ALL ENERGY: Oil, Gas, Coal & Uranium

[drbubb]

ALL ENERGY: Oil, Gas, Coal & Uranium

I am looking for ways to identify and trade the cheapest Energy sources

USO/ US Oil etf looks to be the Leading Bellwether, and it has rallied

Oil prices are near their L.T. Low vs Gold (USO, 7.5%) : USO-$11.88 / GLD-$138.27: r-8.59% Latest

USO - vs GLD, Ngas, Oilb .... fr. Feb.2009 : 2.17.16 : 9/2017 : end2018 : 10d :

ALL Energy: 12mo : fm. Apr.2018 : 10d / uso: $12.14, u.t: C$4.22, ngas: 2.34cents, btu: $9.70 - at 11/27/2019

USO-etc ... ALL : from 2001 :  Jan.2007 : 7/2012 : 1/2014 : fr. 2015 : 1/2016 : 10d /

USO /US Oil etf ... 10-yr : 5-yr : 1-yr : Last: $12.14

USO, ngas, btu, ca:u ... fr. 11/1/2015 : 6/1/17 : 12mo : 10d:

Coal & Natgas could be cheapest, but it depends on the Time Frame you are looking at

RATIO :: USO/GLD Low : 7.50%
Timing : - GLD-: -USO-: %GLD : WT/u: -WTI-: Gold; wt/Au:
200 5ye: $51.58: 00.00e 00.0%:
2006ye: $63.21: $51.60: 81.6%:
2007ye: $82.46: $75.76: 91.9%:
2008ye: $86.52: $33.10: 38.3%:
2009ye:  107.31: $39.28: 36.6%:
2010ye:  138.72: $39.00: 28.1%: 0.000: $00.00/ 1405.5=
2011ye:  151.99: $38.11: 25.1%: 2.391: $91.12/ 1531.0= 5.95%
2012ye:  162.62: $33.37: 20.5%: 2.721: $90.80/ 1657.5= 5.48%
2013ye:  116.12:  $35.32: 30.4%: 2.811: $99.29/ 1204.5= 8.24%
2014ye:  113.58: $20.36: 17.9%: 2.658: $54.12/ 1206.0= 4.49%
2015ye:  101.48: $11.00: 10.8%: 3.370: $37.07/ 1060.5= 3.50%
2016ye:  109.61: $11.72: 10.7%: 4.584: $53.72/ 1151.7= 4.66%
2017ye:  123.65: $12.01: 9.71%: 5.031: $60.42/ 1309.3= 4.61%
2018ye:  121.25: $  9.66: 7.96%: 4.701: $45.41/ 1281.3= 3.54%
11.4.19: 142.15: $11.81: 8.31%: 4.787: $56.54/ 1511.1= 3.74%

[drbubb]

Oil Prices may be Stalling out near $60

Energy price at a "pinch point"?

Energy bellwethers : fr 6/1/2018 :

WTI crude /Last $60.14 +$0.84

USO /US Oil  etf ... 10-yr-L : 5-yr-Log : 3-yr : 12-mo : Last: $12.50 --  $60 /12.5 = r-4.8

Ratio: WTI-to USO : ratio: 4.81

==

[drbubb]

AFTER LOOKING at all these charts...

I am less confident that Oil & energy have broken out,

Instead, it is possible that WTI Crude is rolling over at around $60. ($67?)

Here's the Brent Oil chart

Comment: Possible peak below $70

I was wrong about U /Uranium a few days ago. It did not follow USO in a rally

USO - U.T etc. 10d /

[drbubb]

WTI Crude up 2.41% to $61.59

Is this an important Breakout? (over $60  Resistance)

WTI Crude

WTI to Gold Ratio

I note that URA / Uranium share etf also had a good day: +2.72% to $12.83

But URA itself has NOT broken out yet

[drbubb]

Brent Oil Hits $70... could be headed to $73 or higher

...Hits $70 On Libya Unrest, Crisis In Venezuela

Crude rallied on Friday morning, ending the week on a bullish note as traders are increasingly concerned about global supply outages.

Read more: WHAT REALLY HAPPENED | The History The US Government HOPES You Never Learn! https://www.whatreallyhappened.com/#ixzz5kMFxH59z

[drbubb]

Uranium Prices (in US$) have become cheap vs. rising Brent Oil (now over $70)

As URA, Uranium Shares rose, Uranium got relatively cheaper too

[Traineeinvestor]

A question on oil.

