CFA Institute Research Challenge 2016 Prague, 3/2/2016
Unipetrol: From Ashes Like a Phoenix!
Team D Ondřej, Pavel, Robert K., Robert Š., Tomáš
Executive Summary
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
Target Price:
206 CZK
Upside: 29%
BUY
Recommendation
Main features
Largest downstream group in CZ
Operator of 339 fuel stations in CZ
Part of PKN Orlen (63%)
110
130
150
170
190
210
230
in
CZ
K p
er
share
Price Target CZK 206
as of 17/12/2016
Market Price CZK 160
as of 17/12/2015
Market Cap CZK 29.0bn
EBIT CZK 8.5bn
Net Cash CZK 6.8bn
52-week price range CZK 119 – 195
Average daily volume CZK 10.8m
Free float 15%
Company profile
Current Price:
160 CZK
Refining
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
Business Description
Downstream Retail
PetChem
Filling stations network
Refining
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
Downstream Retail
PetChem
Filling stations network
Business Description
Financials Breakdown
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
70%
11%
2%
8%
9% Poland
Czech Republic
Germany
Slovakia Other
0.2bn
62bn
8.1bn
30bn
0.3bn
9bn
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
EBIT
Revenues
Refining Petrochemistry Retail
Revenues by country 2015E Revenues and EBIT (CZK)
Industry Overview
& Competitive Positioning
Industry & Competitors
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
Steam cracker ethylene
production in kt
Unipetrol operations
PKN ORLEN
700,000
OMV AG
450,000
PKN ORLEN
544,000
Dow Chemical Co.
560,000
OMV AG
500,000
MOL Group
220,000
MOL Group
660,000
TOTAL GERMANY
5,757,265
TOTAL NETHERLANDS
3,965,000
TOTAL BELGIUM
2,460,000
Shell
560,000
Investment Summary
Investment Summary
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
crude oil represents
62% of total
costs
Key drivers:
1. Crude oil price
2. Steam cracker overreaction
3. Modernization and M&A
4. Macro environment
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Investment Summary
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
OPEC defends
market share
oversupply
2m bbl/day
Key drivers:
1. Crude oil price
2. Steam cracker overreaction
3. Modernization and M&A
4. Macro environment
Brent crude oil price (USD/bbl)
Investment Summary
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2008 2010 2012 2014 2016E 2018E
-47%
Key drivers:
1. Crude oil price
2. Steam cracker overreaction
3. Modernization and M&A
4. Macro environment
Avg. annual oil price forecast (USD/bbl)
Investment Summary
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
-4%
-2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2008 2010 2012 2014 2016E 2018E
PE3 unit increases
EBIT margin
Key drivers:
1. Crude oil price
2. Steam cracker overreaction
3. Modernization and M&A
4. Macro environment
Avg. annual oil price vs. EBIT margin
Investment Summary
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
CZK
Damage & lost profit 14bn
Unrecoverable cost:
Management expectation 2bn
Market reaction 7bn
Our estimation 6bn
Key drivers:
1. Crude oil price
2. Steam cracker overreaction
3. Modernization and M&A
4. Macro environment
August 2015 – steam cracker caught on fire
October 2016 – fully operational
Steam cracker accident
CZK 1bn
upside
Investment Summary
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
4.45
mt/y 8.7 mt/y +95%
Refining capacity
2013
2016
Key drivers:
1. Crude oil price
2. Steam cracker overreaction
3. Modernization and M&A
4. Macro environment
100% stake in Česká rafinérská (April 2015)
68 OMV stations (reaching 20% share in retail)
M&A activities
Investment Summary
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
New polyethylene (PE) unit
Large investment project (CZK 8.5bn)
320
kt/y 470 kt/y +47%
Polyethylene units capacity
2017
2019
Key drivers:
1. Crude oil price
2. Steam cracker overreaction
3. Modernization and M&A
4. Macro environment
PE3 Investment
Investment Summary
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
2,0%
3,9%
2,6% 2,6%
2,2% 2,2% 2,2%
0,9%
1,5% 1,6% 1,7% 1,6% 1,6% 1,6%
2014 2015E 2016E 2017E 2018E 2019E 2020E
Czech Rep. EU 15
Key drivers:
1. Crude oil price
2. Steam cracker overreaction
3. Modernization and M&A
4. Macro environment
GDP Growth
Financial Analysis
Profitability Analysis
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
PE3 → ↑ efficiency
↑ oil price
Steam cracker & Margin rationalization
EBIT margin
2011 – 2014 -0.3%
2015 9.5%
2020E 2.2%
EBIT margin Unipetrol vs. peers
-4,0%
-2,0%
0,0%
2,0%
4,0%
6,0%
8,0%
10,0%
12,0%
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015E 2016E 2017E 2018E 2019E 2020E
Unipetrol Peers median Peers LT avg.
