Shell profits fall as trading hit by volatile markets
Nevertheless, profits in the second quarter of the year were ahead of analyst expectations.
Shell added that income attributable to shareholders was 23% lower, due to the effect of 'lower trading and optimisation margin' and decreasing energy prices.
The firm said it was also impacted by a charge of 509 million dollars (£383 million) related to the UK energy profits levy, which took place in the first quarter.
The FTSE 100 company, however, said it would continue to hand significant cash back to its shareholders.
It announced a 3.5 billion dollar (£2.6 billion) share buyback for the quarter.
Wael Sawan, chief executive of Shell, said: 'Shell generated robust cash flows reflecting strong operational performance in a less favourable macro environment.
'We continued to deliver on our strategy by enhancing our deep-water portfolio in Nigeria and Brazil, and achieved a key milestone by shipping the first cargo from LNG (liquified natural gas) Canada.
'Our continued focus on performance, discipline and simplification helped deliver 3.9 billion dollars (£2.9 billion) of structural cost reductions since 2022, with the majority delivered through non-portfolio actions.
'This focus enables us to commence another 3.5 billion dollars (£2.6 billion) of buybacks for the next three months, the 15th consecutive quarter of at least 3 billion dollars in buybacks.'
Derren Nathan, head of equity research at Hargreaves Lansdown, said: 'Shell's second earnings hit a bit of an oil patch, with lower commodity prices, a weaker trading environment and unplanned downtime at its chemical plants all playing their part.
'Shell's balance sheet is one of its key strengths and investors could start to get nervous if debt continues to rise for any length of time.
'Nonetheless, management has ploughed on with a further buyback […] and there are some signs that financial performance could improve in the third quarter.'
Shares in the company moved 1.7% higher in early trading.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Good, mad and ugly: the US economy's performance under Trump
According to Donald Trump's White House, the US economy is booming, inflation is dead and jobs are surging. A blizzard of economic reports has cast a pall on such claims in recent days. This week's data on Trump's early economic record was mixed – good, mad and ugly – with jobs numbers so weak he reached for the catchphrase he once used to build himself into a reality TV star: you're fired. The picture is chaotic, with robust headline growth in the world's largest economy, wild swings in trade, and a remarkable slowdown in the labor market. For six months, Trump has staged an extraordinary campaign to overhaul the global economy and extract concessions from Washington's allies and rivals by threatening and imposing steep tariffs on their US exports. But the unpredictable, erratic rollout of this strategy has already had bizarre consequences. On the surface, at least, this week's deluge of data opened with good news: the US economy returned to growth in the second quarter, with gross domestic product (GDP) – a broad measure of economic health – expanding at a rate not seen since last summer. But this followed an unexpected contraction in the first quarter, and underlined some more concerning figures, such as a 15.6% drop in private domestic investment. Businesses have been struggling to keep up with the hour-by-hour jerks and jolts on sweeping economies policies. Yes, there was good growth in the last quarter but in the first six months, the US economy grew at a mediocre 1.2%. The Wall Street Journal called it 'the weirdest GDP report ever'. Delve a bit deeper, and you start to see how the US economy is grappling with a series of extraordinary forces as Trump hammers out his trade strategy. Firms spent much of the first quarter waiting for the president to reveal his plans for tariffs: which countries would be targeted, at what rates, and when. They stockpiled, triggering an unprecedented surge in imports that pushed growth into the red. In the second quarter, however, as Trump started to ramp up his economic attacks, imports tumbled at an equally astonishing pace. Net exports – how much a country exports more than it imports – boosted GDP. This is Trump's least favorite chart. Despite his many public demands, threats and attacks, the Federal Reserve has not yet cut interest rates this year. Why? Jerome Powell, the central bank's chair, has repeatedly argued it should wait and see the impact of the president's trade strategy before moving. Fed officials are worried that inflation – despite Trump's claims that it has collapsed on his watch – has actually remained stubborn, and might rise as a result of his tariffs. This has gone down extremely poorly in the White House, where officials are counting down the weeks until Powell's term as chair ends next May. Data released on Friday fundamentally changed the way US policymakers and politicians think about the economy. Until then, many inside the Fed thought everything was broadly ticking over nicely – and Trump administration officials claimed they were overseeing a boom in activity. But July's employment report revealed far fewer jobs were created that month than economists had expected, and revised down estimates for May and June by an astonishing 258,000. Job creation has stalled. 'Look, this jobs report isn't ideal,' Stephen Miran, chairman of the White House council of economic advisers, told CNN, before suggesting that fading uncertainty around trade and fiscal policy would lead to significant improvement. 'It's all going to get much, much better from here,' he added.
The Independent
3 hours ago
- The Independent
Talks held over making Trump first US president to be given Freedom of the City of London
Your support helps us to tell the story Read more Support Now From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference. Read more Talks have been held over giving Donald Trump the Freedom of the City of London during his state visit in September, in a highly symbolic move. According to a source, the proposal to give President Trump the honour was made because it would give the Corporation the opportunity to meet the US leader and make the case for free trade and against tariffs at the ceremony. It would also be a way of marking the UK receiving the first of the Trump trade deals with questions still over tariffs on steel. The president would helicopter in from Windsor Castle to the US ambassador's Winfield House residence in Regent's Park for the ceremony. The Independent was told: 'It would be an important honour for the president just as our countries prepare to mark the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence next year. President Donald Trump ( REUTERS ) 'More importantly it would be the perfect opportunity for the City to address the importance of free trade and the issues of tariffs. 'The symbolism of being allowed to herd your sheep across the bridge and not pay taxes is very important all things considered.' But while the president was understood to be keen on the idea of receiving the honour, the Freedom Applications Sub (Policy & Resources) Committee chaired by Sir William Russell, half brother of the actor Damian Lewis, has not been persuaded. According to sources the sub committee was warned that the award would be 'too controversial'. The Corporation rarely gives government leaders the honour and had to withdraw it from Myanmar'ss Aung San Suu Kyi after criticism of her government being involved with persecution of the Rohingya. However, the official explanation is that President Trump has not been in government long enough. A spokesperson said: 'By convention, only Heads of State or Government who have served a minimum of seven years in office are eligible to be considered for the Honorary Freedom. 'The decision to grant the Honorary Freedom rests solely with the Court of Common Council – our highest decision-making body – not with any individual elected member.' The last head of government to be awarded the Honorary Freedom was Baroness Margaret Thatcher, who was recognised after serving 10 years as prime minister. The Honorary Freedom has never been awarded to a sitting US president, although Dwight Eisenhower received it after the Second World War for his role as commander in chief of the allied forces. According to a source, the City may change its mind if there is a request from the government which has not been made yet. It means that the US president is facing a second snub in his state visit. It follows a decision not to ask him to address a joint sitting of the Houses of Parliament with the state visit happening the day after parliament rises for the conference season recess. This is despite the fact that when Pope Benedict came on a state visit in 2010 he was given the honour of addressing Parliamentarians in Westminster Hall even though it was the day after recess had begun. Trump's state visit - the first time an individual has been granted a second state visit - will take place between 17 and 19 September. It will include a state banquet hosted by the King with the president staying at Windsor Castle.
