Range Resources (RRC) — Stock Analysis 2026 [4.5]

Analysis as of 29 July 2026. This is a point-in-time snapshot, not an evergreen guide. Fundamentals are from Range’s fiscal-2025 Annual Report (10-K, year ended 31 December 2025) and its Q2 2026 results, released 21 July 2026; market data is as of the 28 July 2026 close and will move. Rating: ★★★★½, High quality — Fairly valued → priced for its quality: you are buying duration, not yield. Price deck used in the valuation (Table 3b grid, V26): base Henry Hub US$3.50/MMBtu — the fixed-grid rung nearest the representative trailing average of Henry Hub through mid-2026 — with bear US$3.00 and bull US$4.00, all three rungs of the fixed 2.5–4.5/MMBtu grid; spot ~US$3.25 and the EIA’s US$3.49 (2027) forecast are 0%-weight cross-checks, and the company’s own reserve report is struck at a US$3.39/Mcf NYMEX benchmark. 10% discount rate, matching the SEC PV-10 convention, sensitised at 8% and 12%. Refreshed on each annual report and on material events. For information only, prepared with AI assistance — see the disclaimer at the end.

Range Resources owns twenty-two years of reserves and is in no hurry to produce them. That single fact explains almost everything about the company: why it trades below the discounted value of its own audited proved reserves while every Appalachian peer trades above; why its free-cash-flow yield screens as the thinnest in the basin; and why management holds capital flat at US$650–700 million a year and sends the difference to shareholders instead. The thesis in one line: the best-capitalised, longest-lived and most independently-certified operator in Appalachia, priced at roughly one times a net asset value built almost entirely from audited reserves rather than promises. Why look now: net debt fell 28% in six months to US$881 million, and the company just finished a US$850 million buyback with US$1.4 billion of fresh authorisation behind it. To screen Range against every North American upstream name on production, cost, reserve life and free-cash-flow yield, go to Metal Pilot.

1. Snapshot & thesis

Range Resources Corporation (NYSE: RRC) is an independent natural gas, NGLs and oil producer headquartered in Fort Worth, Texas, with operations concentrated almost entirely in the Marcellus Shale of southwest Pennsylvania. It is a producer/operator by archetype and an energy producer by sector. Unlike its two closest comparables it neither owns its midstream nor is captive to an affiliate: it contracts gathering, processing and fractionation from third parties and markets the resulting NGLs into domestic and international channels. In FY2025 it produced 2.24 billion cubic feet equivalent per day (Bcfe/d) from 1,579 gross (1,499 net) producing wells across approximately 879,000 gross (769,000 net) leased acres, at a 95% average working interest, with 564 employees. (Mcf = thousand cubic feet; Mcfe = thousand cubic feet equivalent, liquids converted at 6 Mcf per barrel; Bcfe = billion; Tcfe = trillion; NGLs = natural gas liquids; TGP&C = transportation, gathering, processing and compression.)

Figure 1. Range Resources in numbers

Figure data: Range Resources FY2025 Form 10-K (production, reserves, PV-10, unit costs, capital returns); net debt per Q2 2026 results, 21 Jul 2026; market data and analyst consensus as of 28 Jul 2026. Rating per Section 9.

Table 1. Range Resources in numbers

Source: Range Resources FY2025 Form 10-K for all operating and FY2025 financial figures; net debt per the company’s Q2 2026 results (21 Jul 2026); market data and share count (233.67 m) per stockanalysis.com as of 28 Jul 2026. Free cash flow is operating cash flow (US$1,171 m) less all capital additions including acreage purchases (US$642 m); on an exploration-and-production-only basis it is US$587 m. Realized price is the company’s “including derivative settlements” measure, before third-party transportation deductions — see Section 2.2. Listed: Public (NYSE: RRC).

Thesis in brief. Bull: Range holds 18.1 Tcfe of proved reserves against 816 Bcfe of annual production — a 22-year life, roughly seven years longer than any peer — inside a contiguous 769,000-net-acre Pennsylvania position with three stacked benches and about 27 million lateral feet of drilling inventory. It carries the lowest leverage in the basin at 0.73× debt to EBITDA, earns the highest returns on capital in the peer set (ROIC 17%), holds third-party MiQ ‘A’ methane certification across all of its production, and returned US$316 million to shareholders in 2025 while cutting net debt 28% in the first half of 2026. It trades at 0.86× its own PV-10 — the only Appalachian producer below one. Bear: that long life is the flip side of deliberate slowness. Production grew 2.5% in 2025, capital is pinned flat through 2027, and the resulting free-cash-flow yield of roughly 6% is the thinnest in the peer group — an investor is paid in reserve duration rather than in cash today, and duration is only worth something if gas prices eventually reward it. What tips it: the gas price. A 22-year book has more leverage to the deck than anything else in Appalachia, in both directions. The full rating and its rationale are in Section 9.

How to read this analysis: here for the verdict? The statcards above and the rating in Section 9 are the whole story. Want the evidence? Read Section 2 (the assets) through Section 7 (the valuation).

