Chord Energy Corporation

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Cord Energy First Quarter 2026 Earnings Call. At this time, all lines are in the small name mode. Following the presentation, we will conduct a question and answer session. If at any time during this call you require immediate assistance, please press star zero for the operator. This call is being recorded on Wednesday, May 6, 2026. I would now like to turn the conference over to Bob Bakanasakis, Vice President of Finance. Please go ahead.

Thanks, Natasha, and good morning, everyone. This is Bob Bakanasakis, and today we are reporting our first quarter of 2026 financial and operational results. We are delighted to have you on the call. I am joined today by Danny Brown, our CEO, Michael Liu, our Chief Strategy Officer and Chief Commercial Officer, Darren Hanke, our COO, Richard Roebuck, our CFO, as well as other members of the team. Please be advised that our remarks, including the answers to your questions, include statements that we believe to be forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. These forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to be materially different from those currently disclosed in our earnings releases and on conference calls. Those risks include, among others, matters that we have described in our earnings releases as well as in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including our annual report on Form 10-K and our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q. We disclaim any obligation to update these forward-looking statements. During this conference call, we will make reference to non-GAAP measures and reconciliations to the applicable GAAP measures can be found in our earnings releases and on our website. We may also reference our current investor presentation, which you can find on our website. And with that, I'll turn the call over to our CEO, Danny Brown.

Thanks, Bob. Good morning, everyone, and thanks for joining our call. Last night, we issued our first quarter results and our updated investor presentation. These materials outline key strategic, operational, and financial details, along with our updated 2026 outlook. I plan on highlighting a few key points, and then we'll open it up for Q&A. To start, looking at the first quarter briefly, CORE delivered another consecutive quarter of solid operating performance. The team did an excellent job executing through adverse weather conditions and some midstream constraints to deliver oil volumes above the high-end guidance. Additionally, we maintained solid cost control. Adjusted free cash flow for the first quarter was $324 million, substantially exceeding expectations, and we returned $145 million of this amount to shareholders through a combination of our base dividend and share repurchases. After accounting for lease acquisitions occurring in the quarter, we were also able to send $175 million to the balance sheet. Second, as we assess the macro environment, there is clearly an unprecedented amount of volatility and uncertainty in commodity markets. CORD has been running a Maintenance Plus program for more than five years with the goal of maximizing free cash generation for our stakeholders. One of the key factors influencing this strategy has been the high levels of excess low-cost oil capacity which has weighed on global oil markets and contributed to persistent backwardation. We will continue to monitor global supply-demand balances, and for now, given the uncertainty of how much and how quickly oil volumes will find their way into the market, we are comfortable staying the course with a flat to slight growth volume outlook. Given this, drilling and completions capital is expected to stay consistent with our February outlook. However, we are seeing improvements in cycle times, which accelerates some activity into the second quarter. Although 2026 capital spending expectations remain unchanged, we do have some flexibility within our program. Over the past two years, we have consistently outperformed initial expectations and have generally prioritized capital reduction over incremental volume growth. In the current environment, if efficiencies continue to improve and oil prices remain high, we are inclined to allow modest volume upside rather than focusing solely on reducing capital. For clarity, this does not bias our capex higher, but simply means we are not focused on reducing capex in this environment and will let incremental volumes roll through should we continue to outperform. Additionally, CORD is pursuing various initiatives to optimize our production base with efforts centered around maximizing very short cycle volumes through high-return projects across our roughly 5,000 operated wells. These activities include accelerating workovers, reducing cycle times for downed wells, various chemical jobs, debottle-necking surface constraints, optimizing artificial lip through the utilization of artificial intelligence, and a host of other projects. Accordingly, last night we updated our 2026 outlook to reflect a 2,000-barrel-per-day increase in oil volumes with a slight increase in LOE, and capital remaining unchanged. Assuming $80 oil, the net impact is over $40 million in incremental free cash flow versus our February expectations. From an activity standpoint, we are currently running five rigs, one full-time frat crew, and one spot crew, with the spot crew scheduled to drop around mid-year, which, because of faster cycle times, is a little earlier than our February expectations. We continue to expect approximately 80% of tills will be longer laterals, split fairly evenly between three and four milers. We've also updated our 2026 guidance to reflect improving oil realizations. Currently, CORD is realizing modest premiums to WTI, and we expect that to persist through most of 2026, given the structure of the futures curve and linkage to waterborne crudes. Assuming benchmark prices of $80 per barrel of oil and $3.25 per MMBTU of natural gas for the balance of 2026, we expect to generate approximately $1.4 billion of free cash flow this year. With high levels of free cash flow anticipated, we expect shareholder distributions to remain robust in 2026 with a continued focus on a healthy and sustainable base dividend supplemented by share repurchases. In the current environment, share repurchases continue to look attractive. However, in the interest of avoiding pro-cyclical buybacks, Cord may choose to taper repurchases if and when we see higher oil prices more fully reflected in our share price. In addition, we currently don't envision resuming variable dividends and plan to let excess free cash flow go to the balance sheet. This will reduce net debt and allow us to create per share value opportunistically in the future. Turning to our updated hedge position, you can see Cord added significant hedge volumes in 2026 and moderate amount and outer years as well. As a reminder, our hedge program is designed to systematically hedge more when prices are above historical levels, and conversely hedge less when the strip is below historical pricing. In any prompt quarter, we have the ability to lock in up to 55% of our volumes if pricing surpasses certain thresholds, and the program deliberately moves at a slower pace further out on the curve. Currently, we have approximately one-third of our 2026 oil volumes hedged and less than 15% of 2027. Turning to the long lateral front, I am happy to report CORD successfully executed and turned in line its first full four-mile BSU development, the Tuney Pad. The pad consisted of five wells, including one alternate shape, and CORD was able to clean out to total depth on all wells. Both execution and early performance are in line with expectations. Slide 11 in our investor presentation highlights the tuning success, as well as CORD's progress on four-mile laterals in development across the perimeter of the basin. A significant reduction in drilling and completion costs per foot underpins the strong economics of these wells. Slide 10 on the upper right illustrates a 37% reduction in CORD's DNC cost per foot over the past four years. These benefits can be seen in CORD's improving program-level capital efficiency year over year. If you look at volumes delivered relative to capital spent, essentially the inverse of an F&D calculation, you can see the 2026 program is more efficient than 2025. Additionally, CORD's future F&D costs on a company level have trended 22% lower over the past few years, clearly demonstrating sustained efficiency gains. Overall, we are very pleased with execution and early results from the four-mile program. As a reminder, Cord is scaling its four-mile program in 2026 with approximately 40% of tills and 60% of spuds expected to be four-mile laterals. So, in closing, Cord remains committed to delivering affordable and reliable energy in a sustainable and responsible manner. We continue to improve the business, growing production while simultaneously improving the depth and quality of our inventory, driving operational efficiencies, and enhancing free cash flow. With that, I'll hand the call over to Natasha for questions.