There are different grades of oil - WTI and Brent being the two best known crude oil benchmarks. 

Looking at Iron Ore,  over the last several years, the price gap between low grade IO fines, higher grade IO fines and IO pellets has expanded significantly in response to demand for the higher quality products (especially the IO pellets) which produce much lower levels of pollution. 

The question I have is whether we will see a similar widening of the price spread between the prices for lower grade/higher polluting crude oil  and the higher grade/lower polluting crude oil. There is already some differential (see WTI v Brent prices), but with changes like those the shipping industry is currently going through, I'm wondering (i) whether the existing price differentials will widen and (ii) if so, which companies stand to benefit most.

My search to match oil companies against the quality of their crude oil reserves has, so far, proved to be an exercise in frustration. 

 

 

 

[drbubb]

USO-etc ... ALL : from  fr. 2015 : 1/2016 : 10d /

[drbubb]

15 hours ago, Traineeinvestor said:

A question on oil.

...The question I have is whether we will see a similar widening of the price spread between the prices for lower grade/higher polluting crude oil  and the higher grade/lower polluting crude oil. There is already some differential (see WTI v Brent prices), but with changes like those the shipping industry is currently going through, I'm wondering (i) whether the existing price differentials will widen and (ii) if so, which companies stand to benefit most.

My search to match oil companies against the quality of their crude oil reserves has, so far, proved to be an exercise in frustration.

Yes.

It has been going on for years.  Light sweet crude gains value relative to Heavy Sour Crude,

as LSFO (low sulphur fuel oil) gains value relative to HSFO 9high sulfur fuel oil)

[drbubb]

" it is possible that WTI Crude is rolling over at around $60. "

And so it did eventually rollover... but from a little higher, $66.60!

Energy Bells - from 2016 ...

Only U is fighting the downtrend for the moment

[drbubb]

The "ALL ENERGY" chart has broken down - Where is the Low?

All Energy ... fr. mid-June.2018 / USO: $10.64, NGas: $0.0235, U.t: C$4.32, URA: $11.91, BTU: $22.52

==

[drbubb]

USO/ US Oil etf looks to be a Leading Bellwether.

On Tuesday, USO slid tuesday 2% to $11.14, & may slide to LO.Yr at $9.23.

USO-etc ... ALL : from 2001 :  Jan.2007 : 7/2012 : 1/2014 : fr. 2015 : 1/2016 : 10d /

: 1/2016 :

BTU / Peabody Coal ... fr. 1/2016 : $17.89 - 0.89% / $11.14 = r-00% -- Yield: 3.13%; PER: 4.22; EV/ebit: 0.00

HAL / Halliburton ... fr, 1/2016 : $19.95 - 1.77% / $11.14 = r-00% -- Yield: 3.61%; PER: 13.12; EV/ebit: 0.00

MUR / Murphy Oil ... fr. 1/2016 : $22.05 - 2.35% / $11.14 = r-00% -- Yield: 4.54%; PER: 13.59; EV/ebit: 0.00

SLB / Schlumberger ... fr, 1/2016 : $35.46 - 1.47% / $11.14 = r-00% -- Yield: 5.64%; PER: 23.64; EV/ebit: 0.00

XLE / Energy Select Sector SPDR.. 1/2016 : $58.53 - 0.12% / $11.14 = r-00% -- Yield: 3.64%; PER: N/A; EV/ebit: 0.00

OTH / Other Stock ... fr, 1/2016 : $00.00 - 0.00% / $00.00 = r-00% -- Yield: 0.00%

==

[drbubb]

I used the slide after the Opening GAP down to buy some calls on Energy stocks

USO/ US Oil etf : $10.84 - 0.30, -2.69% O: 10.81 / H: 10.89 L: 10.49.  closed near Hi-Day

Larry Pesavento thinks we are near at/near an important Low in NatGas

> https://www.listennotes.com/podcasts/trade-what-you-see/trade-what-you-see-08-06-19-j2miW6wLFpa/

BOUGHT CALLS on: SLB, MUR, RRC … also, non-energy: FCX, FXI

Sector Update: Energy Giants Decline Pre-Market Wednesday

09:25 AM EDT, 08/07/2019 (MT Newswires) -- Top Energy Stocks:

XOM: -1.28%

CVX: -1.11%

COP: -1.81%

SLB: -1.95%

OXY: -1.22%

Energy giants were declining pre-market Wednesday. West Texas Intermediate crude oil for September delivery was down $1.08 at $52.55 per barrel at the New York Mercantile Exchange. The global benchmark Brent crude October contract lost $1.12 to $57.82 per barrel and September natural gas futures were flat at $2.11 per 1 million BTU. Among energy-related ETFs, the United States Oil Fund was down 2.60%, while the United States Natural Gas fund was 0.55% higher

[drbubb]

Oil, & Energy, and Energy Stocks - weak from Technological advances

After MONTHS of weakness in the entire energy complex... it was time for rethinking...

"All-Energy": all-data : fr. 6/2018 / Last: USO: $11.28 +2.9%, (22.2% over LoYr, $9.23) / aver. Off L: +7.7%, Other: +4.1%
U.t: C$4.20 +0.5% (3.99, +5.3%), Ngas*: 0.0214 -0.5% (.0205, +4.4%), BTU: $18.13 -2.09% (17.20, +5.4%)
URA: $10.33 -1.15% (10.19, +1.4%).   /*Natgas Futures: $2.12 vs. $2.03 Low of Year

: fr. 6/2018 / 10d :

The Five Transitions in Energy Happening Now (w/ Rob West)

Rob West, CEO and founder of Thunder Said Energy, talks about the five major energy transitions occurring simultaneously in 2019. He compares the energy transitions happening now - renewables, shale, electrification, digitalization and environmental - to other energy transitions over the past 200 years. This clip is excerpted from a video published on Real Vision on May 21, 2019 entitled, “The Third Major Energy Transformation.”

[drbubb]

Maybe finally this is past an important low

MUR / Murphy Oil ... all-data : x / Last

MUR is looking CHEAP relative to Natgas - which is now rising

[drbubb]

Trouble & Opportunity come together

Junk Debt in a stressed oil patch

Wall Street Gears Up For Onslaught Of Oil & Gas Bankruptcies

Oil and gas companies are facing an onslaught of bankruptcies as the “shale revolution” appears to be coming to an unceremonious end, at least on Wall Street, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Companies like Sanchez Energy Corp., Halcon Resources Corp. and 26 other oil and gas producers have all filed for bankruptcy this year, already matching the 28 industry bankruptcies from all of 2018. The number is expected to rise as debt maturities for those looking to cash in on the shale revolution and make bets on higher oil prices years ago are now looming.

5.7% of all energy companies with junk rated bonds are defaulting as of August, the highest level since 2017. The metric is “considered a key indicator of the industry’s financial stress.”

The defaults are on the rise as companies struggle to service debt, bring in new money and refinance existing debt. The once-darling shale business model has been under significant scrutiny from Wall Street over the last 18 months, adding to the headwinds for many companies.

Investor interest has faded after years of meager returns while, at the same time, companies struggle to meet their cost of capital with oil prices below $60/barrel.

/ 2 /

Oil Prices Must Drop Sharply To Compete With EVs

All major stakeholders in the oil industry need oil prices to be higher than the current $60 a barrel Brent Crude to turn profits or balance government budgets.

Yet, in the long term, oil prices at $60 wouldn’t be competitive in the transportation sector because they won’t be able to compete with electric vehicles (EVs), BNP Paribas Asset Management said in a research note last month.

. . .The report introduces the concept of Energy Return on Capital Invested (EROCI) to measure how much a given capital outlay on oil and renewables translates into useful or propulsive energy at the wheels: “in other words, for a given capital outlay, how much mobility can you buy?”

According to BNP Paribas Asset Management’s analysis, at present, for the same capital investment, wind and solar energy will already produce significantly more useful energy for EVs than oil at $60 a barrel will for cars and other light-duty vehicles (LDVs).

Major oil producing countries dependent on oil revenues need oil prices higher than the current $60 a barrel level to balance budgets and boost government income. U.S. shale also needs at least $50-60 a barrel of oil to profitably drill new wells. The oil majors, despite all the cost cuts and streamlining, also need oil at some $50 to turn a good profit and keep or increase dividends.   Related: Can This Multi-Billionaire Revive Alaska’s Oil Industry?

