Kivalliq Energy is a uranium exploration company focused on advancing its Angilak property in Nunavut, Canada. It has a high-grade inferred resource of 43.3 million pounds of U3O8 at 0.69% and is exploring additional targets. The company has a strong balance sheet, experienced management team, and is well positioned to benefit from an anticipated uranium supply deficit in the coming years. If successful in advancing Angilak, it could potentially develop one of the highest grade uranium deposits outside of major producer control.

1. Advancing Northern Canada’s Highest Grade
Click to edit Master title style
Uranium Deposit
January 2014

2. Must Be Round to Roll
 Strong Shareholder Base
 Solid Track Record
 Regional Experience
 Aggressive but
− Lumina Capital: 17%
 Great Access to Capital
− $39.5mm raised since
Disciplined Growth
HighlySeasoned
Team
 Recent Board Additions
 ‘District Scale Potential’
 Large, High-Grade
 Solid Balance Sheet
The Right
Corporate
Structure
 Mining friendly, Pro-U
 Several Mines &
Great
Jurisdiction
World-Class
Asset
Nunavut
Angilak
Fukushima
− C$2mm working cap.
Development Projects
 Community Engagement
a Priority of KIV
Support Growth Strategy
Inferred Resource:
− 43.3mm lbs @ 0.69% U3O8
 Near-surface zones
 Positive Initial Met Tests
 Areva’s Kiggavik Lays
Groundwork for Angilak
Kivalliq is Very Well-Positioned to Advance Angilak
KIV:TSX-V | Kivalliqenergy.com
2

3. The Right Corporate Structure
Ownership
Retail / Other
37%
Recent Financings
Angilak
43.3mm lbs U3O8
Q2 2013: C$4.5mm
15mm Units @ $0.30
(1 Share + 1 Warrant @ C$0.50)
Close Associates
26%
Baker Basin
Genesis
Q2 2012: C$11.6mm
FT: 16.8mm @ $0.50
NFT: 7.1mm @ $0.45
Lumina Capital
17%
Q2 2012: C$9.5mm
FT: 6.9mm @ $0.52
NFT: 13.1mm @ $0.45
Insiders Resource /
5% Mining Funds
15%
Capital Structure
Uranium Portfolio
KIV Price / Volume (2010 – Present)
(As at January 16, 2014)
Shares Outstanding
(mm)
Price (C$/Share)
191.0
Volume (mm)
$1.00
Warrants (weighted avg strike price $0.50)
(mm)
5.0
KIV Volume (RHS)
17.4
KIV (LHS)
$0.80
4.0
Options (weighted avg strike price $0.47)
(mm)
12.7
Fully Diluted Shares
(mm)
221.1
$0.60
3.0
Working Capital
(C$mm)
2.0
$0.40
2.0
Market Capitalization ($0.22)
(C$mm)
38.21
$0.20
1.0
Average Trading Volume (3 months Jan. 17)
(‘000s)
171,327
Kiv Current Price (Jan. 17)
(C$/share)
TSX-V Repriced to KIV (LHS)
$0.23
KIV:TSX-V | Kivalliqenergy.com
$0.00
2010
3
2011
2012
2013
0.0
2014

4. Highly Seasoned Team
 Expertise added to the Board of Directors related to uranium fuel markets and uranium industry M&A
 Bolstered management team with finance and legal capacity
 Operational team continuously executes large logistical programs and successful exploration campaigns – on budget
Uranium Exploration Leadership
KIV:TSX-V | Kivalliqenergy.com
4

5. Highly Seasoned Team – High Impact Exploration
(C$mm) / (mm lbs )
(US$/lb)
100
80
KIV Market Cap vs. U3O8 Spot
& Inferred Resource
KIV Mkt. Cap ~C$90mm
KIV Market Cap (C$mm, LHS)
Fukushima
U3O8 Monthly Spot Price (US$/lb, RHS)
75
60
50
40
Inferred Resource:
43.3 mm lbs U3O8 @ 0.69%
25
20
Inferred Resource:
27.13 mm lbs U3O8 @ 0.69%
Inferred Resource:
14.15 mm lbs U3O8 @ 0.79%
0
2010
Exploration
Budget
U3O8 Inferred Resource (mm lbs, LHS)
2011
2012
0
2014
2013
$20mm
$17mm
$9mm
$5mm
2010
KIV:TSX-V | Kivalliqenergy.com
2011
2012
5
2013

