Switch to:
Also traded in: Brazil, Germany, Mexico

GuruFocus Financial Strength Rank measures how strong a company’s financial situation is. It is based on these factors

1. The debt burden that the company has as measured by its Interest coverage (current year).
2. Debt to revenue ratio. The lower, the better
3. Altman Z-score.

A company ranks high with financial strength is likely to withstand any business slowdowns and recessions.

Financial Strength : 3/10

vs
industry
vs
history
Equity-to-Asset -0.02
CHK's Equity-to-Asset is ranked lower than
90% of the 423 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 0.54 vs. CHK: -0.02 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Equity-to-Asset only.
CHK' s Equity-to-Asset Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -0.33  Med: 0.34 Max: 0.56
Current: -0.02
-0.33
0.56
Debt-to-Equity -42.62
CHK's Debt-to-Equity is ranked lower than
99.99% of the 301 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 0.46 vs. CHK: -42.62 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Debt-to-Equity only.
CHK' s Debt-to-Equity Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -301.53  Med: 0.96 Max: 15.09
Current: -42.62
-301.53
15.09
Debt-to-EBITDA 3.57
CHK's Debt-to-EBITDA is ranked lower than
69% of the 255 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 2.98 vs. CHK: 3.57 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Debt-to-EBITDA only.
CHK' s Debt-to-EBITDA Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -3.27  Med: 2.61 Max: 4.2
Current: 3.57
-3.27
4.2
Interest Coverage 2.75
CHK's Interest Coverage is ranked lower than
73% of the 295 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 10.62 vs. CHK: 2.75 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Interest Coverage only.
CHK' s Interest Coverage Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 3.66  Med: 19.74 Max: 141.53
Current: 2.75
3.66
141.53
Piotroski F-Score: 7
Altman Z-Score: -0.61
Beneish M-Score: -2.78
WACC vs ROIC
7.78%
13.76%
WACC
ROIC
GuruFocus Profitability Rank ranks how profitable a company is and how likely the company’s business will stay that way. It is based on these factors:

1. Operating Margin
2. Trend of the Operating Margin (5-year average). The company with an uptrend profit margin has a higher rank.
••3. Consistency of the profitability
4. Piotroski F-Score
5. Predictability Rank•

The maximum rank is 10. A rank of 7 or higher means a higher profitability and may stay that way. A rank of 3 or lower indicates that the company has had trouble to make a profit.

Profitability Rank is not directly related to the Financial Strength Rank. But if a company is consistently profitable, its financial strength will be stronger.

Profitability & Growth : 5/10

vs
industry
vs
history
Operating Margin % 13.53
CHK's Operating Margin % is ranked higher than
65% of the 429 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: -2.34 vs. CHK: 13.53 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Operating Margin % only.
CHK' s Operating Margin % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -12.89  Med: 15.5 Max: 36.86
Current: 13.53
-12.89
36.86
Net Margin % 11.94
CHK's Net Margin % is ranked higher than
64% of the 429 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: -4.39 vs. CHK: 11.94 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Net Margin % only.
CHK' s Net Margin % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -114.13  Med: 4.49 Max: 18.94
Current: 11.94
-114.13
18.94
ROA % 9.17
CHK's ROA % is ranked higher than
85% of the 497 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: -3.08 vs. CHK: 9.17 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful ROA % only.
CHK' s ROA % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -50.17  Med: 1.74 Max: 7.46
Current: 9.17
-50.17
7.46
ROC (Joel Greenblatt) % 14.91
CHK's ROC (Joel Greenblatt) % is ranked higher than
82% of the 466 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: -2.70 vs. CHK: 14.91 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful ROC (Joel Greenblatt) % only.
CHK' s ROC (Joel Greenblatt) % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -80.19  Med: 4.47 Max: 12.96
Current: 14.91
-80.19
12.96
3-Year Revenue Growth Rate -29.50
CHK's 3-Year Revenue Growth Rate is ranked lower than
66% of the 373 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: -19.90 vs. CHK: -29.50 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 3-Year Revenue Growth Rate only.
CHK' s 3-Year Revenue Growth Rate Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -29.5  Med: 16.85 Max: 117.5
Current: -29.5
-29.5
117.5
3-Year EBITDA Growth Rate -31.50
CHK's 3-Year EBITDA Growth Rate is ranked lower than
77% of the 340 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: -8.70 vs. CHK: -31.50 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 3-Year EBITDA Growth Rate only.
CHK' s 3-Year EBITDA Growth Rate Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0  Med: 3.2 Max: 101.8
Current: -31.5
0
101.8
3-Year EPS without NRI Growth Rate -21.60
CHK's 3-Year EPS without NRI Growth Rate is ranked lower than
68% of the 300 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: -2.90 vs. CHK: -21.60 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 3-Year EPS without NRI Growth Rate only.
CHK' s 3-Year EPS without NRI Growth Rate Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0  Med: -18.45 Max: 145.3
Current: -21.6
0
145.3
GuruFocus has detected 6 Warning Signs with Chesapeake Energy Corp CHK.
More than 500,000 people have already joined GuruFocus to track the stocks they follow and exchange investment ideas.
» CHK's 30-Y Financials

