from Norway ‌and ⁠the US (United States) - the disruption to global supplies has forced European buyers to compete with those in Asia for flexible LNG cargoes, and increased European gas prices by around 40 percent. Europe’s current reserves of stored gas are unusually low, after a ​cold winter. The current ​high prices are ⁠deterring companies from buying gas for storage. EU gas storage is currently 31 percent full, the lowest level for this time ​of year since 2022, when Russia slashed gas supplies to ​Europe, Gas Infrastructure Europe data showed. Gas from storage typically covers up to a third of EU gas demand in winter. The European Commission has urged governments to start refilling ⁠gas storage ​as soon as possible, and said it will step in to coordinate countries' efforts to avoid them rushing to buy gas at the ​same time and causing new price spikes.\n\nSlovakia will file a lawsuit in the coming days challenging the EU’s decision ​to ban Russian gas imports, adopted by ‌a qualified majority, and will seek a preliminary injunction, Prime Minister (PM) Robert Fico said. The ban on Russian gas imports, ​to be implemented by late 2027, was cleared ​by a reinforced majority of countries, allowing the EU to overcome opposition from Slovakia and Hungary when it ​approved the measure earlier this year.\n\nFrance’s proposal to cap profit margins on transport fuels sold throughout the country’s service stations prompted an immediate backlash from the distribution industry. The French government had ​submitted for consultation a draft decree that would fix prices to ensure fuel distributors did ​not earn margins higher than those seen in January and February, based on a ⁠sliding five-day average of wholesale prices at Rotterdam.\n\nUnited States oil major ExxonMobil, Energean and Helleniq Energy will sign ​a contract with ‌Stena Drilling to start exploratory drilling in a western Greek offshore block, Greece’s ​energy ministry said. ​ExxonMobil, Energean and Greece’s biggest oil ⁠refiner Helleniq announced an agreement last ​year to explore for natural gas ​in Block 2 in the Ionian Sea. The consortium will proceed with exploratory drilling in ​February 2027, the ​ministry said, ‌the ⁠country’s first offshore exploration drilling in 40 years. Europe is attempting to diversify its energy ⁠sources ​as it seeks to ​replace Russian gas following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.\n\nUkraine plans to have 14.6 bcm of natural gas in ​underground storage for the 2026-2027 heating season, Energy Minister Denys Shmyhal ‌said. Ukraine had ​about 13.2 bcm of gas in storage facilities before the start of the ​previous heating season in October 2025. Shmyhal did not specify how ⁠much gas Ukraine currently has in storage or how much it intends to ​import. Shmyhal noted that Ukraine’s state energy firm Naftogaz and the Ukrainian Gas Transmission System Operator ​were already working on the issue of reserving potential capacity for natural ​gas imports and extending the validity of the so-called Vertical Gas Corridor. After Russia stepped up its attacks on Ukrainian gas production late last year, Ukraine, which previously imported only small volumes of gas, was forced to increase daily imports to around 24 million cubic meters (mcm). However, it ​sharply cut gas imports ​starting 1 April, ⁠and analysts said they would likely remain low at least through April, with purchases possibly increasing if prices on ​the European market decline. Kyiv-based ExPro consultancy analysts said this month that Ukraine ended the 2025/26 heating season on 10 March and gas reserves in storage stood at 9.5 bcm, ⁠1.6 times ​higher than a year earlier. Analysts said Ukraine ​can acquire the gas needed for the next heating season from domestic production, without resorting to ​costly imports. Ukraine sharply cut its natural gas imports on 1 April, and analysts said they would likely remain low at least through ​April, with purchases possibly increasing if prices on the European ‌market decline. The war in Iran has sent global gas and oil prices surging. Data from the gas transmission system operator showed Ukraine planned to import 0.8 million cubic meters (mcm) of ​gas import, exclusively from Poland, against 23 mcm. In the January-to-March period, Ukraine received gas from Poland, ⁠Hungary, Slovakia and Romania. After Russia stepped up its attacks on Ukrainian gas ​production late last year, Ukraine, which previously imported only small volumes of ​gas, was forced to increase daily imports to around 24 mcm. Ukraine ended the 2025/26 heating season on March 10 and gas reserves in storage stood at 9.5 ​billion cubic meters (bcm), 1.6 times higher than a year ​earlier.\n\nItaly will begin receiving LNG from the Golden Pass LNG facility ​in the US, a joint venture between QatarEnergy and Exxon Mobil, ‌from June. The LNG tankers from the United States will help Italy plug a potentially costly supply gap due to disruptions from Qatar linked to the ​US-Israeli war against Iran. Italy ​is already receiving LNG from the United States but these cargoes would ⁠mark the first LNG coming from Golden Pass facilities in Texas to Italy's ​Adriatic LNG terminal. In March, US exports of LNG rose to an all-time high as ​plants ran above nameplate capacity and new units started up, financial firm LSEG data showed. Exxon Mobil said gas exports from Golden Pass LNG would start ​in the second quarter of this year.\n\nSpain’s Repsol and Italy’s Eni are seeking to increase production at Venezuela’s ​Cardon IV gas field to 645 million cubic feet per ‌day. The field ​currently produces about 580 million cubic feet per day. Venezuela’s vice ​minister for gas Cindy Rondon said the country needed to speed up repairs ​to gas infrastructure.\n\nAfrica/ Middle East\n\nUAE (United Arab Emirates)’s Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) is planning to invest tens ​of billions of dollars to build a natural gas business ‌in the US. The ​company is reviewing 29 potential deals aimed at creating a vertically ⁠integrated global gas business. The strategy is to diversify ADNOC’s overseas ​investment arm XRG’s commodity exposure by operating ​across the entire gas value chain. XRG ​is weighing options to create a business that would meet rising global demand for LNG and the growing ​US demand to power data centres.\n\nLibya’s National Oil Corporation (NOC) ‌has begun trial operation of a long-delayed gas pipeline aimed at easing production bottlenecks and supporting future exports, the company said. The ​North African country, the continent’s second-largest oil producer and a ​member of OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries), relies heavily on hydrocarbons, but its ⁠ability to attract foreign investment and expand output has been ​hampered by years of political and economic turmoil since 2011. In recent ​months, NOC has sought to reverse that trend, announcing new oil and gas discoveries and awarding exploration blocks in its first licensing round since 2007, signalling a ​renewed push to bring in international partners as the nation looks ​to boost production to 1 billion standard cubic feet per day and raise exports ‌to ⁠Europe by the early 2030s. The new 42-inch pipeline links the Intisar A/103 field to the Brega gas distribution network over about 130 km (80 miles). NOC said it would enable the recovery of ​about 150 million ​cubic feet of ⁠gas per day that had previously been flared, boosting supplies to domestic consumers and freeing up ​volumes for export. Libya holds an estimated 80 trillion ​cubic feet ⁠(tcf) of gas reserves, but exports via the Greenstream pipeline to Italy remain limited.\n\nIsrael’s energy ​ministry said ‌that it had instructed Energean to begin resuming operations at the ​Karish natural gas platform off ​Israel's Mediterranean coast following the ⁠US ceasefire with Iran. The platform ​has been closed since 28 February, ​when the US-Israeli war with Iran began, due to safety concerns. Energean confirmed ​it had received notice ​from the energy ministry that would permit ‌the ⁠safe restart and resumption of production and operations at its Karish site. Israel’s offshore ⁠Leviathan ​gas field also resumed operations ​after a month-long war shutdown.\n\nQatarEnergy is ​preparing to restart LNG ‌production. In March, ​QatarEnergy halted production of LNG ​and associated products due to military attacks ⁠on facilities in Ras Laffan and ​Mesaieed. The company has restarted two out ​of three trains at QELNG North 1 (Qatargas-1). QELNG North 1 ​is Qatar’s first-ever LNG project and ​is located in Ras Laffan Industrial City. The ‌facility ⁠includes three conventional liquefaction trains with a combined capacity of approximately 10 million tonnes per annum (mtpa) of LNG.\n\nOil ​and gas producer Energean is spending about US$10 mn a month to keep its ‌shut-in Israeli offshore operations on standby, and its more than US$1 bn Katlan project will be delayed if the Iran war lasts beyond May. Before the shutdown, Energean produced 15,000 barrels per day (bpd) ​of oil alongside gas. Following facility upgrades, production will hit 20,000 bpd upon restart, helping offset ​deferred income. The planned May launch of Katlan, which was discovered by Energean in 2022 near two other projects it owns off Israel’s coast, will be delayed if the war has not been resolved by ​then though there will be no material impact if it ends sooner. Regional supply squeezes and Egyptian domestic gas shortages mean Egypt, Israel, Jordan, and their neighbours need ‌over 100 bcm of gas annually. Energean has booked capacity to supply 1 bcm of gas annually from Israel to Egypt through a planned pipeline, which remains significantly cheaper than imported LNG.\n\nNorth and South America\n\nCamuzzi Gas Inversora and Vitol signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) for ​Argentina’s LNG del Plata project, the ‌Argentine firm said, with Vitol potentially acquiring up to 100 percent of production and evaluating ​an equity investment. The project, currently wholly ​owned by Camuzzi, is located at the ⁠Port of La Plata in Buenos ​Aires province and will require an investment ​of US$3.9 billion over the next 20 years.\n\nCanada has approved a ‌C$4 bn (US$2.93 bn) expansion of Enbridge’s Westcoast natural gas pipeline system in British Columbia, the first major pipeline project to get the go-ahead under Prime Minister Mark Carney. Enbridge has ⁠been developing its Sunrise Expansion project, which will add 300 million cubic feet per day of natural gas ​capacity in B.C., since 2022, and applied for federal regulatory approval two years ago. Enbridge ​will build Sunrise to meet rising B.C. natural gas demand, including from LNG projects such as Woodfibre, which is under construction ‌on ⁠the Pacific coast and of which Enbridge owns 30 percent. Enbridge’s Westcoast natural gas pipeline system stretches ​2,900 kilometres (1,802 miles) from northeast ​British Columbia to the ⁠Canada-US border, with a current capacity of 3.6 billion cubic feet (bcf) of natural gas per day. The expansion will involve constructing new pipeline segments along the existing system, additional ​gas compression capacity and upgrades and changes to existing facilities. Construction is scheduled to ​begin in July, ⁠with a targeted in-service date in late 2028.\n\nUS Energy Secretary Chris Wright said he believes gas prices have peaked but predicted that they may stay above US$3 per gallon ​until next year. Gas prices have risen during the US and Israeli war on Iran and ‌Iranian attacks on nearby countries, creating political headwinds for President Donald Trump ahead of the November midterm elections, where his Republican Party will defend slim majorities in the Senate and House of Representatives.