Thank you, Maggie, and thank you to everyone on the call for joining this briefing on Yancoal's fourth quarter production report for 2025. We have several members of Yancoal's executive leadership team to recap the quarter and participate in the question and answer session.

On the call we have: Sharif Farah, Chief Executive Officer; Kevin Su, Chief Financial Officer; Laura Zhang, Company Secretary, Chief Legal, Compliance, Corporate and Affairs Officer; Frank Fulham, Chief Sustainability, Technology, Innovation and Development Officer; David Bennett, EGM Operations; Mark Salem, EGM Marketing and Logistics; Mike Wells, EGM Finance; and Mark Jacobs, EGM Environment and External Affairs. The commentary provided today is based on the quarterly production report published to the Australian Securities Exchange and the Stock Exchange of Hong Kong platforms on the 19th of January.

There is no presentation pack for this conference call. The Yancoal website holds past presentations for any participants who require additional information on the company.

I'll hand over to our CEO, Sharif Farah, to provide the fourth quarter highlights.

Thanks, Brendan. I also welcome everyone joining us on today's conference call.

We had a great quarter. In fact, the 10.4 million tonnes of attributable saleable coal was a company record.

The fourth quarter production carried us to the top of our annual production guidance range, and the 38.6 million tonnes for 2025 was also a company record. This was a tremendous effort, and I congratulate all of our people for their role in this achievement.

All of our mines contributed to total ROM coal production, which increased 20% compared to the third quarter. As usual, we don't include cash operating costs per tonne in the quarterly report.

At the half year, our cash operating costs were 93 Australian dollars per tonne, in the middle of our 89 to 97 Australian dollar per tonne guidance range. Consistent with our commentary in October, for the full year, we expect to deliver unit costs around the middle of the guidance range.

Previously, we disclosed our expectation for capital expenditure within the guidance range. We now anticipate it will be towards the bottom end of the 750 to 900 million dollar guidance range.

During the fourth quarter of 2025, international coal indices for both the thermal and metallurgical coal markets had mixed performances, yet our average realised prices improved by 6% to 148 Australian dollars per tonne from the prior quarter. This realised price, combined with 10.8 million tonnes of attributable sales and our disciplined approach to costs, delivered a 307 million dollar increase to our cash balance over the quarter.

We now have over 2 billion dollars on the balance sheet and no debt. This gives us scope to consider dividends and to contemplate potential value-adding growth opportunities.

We look forward to carrying our positive operational momentum into 2026. We will provide our 2026 guidance on production, cash operating costs and capital expenditure in our 2025 financial results, which are scheduled to be released on the 25th of February.

I'll now hand over to other members of our executive team to share further details from the fourth quarter, starting with David Bennett, our Executive General Manager of Operations.

Thanks, Sharif. Our total recordable injury frequency rate reduced throughout 2025, and it was 6.14 at the end of the year.

We achieved a downward trend in this statistic, and our rate is below the industry weighted average of 7.45. We remain committed to further improving our safety performance.

During the quarter, we produced 18.9 million tonnes of ROM coal, 20% more than the third quarter. From our ROM coal, we produced 13.6 million tonnes of saleable coal, 11% more than the third quarter.

It takes all our people across all our mines working cohesively to deliver this level of performance. There were some temporary challenges, such as hard coal encountered by the Moolarben longwall, some wet weather delays, and some equipment reliability issues.

However, in each case the issues were resolved or effective adaptions were applied. Our attributable share of the saleable coal was 10.4 million tonnes.

As Sharif mentioned, this was a record performance. In the report, we explain how the 10.4 million tonnes includes the additional 3.75% interest in the Moolarben joint venture, which we secured on the 3rd of October.

If this additional interest was excluded, the figure would have been 10.2 million tonnes, which still would have equalled our best ever historical quarter. I will now hand over to Brendan Fitzpatrick, Investor Relations Manager, to provide commentary on the coal markets.

Thanks, David. This is Brendan.

We do have Mark Salem, our EGM Marketing and Logistics, online for the Q&A; however, I'll present the initial comments on his behalf regarding the coal market. Our attributable sales volume of 10.8 million tonnes was similar to the third quarter and followed our strategy of optimising sales volumes and managing stock positions.

The sales volume contained a typical mix of thermal and metallurgical coal products. During the quarter, conditions in the international coal markets, both thermal and metallurgical, remained somewhat challenging.

There were mixed performances across the indices we sell against. The average price on the API5 index was 12% higher than in the third quarter, while the average price on the GC Newcastle index was flat.

That said, it was the GC Newcastle index that finished the quarter with positive momentum. There was a similar situation for our metallurgical coal products.