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, we will now begin the question and answer session. Should you have a question, please press the star followed by the one on your touchtone phone. You will hear a prompt that your hand has been raised. Should you wish to decline from the polling process, please press the star followed by the two. If you are using a speakerphone, please lift the handset before pressing any key. One moment, please, for your first question. Your first question comes from John Abbott with Wolf Research. Please go ahead.

Hey, thank you very much for taking our questions. Danny, I mean, I appreciate the opening comments on the macro front. There's a lot of uncertainty there. My two questions are really on growth and on inventory. My understanding from our previous virtual events is that you do have the ability to grow at some point when there's fundamental system works to support the long-term commodity pricing higher. How do you think about that appropriate long-term price? And then the other second part, the second question is really on inventory. If you do grow, the commodity price is higher, how does that change the depth of your inventory as commodity prices sort of go higher? So those are our two questions.

Thanks, John. So I think they're both great questions, and You know, from an oil price perspective, I think you're exactly right in our philosophy in that it's not necessarily a specific price, but also what is the durability in the macro setup that supports that price over a long term. And so that's really been fundamentally why we have been focused on, I call it more of a maintenance program as opposed to a growth program, because we have seen just significant behind choke volumes out in the global market that really could come to market at any time that could undermine our price expectations and we would invest a lot of capital and not get the returns off of that investment that we, you know, may have expected when we undertook the capital investment in the first place. And so we don't want to be exposed to that. And as I look at the amount of volume not flowing currently within the global market, I think it's analogous to that. We just don't know how much and how quickly this volume will return to the market, which means, so the durability of any price signal is just somewhat, we're somewhat circumspect on it. And so, but if we did see that more constructive macro setup from a supply-demand balance, where we thought the durability of sort of let's say above mid-cycle pricing would be durable for some period of time, I think we're we are in a great position in that we do have a deep bench of low-cost inventory that we could accelerate into, and we could deliver some, you know, modest growth into the system and think of it sort of mid, you know, probably mid-single digits as something that we would be comfortable with if the structural setup was conducive to that. From an inventory standpoint, you know, I think if we saw that setup and we're at, let's say, call it above mid-cycle pricing, and we thought that would stay for some period of time, clearly that's a tailwind for our inventory. Because we would look at new development opportunities, probably some incremental evaluation on our spacing would be appropriate at that point. We would certainly some areas on the periphery of the basin would come into the fold. And so I think it would be a tailwind to inventory. And so, you know, we've been able to maintain 10 years of inventory for the last five years. I would expect in a higher commodity price environment, if we did push some growth in the system, that would also mean our inventory was marching up as well.

