Maersk Presentation Annual Report 2015 Appendix

Maersk Group strategy and performance
page 2
Maersk Group
Founded in 1904
Represented in over 130 countries,

employing around 90,000 people
Market capitalisation of around USD

27.6bn end Q4 2015
Facilitating global containerised trade

Maersk Line carries around 14% of all seaborne
containers and, together with APM Terminals and
Damco, provides infrastructure for global trade
Supporting the global demand for energy

The Group is involved with production of oil and
gas and other related activities including drilling,
offshore, services, towage, and transportation of
oil products.
Strategy and performance AR 2015

page 3
Maersk Group overview

Revenue, NOPAT and Invested capital split1
MAERSK LINE MAERSK OIL APM TERMINALS MAERSK DRILLING APM SHIPPING
SERVICES
Revenue, FY2015 (%)
58% 14% 10% 6% 12%
UNDERLYING PROFIT2, FY2015 (%)
37% 12% 18% 21% 12%
INVESTED CAPITAL, FY2015 (%)
47% 8% 15% 19% 11%
Note 1: Reportable segments

Note 2: Excluding net impact from divestments and impairments

page 4
Ambitions
The Group will create value through

profitable growth and by creating
winning businesses
The Group seeks to improve the Return

on Invested Capital (ROIC) by;
Focused and disciplined capex

allocation
Execute portfolio optimization
Performance management
The Group intends to share the value

creation by growing ordinary dividends
in nominal terms.

page 5
Group strategy overview

The Groups ambition is for all our businesses to deliver top quartile
returns and achieve above 10% ROIC over the cycle
Maersk Line Maersk Oil APM Terminals Maersk Drilling APM Shipping Services
Growing at least Mature key projects Container and Capitalize on large Executing on cost
with the market to multiport (adjacent) & new fleet programs
defend our market Acquisitions and expansion
leading position opportunistic Maintain core focus on Rejuvenating part of
investments Active portfolio ultra-deepwater & the fleet
EBIT margin management harsh-environment
5%-points above Focus on cost market segments
peer average management Grow ahead of global
transportation market Focus on cost savings
Funded by own cash initiatives
flow
Optimise operational
Average returns of efficiency
8.5-12.0% (ROIC) performance

page 6
Most of our businesses deliver top quartile

returns
Below WACC return and top quartile performance Above WACC return and top quartile performance
Top quartile
performance
in H1 2015
Not top quartile

performance
in H1 2015
Below WACC return and not top quartile performance Above WACC return and not top quartile performance
Below BU WACC return in H1 2015 Above BU WACC return in H1 2015
Source: Benchmarking study H1 2015; Maersk Group

page 7
Invested capital and ROIC
Invested
ROIC % ROIC % ROIC % ROIC %
Business capital
Q4 2015 Q4 2014 FY 2015 FY 2014
(USDm)
Group 43,509 -20.8% 2.3% 2.9% 11.0%
Maersk Line 20,054 -3.6% 13.0% 6.5% 11.6%
Maersk Oil 3,450 -214% -2.5% -38.6% -15.2%
APM Terminals 6,177 8.3% 7.9% 10.9% 14.7%
Maersk Drilling 7,978 9.0% 2.7% 9.3% 7.1%
APM Shipping Services 4,748 5.1% -35.8% 9.5% -4.2%
Maersk Tankers 1,644 7.3% 5.2% 9.9% 6.8%
Maersk Supply Service 1,769 0% 15.2% 8.5% 11.9%
Svitzer 1,132 10.4% -114% 10.9% -19.2%
Damco 203 2.6% -177% 7.1% -63.2%
Other Businesses 861 -6.8% -2.2% 10.8% 6.1%

page 8
Disciplined capital allocation
Development in invested capital since Q4 2010
Maersk Drilling 115%

Invested capital re-allocated
APM Terminals 30%
Maersk Line 19%

Commitments of around USD
Damco 7% 9bn with pipeline of
Group -7%
investments still not
committed
Maersk Supply -20%
SVITZER -28%
Focus on consistent delivery
Maersk Oil -30% of returns
Maersk Tankers -51%
-88%
Other businesses
-100%
Dansk Supermarked
-100% -50% 0% 50% 100% 150%
Note. Development since Q4 2010. The 2010 numbers have not been restated with
the changed consolidation method for joint ventures in 2013

page 9
Capital commitment
Low fraction of capital expenditure committed, provides financial
flexibility
Maersk Line Maersk Oil APMT Maersk Drilling APM Shipping Services
USDbn
1.4 9.4
9.0
5.2
6.0
2.8
3.0
0.0
2016 2017-2020 2020+ Total

page 10
Active portfolio management
Cash flow from divestments has been USD 17bn with divestment gains of USD 5.7bn pre-tax since 2009
USDbn
8
5.8
6
4.4
4 3.3 3.4
2 1.2 1.4
0.5 0.7 0.5 0.2 0.6 0.5
0.2 0.1
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Selected Cash flow from divestments Divestment gains (pre-tax)

divestments
Rosti Sigma Netto, UK Maersk LNG DFDS stake Dansk Danske Bank
Loksa Baltia FPSO Ngujima- FPSO Peregrino US BTT Supermarked stake
Yin US Chassis ERS Railways majority share Esvagt
Dania Trucking VLGCs 15 Owned
Handygas VLCCs
FPSO Curlew APM Terminals
Virginia

page 11
Value creation shared with investors
DKKbn Ordinary dividend Executed share buy back
40 36.7
11.8
10.0
10
5.2
3.9
5.3
5 4.4 4.4
2.9
6.2 6.6
1.4
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2015
Extraordinary
dividend
(Danske Bank)
Note. Dividend and share buy back in the paid year. The second share buy back of USD ~1bn was initiated 1 September 2015.

page 12
Maersk B relative performance
Outperformed its synthetic peer by Outperformed its synthetic peer by

14%-points in 2015 16%-points YTD 2016
Forwarders 13.3% Maersk B -2.2%
Maersk B -11.5% Ports -7.6%
Liners -16.3% Forwarders -9.1%
Ports -16.9% Upstream -11.9%
Synthetic -25.2% Offshore -16.3%
Upstream -28.2% Synthetic -17.9%
Tankers -30.9% Liners -21.7%
Drillers -42.6% Drillers -23.9%
Offshore -63.3% Tankers -24.4%
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% -30% -25% -20% -15% -10% -5% 0%
Note: Total shareholder return in local currency.