\n\nUS energy company Williams Companies CEO (chief executive officer) Chad Zamarin said the long-delayed Constitution ​natural gas pipeline from Pennsylvania (PA) to New York (NY) could be ‌operational as soon as the end of 2027, if all goes as planned with the controversial project. Zamarin made the comments in Brooklyn, New York, at the ​ground-breaking of another long-delayed gas pipe, the company’s Northeast Supply Enhancement (NESE) ​project. Constitution ​is designed to move around 0.65 bcf per ⁠day of gas from Pennsylvania to New York. NESE is designed to move around 0.4 bcf per ⁠day of gas from Pennsylvania, across New Jersey and into ⁠New ​York. One bcf of gas is ​enough to supply around five million US homes for a day.\n\nIndiana became the second United States (US) state to suspend its gas tax amid the ongoing US-Israeli conflict with ​Iran. Governor Mike Braun, a Republican, said the suspension of ‌the 7 percent usage tax on fuel will last 30 days and could be extended depending on \"the circumstances in the Middle East.\" He said the ​state will be \"patrolling the pumps\" to make sure the tax relief is passed directly to consumers. The average gas price in Indiana is US$4.137, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA). The ​average price was US$3.466 ​a month ago, ⁠AAA said.\n\nBrazil’s oil ‌company Petrobras could raise the prices of natural gas sold to distributors by some 20 percent starting ​in May due to a global ​hike in oil prices, the ⁠industry group Abegas executive director Marcelo Mendonca said. Petrobras updates ​natural gas prices quarterly, with the readjustments ​tracking Brent oil. The last change took place in early February, before a jump in global ​oil prices due to the US-Israeli ​war on Iran. Based on current market data, Abegas ‌fears ⁠that an even higher increase, of over 35 percent, could happen in August, Mendonca said. Distributors ⁠were asking the Brazilian government to take measures to ease the impact of potentially higher natural ⁠gas ​prices, as it already ​did with diesel and jet fuel, Mendonca said.\n\nCaturus said it had reached full ​commercialization of its Commonwealth LNG ‌project in Louisiana after securing long-term offtake agreements, paving the ​way for project financing ​and a final investment decision ⁠in the coming weeks. EQT LNG ​Trading, Glencore, Mercuria, Malaysia's Petronas ​LNG and Saudi Aramco’s Aramco Trading Americas have each signed sale and ​purchase agreements for output ​from the facility, the company said. US (United States) LNG ‌developers ⁠are securing long-term buyers to advance projects amid strong global demand, even as costs ​and ​financing discipline ⁠remain key hurdles. The US$12.5 bn Phase 1 development, ​located in Cameron Parish, ​is ⁠expected to start operations in 2030 and generate about US$3.5 ⁠billion ​in annual export ​revenue once online.\n\nFreeport LNG has asked US regulators for permission to demolish facilities in Texas ​that were previously used to import LNG. While the US was ⁠once a major importer of the fuel, the shale revolution ​transformed the domestic gas market and turned the country into ​the world’s largest LNG exporter. Freeport has not imported LNG since 2011. Freeport, the third largest LNG exporter in the US, said it wants FERC approval for the project ​by the end ​of this ⁠year, adding that removing the unused infrastructure would enhance operational safety and significantly reduce the ​time employees spend maintaining and inspecting non-operational ​assets.\n\nChina\n\nTurkmenistan’s state gas company and China’s CNPC signed a deal to build the fourth ​phase of Turkmenistan’s Galkynysh gas field, which produces much of ‌the country’s annual 30 billion cubic meters (bcm) in gas exports to China. Under the deal, CNPC will build a facility for processing an additional 10 bcm of commercial gas ​per year at the field in the deserts of eastern Turkmenistan, ​along with drilling new production wells. The project will be entirely financed by Turkmenistan. It will cost US$5.1 billion, and service both domestic ​and export markets. Turkmenistan, a mostly desert former Soviet republic that borders Iran and Afghanistan, has the fourth largest natural gas reserves in ​the world, with the bulk of its exports going to China.\n\nRest of Asia-Pacific\n\nJERA, Japan’s biggest power ‌generator, has secured adequate LNG inventories through July to cover Middle East supply disruptions caused by the US -Israeli war with Iran. JERA handles about 35 ​mtpa of imports and trading, of which roughly 27 million tons ​are used domestically. About 5 percent of its Japan-bound shipments pass through the ⁠Strait of Hormuz, where the conflict has disrupted shipping. In February, JERA signed a 27-year deal with QatarEnergy for 3 mtpa from the North Field South expansion project starting in 2028.\n\nPakistan LNG Ltd has issued its first spot tender for LNG since December 2023 amid supply ​shortfalls triggered by the US (United States)-Israeli war with Iran. The company is seeking bids from international suppliers ‌for three LNG cargoes of around 140,000 cubic metres each for delivery on 27-30 April, and on 1-7 and 8-14 May at Port Qasim in Karachi. Pakistan ​Federal Minister of Energy Awais Leghari said the LNG tender was aimed at meeting ​rising power demand and to cut reliance on costlier diesel and furnace oil. Pakistan is ⁠not sure when it will get more cargoes from Qatar, Leghari said. Pakistan has not received any LNG cargoes loaded after the Middle East war began on 28 February and Iran shut off almost all shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, which connects the Gulf to the ​Indian Ocean. Qatar depends on access through the strait to move its energy output. It supplied the bulk ​of the 6.64 million metric tonnes of LNG Pakistan imported last year, according to Kpler data. Islamabad cancelled 21 LNG cargoes for 2026–27 under a long-term deal ​with Eni, expecting slower ​demand growth and increased ⁠power supply from solar energy. Pakistan remains ​exposed to supply shocks, however, and LNG is still needed to meet peak ​summer demand ⁠and limit outages.\n\nBangladesh expects to import 11 cargoes of LNG in May to meet demand during the ​peak summer season, including two spot cargoes that had ‌recently been awarded, Petrobangla said. Bangladesh has bought 11 spot cargoes since ​the war started ​on 28 February. Last year, Bangladesh relied on Qatar for more than half of its annual ⁠LNG ​imports. Dhaka has already sought US$2 bn in ​external financing to secure fuel and LNG imports.\n\nAustralia may invoke its gas security ​policy to safeguard domestic supply for its ‌east coast as authorities warn of potential shortages during the winter months amid global energy disruptions linked to ​the Middle East conflict. Resources Minister Madeleine King ​said the government was considering activating the so-called ⁠Australian Domestic Gas Security Mechanism (ADGSM) which would ​force exporters to prioritise local supply. A decision ​is expected next month following consultations with major gas producers. The ADGSM mechanism requires gas exporters to offer uncontracted gas to ​the domestic market before international buyers and ​ensures Australian buyers are not charged more than foreign customers ‌for ⁠such supplies.\n\nThailand is actively seeking additional LNG supplies from Malaysia following disruptions caused by ​the ongoing Middle East conflict. Thailand would need to diversify some of its LNG supply away from the Middle East, ​estimated at roughly 5 percent to 10 percent, the energy ministry said. The ministry ​said ⁠that discussions are underway with Petronas, though he clarified that Thailand's state-controlled energy firm PTT PCL handles supply procurement. The ministry ​said ⁠the country has requested additional gas supplies from the Malaysia-Thailand Joint Development Area (MTJDA), a shared resource zone ⁠jointly ​managed by both countries.\n\nNews Highlights: 29 April – 5 May 2026\n\nNational: Oil\n\nIndia’s April LPG consumption falls 16.2 percent year-on-year\n\n4 May: India’s liquefied petroleum gas consumption in April fell by 16.2 percent to ​2.2 million metric tonnes, preliminary government data ‌showed, as supplies were hit by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz after Israel ​and the US (United States) attacked Iran. India consumed ​33.15 million tonnes (MT) of LPG, mostly used ⁠as cooking gas, in 2025, with ​imports accounting for about 60 percent of demand. About ​90 percent of those imports came from the Middle East. Supply of LPG to industries has been hit ​due to the shortage, and the government ​is pushing customers to use piped gas. India’s jet fuel ‌demand ⁠declined by 1.37 percent to 761,000 tonnes in April, as airlines passed on the higher fuel prices to consumers. In contrast, gasoline ​and gasoil consumption ​rose ⁠in April, according to the Petroleum ​Planning and Analysis Cell data. India’s gasoline consumption in April was about 3.7 million metric tonnes, up 6.36 percent from ⁠a ​year earlier. Local gasoil sales ​increased by 0.25 percent to about 8.3 MT in April.\n\nIndia has no plans for financial support for fuel retailers\n\n4 May: India has no plans to ​compensate fuel retailers for ‌losses from selling transport fuels below market prices, the petroleum ​ministry said, even as companies raised ⁠prices for some industrial ​and bulk customers. Indian state fuel ​retailers have raised prices of liquefied petroleum gas for industrial customers and jet fuel sold to ​foreign carriers, but there ​has been no increase in retail prices ‌of ⁠gasoline, gasoil, LPG or jet fuel for Indian carriers. Indian Oil Corporation (IOC), Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd (HPCL) ​and Bharat ​Petroleum ⁠ Corporation Ltd (BPCL) have raised diesel prices for ​bulk buyers.\n\nRIL cuts exports of alkylates, boosts LPG output\n\n4 May: Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) is cutting output ​of alkylates and diverting feedstock to ramp ‌up production of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) as India battles shortages of the cooking fuel due to the ​Iran war, the company said. The ​operator of the world’s biggest refining complex ⁠is running its alkylation unit at minimum rates, ​curtailing exports of the gasoline-blending component. RIL typically exports ​alkylates to the US (United States) from its 704,000 barrels per day (bpd) export-focused refinery. The company said LPG production has increased more than ​threefold from pre-war levels. In March, the federal government directed refiners to maximise LPG production as India ​faced shortages after ​the ⁠closure of the Strait of Hormuz. India, the world’s second-largest LPG importer, is ​grappling with its worst gas crisis ​in decades, ⁠with the government cutting supplies to industry to protect household cooking fuel needs. The country had relied ⁠on ​the Middle East for ​about 90 percent of its LPG imports.\n\nKarnataka State Hotels Association demands GST cut on commercial LPG cylinders to 5 percent\n\n2 May: The Karnataka State Hotels Association (KSHA) urged the government to immediately reduce GST (goods and services tax) on 19-kg (kilogram) commercial LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) cylinders from 18 to 5 percent. Meanwhile, the Bangalore Hotels Association (BHA) has separately written to Prime Minister (PM) Narendra Modi requesting his intervention to roll back or reduce the recent LPG price hike, rationalise GST rates on commercial LPG to bring them on par with domestic LPG at 5 percent, and ensure uninterrupted and adequate supply of LPG to the hospitality sector. The demand comes in the wake of a steep hike of INR993 per 19-kg commercial LPG cylinder, marking the third consecutive monthly increase due to rising global energy prices linked to the West Asia conflict.