Thank you, Danny.

Thanks, John.

Your next question comes from Oliver Huy with TTH. Please go ahead.

Good morning, Danny and team, and thanks for taking our questions. I wanted to start on the base production enhancement program. There were a number of call-outs in the release, AI-optimized, artificial work over tense programs, less downtime, among some other stuff. But just wanted to dive in a bit deeper. Are you all viewing this as something that's more structural, driving lower base declines for the portfolio across multiple years, or is this more of a one-time addition on the set of wealth the program is targeting? just trying to understand the sustainability of that uplift better and just what sort of upside running room there might be beyond what's baked into this year's guide?

I think it's a great question, Oliver, and I think maybe the answer is it's a bit of both. And the reality is we've had efforts underway as an organization to optimize the production from our base wells. We've seen some early success there, and in a pricing perspective, In a world where the market's been telling us it needs oil, very short cycle oil, we've had opportunities to do that, so we've leaned in. But I'm going to ask Aaron maybe to talk us through a little bit more some specifics going on there and some of the early results we're seeing.

Yeah, Oliver, we've seen a dramatic increase in our productivity on our older wells. We've lowered some pumps, some rock pumps lower into the wells. We've adjusted our artificial intelligence to focus on maximizing productivity out of our older rock pump wells. And really seeing, as you see on slide 12, on the lower right-hand side, you can really see a dramatic impact, positive impact to base production and really a resting decline on this group of wells. And we have the teams consistently generating new ideas. And as Danny said, it's going to take time to figure out how sustainable – these changes are to the wells that are already improved on production. And we'll see how it goes over time. But the team's doing a great job there. And we picked up a couple additional work over rigs. We're focusing on some longer-term shut-in wells that have some challenging down-hole problems. And we're finding that we're able to get those wells back online and get those producing as well. And there's a number of wells in that category that we're working on. So while we see these higher prices, we're definitely trying to take advantage of maximizing our base production.

Awesome. Thanks for that color. And maybe just for my second question, just on the four-mile laterals, you all have talked about verifying the tow contribution with tracers on these four-mile laterals. But just as you all get more data – and a greater sample set, is there a point in time or some sort of quantitative benchmark that we should be aware of where you all would kind of revisit and start to assume maybe a greater than the 80% contribution on the last mile of the wealth lateral if the data were to be supportive of it?

I think the answer to that, Oliver, is yes. Just like with the three-mile laterals, you know, after we got enough production history, we came out and said we were no longer underwriting that last mile at 80. We were moving that up to 100% because we were seeing that through the production data. I think it would be sort of a similar case from a four-mile lateral standpoint. So, a little too early for us to say that right now, but we're continuing to monitor our production and given, you know, if we're If we continue to see things look positively, hopefully we'll come out with an update at some point in the future indicating that we're getting more from that last mile than we're currently underwriting.

Makes sense. Thanks for the time.

Thanks, Oliver. The next question comes from Philip Junkberg with BMO Capital Markets. Please go ahead.

Hi, this is Jack Kinnergan on for Phil. Just hoping you could touch on crude differentials a little bit. I think I have a decent understanding of the near-term premium to WTI, but can you help us understand what the second half might look like and why you could still price barrels above WTI at that point?

Okay, Jack, good question. Obviously, over the end of the first quarter and into the second quarter, you're seeing stronger differentials in the basin. Some of that is, as you think about Brent TI, differentials Dave widened. A lot of our barrels get to the coastal markets, and so you're seeing very strong differentials in basin. A lot of that's going to depend on kind of how the broader global markets act, but we think that it certainly will last through the second quarter and maybe beyond into the second half of it.