CAPEX and Dividend Potential
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
Cumulative FCF 2016 – 2020 (CZK bn)
12.5
Accum.
Cash
2020E
Change
in NWC
0.4
Retail
EBIT
2.2
Petchem
EBIT
13.6
Net cash
2015E
3.7
CAPEX
22.0
Deprec.
15.1
Refining
EBIT
Income
tax &
Non core
0.0
6.8
Valuation
50%
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
?
50%
?
Discounted cash flow model
10-year forecast
EBIT estimated by segments
Adjustments for CAPEX, Depreciation, and NWC
Peer group valuation
Valuation
Discounted Cash Flow
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
2014 2015 2016E 2017E 2018E 2019E 2020E
Crude Oil price (USD/bbl) 99.0 52.5 48.5 47.3 50.0 52.0 56.0
EBIT margin 2.1% 9.5% 4.5% 2.7% 2.9% 3.5% 2.5%
WACC calculation
Risk-free rate 2.7%
Beta 0.76
Risk premium 3.9%
Size premium 2.2%
Cost of Equity 8.8%
Cost of Debt 2.6%
Equity weight 63%
Debt weight 37%
WACC 6.3%
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
2016E 2017E 2018E 2019E 2020E 2021E 2022E 2023E 2024E
Free cash flow (CZK bn)
50%
Valuation
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
194
CZK
50%
?
Discounted cash flow model
Peer group valuation
13 European downstream companies
EV/Sales valuation
EV/EBITDA inappropriate multiple – volatility
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
EV/Sales
Historical discount -6%
LTM discount 48%
EV/Sales Unipetrol vs. peers median
Multiples Pricing
0,10
0,15
0,20
0,25
0,30
0,35
0,40
0,45
2011 2012 2013 2014 LTM
EV/Sales Unipetrol EV/Sales peers
Multiples Pricing
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
37 278
30 478
36 3306 8005 852
Net cash Steam
Cracker
Enterprise
value unadj.
EV adjusted Equity value
219 CZK
0.41x
LTM EV/Sales peers median
Target Price
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
DCF Analysis
50%
194
CZK
50%
Multiples
219
CZK
206 CZK
12-month target price
Upside: 29%
Risk Analysis
Risk Matrix
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
Polish
Elections
Regulatory
Environment
Long-term
Competitiveness
FX Risk
Steam
Cracker
Shutdown
Crude Oil
Price
Labour Union Russia/Ukraine
Conflict Macro
LOW MEDIUM HIGH
LO
W
MED
IUM
HIG
H
Impact
Pro
bab
ilit
y
Main Risk: Steam Cracker Shutdown
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
4Q14 2Q15 4Q15 2Q16 4Q16
Steam cracker shutdown
Postponed reconstruction
Full coverage expected by management
Additional potential upside
Planned steam cracker utilization
Main Risks: Oil Price
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
Positive risks Negative risks
China slowdown
Iran comeback
US storage capacity utilized
Curtailing production in the US
US-RUS-OPEC agreement
Geopolitical risks
Main Risks: Corporate Risk
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
Shareholder structure
63%
24%
13%
J&T Group
Others
PKN Orlen
Polish elections
Changes in PKN long-term strategy
New management
J&T Group
Activist shareholder
Pressure on dividend payout
Conclusion
Recommendation
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
BUY
1. Low crude oil prices
2. Steam cracker overreaction
3. Modernization and M&A
4. Macro environment
Appendix
Contents:
Stock Price Development
Company Structure
Map of Distribution System
SWOT Analysis
Porter 5 Forces
Oil Supply & Demand Factors
Steam Cracker Accident
Refining Utilization Ratio
Refining and PE Capacity
Refining Shutdowns
Number of Fuel Stations
ROIC Decomposition
Beta Calculation
DCF Model
Comparables List
Comparable Companies
Multiples Valuation
EV/EBITDA
Sensitivity Analysis
Risk Matrix
Appendix: Stock Price Development
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
90
110
130
150
170
190
Trade volume in CZK million CZK per share
UREA unit shutdown
Acquisition of 16.335% share
in Česká rafinérská from Shell
Acquisition of 32.445% share in
Česká rafinérská from Eni
Steam Cracker Accident
Crude Oil Price Slump
J&T Bank ceases acquiring
shares of Unipetrol
Unipetrol stock price (CZK) and daily volumes (CZK m)
Back to contents
Appendix: Company Structure
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
Unipetrol, a.s.
