NR Equity Report

NEWPARK RESOURCES INCORPORATED
NR/NYSE
Continuing Coverage:
A Stable Stock in an Unstable Environment
Investment Rating: Market Perform

 Decrease in oil rig count and the appreciating U.S. dollar are major
concerns
 Low debt provides a competitive advantage in financing flexibility
 Expanded R&D provides value added products and potential entry into
new markets
 Industry trends’ effect on revenue drivers is uncertain
 Our 12‐month target price is $7.00.

Company Quick View:

This Newpark covers a wide field. Headquartered in The Woodlands, Texas, Newpark
Resources is a supplier of specialized drilling fluids and advanced mat technology to
customers in the oil and gas exploration industry. Through its two segments, Fluid
Systems, and Mats and Integrated Services, Newpark provides well site solutions and
services to companies around the world. While the majority of its business is conducted in
North America, the Company maintains a lowly leveraged capital structure that allows for
flexibility of expansion and pursuit of long term contracts in new geographic markets.
Outside of the United States, Newpark operates in Europe, the Middle East, Africa, Latin
America, and the Asia Pacific.
Company Website: www.newpark.com
Analysts: Investment Research Manager:
Constantine Zotos Liam Green
Ryan Kern
Doug Prescott
Eric Hugon
November 06, 2015
PRICE: $ 6.18 S&P 500: 2,102.31 DJIA: 17,867.58 RUSSELL 2000: 1,190.38
Valuation
EPS*
P/E
CFPS
P/CFPS
* Excluding non‐recurring ite
2014 A
$ 0.95
6.5x
$ 1.20
5.2x
ems
2015 E
$ (0.13)
NM
$ 0.74
8.3x
2016 E
$ (0.16)
NM
$ 0.53
11.7x
Market Capitalization Stock Data
Equity Market Cap (MM): $ 520.04 52‐Week Range: $4.89 ‐ $12.65
Enterprise Value (MM): $ 584.60 12‐Month Stock Performance: ‐47.45%
Shares Outstanding (MM): 84.15 Dividend Yield: Nil
Estimated Float (MM): 81.93 Book Value Per Share: $ 7.17
3‐Mo. Avg. Daily Volume: 1,101,950 Beta: 1.31
The BURKENROAD REPORTS are produced solely as a part of an educational program of Tulane University's
Freeman School of Business. The reports are not investment advice and you should not and may not rely on
them in making any investment decision. You should consult an investment professional and/or conduct your
own primary research regarding any potential investment.
Wall Street's Farm Team
BURKENROADREPORTS

Newpark Resources Inc. (NR) BURKENROAD REPORTS (www.burkenroad.org) November 6, 2015
2
Figure 1: 5‐year Stock Price Performance
Source: Google Finance November 11, 2015
INVESTMENT SUMMARY
We give Newpark Resources a rating of Market Perform with a 12‐month target price of $7.00.
Newpark Resources provides oilfield services to oil and natural gas exploration and production
(E&P) companies. The Company operates in two segments: the Drilling Fluids segment and
Mats and Integrated Services segment. Newpark is also expanding into non‐E&P industries,
such as the utilities industry and construction industry, through its Mats and Integrated Services
segment. The Company’s revenue is highly correlated with drilling activity, and the recent
decline in U.S. rig count has hindered Newpark’s success. Fortunately for the Company, a lack of
debt and considerable cash on hand has provided sustainability for Newpark’s future financing
activities.
Newpark will continue to focus on research and development (R&D) as it enters into new
markets, both advancing and adding value to its product base. Overseas, the Organization of
Petroleum Exporting Countries’ (OPEC) refusal to slow oil production adds to an already
oversupplied oil market, pushing global oil prices downwards. If the U.S. E&P suppliers are not
able to reach an agreement with OPEC then the decline in prices may continue for some time.
As the domestic E&P market continues to endure this low price period, oilfield service
companies, like Newpark, must be able to sustain and discover other sources of revenue.
Table 1: Historical Burkenroad Ratings and Prices
Report Date Stock Price Rating 12 Month Target Price
10/13/14 $11.43 Market Perform $12.00
INVESTMENT THESIS
Our research team has issued Newpark Resources a 12‐month target price of $7.00 and a
rating of Market Perform.
In September 2014, the oil and natural gas industry began to face turbulence as prices fell. In
August 2015, when crude oil prices hit a low of $38.51 per barrel, smaller E&P services
companies were in danger of financial failure. Newpark’s large cash balance relative to other
companies of similar size and operation has kept the Company stable.

