바이퍼 에너지(VNOM) 2026년 3분기 실적 발표회: 원유 가이던스 상향

핵심 요약

• 2026년 3분기 원유 생산량이 일일 69,000배럴을 초과해 가이던스 상단을 소폭 상회했으며, 전분기 대비 6% 이상 증가했습니다.
• 운영사들은 바이퍼 에너지(Viper Energy) 보유 부지 전반에서 총 689개의 수평정을 가동했으며, 이 중 다이아몬드백(Diamondback)이 운영하는 우물 123개의 평균 순매출지분(NRI)은 9%를 상회했습니다.
• 잉여현금흐름(FCF)은 5억 2,000만 달러를 기록해 80%에 가까운 마진율을 나타냈습니다. 바이퍼는 주당 0.50달러의 기본 배당을 선언하고 9,000만 달러 규모의 자사주를 매입했습니다.
• 경영진은 2026년 전체 원유 생산량 가이던스 중간값을 일일 67,500배럴로 상향 조정했습니다. 4분기 가이던스는 일일 70,000~71,000배럴입니다.
• 바이퍼는 5억 2,900만 달러 규모의 맥엘로이 랜치(McElroy Ranch) 인수 건을 완료했으며, 현금 2억 8,000만 달러와 클래스 A 보통주 180만 주를 지급하는 조건으로 벅혼 미네랄스(Buckhorn Minerals) 자산을 인수하기로 합의했습니다.
• 경영진은 인수 관련 부채를 신속하게 상환하기 위해 추가 현금을 적립할 계획인 한편, 주가 약세 기간에는 자사주를 매입할 의향을 유지하고 있습니다.

주요 재무 데이터

사업 및 영업 성과

생산량 증가는 최근 인수 건과 다이아몬드백 에너지를 비롯한 제3자 운영사들의 지속적인 개발을 반영한 결과입니다. 경영진은 인수 기여분을 제외하더라도 자체 성장 모멘텀이 유지되었으며, 다이아몬드백의 집중적인 활동이 앞으로도 중요한 성장 동력으로 작용할 것으로 예상된다고 밝혔습니다.

바이퍼는 7월 1일 리버벤드(Riverbend) 인수를 완료하고, 9월 1일 다이아몬드백으로부터 광구 자산(mineral drop-down) 인수를 마쳤습니다. 다이아몬드백은 인수 대금을 전액 지분으로 수령하여 바이퍼에 대한 지분율을 높였습니다.

맥엘로이 랜치 거래를 통해 5억 2,900만 달러에 업턴(Upton) 및 크레인(Crane) 카운티 소재 순 로열티 에이커 약 7,400에이커가 추가되었습니다. 바이퍼는 총 60,000에이커 전반에 걸쳐 약 12%의 NRI 소유 지분을 보유한 것으로 추정합니다. 해당 자산은 95% 이상 미개발 상태로, 40개 이상의 순 인벤토리 시공 위치를 보유하고 있으며 미들랜드 분지 서부의 신흥 바넷(Barnett) 개발 수혜 기회를 제공합니다.

추진 중인 벅혼 인수 건은 미들랜드 분지 내 순 로열티 에이커 약 1,600에이커를 포함합니다. 약 80%가 바이퍼의 기존 영업 구역과 중복되며, 해당 자산의 약 60%는 미개발 상태입니다. 경영진은 순 인벤토리의 절반 가까이가 미들랜드 분지 남은 인벤토리 중 상위 25%(1분위)에 속하고 70%는 상위 50%에 속하는 것으로 추정합니다.

맥엘로이 랜치와 벅혼을 합쳐 주로 미개발 상태인 두 자산에서 약 60개의 순 시공 위치가 추가됩니다. 바이퍼는 수정된 자본 배치 프레임워크에 따라 주로 현금으로 거래 대금을 조달하고 있습니다.

경영진 가이던스

4분기 가이던스 범위는 3분기 생산량보다 일일 약 1,500배럴 높은 수준이며, 벅혼의 부분 분기 기여분이 포함되어 있습니다. 경영진은 자체 모멘텀과 인수 기여분이 생산량을 뒷받침할 것으로 예상하면서도, 제3자 운영사들의 2027년 계획에 대한 가시성은 여전히 제한적이라고 밝혔습니다.