Retail
Benzina
Downstream
Česká
rafinérská
Unipetrol
RPA
Paramo
Unipetrol
Deutschland
Unipetrol
Slovensko
Unipetrol
Hungary
R&D Logistics
Petrotrans
Unipetrol
Doprava
Service
Center
Company structure
Back to contents
Appendix: Map of Distribution System
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
Distribution system in CZ and SK
Back to contents
Appendix: SWOT Analysis
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
Strenghts Weaknesses
Česká rafinérská shares purchase Disabled PetChem Production
Leveraging on retail market position New Polish Government Changes
Refining Monopoly in CR Low Competitiveness
High Refining & PetChem Margins
Record GDP Growth
Low Crude Oil Price
Strong US Dollar
Opportunities Threats
PE3 Investment Project MOL Group influence Growth
Low Crude Oil Forecast New Gulf and US refineries
Strengthening Export
Further CNB Interventions
Divident Payout
SWOT analysis
Back to contents
Appendix: Porter 5 Forces
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
0
1
2
3
4
5
Threat of New
Entrants
Threat of
Substitute
Products or
Services
Bargaining
Power of
Customers
Bargaining
Power of
Suppliers
Intensity of
Competitive
Rivalry
0 No threat to the business
1 Insignificant threat to the business
2 Low threat to the business
3 Moderate threat to the business
4 Significant threat to the business
5 High threat to the business
Porter five forces analysis
Back to contents
Appendix: Oil Supply & Demand Factors
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
Proven Oil Reserves 2014 Proven Oil Reserves (m bbl) Total Cost of Oil Production (USD/bbl) Marginal Cost of Production
(USD/bbl)
North America 40 681 39 80
Latin America 342 235 25 20
Eastern Europe and Eurasia 119 863 22 45
Western Europe 11 577 52 105
Middle East 802 518 10 7
Africa 127 561 26 19
Asia and Pacific 48 445 29 N/A
Total 1 492 880 18 17
OPEC 1 206 004 14 11
OPEC % 81% 24% 34%
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
2014 2015 2016
Total Demand Total Supply
Supply & demand drivers
1. OPEC production + 5.7% over official quotas
2. Iran easement + 600 k bbl/day + 30 m bbl stored
in tankers
3. Historical highs of Iraq production
4. High utilization of US storage capacities
5. Oil demand slowdown driven by lower GDP
growth of China (6% 2016 vs. 6.8% 2015)
2 mln bbl 1 mln bbl
Avg. daily supply/demand (m bbl)
Back to contents
Appendix: Steam Cracker Accident
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
Steam cracker accident direct costs and insurance (mil. CZK)
Cost by type Total cost
Mngmt.
expected
recovery in %
Management
expected loss
Our expected
recovery
Our expected
loss
Cost of repair 4 100 100%
- 100%
-
Lost profit 3Q 2015 1 600 0% 1 600 0% 1 600
Lost profit 4Q 2015 480 0% 480 0% 480
Lost profit 4Q 2015 2 400 100%
- 50% 1 200
Lost profit 1Q 2016 2 189 100%
- 50% 1 094
Lost profit 2Q 2016 2 189 100%
- 50% 1 094
Lost profit 3Q 2016 766 100%
- 50% 383
Total cost 13 724 2 080 5 852
Back to contents
Appendix: Refining Utilization Ratio
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
77%
82% 82%
88%
72%
87% 87% 87% 86%
85%
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016E 2017E 2018E 2019E 2020E
Refining utilization ratio
Back to contents
Appendix: Refining and PE Capacity
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
140%
160%
180%
200%
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
refining
PE
Refining and PE capacity development
Back to contents