3
Newpark’s large cash balance, compared to its short‐term debt amount of $9.2 million,
provides the Company and its shareholders reprieve in a very bullish energy market.
Decrease in U.S. oil rig count and appreciating U.S. dollar are major concerns
The U.S. oil rig count dropped by 63% since October 2014, falling from 1,609 rigs to 594.
Despite a slowdown in U.S. oil and gas output in recent months, oil production remains above
nine million barrels per day. U.S. inventory data shows that domestic inventories have risen
above eight million barrels, the largest increase since earlier this spring and near an 80‐year
high. The increased levels of production and decreased oil rig count indicate that U.S. oil prices
are a long way from recovery.
Since Newpark provides services for drilling and production, the decrease in U.S. rig counts
limits Newpark’s domestic business prospects. Newpark’s earnings are directly correlated with
its E&P customers’ drilling activity. The U.S. rig count has shown no signs of increasing to
normal levels in the next year, so it is likely that Newpark’s margins in the domestic drilling
fluids business will remain constant or possibly decline.
The appreciation of the U.S. dollar has yielded a negative return on domestic oil prices. As the
U.S. dollar strengthens against foreign currencies, it becomes more expensive for foreign
investors to purchase U.S. crude oil. Thus, decreasing exports will reduce U.S. oil prices further.
The appreciation of the U.S. dollar creates a low price oil environment that will keep revenues
of Newpark’s customers down as long as conditions continue. Also, Newpark does not hedge
any assets against foreign exchange rate risk. This could lead to future losses in foreign currency
translation, which would decrease Newpark’s cash flow.
Low debt provides a competitive advantage in financing flexibility
With a low total debt to capital ratio of 0.22, Newpark is prone to using equity in its capital
structure to finance future activities. The lack of leverage in its capital structure provides
Newpark with the ability to fund expansions and cover operating expenses using cash on hand.
If the Company needed to secure a loan, its stable, investment grade credit rating would
incentivize lenders to provide a low interest loan. This is a competitive advantage when
considering some of Newpark’s highly leveraged competitors who cannot secure necessary
debt with low interest.
Expanded R&D provides value added products and potential entry into new markets
Research and development (R&D) should increase significantly this year because of the
Company’s completion of a $41.1 million dollar expansion of its manufacturing facility in
Carencro, Louisiana. The facility now houses a dedicated R&D center focused on continuing the
Company’s efforts towards new product development. The products that Newpark has created
will serve as introductions into new industries, such as utilities and construction. For example,
the Company plans to roll out a new type of mat called the EPV mat that is aimed at meeting
the needs of utility companies.