[drbubb]

BTU: $16.56 - 11% > new Low for Year

Recent News for Peabody Energy Corp

1. Aug 22, 2019 Peabody Energy stock price target cut to $29 from $31 at B. Riley FBR MarketWatch. 

2. Aug 21, 2019 Moody’s Downgrades Coal Sector on Weakening Export Demand Wall St Journal

3. Aug19, 2019 Peabody Energy downgraded to neutral from overweight at J.P. Morgan MarketWatch.  

[drbubb]

Along with MUR, the Oil Stock index could be bottoming too

XLE / Major Oil Shares etf ... All-data : 2yr / Last: $59.03

[drbubb]

PINCHPOINT - for "All Energy"?

URPTF (Uranium), BTU (peabody Coal), USO (Crude Oil), Ngas (Nat.Gas) ... update

===

[drbubb]

Still waiting ... At the Energy Pinchpoint(s)

All-E-2017 .... update : 10d / USO:

USO / US Oil ...10yr : 4yr : 2yr : 6mo : 10d / Last:

BTU-Peabody Coal may need help from Natgas (& Oil) ... update / Last

Some Oil Service stocks ... like HAL... are still near the Lows

HAL to USO ..

==

[drbubb]

COAL & NATGAS stocks

Sym.*: Last: MktCp: EValue: Ebitda: EV/eb: $Debt: Yrs/eb: Earns: PE-R: Div.: Yield: BkVal.: Lo-Yr
BTU :  18.37: $1.89B: $2.54B: $1.12B: r2.28: $1.44B: r1.29y:$4.26: r4.33: 0.52: 2.97%: 29.91: 16.41
Ceix :  17.42: $449M: $1.30B: $414M: r3.13: $836M r2.02y: $3.67: r4.72: 0.00: 0.00%: 17.18: 15.92
CCR :  13.26: $366M: $566M: $105M: r5.37: $190M r1.81y: $1.95: r6.80: 2.05: 15.3%: $7.72: 12.30
CNX* $8.32: $1.54B: $5.14B: $986M: r5.22: $2.84B r2.88y: $1.49: r5.58: 0.00: 0.00%: 23.06: $6.14
CHK* $1.79: $3.37B: $15.3B: $3.05B: r5.02: $9.75B: r3.20y: (33.0) rNEG: 0.00: 0.00%: $1.56: $1.26
RRC* $4.38: $1.15B: $5.00B: $1.32B: r3.78: $3.85B: r2.91y: (6.47): rNEG: 0.08: 1.83%: 17.07: $3.36
Swn* $2.14: $1.16B: $3.42B: $1.40B: r2.45: $2.42B: r1.73y: $1.81: r1.16: 0.00: 0.00%: $5.71: $1.56
DMY: 00.00: $1.00B: $1.00B: $1.00B: r0.00: $1.00B: r0.00y: $0.00: r0.00: 0.00: 0.00%: $0.00:
====
*Natgas spinoff from Consol, Energy (CEIX); & other Natgas

COAL Co's: BTU, CEIX, CCR ... update :

First Quarter 2019 Highlights

Highlights of the CEIX first quarter 2019¹ results include:

• GAAP net income of $20.3 million and adjusted net income² of $39.5 million;
• Total GAAP dilutive earnings per share of $0.52 and adjusted dilutive earnings per share² of $1.21;
• Net cash provided by operations of $82.2 million;
• Adjusted EBITDA² of $118.5 million;
• Organic free cash flow net to CEIX shareholders² of $42.4 million;
• Reduced total debt by $100 million during the quarter;
• Total net leverage ratio² reduced to 1.7x on March 31, 2019 compared to 2.0x on March 31, 2018;
• Increased share and debt repurchase program to $175 million; 2.5% of outstanding shares repurchased since the spin³;
• Amended credit facilities and paid down debt to lower annual interest expense by $15 million, improve operational and financial flexibility, extend maturities and boost liquidity; and
• Extended a major export contract through the end of 2020; pricing terms unchanged.

Internationally, thermal coal prices have come under pressure since the beginning of 2019 due to pullback in global LNG prices and other factors such as weak weather-related demand in Japan and Korea and softening demand in Europe due in part to an influx of Russian coal. We are already beginning to see an export supply response from several countries that should help to stabilize API2 and Newcastle prices. We believe the recent market behavior is consistent with normal cycle trends exacerbated by transient items. We believe longer-term coal pricing will be driven by continued growth of coal-fired generation capacity build out in Asia, limited investments in coal supply, and tightening supply-demand fundamentals for LNG in 2021. According to our analysis of data from IHS Markit, approximately 111 GW of new coal-fired capacity is under construction globally for commissioning between 2019-2024. Furthermore, an additional 300 GW of new coal-fired capacity is in the planning stages. We believe this bodes well for seaborne thermal coal demand, particularly for high-Btu NAPP coal.