The average price on the Platts Low-Vol PCI index was down 2%, but the average price on the Platts semi-soft index was up 10%. In the thermal coal market, Japan is still utilising coal as the fuel of choice for power generation, and its imports increased 16% in 2025.

South Korea also increased its imports, but prioritised Indonesian and Colombian supply over Australian coal. Elsewhere, demand for thermal coal was less resilient.

Despite a restock cycle in China during the fourth quarter, its annual imports fell 18% through the year due to a strong domestic production level in the first half. Taiwan utilised more gas and imported 12% less coal than last year, and India reduced demand for coal imports due to cooler weather through summer and increased hydropower generation.

Supply from Australia was constrained at times during 2025, but as our performance shows, there are still good export rates being achieved. Indonesia's exports fell 10%, and Colombia's exports fell 18% in response to market conditions and due to some infrastructure challenges.

Russian exports continued to reach international markets, and improved rail and port operations in South Africa enabled its exports to increase by 5%. A demand uplift may be needed for thermal coal indices to break upward from the trading ranges observed over the past six to twelve months.

Global demand for metallurgical coal declined as steel production decreased in many countries. The primary driver of this situation was Chinese steel exports displacing production from other steel production nations.

In seaborne metallurgical coal markets, global exports were down 7% compared to 2024. A primary component of the global reduction was 9% lower exports from Australia due to a mix of temporary and structural reductions, including mine suspensions and some rain delays.

Exports from Canada were down 3% due to reduced coal handling capacity following a shiploader fire at an export terminal. Sharif mentioned the 6% increase in our average realised price to $148 Australian dollars per tonne.

This combined the 6% increase in our average thermal price to $138 Australian dollars per tonne and a 4% increase in our average metallurgical coal price to $203 Australian dollars per tonne. Having made all these comments, gains in most coal price indices since the end of 2025 is stoking optimism amongst some industry participants.

We continue to utilise our scale and blending capabilities to maximise the realised prices we can deliver. I will now hand over to Kevin Su, our CFO, to touch on the financial position.

Thanks, Brendan. The key observations are the same, but we made last quarter.

Yancoal remains in a strong financial position. We ended the quarter with over $2 billion in the bank and remain free of interest-bearing debt.

When we last spoke, we discussed the external and temporary cost pressures at the Port of Newcastle. The ship queue at the port has now gone and we have most of those temporary cost pressures.

Sharif described how we are still on track to deliver operating costs around the middle of the guidance range. We would see this as a notable achievement in the current industry setting.

It reinforces our position as a leading low-cost coal exporter. David and the operation teams delivered production records, which allowed Mark and the marketing team to maximise sales and blending opportunities.

Adding over $300 million to our balance sheet in just three months speaks to the quality of our assets. Our strengthening financial position enables us to consider dividends and to contemplate potential value-adding growth opportunities.

We'll be better placed to provide further capital management commentary when we release our 2025 financial results. I'll now hand over back to Brendan to coordinate the Q&A session.

Thanks, Kevin, and also David and Sharif for highlighting the drivers of our record fourth quarter performance. We will now move on to the question and answer session, starting with questions from the phone, then moving to questions submitted via the webcast.

Maggie, could you please initiate the process for questions via the phone?

Thanks, Maggie. I'll take questions from the webcast and I'll come back to you shortly.

Let's start with some questions about the operational performance. There's a multi-component question.

I'll take it in pieces, starting with the question: the current Yancoal stockpiles and inventory levels, how are they looking, and is the company back to matching production volumes with sales volumes given the various disruptions at Newcastle through the middle of the year?

Thanks, Brendan. Look, sales and production are back to normal and are matched.

We had a very good quarter, a strong production quarter and also a good sales quarter, and moving forwards the intention is for those to be matched.

Thank you. There's an additional component talking about New South Wales production and asking a question about coal royalties, given the royalties were revised and new royalties were implemented a year and a half ago.

Is there any comment on the current royalty structure and how we view that part of our business?

Thanks, Brendan. Again, we've had no discussions regarding New South Wales coal royalties and currently are unaware of any changes.

And

also on the operational side, the Hunter Valley operations, can we comment on the production profile and its uplift in the fourth quarter and how it's running in relation to what we would see as the normalised levels?

Thanks, Brendan. David, you may want to comment on Hunter Valley operations, but again just reinforcing they did have a very strong fourth quarter.

I'll cover that, Sharif. Look, it was a very strong fourth quarter.

Hunter Valley operations, as well as Mount Thorley Warkworth earlier in the year, had quite a bit of wet weather. At the halfway point of the year, both sites were a little bit behind their production target for 2025.