Understood. Thank you. And you touched on your capital plans for the balance of the year a little bit, but just seeing the oil uplift in 1Q and the better 2Q and 3Q guide is trying to get into the sense of the 4Q dip and just understanding if there's a case for running higher activity there, filling in completion white space just to maintain operational momentum, even if it leads to some capex creep.

Yeah, Phillip, I think at this point we're pretty happy with our activity levels. You know, we've got the spot crew we'll release later this year. And so, you know, we run that crew continuously until we drop it. So it's not really like we need to manage white space on a sort of in-between an existing program. It's just we'll drop that. And so I don't think there's a lot of efficiency improvement we'd pick up by pushing incremental activity through the system. So we're I think we're happy with our activity levels where they are right now. We'll continue to monitor, you know, the macro situation. But too early for us to pivot off that. We're very comfortable with where we're at now.

Great. Thank you for your time.

Your next question comes from Scott Hanos with RBC Capital Markets. Please go ahead.

Yeah, thanks. I was wondering if we could pivot to shareholder returns. You all have had a pretty good appetite to be pretty aggressive with buybacks, getting close to 100% in past quarters. It sounds like you want to be a little bit reserved, just not to be pro-cyclical, but when you look at your stock price today, with oil still near $100 a barrel, is this an opportunity for you to continue to be pretty assertive with buybacks and push it a little bit harder, or would you rather just wait for a much more counter-cyclical time to get that robust with the buybacks?

Scott, I'd kind of frame it this way. Clearly, if you look at the headline oil price, our stock is not underwriting anywhere near that level. in our opinions. And so we really like where our stock's at right now, and I think buybacks will command a, you know, are very attractive at the current levels. At some point, it may be that, you know, we see our stock price underwriting a significantly higher wealth price. We're not seeing that today, but we may see that at some point. At that point, we would consider tapering back on those buybacks to avoid being pro-cyclical. But I like where our shares are right now.

Okay, understood. And You know, I guess looking at the tuning pad, can you just talk about like the learnings from, you know, that, you know, have you seen, you know, cost reductions, you know, with that pad consistent or better than what you expected? And what does that mean for like four-mile pad development moving forward?

I'll let Darren address this. I'd say, generally speaking, Scott, we're really happy with what we saw at the tuning, and any time you get the pad level development, you're just going to pick up efficiencies as opposed to doing one-offs. And so, you know, getting the pads is a pretty big cost improvement for us organizationally, but I'll let Darren expand.

Yeah, so we have 12 four-mile laterals now producing, and so five of them were on the tuning pad, and We have drilled 33 4-mile laterals. And so there's tons of learnings, not only on the tuning pad, but where we've drilled other wells on other pads, 4-mile wells, and we're consistently getting those wells drilled with one BHA. We recently just drilled our first hairpin with one BHA. So pretty neat accomplishment there. So the tuning was just able to put it all together on one pad and – Definitely saw efficiencies across the entire PAB that we'll take into the future for future PABs. Learning has come in all those wells that we've done. As far as you asked about the costs and performance, the costs were in line with what we thought we would do on that PAB. The well productivity is in line with what we thought. We're very pleased with what we're seeing with our four-mile program at this time.

Appreciate that. Thank you.

We now have a question from Neil Dingman with William Blair. Please go ahead.

Morning, guys. My first question, you know, and a little bit maybe more on capital allocation. than, you know, what you mentioned, the prepared remarks. Specifically, you know, I know you've had – I've seen a couple of guys now talk about dialing down buyback, perhaps, in the current up cycle. I'm just wondering what's your thoughts on incremental buybacks versus debt repayment for remainder of this year of prices failure?

Yeah, I think, Neal, in the current environment, we think, you know, our return of capital framework provides a great framework for us to think about capital allocation. We You know, we have, based on, we listen to investors and based on a lot of investor feedback, we're not really focused on variable dividends at this point, so I think our return on capital program is really going to be made up of what we think is a pretty strong base dividend plus share repurchases. We really like the shares with where we're at right now. We do recognize that, you know, if we see elevated oil prices, some of that elevated oil price may be may cause us to think a little bit about is it the right time for us to be buying back aggressively shares. We've said for a long time we're not fans of pro-cyclical buybacks. That's not something we've been focused on historically. But I don't think with where we're at currently, that's what we're doing. We think the shares are very attractive and they're currently commanding a significant focus from a capital allocation perspective.