\n\nIndia-bound LPG supertanker crosses Hormuz\n\n2 May: India-bound LPG supertanker Sarv Shakti transited the Strait of Hormuz and is expected to arrive at Visakhapatnam on 13 May. The last India-bound ship to cross the conflict-hit channel was Desh Garima (oil tanker) on 18 April, after Iran announced free passage for a short period. The Marshall Islands-flagged LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) carrier is carrying 46,313 tonnes of LPG and has 20 crew members, including 18 Indians. A state-run oil PSU has chartered the cargo. The past-track of the LPG tanker on Marine Traffic shows that it sailed close to Iran’s Larak Qeshm islands in the direction of the Gulf of Oman. Ten Indian-flagged energy ships — nine LPG tankers and one crude oil carrier — have crossed the strait since March. A few foreign-flagged energy tankers have arrived at Indian ports from the Persian Gulf. As of now, there are 13 Indian-flagged and one Indian-owned ship in Persian Gulf. The shipping ministry had shared with the external affairs ministry a list of 41 India-bound “priority vessels” which needed to be evacuated.\n\nIndia’s crude imports in April 85 percent of February level, Russia largest source\n\n1 May: Russia remained the largest source of crude for India in April, supplying 1.6 million barrels per day (bpd), followed by Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Venezuela and Qatar, data from shipment-tracking firm Kpler data showed. India imported nearly 4.4 million bpd of crude in April, marginally lower than in March (4.5 million bpd) and 85 percent of February shipments (5.2 million bpd), amid the ongoing disruption of supply flows through Strait of Hormuz. Supplies from Russia were down 20 percent from nearly 2 million bpd in March, which was the highest since May last year. While Saudi Arabia (685,000 bpd) and UAE (575,000 bpd) ramped up supplies, India resumed imports from Iran and Venezuela to plug the gap caused by disruptions from other West Asian nations. No shipments arrived from Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar or Saudi-Kuwait neutral zone in April, despite Iraq usually being among India’s top crude suppliers. For the first time since March 2019, Indian refiners sourced nearly 1.3 lakh barrels of oil a day from Iran in April, after the US eased sanctions for a month to help reduce global crude prices. Imports of LPG fell to less than 1 million tonnes (MT) in April, down from 2-2.2 MT during the pre-crisis months. Data showed that India received nearly 9.5 lakh tonnes of the primary cooking fuel in April, about 16 percent less than March shipments, which were estimated at a little over 1.1 MT.\n\nGovernment has not ruled out petrol, diesel price hike in near future\n\n1 May: An increase in petrol and diesel prices in the near future is not ruled out, government said, as losses mount from a four-year-old freeze in retail rates despite the sharp rise in global crude oil prices. Government said the possibility of a petrol and diesel price hike in the near future is not ruled out. Earlier in the day, Indian Oil Corporation (IOC), making a statement on behalf of the industry, said petrol and diesel price as also domestic LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) rates are not being increased despite a surge in international energy cost. State-owned oil firms hiked prices of commercial LPG, industrial diesel, 5-kg (kilogram)LPG and jet fuel sold to international airlines in keeping with the cost. The oil ministry said that state-owned fuel retailers were incurring losses of about INR20 per litre on petrol and roughly INR100 per litre on diesel as pump prices remained frozen for nearly four years despite a surge in global oil prices. Retail petrol and diesel prices have remained frozen since early April 2022 -- a period during which oil prices rose in some months and fell in other times. When prices fell, state-owned oil firms made handsome profits, which they used to set off losses when rates rose. Petrol is currently priced at INR94.77 a litre in Delhi, and diesel comes for INR87.67.\n\nNational: Gas\n\nIndia’s Petronet expects to receive full supply of Qatar LNG after crisis ends\n\n4 May: India’s top gas importer Petronet LNG expects to receive its full contracted ​amount of LNG (liquefied natural gas) from Qatar ‌once the geopolitical situation in the Middle East stabilises, chief executive Officer (CEO) A K Singh said. Qatar, India’s largest LNG ​supplier, has a contract to supply 7.5 ​million metric tonnes per year of LNG to ⁠Petronet, equivalent to 9-10 cargoes per month. However, supplies ​were halted in March following the closure of the ​Strait of Hormuz, while Iran struck two of Qatar’s 14 LNG production trains, forcing it to declare force majeure. Qatar has said ​repairs will sideline 12.8 million tonnes (MT) per year ​of LNG for three to five years. Singh said Petronet had ‌not ⁠been receiving cargoes from the trains that were damaged in attacks. Petronet is building three new LNG storage ​tanks - two at a new import terminal ​in ⁠eastern India and one at Kochi terminal in the south - and Singh added that it is also scouting ⁠for ​land to build four additional ​tanks near its 22.5 MT per year Dahej terminal in western ​Gujarat state.\n\nGAIL moves court against PNGRB over unbundling plan\n\n2 May: Nearly two decades after the Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board (PNGRB) mandated the separation of gas transportation and marketing activities in 2017, the reform remains unimplemented. At the centre of the standoff is GAIL (India) Ltd, which has resisted the move, arguing that unbundling threatens its integrated business model spanning pipelines and gas marketing. The regulator, meanwhile, appears increasingly frustrated with the pace of progress and GAIL’s resistance. GAIL rejected the unbundling push, arguing that global models are not directly comparable to India’s still evolving gas market. GAIL’s dominant role in building the country’s pipeline backbone. The committee report underscores this dominance, noting that GAIL accounts for nearly 59 percent of India’s authorised pipeline network and around 70 percent share in gas transmission volumes, along with over 50 percent share in gas marketing.\n\nChhattisgarh approves Urban Gas Distribution Policy 2026 for PNG rollout\n\n29 April: Chhattisgarh has approved the Urban Gas Distribution Policy 2026 to expand access to piped natural gas (PNG) in urban areas, reinforcing India’s transition towards cleaner fuels and wider city gas distribution (CGD) coverage. The policy establishes a comprehensive framework for the phased expansion of CGD infrastructure across urban centres, with a focus on last-mile connectivity and the delivery of reliable, affordable, and environment-friendly fuel to households, commercial establishments, and industries. It aligns with the Government of India’s objective of increasing the share of natural gas in the energy mix and complements the ongoing national rollout of CGD networks. The policy is expected to facilitate the rapid and seamless expansion of gas supply through pipeline networks, enabling the development of a convenient, efficient, and future-ready urban fuel ecosystem. It is expected to promote clean energy adoption, diversify fuel consumption patterns, and accelerate the creation of pipeline infrastructure across the state.\n\nNational: Coal\n\nCement companies in Meghalaya imported nearly 3 lakh metric tonnes of coal without valid papers\n\n3 May: Two cement companies in Meghalaya have been accused of violating prescribed norms in the transport of over 2.93 lakh metric tonnes of coal, a high court (HC)-appointed committee said in its latest report. The single-member panel of retired judge B P Katakey said that the two companies transported the dry fuel from outside the state between February 2025 and February this year \"without obtaining mandatory approvals under the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP), 2024\". Justice (Retd) B P Katakey heads the committee, appointed by the HC to oversee compliance with its directions on curbing illegal coal mining and transportation.\n\nCoal India’s production in April drops amid rising power demand\n\n1 May: Coal India Ltd (CIL), the country’s largest coal producer, reported a 9.7 percent drop in coal production to 56.1 million tonnes (MT) in April, raising concerns over meeting the country’s surging energy demands. The slump in coal production is significant as coal remains the backbone of the country’s power generation, accounting for over 70 percent of electricity output. CIL produced 62.1 MT of coal in April 2025-26.\n\nNTPC’s Pakri Barwadih surpass 100 MT coal production\n\n30 April: The Pakri Barwadih coal mining project of NTPC Ltd has achieved a milestone by surpassing 100 million tonnes (MT) of coal production since inception, it announced. Coal production at the Pakri Barwadih project operating in Barkagaon block of Hazaribag district, began in Jan 2017, while the first rail rake was dispatched in Feb 2017. The project was declared commercial on April 2019.\n\nNational: Power\n\nUP government ends prepaid system for smart meters, shifts all users to postpaid billing\n\n5 May: The Uttar Pradesh (UP) government announced to discontinue the prepaid mode of smart electricity meters and operate all such meters in postpaid mode, following complaints from consumers regarding technical difficulties. There are a total 83 lakh smart prepaid meters out of 86.5 lakh smart meter consumers. Majority are 1 kilowatt (kW) and 2kW consumers. According to the revised arrangement, electricity consumption from the 1st to the 30th of each month will be billed in the usual manner, and consumers will receive their bills within the next ten days through SMS or WhatsApp. Payments will need to be made within the prescribed time frame after the bill is issued. Additionally, consumers with pending dues will be allowed to pay outstanding amounts in up to 10 installments. As part of the decision, the replacement of old meters with smart prepaid meters has been temporarily suspended. However, the government has clarified that resolving complaints related to smart meters already installed will remain a priority. Consumers have been advised to update their mobile numbers with the electricity department to ensure timely receipt of billing and service-related messages. The state government has maintained that consumer convenience remains central to its power sector policies and that steps will continue to be taken to address feedback related to smart meter implementation.\n\nIndia’s power demand hits record as heatwaves fuel AC demand\n\n4 May: Heatwaves in India have elevated the electricity demand, as tens of millions of air conditioners (AC) have been running in homes, offices and institutions to keep a check on the intolerable rising temperatures. The power generation hit an all-time high of 256.1 gigawatt (GW) mid-afternoon on 25 April. That’s about double the peak level in the early 2010s and the hottest months of the year are yet to come. In 2006, there were just two million AC units in the entire country. Only 10 percent of homes have one installed at present. With incomes rising and temperatures soaring the scenario is transitioning fast. In 2025, 15.4 million AC were sold and volumes will almost double the 28mn by 2030. All those units are putting immense pressure on the grid. Already, cooling is pulling about 50 GW of electricity at peak times. By 2035, that could rise to 180 GW. Accommodating the rise of Indian AC over the coming decade will require twice as much generation capacity as will be needed for new US (United States) data centers.\n\nNoida set to install 250 transformers to improve power supply\n\n3 May: Noida power department has begun installing 250 new transformers across the district at an investment of INR250 million, ahead of peak summer demand. The units, with capacities of 250 kilovolt-ampere (kVA) and 400 kVA, will operate at a maximum load of 50 percent to prevent burnouts from overloading — a recurring problem during summer months when electricity demand surges. Power department said that the project is being carried out collaboratively by both the central and state governments. The district currently has over 24,000 transformers, ranging in capacity from 10 kVA to 650 kVA and serving various needs from residential areas to agricultural tube-well connections. Most of these are 25 kVA transformer units located primarily in rural parts of the district like Dadri, Jewar and Dankaur. Additional transformers will be deployed in locations currently experiencing overloading issues, including Salarpur, Sadarpur and sectors 62, 63, 12, 11, 77, among others.