Appendix: Refining Shutdowns
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015E 2016E 2017E 2018E 2019E 2020E
2017 and 2019 planned periodical shutdowns (ths. kt)
Back to contents
Appendix: Number of Fuel Stations
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
339 316
215 190 173
68
Benzina MOL OMV EuroOil Shell
Number of filling stations in 2015
Selected Chains
Back to contents
Appendix: ROIC Decomposition
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
Year 2 011 2 012 2 013 2 014 LTM
Unipetrol 2.97 3.65 3.36 4.00 4.50
Peers med. 3.30 3.31 3.49 4.00 2.66
Invested capital turnover
Year 2 011 2 012 2 013 2 014 LTM
Unipetrol 29.28 23.63 19.06 12.21 18.94
Peers med. 15.80 19.03 16.89 11.44 19.98
ST part of Invested capital turnover
Year 2 011 2 012 2 013 2 014 LTM
Unipetrol 3.30 4.32 4.08 5.94 5.90
Peers med. 3.99 3.77 3.93 2.94 2.69
LT part of Invested capital turnover
Year 2 011 2 012 2 013 2 014 LTM
Unipetrol -1.2% -0.1% -0.7% 1.7% 6.8%
Peers med. 2.5% 1.8% 0.5% 0.3% 3.6%
PM (After tax)
Year 2 011 2 012 2 013 2 014 LTM
Unipetrol -3.6% -0.2% -2.3% 6.8% 30.4%
Peers med. 8.6% 6.7% 1.7% 1.5% 12.3%
ROIC
Year 2 011 2 012 2 013 2 014 LTM
Unipetrol 5.5% 5.5% 4.7% 6.6% 13.1%
Peers med. 8.7% 7.8% 6.4% 3.7% 8.2%
Gross margin
Year 2 011 2 012 2 013 2 014 LTM
Unipetrol 3.8% 3.0% 3.2% 2.7% 3.0%
Peers med. 3.9% 4.2% 3.8% 3.9% 5.1%
SG&A, distribution expenses and others/Sales
Year 2 011 2 012 2 013 2 014 LTM
Unipetrol 3.2% 2.6% 2.4% 1.8% 1.7%
Peers med. 1.9% 1.8% 1.9% 2.2% 2.5%
Depreciation/Sales
Back to contents
Appendix: Beta Calculation
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
Levered Beta Leverage
Unlevered
Beta
Beta
relevered
Beta with
shrinkage
Ticker FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 LTM FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 LTM
Averag
e LTM LTM LTM
PKN 0,90 0,87 0,96 0,62 0,49 93% 43% 43% 51% 38% 54% 0,34 0,63 0,75
NESTE 1,07 1,17 1,58 1,40 1,20 119% 93% 48% 36% 29% 65% 0,78 0,67 0,78
MOL 1,20 1,19 0,98 0,59 0,63 58% 51% 51% 64% 30% 51% 0,44 0,62 0,75
Saras 1,21 1,34 1,06 0,90 1,01 58% 49% 55% 74% 29% 53% 0,71 0,63 0,75
Hellenic Pet. 0,72 0,70 0,48 0,62 0,39 59% 18% 63% 160% 180% 96% 0,22 0,78 0,86
Lotos 1,13 1,09 0,93 0,64 0,43 251% 123% 135% 139% 127% 155% 0,19 0,99 1,00
Motor Oil Hellas Lvol. Lvol. Lvol. Lvol. Lvol. 199% 129% 115% 166% 122% 146% Lvol. 0,96 0,98
Slovnaft Lvol. Lvol. Lvol. Lvol. Lvol. 13% 38% 22% 35% 16% 25% Lvol. 0,53 0,69
NIS Lvol. Lvol. Lvol. Lvol. Lvol. 38% 31% 59% 79% 109% 63% Lvol. 0,67 0,78
Esso Francaise 1,11 1,13 1,07 1,01 0,92 15% 21% 63% 89% 0% 38% 0,70 0,58 0,72
Paz Oil 0,78 0,78 0,70 0,52 0,62 122% 108% 109% 80% 59% 95% 0,35 0,78 0,85
Oil Refineries NA 0,89 0,82 0,84 0,96 130% 139% 170% 189% 112% 148% 0,44 0,97 0,98
TUPRAS 1,16 1,25 1,02 1,16 1,09 14% 29% 52% 55% 57% 41% 0,82 0,59 0,72
Unipetrol Lvol. Lvol. Lvol. Lvol. Lvol. 8% 9% 9% 20% 0% 9% Lvol. 0,65 0,77
1st quartile 84% 85% 79% 61% 48% 15% 27% 46% 48% 25% 40% 0,31 0,31 0,31
Median 111% 111% 97% 74% 77% 58% 46% 57% 76% 47% 58% 0,44 0,66 0,77
3rd quartile 118% 121% 106% 105% 103% 124% 111% 110% 144% 115% 109% 0,72 0,83 0,86
Back to contents
DCF (CZK m) 4Q15E 2016E 2017E 2018E 2019E 2020E 2021E 2022E 2023E 2024E
EBIT 111 3,291 2,636 3,031 3,644 2,901 2,849 2,794 2,753 2,718
Tax rate 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19%
NOPAT 90 2,666 2,135 2,455 2,951 2,349 2,349 2,263 2,230 2,202
Depreciation 780 2,620 2,881 3,114 3,211 3,298 3,298 3,443 3,504 3,559