Financials (Next Earnings Date: 2018-08-03)


Revenue & Net Income
Cash & Debt
Operating Cash Flow & Free Cash Flow
Operating Cash Flow & Net Income

» Details

Guru Trades

Q2 2017

CHK Guru Trades in Q2 2017

Ray Dalio 5,253,784 sh (New)
David Tepper 3,566,000 sh (New)
Joel Greenblatt 25,264 sh (New)
Bill Nygren 30,000,000 sh (+50.00%)
Jeremy Grantham 410,402 sh (+44.59%)
Charles Brandes 4,394,087 sh (+23.81%)
Barrow, Hanley, Mewhinney & Strauss 16,574,800 sh (+22.27%)
John Hussman 13,000 sh (unchged)
Richard Snow Sold Out
Andreas Halvorsen Sold Out
Paul Tudor Jones Sold Out
George Soros Sold Out
Steven Cohen Sold Out
Arnold Schneider 6,876,855 sh (-8.73%)
Mason Hawkins 43,543,954 sh (-12.13%)
» More
Q3 2017

CHK Guru Trades in Q3 2017

Joel Greenblatt 119,983 sh (+374.92%)
Charles Brandes 5,065,181 sh (+15.27%)
John Hussman Sold Out
Ray Dalio Sold Out
Mason Hawkins 42,912,004 sh (-1.45%)
Arnold Schneider 5,658,855 sh (-17.71%)
Bill Nygren 20,000,000 sh (-33.33%)
Barrow, Hanley, Mewhinney & Strauss 11,043,700 sh (-33.37%)
Jeremy Grantham 195,402 sh (-52.39%)
David Tepper 766,000 sh (-78.52%)
» More
Q4 2017

CHK Guru Trades in Q4 2017

David Dreman 752 sh (New)
Pioneer Investments 19,735 sh (New)
Steven Cohen 505,800 sh (New)
Arnold Schneider 10,231,525 sh (+80.81%)
Caxton Associates 400,000 sh (unchged)
Bill Nygren 20,000,000 sh (unchged)
David Tepper Sold Out
Joel Greenblatt Sold Out
Barrow, Hanley, Mewhinney & Strauss 10,735,800 sh (-2.79%)
Jeremy Grantham 187,602 sh (-3.99%)
Mason Hawkins 33,090,194 sh (-22.89%)
Charles Brandes 2,946,332 sh (-41.83%)
» More
Q1 2018

CHK Guru Trades in Q1 2018

Joel Greenblatt 22,563 sh (New)
Jeremy Grantham 220,502 sh (+17.54%)
Arnold Schneider 10,731,525 sh (+4.89%)
Barrow, Hanley, Mewhinney & Strauss 10,795,200 sh (+0.55%)
David Dreman 752 sh (unchged)
Mason Hawkins Sold Out
Steven Cohen Sold Out
Pioneer Investments Sold Out
Charles Brandes 2,777,245 sh (-5.74%)
» More
» Details

Insider Trades

Latest Guru Trades with CHK

(List those with share number changes of more than 20%, or impact to portfolio more than 0.1%)