2. Assets & operations

Range earns two prices from one wellbore, and the second one is the interesting one. Henry Hub sat near US$3.25/MMBtu in late July 2026, with the U.S. EIA forecasting US$3.67 for 2026 and US$3.49 for 2027; roughly a third of Range’s production comes out as ethane, propane, butanes and condensate, which price off crude and off international arbitrage. For how gas is priced, who produces it and how the Appalachian basis discount works, see the Natural Gas — A Complete Market Guide ; the crude complex that sets the NGL strip is covered in the Oil guide . This section spends its words on the company. For how Range compares with the other four large US gas producers on one construction — scale, cost, reserve value, balance sheet and the nine-point scorecard — see US Upstream Natural Gas Producers Compared .

2.1 Portfolio overview & map

Range’s asset is a single, contiguous block. At 31 December 2025 it held approximately 879,000 gross (769,000 net) leased acres, of which the Pennsylvania position alone was 870,835 gross (763,362 net) — 775,315 gross developed acres and 95,520 gross undeveloped. It operates almost all of it at a 95% average working interest, with no dual completions. What sits under that acreage is three stacked targets: the Marcellus, the Utica/Point Pleasant beneath it, and the Upper Devonian above — of which only the Marcellus is meaningfully developed.

Table 2. Asset base, 31 December 2025

Source: Range Resources FY2025 Form 10-K , properties and acreage tables at 31 Dec 2025. The Utica/Point Pleasant and Upper Devonian benches sit under the same leasehold and carry no booked proved reserves; the company describes them as “significant unbooked resource potential.” WI = working interest. Listed: Public (NYSE: RRC).

Concentration here is a feature rather than a bug, and Range says so: a single contiguous operating area supports “regional expertise, economies of scale and a low-cost structure.” The practical consequence is visible in the inventory figure — approximately 27 million lateral feet of drilling locations, which at the current pace of roughly 60 wells a year represents decades rather than years. The company is explicit that its proved reserves capture only the five-year development horizon the SEC permits, and that a large portfolio of drilling opportunities sits beyond it.

2.2 Revenue split — by commodity & the cost stack

By commodity, FY2025 sales of US$2,816 million split roughly US$1,728 million natural gas (61.4%), US$979 million NGLs (34.8%) and US$106 million oil (3.8%), from realized prices of US$3.08/Mcf for gas, US$24.15/Bbl for NGLs and US$53.68/Bbl for oil before derivatives. The liquids weighting — about 31% of production by volume — sits neatly between CNX’s dry-gas 8% and Antero’s 36%.

Figure 2. FY2025 hydrocarbon revenue by commodity

Figure data: Range Resources FY2025 Form 10-K ; derived from FY2025 volumes (560.9 Bcf gas, 40.55 MMBbl NGLs, 1.98 MMBbl oil) and realized prices excluding derivative settlements, which reconcile to the reported US$2,816 m of natural gas, NGLs and oil sales to within 0.1%.

Range does something no peer in this series does: it publishes three realized-price measures, including one that nets out the transportation it pays. The three for FY2025 are US$3.45/Mcfe excluding derivatives, US$3.60/Mcfe including derivative settlements, and US$2.10/Mcfe including derivatives and third-party transportation costs paid by Range. That last figure is the honest wellhead-equivalent number, and inside it sits the most striking disclosure in the filing: NGLs realize US$24.15 per barrel gross but US$9.67 per barrel after transport — the pipe takes 60% of the NGL price.

Figure 3. Where the US$3.60 goes — FY2025 unit economics

Figure data: Range Resources FY2025 Form 10-K , production and per-unit cost disclosures. Cash margin is derived as the realized price including derivative settlements less the four cash cost lines; the fully-loaded margin additionally deducts depletion, depreciation and amortisation of US$0.45/Mcfe. This figure substitutes for the standard by-asset revenue split, because Range operates a single contiguous asset — see Section 10.1.

Read across the series, the cost stack is where Range earns its rating. Its TGP&C of US$1.50/Mcfe sits between CNX’s US$0.54 and Antero’s US$2.27 — the right place for a producer that is a third liquids and uses third-party midstream. But its depletion charge of just US$0.45/Mcfe is the lowest of the three, a function of a long-lived, largely-depreciated asset base and low finding costs. The result is that Range converts a mid-range realized price into the best fully-loaded margin in the group: US$1.26/Mcfe, against CNX’s US$1.17 and Antero’s US$0.67. It is neither the cheapest operator nor the richest seller, and it ends up ahead of both.

2.3 The Marcellus — the producing asset

Everything Range owns of consequence is one play. FY2025 production was 816 Bcfe (2.24 Bcfe/d): 560.9 Bcf of natural gas, 40.55 million barrels of NGLs and 1.98 million barrels of oil — up 2.5% on 2024’s 796 Bcfe and 4.5% on 2023’s 781 Bcfe. That is maintenance-plus, by design. At year-end the company had 29 gross (28 net) wells drilling or completing and 53 gross (52 net) waiting on completion or pipelines, a modest inventory of work in progress consistent with a flat programme.