Investors Who Bought CONSOL Energy (NYSE:CEIX) Shares A Year Ago Are Now Down 62%

During the unfortunate twelve months during which the CONSOL Energy share price fell, it actually saw its earnings per share (EPS) improve by 21%. It could be that the share price was previously over-hyped. It's fair to say that the share price does not seem to be reflecting the EPS growth. So it's easy to justify a look at some other metrics.

CONSOL 11.00% Senior Secured Notes due 2025 or common units of ...

Expansion of Share and Debt Repurchase Program

CONSOL's Board of Directors ("Board") has increased its previously authorized repurchase program to an aggregate amount of up to $175 million from $100 million and extended the program through June 30, 2020 ("repurchase period"). Under the new authorization, CONSOL management may purchase, from time to time, outstanding shares of CONSOL's common stock, its 11.00% Senior Secured Second Lien Notes due 2025, amounts outstanding under its Term Loan B and Term Loan A Facilities, and common units of CONSOL Coal Resources LP ("CCR units"). These securities may be purchased in the open market, through negotiated purchases or otherwise.

2019 Guidance and Outlook

Based on our year-to-date results, current contracted position, approval of the Itmann project (increased capex), estimated prices and production plans, please find below our financial and operating performance guidance for 2019:

• Coal sales volumes (100% PAMC) - 26.8-27.8 million tons
• Coal average revenue per ton sold - $47.70-$49.70
• Cash cost of coal sold per ton⁴ - $30.40-$31.40
• CONSOL Marine Terminal Adjusted EBITDA⁴ - $40-$45 million
• Adjusted EBITDA⁴ (incl. 100% PAMC) - $380-$440 million
• Effective tax rate - 8-12%
• Capital expenditures (incl. 100% PAMC) - $155-$185 million

[drbubb]

Uranium sector won’t catch a break

One week ago Cameco announced it will maintain low output levels until uranium prices recover. The Canadian uranium miner also said it might cut production further, having already closed four mines in Canada and laid off 2,000 of its workers in the uranium mining hub of Saskatchewan. 

 

. . . Just over a year ago Cameco made the difficult decision to close its MacArthur River and Key Lake mines, in response to low uranium prices, leaving the company’s flagship Cigar Lake facility as its only operating mine left in northern Saskatchewan, home to the world’s highest grade uranium deposit. 

The mine closures by Cameco were preceded by 20% production cuts in Kazakhstan, the number one uranium-producing country. The former Soviet bloc country has said 2020-21 output will not rise above 2019 levels. In Canada, the second largest U producer, 2018 production was cut in half to 7,000 tonnes. 

An estimated 35% of uranium supply has been stripped from the market since Kazakhstan’s supply reductions in December 2017.

Uranium demand and China 

In response to the supply glut/ low price argument, uranium bulls like to present China as the country that will save the day and float everyone’s long-sunken uranium stock boats. It’s true that, of 453 operating nuclear reactors and 55 new reactors under construction, globally, China has the most reactors in the pipeline including 43 operating, 15 under construction and 179 planned or proposed. 

China then, will demand millions of tonnes of yellowcake, that it will have to import, right, pushing up the price? In fact, China has been working to reduce its dependence on imported uranium, and fossil-fueled power generation, by developing domestic uranium deposits and either partnering with or buying mine properties overseas. The Asian superpower has started building its own uranium supply chain, such as starting the Husab mine in Namibia. In November 2018, China National Uranium Corp bought the Rossing mine in Namibia from Rio Tinto. 

According to the World Nuclear Association, China has become self-sufficient in most aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle: China aims to produce one-third of its uranium domestically, obtain one-third through foreign equity in mines and joint ventures overseas, and to purchase one-third on the open market.

The China Nuclear International Uranium Corporation (SinoU) set up the Azelik mine in Niger and has agreed to buy a 25% stake in Paladin’s Langer Heinrich mine in Namibia for $190 million. In 2007 SinoU bought a share in the Zhalpak mine in Kazakhstan, through a joint venture with Kazatomprom.

Prospects in Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Mongolia, Namibia, Algeria and Zimbabwe, Canada and South Africa are also seen as potential suppliers for SinoU, writes WNA.

Read more at https://stockhouse.com/opinion/independent-reports/2019/09/13/uranium-sector-won-t-catch-break#IrVa9RbiW1QBhOQ5.99

 

[drbubb]

The Action continues to the Downside for All Energy - tho'  U is fighting a solo battle

USO, ngas, btu, ca:u ... fr. 11/1/2015 : 6/1/17 : 12mo : 10d:

: 10d:

[drbubb]

Fission: The Real Deal?

Uranium is entering a tipping point of constrained supply and the best play is right here in Canada

(Because of) inelastic demand from existing operators, and because of past market conditions, uranium is entering a tipping point of constrained supply.

According to the World Nuclear Association’s September 2019 report on nuclear fuel, uranium projections are up in all scenarios, including 49% base case growth. With secondary inventory being consumed and a growing demand gap, the report calls for restarting idle mines and new sources of uranium.

What investors might not know is that the best plays for uranium are right here in Canada. The country is the second highest producer of Uranium , with North Saskatchewan’s Athabasca Basin being home to some of the largest sources of uranium in the world. Storied success in the region means mining initiatives in the area receive strong local support.

That’s what makes the latest news from Fission Uranium (TSX:FCU, OTC:FCUUF, Forum) an eye-opener. The development-stage company’s Patterson Lake South (PLS) property has a large, near surface and high-grade resource estimate for uranium and now has further developed a scenario to access this resource via an underground-only prefeasibility study.

Earlier in April 2019, the Company examined the potentiality of the Triple R Deposit via a prefeasibility study with mine development as a hybrid open-pit and underground mine.  This option showed viability and strong positive economics.  But the study also left the door open for another potentially profitable development option by providing a Preliminary Assessment study-level look at development of an underground-only option.

Fission initiated the effort set to examine the second plan further at a Prefeasibility study level, and on Sept. 23, 2019, the results of this study were announced.  The study of an underground-only mine showed a substantial reduction in capital expenditures and time requirements over the hybrid model. In addition to reducing the construction timeline by a whole year to 3 years total and a 21% reduction in capital costs to $1.18 billion, the positive economics of the project increased to a pre-tax IRR of 34%.

Ross McElroy, President, COO and Chief Geologist of Fission, commented that the study results mean the Company is ready to take its Triple R deposit to the next stage.

"…The report highlights important potential advantages to the underground approach, including large reductions in capital expenditure, construction time and surface footprint, while still enjoying low operating costs and a very strong return on investment. We are delighted by the results and have demonstrated the flexibility of the Triple R to be mined by multiple methods.  Fission is now able to transition confidently into the feasibility study phase."

A major takeaway from the prefeasibility study is that Fission Uranium’s resource is the real deal. The updated resource estimate from the underground mine is of 2,299 kilotons at a grade of 1.61% U₃O₈ for a total of 81.4 million pounds U₃O₈ and used the following parameters:
 

1. CIM definitions (2014) were followed for Mineral Reserves.
2. Underground Mineral Reserves are reported using stope shapes generated with a 0.25% U₃O₈ minimum grade.
3. This cut-off grade is based on a price of US$50 per lb U₃O₈ and an exchange rate of US$0.75/C$1.00.
4. For underground mining, a minimum mining width of 3.0 m was used, which includes 0.5 m dilution on both the hanging wall and footwall.
5. An extraction factor of 95% was applied.

The study gives an underground-only mine a seven-year production life with a pre-tax NPV at 8% of $1.33 billion that pays back in 2.2 years.
Read more at https://stockhouse.com/news/newswire/2019/10/02/finding-best-strategy-for-uranium-success-canada#pe7rf34OAVaC0i1g.99

[drbubb]

Relative Weakness of Coal (& BTU) shown here

All Energy ... 12mos /

Comparison back to mid-2017 - shows similarity of Recent path of Natgas & BTU ...

All-E ... since mid-2017 - Shows Two Tiers: upper tier: U & Oil / lower tier: Natgas & BTU/Coal

Natgas plays (RRC & SWN) vs. All-E's "lower tier" ... since mid-2017 : 10d/ Last: RRC:$3.62 , SWN:$1.82

: 10d/ Last: RRC:$3.62 , SWN:$1.82

==