Capex/Divestitures -3,973 -5,000 -5,000 -4,000 -4,000 -4,000 -4,000 -4,000 -4,000 -4,000
Change in NWC 3,116 953 -16 -443 5 -455 -455 -163 -17 -17
Free Cash Flow 13 1,239 1 1,126 2,167 1,192 1,192 1,543 1,718 1,744
WACC 6.34% 6.34% 6.34% 6.34% 6.34% 6.34% 6.34% 6.34% 6.34% 6.34%
Discount factor 0.98 0.93 0.87 0.82 0.77 0.72 0.68 0.64 0.60 0.57
NPV of FCF 12 1,147 1 922 1,669 864 812 988 1,035 988
Sum of NPV of FCF 8,311 2016E 2017E 2018E 2019E 2020E
Terminal value growth 1% NOPAT 2,689 2,158 2,478 2,972 2,369
Term value at 1% growth 32,989
Terminal value PV 18,405
Enterprise Value 26,716 -3973
Net cash/(Net Debt) 6,800 705900000
0
Fair value 33,516 5500 5.5248618
8
Shares outstanding (m) 181
Present value 182.0
Upside 13%
Price Target 193.6
Upside 20%
Back to contents
Appendix: Comparables List
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
Ticker Company Refining&
Petchem
Retail/
Trading others Markets
PKN.WA PKN Orlen 74.48% 25.29% 0.23% Germany and Central Europe
NESTE.HE Neste Oil 63.23% 24.06% 12.71% Baltic sea region
MOLB.BU MOL Plc 70.17% 16.25% 13.59% Eastern Europe and UK
SRS.MI SARAS group 74.67% 21.05% 4.28% Italy, Spain
ELPE.AT Hellenic
Petroleum 73.79% 25.99% 0.22% South Eastern europe
LTSP.WA Grupa Lotos 96.79% 0.00% 3.19% Poland and surrounding
MOH.AT Motor Oil Hellas
Group 73.96% 26.04% 0.00% Greece and South eastern europe
SLV.BE SLOVNAFT 98.39% 10.56% -8.95% Central Europe, Germany and Austria
NIIS.BEL NIS ad Novi Sad 75.29% 0.00% 24.71% South east Europe
ESSF.PA Esso Francaise
SA NA NA NA France
PZOL.TA Paz Oil Company
Ltd 57.75% 42.25% 0.00% Israel
ORL.TA Oil Refineries Ltd 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% Israel
TUPRS.IS TUPRAS 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% Turkey
UNPE.PR Unipetrol 91.00% 9.00% 0.00% Czech Republic and central europe
Back to contents
Appendix: Comparable Companies
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
4
10 11
6
8 6 7 5
-1
9 4 2
14
2
0
3
3
7
0
1
19
5
1
Unipetrol
Esso Francaise
Paz Oil
Hellenic Pet.
TUPRAS
Lotos
Oil Refineries
ICTO
NIS Slovnaft
Saras
Motor Oil Hellas
PM
PKN
NESTE
MOL
Size: 5 000
Comparable companies PM, ICTO sized by sales (EUR m)
Back to contents
Appendix: Multiples Valuation
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
0,0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
0,8
0,9
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
TUPRAS
Oil Refineries
Paz Oil
Esso Francaise EV/EBITDA
NIS
Slovnaft Motor Oil Hellas
Unipetrol
EV/Sales
Lotos Hellenic Pet.
Saras
MOL
NESTE
PKN
Equity value
Multiple used LTM
EV/Sales 37 278
MV/BV 36 939
EV/EBITDA 65 363
Comparison of peers multiples in 2015
Back to contents
Appendix: EV/EBITDA
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
-
5
10
15
20
25
2 011 2 011 2 012 2 012 2 013 2 013 2 014 2 014 2 015 2 015
EV/EBITDA Unipetrol vs. peers median
EV/EBITDA Unipetrol EV/EBITDA peers
Back to contents
Appendix: Sensitivity Analysis
Company Overview Industry &
Competitors
Investment
Case
Financial
Analysis Valuation Conclusion Risks
WACC
term
inal
gro
wth
205.8 5.3% 5.6% 5.8% 6.1% 6.3% 6.6% 6.8% 7.1% 7.3%
-2% 194 191 189 187 185 183 182 180 178
-1% 201 198 195 193 190 188 186 184 182
0% 211 207 203 200 197 194 191 189 187
1% 225 219 214 210 206 202 199 196 193
2% 248 239 231 225 219 214 209 205 201
3% 290 274 261 250 240 232 225 219 214
4% 395 352 321 298 280 265 252 242 234
Price target sensitivity to terminal growth and WACC
Back to contents