The cost discipline shows in the per-unit lines, which barely move: lease operating expense of US$0.13/Mcfe (US$0.12 in both 2024 and 2023), taxes other than income of US$0.04/Mcfe including the Pennsylvania impact fee, and general and administrative expense of US$0.22/Mcfe, unchanged year on year. TGP&C rose slightly, from US$1.48 to US$1.50/Mcfe, which the company attributes to higher electricity costs and FERC rate changes rather than to anything it controls.

The single most important asset-level risk is the one Range cannot fix from Pennsylvania: it depends on third-party gathering, processing and pipeline takeaway, and the price it receives for two-fifths of its molecules is set by how much of that capacity it must pay for. The offset is that, unlike a producer captive to an affiliate, Range can and does re-contract.

2.4 Reserves — the twenty-two-year book

Range’s reserve position is the reason this analysis rates it where it does. At 31 December 2025 proved reserves stood at 18,142 Bcfe (18.1 Tcfe) — 11,716 Bcf of natural gas, 1,038 million barrels of NGLs and 33 million barrels of oil, or 35% liquids — of which 12,801 Bcfe, or 70.6%, was proved developed, up from 65.8% a year earlier. Against 816 Bcfe of annual production that is a reserve life of 22.2 years.

Two features of that book deserve emphasis. First, reserves were essentially flat year on year — 18,131 Bcfe to 18,142 Bcfe — while the company produced 816 Bcfe, which is a reserve-replacement ratio of roughly 100% achieved entirely through the drill bit and revisions, with no acquisition. Second, the PV-10 was US$11,566 million at the SEC benchmark of US$3.39/Mcf NYMEX gas, with a standardized measure after tax of US$9,636 million — figures that more than doubled from 2024’s US$5,454 million and US$4,691 million on the strength of a US$1.26/Mcf higher benchmark price. That sensitivity is the single most important number in the valuation, and Section 7 sensitises it.

Figure 4. Production by fiscal year, FY2023–FY2026E

Chart source: Range Resources FY2025 Form 10-K for FY2023–FY2025 volumes; the 2026 bar is derived from guidance of modest growth toward 2.5 Bcfe/d exiting 2026 (Q2 2026 results) and is an estimate. Realized price including derivatives moved to US$3.32/Mcfe (2024) and US$3.60 (2025) (Table 4) — that second series is carried in the table rather than overlaid (rule A13).

2.5 Capital discipline & the North Louisiana tail

Range’s 2026 capital budget is US$650–700 million — US$620–640 million of drilling, US$15–35 million of acreage and US$15–25 million of software, facilities and other — explicitly framed as achieving “modest growth in production relative to 2025.” Q2 2026 delivered production of 2,296 MMcfe/d, up 4.5% year on year, with the company guiding to 2.5 Bcfe/d exiting 2026 and 2.6 Bcfe/d in 2027 on capital held flat across both years, having moved a portion of second-half 2026 drilling into 2027.

Two structural items sit behind the operating business. The US$3.0 billion borrowing-base bank credit facility underpins liquidity, which stood at approximately US$1.7 billion at year-end and about US$1.1 billion after the January 2026 note redemption. And a legacy tail: the August 2020 divestiture of the North Louisiana assets left Range with retained gathering, transportation and processing obligations running until 2030 — a diminishing but real drag disclosed separately from the main contractual-obligations table.

2.6 Peer positioning

Range’s peer set is the one used across this series for Appalachian gas: EQT Corporation (NYSE: EQT), the basin’s largest producer; Expand Energy Corporation (Nasdaq: EXE), the largest US gas producer by volume; Antero Resources Corporation (NYSE: AR), the liquids-rich comparable; and CNX Resources Corporation (NYSE: CNX), the low-cost dry-gas counterpoint. Every “vs. peers” claim in this analysis — each scorecard star, the cost read, the valuation multiples in Section 7 — uses that set.

Table 3. Quality-metric peer positioning, mid-2026

Source: company guidance and filings as reported — Range, Antero and CNX per their FY2025 Form 10-Ks and 2026 guidance; EQT Q2 2026 results ; Expand Energy Q2 2026 results . Leverage ratios are on each company’s own reported basis and are not strictly comparable. “n/d” = not disclosed on a comparable basis in the sources used. Figures should be refreshed at publish.

Where Range sits: mid-scale, mid-liquids, and first in the group on the two dimensions that compound — reserve life and balance-sheet strength. It produces a third of what EQT does and a little more than half of Antero, but it holds nearly as many proved reserves as Antero against 45% less annual production, and it carries less than a third of Antero’s net debt. That combination — long life, low leverage, moderate growth — is a distinctive profile in a basin where most operators have chosen either scale or yield.

3. Financials & balance sheet

FY2025 was Range’s strongest year since 2023, and the improvement came from price rather than volume. Natural gas, NGLs and oil sales rose 27% to US$2,816 million on a 24% increase in realized prices and a 2% increase in production; total revenues and other income, which include derivative marks and brokered gas, reached US$3,116 million. Net income was US$658.0 million (US$2.74 diluted), against US$266.3 million in 2024. Operating cash flow of US$1,171 million against US$642 million of all-in capital additions produced US$530 million of free cash flow.