\n\nPower ministry phases local content norms for HVDC projects to 60 percent by 2035\n\n2 May: The power ministry has revised its “Make in India” procurement norms for the power sector, introducing a phased roadmap to achieve 60 percent minimum local content in HVDC (high voltage direct current) substations, according to the order. As per the order, the minimum local content for HVDC substations (LCC type) will be 30 percent up to 31 March 2028, followed by 40 percent from 1 April 2028 to 31 March 2030, then 50 percent from 1 April 2030 to 31 March 2032, and finally 60 percent from 1 April 2032 to 31 March 2035. The ministry said the changes fall under the Public Procurement (Preference to Make in India) framework, which provides purchase preference linked with local content in the power sector. The revised roadmap applies to HVDC substations under the engineering, procurement and construction or turnkey project category, which are critical for long-distance power transmission infrastructure.\n\nIndia produced 464 bn units of power in Q4FY26, up 3 percent over previous year\n\n1 May: India generated 464 billion units of electricity in Q4 of 2025-26 financial year, up 3 percent year-on-year, driven by strong growth in non-fossil fuel-based power generation, particularly solar, Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) said. While coal- and lignite-based generation declined by 1 percent, generation from solar and wind increased by 24 percent and 11 percent, respectively. Solar generation reached 48.9 billion units in Q4, with the highest daily output of 658 million units recorded on 2 March, the research organisation mentioned in its first quarterly energy snapshot for India. Gujarat recorded the highest curtailment, highlighting grid integration challenges in high-renewables regions. After recording an all-time peak demand of 250 gigawatt (GW) on 30 May 2024, India’s peak electricity demand reached a new Q4 high of 245 GW on 9 January 2026. Maharashtra recorded the highest state-level peak demand (32 GW) in Q4FY26, followed by Gujarat (25 GW) and Uttar Pradesh (23 GW).\n\nNational: Non-Fossil Fuels/ Climate Change Trends\n\nSolar investment turns liability for Nagpur hotels amid new rules\n\n3 May: The Nagpur Residential Hotels Association (NRHA) has raised serious concerns over the current electricity tariff structure and Time-of-Day (ToD) regulations, stating that recent policy changes have drastically reduced the effective use of solar power while increasing financial burden on the hospitality sector. According to NRHA, hotels that invested heavily in rooftop solar systems utilise only a fraction of the energy they generate. Data compiled from multiple member establishments shows that, on an average, barely 4.6 percent of total electricity consumption occurs during designated ToD hours (9am to 5pm). As a result, only about 7.6 percent of solar energy generated is actually consumed by hotels, while a massive 92.4 percent is exported to the grid. NRHA president Tejinder Singh Renu said the current framework penalises those who adopted renewable energy in good faith. He argued that the mismatch between solar generation hours and peak consumption patterns of hotels — typically during evening and night — makes it nearly impossible to derive intended benefits from solar investments.\n\nMaharashtra government sets up panel to study electricity duty on rooftop solar consumers\n\n30 April: The Thane Small Scale Industries Association (TSSIA) said the Maharashtra government has set up a committee to study applicability of electricity duty on Rooftop Solar (RTS) consumers and implementation of 'Grid Support Charges' (GSC) based on its formal representation on the issue. Grid Support Charges are an \"unnecessary additional burden\" that could derail Maharashtra’s solar mission, the TSSIA said. Many industrial consumers may hesitate to make large-scale investments in rooftop solar energy if they are required to pay significant GSC per unit, the TSSIA said.\n\nGujarat solar exports hit hard as US tariffs surge past 200 percent\n\n30 April: The United States (US) has imposed a 123 percent anti-dumping duty on Indian solar imports, sharply raising pressure on major exporters from Gujarat. Combined with existing countervailing duties of 125 percent, the total tariff burden on Indian solar exports to the US exceeds 200 percent. The move has intensified concerns across Gujarat’s solar manufacturing sector, which is already facing an oversupply situation amid tapering exports. Industry players said that domestic demand remains strong, but is not growing fast enough to match supply and installed capacity.\n\nNearly one-third of peak demand of 256 GW met via renewable energy: Joshi\n\n29 April: Union Minister Pralhad Joshi said that nearly one-third of the record peak demand of over 256 gigawatt (GW) was met through renewable energy like solar, wind and hydro. The peak power demand touched a record high of 256.11 GW on 25 April 2026, according to power ministry data. He said that one-third of the peak power generation on 25th April was successfully met through renewable energy. That itself showcases that India is capable of generating and India is capable of handling peak power demand through renewable energy, he said. He said that the government is making efforts to translate installed capacity into actual generation, and consequently transmission to boost the share of renewable energy in the power basket. According to the ministry, solar contributed 21.5 percent of power generation to meet the peak of 256.1 GW on 25 April. The hydro power contribution was 4.4 percent, and wind energy added 1.9 percent. Nuclear power and gas contributed 2.4 percent and 2 percent, respectively. The contribution of thermal power was 66.9 percent.\n\n800 homes in Noida with solar power see zero bill in at least one cycle\n\n29 April: Over 800 power consumers of a private discom (distribution company) in Greater Noida have got the supply virtually free in at least one billing cycle because of solar power. Eight hundred and eight consumers of Noida Power Company Ltd (NPCL) have achieved this zero power charge under PM Surya Ghar: Muft Bijli Yojana. Zero power charge means that a domestic consumer has generated enough solar electricity via a rooftop system to fully offset the electricity they consumed from the grid during that month. According to the recent tariff, the per-unit charge for domestic electricity in Greater Noida ranges from INR3.00 to INR6.50/kWh (kilowatt hour), depending on usage, plus fixed charges. Of the over 2.2 lakh consumers of NPCL in Greater Noida, 1,781 rooftop solar panels have been installed in the discom’s licensed area, of which 1,162 were installed under the scheme. This is a ray of hope and an encouraging one. The INR750.21 billion Yojana was launched on 15 February 2024, under which households are provided a subsidy to install solar panels on their roofs. The subsidy covers up to 40 percent of the cost of the panels.\n\nInternational: Oil\n\nColombia’s Ecopetrol, Parex ink US$250 mln deal to jointly develop oil fields\n\n4 May: Colombia’s state oil company Ecopetrol has ​signed a US$250 million deal ‌with Canada’s Parex Resources to jointly develop five oil ​fields, Ecopetrol said. The ⁠investment will be fully ​funded by Parex and ​carried out within five years, and will ​include development of enhanced ​recovery projects, optimization of water injection ‌and ⁠infill drilling. Parex Resources will hold a 50 percent interest in production, while ​Ecopetrol ​retains ⁠ownership and operatorship of the fields.\n\nJapan’s Taiyo Oil to receive cargo of oil from Russia’s Sakhalin-2 as Iran war continues\n\n2 May: Japanese refinery Taiyo Oil is to receive a cargo of crude oil from ​Russia’s Sakhalin-2 project, the company said, as the country seeks alternative sources of petroleum after the US (United States)-Israeli war with Iran limited supplies from the Gulf. Japan has largely suspended purchases of oil ​from Russia after Moscow's invasion of Ukraine in 2022. A US ​exemption for oil sales from the Sakhalin-2 project, which ⁠largely produces the liquefied natural gas, runs until 18 June. Taiyo Oil has ​purchased a crude oil cargo from the Sakhalin-2 project in Russia’s ​far east and which is set to arrive at the Ehime Prefecture in western Japan on 4 May, the company said. Japan has secured supplies from the US and from destinations bypassing the largely closed Strait of Hormuz, among other sources.\n\nIraq starts work on Basra-Haditha oil pipeline\n\n1 May: Iraq has commenced work on an oil pipeline linking Basra to Haditha with a planned capacity ​of 2.5 million barrels per day (bpd), the oil ministry said. About US$1.5 billion ​has been allocated for the project, although its ​pace will depend on securing further budget allocations, ⁠the ministry said. The 700 kilometres (435 miles) pipeline will transport crude ​for export through multiple routes, including Syria’s Baniyas, Turkey’s ​Ceyhan and Jordan's Aqaba, while also supplying refineries along its path, the ministry said. Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani ​chaired a meeting to follow up on the ​Basra-Haditha pipeline project, approved in 2024, and said it had been ‌conceived ⁠as a proactive step anticipating current regional conditions and guarding against potential disruption to existing export routes. Crude exports through the Kirkuk–Ceyhan oil pipeline had resumed in March, ​after Baghdad and ​the Kurdistan ⁠Regional Government agreed on restarting flows. Baghdad is working to revamp a disused pipeline ​that would allow oil to be pumped ​directly to ⁠Turkey’s Ceyhan port without passing through the Kurdistan region.\n\nOil companies must do their part to lower fuel costs: German Finance Minister\n\n1 May: Oil companies must ​pass on the benefits of Germany’s fuel price discount to consumers, German Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil said, as his government seeks to cushion the effects of the energy price shock caused by the Iran war. The government has temporarily cut Germany’s energy tax on diesel and petrol by about €0.17 per litre, relief worth around €1.6 billion (US$1.88 billion) as part of a package of measures to mitigate ​the fallout from soaring global prices. The German Federal Cartel Office said the fuel price discount appeared to have been largely passed on to consumers, though it said some petrol ​stations had actually raised prices.\n\nSyria relies on Russia’s oil despite pivot to the West\n\n1 May: Russia has emerged as the main supplier of oil to Syria, despite the new government’s alignment with the West and widespread distrust of Moscow over its military support for fallen leader Bashar al-Assad. Oil shipments from Russia have jumped 75 percent to about 60,000 barrels per day (bpd) this year, ship tracking data showed. The volumes represent a tiny share of Russia’s daily global oil exports. But for Syria, where domestic production remains far below demand, the flows make Moscow the country’s dominant ​crude supplier following the fall of Assad in December 2024, taking over from Iran which was a key ally of the ousted leader during the country’s 14-year civil war.\n\nGlobal oil price retreats after hitting 4-year high on concern of US-Iran war escalation\n\n30 April: Global oil prices retreated ​after hitting a four-year high of more than US$126 a barrel ​ on concerns that the US (United States)-Iran war could worsen and lead ⁠to a protracted Middle East oil supply disruption that could hurt ​global economic growth. Global oil benchmark Brent crude futures were down US$2.05, or 1.7 percent, to US$115.98 a barrel, after touching an intraday high of US$126.41, ​the ⁠loftiest since 9 March 2022.