리스크 및 주시 사항

• 경영진은 향후 제3자 개발 계획에 대한 가시성이 제한적이며, 허가 전환 및 운영사 계획이 진행됨에 따라 명확성이 높아질 것으로 예상합니다.
• 바이퍼는 맥엘로이 랜치 부지에 대한 셰브론(Chevron)의 개발 일정에 대해 구체적인 가시성을 확보하지 못했습니다. 이번 인수는 즉각적인 활동보다는 향후 10년간의 개발을 전제로 인수 심사(underwritten)가 이루어졌습니다.
• 부채 상환을 위해 현금을 적립하는 결정은 단기적인 상환 대 자사주 매입 간 배분에 영향을 미칠 수 있으나, 경영진은 주가가 약세를 보일 경우 자사주 매입을 늘릴 수 있다고 밝혔습니다.
• 이번 인수로 미개발 인벤토리에 대한 노출이 커짐에 따라 운영사의 개발 시기와 속도가 향후 생산량 성장에 중요해졌습니다.

애널리스트 Q&A 하이라이트

M&A 여력 및 전략: 경영진은 바이퍼가 선별적인 기조를 유지하면서 단기적인 실적 가산성(accretion)과 장기 미개발 인벤토리를 모두 제공하는 자산에 우선순위를 둘 수 있다고 밝혔습니다. 높은 잉여현금흐름 전환율과 재무제표 여력을 바탕으로 거래 구조에 따라 현금, 주식 또는 세금 연계 유닛을 유연하게 활용할 수 있습니다.

자체 성장: 다이아몬드백의 개발 프로그램이 여전히 가장 가시적인 핵심 성장 동력입니다. 경영진은 생산 기반이 확대됨에 따라 백분율 기준 성장세는 둔화될 수 있으나, 바이퍼 부지 전반에 걸친 집중적인 활동으로 인한 생산 혜택이 지속될 것으로 예상합니다.

자본 배치: 바이퍼는 지속 가능한 기본 배당을 부채 감축, 인수 및 주가 민감적 자사주 매입과 병행할 계획입니다. 경영진은 2026년 중 10억 달러가 넘는 현금 조달 거래를 완료했음에도 불구하고 연말 레버리지 비율이 1배 미만을 유지할 것으로 예상합니다.

바넷 기회: 경영진은 향후 수년간 바넷 형성층(Barnett) 활동이 바이퍼의 주요 개발 지표를 실질적으로 변화시킬 것으로 예상하지는 않습니다. 그러나 다이아몬드백 및 다른 운영사들이 개발을 확장함에 따라 해당 형성층이 타깃 인수 기회를 제공할 수 있습니다.

지표 자산: 경영진은 유전 인프라, 데이터 센터 또는 발전 설비를 지원할 수 있는 일부 지표면 부지에 대해 보다 긍정적인 입장을 취하게 되었습니다. 회사는 여러 방안을 검토 중이나 특정 거래나 조직 변화를 발표하지는 않았습니다.

실적발표 컨퍼런스 콜 전문

전체 실적 발표 컨퍼런스 콜 녹취록

경영진 발표

Operator

Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Viper Energy Third Quarter 2026 Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Be advised that today's conference is being recorded.

I will now hand the conference over to your first speaker today, Chip Seale, Investor Relations Director. Please go ahead.

Chip Seale

Thank you, Sarah. Good morning, and welcome to Viper Energy's Third Quarter 2026 Conference Call. During our call today, we may reference an updated investor presentation, which can be found on Viper's website. Representing Viper today are Kaes Van't Hof, CEO; and Austen Gilfillian, President.

During this conference call, the participants may make certain forward-looking statements relating to the company's financial condition, results of operations, plans, objectives, future performance and businesses. We caution you that actual results could differ materially from those that are indicated in these forward-looking statements due to a variety of factors. Information concerning these factors can be found in the company's filings with the SEC. In addition, we will make reference to certain non-GAAP measures. The reconciliations with the appropriate GAAP measures can be found in our earnings release issued yesterday afternoon.

I will now turn the call over to Kaes.

Kaes Van't Hof

Thank you, Chip. Welcome, everyone, and thank you for listening to Viper Energy's Third Quarter 2026 Conference Call. Q3 was another strong quarter for Viper. Oil production averaged just above the high end of our guidance range at over 69,000 barrels per day, up more than 6% quarter-over-quarter, driven by recent acquisitions and continued development from both Diamondback and our third-party operators. During the quarter, operators turned 689 gross horizontal wells to production on our acreage, including 123 Diamondback-operated wells at an average NRI of over 9%.