Table 4. Three-year financial summary (US$ millions)

Source: Range Resources FY2025 Form 10-K — consolidated statements of income and cash flows, the production and price history table, and the PV-10 disclosure. A five-year series is not shown because the FY2025 filing presents three years; “—” marks figures not disclosed on a consistent basis rather than mixing sources. Capital additions comprise natural gas, NGLs and oil properties, field service assets and acreage purchases; free cash flow is operating cash flow less that total. Total revenues include derivative fair value income and brokered gas and therefore swing more than the underlying sales line. Range pays a dividend and reports no adjusted-EBITDA figure in the filing.

The balance sheet is the strongest in the peer set, and it got stronger fast. Range ended 2025 with US$1.2 billion of total debt — US$600 million of 8.25% senior notes due 2029, US$500 million of 4.75% notes due 2030 and US$118 million drawn on the bank facility — against essentially zero cash, having used its US$304 million opening balance and facility borrowings to repay the remaining US$606.5 million of 4.875% notes at maturity in May 2025. Net debt was therefore about US$1.22 billion at year-end. Then, on 15 January 2026, Range fully redeemed the US$600 million of 8.25% notes due 2029 using credit-facility borrowings — a refinancing that cut its highest coupon but shifted the fixed-to-floating mix from 90/10 to roughly 50/50. By 30 June 2026 net debt had fallen 28% to US$880.8 million, and leverage of 0.73× debt to EBITDA is the lowest in the group outside Expand.

Contractual obligations are the offsetting weight, and they are smaller than the comparable. At 31 December 2025 Range’s total contractual obligations were US$7.44 billion, of which US$5.86 billion was transportation and gathering commitments with the remainder debt, operating leases and asset-retirement obligations. That is a real fixed claim on future cash flow — but set against 18.1 Tcfe of proved reserves it works out to roughly US$0.32 per Mcfe of commitment, against US$0.43 for Antero on the same arithmetic. Range’s transport book is both smaller in absolute terms and better covered by reserves.

Hedging: the lightest in the basin. At 31 December 2025 Range had hedged approximately 20% of projected 2026 total production, including about 27% of projected natural gas — a materially lower ratio than Antero or CNX. The book comprises natural-gas swaps on 300,000 MMBtu/d for 2026, collars on 50,000 MMBtu/d for January 2026, three-way collars on 137,123 MMBtu/d for 2026, and basis swaps totalling 161,290,000 MMBtu locking differentials between NYMEX and Appalachian delivery points. The posture is deliberate: protect a defined slice of near-term cash flow, keep the upside on the rest. It also means Range carries the most spot exposure of the three.

Capital returns are the most complete in the group. Range is the only company in this series doing all three at once — dividend, buyback and deleveraging. In FY2025 it paid US$85.7 million of dividends and repurchased US$230.6 million of stock, returning US$316 million, about 60% of free cash flow. In the first half of 2026 it completed a multi-year buyback of 35.9 million shares for US$850 million and had US$1.4 billion of authorisation remaining at the end of Q2, alongside US$78 million of Q2 repurchases at an average of about US$39.18 and US$24 million of dividends.

Figure 5. Free cash flow by fiscal year, FY2023–FY2025

Chart source: Table 4, this analysis; Range Resources FY2025 Form 10-K and Q2 2026 results. Operating cash flow (US$978m → 945 → 1,171), capital returned to shareholders (US$96m → 142 → 316) and net debt (US$1.22 bn at year-end falling to US$881 m by mid-2026) are read from Table 4 and §3 rather than overlaid as additional series (rule A13).

4. Management, strategy & corporate structure

4.1 Management & governance

Range is led by President and Chief Executive Officer Dennis L. Degner, who has more than 25 years in oil and gas including prior roles at Encana, Sierra Engineering and Halliburton. The finance seat is held by Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Mark S. Scucchi, and legal and governance by Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary Erin W. McDowell. The board is chaired by Greg G. Maxwell, who oversees strategy, risk and capital allocation.

The governance emphasis stated in the filing is straightforward and matches the observable behaviour: safety, environmental protection, and alignment of employee incentives with stockholder interests through equity ownership. What distinguishes this team from its closest comparables is simply that nothing about it is in transition — the same leadership has held capital flat, cut net debt 28% in six months, completed an US$850 million buyback and delivered its production guidance, all in the same period in which Antero changed chief executives and executed the largest acquisition in its history. Continuity is not a strategy, but for a business whose thesis rests on twenty-two years of patient development it is worth something.

The governance question a reader should weigh is alignment depth: insider ownership is 1.13%, against 97.21% institutional. The incentive structure points the right way; the personal capital behind it is thin.

4.2 Strategy & capital allocation

The stated strategy is unusually plain, and Range has actually followed it. Generate consistent cash flow from a long-life reserve base with a low base-decline rate, developed through internally generated drilling projects rather than acquisitions; maintain a multi-year inventory of roughly 27 million lateral feet to sustain capital-efficient development; and prioritise capital toward funding the budget, returning capital to stockholders, and maintaining a strong balance sheet. The filing states the posture directly: maintenance-level activity and shareholder returns rather than production growth for its own sake.