Note: Total shareholder return in local currency As of 4th Feb 2016

page 13
Shareholder composition
A.P. Mller og Hustru North Rest of

Denmark Nordics Rest of World Unidentified
Chastine Mc-Kinney America Europe
Mllers Fond til almene
Formaal Share capital Share capital Share capital Share capital Share capital Share capital
23.8%* 8.5% 2.7% 6.1% 1.4% 4.5%
100%
A.P. Mller Den A.P.

A.P. Mller og Hustru Chastine
Holding A/S Mllerske Free float
Mc-Kinney Mllers Familiefond
Stttefond
Share capital 41.5% Share capital 8.5% Share capital 3.0% Share capital 47.0%
Voting rights 51.2% Voting rights 12.9% Voting rights 5.9% Voting rights 30.0%
A.P. Mller - Mrsk A/S
Source: CMi2i. As of November 2015

* Including 1.4% in treasury shares

page 14
Underlying profit reconciliation
Profit for the year Gain on sale of

Impairment losses, Tax on
- continuing non-current Underlying profit
net1 adjustments
operations assets, etc., net1
USD million 2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014
Group 925 2,339 482 600 -3,163 -2,951 535 158 3,071 4,5322
Maersk Line 1,303 2,341 40 89 -17 72 -7 -19 1,287 2,199
Maersk Oil -2,146 -861 5 4 -3,131 -2,208 545 308 435 1,035
APM Terminals 654 900 15 374 14 -181 -1 -142 626 849
Maersk Drilling 751 478 46 82 -27 -85 - 10 732 471

APM Shipping
446 -230 45 13 -1 -426 -2 -2 404 185
Services
Maersk Tankers 160 132 5 -4 -1 -4 - 1 156 139
Maersk Supply
147 201 30 12 - - - - 117 189
Services
Svitzer 120 -270 5 5 - -354 -1 -3 116 82
Damco 19 -293 5 - - -68 -1 - 15 -225
1 Including the Groups share of gains on sale of non-current assets etc, net and impairments, net, recorded in joint ventures and associated companies
2 USD 4,083m excluding the underlying result from Danske Bank of USD 449m

page 15
Impairments of assets
Intangible assets (note 6 in the consolidated financial statements)
Impairment
Operating segment Cash generating unit Methodology losses, USDm
2015 2014
Oil concession rights

Angola Value in use 114 -
USA Value in use 44 -
UK Value in use 38 50
Maersk Oil
Norway Value in use 6 -
Brazil Value in use 599 1,706
Kurdistan Value in use 225 -
Goodwill
Adsteam Marine
Svitzer Value in use - 357
Limited (Australia)
Damco Airfreight Service Value in use - 35
Other rights
Other Value in use - 34
Total 1,026 2,182

page 16
Impairments of assets
Property, plant and equipment (note 7 in the consolidated financial
statements)
Impairment
Operating segment Cash generating unit Methodology losses, USDm
2015 2014
Maersk Line Multi-purpose vessels Fair value 17 -
Angola Value in use 645 -
Kazakhstan Value in use 418 -
Denmark Value in use 310 -
Maersk Oil
USA Value in use 54 -
UK Value in use 649 426
Norway Value in use 28 28
Maersk Drilling Endurer Fair value 27 35
Other 2 9
Total 2,150 498

page 17
Maersk Line
Capacity market share by trade
16%
no.3 no.3 no.2 no.1 no.3
8% 15% Intra 21%
Europe
Pacific Atlantic Asia-Europe Pacific
9% no.4 Intra
8% Asia no.1
Intra
Trade y/y America
Asia-Europe -1pp
Latin Africa West- Oceania
America Central
Atlantic +10pp Asia
Pacific +1pp
Oceania +1pp
26% 26% 17% 16%
West-Central Asia 0pp
Africa -2pp
Latin America +3pp no.1 no.1 no.1 no.1
Intra Europe +2pp
Intra Asia +1pp
Intra America +1pp
Maersk Line capacity (TEU)
East-West 40.5% North-South 48.2% Intra 11.4% Capacity market share no. Market position
Note: 1)West-Central Asia is defined as import and export to and from Middle East and India. 2) Trades mapped as per ML definition.
3) ML EW market shares calculated as ML accessible capacity based on internal data on ML-MSC allocation split applied to 2M capacity
market share (deployed capacity data from Alphaliner)
Source: Alphaliner as of 2015 FY (end period), Maersk Line

page 18
Industry is fragmented
but East-West trades now operated mainly through 4 key alliances
Capacity market share (%) Far East Europe (capacity share by Alliance)
Maersk Line 14.7% 1%

MSC 13.2%
CMA CGM 8.9% 18%
Evergreen 4.6% 34%
Hapag-Lloyd 4.6%
COSCO 4.2% 25%
CSCL 3.4%
Hamburg Sd 3.2% 22%
Hanjin 3.1%
OOCL 2.8%
MOL 2.7% Far East North America (capacity share by Alliance)
APL 2.6%
Yang Ming 2.6% 6%
15%
UASC 2.5%
NYK 2.4%
30% 14%
K Line 1.9% G6 Alliance
Hyundai 1.9% Ocean 3
PIL 2M
1.8%
CKHYE
Zim 1.8% 35%
Wan Hai 1.0%
0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0%

2M Ocean 3 CKYHE G6 Others
Source: Alphaliner, 1 January 2016

page 19
Freight rate outlook is uncertain

Many factors drive rates
Supply Demand
Orderbook and new deliveries Competitive
Global economic growth
Scrappings reactions Global inventories
Idling Outsourcing / offshoring
Slow steaming Containerisation
Cancellations (blankings)
Bunker cost

page 20
The vicious circle of the container industry
Declining and gives incentive to invest in

volatile rates larger vessels
~2% reduction -25%

Freight rate at floating bunker price Unit cost reduction when
2004 - 2015 (CAGR) doubling vessel size1
Vicious circle
of container
shipping
which leads leading to strong vessels

to overcapacity ordering
10% vs. 5% 11%

Nominal capacity growth vs. Average yearly vessel capacity
demand growth (2004 2015 H1) ordered 2004 2015 H1 (% of fleet)
Note: Nominal capacity growth is deliveries less scrappings.