\n\nUS President signs order authorizing oil pipeline project partially reviving Keystone XL\n\n30 April: United States (US) President Donald Trump signed an order granting a cross-border ‌permit to a project that would revive parts of the Keystone XL pipeline to transport Canadian oil from the US-Canada border to Guernsey, Wyoming. The pipeline, proposed by Canadian pipeline company South Bow and its US partner Bridger Pipeline, could increase Canada’s crude exports to the US by more than 12 percent if it goes ahead. A presidential permit was required for ​the project to proceed. The new proposal involves a different route through the US than the previous Keystone XL project, which was canceled by ​former President Joe Biden in 2021 after years of Indigenous and environmental opposition. But the project will use some of the previously built pipe on the Canadian side, where Keystone XL is already fully permitted. ​South Bow was spun off by former Keystone XL proponent TC Energy in 2024 to take over its oil pipeline business.\n\nSpain’s Repsol plans to boost jet fuel output as Iran war disrupts global supply\n\n30 April: Spain’s Repsol plans to boost jet fuel output by 15 percent to 20 percent to offset supply disruptions linked ‌to the Iran war, it said, as first-quarter adjusted net profit rose about 57 percent on strong refining margins. Spain’s main refiner and oil producer reported adjusted net income of €873 million (US$1.02 billion), slightly missing a company-provided forecast of €897 million, with analysts pointing to price ​lag effects in its downstream business. Repsol said volatility stemming ⁠from the Middle East conflict supported results. Higher oil prices have benefitted European energy companies. Brent crude averaged about US$78.38 per barrel in ​the quarter, up from roughly $74.98 a year earlier, according to LSEG data. Repsol plans to increase jet fuel production ​at its five refineries in Spain, it said, as it aims to boost its refining margin. Repsol allocated €1.2 billion in the quarter to build crude oil inventories and maximize feedstock availability. The company expects to produce between 560,000 and 570,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day ​in 2026, which could increase, depending on improvement in Venezuela, it said.\n\nInternational: Gas\n\nRussia’s LNG exports up 8.6 percent in January to April\n\n5 May: Russia’s exports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) rose 8.6 percent in January to April to 11.4 ​million metric tonnes from the same period ‌last year due to supplies from the Arctic LNG 2 project, which reached 1 million tonnes (MT) in the first ​four months of the year, LSEG ​data showed. US (United States) sanctions against Moscow over ⁠the Ukraine conflict have restrained Russian LNG ​exports, particularly from the Arctic LNG 2 plant, where ​operations have been hindered owing to difficulty securing buyers. In April alone, total Russian exports of LNG rose 13.2 percent from a ​year ago to 2.92 MT. Data ​showed that Russian LNG exports to Europe in January to April ‌jumped ⁠20.8 percent year-on-year to 6.4 MT. In April, they rose to around 1.6 MT from 1.2 MT a year earlier. In January, EU (European Union) countries gave their ​final approval ⁠to ban Russian gas imports by late-2027. Total exports from Novatek’s Yamal LNG ​plant in the January to April period ​fell ⁠by 1.5 percent year-on-year to 6.5 MT.\n\nArgentina sets additional 25 percent discount for subsidized gas users in May\n\n4 May: Argentina set a 25 percent extraordinary discount for subsidized gas ​users during May, the economy ‌ministry said, aiming to mitigate the impact of rising global ​fuel prices. The measure ​will be added to existing subsidies ⁠and give natural gas ​and propane network users in the ​subsidies program a total 75 percent discount in May.\n\nPipeline work starts on Romania’s biggest Black Sea offshore gas project\n\n4 May: Work has begun to lay pipelines ​for Romania’s Neptun Deep Black Sea gas project, one of the European Union (EU)’s ‌most significant energy deposits with an estimated 100 billion cubic meters of recoverable gas. Once it starts producing gas in 2027, Neptun Deep will double Romania's gas production and likely turn it into a net ​exporter at a time when the EU is weaning itself off Russian gas. ​It will also supply Germany and Moldova, with other European countries like Slovakia also ⁠showing interest. Two ships, owned ‌by ⁠Italy’s Saipem, will lay 160 kilometres (99 miles) of pipeline from offshore wells to land, where works on a gas metering plant are in full swing.\n\nEgypt raises natural gas prices for industries amid volatile energy prices\n\n3 May: Egypt has raised natural gas prices for several energy-intensive industries ​starting in May, according to a ‌prime ministerial decree. The government has already raised domestic fuel prices by ​up to 17 percent in March in response ​to soaring global energy costs, and ⁠is seeking to reduce fuel and ​electricity subsidies under an US$8 billion programme ​agreed with the International Monetary Fund. The decree raised the price of gas by an average ​of US$2, reaching US$14 per million British thermal ​units for cement factories, US$7.75 for iron and steel, ‌non-nitrogen ⁠fertilisers and petrochemicals, and between US$6.50 and US$6.75 for other industrial activities and petrochemical plants producing ethane and propane mixtures. The increases ​do not ​apply to ⁠consumers, whose gas supply contracts already include pricing formulas, the ​decree said. Egypt’s energy import bill ​has ⁠more than doubled, while monthly natural gas import costs have nearly tripled since the ⁠outbreak ​of the US (United States)-Israeli war with ​Iran, with increased reliance on LNG imports or regional producers.\n\nBrazil’s Petrobras raises natural gas prices by 19 percent after oil shock\n\n2 May: Brazilian oil company Petrobras has ​hiked the price of ‌natural gas sold to distributors by 19.2 percent starting 1 May, ​it said, ​marking the latest in a ⁠series of energy price ​increases related to the US (United States)-Israeli ​war on Iran. Petrobras updates natural gas prices on a quarterly basis, ​with adjustments tied to ​Brent crude prices, foreign exchange rates ‌and ⁠US Henry Hub benchmarks. Industry ⁠group Abegas said it expected ​Petrobras to hike prices by ​about ⁠20 percent from May. The Brazilian company raised jet fuel prices ⁠by ​18 percent, ​following a 55 percent hike in April.\n\nCanada’s TC Energy approves US$1.5 bn Columbia Gas project\n\n1 May: Canada’s TC Energy ‌approved a US$1.5 billion Columbia Gas expansion project after robust performance in its North American operations helped it narrowly surpass first-quarter profit expectations. The Appalachia Supply Project - expected to start operations in 2030 - is backed by a ​20-year contract with a financially strong utility, the company said, and will have ​the capacity to move up to 0.8 billion cubic feet of natural gas ⁠per day to support new gas-fired power plants. Major pipeline operators like TC Energy are ​doubling down in anticipation of surging natural gas demand as liquefied natural gas export ​facilities expand and power-hungry AI systems, cryptocurrency miners and data centers ramp up electricity use.\n\nAustralian state offers first gas exploration permits in a decade\n\n29 April: Australia’s New South Wales opened its ‌first new areas for gas exploration in a decade, slashing application fees from A$50,000 (US$35,815.00) to A$1,000 in a bid to revive a domestic industry. Two frontier locations in the state’s west will be opened for exploration, although the state government ​did not elaborate on the specific number of sites. Minister ​for Natural Resources Courtney Houssos ​said gas remained important for heating and manufacturing in addition to electricity, although recent data from the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) found that gas for power generation had fallen to a two-decade low. New South Wales follows other states trying to boost energy security as AEMO predicts gas supply shortfalls on the east coast by the end of the decade.\n\nInternational: Coal\n\nIran war gives small boost to thermal coal, further gains possible\n\n5 May: Seaborne thermal coal prices in Asia rallied in the wake of the US (United States) and Israeli war against Iran, but the gains are modest and nowhere near the size seen during the crisis created by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. This may seem counter-intuitive at first glance, given that thermal coal is an alternative ​to liquefied natural gas (LNG) for electricity generation, and about 20 percent of global supply of the super-chilled fuel has been lost with the effective closure of the Strait ‌of Hormuz. Seaborne thermal coal prices surged as much as 78 percent in the aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, even though there was very little disruption to supply, with the main impact being a re-routing of flows as Western buyers shunned Russian cargoes. But with the prices for spot LNG and oil-linked long-term LNG rising, thermal coal is getting more competitive.\n\nInternational: Power\n\nPower suppliers hesitate as Venezuela seeks grid repairs without payment guarantees\n\n4 May: When potential providers and financiers for Venezuela’s electric industry, including Siemens Energy and GE Vernova, held meetings with officials in Caracas in April, questions of how they might get paid to shore up the country’s deteriorated grid ​were top of mind. Less than 40 percent of Venezuela’s generation capacity is currently available, leading to frequent outages and limiting the nation's manufacturing capacity. A lack of clarity over which projects will be prioritized and supplies needed to ⁠reinforce the country’s transmission lines and fix its thermal and hydroelectric plants remains. Following the April meetings with foreign executives, Rodriguez’s government approached firms including Siemens Energy, GE Vernova and Mitsubishi Power about repairing the grid. Of the 36,000 megawatt (MW) of Venezuela’s installed generation capacity, less than 13,000 MW are currently available, mainly due to the bad condition of its fuel-powered plants, which are only contributing some 2,500 MW, or about 13 percent of their capacity, according to independent data.\n\nUS utility Xcel Energy narrowly beats profit estimates on stronger electricity sales\n\n30 April: United States (US) utility Xcel Energy narrowly beat adjusted profit estimates for the first quarter, as higher recovery of electric ​infrastructure investments and stronger sales helped offset warm weather and ‌higher financing costs. As Big Tech firms increasingly build data centers to support AI and cloud-computing services, utilities are seeing a surge in requests for ​electricity, leading power providers to invest heavily in upgrading their ​generation and transmission infrastructure to meet the growing demand. In ⁠February, Xcel entered into an agreement to power a new Google ​data center in Minnesota. Xcel said it filed a request with Minnesota regulators ​in April for approval of the agreement, including a proposed charge tied to 1,900 megawatt (MW) of clean energy resources. Xcel ​provides electric services to about 3.9 ​million customers and natural gas services to about 2.2 million customers across eight Western and ​Midwestern states.\n\nJapan mulls US$3.1 bn in summer power subsidies as energy costs rise\n\n30 April: Japan’s government is considering reviving subsidies for electricity and natural gas for three months from July, as it braces for ‌higher energy costs amid conflict in the Middle East. The subsidies would likely cover usage from July through September, with a budget that could reach about 500 billion yen (US$3.1 ​billion). The planned measures would target retail electricity and city ​gas prices over the July-September period. The government has so far maintained that ⁠electricity ​prices will not rise immediately but has ​pledged to remain vigilant and be prepared to act to ensure stable energy supplies.