GuruDate Trades Impact to Portfolio Price Range * (?) Current Price Change from Average Current Shares
Barrow, Hanley, Mewhinney & Strauss 2018-03-31 Add 0.55%$2.63 - $4.28 $ 4.3028%10,795,200
Arnold Schneider 2018-03-31 Add 4.89%0.35%$2.63 - $4.28 $ 4.3028%10,731,525
Charles Brandes 2018-03-31 Reduce -5.74%0.01%$2.63 - $4.28 $ 4.3028%2,777,245
Joel Greenblatt 2018-03-31 New Buy$2.63 - $4.28 $ 4.3028%22,563
Mason Hawkins 2018-03-31 Sold Out 1.62%$2.63 - $4.28 $ 4.3028%0
Mason Hawkins 2017-12-31 Reduce -22.89%0.51%$3.51 - $4.35 $ 4.3011%33,090,194
Barrow, Hanley, Mewhinney & Strauss 2017-12-31 Reduce -2.79%$3.51 - $4.35 $ 4.3011%10,735,800
Arnold Schneider 2017-12-31 Add 80.81%3.97%$3.51 - $4.35 $ 4.3011%10,231,525
Charles Brandes 2017-12-31 Reduce -41.83%0.18%$3.51 - $4.35 $ 4.3011%2,946,332
David Dreman 2017-12-31 New Buy$3.51 - $4.35 $ 4.3011%752
Joel Greenblatt 2017-12-31 Sold Out 0.01%$3.51 - $4.35 $ 4.3011%0
David Tepper 2017-12-31 Sold Out 0.05%$3.51 - $4.35 $ 4.3011%0
Mason Hawkins 2017-09-30 Reduce -1.45%0.03%$3.61 - $5.12 $ 4.300%42,912,004
Bill Nygren 2017-09-30 Reduce -33.33%0.29%$3.61 - $5.12 $ 4.300%20,000,000
Barrow, Hanley, Mewhinney & Strauss 2017-09-30 Reduce -33.37%0.04%$3.61 - $5.12 $ 4.300%11,043,700
Arnold Schneider 2017-09-30 Reduce -17.71%1.15%$3.61 - $5.12 $ 4.300%5,658,855
Charles Brandes 2017-09-30 Add 15.27%0.06%$3.61 - $5.12 $ 4.300%5,065,181
David Tepper 2017-09-30 Reduce -78.52%0.2%$3.61 - $5.12 $ 4.300%766,000
Joel Greenblatt 2017-09-30 Add 374.92%0.01%$3.61 - $5.12 $ 4.300%119,983
Mason Hawkins 2017-06-30 Reduce -12.13%0.36%$4.5 - $6.32 $ 4.30-20%43,543,954
Bill Nygren 2017-06-30 Add 50.00%0.29%$4.5 - $6.32 $ 4.30-20%30,000,000
Barrow, Hanley, Mewhinney & Strauss 2017-06-30 Add 22.27%0.02%$4.5 - $6.32 $ 4.30-20%16,574,800
Arnold Schneider 2017-06-30 Reduce -8.73%0.65%$4.5 - $6.32 $ 4.30-20%6,876,855
Charles Brandes 2017-06-30 Add 23.81%0.07%$4.5 - $6.32 $ 4.30-20%4,394,087
David Tepper 2017-06-30 New Buy0.26%$4.5 - $6.32 $ 4.30-20%3,566,000
Joel Greenblatt 2017-06-30 New Buy$4.5 - $6.32 $ 4.30-20%25,264
George Soros 2017-06-30 Sold Out 0.01%$4.5 - $6.32 $ 4.30-20%0
Mason Hawkins 2017-05-31 Reduce -10.22%0.26%Premium Member Access $5.06 $ 4.30-15%44,488,930
Premium More recent guru trades are included for Premium Members only!!
Premium More recent guru trades are included for USA Subscribe Members only!!
» Interactive Charts

Peter Lynch Chart ( What is Peter Lynch Charts )

Preferred stocks of Chesapeake Energy Corp

SymbolPriceYieldDescription
CHKDG.PFD58.308.58Conv Pfd Shs
CHKVZ.PFD448.750.005 3/4 % Cum Conv Pfd Shs Series -A- Reg-S
CHKDH.PFD80.500.005 % Conv Pfd Shs -144A-
CHKpD.PFD54.636.184.50% Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock
CHKDP.PFD610.009.435 3/4 % Pfd Shs
CHKDJ.PFD295.000.005 3/4 % Cum Non-Voting Conv Pfd Shs Reg-S
4GGB.PFD.Singapore0.000.005 3/4 % Conv Pfd Shs Series -A- -144A-
4GJB.PFD.Singapore0.000.005 3/4 % Cum Non-Voting Conv Pfd Shs Reg-S
CHKVP.PFD610.009.435 3/4 % Cum Conv Pfd Shs Series -A-
CKRGZ.PFD0.000.005 3/4 % Pfd Shs -144A
CHKWZ.PFD0.000.005 3/4 % Conv Pfd Shs Series -A- -144A-

Business Description

Industry: Oil & Gas - E&P » Oil & Gas E&P    NAICS: 211120    SIC: 1311
Compare:TSX:PXT, ASX:BPT, NYSE:KOS, NYSE:SM, SZSE:002221, NYSE:CPE, NYSE:WRD, NYSE:LPI, TSX:ERF, NAS:XOG, NYSE:SWN, MIC:RNFT, NYSE:JAG, OTCPK:LNGG, TSX:WCP, NAS:TELL, HKSE:00467, NAS:VNOM, NYSE:CNX, OSL:DNO » details
Traded in other countries:CHKE34.Brazil, CS1.Germany, CHK.Mexico,
Headquarter Location:USA
Chesapeake Energy Corp is a natural gas and oil exploration, development, acquisition and production company. It also owns an oil and natural gas marketing business. Its portfolio includes unconventional oil and natural gas assets in U.S. onshore plays.

Chesapeake Energy, based in Oklahoma City, explores for, produces, and markets natural gas, oil, and natural gas liquids in the U.S. It focuses on unconventional plays, with large positions in the Barnett, Eagle Ford, Haynesville, Utica, and Marcellus shales, as well as leasehold in a number of liquids-rich basins. Chesapeake controls close to 8 million net acres across its properties. At year-end 2015, the firm's proven reserves totaled 9 trillion cubic feet equivalent, with daily production of 4.1 Bcfe. Natural gas made up 72% of production.

Guru Investment Theses on Chesapeake Energy Corp

Longleaf Partners Comments on Chesapeake Energy - Jan 22, 2018

Chesapeake Energy (NYSE:CHK) (-44%,-2.07%,-8%,-0.17%), one of the largest U.S. producers of natural gas and oil, was one of the Fund’s few detractors in 2017 during a tough market for closing energy asset sales. Overshadowing strong operational performance by CEO Doug Lawler and his management team, domestic gas oversupply weighed down strip prices. Chesapeake made progress delineating some of its newer plays, but the market continued to underestimate the company’s ability to sell meaningful assets, as it has done multiple times in the past.



From Longleaf Partners' 2017 shareholder letter.



Check out Mason Hawkins latest stock trades

Longleaf Partners Comments on Chesapeake Energy - Jul 18, 2017

Chesapeake Energy (NYSE:CHK) (-16%, -0.63%), one of the largest U.S. producers of natural gas, oil, and natural gas liquids, was a detractor. Weak commodity prices impacted the oil and gas group overall, but what was most striking about Chesapeake was the stock price’s extremely high correlation to oil prices instead of natural gas prices this quarter. Although Chesapeake’s production is primarily weighted to gas, a meaningful percentage of the company’s current earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) comes from oil. Additionally, oil’s importance to Chesapeake going forward has increased with much of current drilling focused on oil, especially in the Powder River Basin and Eagle Ford Shale. CEO Doug Lawler and his team will make prudent asset sales when the price and time are right, as they have done in the past, but the lack of such reported sales this quarter also weighed on the stock price.



From Longleaf Partners Fund second quarter 2017 shareholder letter.



Check out Mason Hawkins latest stock trades

Longleaf Partners Comments on Chesapeake Energy - Apr 14, 2017

Chesapeake Energy (NYSE:CHK) (-15%; -0.70%), one of the largest U.S. producers of natural gas, oil, and natural gas liquids, was the largest detractor in the quarter. At the macro level, declines in oil and gas prices pressured the stock. We use the futures strip for both commodities in our appraisal of Chesapeake, even though they are currently trading below the global energy industry’s long run marginal costs. CEO Doug Lawler further improved the company’s financial strength and flexibility, closing two Haynesville deals and reporting another solid operational quarter. We believe he and his team will continue to execute additional asset sales and maintain both operating and capital expense discipline.



From Longleaf Partners Fund first quarter 2017 commentary.



Check out Mason Hawkins latest stock trades

Bruce Berkowitz Comments on Chesapeake Energy - Jan 31, 2017

In early 2016, news on all things related to oil and natural gas devoted little coverage to how declining commodity prices were forcing energy companies to reduce supply, lower debt, and cut operating costs. Time and again, history shows that a commodity price forges its own anchor. Our credit investments in Chesapeake Energy (NYSE:CHK) performed exceptionally well in 2016 due to the combination of operational efficiencies driving down unit costs, higher natural gas prices, and success with debt buybacks and asset sales.



From Bruce Berkowitz (Trades, Portfolio)'s Fairholme Fund (Trades, Portfolio) annual shareholder letter 2016.

Check out Bruce Berkowitz latest stock trades

Longleaf Partners Comments on Chesapeake Energy - Jan 24, 2017

Chesapeake Energy (NYSE:CHK) (+377%; +8.46%), one of the largest U.S. producers of natural gas, oil, and natural gas liquids, was the Fund’s top contributor to performance in 2016 and gained an additional 12% in the fourth quarter. Earlier in the year, we transitioned our equity position into heavily discounted bonds and convertible preferred stock, which offered equity-like returns higher in the capital structure and a potentially faster payback. As the bonds rose close to par, we exited them. At the end of the third quarter, we converted all of our appreciated preferred securities into common stock for an attractive premium. Over the course of the year, management executed beyond expectations, selling various assets, improving the balance sheet through discounted debt repurchases, reducing operating and capital expenditures, and renegotiating midstream contracts. The most recent asset sales in the fourth quarter included a portion of the company’s properties in the Haynesville Shale in northern Louisiana for proceeds of approximately $915 million. Signed or closed asset sales reached $2.5 billion in 2016, exceeding management’s original target of $1 billion. To further strengthen its balance sheet, the company secured a term loan and convertible debt offering, which raised more capital at better terms than expected. Since the beginning of 2012, Chesapeake has reduced debt by 50%, and its remaining fixed liabilities should be well covered in the coming years. The company has targeted a two times net debt over earnings before interests, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) with cash flow neutrality by 2018 and 5 to 15% of annual production growth by 2020. We salute CEO Doug Lawler and Chesapeake’s board, with Brad Martin as Chairman, for their successful pursuit of shareholder value in the face of massive headwinds.





From Longleaf Partners' fourth quarter 2016 commentary.



Check out Mason Hawkins latest stock trades

Southeastern Asset Management Comments on Chesapeake - Oct 14, 2016

Chesapeake (NYSE:CHK) (+112%; +4.0%), one of the largest U.S. producers of natural gas, oil, and natural gas liquids, was the top contributor to performance during the quarter. Early in the year we swapped our equity position for near-term bonds and preferred stocks which offered equity-like returns and a shorter horizon for value recognition. As management delivered good results, the bonds approached par. Consequently, we sold all of the remaining bonds over the last three months. On the final day of the quarter, we exchanged all of our preferreds into equity at a price well below our appraisal. In the quarter, both operating expenses and capital expenditures continued to improve, additional debt was retired below face value, and management reduced distribution costs through restructuring agreements with Williams and selling the Barnett assets. The company is pursuing more cost improvements and increased its asset sale target for the year to $2 billion after surpassing the original $1 billion goal. Asset sales plus proceeds from the recent upsized term loan and convertible debt offering, which raised more capital at better terms than expected, should cover the company’s obligations for at least three years. We remain confident that CEO Doug Lawler and Chesapeake’s board will continue to successfully navigate the company through this lower-for-longer commodity price environment.



Southeastern Asset Management's Longleaf Partners third quarter 2016 commentary.



Check out Mason Hawkins latest stock trades

Bill Nygren Comments on Chesapeake - Oct 12, 2016

Recall that earlier in 2016, we swapped most of our Chesapeake (NYSE:CHK) stock at approximately $4 per share for the company’s bonds at $48 per $100 par value, believing the bonds offered similar upside and less downside while capturing a tax loss. Last quarter we reported that the bonds had rallied to $85 per $100 par value, and the stock was trading at $4.28. Given the relative performance of the bonds to the stock and our comfort with the improved liquidity position of the company, we elected to swap back into the stock. Today our position in Chesapeake is exclusively in the form of equity.

From Bill Nygren (Trades, Portfolio)'s Oakmark Select Fund third quarter 2016 commentary.

Check out Bill Nygren latest stock trades

Bruce Berkowitz Comments on Chesapeake Energy - Aug 02, 2016

Short-duration bonds of Chesapeake Energy (NYSE:CHK), such as the 7.250% bonds maturing in 2018, were purchased at substantial discounts to par to yield double digit returns. Chesapeake is one of America’s largest producers of natural gas, oil, and natural gas liquids. The company’s assets span numerous U.S. shale basins. New management has navigated the cyclical downturn in oil and gas prices by cutting costs, raising liquidity, and reducing outstanding debt to the lowest level in the last nine years. Though we normally shy away from commodity price forecasting, data shows that natural gas markets have tightened due to waning production growth, expanding exports (to Mexico or via liquefied natural gas), and record domestic demand for electricity generation. Price forges its own anchor. While the company maintains an active hedging program to mitigate future commodity price fluctuations, small improvements in commodity prices can have a significantly positive impact on Chesapeake’s operating results. The company’s $4 billion revolving credit facility was recently reaffirmed and remains almost entirely untapped, which should provide flexibility for Chesapeake to renegotiate gas gathering contracts and shed additional assets to further reduce obligations.

From Bruce Berkowitz (Trades, Portfolio)'s first-half 2016 letter to shareholders.

Check out Bruce Berkowitz latest stock trades

Southeastern Asset Management Comments on Chesapeake - Jul 14, 2016

As stated earlier, Chesapeake (NYSE:CHK) (+73%;+3.6%), one of the largest U.S. producers of natural gas, oil, and natural gas liquids, was the Fund’s largest contributor during the quarter. Earlier in the year, we swapped our equity for preferred stock and also added to our Chesapeake position via very discounted bonds and convertible bonds. This repositioning paid off in the quarter; the bonds appreciated more quickly than the stock as the company continued to lower its overall debt through purchases below par and debt for equity swaps. Additionally, in April, Chesapeake had its $4 billion revolving credit facility reaffirmed (90%+ untapped), with the next scheduled redetermination pushed out until June 2017. The company increased liquidity with the sale of about half of its mid-continent STACK (Sooner Trend Anadarko Basin Canadian and Kingfisher Counties) acreage to Newfield at a fair price of over $400 million. In total, net debt has declined by over 10% or $1 billion in 2016. Management projects additional asset sales this year and continues to renegotiate pipeline commitments toward better rates. The company has put on hedges that help mitigate its downside. We remain confident that CEO Doug Lawler and Chesapeake’s board will successfully navigate the company through this particularly challenging commodity price environment.



From Longleaf Partners' second quarter 2016 fund commentary.



Check out Mason Hawkins latest stock trades

Bill Nygren Comments on Chesapeake - Jul 11, 2016

Earlier in 2016, investors were pricing in significant bankruptcy risk across Chesapeake (NYSE:CHK)’s capital structure. At the time, we believed Chesapeake’s liquidity risks were manageable given the company’s ability to sell assets representing a small percentage of its future production in exchange for cash, making up a meaningful percentage of the company’s enterprise value. We felt that Chesapeake’s bonds at the time had a similar upside to the stock and had the added benefit of higher seniority in the capital structure, so we swapped the preponderance of our Chesapeake equity position into the company’s fixed income securities. On average over the months in which we executed this trade, we sold CHK stock for approximately $4 per share and bought bonds trading for $48.

Commodity prices rose during the quarter, while Chesapeake sold assets for cash without substantially reducing its current EBITDA. We believe that the liquidity profile of the company is now considerably improved. Today the bonds are trading for $85 while the stock is at $4.28, and the relative attractiveness of Chesapeake bonds to its stock has noticeably narrowed. We are very impressed with how well Chesapeake’s management team and board of directors have navigated this challenging commodity price environment, and we remain positive about the long-term prospects for this company.

From Bill Nygren (Trades, Portfolio)'s Oakmark Select Fund second quarter 2016 commentary.

Check out Bill Nygren latest stock trades

Brandes Investments Comments on Chesapeake - Jun 15, 2016

The uncertainty with Chesapeake (NYSE:CHK) is (and has been) the natural gas price. We believe that supply and demand warrant a much higher price than the current sub-$2 per mmBtu level (currently even lower in Pennsylvania where Chesapeake has a significant percentage of its acreage), likely in the $4-$6 range in the medium to long term. At the current natural gas price, producers are cutting capex significantly, which could ultimately impact the supply of natural gas. The path of natural gas prices is uncertain with a lag between capex cuts and changes to production levels. At higher long-term price levels we believe that Chesapeake’s enterprise value would be substantially more than what was valued by the market.



However, as Chesapeake built out its acreage, it utilized a significant amount of debt, making it one of the more leveraged oil and natural gas companies today. As a result, while we think it likely has access to liquidity to survive the depressed natural-gas price environment for the next year or two, we cannot rule out that the management and board will choose to preemptively file for reorganization under the bankruptcy code in order to restructure the company and reduce the substantial debt burden.



Therefore, the Global Large-Cap Investment Committee decided to sell Chesapeake equity, which bears the brunt of this bankruptcy timing risk, and allocate where possible to Chesapeake debt, which we believed offers a more attractive risk/reward tradeoff as it traded at 15 cents to 35 cents on the dollar. At these levels, the yield to maturity was north of 30%, offers the potential for equity-like returns and provides some downside protection because debt holders have a higher claim on assets than do equity shareholders if the company decides to file for reorganization.



It is not typical for the Global Equity Fund to hold securities other than common equity. Exceptions have been made when the securities within a company’s capital structure offered potential investment returns that rivaled those of common equity. This happened with the preferred equity securities of U.S. banks during the financial crisis, for instance. In this particular case, Chesapeake endured an extremely difficult commodity-price environment which resulted in the market value of its common equity, preferred equity and debt falling significantly. The investment committee believes that the potential return from investing in Chesapeake debt surpasses that of many other common equity investments.



If the company files for reorganization and emerges having restructured its debt, it is highly likely that some/all of the debt will be converted to equity, allowing us to potentially participate in the upside of the company’s enterprise value. The restructured company would allow for further potential recovery in value should natural-gas prices eventually rise to economically viable levels during or after the reorganization process.



From Brandes' Global Equity Fund first quarter 2016 commentary.



Check out Charles Brandes latest stock trades

Top Ranked Articles about Chesapeake Energy Corp

Thinking about buying stock in AmBev, Chesapeake Energy, Campbell Soup Company, General Electric or Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies?
Should you buy stock in Alibaba, Chesapeake Energy, The Home Depot Inc., Microsoft and Tesla Motors?
Chesapeake Energy Corporation Declares Quarterly Preferred Stock Dividends And Provides 2018 First Quarter Earnings Conference Call Information
New Research: Key Drivers of Growth for Johnson & Johnson, Chesapeake Energy, Visa, Celgene, Adobe, and Markel — Factors of Influence, Major Initiatives and Sustained Production
Wall Street High on Friday United Natural tops estimates
U.S. markets are in positive territory on Friday on strong economic data. The U.S. added 313,000 new jobs the past month; however, the hourly pay only rose 4 cents to $26.75 an hour. Read more...
US Stocks Reverse Losses Dermira’s acne drug failed
U.S. markets opened low on Monday with investors worried about the trade war. However, markets reversed early losses. Read more...
Wall Street High Friday Hewlett Packard Enterprise rose on earnings
U.S. markets are set to open high, with all the S&P 500 sectors in the green, as investors are waiting the Fed´s report on monetary policy. Read more...
US Markets Set to Open High Thursday Chesapeake beats on earnings
U.S. markets are set to open high after the Fed´s minutes yesterday showed that the U.S. economy was stronger than at the end of the past year. Further, policy makers see various interest rate hikes in 2018, with the next one probably coming in March. Moreover, the 10-year Treasury note is almost at 3%. Read more...
Arnold Schneider Adds to Chesapeake Energy, Mallinckrodt Positions The guru's largest buys of the 4th quarter
Arnold Schneider (Trades, Portfolio), founder and chief investment officer of Schneider Capital Management, released his fourth-quarter portfolio on Tuesday. The following are his top buys of the quarter.  Read more...
Stock Markets Worldwide in Deep Red Friday Expedia disappoints with outlook
U.S. stock market indexes were higher on Friday after the Dow Jones Industrial Average had its worst week in the last nine years. Oil prices also fell, registering the biggest weekly losses in 10 months. Read more...

Ratios

vs
industry
vs
history
PE Ratio 4.10
CHK's PE Ratio is ranked higher than
87% of the 208 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 11.83 vs. CHK: 4.10 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful PE Ratio only.
CHK' s PE Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 2.81  Med: 14.66 Max: 79.95
Current: 4.1
2.81
79.95
Forward PE Ratio 5.31
CHK's Forward PE Ratio is ranked higher than
96% of the 137 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 16.64 vs. CHK: 5.31 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Forward PE Ratio only.
N/A
PE Ratio without NRI 4.10
CHK's PE Ratio without NRI is ranked higher than
88% of the 210 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 12.65 vs. CHK: 4.10 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful PE Ratio without NRI only.
CHK' s PE Ratio without NRI Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 2.81  Med: 14.66 Max: 79.95
Current: 4.1
2.81
79.95
Price-to-Owner-Earnings 6.86
CHK's Price-to-Owner-Earnings is ranked lower than
99.99% of the 89 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 15.50 vs. CHK: 6.86 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Owner-Earnings only.
CHK' s Price-to-Owner-Earnings Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 4.7  Med: 14.25 Max: 30.29
Current: 6.86
4.7
30.29
PS Ratio 0.46
CHK's PS Ratio is ranked higher than
93% of the 402 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 2.73 vs. CHK: 0.46 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful PS Ratio only.
CHK' s PS Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.08  Med: 0.94 Max: 5.86
Current: 0.46
0.08
5.86
Price-to-Free-Cash-Flow 3.94
CHK's Price-to-Free-Cash-Flow is ranked lower than
99.99% of the 126 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 15.52 vs. CHK: 3.94 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Free-Cash-Flow only.
CHK' s Price-to-Free-Cash-Flow Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 1.89  Med: 5.99 Max: 133.39
Current: 3.94
1.89
133.39
Price-to-Operating-Cash-Flow 3.14
CHK's Price-to-Operating-Cash-Flow is ranked higher than
71% of the 279 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 5.94 vs. CHK: 3.14 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Operating-Cash-Flow only.
CHK' s Price-to-Operating-Cash-Flow Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.85  Med: 3.46 Max: 91.49
Current: 3.14
0.85
91.49
EV-to-EBIT 9.67
CHK's EV-to-EBIT is ranked higher than
59% of the 225 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 12.76 vs. CHK: 9.67 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful EV-to-EBIT only.
CHK' s EV-to-EBIT Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -38.8  Med: 10.1 Max: 32.8
Current: 9.67
-38.8
32.8
EV-to-EBITDA 5.75
CHK's EV-to-EBITDA is ranked higher than
64% of the 298 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 7.99 vs. CHK: 5.75 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful EV-to-EBITDA only.
CHK' s EV-to-EBITDA Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -9.1  Med: 6.25 Max: 91.3
Current: 5.75
-9.1
91.3
EV-to-Revenue 1.63
CHK's EV-to-Revenue is ranked higher than
86% of the 417 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 4.03 vs. CHK: 1.63 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful EV-to-Revenue only.
CHK' s EV-to-Revenue Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.9  Med: 2.2 Max: 9
Current: 1.63
0.9
9
Current Ratio 0.52
CHK's Current Ratio is ranked lower than
73% of the 479 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 1.23 vs. CHK: 0.52 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Current Ratio only.
CHK' s Current Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.3  Med: 0.75 Max: 3.11
Current: 0.52
0.3
3.11
Quick Ratio 0.52
CHK's Quick Ratio is ranked lower than
71% of the 479 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 1.15 vs. CHK: 0.52 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Quick Ratio only.
CHK' s Quick Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.3  Med: 0.74 Max: 3.05
Current: 0.52
0.3
3.05
Days Sales Outstanding 32.22
CHK's Days Sales Outstanding is ranked higher than
70% of the 375 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 48.34 vs. CHK: 32.22 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Days Sales Outstanding only.
CHK' s Days Sales Outstanding Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 19.25  Med: 36.59 Max: 76.93
Current: 32.22
19.25
76.93
Days Payable 76.66
CHK's Days Payable is ranked lower than
61% of the 251 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 81.91 vs. CHK: 76.66 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Days Payable only.
CHK' s Days Payable Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 64.25  Med: 105.76 Max: 446.82
Current: 76.66
64.25
446.82

Buy Back

vs
industry
vs
history
3-Year Dividend Growth Rate -100.00
CHK's 3-Year Dividend Growth Rate is ranked lower than
71% of the 103 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: -38.10 vs. CHK: -100.00 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 3-Year Dividend Growth Rate only.
CHK' s 3-Year Dividend Growth Rate Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0  Med: -60.3 Max: 48.1
Current: -100
0
48.1
5-Year Yield-on-Cost % 1.61
CHK's 5-Year Yield-on-Cost % is ranked lower than
70% of the 415 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 2.93 vs. CHK: 1.61 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 5-Year Yield-on-Cost % only.
CHK' s 5-Year Yield-on-Cost % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.35  Med: 1.04 Max: 8.7
Current: 1.61
0.35
8.7
3-Year Average Share Buyback Ratio -11.00
CHK's 3-Year Average Share Buyback Ratio is ranked higher than
51% of the 369 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: -11.00 vs. CHK: -11.00 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 3-Year Average Share Buyback Ratio only.
CHK' s 3-Year Average Share Buyback Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -29.6  Med: -12.3 Max: 0
Current: -11
-29.6
0

Valuation & Return

vs
industry
vs
history
Price-to-Intrinsic-Value-Projected-FCF 0.68
CHK's Price-to-Intrinsic-Value-Projected-FCF is ranked lower than
99.99% of the 118 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 1.29 vs. CHK: 0.68 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Intrinsic-Value-Projected-FCF only.
CHK' s Price-to-Intrinsic-Value-Projected-FCF Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.36  Med: 3.06 Max: 34.24
Current: 0.68
0.36
34.24
Price-to-Median-PS-Value 0.48
CHK's Price-to-Median-PS-Value is ranked higher than
83% of the 342 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: 0.85 vs. CHK: 0.48 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Median-PS-Value only.
CHK' s Price-to-Median-PS-Value Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.15  Med: 1.73 Max: 12.06
Current: 0.48
0.15
12.06
Earnings Yield (Greenblatt) % 10.34
CHK's Earnings Yield (Greenblatt) % is ranked higher than
82% of the 496 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: -0.99 vs. CHK: 10.34 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Earnings Yield (Greenblatt) % only.
CHK' s Earnings Yield (Greenblatt) % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -131.5  Med: 5.5 Max: 15.9
Current: 10.34
-131.5
15.9
Forward Rate of Return (Yacktman) % -248.57
CHK's Forward Rate of Return (Yacktman) % is ranked lower than
95% of the 186 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas E&P industry.

( Industry Median: -15.06 vs. CHK: -248.57 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Forward Rate of Return (Yacktman) % only.
CHK' s Forward Rate of Return (Yacktman) % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -92.8  Med: -34.4 Max: 5.8
Current: -248.57
-92.8
5.8

More Statistics

Revenue (TTM) (Mil) $9,232.00
EPS (TTM) $ 1.05
Beta2.41
Volatility41.05%
52-Week Range $2.53 - 5.68
Shares Outstanding (Mil)911.82

Analyst Estimate

Dec18 Dec19 Dec20
Revenue (Mil $) 6,860 6,592 7,701
EBIT (Mil $) 1,333 1,430 1,508
EBITDA (Mil $) 2,480 2,544 2,724
EPS ($) 0.80 0.64 0.83
EPS without NRI ($) 0.80 0.64 0.83
EPS Growth Rate
(Future 3Y To 5Y Estimate)
N/A
Dividends per Share ($)

Piotroski F-Score Details

Piotroski F-Score: 77
Positive ROAY
Positive CFROAY
Higher ROA yoyY
CFROA > ROAY
Lower Leverage yoyN
Higher Current Ratio yoyY
Less Shares Outstanding yoyN
Higher Gross Margin yoyY
Higher Asset Turnover yoyY

Personalized Checklist

Checklist has been moved to "Checklist" tab.

Get WordPress Plugins for easy affiliate links on Stock Tickers and Guru Names | Earn affiliate commissions by embedding GuruFocus Charts
GuruFocus Affiliate Program: Earn up to $400 per referral. ( Learn More)

GF Chat

{{numOfNotice}}