On the acquisition front, we closed 2 previously announced transactions, the Riverbend acquisition on July 1 and the Drop Down from Diamondback on September 1. Diamondback took its consideration entirely in equity for the Drop Down, further increasing its stake in Viper and reinforcing our alignment with our parent company.

In September, we also closed the McElroy Ranch acquisition for an aggregate purchase price of $529 million. This adds about 7,400 net royalty acres in Upton and Crane Counties. This ranch gives us a concentrated ownership of roughly 12% NRI across 60,000 gross acres in what we expect to be the core fairway of emerging Barnett development in the Western Midland Basin. It is more than 95% undeveloped with over 40 net inventory locations, and we expect its development to support our production profile and continued growth outlook over the next decade.

Additionally, today, we also announced an agreement to acquire nearly 1,600 net royalty acres in the Midland Basin from Buckhorn Minerals for $280 million in cash and 1.8 million Class A shares. Approximately 80% of the Buckhorn acreage overlaps with Viper's existing footprint and the asset is roughly 60% undeveloped, including exposure to the highly undeveloped Driver Unit.

We think this is one of the highest quality sizable mineral assets left in the Midland Basin. By our estimates, nearly half of its inventory -- half of its net inventory ranks in the top quartile of remaining inventory in the Midland Basin and 70% of the inventory ranks in the top half. Together, the McElroy Ranch and Buckhorn acquisitions add nearly 60 net locations across 2 largely undeveloped assets. Notably, we're funding these deals primarily with cash, delivering on the commitment we made when we revised our return of capital framework last quarter to pursue accretive M&A with less reliance on equity.

Reflecting the strength of our base business and these acquisitions, we are again raising our full year 2026 oil production guidance with a new midpoint of 67,500 barrels of oil per day. We're also initiating fourth quarter oil production guidance of 70,000 to 71,000 barrels of oil per day, up nearly 1,500 barrels per day from our third quarter actuals and inclusive of a partial quarter contribution from Buckhorn.

Turning to our financial results for the quarter, we generated $520 million of free cash flow, which represents a free cash flow margin of almost 80%. With the cash generated during the quarter, we declared a base dividend of $0.50 a share in addition to $90 million of repurchases during the quarter. As part of our revised capital allocation framework announced last quarter, we will also retain a significant amount of incremental cash to pay down debt from our previously disclosed -- discussed acquisitions very quickly.

In conclusion, every part of the Viper model showed up this quarter. Organic growth, high-quality acquisitions funded primarily with cash and a durable growing base dividend paired with opportunistic share repurchases. With a capital-light royalty model and an unmatched acreage position in the Permian Basin, we continue to believe Viper is uniquely positioned to deliver durable per share growth and attractive long-term stockholder returns.

With that, operator, now please open the line for questions.

Operator

[Operator Instructions] Our first question is Betty Jiang from Barclays.

질의응답

Wei Jiang

I first just want to ask about the M&A. It's really good to see the momentum you're seeing there while being able to fund that with cash on hand and the borrowing base. Maybe just the overall M&A landscape, why do you see these deals coming together now? Where do you see more opportunities going forward? And do you think you have the balance sheet capacity to do more of these things going forward?

Kaes Van't Hof

Yes, Betty, I'll give the high level and Austen can tell you what he's seeing in the market. I mean, I think, high-level, 2 of these deals, Buckhorn and Riverbend kind of packages that have been put together over the last few years that were kind of ripe for a sale. We obviously were able to get Riverbend done about 6 months ago and then Buckhorn through the process of the summer, ended up getting it done. I think both are very high-quality assets, a lot of undeveloped inventory. And we think about these things as multi-decade assets that we're going to own forever.

Obviously, we still have to be focused on the accretion near term, which both of these are. But I think that's kind of the sweet spot for Viper in our acquisition strategy. I'd say on the McElroy Ranch, that's kind of one of those -- we call them the unicorns in this basin, right? This is a ranch that was owned by a family for, I think, 80 years or 80-plus years, one of the first ranches bought as the Permian started developing vertical wells way back in the day.

And that's a hard ranch to -- for a lot of people to buy because they needed all cash, but we were able to move quickly and be a good counterparty. And I think the notoriety and the size and the scale of this business is what started to allow these deals to naturally accrue to us. And I kind of mentioned in past quarter's calls that the opportunity set ahead of Viper looks a lot like what it did in front of Diamondback 6 or 7 years ago with just a lot less well-funded, large competitive peers in the peer group. And so I think that should be a win for Viper shareholders.