Makes sense. Thank you. And then second question, maybe around slide 15, a little bit more than what you said on inventory. Specifically, you all suggest, you know, and I agree, 10-plus years of low break-even inventory. Can you speak to, you know, maybe have the assumptions changed at all when you include maybe what level of, you know, kind of your price that you're assuming here, you know, maybe cost around that and, you know, maybe other things that dictate how you view the break-evens in the corresponding inventory?

Yeah, so the inventory that we put out there is really sub-60 WTI inventory. And so that's really what's determining that count. And so if our pricing assumptions from a commodity perspective were higher than that, you'd see more inventory from a count perspective. So that's what we're assuming on that, Neil. I think if structurally, again, we get to a situation where structurally we see a longer-term, higher oil price, then perhaps we would think a little differently about what our inventory position is, and you'd see more inventory flow in. But we're looking at it from a sub-60 standpoint.

Great. Thank you, Dan.

Thanks, Neil. Your next question comes from Michael Thurow with Pickering Energy Partners. Please go ahead.

Good morning. Thanks for taking our questions. Do you want to follow up on that last statement? You mentioned how higher oil prices would unlock some inventory that might not have been economical a few months prior. So, would that change your capital allocation priorities or would you still plan on targeting your highest return wells first?

I think we would continue to focus on our highest return wells.

Got it. That makes sense. Okay. As a follow-up, you know, clearly some volatility this morning. It sounds like the message is clear that activity levels are unlikely to change given the current market dynamics. But what other levers can the company pull to capitalize on higher prices?

Yeah, I think, you know, we say activity – our drilling and completion activity, we don't anticipate changing. But we have flexed up on some of the very, very nil-term, more OpEx-related opportunities. So the workovers and some of the chemical jobs and these things that really are – opportunities across our 5,000 existing wells, we are looking at that because that can deliver very, very short cycle volumes at incredibly high IRRs and profitability. And so we're looking at those types of opportunities. And you've seen us deliver some incremental volumes in the first quarter as a result of that. So we're looking at that. And then the other thing I'd say, Michael, is we continue to focus on improvement across all aspects of our business. And so that is a, you know, that's a lever that we continue to pull and have the entire organization focused on is how do we do better tomorrow? And we've got, you know, around 800 people who wake up every morning and come into the office trying to make tomorrow better than today from our cost structure perspective, from our productivity perspective. And so that focus, we've focused on that for a long time, and that, you know, that focus continues because we can't control what oil price is. but we can control what our cost structure looks like. We can control how we develop the field, and so we're focused on that quite intensely. So we'll flex into those opportunities that deliver very robust and attractive, you know, short cycle, and by that I mean sort of more OPEX, things that can deliver some oil next week or next month. You've seen us do that, and then we'll focus on just improving the business across the board.

That's great, Keller. Thanks for your time. Thank you.

You have a question from John Anis with Texas Capital. Please go ahead.

Hey, good morning, all, and thanks for taking my questions. For my first one, in building off of what you just mentioned, I wanted to ask if you could provide some color on the organizational changes you've made, whether it be standing up new teams or shifting elevation of resources that have been driving the improvement in base production optimization initiatives.

It's a great question, John. I think maybe one of the most significant organizational changes we've made recently is in our production engineering team, we've actually sort of bifurcated that team into those that are looking at our wells that are on ESPs, and I call it our high-rate wells, and having a separate team looking at the balance of our wells, which is measured in the thousands, that aren't on ESPs and delivering high rate. As would be natural, you can imagine a team that's responsible for looking after all of that, the natural focus and the appropriate focus is going to be to focus on those high rate wells, those ESP wells, because they have the biggest impact on your organization. And unfortunately, the reality is that sometimes you don't focus as much on the other wells, which still could provide meaningful value, but on a relative basis, they just don't command as much as your attention. And so we sort of recognize that dynamic going on in the organization, and we've now bifurcated that team. And so we have a group that's dedicated just to looking at these lower-producing wells, but there's a lot of them, and in aggregate, they can have a big impact into what we deliver and what our overall cost structure looks like. So we've seen success with that, and I'm really pleased with the results and the focus of that team, of both of those teams, because they're delivering great performance.

Terrific. For my follow-up, you're guiding around 40% of 2026 tills and 60% of spuds being four-mile laterals. Could you provide some color on how the four-mile spud tilt this year potentially impacts the 2027 production profile? And then is there a ceiling on the four-mile development mix given 50% of your inventory are four-mile locations and DSU geometry constraints?