We got more wet weather in August, but were able to mitigate the effects of that wet weather through the capital investment that we'd made in prior years. We also saw some really good performance from our equipment fleets, our productivities.

We set some remarkable records on some of our fleets for their output, and on the back of that, we're able to deliver our budgeted coal production for 2025. The mines are being operated in steady state.

They're productive, and we're getting the most that we can from our people assets, our equipment assets and our geological assets. Thanks, Sharif.

Thank you, David. Let's segue from the production into the coal markets.

Mark Salem, I presented comments on your behalf. Could you provide any additional thoughts on the coal market outlook, what we've seen so far this year, and what potentially will be driving coal markets over the current calendar year?

Sure. Thanks, Brendan, and thanks for reading my section.

As I'm travelling in rural areas and I was a bit worried about service, I appreciate you stepping up to read that section, and as long as people can hear me clearly. In terms of the market, we did see some price recovery towards in Q4, towards the end of the year, and that was on the back of, as you said, China restocking.

We've since seen that price come down a little. Not substantially, just a little bit, and this is nothing unusual coming into Chinese New Year and the Chinese buying slowing down a little bit.

Coming out of Chinese New Year, I think we are anticipating that market will again pick up a little bit in that high ash area, because there still remains a need in southern China for the demand for the coal. From a met coal point of view, we have had a couple of supply disruptions, and if those supply disruptions come through, that could yield a softening in the market, and we really need the steel industry to pick up, which has been in a slightly weakened situation due to the collapse of the property market in China.

In terms of going in from 2025 into 2026, probably a very similar scenario. The current pricing and world demand is really supply-driven, and we need just stronger demand to really have a bigger impact into that market.

Thank you, Mark. Maggie, could I please ask you to invite people once more for the audio question channel?

Hi, Brendan, can you hear me?

Yes, Anna, we can hear you.

Hello. This is Hannah from Morgan Stanley.

I just have one quick question on the sellable production. I noticed ROM coal production remained high, but the sellable coal production to the ROM coal production percentage has declined to 72% in the fourth quarter 2025, and I think the ratio is lower for the Moolarben and Hunter Valley.

Can we understand the reasons behind this low ratio for the sellable coal production to ROM coal production?

Hannah, I appreciate the question. As I can see, looking at the fourth quarter numbers, our total ROM coal production was about 20% compared to the prior quarter, but the saleable coal production was up 11%, suggesting a slightly lower conversion.

Perhaps David Bennett could offer some insights into the relative balance between ROM coal and saleable coal volumes over the fourth quarter. I suspect it's probably to do with more ROM coal being prioritised, but David, over to you.

Thanks, Brendan, and thanks, Hannah, for your question. Brendan's point there is exactly right.

There was a lot more ROM coal came out of the mines in the fourth quarter, and we were unable to process 100% of that coal through the CHPPs, our coal handling plants. The coal that we couldn't process in the fourth quarter, turning it from ROM coal into saleable coal, sits on stockpiles just ahead of the CHPPs, and we will process that coal and turn it into saleable product throughout the first quarter of 2026.

Thank you.

Thank you, David.

I see clear, thank you.

Thank you, Hannah. I'll move back to the webcast questions.

There's a few questions all touching on a similar topic. It's the focus on our over $2 billion cash balance reported and interest in understanding what that might mean for dividends and payout ratios heading into the financial results in February.

What could we possibly say on this topic ahead of the financial results next month?

Thanks, Brendan. Look, to start with, we do have a dividend framework in our company constitution.

The usual practice being for the board to review the final position after the end of the year and then determine the capacity for dividend allocation. Kevin, you may have some additional comments you want to make in that regard.

I think the framework Sharif just mentioned is very, I think, very clearly communicated with all the investors in the past, which is about 50% NPAT or 50% free cash flow, whichever is higher, and also balancing the debt management, growth opportunities. I think companies still follow the same baseline internally.

From management perspective, we will definitely balancing all these different priorities and make a decision at board level in February. Thanks.

Thank you, Kevin. Thank you, Sharif.

There were several questions on that topic. I think we've covered the main focus of those questions through that combined response.

Maggie, I'll go to you one last time for questions from the phone line, and whilst doing that, let people know that I've exhausted the questions on the webcast. There were some additional further down the screen that I hadn't seen.

Let's have a look at these ones. We're focusing in on the financial performance and the cash balance and cash generation that was reported when adjusting for the $25 million Moolarben payment.

That was the additional 3.75% interest. The free cash flow adjusted to $332 million, which annualises to 1.3 billion, an implied yield of 18%.

How should investors be thinking about capital management, given the free cash flow generation? We somewhat covered the capital management component, but perhaps just worth testing that thought process on how the numbers are flowing through: the $307 million increase in the cash balance, the Moolarben payment, and the implied annualised free cash flow.