But I think the lesson learned is that it's not all going to be equity funded. I think we have the balance sheet, the cash flow, the free cash, the free cash conversion to be able to use cash, do accretive deals for the shareholders and be prepared to do more by paying down debt very quickly.

So Austen, what do you see in the forward outlook here?

Austen Gilfillian

Yes. I think there's still a lot to do. But I think the good thing about how we're positioned today is that we get to be opportunistic. And frankly, we get to be picky about the assets that we choose and the assets that we like. So if you look at everything we've done this year, Riverbend, Buckhorn, McElroy Ranch and also the Drop Down, you can include that in there as well. They're all kind of distinct in that they have a weighting to undeveloped acreage.

So we generally can, I think, deliver differential returns by having a unique view on asset quality and operator development. So that's all I'll say, while I think there's still plenty to do. We'll look for not only the near-term accretion, but for a unique perspective to gain on the inventory and how that might create differential value for our shareholders.

Wei Jiang

That's great color. And for my follow-up, it just seems there's a lot of tailwind to the Viper business right now. You have higher oil prices, higher activity and you have these new assets coming in where you have this visibility on development cadence going forward. Maybe can you just speak to your current view of organic growth that you could generate from the asset base today into '27? Or however much visibility that you can provide to the market would be great.

Kaes Van't Hof

Yes. We don't have a ton of visibility on the third party yet, right? I think as we get closer to the next year, we start to look at permit conversion and kind of work the third-party plan. I think the Diamondback plan continues to chug along. These are big numbers, right? 123 wells with an average 9% interest is -- that's a huge amount of production coming from the Diamondback drill bit to continue.

I mean, I think in general, right, I think you're right. There's tailwinds. There's -- we've generally bought assets that have outperformed the basin growth. And I think maybe that's been misunderstood, right? The amount of growth relative to the basin is a testament to Austen and the team picking assets that should outperform the basin. And I expect that trend to continue.

Obviously, a lot of exciting things going on with new zones, the Barnett-Woodford development, McElroy Ranch development, some of the mega themes we talked about in the Diamondback call. All those things generally accrue to the benefit of Viper shareholders and should build value over time.

Austen, do you want to say anything about activity levels?

Austen Gilfillian

No, that's right. I mean we had quite a bit of organic growth embedded in the Q3 results. And even once you strip out the contribution from the acquisitions, you're still getting some of that momentum carrying into the fourth quarter. So I think we start to have a much bigger base, so the percentages maybe come down, but Diamondback is still driving a lot of growth through their concentrated activity on our position, and we see that happening for the foreseeable future.

Operator

Our next call and question is from Neal Dingmann with William Blair.

Neal Dingmann

My first question is just on asset drop downs. Could you talk about further drop downs for minerals and surface?

Kaes Van't Hof

Yes. I mean we have dropped down all of the minerals that we know about today that sit at the Diamondback level. There's always kind of little cleanups here and there from trades that we do if NRIs are above 75%. I think generally, we're aware of where surface revenues are trading -- surface cash flow is trading in the market. I think we have a unique surface position at Diamondback. We're evaluating the value of that within Diamondback and where it could or should sit.

I think generally, our progress on power deals and infrastructure development in the basin is allowing us to think about different options for the various assets we have across the portfolio, but nothing to announce today, but we're very conscious of the market and where multiples are. And I think generally, as I mentioned in the Diamondback call, we feel like we can dominate in this basin and kind of all facets of infrastructure, surface, minerals, midstream, upstream. So more to come there, Neal, but I think we're at the center of this next wave of Permian growth and Viper and Diamondback will play an important part of it.

Neal Dingmann

Perfect. And then just my second question, really just some you talked about last time on the increased flexibility that you talked about in that, I guess, you called it your previous revised return on capital framework. Specifically, how do you believe this ultimately will continue to improve investor returns and overall value?

Kaes Van't Hof

Yes. I mean, here's how I would frame it. It's -- we're in a kind of a grow or die business, right? And if you have all of your free cash flow going out the door every quarter, that limits your opportunities to grow. And so I think we recognize that there were a lot of opportunities ahead of us. Obviously, we knew we had McElroy Ranch in the works. We knew we had Buckhorn in the works.

And we just said, let's pay a very high base dividend that's competitive with the top dividend payers across our space, the majors combined with even a utility, but let's beat that with growth on top. And that's allowed us to do over $1 billion of deals with cash this year, and we'll still exit the year at sub 1x leverage. So that should accrete value to the equity holders long term. It should allow us to grow our base dividend long term and not be a flash in the pan because we want to be the dominant mineral position in this basin for a long time.