\n\nSpanish power company Naturgy’s first-quarter profit rises 5 percent on higher power generation and network growth\n\n29 April: Spanish power company Naturgy reported ‌a 5 percent rise in first-quarter profit to €530 million (US$620 million) on higher power generation and network growth as energy prices were driven higher by the Iran war. Naturgy invested €339 million in the first quarter of this year, mostly in distribution networks and renewable projects. Total renewable installed capacity reached 8.1 gigawatt (GW), with a further 1.2 GW currently under ​construction and expected to become operational during the year.\n\nInternational: Non-Fossil Fuels/ Climate Change Trends​\n\nArgentine government hikes biofuel prices for domestic market\n\n4 May: Argentina has increased prices for biofuels in ​the domestic market. The energy ministry set ​the minimum price for ​sugarcane-based bioethanol at 1,005.872 pesos (US$0.72) per ⁠liter, up from a ​previous amount of 1,000.868 pesos per ​liter. Meanwhile, the price for corn-based bioethanol rose to 921,910 pesos per liter ($0.66), ​compared with the previous amount ​of 917,323 pesos. The price of biodiesel for ‌mandatory ⁠blending with diesel was set at 1,808.425 pesos per metric ton (US$1,294.50), up from 1,808.690 pesos. Argentina ⁠is a major producer of biofuels, particularly biodiesel. It regularly ⁠raises ​prices for the ​domestic market.\n\nBrookfield, Nuclear Company to form JV for nuclear power\n\n4 May: Investment firm Brookfield and The Nuclear Company said they will form ​a joint venture (JV) to develop nuclear projects ‌using US (United States) company Westinghouse’s reactor technology, as demand for low-carbon power rises globally. The new company will ​combine Brookfield’s asset management and energy infrastructure ​development with The Nuclear Company’s \"nuclear project delivery ⁠capabilities,\" they said. The partnership comes as investors and governments seek to ​revive nuclear power as a stable, emissions‑free ​energy source amid rising electricity demand from data centres and ‌electrification. The ⁠US government inked a partnership with the Canadian owners of Westinghouse Electric that aims to build at least US$80 billion in ​nuclear reactors.\n\nPhilippines, Singapore sign carbon trading deal to boost emission cuts, climate investment\n\n1 May: The Philippines and Singapore signed a carbon-trading deal that allows ​them to share emissions reductions, an agreement ‌which Manila said is expected to lead to more investment into climate projects in the Philippines. The deal, signed during ASEAN’s Climate Week, establishes a framework ​under the Paris Agreement for transferring verified ​emission reductions, or carbon credits, between Manila and Singapore. A ‌joint ⁠committee will oversee the approval and implementation of projects, and tracking of emission reductions. Philippine Environment Secretary Juan Miguel Cuna said the deal ​would help ​Manila to ⁠attract investments in renewable energy, waste management, methane reduction, nature‑based solutions, ​and climate‑smart agriculture.\n\nIran war is supercharging the clean energy transition\n\n30 April: The Iran war is \"supercharging\" the world’s shift to renewable energy, as countries scramble to reduce their exposure to volatile oil and ​gas markets, Executive ​Secretary of the UN (United Nations)’s climate secretariat UNFCCC said. The US (United States)-Israeli war ‌with Iran has upended oil and gas supplies, prompting some countries to ration fuel and others to roll out subsidies and tax cuts to shield consumers from surging prices. Demand for rooftop solar systems across Europe has surged, while countries ⁠including Pakistan have reported a jump in electric vehicle sales. Chinese President Xi Jinping called ​to speed up the construction of a new energy system to safeguard energy ​security, emphasising hydropower development and the expansion of nuclear power. Around 60 governments including Brazil, Germany, Canada and Nigeria, met in Colombia this week for a summit to ⁠discuss how ​to phase out fossil fuels.\n\nRecord US biofuel targets to test biodiesel industry after slow year\n\n30 April: The United States (US) biodiesel industry, still recovering from one of its most difficult years, will have a hard time ramping up production fast enough this ​year to meet the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s most ambitious biofuel blending mandates on record. With fuel prices surging during the US-Israeli war on Iran, the EPA set its ambitious biofuel targets in late March. ‌To meet the record target, companies that process soybeans into biodiesel must boost production by over 60 percent this year. Some industry bodies and biofuel experts doubt they will succeed, yet failure could further stoke the rise in diesel prices. Farmers and agricultural groups have long lobbied Washington seeking higher biofuel mandates. The ​EPA set biodiesel and renewable diesel volume requirements of 5.4 billion gallons for 2026 and 5.7 billion for 2027, up from 3.35 billion last year. EPA estimates that meeting the ​new obligations will require an actual supply of 6.07 billion gallons this year. That figure exceeds the mandates because some domestically produced biofuels are exported or otherwise don't generate ⁠compliance credits. Under the Renewable Fuel Standard, refiners are required to blend billions of gallons of biofuels into the nation's fuel supply each year or purchase credits, known as RINs, from those that do. Credits generated from biodiesel (D4) blending rose to 651 million in March from 481 million in the prior month, according to the EPA data. The US Energy Information Administration forecast ​US supply of about 1.52 billion gallons of biodiesel and 3.53 billion gallons of renewable diesel in 2026, a combined total below the EPA’s requirement. The American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM), which represents refiners, has said the EPA’s targets exceed what domestic feedstock supplies can support and will boost compliance costs.\n\nBelgium to buy Engie’s nuclear assets in the country to secure energy supply\n\n30 April: The Belgian government plans ‌to buy the nuclear utility assets of French power group Engie ​in Belgium, the parties ​said, in a move ⁠Brussels said would help ​secure the country’s energy supplies. The proposed deal would ​cover all nuclear activities currently owned and operated by Engie and its ​Electrabel unit, including the country’s ​seven nuclear reactors. Prime Minister Bart De Wever ‌said ⁠the transaction would also involve suspending plans to decommission nuclear operations in Belgium.\n\nUK solar installations hit decade high in March as energy prices surge\n\n30 April: Britain saw the highest number of solar installations in a decade in ​March, government data showed, as ‌households moved to protect themselves from soaring energy prices due to the Iran conflict. The ​Department for Energy Security and Net Zero data showed more than 27,000 solar installations were ⁠completed in March 2026 - the highest ​monthly total since 2012. The increase was mainly driven ​by rooftop solar, with two thirds of installations being new solar panels on homes. The March additions took ​the total number, including solar farms and ​rooftop installations across the UK (United Kingdom), to more than two million. April ⁠saw a new solar generation record, with output surpassing 15 gigawatt (GW) on Britain’s electricity system for the first time.\n\nGraphic Packaging, NextEra to build 250 MW solar plant in Texas\n\n29 April: Graphic Packaging Holding it has signed an agreement with NextEra Energy Resources to build a ​250 megawatt (MW) solar power plant in Texas, aiming to ‌source renewable electricity and cut greenhouse gas emissions. The deal comes amid rising ​electricity demand in Texas, fueled in part by data ​centers and industrial growth, putting pressure on the ⁠state’s electricity grid operator ERCOT to add new generation capacity. As ​part of the virtual power purchase agreement, the energy produced ​by the plant will be sold to ERCOT, and Graphic Packaging will receive renewable energy credits along with financial exposure related to the ​project. The solar plant, Selenite Springs Energy Center, would be ​located in the ERCOT power market and is expected to start commercial ‌operations ⁠by the end of 2027. The deal is Graphic Packaging’s largest virtual power purchase agreement to date and forms part of its target to cut global Scope 1 and 2 ​emissions by 50.4 percent ​by 2032 ⁠and reach net zero emissions by 2050.\n\nNEWS RECAP\n\nNational: Gas\n\nHormuz Crisis\n\nGAIL (India) Ltd said it will assess curbing supplies ​to natural gas customers after a force majeure notice from ‌long-term supplier Petronet LNG over constraints on vessels as conflict escalates in the Middle East. The United States (US) and Israel's war on Iran has disrupted fuel shipments from the Gulf, affecting ​India's imports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) from key supplier Qatar. Fallout from ​the US-Israeli attacks on Iran and a widening war has ⁠brought the transit of oil and LNG through the Strait of Hormuz ​to a near halt after some vessels in the area were hit. The allocation ​of LNG from Petronet to GAIL has been reduced to zero with effect from 4 March, GAIL said. LNG supplies to GAIL from other sources and suppliers are ​currently unaffected, the gas marketing company said. Petronet LNG, India's ‌top ⁠gas importer, issued a force majeure notice to its supplier, QatarEnergy, and to local buyers like GAIL and Indian Oil Corporation, after its LNG tankers were unable to reach the LNG loading terminal at Ras Laffan, ​it said. GAIL ⁠and IOC have already reduced gas supplies to industrial customers. India imported 27 million metric tons of ​LNG in 2024/25, about half of its overall gas ​consumption, according ⁠to government data. The bulk of the LNG comes from Qatar. Separately, ONGC Petro Additions said that it is operating its Dahej gas cracker in western ⁠India ​at a \"drastically\" lower capacity due to falling ​supplies of gas and other feedstock.\n\nGujarat Gas Ltd, one of India’s largest city gas distributors, has declared force majeure on industrial gas supplies after strains on imported LNG caused by the ongoing war in West Asia disrupted the fuel availability chain. The company said the conflict has “impacted the gas supply scenario” and has led to a severe constriction in the availability of R-LNG (re-gasified liquefied natural gas). As a result, Gujarat Gas has issued force majeure notices to its industrial customers effective from 6 March, restricting supplies of daily contracted quantity under existing gas supply agreements.\n\nScores of small Indian steel producers have warned of production cuts as ‌the escalating Middle East conflict disrupts gas supplies to the world’s biggest producer of the alloy after China. Triveni Iron and Steel Industries is based ⁠in the western state of Gujarat, the country’s largest gas-consuming region, which relies on ​the Middle East for much of its LNG. Most gas producers, including Gujarat Gas declared force majeure to restrict gas supplies to industries. About 6 percent of India’s steel output uses gas-based direct reduced iron, or DRI, while roughly 50 percent depends on coal-fired blast furnaces. India produces around 50 million metric tonnes of sponge iron annually, largely used by secondary steel producers ​as raw material. The impact of falling gas supplies has been exacerbated ​by sharp ⁠rises in imported coal prices.