4
Newpark has always focused on value‐added products rather than low‐cost products. The
Company’s drilling fluids sales revenue is highly correlated to its customers’ drilling activity.
Newpark’s Evolution fluid, the Company’s largest fluid segment revenue generator, is a water‐
based fluid that is primarily used for horizontal drilling. The continued development of
Newpark’s Evolution fluid and other fluids depend upon the success of the Company’s R&D
department.
Industry trends’ effect on revenue drivers is uncertain
As the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) continues to refuse to decrease
oil production, the rig count in countries like Saudi Arabia are projected to increase by 28%.
Newpark could potentially benefit from the increased drilling activity because of an increased
need for drilling fluids and well‐site construction services. The increase in foreign production
will cause the price of oil to continue to fall, which will negatively affect domestic drillers. With
most of its operations in the U.S., Newpark’s revenue will suffer from a decreasing domestic rig
count and increasing foreign production.
Another industry trend affecting revenue is the advancement of rig technology. Improvements
in the efficiency of drilling have allowed companies to cut costs of rig operation by
approximately one‐third. The day rate for renting the most advanced rigs has fallen to about
$20,000 from a high of $30,000 last year. In this low commodity price environment, there is an
incentive for producers to continue drilling to maintain cash inflows because operating costs
have declined significantly. If these companies continue to drill because of the potential
savings, drilling fluid suppliers like Newpark Resources will benefit from longer contracts and
more frequent use of drilling fluids and services. Conversely, technological improvements could
translate to longer rig usage, which would flatten the demand for the exploration of new rigs. If
this were the case, domestic rig count would increase slowly because fewer rigs would satisfy
consumer demand. Given the historical correlation between Newpark’s revenue and domestic
rig count, fewer rigs would negatively affect the Company’s revenue. However, it has yet to be
seen whether the industry decrease in operating costs will benefit Newpark’s value‐added
technology strategy or hurt it. Newpark distinguishes itself from its competitors by offering a
higher quality product at a higher price. With the Company’s primary customer demographic
saving money in rig operating costs, E&P and oilfield services companies have reason to choose
Newpark over cheaper, lower quality competitors.

5
VALUATION
Our team calculated Newpark’s 12‐month target price of $7.00 by using a weighted average of
the price to book value (P/BV) and price to cash flow per share (P/CFPS) ratios (see Figure 2).
Figure 2: Burkenroad Valuation
Comparable Analysis
Our team conducted an analysis of Newpark’s peers to arrive at our current target price. Our
peer group consisted of other oilfield services companies that perform similar services and
operate in similar regions to Newpark. All competitors are based in the U.S. The multiples we
used for valuation capture both the performance of internal operations and expected future
growth. We used P/BV and P/CFPS weighted equally at 50% to determine our valuation. P/BV is
measure of shareholders’ equity that divides the current share price by the current book value
of a share. P/BV works well for Newpark Resources because of the large amount of tangible
assets owned by the Company. P/CFPS, rather than P/E, is a useful metric for Newpark
Resources because earnings in the oil and gas industry tend to be very volatile due to
impairment expenses – one‐time cash expenses that can have a significant impact on earnings
because of commodity prices or a revision of proved reserves. We used P/CFPS to illustrate
Newpark’s cash flows free from the oil and gas market volatility. Our valuation from both P/BV
and P/CFPS yielded a target price of $7 and a Market Perform rating for Newpark’s stock.
INDUSTRY ANALYSIS
Newpark Resources is a diversified oil and gas industry supplier that provides specialized
drilling fluid products, on‐site well construction, and integrated mat services primarily to
companies in the exploration and production (E&P) industry. Newpark, with revenues totaling
$975.23 million in the last 12 months, has a small position in the market when compared to the
three major players ‐ Baker Hughes, Halliburton, and Schlumberger ‐ all of which have
generated over $21.45 billion in revenue in the same time period.