Operator

Our next question is from the line of Derrick Whitfield with Texas Capital.

Derrick Whitfield

I wanted to focus on the acquisition, the McElroy Ranch with my first question. So regarding that acquisition, how would you guys characterize your visibility into the development of the Barnett? Clearly, Diamondback can drive activity, but how do you project it across the other operators?

Austen Gilfillian

Yes, Derrick, good question. So we disclosed that in the Barnett specifically, Chevron is the largest operator, and we have the map on Slide 11 of the investor presentation. So that's kind of the big chunk of the contiguous acreage on the Southwest corner. While we don't have specific visibility into what Chevron is going to do, we do know them. We do know kind of operator trends within the basin. But really where we see value in acquisitions generally and also to this deal specifically is ranking the unbuilt inventory in what we think is an operator's overall inventory position.

So when you look at what Chevron is doing in the Permian and when we look at what we think is their remaining runway, we think this is going to be some of the highest return inventory that they have, both from an NPV certainly and then also from an IRR perspective. So we didn't underwrite happen today or tomorrow, but over the next decade, as these inventory locations start to get developed, I think that's going to create a lot of value for our shareholders.

Derrick Whitfield

Great. And for my follow-up, I wanted to pivot back to your long-term outlook for the business and what's collectively owned across the Diamondback family of companies today. Well, I realize Viper is oil and gas royalties focused. How do you view the longer-term opportunity for surface in Midland, particularly as you think about the mega themes that you outlined in the Diamondback shareholder letter?

Kaes Van't Hof

Yes. I would say, generally, Derrick, I have grown or we have grown more bullish on surface and kind of understand the long-term option value of it. Now just like not all acreage is created equal on the upstream side and not all mineral acreage is created equal on the mineral side, not all surface is created equal either, right? So it's about targeted acquisitions of surface that could have real use cases for oilfield development or data center development or power gen development. And there's some very specific things we're looking for when trying to pursue that. But I would say just generally, our kind of attitude on pursuing the right surface acquisitions has probably grown with knowledge gained through what we hope to be one of the first real projects completed in the basin on the power side.

Derrick Whitfield

Kaes, if I could go one further, maybe just as a follow-up to that. If you guys are looking at that as an opportunity, would that also necessitate standing up a separate team that could really focus on non-oil and gas applications? Or do you think that could all be done within the current management in place?

Kaes Van't Hof

Maybe not management, but we certainly have a lot of -- we have a lot of talented people throughout this organization. And I think those talents can be leveraged to many different things. I think it goes back to the institutional knowledge about the basin and how to get things done here that should drive that talent to succeed. So I know you're baiting me a little bit, Derrick, but I think there's some things in the works over here. And I think we have some catalysts as a group to think about and who's going to sit where it is kind of a secondary discussion.

Operator

Our next question is from the line of Jack Cavanagh with Goldman Sachs.

John Cavanagh

You mentioned earlier that it's a grow or die business. So I'm just kind of curious how that informs how you're thinking about the buyback for VNOM at current levels relative to incremental equity issuance to help fund some of the inorganic growth opportunities you're seeing in the market?

Kaes Van't Hof

Yes, Jack, you kind of think about them a little differently. I see the buyback as something that can grow per share metrics and look at like how many reserves per share we've grown, how much oil production per share we've grown, but we've got to do that at the right time. So I think about the buyback as selective on price. And then on deals, I wish we could control timing of deals, right? I'd love to buy every deal at $40 oil, but in the minerals, you're not being forced to sell, whereas upstream, sometimes the CapEx requirements force people into less economic decisions.

So I think being able to pounce on the upstream is more of a positioning that we focus on, whereas on the mineral side, I think balance sheet capacity being able to divide between cash and stock and even some of the unique aspects of Viper where we can offer tax deferred units to large enough deals positions Viper to be ready to do deals when the counterparty is ready versus be more front foot and aggressive, I would say.

Austen, do you want to add anything to that?

Austen Gilfillian

Yes. I think the beauty of the business model is that it's -- we can do all of the above. I mean when you think about a business with 80% free cash flow margins for us -- it's not a decision of dividend or buyback or acquisitions or debt reduction. It's a little bit of everything. And it might change quarter-to-quarter on the margin. But I think we can grow the business from an absolute standpoint with good deals with continued organic growth. And then if we can reduce the share count opportunistically where we see value, that just means incremental value creation on a per share basis.