6. Great Jurisdiction – Canada
Nunavut and Saskatchewan Mining and Mineral Exploration
Mining Friendly Jurisdiction
 Mining friendly, pro-uranium
jurisdiction
 Multiple projects being advanced
or operated by global mining
companies
 Areva’s Kiggavik and Cameco’s
Turqavik/Aberdeen projects in
close proximity to KIV assets
(NU)
Community Engagement
 Landmark agreement with
Nunavut Tunngavik to explore
for uranium on Inuit land
 Community engagement is a
priority with ongoing community
updates, site visits and
employment opportunities
 Winners of environmental
stewardship awards for two of
the past three years
KIV:TSX-V | Kivalliqenergy.com
6

7. Angilak Property
KIV:TSX-V | Kivalliqenergy.com
7

8. World Class Asset – Comparable Projects
Comparable Independent Uranium Projects Ranked by Grade (%U3O8)
0.69%
Open Pit
0.57%
Underground
ISR
0.41%
0.34%
0.33%
0.20%
0.11%
Falea
(Denison)
Lost Creek
(Ur-Energy)
Wiluna(1)
(Toro)
Lance
(Peninsula)
Salamanca
(Berkeley)
Omahola
(Deep Yel.)
Kihitian Group
(Macusani)
Etango
(Bannerman)
0.02%
Westmoreland
(Laramide)
0.03%
Berlin
(U3O8)
0.04%
Churchrock
(Ur. Res.)
0.04%
Dewey Burd.
(Powertech)
0.05%
Four Mile
(Alliance)
0.05%
Kuriskova
(Euro. Ur.)
0.05%
Roca Honda
(En. Fuels)
0.07%
Matoush
(Strateco)
0.09%
Angilak
(Kivalliq)
0.12%
43.3
28.8
28.7
41.2
70.5
11.2
31.2
21.4
53.2
45.3
8.5
76.5
53.7
34.5
45.1
61.6
212.6
OP/UG
UG
UG
UG
ISR
ISR
ISR
UG
OP
UG
ISR
OP
ISR
OP
OP
OP
OP
Can
Can
USA
Slov
Aus
USA
USA
Colom
Aus
Mali
USA
Aus
USA
Spain
Namib
Peru
Namib
Pre-PEA
PEA
PEA
PFS
FEAS
PEA
FEAS
PEA
PEA
PEA
Comm
Cons
Cons
PFS
PEA
PEA
FEAS
(2)
U3O8
mm lbs
Mine
Type
Location
Stage
(3)
Source: Company technical reports, filings, press releases and investor presentations. Notes: (1) Wiluna PF Lake Maitland transaction (2) Compliant 43-101 or JORC total resource (3) Indicates completed
study or current phase of development. “PEA” = Preliminary Economic Assessment; “PFS” = Pre Feasibility; “FEAS” = Feasibility; “Comm” = Commissioning; “Cons” = Construction
Angilak is The Highest Grade Compliant Resource Not Controlled by a Major
KIV:TSX-V | Kivalliqenergy.com
8

9. Comparable Project Evaluation Framework
Higher
Illustrative Comparable Project Evaluation Matrix
U3O8 Grade: >0.5%
U3O8 Grade: 0.25-0.5%
U3O8 Grade: <0.25%
Angilak
Resource Quality
(Depth, Grade & Resource Size)
Ball Size Represents
Total Resource Size
Etango
Four Mile
Matoush
Wiluna
Westmoreland
Dewey Burdock
Kihitian
Kuriskova
Omahola
Berlin
Lance
Falea
Salamanca
Churchrock
Lower
Lost Creek
Roca Honda
Higher
KIV:TSX-V | Kivalliqenergy.com
Geopolitical Risk
(Political, Social & Infrastructure)
9
Lower

10. 2030
2029
2028
2027
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
275
Supply
Demand
(mm lbs U3O8)
Global U
Supply / Demand(1)
Conceptual Angilak Timeline – ‘Impeccable Timing’
250
Deficit
225
200
175
150
(mm lbs U3O8)
U Supply
Balance(1)
40
Supply Deficit
0
-40
Surplus
-96
Deficit
-113
-80
Kiggavik(2)
Proposed
Dev. Timeline
Angilak(3)
Conceptual
Dev. Timeline
Permitting / Licensing
Construction
Production
PEA / Pre-Feas / Feas / Permitting Construction
Production
Notes: (1) Uranium supply / demand forecast as per Raymond James equity research. (2) As per Areva’s publicly stated development timeline for Kiggavik. (3) Not NI-43-101 compliant,
conceptual and for illustrative purposes only. Conceptual outline based on permitting timelines as per Nunavut Impact Review Board process, and subject to obtaining required approvals,
permits, and financing and receiving positive PEA, PFS, FS, etc.
KIV:TSX-V | Kivalliqenergy.com
10
-122