\n\nCNG/PNG\n\nKolkata chapter of the National Restaurant Association of India (NRAI) has initiated discussions with Bengal Gas Company Ltd (BGCL) to explore the feasibility of piped natural gas (PNG) as an alternative fuel for restaurants facing disruptions, amid a supply crunch of commercial LPG (liquefied petroleum gas). The move comes as eateries across several parts of the city are grappling with irregular LPG supply and delays in cylinder refills, prompting the sector to explore more reliable long-term\n\nAs conflict intensifies in West Asia, throttling energy supplies, the government has expanded the scope of the CBG-CGD Synchronisation Scheme to include the injection of compressed biogas (CBG) in the gas pipeline network. The Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas (MoPNG) extended the scope of the Synchronisation Scheme for co-mingling of domestic gas for supply to CNG (transport) and PNG (Domestic) segments of city gas distribution (CGD) networks. The Ministry has expanded the scope of the Synchronisation Scheme to include the injection of CBG into the gas pipeline network. This is also in accordance with the revised scheme guidelines issued in August last year.\n\nAdani Total Gas Ltd (ATGL) has cut the price of excess natural gas supplied to certain industrial customers to INR82.95 per standard cubic metres (scm) from INR119.90 per scm, effective on 16 March, as upstream gas prices softened amid ongoing supply disruptions. The city gas joint venture of Adani Group and France’s Total Energies said the revision aims to pass on the benefit of lower upstream prices to customers while maintaining system stability and equitable distribution of gas during the current supply constraints. Following the disruption in India’s LNG supplies due to the halt in the movement of ships through the Strait of Hormuz as a fallout of the war in West Asia, ATGL had asked commercial and industrial customers to curtail consumption to 40 percent of their contracted volumes.\n\nLNG\n\nIndia will buy US (United States) LNG if it is offered at reasonable rates, the head of the country’s top gas importer Petronet LNG Ltd chief executive officer (CEO) Akshay Kumar Singh said, as New Delhi looks to boost imports from Washington. US President Donald Trump said he will slash tariffs on imported Indian goods to 18 percent from 50 percent, easing concerns in India, but in exchange asked New Delhi to more than double its annual imports from the US. Bilateral trade was US$132 billion in 2024-2025, with a roughly US$41 billion surplus in India’s favour. India has about 27,000 megawatt (MW) of gas-fired power generation capacity, but plants are operating at less than a quarter of that capacity due to a shortage of gas available at \"affordable prices\". The appetite for LNG in the world’s most populous nation is set to rise in the coming years, driven by demand across the fertiliser, city gas, refining, and power sectors. India is the world’s fourth-largest buyer of LNG and is seeking to raise the share of gas in its energy mix to 15 percent by 2030 from around 6 percent at present. Petronet, which buys gas from Qatar and Australia, is exploring deals to lock in more long-term deals as it expands the capacity of its existing plant and builds a new import terminal on the east coast.\n\nThe government is building a war chest exceeding INR6 billion to immediately augment gas supplies to fertiliser plants from spot markets. This comes when many gas-based urea units have advanced the dates of closure for annual maintenance in view of the shortage in liquefied natural gas (LNG). The need for more spot purchases of LNG for fertiliser plants arose because the government anticipates availability could drop below the promised 70 percent of the average of the last six months’ consumption to 60 or even 50 percent if the Iran crisis lingered.\n\nIndian gas firm GAIL (India) Ltd has bought an Omani LNG cargo as the ‌South Asian nation attempts to meet its natural gas demand, three trade sources said. GAIL has ​bought the prompt cargo for delivery ​next week from a European trader ⁠through negotiations at a fixed price of US$17-US$20 ​per million British thermal units. The cargo loaded on the vessel Orion Hugo, chartered by Shell, is scheduled ​to arrive in India around 15 March, Kpler data showed. India meets half of its 195 million standard cubic metres per day (mmscmd) of natural gas consumption through imports. The country was ​getting about ​60 mmscmd ⁠gas from the Middle East before the closure of the Strait ​of Hormuz and force majeure by ​its ⁠biggest supplier Qatar. India is taking measures to rationalise gas supplies, diverting the fuel from non-priority sectors ⁠to ​key users after the ​disruption of shipments.\n\nGovernance\n\nIn the aftermath of the 3 February incident reported near Adoshi Tunnel on the Mumbai-Pune expressway, in which a tanker carrying propylene gas overturned and resulted in a 32-hour traffic logjam along the route, multiple authorities have said they are now working on long-term measures to handle such emergencies. A senior official of the Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation (MSRDC) said they have directed all stakeholders to strictly enforce existing standard operating procedures (SOPs) to deal with emergencies on the expressway. A senior official of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL), the company that owns the tankers involved both in the 3 February incident and a similar one on 23 February, said that the company has also initiated its own corrective measures to prevent a repeat. According to state disaster management officials, the delay in deploying a recovery van to plug the leakage on Feb 3 was the primary reason it took authorities longer to bring the situation under control. The recovery van was stationed at the Kochi refinery at the time of the accident, posing a major logistical challenge.\n\nPipelines\n\nMizoram Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs Minister B Lalchhanzova said that the Centre has allocated INR4.91 billion for the implementation of the Tripura-Mizoram natural gas pipeline project. The minister noted that the Centre has earmarked a total of INR92.65 billion for the broader North East Natural Gas Pipeline Grid. Of this total fund, INR4.91 billion is specifically designated for the 119.5-km stretch connecting Panisagar in Tripura to Aizawl, he said.\n\nInternational: Gas\n\nAsia Pacific\n\nAustralia’s Santos said it has signed an agreement with the South Australian government to supply 20 petajoules (PJ) of gas annually over 10 years to help transform Whyalla Steelworks into a low-emissions green iron facility. Santos said it will supply gas from its Cooper Basin assets from 2030 and that the annual contract quantity represents around 30 percent of its current gas production from Cooper Basin.\n\nNew Zealand’s plan to build a LNG import terminal faces uncertainty, with Prime Minister (PM) Christopher Luxon saying ​the government would approve the project only if the business case ‌stacked up. In February the government shortlisted contractors to build the facility in Taranaki, on the country’s North Island. The plan was that the terminal would be ready ​to receive LNG in 2027 or early 2028. The government had ​announced the project in 2025 to boost the country’s energy ⁠security and bring down costs.\n\nExpectations of a long-feared gas shortage on Australia’s east coast have been pushed out by a year to 2030, due to coal power extensions, declining ​consumption and fast battery uptake, the country’s energy market operator said. In December the federal government told Queensland LNG exporters ​to reserve up to 25 percent of their gas for domestic use from 2027, ⁠citing tight supply. The state is home to three LNG export consortia led by Santos, ​Shell and ConocoPhillips. They have been blamed by large-scale gas users and the competition watchdog ​for taking gas from the domestic market, and the government is expected to finalise a gas policy addressing those concerns later this year. It noted a new pipeline being built by APA Group to send gas ‌from ⁠Queensland south as new projects come online. Soaring gas prices in Europe and Asia since the beginning of the US Israeli war with Iran, which has disrupted gas supplies, have not hit Australian east coast ⁠domestic ​gas prices.\n\nInpex, Japan’s biggest oil and gas (O&G) producer, expects global demand for LNG to grow by 75 percent to some 700 million metric tonnes annually in 2035, potentially resulting in a supply shortfall in the Pacific coastal region, including Asia. Inpex, which runs the Ichthys LNG project in Australia and develops the Abadi LNG facility in Indonesia, expects global LNG demand to increase from the current level of 400 million tonnes (MT) per year driven by the needs of the Asia-Oceania region, it said. It forecast an annual supply shortfall in the Pacific coastal region of 231 MT in 2035, and expects oversupply of 137 MT and 56 MT in the Atlantic coastal region and the Indian Ocean coastal region, respectively.\n\nSpot prices for LNG in Asia have drifted lower despite solid demand in the top-consuming region and record imports by Europe. Throw in tensions in the Middle East and the threat to shipments from Qatar, the second-biggest exporter behind the US, and the relaxed spot price seems incongruous. Part of the disconnect is explained by robust growth in supply, especially from the US, and by muted demand for spot cargoes from China, the world’s biggest LNG buyer. The Asian spot price slipped to US$10.60 per million metric British thermal units (mmBtu) in the week ended 20 February, down from US$10.65 previously, and also down 8.6 percent from the high so far this year of US$11.60, reached in the week to 30 January. The current spot price is for April delivery cargoes, and therefore reflects the softer demand expected in the shoulder season between the northern hemisphere winter and summer peaks. However, the high so far this winter of US$11.66 per mmBtu in late November and the relatively narrow range for the spot Asian price since then shows that demand has been modest. Asia’s LNG imports have been largely steady, with commodity analysts Kpler tracking arrivals of 21.12 million metric tonnes in February, up marginally from the 20.75 million in February last year.\n\nBangladesh is set to pay sharply higher prices for LNG from the spot ​market after Qatar suspended deliveries amid the escalating Iran–Israel ‌conflict, forcing authorities to ration gas and shut several fertiliser plants. Petrobangla has arranged two spot LNG cargoes for March to keep supplies flowing. One shipment from Gunvor will cost US$28.28 per mmBtu and is expected to arrive on 15–16 March, ⁠while another from Vitol, priced at US$23.08 per mmBtu, is due ​on for 18-19 March, Petrobangla said.\n\nTaiwan’s government said that its natural gas imports from the US will increase from June as it ‌has signed new supply contracts, adding that it was working to address the disruption caused by the war ​in the Middle East. Taiwan’s cabinet, in ​a statement following a meeting about how ⁠to deal with the impact of the war ​on energy and prices more broadly, said the ​economy ministry was tracking international crude oil conditions and inventory levels on a daily basis. Taiwan’s domestic petroleum inventories and LNG inventories are both above the levels required by law.\n\nNorth & South America\n\nLNG from the US made up 33.8 percent of Spain’s ​total gas imports in February, as ‌the country’s gas imports rose almost 20 percent from the same month last year, data ​showed. The US has become Europe’s ​dominant supplier of LNG as the region ⁠pushed to phase out energy imports ​from Russia in the wake of ​its invasion of Ukraine. In February, Spain imported the equivalent of 31,422 gigawatt hour (GWh) of gas, sharply up ​from the 26,318 GWh it imported ​a year earlier, according to Spanish gas ‌grid ⁠operator Enagas data. Spain imported 10,612 GWh of gas from the US, while Algeria, traditionally Spain’s largest gas supplier, which ​mostly pumps ​gas directly ⁠to Spain through pipelines, was the second biggest supplier with ​9,151 GWh of gas, about ​29 percent ⁠of the total imported. Natural gas imports from Russia accounted for 14.6 percent of supply in ⁠February, ​declining roughly 52 percent in ​absolute terms from a year ago.