John Cavanagh

Great. That makes a ton of sense. And then for my follow-up, Kaes, when you think about value capture across the FANG, VNOM complex, has the stock performance this year for VNOM influenced how you're thinking about the relationship between the 2 companies? And looking forward, is there any change to how you see FANG supporting VNOM's growth and value creation given the number of levers you can pull with the FANG enterprise?

Kaes Van't Hof

Yes. I mean that's a good question. Obviously, very reflective this year on stock price performance relative to peers. And I guess we could debate who we should define as VNOM peers. I think there's probably a couple of things I reflect on through the year. I think we sold where my Diamondback hat, we sold some shares in VNOM in March when oil prices, kind of, spiked. And I think in retrospect, that probably sent the wrong message to The Street, and I'm not afraid to admit some mistakes. But I think selling VNOM didn't make sense then. I think we've tried to reframe our commitment to VNOM ownership by increasing ownership through the Drop Down.

I think -- and I think over the long term, the FANG, VNOM relationship remains very strong. I think as an overall capital allocator, keeping all of our options open at both companies is going to be a good thing for both shareholder bases. And at Diamondback, that means grow my dividend, pay down debt, do deals or repurchase shares. But also at Diamondback, it means you can repurchase VNOM shares if you think they're a great deal and you're not blacked out from the market to do so.

And the same goes for VNOM, right? VNOM, we can do deals. We can buy back shares. We can hoard cash or like we did last quarter, we use cash in deals to be able to do that quickly and get our balance sheet back in shape. So long-winded answer, I think the relationship is strong and probably getting stronger, particularly as the 3 mega themes that we talked about on the last call start to come to fruition and grow within our combined complex.

Operator

Our last question will be from the line of Leo Mariani with ROTH.

Leo Mariani

Just wanted to follow up on an earlier comment that you made. It sounds like you're very kind of committed to paying down some of the incremental debt that you guys took on with the acquisitions. Do you see perhaps the share buyback getting a little bit less capital to execute in the next handful of quarters to try to get that debt down? Just trying to get a better understanding of that.

Kaes Van't Hof

Yes. I'll go back to it depends, Leo. I mean if the stock goes back to where it was at the beginning of the third quarter, we're going to lean in and buy back. That's the beauty of how much free cash benefit this business is generating. And I know people like to focus on debt to EBITDA. But at the end of the day, the debt to free cash flow of Viper is second to none. So if we see weakness in the stock price, we're going to lean in and buy back shares.

Leo Mariani

Okay. Appreciate that. And I guess just, obviously, FANG has had success in the Barnett. There's been a little bit more shift in activity towards that zone. It sounds like you guys are signaling you plan to kind of continue to do more in the coming years as kind of percentage of activity. Does that sort of benefit VNOM a bit more on the margin? Do they have higher kind of NRIs in the Barnett perhaps versus some of the other more traditional zones?

Kaes Van't Hof

Yes, Leo, in the near term or really the medium term, I don't think it has a huge impact to Viper. Really, the way that you have to think about it is total Diamondback completions and then what percentage of those wells Viper will own an interest in and then what NRI we have within those. We'll get the benefit of having some really high NRI in some really good areas, thinking about Spanish Trail specifically.

But I think for the next couple of years, even with the Barnett being added in, in a more significant way to the Diamondback development plan, those key metrics look similar. So that's good. I think really what gets exciting is the acquisition opportunity set that we can tailor around the Barnett. Diamondback can be selective on where they're developing it as they start to HBP leases, that creates a lot of synergy opportunities or even leverage for us to be smart in targeted acquisitions. So I think that's going to be a big part of the story over the next couple of years as the Barnett becomes more relevant to both complexes development.

Leo Mariani

Okay. And it sounds like the McElroy Ranch deal is really kind of a prime example of that. And it sounds like that's really kind of a medium- to longer-term bet just on a lot more industry development in the Barnett.

Kaes Van't Hof

Yes. I think we highlighted the Barnett there because we think it's probably the best zone, but there actually was a good amount of development from Firebird that is now Continental. Diamondback has got a little of it. It's not a zone territory, but there are some zones that have been tested further east that have been productive and added to production there.

Operator

This concludes the question-and-answer session. I would now like to turn it back to Kaes Van't Hof for closing remarks.

Kaes Van't Hof

Thanks, everyone, for participating in today's call. If you have any questions, please reach out. We're available at your convenience.

Operator

Thank you for your participation today. This concludes the program. You may now disconnect.