11. Genesis Property, Saskatchewan – A Growing Project Portfolio
Saskatchewan: A Prolific
Uranium District
 Established infrastructure
 Politically supported
 Produces15% of the world’s
annual supply of uranium
Genesis Property
 362,789 acres
 25 kilometres northeast of the
Eagle Point uranium mine and
Rabbit Lake mill
 36 mineral claims strategically
staked along 90 kilometres of
prospective geological and
structural settings
 Covers 28 documented historic
uranium showings and several
boulder trains
KIV:TSX-V | Kivalliqenergy.com
11

12. Comparable Analysis – Junior Explorers and Developers
Equity Value (C$mm)
Total Resource (mm lbs U3O8)
$120
250
200
$90
150
$60
100
$38
$30
43.3
50
$0
0
Total Resource Grade (% U3O8)
EV / Total Resource (C$/lb U3O8)
$2.0
0.8%
0.69%
$6.23
0.6%
$1.5
0.4%
$1.0
0.2%
$0.5
0.0%
$0.0
Source: Company technical reports, filings, press releases and investor presentations. As at January 8, 2014
KIV:TSX-V | Kivalliqenergy.com
12
$0.78

13. Fukushima Impact
Kivalliq Pre-Fukushima
Kivalliq Today
March 2, 2011
January 8, 2014
$6.12/lb
-87%
$0.78/lb
EV / Resource (C$/lb U3O8)
C$95mm
EV / Resource (C$/lb U3O8)
-60%
-61%
C$87mm
+206%
-42%
US$60/lb
C$38mm
43mm lbs
C$34mm
US$35/lb
U3O8
Spot
Inferred
Resource
Enterprise
Value
Equity
Value
U3O8
Spot
Inferred
Resource
Enterprise
Value
Equity
Value
14mm lbs
Since Fukushima, KIV’s inferred resource is up 206% but its EV/lb valuation is down 87%
Source: Company filings. As at January 8, 2014
KIV:TSX-V | Kivalliqenergy.com
13

14. Uranium Market Outlook – Demand-Side
Worldwide Nuclear Landscape
Top 10 Nuclear Generating Countries
(2012, Bln kWh)
 436 operational reactors in 30 countries
800
 72 reactors under construction in 14 countries
600
 372,326 MW total net installed capacity
 12% of world’s electricity production from nuclear
400
 13 countries with ¼ or more of electricity from nuclear
200
On average, a 1 MW reactor
requires in excess of 400k lbs U3O8/year
0
436 Operating Reactors Worldwide
0
20
40
60
80
100
North
America
140
0
20
15
10
North
America
5
South
America
4
2
Western
Europe
25
2
Africa
2
Source: International Atomic Energy Agency, Nuclear Energy Institute
KIV:TSX-V | Kivalliqenergy.com
15
14
25
30
35
40
38
South Asia
& Mid. East
68
South Asia
& Mid. East
10
Central &
E. Europe
98
Central &
E. Europe
5
Asia
118
Asia
Africa
120
121
Western
Europe
South
America
72 Reactors Under Construction Worldwide
0

15. Worldwide U3O8 Production and Operating Reactors
Total
Canada
mm lbs
%
23.5
15.5%
Kazakhstan
mm lbs
%
Total
56.5
37.2%
10
9
7
4
4
6
15
FSU (ex. Kazakhstan)
mm lbs
%
Russia
8.1
5.3%
Other NIS
9.0
5.9%
Total
17.1
11.3%
1
2
1
33
16
19
58
100
8
2
5
1
4
50
19
1
3
23
21
2
6
Total
USA
mm lbs
4.6
%
3.0%
2013E Primary
U3O8 Production(1)
2
2
Nuclear Reactors in
Operation
Africa
mm lbs
Niger
11.6
Namibia
10.9
Other
4.4
Total
26.9
2
%
7.6%
7.2%
2.9%
17.7%
Total
Australia
mm lbs
%
16.6
10.9%
Source: Raymond James, International Atomic Energy Agency
Notes: (1) % represents portion of 2013E primary supply of 152mm lbs. In addition to numbers displayed above, 6.7mm lbs (4.4%) are produced in other countries
KIV:TSX-V | Kivalliqenergy.com
15