Yeah, well, to your point, we think about 50% of our inventory is four miles. And so I think any year you'll see us sort of, I'll call it an error bar around that 50%. Maybe some years we'll be slightly ahead and some years we'll be slightly underneath. But generally speaking, I think our development programs will probably largely mirror our inventory makeup. And so that's kind of how I would characterize it. Now, because we're We're sputting, you know, 60% four miles this year. Obviously, that's going to roll into 27 from a production perspective. You know, so we've started that ramp this year, and we'll just sort of continue that into 2027.

Thanks. I'll turn it back.

Your next question comes from Phillips Johnston with Capital One. Please go ahead.

Hey, thanks for the time. I wanted to ask you about the XTO assets. I recall you guys are in the process of re-permitting, I think, most of those wells for longer laterals. I just wanted to see where we are in that process and when we might see some of those wells coming to the fray.

Yeah, I think, you know, as we've worked through, clearly as we've moved into four monolaterals and looking at our process, spacing opportunities in the lateral links. We wanted to make sure we maximized the contribution from that asset. And so we've taken our time in doing that. And so as we look toward developing in that area, you know, I think that's probably more of a late 27 type phenomenon. And so, you know, we might get some contribution from it in 27, but more likely going into 2028.

Okay, sounds good. And then I'm sure you can't comment too much on this one, but what's the latest messaging regarding long-term plans for the Marcellus acreage?

So I think the messaging around Marcellus really kind of remains consistent. We continue to see that as a non-core asset and have been very, you know, prompt and consistent in saying that we're looking to maximize value for our shareholders. And that would include divesting that asset. But I'd say we're not in a rush, but certainly it's non-core, and we just want to maximize value from it. In the meantime, I'd say it's got very low friction cost to us holding, and you can see from our first quarter results the significant value that asset contributed. So non-core, we want to maximize value from it. We are absolutely open to divesting it, but we want to make sure we do that in a fashion that maximizes value for shareholders.

Sounds good. Thank you, Danny.

Thanks, Phyllis.

As a reminder, if you wish to ask a question, please press star 1. Your next question comes from John Edelman with Jefferies. Please go ahead.

Hey, Danny and team. Appreciate you getting me on. Just a quick one for me. I heard from Nod earlier this week, or last week, I guess, about a large Bakken package that was coming for sale. Just wanted to get your thoughts on M&A and the current elevated price environment and sort of what type of leverage are you guys kind of on an upside scenario able to kind of stretch to for the right type of inventory mix?

Thanks. So I'll make some opening comments, then I'll pass it over to Michael. You know, I think from a positioning perspective, we clearly, you know, our – Our footprint in the Bakken really stretching across the entirety of the basin means that any package that comes to market there, we think we could be, you know, quite competitive on. We can bring synergies to bear, I think, really like no one else can. We've got great supply chains in place. We know the subsurface quite well. And so from, you know, we're believers in consolidation, and so I think we can compete well in any process. But we will also be very disciplined. and what we do, and you'll see us, you know, you haven't seen us win every deal in the Bakken, and oftentimes that's been because, you know, the market clearing price wasn't something that we think made us a better company at the end of the day. So with those as maybe opening comments, I'll ask Michael to fill in some more color.

Yeah, John, I would say that usually when prices are moving very rapidly, there's a bit of a lull in terms of, M&A opportunities that are out there. As you've seen elevated pricing for two months now, I think that because of that, you're going to see some assets come to market. The big question is whether or not you're going to be able to close the gap between buyers and sellers in terms of valuations and see how that goes. As Danny mentioned, We think we're in great shape to be consolidated in Bakken, but we're going to be disappointed in the way we look at that marketplace.

This looks like all the questions for now, so I will turn the call over to Danny Brown, DEO, for closing remarks. Please continue. Thank you.

Okay, thanks, Natasha. Well, to close out, I just want to extend my sincere thank you to all of our employees who, through their hard work, have positioned us for continued success. Cord has consistently delivered results that have exceeded expectations while improving the quality and depth of our inventory and enhancing profit margins. Cord has created what we believe is a valuable and increasingly rare asset. Cord has a substantial, low-decline, high-oil-cut production base paired with a deep inventory of highly economic, conservatively spaced, oil-weighted locations. We feel great about our competitive position and have a lot of confidence in our ability to deliver going forward. And with that, I appreciate everyone's interest and thank you for joining our call.

Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today's conference call. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect.