Why I prefer Shell and BP shares over US oil companies

Shell and BP shares look more attractive to me, because they are spending a larger share of operating cash flows on capital investments.

| More on:

The content of this article was relevant at the time of publishing. Circumstances change continuously and caution should therefore be exercised when relying upon any content contained within this article.

You’re reading a free article with opinions that may differ from The Motley Fool’s Premium Investing Services. Become a Motley Fool member today to get instant access to our top analyst recommendations, in-depth research, investing resources, and more. Learn More.

RISK WARNING: should you invest, the value of your investment may rise or fall and your capital is at risk. Before investing, your individual circumstances should be assessed. Consider taking independent financial advice. The Motley Fool believes in building wealth through long-term investing and so we do not promote or encourage high-risk activities including day trading, CFDs, spread betting, cryptocurrencies, and forex. Where we promote an affiliate partner’s brokerage products, these are focused on the trading of readily releasable securities.

There is one metric that makes Shell (LSE:SHEL) and BP (LSE:BP) shares look much more attractive to me than their American-listed competitors.

That metric can be calculated by dividing capital expenditure (CapEx) by operating cash flow (OCF). In other words, it is the amount companies spend on new projects as a proportion of the money they make in a year from normal business activities.

A higher CapEx/OCF means a company is investing more for tomorrow. By contrast, a lower CapEx/OCF could mean a company is paying out big dividends and doing share buybacks at the expense of investing.

Beware of cannibals!

Paying out dividends and buying back shares returns capital to shareholders. However, when done unsustainably, this de-capitalises the company. Essentially, the firm cannibalises itself.

Unfortunately, this is a well-known problem in the oil and gas space. The great intellects of our time, like Greta Thunberg and that bearded bloke from Extinction Rebellion, have decreed that fossil fuels have no future, and should be outlawed by the end of the decade.

That sentiment makes companies in the sector understandably reluctant to spend billions on multi-decade projects to find and extract new supplies.

Peak oil could be far, far away

Despite all of the wind farms, solar panels and hydroelectric plants that have popped up in the last decade, 2021 saw more global demand for oil than any previous year on record.

That record won’t last for long: 2022 is on track to see an even larger quantity of the black, viscous liquid being demanded.

Some analysts even predict we may not see oil demand peak until 2040 — in stark contrast with those more starry-eyed forecasters who believe peak oil will arrive in just two years’ time.

Personally, I’m not hopeful that peak oil will come any time soon. If it seems like a challenge setting up electric vehicle charging points in the UK, imagine what it will be like in the Congo, where burning coal and firewood are the dominant energy sources.

The global population now stands at eight billion, with 85% of those people living in the developing world. If people in poor countries are to live like us in rich countries — which they have every right to aspire to — they are going to need to consume a lot more energy.

CapEx/OCF: Brits on top!

Looking at CapEx/OCF with trailing 12-month data, I find that Shell dominates the field, spending 38% of OCF on sustaining capital investments.

BP comes narrowly behind with 34%.

Interestingly, both of those UK-listed companies trounced their US-listed competitors, with one exception: ConocoPhillips came neck-and-neck with BP, investing 34% of OCF.

Chevron (24%), Exxon (23%) and Occidental Petroleum (22%) were the laggards of the pack.

A flaw in my analysis is that some of that CapEx spending will have been to branch out into renewable energy projects. I would have to dig further into the companies’ accounts to find out exactly how much was spent on sustaining the oil and gas side of their businesses.

RISK WARNING: should you invest, the value of your investment may rise or fall and your capital is at risk. Before investing, your individual circumstances should be assessed. Consider taking independent financial advice. The Motley Fool believes in building wealth through long-term investing and so we do not promote or encourage high-risk activities including day trading, CFDs, spread betting, cryptocurrencies, and forex. Where we promote an affiliate partner’s brokerage products, these are focused on the trading of readily releasable securities.

Mark Tovey has no position in any of the shares mentioned. The Motley Fool UK has no position in any of the shares mentioned. Views expressed on the companies mentioned in this article are those of the writer and therefore may differ from the official recommendations we make in our subscription services such as Share Advisor, Hidden Winners and Pro. Here at The Motley Fool we believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors.

More on Investing Articles

Investing Articles

Publish Test

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut…

Read more »

Investing Articles

JP P-Press Update Test

Read more »

Investing Articles

JP Test as Author

Test content.

Read more »

Investing Articles

KM Test Post 2

Read more »

Investing Articles

JP Test PP Status

Test content. Test headline

Read more »

Investing Articles

KM Test Post

This is my content.

Read more »

Investing Articles

JP Tag Test

Read more »

Investing Articles

Testing testing one two three

Sample paragraph here, testing, test duplicate

Read more »