\n\nVenture Global has agreed to sell about 0.5 million tonnes per annum (mtpa) of US LNG to commodity trader Trafigura for five years, starting in 2026, the companies said. The agreement marks the latest move by Trafigura to secure North American LNG, while Venture Global continues to expand its commercial footprint ahead of new project milestones. The deal underscores continued demand for flexible US LNG as buyers and traders reposition, even as forecasts suggest the global market will move toward a more balanced outlook later this year. The company signed a 20-year sales and purchase agreement with Korea’s Hannah Aerospace for 1.5 mtpa of LNG.\n\nArgentina’s energy exports could reach US$50 billion per year starting in ​2031, driven primarily by sales of LNG, Argentina’s oil and gas producer YPF CEO Horacio Marin said. He estimates US$130 billion will be invested in ​the country through 2031 for the development of ⁠crude oil, LNG, and transport infrastructure from the Vaca ​Muerta region - the world’s second-largest unconventional gas reserve and fourth-largest oil ​reserve. YPF is leading projects ‌to ⁠transport gas from Vaca Muerta to an Atlantic-facing port in Rio Negro province, where two ships will arrive to convert it into LNG for shipment worldwide. The Southern Energy company, ​comprised of YPF, ​Golar LNG, ⁠Pan American Energy, Pampa Energía, and Harbour Energy, has agreed to bring in the two ​ships. One of those ships, the Hilli Episeyo should ​arrive ⁠in the second half of 2027 while the MKII is set to arrive in the second half of 2028. They ⁠have ​a capacity for 2.4 MT ​of LNG per year and 3.5 MT per year, respectively.\n\nLNG Canada, a Shell-led venture, has ramped up production and exports to Asia this ‌month, as the Iran war threatens Asian natural gas supplies which are particularly vulnerable to global disruptions. The LNG project in Kitimat, British Columbia, which began operations in June 2025, has exported five cargoes in the first 11 days of March, already exceeding half its total February ​volume. A sixth shipment is due to depart. All cargoes have been sent to ​Asia, with two heading to Japan, two to South Korea and one to the Philippines. ⁠The plant appears to be operating close to its full capacity of 14 million metric tonnes per year, according to ​the LSEG data. The venture can export just under 1.2 million metric tonnes per month. In the first one-third of this month it has loaded ​more than 40",
      "word_count": 15544,
      "original_language": "EN",
      "author": "Observer Research Foundation",
      "countries": [
        "IND",
        "USA",
        "QAT",
        "URS",
        "AUS",
        "RUS",
        "EGY",
        "VEN",
        "ARG",
        "CAN",
        "GBR",
        "JPN",
        "TKM",
        "PAK",
        "BGD",
        "AUS",
        "THA",
        "PHL",
        "COL"
      ],
      "industries": [
        {
          "name": "LNG Liquefaction Plants (Onshore & FLNG)",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "LNG Regasification & Import Terminals",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "LNG Contracting & Commercial (SPAs, Tolling, Offtake, Pricing)",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        {
          "name": "Supply-Chain Disruptions",
          "code": "RK08",
          "is_primary": true
        },
        {
          "name": "Economic Indicators",
          "code": "MM01",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Monetary Policy",
          "code": "MM02",
          "is_primary": false
        },
        {
          "name": "Earnings Releases",
          "code": "FR01",
          "is_primary": false
        }
      ],
      "company_mentions": [
        {
          "uuid": "0000hh4",
          "name": "Bharat Petroleum Corp.",
          "website": "https://www.bharatpetroleum.in/"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "000071m",
          "name": "Reliance Industries",
          "website": "https://www.ril.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0000rqj",
          "name": "Adani Total Gas",
          "website": "https://www.adanigas.com/"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "00061ms",
          "name": "Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited",
          "website": "https://www.hindustanpetroleum.com"
        },
        {
          "uuid": "0006ci9",
          "name": "GAIL",
          "website": "http://www.gailonline.com"
        }
      ],
      "article_type": "News analysis",
      "is_press_release": false,
      "is_opinion": false,
      "is_breaking": true,
      "iptc_codes": [
        "20000263",
        "20001243"
      ],
      "iab_categories": [
        "81",
        "110"
      ],
      "naics_codes": [
        "48621",
        "22121",
        "211130"
      ],
      "sic_codes": [
        "4923",
        "4922",
        "1311"
      ],
      "entities": {
        "person": [
          "nitin gadkari",
          "denys shmyhal",
          "robert fico",
          "cindy rondon",
          "chad zamarin",
          "chris wright",
          "mike braun",
          "mark carney",
          "donald trump",
          "marcelo mendonca",
          "awais leghari",
          "madeleine king",
          "narendra modi",
          "a k singh",
          "b p katakey",
          "tejinder singh renu",
          "pralhad joshi",
          "bashar al-assad",
          "mohammed shia al-sudani",
          "lars klingbeil",
          "joe biden",
          "courtney houssos",
          "rodriguez",
          "xi jinping",
          "juan miguel cuna",
          "bart de wever",
          "akshay kumar singh",
          "christopher luxon",
          "b lalchhanzova",
          "horacio marin"
        ],
        "location": [
          "qatar",
          "australia",
          "uae",
          "india",
          "oman",
          "russia",
          "east africa",
          "atlantic basin",
          "hormuz strait",
          "northeast asia",
          "united states",
          "us",
          "west asian countries",
          "west asia",
          "japan korea",
          "arctic",
          "bahamas",
          "kandla port",
          "nassau",
          "gulf",
          "thane",
          "norway",
          "nagpur",
          "mumbai",
          "delhi-ncr",
          "navi mumbai",
          "europe",
          "raigad",
          "mira-bhayander",
          "majri",
          "asia",
          "bhadravati tehsil",
          "chandrapur district",
          "strait of hormuz",
          "gulf region",
          "middle east",
          "mmr",
          "iran",
          "poland",
          "slovakia",
          "ukraine",
          "hungary",
          "rotterdam",
          "france",
          "romania",
          "greece",
          "ionian sea",
          "libya",
          "texas",
          "venezuela",
          "italy",
          "ras laffan",
          "spain",
          "israel",
          "mesaieed",
          "brega",
          "united arab emirates",
          "mediterranean",
          "karish",
          "africa/ middle east",
          "qelng north 1",
          "egypt",
          "jordan",
          "indiana",
          "british columbia",
          "new jersey",
          "argentina",
          "canada",
          "new york",
          "pennsylvania",
          "the pacific coast",
          "buenos ​aires province",
          "b.c.",
          "la plata",
          "brooklyn",
          "louisiana",
          "japan",
          "brazil",
          "turkmenistan",
          "cameron parish",
          "karachi",
          "afghanistan",
          "pakistan",
          "china",
          "malaysia",
          "port qasim",
          "bangladesh",
          "thailand",
          "islamabad",
          "dhaka",
          "indian ocean",
          "kuwait",
          "visakhapatnam",
          "iraq",
          "persian gulf",
          "gulf of oman",
          "saudi arabia",
          "larak qeshm islands",
          "saudi-kuwait neutral zone",
          "delhi",
          "kochi terminal",
          "chhattisgarh",
          "dahej terminal",
          "gujarat state",
          "meghalaya",
          "hazaribag district",
          "uttar pradesh",
          "pakri barwadih",
          "barkagaon block",
          "salarpur",
          "jewar",
          "gujarat",
          "sadarpur",
          "maharashtra",
          "dadri",
          "dankaur",
          "noida",
          "greater noida",
          "germany",
          "baghdad",
          "syria",
          "colombia",
          "turkey",
          "basra",
          "ehime prefecture",
          "kurdistan",
          "baniyas",
          "ceyhan",
          "haditha",
          "aqaba",
          "moscow",
          "sakhalin-2",
          "west",
          "guernsey, wyoming",
          "moldova",
          "appalachia",
          "black sea",
          "new south wales",
          "north american",
          "minnesota",
          "caracas",
          "east coast",
          "singapore",
          "philippines",
          "nigeria",
          "manila",
          "belgium",
          "britain",
          "uk",
          "washington",
          "united kingdom",
          "brussels",
          "kolkata",
          "new delhi",
          "adoshi tunnel",
          "mumbai-pune expressway",
          "european",
          "queensland",
          "taranaki",
          "indonesia",
          "cooper basin",
          "new zealand",
          "aizawl",
          "panisagar",
          "atlantic coastal region",
          "north island",
          "tripura",
          "kochi",
          "indian ocean coastal region",
          "the pacific coastal region",
          "pacific coastal region",
          "whyalla",
          "north east",
          "algeria",
          "taiwan",
          "rio negro province",
          "korea",
          "gunvor",
          "north & south america",
          "northern hemisphere",
          "south korea",
          "kitimat"
        ],
        "product": [
          "lng",
          "natural gas",
          "cng",
          "glass",
          "crude oil",
          "lpg",
          "ceramics",
          "petrochemicals",
          "fertiliser",
          "png",
          "naphtha",
          "plastics",
          "packaging",
          "synthetic fibres",
          "chemical intermediates",
          "liquefied petroleum gas",
          "urea",
          "taxis",
          "autorickshaw",
          "sng",
          "synthetic natural gas",
          "woodfibre",
          "katlan",
          "constitution",
          "sunrise",
          "qelng north 1",
          "gas",
          "diesel",
          "jet fuel",
          "brent oil",
          "commonwealth lng",
          "furnace oil",
          "gasoil",
          "gasoline",
          "alkylates",
          "desh garima",
          "petrol",
          "air conditioners",
          "ac",
          "smart meter",
          "yojana",
          "keystone xl",
          "brent crude",
          "liquefied natural gas",
          "russian lng",
          "subsidized gas",
          "yamal lng",
          "thermal coal",
          "biodiesel",
          "corn-based bioethanol",
          "electric vehicle",
          "renewable diesel",
          "soybeans",
          "r-lng",
          "sponge iron",
          "orion hugo",
          "propylene gas",
          "hilli episeyo",
          "mkii"
        ],
        "event": [
          "iran war",
          "war in west asia",
          "war in iran",
          "us-israeli war against iran",
          "us-israeli war with iran",
          "november midterm elections",
          "us-israeli conflict",
          "middle east war",
          "middle east conflict",
          "coal iran war",
          "us-israeli war on iran",
          "us israeli war with iran"
        ]
      },
      "newsworthiness_score": 1,
      "group_id": 364526
    }
  ],
  "credits_consumed": 0.2
}