The 2026 allocation stack is concrete: a US$650–700 million budget — flat with 2025 and guided flat again into 2027 — targeting 2.5 Bcfe/d exiting 2026 and 2.6 Bcfe/d in 2027, with the residual cash split between the US$1.4 billion buyback authorisation, a growing dividend and further debt reduction. Range also markets to a deliberately wide set of domestic and international customers to maximise realisations and spread counterparty risk. There is no stated intention to acquire.

4.3 Ownership & corporate structure

Range’s structure is the simplest of the four companies in this series, and that simplicity is itself informative. There is no captive midstream affiliate, no drilling partnership, no noncontrolling interest and no joint venture of consequence — gathering, processing and fractionation are contracted from third parties on commercial terms, which is why the whole of the TGP&C line sits in operating expense rather than being split between a toll and an equity stake.

Three structural features shape the cash-flow profile. The US$3.0 billion borrowing-base bank credit facility is the liquidity backbone and, after January 2026, the source of roughly half the debt. The firm-transportation portfolio across multiple pipelines is what lets Range move gas and NGLs into diverse markets and manage Appalachian basis — and it is the source of the US$5.86 billion of commitments. And the August 2020 North Louisiana divestiture left retained gathering, transportation and processing obligations running to 2030, disclosed outside the main obligations table.

On the equity side: 268,573,212 shares issued with 33,115,000 held in treasury at 31 December 2025, leaving roughly 235.5 million outstanding and about 233.7 million by late July 2026 after further repurchases — a share count that has fallen by nearly 36 million over the life of the completed buyback.

5. ESG & sustainability

Range has the strongest environmental profile in this peer set, and — unusually — most of it is verified by someone other than Range. The company reports net-zero Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse-gas emissions, achieved through direct emissions reductions complemented by verified carbon credits. More significant for a gas producer, it has expanded its ‘A’-grade MiQ methane certification to cover all of its Pennsylvania production — MiQ being an independent methane-certification standard, so this is third-party attestation across the entire producing base rather than a self-reported intensity figure.

The water record is equally concrete: Range recycles approximately 100% of the flowback and produced water generated from its operations, which removes both freshwater demand and disposal volumes from the equation — the two water impacts that generate most of the local opposition to Appalachian development. On equipment, it has expanded the installation of compressed-air pneumatic controllers, replacing the natural-gas-driven devices that are the largest routine source of upstream methane venting. It publishes a Corporate Sustainability Report covering environmental, social and governance performance and targets.

The commercial logic matters as much as the environmental one. Certified low-methane gas is increasingly a condition of access to LNG-linked and European buyers, and a whole-base ‘A’ certification is a marketable asset rather than a disclosure exercise. The balanced read: this is the most externally-validated environmental position among the Appalachian names reviewed in this series, and it is achieved on the operating side rather than purchased. Two caveats keep it honest — net-zero Scope 1 and 2 depends in part on purchased carbon credits rather than on absolute emissions elimination, and no quantity of upstream certification changes the Scope 3 profile of the molecule itself.

6. Risks

Table 5. Risk register

Source: Range Resources FY2025 Form 10-K risk factors, contractual obligations, hedge disclosures and MD&A; Q2 2026 results for post-year-end figures. Likelihood and impact are the author’s assessment.

The through-line is that Range has deliberately swapped near-term certainty for long-term optionality, and the risk register is the bill for that choice. It hedges less than anyone else in the basin, grows slower than anyone else in the basin, and holds more reserve years than anyone else in the basin. Each of those is the same decision viewed from a different angle: management would rather own the resource than monetise it quickly, and would rather carry price risk on a strong balance sheet than pay away upside to remove it.

The two risks that would actually break the thesis are the gas price and the duration it is applied to. A 22-year book means Range’s net asset value moves further per dollar of gas price than any peer’s — Section 7 puts that at roughly ±23% of net asset value per ±US$0.50/MMBtu, against ±21% for Antero and ±9% for a low-margin developer. In a sustained sub-US$3.00 world, the long life becomes a liability rather than an asset: the back half of the book is discounted more heavily, the light hedge coverage offers no shelter, and the free-cash-flow yield that already screens thinnest in the group compresses further. What makes that survivable rather than fatal is the balance sheet — at 0.73× leverage with no maturity before 2029, Range can simply wait, which is precisely what a 22-year reserve life is for. Which price regime arrives is a macro question rather than a company one; Commodities Across the Cycle sets out the regimes in which energy commodities lead and lag.

Figure 6. Risk heat-map

Figure data: this analysis; risks per the register above.