Times
5 hours ago
- Times
My pension is up £167k — and I've only put £7k in
When Jaspal Saund transferred £743,000 that he had spent years building up in workplace pensions into his own self-invested personal pension (Sipp), he was terrified. 'If you lose the money, it is on you, nobody is going to step in and help you,' said Saund, 56, who is a chartered accountant. Yet he felt it was something he had to do to turbocharge his pension, as getting a Sipp would allow him to invest more heavily in the stock market. Now, nearly 20 months and 95 trades later, Saund, who lives in South Woodford, east London, has grown his pot by £167,000, to £910,000, despite saving only £7,200. His goal is to have a pension pot of £2 million before his planned retirement at 67. 'Pension portfolio theory tells you that at my age you should really be much heavier in bonds and gilts and less in equities,' Saund said. 'But staying more heavily invested in shares has paid off and propelled me closer to my goal.' • Top of the pension pots: the best place for your Sipp Saund's decision to take control of his pension and concentrate his investments on the stock market is not the usual strategy for people who are approaching retirement. Most of the 22 million employees who are signed up to workplace pensions are part of their companies' default schemes. Many of these schemes automatically move clients into less risky assets in the years leading up to retirement. Helen Morrissey from the investment platform Hargreaves Lansdown said: 'A popular approach taken by many default funds is to adapt to what is known as lifestyling, where you are switched out of equities to lower-risk assets such as bonds, the closer you get to retirement.' Equities are considered to be more risky because they are subject to market volatility and potential losses. Bonds are effectively IOUs from the government or companies. The returns are guaranteed and in the case of UK government bonds — known as gilts — there is very little chance of default. They also provide regular interest payments. By switching to bonds, savers can ensure their pots are protected from the ups and downs of the stock market. This lifestyling process can happen up to 15 years before someone's stated retirement date. But it can mean missing out on significant returns. Someone on a starting salary of £25,000 at 22, who retired at 65 and saved 8 per cent into their pension throughout their career would have a pot worth £283,000 if it was moved into less risky assets (with 33 per cent stocks and 42 per cent bonds) 15 years before retirement, according to the consultancy Isio. If that pot stayed in the typical growth fund (with 83 per cent shares and 6 per cent bonds), it would be worth £308,000. This assumes a salary increase of 2 per cent a year and investment growth of 7 per cent a year after fees. Saving enough for retirement has become increasingly important as life expectancy and the cost of living have risen. In June the trade association Pensions UK reported that the minimum amount required for a single retired person to live a comfortable retirement was £43,900 a year after tax, assuming you don't have to pay rent or a mortgage, up from £33,600 in 2021. You would need pension savings of at least £800,000 to afford that standard of living, according to the wealth manager Quilter. Laith Khalaf from the investment platform AJ Bell said: 'For many people, there is a fundamental mismatch in terms of what the lifestyle investment strategy is trying to achieve and what is going to happen in their retirement.' Saund puts £400 into his Sipp every month. He also has a workplace pension into which £780 is paid by his employer every month and a £20,000 pension from a former employer that could not be moved into his Sipp. • The cheap and easy way to invest (without the risk) 'I've got three kids and because of the nature of what I do, and how intense it is, I probably can't keep doing this past 67,' Saund said. 'My target is to get to £2 million to be comfortable, which is achievable over the next ten years, if I don't do anything stupid.' After consolidating four of his workplace pensions into a Sipp with AJ Bell, he was given full control of the stocks and funds he invested in. His wisest move has been to heavily back US tech stocks. This included ploughing £262,000 into JP Morgan's US Select Equity fund, and £200,000 into the bank's US Technology fund. After seeing what he called a 'wobble in the US market' last July, he sold the US Select Equity fund, which invests in Apple, Microsoft and Amazon, for £332,000, while the US Technology fund was sold for £223,058. Saund is also one of many winners from investing in the US chipmaker Nvidia, which was recently valued at $4 trillion. He has a stake worth about £188,000, having bought the shares for £143,700. This included buying £75,000 worth between late February and early March, after they fell 8 per cent on news of a weaker-than-expected quarterly forecast. That £75,000 investment is now worth more than £98,000. Saund's decision to keep heavily invested in equities instead of following the lifestyling approach has paid dividends. Analysis by AJ Bell found that if he had transferred all his £743,000 pension pot to the average lifestyle bond fund (which is fully invested in long-dated bonds with the purpose of preparing for retirement) in October 2023, it would be worth about £792,000. But even Saund has decided to reduce his risk in the past year amid market volatility. Last August he used some of the proceeds from selling the JP Morgan Funds to buy £400,000 of 30-year UK Treasury bonds with an interest rate of 4.25 per cent. He bought another £100,000 of bonds in March. In total they return about £22,000 a year, providing another boost to his retirement funds. • Banks to push cash savers towards investing While the potential returns of having all of your pension in equities might be appealing, it comes with its risks. 'If you take out a full equity approach and are reliant on it for income, you could be having to sell shares when they are at market lows,' Khalaf said. And lifestyling still has a place, particularly for those who don't want to actively manage their investments, according to Sonia Kataora from the investment consultancy Barnett Waddingham. 'Lifestyling can offer a hands-off approach, which can be reassuring to individuals not confident or interested in managing their pension investments.'