1) Assuming unchanged utilization of larger vessel and fixed bunker price of USD 400/tonne
Source: Maersk Line, Alphaliner

page 21
Supply has outgrown demand past 10 years

except for 2010 and trend expected to continue
Y/Y Growth, (%) Y/Y Supply Growth Y/Y Demand Growth
20%
Estimate
15%
10%
5%
0%
-5%
-10%
-15%
2015E
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Note: Capacity growth compares standing container vessel capacity beginning of year to end of year, while demand growth compares total amount of containers in two consecutive
years.
Source: Alphaliner, Maersk Line

page 22
Rates will continue to be under pressure

from supply/demand imbalance
Maersk Lines average freight rate has declined 1.9% p.a. since 2004
Maersk Line freight rate, (USD/FFE)
3,500
CAGR -1.9% Since CAGR (%)
3,300
2004 -1.9
3,100
2008 -5.6
2,900 2010 -6.4
2012 -8.5
2,700
2014 -16.0
2,500 Vicious
circle
2,300
2,100
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Source: Maersk Line

page 23
Maersk Lines response is to focus on cost
Maersk Lines unit cost has declined 7.5% p.a. since Q1 2012
Unit cost, (USD/FFE)

3,200
CAGR -8.6%
Since CAGR (%)
3,000
2012 -9.2
2014 -11.5
2,800
2,600
2,400
2,200
2,000
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
12 12 12 12 13 13 13 13 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15
Note: Unit cost excluding gain/loss, restructuring, share of profit/loss from associated companies and including VSA income.
Source: Maersk Line

page 24
and will continue to

drive cost down with
plenty of opportunities
Network Speed equalization & Improve

rationalization Slow steaming utilization
SG&A 2M Improve
procurement
Inland Deployment of Retrofits

optimization larger vessels
Source: Maersk Line

page 25
Network rationalisation and initiatives
Example of network rationalisation and further 2015 network initiatives
AE9 Far East - Europe:

Closure September 2015
Utilise AE network to balance
required Trade flows
Close ME5
TA4 Atlantic:
Closure October 2015
AE3 Far East - Mediterranean:

Closure October 2015
WHAT: Closure of ME5 service, through better utilisation of

AE network through Suez.
IMPACT: Reduced bunker consumption, vessels, and
port/canal expenses.
Note: ME5 service: Middle East Mediterranean.

Source: Maersk Line

page 26
As the largest carrier we have delivered a

sustainable EBIT margin gap
Gap to peers on par with target and Maersk Line continues to
be best in class
Core EBIT margin gap, (% pts.) Q3 2015 Core EBIT margin, (%)
10%
9% 9% 9% 9% Maersk Line 5.7%
9% 6% 8% 8% CMA CGM 4.0%
8% Hapag Lloyd 3.4%
7% 9% 9% 7% NYK 2.0%
6% 6% Hanjin 1.2%
5%
5% ZIM -0.1%
8% 5% Target
4% K Line -0.6%
5%
3% MOL -2.1%
Hyundai MM. -4.6%
2% 2%
APL -5.5%
1%
Peer group Avg* 0.8%
0%
12Q1 12Q3 13Q1 13Q3 14Q1 14Q3 15Q1 15Q3 -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15%
Note: *Peer group includes CMA CGM, APL, Hapag Lloyd, Hanjin, ZIM, Hyundai MM, K Line, NYK, MOL and OOCL, CSCL and COSCO also included
with average of 14H2-15H1 gap to MLB as they only report half-yearly; Peer average is TEU-weighted. EBIT margins are adjusted for gains/losses
on sale of assets, restructuring charges, income/loss from associates. Maersk Line EBIT margin is also adjusted for depreciations to match
industry standards (25 years).
Source: Alphaliner, Company reports, Maersk Line

page 27
Scale is a lever of profitability
Average EBIT margin 2012-2015H1, (%)
10%
Global scale leaders
Regional focus
Maersk Line
8%
6% Wan Hai CMA
SITC
4% OOCL
2%
Hanjin COSCO
K Line
Evergreen
0% NYK
Yang Ming Hapaq Lloyd
CSCL
-2%
ZIM
APL
Hyundai MOL
-4%
-6%
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000
Average capacity 2012-2015H1, (000 TEU)
Source: Maersk Line, Company Reports, Alphaliner

page 28
Terminal and vessel costs represent the

largest components of our cost base
Cost base, FY 2015
Administration
10%
and other
USD 21.8bn costs
32%
Terminal
costs
13%
FY 2015 cost base
Bunker
2,288 USD/FFE 28% 12%

FY 2015 unit cost Inland
5% transpor-
Vessel costs
tation
Containers
& other
equipment
Note: Terminal costs: costs related to terminal operation such as moving the containers (mainly load/discharge of containers), container storage at terminal, stuffing (loading) and
stripping (unloading) of container content, power for reefer units, etc. Inland transportation: costs related to transport of containers inland both by rail and truck. Containers and
other equipment: costs related to repair and maintenance, third party lease cost and depreciation of owned containers. Vessel costs: costs related to port and canal fees (Suez and
Panama), running costs and crewing of owned vessels, depreciation of owned vessels, time charter of leased vessels, cost of slot (capacity) purchases and vessel sharing agreements
(VSA) with partners. Bunkers: costs related to fuel consumption. Administration and other costs: cost related to own and third party agents in countries, liner operation centers,
vessel owning companies, onshore crew and ship management, service centers and headquarters. Administration cost types such as staff, office, travel, training, consultancy, IT,
legal and audit, etc. Other costs covering currency cash flow hedge, cargo and commercial claims and bad debt provision. Cost base: EBIT cost adjusted for VSA income, restructuring
result from associated companies and gains/losses.
Source: Maersk Line

page 29
Maersk Oils portfolio

The value chain
Exploration Appraisal Development Primary production Mature field EOR1) Abandonment
Greenland
Norway
United Kingdom Denmark
Kazakhstan
Algeria Kurdistan Region of Iraq

USA Qatar
Ethiopia2)
Kenya
Active in 13 countries Angola
Exploration in 9 Brazil
Development projects in 9
Operated production in 4
Non-operated in 4
1) Enhanced Oil Recovery

2) Ethiopia acquisition is subject to government approval

page 30
Maersk Oil Entitlement Production, 2015
Hydrocarbon type Location Operatorship OECD/non-OECD

(%) (%) (%) (%)
Oil Shallow water Operated OECD
Gas Onshore Deepwater Operated by others Non-OECD
100 100 100 100
80 80 80 80
60 60 60 60
40 40 40 40
20 20 20 20
0 0 0 0

page 31
Maersk Oils reserves and

resources
End End End

(million boe)
2012 2013 2014
Proved reserves (1P) 410 392 327
Probable reserves (2Pincremental) 209 207 183
Proved and Probable reserves (2P) 619 599 510
Contingent resources (2C) 740 874 801

New picture
Reserves & resources (2P + 2C) 1,359 1,473 1,311
Note: 2015 reserves and resources numbers will be released in connection with
the interim report for the first quarter 2016, including reserves additions from
Johan Sverdrup and Culzean.
Definitions:
Proved Reserves: quantities of oil and gas estimated with reasonable
certainty to be commercially recoverable.
Probable Reserves: additional reserves, which analysis of geoscience and
engineering data indicate are more likely than not to be commercially
recoverable.
Contingent Resources: quantities of oil and gas estimated, as of a given
date, to be potentially recoverable from known accumulations, but which
are not yet considered mature enough for commercial development due
conditions that are not fulfilled.

page 32
Long-term profitable growth
Selecting growth
Profitable growth
opportunities
Maersk Oil will grow to ensure a Balanced portfolio and cost curve
profitable future
Focus is on inorganic growth in 2016
and investing in exploration acreage Geographic fit, risk profile
to deliver sustained exploration
performance by 2016/17
Production profile & timing
Longer term, exploration is
considered a critical element for
reserves replacement
Leveraging our capabilities
To deliver both long and short term
growth Maersk Oil must expand
within our core and beyond

page 33
Capital discipline Investing through the cycle
Development Capex1) Capex reductions realised in 2015 in

(USD million) response to market changes
Continuously optimising capital

4,000 expenditure by active portfolio
3,500 management and contract re-
negotiations
3,000
2,500 Investing through the cycle

2,000
Johan Sverdrup (NO) and Culzean
3,788 (UK)
1,500
1,000 2,198 2,017

1,959 1,800
500
0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
1) Including acquisitions

page 34
Reducing our costs
Focus on building a sustainable Portfolio Organisational

cost base Management and Process
Efficiency
On track to reach 20% Opex
savings end of 2016
Global workforce reduced by
approximately 1,250 positions in
2015
Active portfolio management
Focus on shift from organic to
inorganic growth
Procurement Cost Focus
and Supply and Performance
Chain Management

page 35
Maersk Oils share of

Production and Exploration Costs
Maersk Oils share of production (000 boepd)
500
424 429
387 377
400
321 333 312 ~315
300 257 251
235
200
100
0
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016e
DK UK Qatar Algeria Other
Maersk Oils exploration costs* (USDm)

1,400
1,149
1,200 1,088
990
1,000
831
765
800 676
605
600
404 423 ~423
400
229
200
0
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016e
*All exploration costs are expensed directly unless the

project has been declared commercial

page 36
Maersk Oils portfolio (Q4 2015)
Exploration Resources Project Maturation Process Reserves Production

Prospects in Initiate &
the pipeline1) Discoveries1) Assess1) Select Define Execute Assets
Southern Area Jack II

Fields2) USA
Johan Denmark
Yeoman
Sverdrup II3)
Johan
Farsund Sverdrup I
Kazakhstan
Buckskin
Flyndre &
Drumtochty Cawdor
Zidane
Alma Swara Tika UK
Itaipu
Adda LC
Wahoo Chissonga5)
Algeria
Quad9 Gas Culzean

Tap oNoth Greater
Blowdown Gryphon
Area4) Qatar
Total of 25 exploration Al Shaheen
prospects and leads in FDP 2012
the exploration pipeline Harald East
Brazil
Tyra Future
Total 25 5 9 12 6 15 Total no. of projects

per phase
Uncertainty
Bubble size indicates estimate of net resources: Colour indicates resource type:
>100 mmboe 50-100 mmboe <50 mmboe Primarily oil Primarily gas Discoveries and prospects
(Size of bubbles do not reflect volumes)
1) Does not include prospects from Kenya and Ethiopia acreage

2) Southern Area Fields cover Dan Area Redevelopment and Greater Halfdan FDP projects (Denmark).
3) Phase 2 of the Johan Sverdrup development (Norway) is expected to commence production in 2022.
4) Greater Gryphon Area project has been reduced to a number of small well projects to be matured on an individual basis with different timing
5) Reevaluating options in light of the low oil price
page 37
Maersk Oils Key Projects
Sanctioned development projects

Project First Production Working Net Capex Plateau Production Operator
Interest (USD Billion) (Entitlement, boepd)
Flyndre & Cawdor 73.7% &
(UK/Norway) 2017 ~0.5 8,000 Maersk Oil
60.6%
Johan Sverdrup
Late 2019 8.44% 1.82 29,0002 Statoil
Phase 1 (Norway)
Culzean (UK) 2019 49.99% 2.3 30-45,000 Maersk Oil
Major discoveries under evaluation (Pre-Sanctioned Projects1)

Project First Working Net Capex Plateau Production
Production Interest Estimate Estimate
Estimate (USD Billion) (Entitlement, boepd)
Chissonga (Angola) TBD 65% TBD TBD
Buckskin3 (USA) 2019 20% TBD TBD
Lokichar (Kenya) 2021 25% TBD TBD
1 Significant uncertainties about time frames, net capex estimates and production forecast
2 Capex and production estimates are for Phase 1 only
3 Buckskin being re-evaluated following operator Chevrons decision to exit

page 38
Sanctioned projects against the trend
Swara Tika, Johan Sverdrup, Culzean,

Kurdistan Norway United Kingdom
Sanctioned Maersk Oils Sanctioned the biggest Sanctioned mega gas

first on-shore project in planned project in the project and biggest
Kurdistan, Iraq North Sea over the discovery in the UK sector
coming decade in ten years
page 39
African Oil acquisition
Maersk Oil acquired 50% of Africa Oils

shares in three onshore exploration
licences in Kenya and two in Ethiopia
The licences include nine recent oil

discoveries
Four of the blocks are operated by Tullow

Oil and the remaining by Africa Oil
Upfront farm-in payment of USD 365m,

including exploration costs. Future
payments of up to USD 480m for the
Lokichar Project Lokichar Basin

page 40
Abandonment provisions
Provisions for abandonment, USDm

3,500 3,166
3,000 2,774 Provisions for abandonment have
increased USD 392m over the year
2,500 2,198
2,000 1,638 1,698
1,500
51% of the provisions is expected to be
1,000 utilised over the next 10 years compared
500 to 43% by end-2014
-
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Expected utilisation, USDm
2,000 2014 2015

1,600 1,526
1,500
1,198
1,000 773 763
500
4 40 36
-
0-10 years 10-20 years 20-30 years 30-40 years

page 41
APM Terminals
Portfolio overview
36.0m TEUs
(equity)
75.2m TEUs
(gross)
60 shipping lines
serviced
63 operating ports
7 new port projects
10 expansion projects
140 inland locations
20,600 employees
in 67 countries
Terminals
Inland
Note: Volume figures are full year 2015

page 42
The ports business will

remain attractive
World population growth and growing

middle class
Growing consumer demand in

emerging markets
Increasing regional trade

(e.g. Intra-Asia)
Increasing containerization of commodities

(e.g. grain, reefer)
Production of goods, food and energy differ

from where it is consumed

page 43
Diversified Global Portfolio

Container throughput by geographical region (equity Geographical split of terminals (number of terminals)
weighted crane lifts, %) 25
Total throughput of
36.0m TEU in 2015
20 2
Americas Africa & 1 2
18% Middle East
15
19%
2
10 19
Europe, 17 17
Russia and
5 10
Baltics
Asia
29%
34%
0
Americas Europe, Russia Asia Africa and Middle
and Baltics East
Existing terminals New terminal projects
Average remaining concession length in years Port Volume growth development (%)
30 28 12% 65
64
63
25 23 62
21 8%
20
16 4%
15
11
0%
10 55
-4%
5
0 -8%
Americas Europe, Asia Africa and Total portfolio 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Russia and Middle East No. of terminals Equity Weighted Like-for-like Global market
Baltics
Note: Average concession lengths as of FY 2015, arithmetic mean Note: Like for like volumes exclude divestments and acquisitions

page 44
APM Terminals New terminal developments

Project Opening Details Investment
Lzaro Crdenas, 2016 Signed 32-year concession for design, construction and operation USD 0.9bn
Mexico (TEC2) of new deepwater terminal
Will add 1.2 million TEUs of annual throughput capacity and
projected to become fully operational in H2 2016
Ningbo, China (Meishan 2016 Major gateway port in Eastern China and Zhejiang Province. 6th n/a
Container Terminal largest and fastest growing, deepwater container port in the
Berths 3, 4, and 5) world
67%/33% (Ningbo Port Group/APM Terminals) share to jointly
invest and operate
Izmir, Turkey (Aegean 2016 Agreement with Petkim to operate a new 1.5 million TEU deep- USD 0.4bn
Gateway Terminal) water container and general cargo terminal
Moin, Costa Rica (Moin 2018 33-year concession for the design, construction and operation of USD 1.0bn
Container Terminal) new deepwater terminal
The terminal will have an area of 80 hectares, serving as a
shipping hub for the Caribbean and Central America
Savona-Vado, Italy 2017 50-year concession for the design, construction, operation and USD 0.4bn
(Vado-Ligure) maintenance of a new deep-sea gateway terminal
Abidjan, Ivory Coast 2018 Terminal will be the second in one of the busiest container ports USD 0.6bn
in West Africa
New facility will be able to accommodate vessels of up to 8,000
TEU in size (existing facility 0.75 million TEU)
Tema, Ghana TBD Joint venture with existing partner Bollor (35%) and the USD 0.8bn
Ghana Ports & Harbours Authority (30%)
Will add 3.5 million TEUs of annual throughput capacity
Greenfield project located outside the present facility that
includes an upgrade to the adjacent road network

page 45
Active portfolio management continues to

create value
Acquisitions and secured Projects
Grup TCB
Valencia
Parangua
Buenaventura
Quetzal
Lazaro Cardenas Yucatan
Gothenburg Izmir
Ningbo La Palma
Monrovia Talin Abidjan Qingdao Tenerife
Moin Kotka/Helsinki Ust Luga Vado reefer Gijon
Cotonou Callao Vostochny St. Petersburg 2 Cartagena Castellon
Santos Poti St. Petersburg Izmir Namibe Tema Barcelona
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Kaoshiung Dailan Oslo Le Havre Charleston
Dunkirk Virginia Houston
Oakland Jacksonville
Gioia Tauro
Divestments
Note: Grup TCB deal close expected in Q1 2016, subject to regulatory approvals

page 46
Transaction multiples remain high amid

strong competition for projects
Port M&A transaction multiples (EV/EBITDA)

Port landlord
35 x Terminal operator
Maher
(32x)
30 x
Port Newcastle
(27x)
25 x
Port Brisbane
(22x)
Carrix Port Botany
OOCL (20x) Forth Ports (20x) ABP
20 x (20.5x) (19x) (20x)
TIL/MSC
Euroports (17.5x)
DP World Montreal
(17x) Australia DP World HK (16x)
15 x HPH Montreal (15x)
(12.7x)
(14.8x) Peel Group (15.4x)
(16.3x) Terminal Link
(12.5x)
NCC
10 x (13x) Prince Rupert
Port of
PD Ports (12x)
Brisbane
(7.9x) (9.3x)
Global Ports
5x (8.4x)
Dragados
(6.5x)
0x
May-05 Oct-06 Feb-08 Jul-09 Nov-10 Apr-12 Aug-13 Dec-14 May-16

page 47
Grup Maritim TCB

acquisition
Grup Maritim TCB has 11 container terminals in
Spain and Latin America
Annual throughput capacity is 4.3m TEUs and

estimated annual container volume of 3.5m TEUs
(2.6m TEUs weighted with APM Terminals
ownership interest in the individual terminals)
The implied enterprise value of the transaction is

approximately USD 1.1bn for 100% of the issued
shares
Expected capex of USD 400m over the next five

years, subject to market conditions
The acquisition will initially have a negative

impact on ROIC of just over one percentage point
due to the increased asset base and the
amortisation of terminal rights.
Transaction is expected to close in the first

quarter of 2016, subject to regulatory approvals
Barcelona container terminal

APM Terminals has signed agreement to acquire Grup Maritim
TCB that will add 11 container terminals to the portfolio

page 48
All segments remain profitable with an obvious

negative impact from implementations
Q4 2015 Consolidated JV & Operating

Implementations Total
USDm businesses Associates businesses
Throughput (TEUm) 5.0 3.8 8.8 - 8.8
Revenue 985 - 985 40 1,025
EBITDA 212 - 212 -13 199
EBITDA margin 21.5% - 21.5% -32.4% 19.4%
Reported profit 115 22 137 -11 128
Reported profit, underlying 109 18 126 -11 117
ROIC 11.4% 6.2% 10.0% -6.7% 8.3%
ROIC, underlying 10.7% 5.1% 9.2% -6.6% 7.6%
Average Invested capital 4,046 1,423 5,469 636 6,105
Note: Implementations include terminals currently under construction (Vado, Italy; Moin, Costa Rica; Izmir, Turkey; Lazaro Cardenas, Mexico) and eliminations

page 49
Consolidated
businesses heavily
impacted by
challenging markets
Q4 Q4 Q4 15
USDm
2015 2014 /Q4 14
Throughput (TEUm) 5.0 5.5 -8%
Revenue 985 1,119 -12%
EBITDA 212 236 -10%
EBITDA margin 21.5% 21.1% 0.4pp
Reported profit 115 137 -16%
Reported profit,
109 139 -22%
underlying
ROIC 11.4% 14.1% -2.7pp
ROIC, underlying 10.7% 14.3% -3.6pp
Average Invested
4,046 3,885 4%
capital
Note: Consolidated businesses includes terminals and inland services that are
financially consolidated

page 50
JV and Associates in
tough emerging
market conditions
Q4 Q4 Q4 15
USDm
2015 2014 /Q4 14
Throughput (TEUm) 3.8 3.9 -3%
Revenue - - n.a.
EBITDA - - n.a.
EBITDA margin - - n.a.
Reported profit 22 -7 -414%
Reported profit,
18 95 -81%
underlying
ROIC 6.2% -1.6% 7.8pp
ROIC, underlying 5.1% 22.2% -17.1pp
Average Invested capital 1,423 1,711 -17%
Note: Includes joint venture and associate

companies in the portfolio

page 51
Bigger vessels and alliances require

enhanced capabilities
Less frequent ship calls and

SPEED
greater throughput peaks
Increased segmentation of terminal

capacity and rapid capacity RELIABILITY
obsolescence
2M
Customer size and complexity

O3 G6 AVAILABILITY
increasing
CKYHE
Ports even more vital element

LOW COST
in network optimization

page 52
Maersk Drilling
Rig fleet overview North West
Europe
8 ultra harsh jack-up rigs
3 premium jack-up rigs
Caspian Sea
1 midwater floater
US Gulf of Mexico South East Asia

3 ultra deepwater floaters 1 premium jack-up rig
Ghana
1 ultra deepwater floater
Angola Egypt
Egyptian Drilling
Company
Under construction Available 50/50 Joint Venture
1 ultra harsh jack-up rig 1 ultra deepwater floater**
1 ultra harsh jack-up rig*
1 premium jack-up rig
Note: As per end Q4 2015
* Maersk Guardian converted to accommodation rig. Rig will go on contract with Maersk Oil in Denmark in Sep 2016
** Maersk Venturer will go on contract with Total in Uruguay in Mar 2016

page 53
Drop in oil price has led to

Reduced rig demand, lower utilisation levels while modern rigs retain
competitive advantage, and decreasing dayrates
Global rig utilisation Continued bifurcation in Dayrates decline as a
decreasing as supply utilisation for rigs delivered reaction to the rig supply-
outpaces demand before and after 2000 demand imbalance
Demand Supply Floaters (Post-2000) UDW Dayrates

Utilisation (RHS) Floaters (Pre-2000) Premium JU Dayrates (RHS)
No. of rigs USD `000s
1000 90% 100% 600 300
500 250
800 85% 90%
400 200
600 80% 80%
300 150
400 75% 70%

200 100
200 70% 60%

100 50
0 65% 50% 0 0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Source: IHS Petrodata, Maersk Drilling

page 54
Maersk Drillings response

A modern state-of-the-art rig fleet offers true competitive
advantage during adverse market conditions
FLOATERS JACK-UPS FINANCIAL

INVESTMENT
Maersk Voyager (2015) Maersk XL Enhanced 4 (2016) Maersk Convincer (2008) Egyptian Drilling Company (EDC)
Maersk Valiant (2014) Maersk Integrator (2015) Maersk Completer (2007) (50/50 Joint Venture)
Maersk Venturer (2014) Maersk Interceptor (2014) Mrsk Inspirer (2004)
Maersk Viking (2014) Maersk Intrepid (2014) Mrsk Innovator (2002) Onshore rigs: 62
Mrsk Deliverer (2010) Maersk Reacher (2009) Mrsk Gallant (1993) Offshore rigs: 4
Maersk Discoverer (2009) Maersk Resolve (2009) Mrsk Giant (1986)
Mrsk Developer (2008) Maersk Resilient (2008) Maersk Guardian (1986)1
Heydar Aliyev (2003) Maersk Resolute (2008)
5 Years 10 Years
Average Age Average Age
Note 1: Maersk Guardian converted to accommodation rig, therefore not included jack-up average age calculation
Source: Maersk Drilling

page 55
Maersk Drilling has one of the most modern

fleets of floaters in the competitive landscape
Floater fleet average age, years
35
30
25
20
15
10
0
Rowan Seadrill Maersk Ensco Noble Atwood Transocean Diamond
Drilling Offshore
Industry average (floaters) = 16 years

page 56
Maersk Drilling rigs also compete well

in the jack-up segment
Jack-up fleet average age, years
35
30
25
20
15
10
0
Seadrill Atwood Maersk Transocean Noble Rowan Ensco Diamond
Drilling Offshore
Industry average (jack-ups) = 17 years
Note: Maersk Guardian converted to accommodation rig, therefore not included jack-up average age calculation

page 57
Cost savings program

Our commitment to enhancing resiliency has enabled 8% cost
reduction FY 2015 vs. FY 2014
OPERATIONAL YARD STAYS ADMINISTRATIVE STRATEGIC APPROACH

EXPENDITURES & OVERHEAD, TO STACKING
LOCATION COSTS
Leaner maintenance & Optimisation of Refitting the head office, Evaluate on a case-by-
project management, yardstays, rolling expat position case basis, aggressively
procurement savings, maintenance evaluation, localisation, consultants, pursue new contracts &
travel expense predictive maintenance travel & benefits extensions, rigorously
reductions, general & real-time monitoring efficiencies realised re-evaluate stacking cost
efficiency programmes levels
Note: cost reduction excluding FX

page 58
Our competitors have also focused aggressively on cost reduction

across both Opex and SG&A
X USD m X % savings
savings
Opex savings1 SG&A savings Fleet redn.

USD m, % USD m, % Impact USDm Industry wide initiatives
SG&A costs
Maersk Drilling 10 10
Reviewing all back office/support function spend
Cutting air travel class and amount of travel
Atwood 63 11 3 5 37m
and instead meeting via tele/video conference
Diamond 316 20 13 16 430m Crew costs

Onshore staff reduction (~15%)
Ensco 355 16 13 10 373m
Reducing variable pay and benefits company-wide
(10-15%)
Noble 251 16 26 25 193m Stopping merit raises in 2015
Hiring freezes
Rowan 3 0 17 13 40m Stopping all offshore retention pay and salary
adjustments
Transocean 1385 27 59 25 397m

R&M costs
Ensuring vendors and suppliers agree to cost cuts
Seadrill 278 27 36 11 309m
Reducing spend on spares through inventory
management
Pacific Drilling 35 8 3 5 47m Focus on R&M on being right first time
Note 1 Savings shown for all competitors is calculated as change in 2015 over 2014, as announced in Q3 2015 (Q2 for Seadrill),
and includes impact due to operational changes, stacking, rig additions and cost reduction initiatives. Not adjusted for FX
Source: Company filings, Maersk Drilling

page 59
Utilisation adversely impacted by idle rigs

but continued strong operational uptime
Contracted days (left) and coverage % (right) Operational uptime*
2,000 100% 100%
96% 96% 97% 97% 97%

1,800 94%
92%
95%
1,600 80%
1,400
90%
1,200 60%
1,000 85%
800 40%
80%
600
400 20%
75%
200
0 70% 0%
Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Contracted days Coverage % *Operational availability of the rig

page 60
Strong forward coverage with backlog

providing revenue visibility
Contract coverage Revenue backlog, USDbn Revenue backlog by customer
Others
100% 2.0
Shell
~1.9 Chevron
80% Maersk Oil
77% 1.5
Conoco-
Phillips
BP
~1.4
60%
Exxon
USD
52% 1.0 Conoco/ 5.4bn
Marathon
~1.0
40% 43% Total Statoil
Eni
0.5 Det Norske
~0.6
20% ~0.5
0% 0.0
2016 2017 2018 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020+

page 61
Fleet status jack-ups
Jack-ups Delivery year Customer Contract start Contract end Country Comments
Mrsk Innovator 2003 ConocoPhillips Feb 2010 Jun 2018 Norway 1 x 1 year option
Mrsk Inspirer 2004 Statoil (Volve) May 2007 Dec 2016 Norway
Maersk Intrepid 2014 Total Aug 2014 Sep 2018 Norway 4 x 1 year option
Maersk Interceptor 2014 Det norske Dec 2014 Dec 2019 Norway Up to 2 years option
Maersk Integrator 2015 Statoil Jun 2015 Jun 2019 Norway 2 x 1 year option
Mrsk Gallant 1993 Statoil Aug 2014 Aug 2016 Norway
Mrsk Giant 1986 DONG Nov 2015 Mar 2016 Denmark
Maersk Guardian 1986 Maersk Oil Sep 2016 Sep 2021 Denmark Accommodation contract
Maersk Reacher 2009 BP Sep 2011 Sep 2016 Norway
Maersk Resolute 2008 Hess Nov 2012 Apr 2016 Denmark
Maersk Resolve 2009 DONG Jun 2014 Feb 2017 Denmark 2 x 1 well option
Maersk Resilient 2008 Maersk Oil Oct 2015 Oct 2018 Denmark
Maersk Completer 2007 BSP Nov 2014 Oct 2018 Brunei 3 x 1 year option
Maersk Convincer 2008 Available
XL Enhanced 4 2016 BP Apr 2017 Apr 2022 Norway 5 x 1 year option
Note. As of 1 Jan 2016

page 62
Fleet status - floaters
Semisubmersibles Delivery year Customer Contract start Contract end Country Comments
Mrsk Developer 2009 Statoil Sep 2009 Jan 2016 USA
Mrsk Deliverer 2010 Chevron Jun 2012 Nov 2016 Angola
Maersk Discoverer 2009 BP Jul 2012 Aug 2019 Egypt
Heyday Aliyev 2003 BP Sep 2012 May 2021 Azerbaijan
Drillships
Maersk Viking 2014 ExxonMobil May 2014 Jun 2017 USA
ConocoPhillips/
Maersk Valiant 2014 Jun 2014 Aug 2017 USA 2 x 1 year option
Marathon
Maersk Venturer 2014 Total Mar 2016 Jul 2016 Uruguay
Maersk Voyager 2015 Eni Jul 2015 Dec 2018 Ghana 1 x 1 year option
Note. As of 1 Jan 2016

page 63
APM Shipping Services

Combined revenue of approx. USD 5bn and 18,000
employees operating all over the world
MAERSK TANKERS MAERSK SUPPLY SVITZER DAMCO

SERVICE
One of the largest The leading high-end The leading company One of the leading 4PL
companies in the company in the in the towage industry providers in the
product tanker industry offshore supply vessel logistics industry
industry

page 64
Improving and growing

the business
Underlying NOPAT, USDm
H1 H2
450
404
350
204
250
185
150 80
37 200
50 105
76
-37
-50
2013 2014 2015
Note: Excluding sales gain/loss

and impairments

page 65
Maersk Tankers strategy execution
PERFORMANCE Strong FY 2015, NOPAT USD 160m (FY 2014:

UPDATE USD 132m) and ROIC of 9.9% (FY 2014: 6.8%).
Best result since 2008
Product FY 2015 NOPAT USD 154m (FY 2014: loss
of USD 35m) ) highest ever result for the
product tanker segment
ROIC on par with average product peers
STRATEGIC Taking Lead strategy remains focused on

EXECUTION improving profitability and relative performance
within:
Cost Leadership
Active Position Taking
3rd Party Services
FY 2015 Taking Lead has contributed with USD
21m
Continued strong focus on Safety, with the 2015
result being the best in the history of Maersk
Tankers
Taking lead is estimated to contribute 2-3% to
ROIC over the next years and bringing Maersk
Source: Company financial reports and press releases Tankers to best in class in the industry

page 66
Maersk Supply Service strategy execution
PERFORMANCE Challenging markets the coming 2 years

UPDATE 2015 NOPAT at USD 147m (2014: USD 201m)
and ROIC of 8.5% (2014: 11.9%) driven by:
Decrease in revenue caused by lower rates
and utilisation in wake of weak market
Partly mitigated by significant costs
improvements during 2015
STRATEGIC Overall strategic direction remains:

EXECUTION 0 incidents
Top quartile performance
+10% return over the cycles
De-risking growth plans e.g. building to
contracts only
Implemented cost efficiency project resulting in
significant operational cost improvements
300+ seafarers made redundant (15% of crew
pool) resulting in annual saving of USD 21.5m
Working alongside customers to reduce total
costs of operations

page 67
Svitzer strategy execution
PERFORMANCE 2015 NOPAT USD 120m (2014: USD -270m) and

UPDATE ROIC of 10.9% (2014: -19.2%)
Financial and operating performance has improved
to historic high levels driven by improved
productivity, pricing/surcharge initiatives and
higher market shares in harbor towage
The difficult outlook for the commodity exports
and for shipping and off shore in general will likely
impact Svitzers growth potential negatively in the
coming years
STRATEGIC Focus on three closely related towage segments:

EXECUTION Harbour towage, Terminal Towage and Light
Offshore
Continued margin improvements in Harbour
Towage from improved asset utilization,
behavioral pricing and broader service offering for
global clients
Leverage relationships with global clients to
accelerate investments in emerging markets
targeting long-term commitments

page 68
Damco strategy execution
PERFORMANCE FY 2015 NOPAT USD 19m (FY 2014: USD -

UPDATE 293m) and ROIC of 7.1% (FY 2014: -63.2%)
Continuous overhead cost reduction and
productivity improvement
Strong development in supply chain
management product, while forwarding
products remains behind competition
Net Working Capital improved by two-thirds
(USD 112m) vs. year end 2014
STRATEGIC
EXECUTION Top-priorities for Damco remains:
Growing Ocean and Air profitability by
providing visibility and improving margins
through procurement
Gradual reduction of overhead costs and
headcount following the 2014 restructuring
initiatives, which started to pay off

page 69
Henrik Lund Johan Mortensen Maja Schou-Jensen

Head of Investor Relations Senior Investor Relations Officer Investor Relations Officer
henrik.lund@maersk.com johan.mortensen@maersk.com maja.schou-jensen@maersk.com
Tel: +45 3363 3106 Tel: +45 3363 3622 Tel: +45 3363 3639

Maersk Presentation Annual Report 2015 Appendix

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Maersk Presentation Annual Report 2015 Appendix

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Maersk Group strategy and performance

Represented in over 130 countries,

Market capitalisation of around USD

Facilitating global containerised trade

Supporting the global demand for energy

Strategy and performance AR 2015

Maersk Group overview

58% 14% 10% 6% 12%

UNDERLYING PROFIT2, FY2015 (%)

37% 12% 18% 21% 12%

INVESTED CAPITAL, FY2015 (%)

47% 8% 15% 19% 11%

Note 1: Reportable segments

Strategy and performance AR 2015

The Group will create value through

The Group seeks to improve the Return

Focused and disciplined capex

Execute portfolio optimization

The Group intends to share the value

Strategy and performance AR 2015

Group strategy overview

Strategy and performance AR 2015

Most of our businesses deliver top quartile

Not top quartile

Below BU WACC return in H1 2015 Above BU WACC return in H1 2015

Source: Benchmarking study H1 2015; Maersk Group

Strategy and performance AR 2015

Invested capital and ROIC

Group 43,509 -20.8% 2.3% 2.9% 11.0%

Maersk Line 20,054 -3.6% 13.0% 6.5% 11.6%

Maersk Oil 3,450 -214% -2.5% -38.6% -15.2%

APM Terminals 6,177 8.3% 7.9% 10.9% 14.7%

Maersk Drilling 7,978 9.0% 2.7% 9.3% 7.1%

APM Shipping Services 4,748 5.1% -35.8% 9.5% -4.2%

Maersk Tankers 1,644 7.3% 5.2% 9.9% 6.8%

Maersk Supply Service 1,769 0% 15.2% 8.5% 11.9%

Svitzer 1,132 10.4% -114% 10.9% -19.2%

Damco 203 2.6% -177% 7.1% -63.2%

Other Businesses 861 -6.8% -2.2% 10.8% 6.1%

Strategy and performance AR 2015

Disciplined capital allocation

Development in invested capital since Q4 2010

Maersk Drilling 115%

Maersk Line 19%

-100% -50% 0% 50% 100% 150%

Strategy and performance AR 2015

Strategy and performance AR 2015

Active portfolio management

Selected Cash flow from divestments Divestment gains (pre-tax)

Strategy and performance AR 2015

Value creation shared with investors

DKKbn Ordinary dividend Executed share buy back

Strategy and performance AR 2015

Maersk B relative performance

Outperformed its synthetic peer by Outperformed its synthetic peer by

Forwarders 13.3% Maersk B -2.2%

Maersk B -11.5% Ports -7.6%

Liners -16.3% Forwarders -9.1%

Ports -16.9% Upstream -11.9%

Synthetic -25.2% Offshore -16.3%

Upstream -28.2% Synthetic -17.9%

Tankers -30.9% Liners -21.7%

Drillers -42.6% Drillers -23.9%