Kevin, could I start with you to share some thoughts on what we reported in the fourth quarter in terms of the $307 million increase in the cash balance, and recognising how that might or might not be relevant to an annualised number?

I think from the previous communication, one thing we have to appreciate is the realised price versus the price curve. There is a lagging effect and there is some timing difference we should consider.

At the same time, normally Q4 is a strong, been a fairly strong quarter, providing more volume from shipment perspective as well. They all contributed to quite a healthy cash flow.

Overall, as Sharif just mentioned, the whole objective from management perspective is to be very cost competitive compared with our peers. We are still to be the lowest cost competitive coal producer in the country.

For that reason, even in an unfavourable coal price market, I think Yancoal is still generating, generally speaking, very healthy cash flow compared with our peers. Back to the capital management philosophy we just mentioned, we will be assessing the free cash flow on a full-year basis, balancing the other priorities, and follow the guidance internally and also externally we've been communicating, and decide our dividend management decision by February the following year.

Thanks.

Very good, Kevin. We've got a hypothetical question related to coal markets.

I suspect Mark Salem, this will be one that we call on your expertise. It relates to the U.S.

market, and the observation is currently the U.S. exports coal into the global market, but there is speculation with AI-driven power demand levels increasing.

Is there a potential for the U.S. to need coal imports to meet power demand, is my understanding of the question?

Is there a scenario where Australian coal could be imported into the U.S.? Is there any historical precedent for such a market setting?

Mark Salem, could you share your thoughts on the coal markets and, in particular, swings in U.S. exports and imports?

Sure. Look, I suppose very simply, Australia has not supplied coal into mainland USA, and I say that because Australia was a supplier into Hawaii, a coal-fired power station to Hawaii many years ago.

Australia is not a supplier. U.S.

is the second largest coal producer themselves, and they still have a lot of resources and a lot of surplus. They've always been known in the international seaborne market as the swing supplier.

When coal prices are high, you often see U.S. coal come into the international seaborne market.

When prices are low, they withdraw and keep their production domestically. They're not one for importing.

The U.S. is not really on our radar as a future coal import market in terms of mainland USA.

We do sell coal into South America and some of the South American markets as well. Just in terms of AI, yeah, there is growing demand for electricity consumption in AI in Asian countries, in our more geographically located markets.

That is something we're monitoring very closely and something we do watch in that regard. Yeah.

Thank you, Mark. Looking at the questions coming through, we've got another one that is basically hypothetical in nature.

Given recent media commentary suggesting the potential of a Glencore-Rio merger or acquisition of some sort, the question seeks to clarify our Hunter Valley operations, which are a joint venture with Glencore. Is that joint venture or that operation subject to any change of control clauses or relevant agreements that might be triggered under such a hypothetical scenario?

Thanks, Brendan. Look, I won't be commenting on market hypotheticals at this stage.

I think we're all reading the press, and it's too early to form any view as to the merits of anything of this nature at this point in time.

Fair enough. Thank you very much, Sharif.

We'll come back to the market as and when something concrete requires a comment from us in relation to our specific joint venture operations or joint venture at Hunter Valley operations. I've now concluded all the questions on the webcast, having scrolled down and found them all in the second setting.

Maggie, I'll come back to you one last time for questions via the phone line. During that time, if any questions appear on the webcast, I'll take those.

Otherwise, we'll be shortly moving to close out the webcast. Maggie, could you do online questions once more?

Thank you, Maggie. Confirming, I see no fresh questions on the webcast.

I'll pass back to Sharif one last time for the closing comments.

Thank you, Brendan, and thank you once again to everyone who joined us on the call. I look forward to engaging with you in just over a month when we deliver our 2025 financial results.

As we reflect on the production records and the robust financial position we reported, there are three things I hope you'll keep front of mind. Firstly, Yancoal delivered the production records because we have world-class assets run by some of the most capable people in the industry.

This is something I firmly believe. The level of production we delivered through 2025 required sustained dedication from all of our workforce.

Secondly, Yancoal is highly disciplined on cost control. In our view, keeping unit costs flat compared to last year and delivering cash operating costs around the middle of guidance would be a great outcome in the current industry setting.

We see our ability to operate with comparatively low cash costs as a distinct competitive advantage. Thirdly, Yancoal increased its cash position by more than $300 million in three months.

This is a distinct reminder that we're not only a low-cost miner, but that our position as the second largest coal producer in Australia provides great leverage to improving coal prices. We look forward to speaking with you all again in February following the release of our 2025 financial results.

Have a great day.

Thank you, Sharif. Maggie, could you please conclude the webcast?