Coal Earnings Notes (Q1 2024)
Metallurgical coal prices have been a bit soft so far this year. Since coal miners have operating leverage as well as capital expenditure requirements, you would expect that their free cash flows have suffered more than the royalty owners' have. And as we pointed out in January, the royalty owners - which hold the senior securities in the capital structure of mines - seemed cheaper than the producers.
It is a concern that the miners are expanding met coal production even while the commodity price has been weak and their own shares have been "cheap". Warrior's new Blue Creek mine is expected to produce 5 million tons per year and Peabody's North Goonyella / Centurion mine is supposed to produce 3 million tons per year. To put that in perspective, 8 million tons of new capacity is about equal to what Warrior produces in total now.
It seems like a possible "base case" is that the miners' predictable over-investment in capacity will result in the commodity price trending towards marginal cost. The miners will be able to earn a profit margin during times of strong steel demand, but we are not really seeing anything that would show us that mining has become a good business or that the executives recognize that they are not in a good business.
People are working
on electrolysis of iron ore (which would be like aluminum production)
as well as hydrogen based reduction for steelmaking. Either of those innovations would disrupt metallurgical coal and what they would mainly require is cheaper electricity. It does not seem prudent to invest capital in new coal mines without establishing long term sales contracts with financially sound entities to sell the output. The miners could idle the expansion projects and have the option to start them at such time that they could guarantee an attractive market for the output.
We follow four coal producers and three royalty owners. The miners are Alpha Met (AMR), Warrior Met (HCC), Arch Resources (ARCH), and Peabody (BTU). The mineral owners are Natural Resource Partners (NRP), Pardee Resources (PDER), and Beaver Coal (BVERS). Some notes on the results:
Alpha Met
The market capitalization of AMR is now $3.7 billion (at $285 per share), down quite a bit
from $5.75 billion at the high in February. Results for March 31st (10-Q) show Alpha's
current assets less total liabilities (ignoring deferred taxes) were
$248 million (about the same as year-end 2023) which puts the enterprise
value at $3.45 billion now.
For the first quarter of 2024, AMR's
adjusted EBITDA was $190 million (down from $266 million the prior
quarter) which puts the EV/EBITDA at 4.5x. AMR sold 4.4 million
tons of met coal in Q1, down from 4.6 million in Q4. They got $167/t for
met coal versus $184/t the prior quarter, and the cost per ton was down
slightly to $116/t versus $119/t.
Cash from operations was $196
million and capital expenditures were $72 million for the quarter
(including $8.5 million of contributions to equity affiliates), for $124
million of free cash flow, an annualized yield on the enterprise value
of 14%. They paid $3 million of dividends for the quarter and
bought back $116 million of stock, for a shareholder yield of 13%
(annualized) on the current market capitalization. The share count was
down 14.8% year-over-year.
Warrior Met
The market capitalization of HCC is now $3.3 billion (at $63.25 per share), down about 10% from a recent all time high of $70 in late April. Results for March 31st (10-Q) show Warrior's current assets less total liabilities (ignoring deferred taxes) were $422 million which puts the enterprise value at $2.89 billion now.
For the first quarter of 2024, Warrior's adjusted EBITDA was $200 million (up from $164 million the prior quarter) which puts the EV/EBITDA at 3.6x. Warrior sold 2.1 million tons of met coal in Q1, up from 1.9 million tons in Q4. They got $234/t for met coal versus $258/t the prior quarter, and the cost per ton was down slightly to $133/t versus $147/t.
Cash from operations was $104 million and capital expenditures were $102 million for the quarter. There was an adverse change in working capital (mostly paying down trade accounts receivable) that negatively affected cash from operations by $87 million. If you add that back, free cash flow would have been $89 million, which is a 12% yield on the enterprise value.
The company paid $31 million of dividends and did not buy back any stock, making the shareholder yield 3.8% (annualized). It seems like it would be a good idea not to be expanding production, as we have previously observed.
Arch Resources
The market capitalization of ARCH is now $2.8 billion (at $156 per share), down about 15% from the all time high in March. Results for March 31st (10-Q) show Arch's current assets less total liabilities (ignoring deferred taxes) at negative $104 million which puts the enterprise value at $2.9 billion now.
For the first quarter of 2024, Arch's adjusted EBITDA was $103 million (down from $180 million the prior quarter) which puts the EV/EBITDA at 7x. Arch sold 2.2 million tons of coal in Q1 (both met and thermal coal), down from 2.3 million tons in Q4. They got $166/t for met coal versus $196/t the prior quarter, and the cost per ton (both met and thermal combined) was up to $94/t from $87/t. Note that the cash margin per ton was thus down one-third just from the prior quarter.
Cash from operations was $128 million and capital expenditures were $45 million for the quarter, resulting in $83 million of free cash flow, an 11% yield on the enterprise value. The company paid $44 million of dividends and bought back $14 million of stock, making the shareholder yield 8.3% (annualized).