7. Valuation

Valuation as of 29 Jul 2026, in USD. Horizon: spot fair value. Deck (Table 3b rungs, V26): bear US$3.00/MMBtu, base US$3.50/MMBtu, bull US$4.00/MMBtu Henry Hub — the base is the fixed-grid rung nearest the representative trailing average of Henry Hub through mid-2026; spot ~US$3.25 and the EIA’s US$3.49 (2027) forecast are 0%-weight cross-checks, and the reserve report is struck at a US$3.39/Mcf NYMEX benchmark. Discount rate 10%, matching the SEC PV-10 convention, sensitised at 8% and 12% — because for a 22-year reserve book the discount rate is nearly as important as the price.

This section applies the Metal Pilot valuation module for a producer/operator archetype. The primary intrinsic method is a net asset value anchored on the company’s own disclosed PV-10, adjusted to the base price deck and bridged to equity — a method that fits Range unusually well, because roughly nine-tenths of the resulting value comes from audited proved reserves rather than from estimates the author has to supply. The primary relative methods are enterprise value to PV-10 and free-cash-flow yield against the Appalachian peer set. A headline price-to-earnings is not the anchor: Range’s reported earnings include derivative fair-value income of US$121.5 million in FY2025 and swing with marks rather than with operations.

Method selection. NAV off PV-10 bridged to equity (primary intrinsic) · EV/PV-10 and free-cash-flow yield vs. peers (primary relative) · price to standardized measure per share and the analyst consensus as cross-checks. No transaction-comparables analysis is run, because no comparable disclosed southwest Pennsylvania corporate transaction was available in the sources used.

7.1 Net asset value

The disclosed anchor is a PV-10 of US$11,566 million at 31 December 2025 on an SEC benchmark of US$3.39/Mcf NYMEX gas, reconciling to a standardized measure of US$9,636 million after US$1,930 million of discounted future income taxes. Because the SEC deck is already close to the base case, the adjustment is small — the work is in the bridge.

Table 6. NAV build-up (base case: US$3.50/MMBtu Henry Hub, 10% discount)

Source: this analysis. PV-10, the discounted-tax reconciliation, the asset-retirement obligation and G&A per Mcfe are per the Range Resources FY2025 Form 10-K ; net debt and share count per Q2 2026 results and stockanalysis.com . The price adjustment, the risked unbooked-inventory credit and the capitalised G&A are the author’s estimates, not disclosed figures. The PV-10 price scaling uses the sensitivity implied by the company’s own three-year disclosure, in which PV-10 moved from US$5,454 m at a US$2.13/Mcf benchmark to US$11,566 m at US$3.39 — roughly US$4,850 m per US$1.00/Mcf, a relationship that reproduces the 2023 datapoint to within 1%.

Figure 7. NAV build-up waterfall

Figure data: Table 6, this analysis.

A base-case NAV of US$37.65 against a US$38.75 price puts Range at 1.03× net asset value — and, more usefully, 91% of that NAV comes from the audited PV-10 rather than from author estimates. That is a meaningfully better-evidenced valuation than any of the comparables in this series carry, and it is the reason the range in Section 7.4 is narrower on the intrinsic side than the headline scenario spread suggests.

Table 7. NAV/share sensitivity — Henry Hub price × discount rate

Source: this analysis; NAV/share in US$, from the Table 6 model, with discounted taxes scaled proportionally to PV-10. A ±US$0.50/MMBtu move shifts NAV/share by roughly ±US$8.6, or about ±23% — the highest gas-price leverage in this series, precisely because a 22-year book puts more cash flow further out where price assumptions compound. A ±2-point move in the discount rate moves NAV/share by roughly ∓14%, which is why duration is a risk as well as an asset.

Figure 8. NAV/share sensitivity — Henry Hub price × discount rate

Figure data: Table 7, this analysis.

7.2 Relative valuation

At US$38.75 and 233.67 million shares, market capitalisation is ~US$9.05 billion and enterprise value ~US$9.93 billion. Against a PV-10 of US$11,566 million that is 0.86× — and Range is the only Appalachian producer in this series trading below the discounted value of its own audited proved reserves.

Table 8. Relative valuation vs. the Appalachian peer set, July 2026

Source: PV-10 figures are each company’s own disclosure in its FY2025 Form 10-K, all at year-end 2025 SEC pricing and therefore directly comparable; market capitalisations, enterprise values, free-cash-flow yields and analyst consensus per stockanalysis.com as of 24–29 Jul 2026. Range’s free-cash-flow yield is on FY2025 all-in free cash flow of US$530 m; on the exploration-and-production-only capex basis some providers use it is ~7.5%. Antero’s “ex-midstream” figure removes the market value of its 29% Antero Midstream stake. “n/d” = not disclosed on a comparable basis in the sources used. Screen the live peer set on Metal Pilot.

The two relative measures point in opposite directions, and that is the finding. On reserve value Range is decisively the cheapest: 0.86× PV-10 against Antero’s 1.36× and CNX’s 1.08×, and on the after-tax measure the shares trade at just 1.03× the standardized measure per share (US$9,636 million less US$881 million of net debt, over 233.67 million shares, is US$37.47) against 1.24× for Antero and 1.91× for CNX. On cash-flow yield it is the most expensive: roughly 5.9% against CNX’s 11.1% and EQT’s 11.55%. Both are true, and the reconciliation is duration. Range reinvests 55% of operating cash flow to hold production nearly flat across a 22-year book; CNX reinvests 48% against a 15-year book and hands more back today. An investor in Range is buying reserve years; an investor in CNX or EQT is buying current yield. Which is the better trade depends entirely on what gas does over the next decade.

7.3 Scenario analysis

Table 9. Scenario valuation (illustrative, not forecasts)

Source: this analysis; illustrative scenarios, not forecasts. The three decks are three rungs of the fixed natural-gas grid (Table 3b, V26); NAV/share is read from the Table 7 grid, combining the price and discount-rate axes as a coherent set rather than independently. Spot ~US$3.25 and the EIA’s US$3.49 (2027) forecast are 0%-weight cross-checks.

7.4 Valuation conclusion

Triangulating the risked NAV (US$37.65 base, US$25–55 across the scenarios), the relative reads (0.86× PV-10 and 1.03× the standardized measure per share — the cheapest in the peer set — against a ~5.9% free-cash-flow yield, the thinnest) and the analyst consensus gives a blended value range of roughly US$32–46 per share, centred near US$39 — against a US$38.75 price sitting essentially on the midpoint. The value read is Fairly valued. The anchor is the NAV, and it deserves more weight here than in the comparables because 91% of it is the company’s own audited PV-10 rather than author estimates: what a reader is asked to take on trust is a US$900 million inventory credit and a US$1.15 billion overhead deduction, not a synergy or a risking factor on an unbuilt mine. The Street is modestly more positive at US$45.41 (+17%) with 23 analysts at Hold — the least enthusiastic consensus in this series, which is itself consistent with a company that offers duration rather than momentum. Assumptions box: valuation date 29 Jul 2026; balance sheet as of 30 Jun 2026; horizon spot fair value; USD throughout. Price deck (Table 3b rungs, V26) bear US$3.00 / base US$3.50 / bull US$4.00 per MMBtu Henry Hub — base is the fixed-grid rung nearest the representative trailing average of Henry Hub through mid-2026; spot ~US$3.25 and the EIA’s US$3.49 (2027) forecast are 0%-weight cross-checks, and the reserve report is struck at a US$3.39/Mcf NYMEX benchmark; nominal deck, 10% base discount rate, sensitised 8–12%. 233.67 m shares; net debt US$881 m at 30 Jun 2026. Method weights: the reserve-based NAV anchors the read (91% of it the audited PV-10), cross-referenced to EV/PV-10 and price/standardized measure per share; the analyst-consensus target carries 0% weight (V12). PV-10 and the tax reconciliation from the FY2025 reserve report; unbooked inventory risked to US$900 m and G&A capitalised at US$1.15 bn, both author estimates; NAV is author-built on the company-published PV-10. To run the same NAV and multiples across every North American upstream name, screen the sector on Metal Pilot.

8. Near-term catalysts (1–3 years)

Range’s catalysts are modest by design — this is a company whose plan is to do roughly the same thing for a very long time, more cheaply each year.

Table 10. Near-term catalysts (1–3 years)

Source: Range Resources FY2025 Form 10-K (capital budget, buyback, dividend, debt structure, PV-10 history), Q2 2026 results (production targets, net debt, remaining authorisation) and the U.S. EIA Short-Term Energy Outlook , July 2026. Timing reflects company guidance and is not guaranteed.

The common thread is that none of these requires Range to spend more, buy anything or take on risk. Growth to 2.6 Bcfe/d comes on a flat budget; the buyback and dividend come from cash already being generated; the reserve report reprices itself with the strip. The swing factor is not execution — it is the gas price, and Range has arranged its balance sheet so that it does not have to guess.

9. Rating & verdict

Range is scored on the Metal Pilot Company Scorecard — the same nine dimensions, on the same ★1–5 scale, that every North American upstream name in the series is scored on. As a producer/operator it takes the full rubric with no dimension marked not-applicable. Each star is relative to the Appalachian peer set declared in Section 2.6 and substantiated below.

Table 11. The Range Resources scorecard

Σ(weight × score) = 0.60 + 0.60 + 0.75 + 0.19 + 0.75 + 0.75 + 0.25 + 0.31 + 0.31 = 4.51/5 → ★★★★½.

Source: the Metal Pilot Company Scorecard; evidence in Sections 2–7. Peer basis: the Appalachian gas producers named in Section 2.6 (EQT, Expand Energy, Antero Resources, CNX). Weighted by producer/operator archetype: dominant dimensions (asset quality, cost, reserves/life, balance sheet, capital allocation) at 15% each, remaining dimensions (growth, management, jurisdiction, ESG) at 6.25% each.

The two-axis verdict. Quality High (★★★★½) × Value Fairly valued → priced for its quality: you are buying duration, not yield. Five dimensions score ★★★★★ — reserves, balance sheet, capital allocation, jurisdiction and ESG — and they are mutually reinforcing rather than coincidental. A 22-year reserve life is what lets management hold capital flat; flat capital is what produces the free cash flow; the free cash flow is what funded a 28% cut in net debt and an US$850 million buyback in the same six months; and the low leverage is what makes it safe to hedge only a fifth of production. The one ★★★ is growth, and it is a consequence of the same choice rather than a failure of it.