16. Overview of Uranium Producing Regions
U3O8 Prod.
(mm lbs / %)(1)
Australia
% of Known
Resources(2)
16.6mm
10.9%
U.S.
4.6mm
3.0%
Africa
26.9mm
17.7%
FSU
Canada
73.6mm
48.5%
23.5mm
15.5%
31%
4%
18%
25%
9%
Operating
Reactors(3)
0
100
2
68
19
Geopolitical
Stability
Comments / Considerations
Good
•
•
•
•
•
•
Significant producer with largest known resources
Long history of uranium mining but highly political issue
History of anti-uranium policies: “no new mine policy”
Queensland & WA recently lifted production moratoriums
Production moratoriums still in place in NSW & Victoria
Aboriginal issues a consideration
Good
• Production from 1 conventional mill and several ISL operations
• Consumes 50mm lbs / year, produces 5mm lbs / year - HEU
provided ~45% of supply
• National security / energy independence concerns may bode
well for related policy
• Moratoriums in Virginia, Navajo Reservations, Grand Canyon
Fair/Poor
•
•
•
•
Fair/Poor
• Largest producing region with significant known resources
• Highly concentrated, largely controlled by Russian State and
subject to supply management
• Kazakhstan responsible for substantially all worldwide growth in
primary supply over last 5 years
Good
•
•
•
•
•
Production concentrated in Niger and Namibia
Strong political support in Namibia
Recent extremist activity in Niger places uncertainty on supply
Typically large, low-grade deposits
Significant producer with long history of uranium mining
Home to world’s largest mine and highest grade deposits
Consistent and transparent permitting regimes
Moratoriums in Quebec, BC and Nova Scotia
First Nations issues a consideration
Notes: (1) 2013E U3O8 production as per Raymond James, WNA. (2) 2011 reasonably assured resources plus inferred resources from OECD as per NEA & IAEA. (3) As per IAEA
KIV:TSX-V | Kivalliqenergy.com
16

17. Uranium Market Outlook – Supply-Side Themes
New Mines
Existing Mines
Secondary Supply
Demand
250
(mm lbs U3O8)
Global Uranium
Supply / Demand
300
200
2020: 16mm lbs Deficit
2025E: 52mm lbs Deficit
150
100
50
0
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
Recent Supply-Side Themes
 Supply-side impact of post-Fukushima uranium price weakness has really begun to rear its head
−
−
−
Until recently, planned development projects have been main victims - Trekkopje, Imouraren, ODX, etc.
However, late November saw significant reduction of production guidance form existing mines – Kazatomprom,
ARMZ/Uranium One, Energy Fuels, etc.
Continued supply management and growth curtailment will be a prevailing theme in current price environment
 Anemic mining equity capital markets also contributing to supply-side uncertainty
−
−
Delayed projects being pushed back further
Juniors' ability to progress exploration and development projects severely impaired
 Forecasted supply deficit starting in 2017 and growing rapidly
−
−
Deficit widens to 16mm lbs by 2020 and 52mm lbs by 2025
Further mine closures and recent events could see forecasted supply deficits being brought forward to 2015 or 2014
−
−
Incident at Rio Tinto’s Ranger Mine could lead to prolonged or indefinite closure
Potential for Kayelekera and Rössing to fall victim to current price environment
 Japanese inventory reduction and timing on reactor restarts remains the main near-term issue
Source: Raymond James, Kivalliq
KIV:TSX-V | Kivalliqenergy.com
17
2030

18. Disclaimer
This presentation does not constitute an offer to sell or solicitation of an offer to buy any securities of Kivalliq
Energy Corporation.
The information in this presentation related to the mineral resource estimate has been approved by Robert Sim,
P.Geo, of SIM Geological Inc. who is an independent Qualified Person as defined under National Instrument
43‐101. Jeff Ward, P.Geo, President of Kivalliq and a Qualified Person for the Company has reviewed and
approved the information contained in this presentation and related news releases.
FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS
This presentation contains "forward-looking statements". These forward-looking statements are made as of the
date of this presentation and Kivalliq Energy Corporation does not intend, and does not assume any obligation,
to update these forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to,
statements with respect to the timing and amount of estimated future exploration, success of exploration
activities, expenditures, permitting, and requirements for additional capital and access to data.
Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause
the actual results, performance or achievements of the Company to be materially different from any future
results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. Such factors
include, among others, risks related to actual results of current exploration activities; changes in project
parameters as plans continue to be refined; the ability to enter into joint ventures or to acquire or dispose of
property interests; future prices of mineral resources; accidents, labour disputes and other risks of the mining
industry; ability to obtain financing; and delays in obtaining governmental approvals or financing.
KIV:TSX-V | Kivalliqenergy.com
18

19. Contact
Kivalliq Energy Corporation
#1020 - 800 W Pender Street, Vancouver, BC V6C 2V6
www.kivalliqenergy.com
Reesa Meltzer, Senior Administrator
++604-646-8361 or info@kivalliqenergy.com
KIV:TSX-V | Kivalliqenergy.com
19