Peabody
The market capitalization of BTU is now $2.8 billion (at $22.50 per share). Results for March 31st (10-Q) show Peabody's current assets less total liabilities (ignoring deferred taxes) at negative $263 million which puts the enterprise value at $3.1 billion now.
For the first quarter of 2024, Peabody's adjusted EBITDA was $161 million (down from $345 million the prior quarter) which puts the EV/EBITDA at 4.8x. Peabody's seaborne thermal earned $94 million of EBITDA for the quarter, the seaborne met earned $48 million, Powder River Basin earned $16 million, and other U.S. thermal earned $46.5 million.
Cash from operations was $120 million and capital expenditures were $68 million for the quarter, resulting in $52 million of free cash flow, a 6.7% yield on the enterprise value. The company paid $10 million of dividends and bought back $83 million of stock, which resulted in a 3% share count reduction.
Natural Resource Partners
The market capitalization of NRP is now $1.16 billion (at $90 per unit) and as of March 31st (10-Q) the partnership has $175 million of long term debt and $72 million of convertible preferred stock, for net liabilities of $220 million. The enterprise value is thus $1.39 billion.
NRP generated $72 million of free cash flow in the first quarter of 2024 and $312 million of free cash flow over the trailing twelve months. The first quarter figure, which annualizes to $288 million, is a 20.7% yield on the enterprise value.
After the end of the first quarter, NRP settled the remainder of its warrants and bought back more than half of its convertible preferred units. Our best guess now is that the partnership has an enterprise value of $1.35 million. Assuming an annualized free cash flow of $280 million, that would still be a yield of greater than 20% on the enterprise value. Also, it would mean that estimated remaining net liabilities of $175 million could be paid off in about 2.5 quarters, which would mean the end of this year. The stated intention of management is to begin distributing cash to shareholders once all liabilities are paid off. That would indicate a possible annual distribution of $20, which would be a 22% yield on the current unit price, assuming that current level of free cash flow holds.
Pardee Resources
Pardee is interesting because it owns a huge amount of land in West Virginia, both the surface with timber and also the mineral rights. The current market capitalization (at $250 per share) is $166 million and the company reported $35 million of current assets net of all liabilities at March 31, which gives an enterprise value of $131 million. That is $845 per acre, which seems quite low compared to what timberlands are worth, not to mention the mineral rights and other assets.
Pardee earned $5 million of EBITDA in the first quarter, which was down 17% y/y. The coal royalty per ton was down (because of lower commodity prices received by their lessees), but the lessees' production levels were up. That gives a yield of 15.5% on the enterprise value (annualized).
Beaver Coal
Beaver Coal is a partnership that also owns land in West Virginia (only about one-third as many total acres as Pardee) and unlike Pardee is also getting ground lease income from real estate tenants, in addition to coal royalties and timber sales. At $2,750
per unit, the market capitalization of the Beaver partnership is $68.4 million.
Subtracting the $6.6 million of net current assets, the enterprise value is $61.8
million.
Beaver's coal royalties were $8.9 million in 2023 vs $9.6 million in 2022. Total revenue was $12.9 million vs $14.4 million. Expenses were $2.3 million vs $2.1 million. Operating income was $10.5 million vs $12.1 million. The enterprise value is $1,246 per acre and the OCF yield on the EV (ignoring working capital changes) is 17%. Shares are trading for under 7x net income.
The partnership has had a cash build from $5.2 million (YE 2022) to $6.1 million (YE 2023), which
is an increase of $34 per unit. There has been a net current asset build from $5.1
million to $6.6 million, now standing at $266 per unit of current assets
net of all liabilities (excluding deferred revenue).
They had $889k of
proceeds from sale of property and equipment (also had $511k expenditure
for purchase of property and equipment). The financial statements do
not say what the sale or purchases were. This will perhaps be explained
in the shareholder letter when they mail the annual report.
1 comment:
At current (January 2023) coking coal prices of about $190 a tonne, both hydrogen and MOE production routes will be probably become cheaper than the conventional blast furnace approach within a few years. (I’m assuming $40 a MWh for renewable electricity for use in either alternative process). Moreover, a carbon tax/border adjustment of $100/€100 a tonne will make coal-based steel entirely uneconomic against both hydrogen and MOE.
https://www.carboncommentary.com/blog/2023/1/31/decarbonising-steel-hydrogen-or-metal-oxide-electrolysis
In the MOE cell, an inert anode is immersed in an electrolyte containing iron ore, and then it’s electrified. When the cell heats to 1600°C, the electrons split the bonds in the iron oxide in the ore, producing pure liquid metal. No carbon dioxide or other harmful byproducts are generated, just oxygen. Furthermore, MOE does not require process water, hazardous chemicals or precious-metal catalysts. The result is a clean, high purity liquid metal that can be sent directly to ladle metallurgy — no reheating required.
https://www.bostonmetal.com/green-steel-solution/
Post a Comment