The value axis is close to neutral and the disagreement inside it is instructive. Range trades at 0.86× its own PV-10 and 1.03× its standardized measure per share — the cheapest in the peer set on the audited numbers — and at roughly 5.9% free-cash-flow yield, the thinnest. Both facts describe the same company: reserve value sits in years fifteen through twenty-two, where a discounted-cash-flow model puts it but a yield screen does not. What tips the verdict from bull to bear is simply whether those back years arrive into a good gas market. At US$4.00 Henry Hub the NAV is US$46 and rising steeply; at US$3.00 it is US$29 and the light hedge book offers no cover. What makes the bear case survivable rather than terminal is the balance sheet: at 0.73× leverage with no maturity before 2029, Range can wait out a bad decade, which is the entire point of owning a twenty-two-year asset. This is an analytical read of quality and price, not a recommendation.

To go from this single-name view to the whole peer group — screening every North American upstream producer on production, cost, reserve life, net debt and free-cash-flow yield — explore Metal Pilot.

10. Sources, methodology & disclaimer

10.1 Sources, methodology & data vintage

Company fundamentals, reserves, PV-10, production, realized prices, unit costs, acreage, hedge positions, contractual obligations, structure, management and risk factors are from Range Resources Corporation — 10-K Filing / Annual Report — 2025 (fiscal year ended 31 December 2025), including its production, sales price and production cost tables, the acreage and drilling-activity disclosures, the PV-10 and standardized-measure reconciliation, the contractual-obligations table and the long-term debt and derivative notes. Reserves are SEC-basis proved reserves at 31 December 2025 using the unweighted twelve-month average first-day-of-the-month prices — a US$3.39/Mcf NYMEX gas benchmark and US$3.03/Mcf wellhead realisation — held flat for the life of the reserves; PV-10 is the company’s disclosed pre-tax measure and the standardized measure its after-tax equivalent, and neither purports to be fair market value. Post-year-end developments — the January 2026 redemption of the 8.25% senior notes due 2029, Q2 2026 production of 2,296 MMcfe/d, net debt of US$880.8 million at 30 June 2026, the completed US$850 million buyback and the US$1.4 billion remaining authorisation — are from the company’s Q2 2026 results, released 21 July 2026.

Market data (share price US$38.75 at the 28 July 2026 close, 233.67 million shares, market capitalisation ~US$9.05 billion), peer statistics and the 23-analyst Hold consensus with its US$45.41 target are from stockanalysis.com , sourced from S&P Global Market Intelligence. Peer PV-10 figures used in Table 8 are each company’s own FY2025 Form 10-K disclosure, all struck at year-end 2025 SEC pricing, which makes that particular comparison unusually clean; the free-cash-flow yields alongside them are not on a uniform basis and are labelled accordingly. The commodity price deck is from the U.S. EIA Short-Term Energy Outlook , July 2026.

Methodology and its limits. The net asset value starts from the disclosed PV-10, scales it to the base deck using the price sensitivity implied by the company’s own three-year PV-10 history, applies the disclosed tax reconciliation proportionally, and deducts net debt and asset-retirement obligations. Only two lines are author estimates: a US$900 million risked credit for unbooked inventory beyond proved reserves, and US$1.15 billion of capitalised corporate general and administrative expense, which PV-10 excludes by construction. Together they are about 9% of the gross value, so this NAV rests on audited figures to an unusual degree — but the price and discount-rate assumptions remain the dominant uncertainty, which is why Table 7 sensitises both. Two sanctioned template adaptations are noted. First, because Range operates a single contiguous asset, the standard by-asset revenue split is replaced by a per-Mcfe unit-economics figure (Figure 3), consistent with the treatment used elsewhere in this series. Second, the asset-map figure is omitted — a proportional-symbol map of the southwest Pennsylvania leasehold is drawn geometry the component library does not express, and this post type generates no SVG (rule A13), so Table 2 and the §2.1 prose carry the acreage picture instead; every published figure is an inline HTML/CSS component. Data as of 29 July 2026; refreshed on each annual report and on material events. Unlike its peers Range has already reported Q2 2026, so the figures here reflect the most recent quarter. Provenance: Range Resources Corporation — 10-K Filing — 2025.

10.2 Disclaimer & disclosure

This analysis is for informational purposes only and is not investment advice; do your own research or consult a licensed advisor. It is a point-in-time snapshot as of 29 July 2026 — share prices, multiples, analyst targets and the valuation read move, and reserve, production and net-asset-value figures are estimates as of the stated dates. PV-10 and standardized-measure figures are prepared under SEC pricing conventions and do not represent market value. The two-axis verdict is an analytical read of quality and price, not a personal buy or sell instruction. This report was prepared with AI assistance; figures were sourced from Range’s filings, the U.S. EIA and market data and reviewed, but readers should verify before acting. The author holds no position in Range Resources as of the date of writing.