6
As a supplier of drilling fluid services, hydraulic fracturing has played a large part in the growth
of the Company. In recent years, increased popularity of hydraulic fracturing has shifted the
majority of drilling from vertical to horizontal drilling techniques. While Newpark has benefitted
from this trend, fluctuations in oil prices have seriously impacted Newpark’s operations and
profits. The current state of the market has resulted in decreased drilling activity that should
concern both the industry and Newpark.
Newpark Resources’ Position in the Industry
As stated above, Newpark Resources is one of the smaller companies in the oil and gas
equipment and services industry relative to large competitors such as Schlumberger, Baker
Hughes, and Halliburton. The local market competition that Newpark faces as a smaller
specialized supplier of E&P services is extremely fragmented. Newpark specializes in its
patented DURA‐BASE mats and its oil‐ and water‐based fluids systems. The DURA‐BASE mats
provide environmental protection and ensure all‐weather access to sites with unstable soil
conditions. The slowdown in drilling activity in the E&P market has allowed the Company to
explore a variety of uses for its mats. For example, the mats have been useful for infrastructure
construction, maintenance, and upgrades of pipelines and electric utility transmission lines, and
as temporary roads for movement of oversized or unusually heavy loads. Newpark’s fluid
systems segment includes horizontal, directional, and deepwater drilling.
Industry Volatility
The supply‐induced collapse of oil prices last August, triggered by Saudi Arabia’s decision to
vacate its role as a swing producer, has severely affected the entire energy industry. The E&P
companies, to which Newpark supplies its products and services, have been hit the worst. Over
the last year, the price of crude oil decreased from over $100 per barrel to $38.51 per barrel in
September 2015. Global oil production has been outpacing consumption, which has led to a
surplus of oil. Aside from the U.S. and the European Union, all of the major nations are
producing more oil than they can consume, illustrated in Figure 3. Most notably, Russia and
Saudi Arabia are overproducing because of their significant presence in the global oil market
and unwillingness to cut production. This overproduction has flooded the market with a
surplus of oil supply, which has been the key driver in the decline of oil prices over the last
year.

7
Figure 3: Global Oil Production and Consumption by Nation
Source: The CIA World Factbook
Global oil inventory builds in the second quarter of 2015 averaging 2.9 million barrels/day.
Analysts expect this growth to slow to around 1.8 million barrels/day towards the end of 2016,
according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the principal agency responsible
for collecting and analyzing energy information. In 2016, inventory builds are forecasted to
slow to 1.1 million barrels/day.
Global oil rig count data is also a strong indicator for well production activity. On September
19, 2014 the U.S. rig count was 1,931 and as of September 18, 2015, a year later, the rig count
had fallen to 842. A high correlation between rig count and Newpark’s revenue exists because
as drilling activity and well‐site construction increases, the need for the Company’s products
increases. An increase in activity from the E&P industry could present Newpark with new
opportunities for geographic expansion, contracts for product ventures, and entrance into new
markets.

0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00%
Oman
Libya
Indonesia
Algeria
Brazil
Iraq
Nigeria
Kuwait
United Kingdom
United Arab Emirates
Canada
Venezuela
European Union
China
Norway
Mexico
Iran
Russia
United States
Saudi Arabia
Consumption Production

8
Industry Drivers
Oil prices have remained depressed for a number of reasons. The cash costs of production are
continuously decreasing, even for U.S. producers. If this translates to decreasing industry‐wide
capital expenditures, then it is unlikely that production will decrease in the near future. E&P
equipment and services companies’ revenues depend on activity and discovery success of
producers. This creates an almost circular dilemma for Newpark’s position in the industry; as
production increases, creating a need for Newpark’s services, so does supply. If the supply of oil
continues to marginally outnumber the demand, commodity prices would remain at the current
lows, which will translate to less drilling activity and, thus, less need for Newpark’s solutions.
Since Newpark is a service company, its success is closely tied with the E&P companies it serves.
So, the drivers that affect these companies also affect Newpark. These drivers include: oil and
natural gas prices, rig count figures (horizontal and vertical), and global energy demand. Oil and
natural gas prices are affected by global political policies and events, such as Saudi Arabia’s
decision to flood the market, pipeline transportation structure, and worldwide supply and
demand.
Oil and Gas Industry Regulation
Newpark is responsible for complying with many federal, state, and local laws and regulations
that govern environmental protection, zoning, and other matters that are applicable to its
business. Since the Deepwater Horizon Drilling incident in 2010, the oil and gas industry has
faced many of these regulations and policies. A regulation specifically affecting Newpark is the
Safe Drinking Water Act that requires chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing fluids be disclosed
to the public. This act may hamper the proprietary nature of Newpark’s value‐added Evolution
technology.
The markets for Newpark’s products and services are contingent on the continued exploration
and production of oil and natural gas resources. Since climate change is receiving increased
attention worldwide, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has adopted regulations to
limit greenhouse gas emissions and imposed reporting obligations on companies that emit large
amounts of greenhouse gasses. Furthermore, the EPA is now enforcing rules that could require
the reduction of certain air emissions during exploration and production of oil and gas. The
regulations enacted as part of climate change legislation tend to increase the costs of drilling, or
reduce the demand for oil and gas. As such, these regulations could have a negative impact on
Newpark’s operations and profitability. Recently, hydraulic fracturing has received increased
scrutiny from a number of regulatory agencies, including the EPA and other state authorities.
Many states, such as New York, have adopted regulations requiring operators to identify the
chemicals used in fracturing operations, going so far as to completely ban activity.
Industry Outlook
The outlook for the oilfield services industry is not optimistic. Many analysts do not expect
crude oil prices to rebound soon and many suggest that prices could fall further. A Goldman
Sachs report speculates that oil could possibly drop to as low as $20 per barrel.

9
With a high level of uncertainty, demand for drilling fluids would be extremely low, especially if
the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) continues to oversupply oil.
Companies with international contracts, such as Newpark, will still see international revenues,
but domestic revenues will take a significant hit. International demand for oil is also expected
to decrease because of China’s economic slowdown. This slowdown will hurt many companies
that rely on commodities exports and the businesses that supply commodities exporters.
Overall, the oilfield services industry, including Newpark, will feel the backlash of oversupply
and a low commodity price environment. Over the long‐term, the industry should reflect an
increase in profit margins when oil prices find a steady bottom and E&P companies establish
lower capital expenditure costs.
Threat of New Entrants
The competitive nature of the oil and gas industry does not allow for many new entrants. Most
of the major players ‐ Schlumberger, Halliburton, and Baker Hughes ‐ are established
companies. These companies have been built over decades and have large amounts of
operating cash flows and market share. For example, during 2014 Schlumberger, Halliburton,
and Baker Hughes had cash flows of $11.195, $4.062, $2.953 billion, respectively. Aside from
these major companies, the industry is made up of smaller, more specialized companies, such
as Newpark. The amount of capital needed to invest in property, plant, and equipment (PP&E),
research and development (R&D), and manufacturing for an E&P equipment and services
company is almost unattainable for a start‐up company. Newpark should be able to remain in
its current market position due to the large industry barriers to entry. Figure 4 shows operating
revenues in millions for 2014 for Schlumberger, Halliburton, Baker Hughes, and Newpark.
Figure 4: Comparative 2014 Operating Revenue (in billions)

Source: Yahoo Finance October 15, 2015
Bargaining Power of Suppliers
The bargaining power of supplies for small companies like Newpark is relatively low due to the
chemical nature of the basic materials that are provided, such as Barium Sulfate for drilling
fluids. The supplier market for many of these raw materials is very fragmented. Therefore,
oilfield service companies can easily find the lowest priced products that meet specific quality
standards. The price of these raw materials only changes because of major macroeconomic or
geopolitical events that affect all supplier prices.
$48.50
$32.87
$24.55
$1.118
$0.00
$10.00
$20.00
$30.00
$40.00
$50.00
$60.00
Schlumberger Haliburton Baker Hughes Newpark
Resources

10
Bargaining Power of Buyers
Buyers have a significant amount of power over suppliers because of the large amount of
competition in the oil and gas industry. In this industry, many companies offer similar products
and compete solely on price and contract length. However, smaller companies, like Newpark,
are able to hold a certain competitive advantage over larger companies by specializing their
products for specific types of drilling activity. For example, Newpark is able to stay competitive
through its patented water‐based Evolution fluid used in hydraulic fracturing. This fluid is
known throughout the industry for being efficient, effective, and environmentally friendly. The
bargaining power of buyers is higher in the mats and integrated services segment than the
drilling fluids segment. The high bargaining power of buyers in the mats and integrated services
segment is a result of a highly fragmented industry with stiff competition.
An increase in competition, coupled with indistinguishable product offerings, means success
can be measured by the Company’s ability to lower its price and secure long‐term contracts.
Availability of Substitutes
Not many substitutes threaten the oilfield services industry. The only substitute for the oil and
gas industry would be the growth of the alternative energy industry. The alternative energy
industry consists of companies looking to provide energy through different sources such as
solar, electricity, hydrogen, biofuels, wind, and many others. Although alternative energy is a
growing threat to oil and natural gas, it is too young to pose a real threat. The technology
involved is too undeveloped, at this point, to compete with the advancements in the oil and gas
sector.
ABOUT NEWPARK
Newpark Resources, (NR/NYSE) headquartered in The Woodlands, Texas, supplies fluid
systems and patented DURA‐BASE mats to the oil and gas industry. The Fluid Systems segment
operates throughout North America, Europe, the Middle East and Africa, Latin America, and
Asia Pacific. The Mats and Integrated Services segment provide matting solutions for unstable
soil conditions with applications both inside and outside the oil and gas exploration and
production (E&P) market.
History
The New Park Mining Company, founded in 1932 in Nevada, Las Vegas, became Newpark
Resources through a merger of the Star of Utah Mining Company, Mayflower Mines
Corporation, and Park Galena Mining Company. In 1968, Newpark purchased SOLOCO, Inc.,
which gave the Company the capacity to build access roads to well sites. Then, in 1997,
Newpark acquired Ava Drilling Fluids and Services – a company headquartered in Rome, Italy ‐
which allowed Newpark to expand its services from drilling fluids to include waste recovery,
water recycling, and drilling fluids disposal. Newpark used this acquisition to strategically
increase its presence in the Mediterranean and North Africa.

11
In 2010, Newpark created Evolution Technology, a water‐based drilling fluids solution. Newpark
found that water‐based drilling fluids solutions are a strong alternative to diesel‐based fluids
solutions. The water‐based fluids solutions specialize in particularly demanding conditions for
projects that oil field operators consider extremely elusive. In 2011, Newpark acquired
Australian‐based Rheochem PLC’s Drilling Fluids and Engineering services segment. This
acquisition allowed Newpark to expand its business into Australia, New Zealand, India, and
Asia‐Pacific.
In 2014, Newpark sold its Environmental Services segment for $100 million USD to private
equity group Lariat Partners LP as part of its strategy to focus on core drilling fluids and mats
segments. The Company also announced plans to expand its manufacturing facility for its mats
services by 2015 to meet demand and increase the Company’s production capacity.
Throughout 2015, Newpark has taken significant actions to optimize its cost structure, by
cutting its North American workforce by nearly 40% and reducing annualized personnel costs by
approximately $50 million. The expansion of the manufacturing facility focuses on building an
initial fleet of the Company’s new Defenders spill‐containment system. By the end of 2015, the
Company expects its production line to be completed.
Products and Services
Newpark currently operates in two segments: the Fluids Systems segment and Mats and
Integrated Services segment. The Fluid Systems segment provides services to horizontal,
directional, geologically deep, or deep water wells. During 2014, Fluids Systems made up 86%
of total revenues at an operating profit margin of 9.9%. The segment serves markets in North
America, Europe, the Middle East, Africa, Latin America, and the Asia Pacific region. Newpark
owns patents on a variety of water‐based drilling fluids, which are marketed as Evolution,
DeepDrill, and FlexDrill.
The Mats and Integrated Services segment provides matting solutions, well site construction
services, and access roads and temporary work sites for pipeline, electrical utility, and highway
construction projects to diverse segments around the world. During 2014, The Mats and
Integrated Services segment made up roughly 14% of total revenue and operates at a profit
margin of 46%. This segment manufactures DURA‐BASE Advanced Composite Mats for use in
rental operations and third party sales. The mats ensure all‐weather access to sites with
unstable soil conditions. The mats are rented to E&P customers in the Northeast U.S., Gulf
Coast, and Rocky Mountain Regions. Newpark also rents mats to non‐E&P companies in the
U.S., Canada, and the U.K.
Competitors
Newpark competes against the largest oil field services companies in the world. In the Fluids
System segment, Newpark’s main competitors are Schlumberger, Halliburton, and Baker
Hughes, which all compete on fluids performance and price. The Company has a much lower
market capitalization than any of its direct fluids competitors restricting the level at which
Newpark can compete.

12
These competitors provide an abundance of different services such as reservoir
characterization, drilling production, completion, evaluation, and eliminations. Some smaller
regional companies pose a threat by competing with Newpark mainly on price and local
relationships. The Company also faces international competition with its operations in North
America, Latin America, Europe, the Middle East, Africa, and Asia‐Pacific. In the Mats and
Integrated Services business, the competition is fragmented, with many competitors providing
various forms of mat products and services. Recently, several competitors began marketing
composite products to compete with Newpark’s DURA‐BASE system.
Competitive Advantages
Newpark’s proximity to prime oil‐producing areas creates a competitive advantage for its Fluid
Systems segment. The Company maintains this advantage because its facilities are located in
prime oil, exploration, and industrial regions. This allows Newpark to provide services more
efficiently than its competitors
Newpark owns and operates four barite‐drilling locations in Houston and Corpus Christi, Texas,
New Iberia, Louisiana, and Dyersburg, Tennessee. These plants ‐ named the Excalibar Plant
locations ‐ process barite, calcium carbonate, and other minerals. The processed minerals are
then used in the industrial sector for the exploration of energy and as fillers in paints and
plastics. Newpark operates industrial mineral grinding for barite, which is a critical raw material
in drilling fluids products.
Newpark maintains its competitive advantage by investing in superior technologies that are a
result of extensive research and development. Newpark seeks patents and licenses on new
developments whenever a particular application is in high demand.
Newpark’s patents include its Evolution system of water‐based drilling fluids, which was
patented in 2013 and is a segment that has seen steep revenue growth. From 2010 to 2014, the
Fluid System segment grew from $27 million to $251 million with the creation of its Evolution
system. Additionally, Newpark owns patents on a network of high‐performance water‐based
fluids systems, which it markets as Evolution, DeepDrill, FlexDrill, CyberPhase, and OptiPhase.
These systems allow Newpark to maintain enhanced drilling performance and provide
environmental benefits to customers. Newpark’s technologies help provide operators with
lower overall well costs and improved production rates.
Newpark’s Mats and Integrated Services segment is not as competitive as its Fluids Systems
segment. Few oilfield service companies can provide alternative offerings with the same
benefits as Newpark’s DURA‐BASE mats because of high startup costs and proprietary
technology involved. Over the past year, Newpark has completed a project that will double
manufacturing capacity and allow for more extensive mat research and development. The
application of DURA‐BASE mats outside of E&P could increase the Company’s revenues despite
the decline in oil markets.

13
Corporate Strategy
In the short term, Newpark is adjusting to the current decline in oil and gas markets by reducing
discretionary spending and seeking cost reductions from suppliers. Newpark’s long‐term goals
will continue to focus on international expansion, construction of its mat research and
development center, and facility investments. Newpark will base its international expansion on
deepwater oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico because of the historically limited presence of
companies in the area. Newpark is investing $30 million in Fourchon, Louisiana to build
infrastructure and significantly upgrade its offshore capacity. Additionally, Newpark will pursue
a mat expansion in non‐E&P markets and will seek to strengthen core competencies, such as its
fluid systems research and development (R&D) and the utility of DURA‐BASE mats outside of
E&P.
Newpark will continue to focus on international expansion and customer satisfaction as
strategic drivers for growth. In 2014, 33% of revenues were generated by international
operations. In 2015, Newpark won contracts from the Kuwait Oil Company, Black Sea
Deepwater, and Sonatrach, an Algerian company, to promote international growth in 2015.
Newpark’s corporate strategy is heavily contingent upon customer satisfaction. Awards won for
customer satisfaction demonstrate Newpark’s commitment to its customers. For example,
EnergyPoint Research, an independent customer service survey company, consistently
recognizes Newpark Resources for its excellence in customer support. Newpark will aim to
strengthen customer relationships to maintain its reputation for outstanding customer
satisfaction and possibly procure business from oil service companies that will not survive the
oil price decline.
Latest Developments
Newpark plans to expand its Mats and Integrated Services segment to serve more companies
outside the E&P industry. This is evident through the completion of a $41 million expansion of
its manufacturing facility in Carencro, Louisiana. Newpark’s expansion is an attempt to offset
the decrease in oil and natural gas production that hurt the Mats and Integrated Services
segment in the second quarter of 2015.
Newpark recently won a contract with ENI S.A to provide drilling fluids and related services for
onshore and offshore drilling in the Republic of Congo, which marks the Company’s first
expansion into West Africa. The initial term of the contract is three years with a two‐year
option for an additional two year extension, and work should begin under the contract in fourth
quarter of 2015.
Newpark is increasing its dedication to deepwater drilling fluids products and services through
an expansion of its Port Fourchon facility in Louisiana. This expansion will significantly increase
the facility’s synthetic and water‐based drilling fluid mixing and storage capacities.

14
PEER ANALYSIS
Newpark Resources operates within the oilfield services industry and is attempting to expand
into utilities construction. Newpark provides specialized drilling fluids to exploration and
production (E&P) companies around the world. Newpark’s peer group consists of three large
players, Schlumberger, Halliburton, and Baker Hughes, along with several other smaller oilfield
service companies.
These companies all operate in the upstream segment, with a few others also operating in the
exploration and production of oil. The larger companies in this peer group produce drilling
fluids and market drilling fluids based on low prices. The smaller companies market drilling
fluids based on some sort of value‐added aspect.
Table 2 shows Newpark Resources and its peers along with some key ratios and statistics
sourced by ThomsonOne.
Table 2: Comparable Analysis of Newpark Resources
Company
Market Cap
(MM)
Revenue
(MM)
Growth % EV/EBITDA Debt/Equity P/E
Stock
Price
Newpark Resources, Inc. (NR) $422.42 $975.00 (5.30%) 4.00 29.80% 11.20 $5.02
Schlumberger Limited (SLB) $8,660.00 $44,594.00 (5.10%) 9.00 35.10% 20.40 $67.65
Halliburton Company (HAL) $2,984.00 $30,440.00 (0.20%) 7.70 50.00% 19.90 $34.91
Baker Hughes, Inc. (BHI) $2,231.00 $21,447.00 (8.00%) 9.70 22.90% 87.40 $51.18
Tetra Technologies, Inc. (TTI) $465.12 $1,190.00 (27.20%) 25.30 249.40% NEG $5.80
FMC Technologies, Inc. (FTI) $6,850.00 $7,508.00 (8.00%) 6.70 49.50% 12.30 $29.83
Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc. (HLX) $512.85 $904.00 (10.20%) 3.00 47.40% 5.00 $4.84
Average $1,280.00 $13,577.38 (1.48%) 8.79 62.00% 23.73 $28.03
Source: Thomson One October 3, 2015
Schlumberger N.V. (SLB/NYSE)
Schlumberger N.V., based out of New York, New York, is the largest player in oil and gas
integrated solutions, and oil and gas exploration and production in the world. The company
operates through three internal groups: the Reservoir Characterization Group, the Drilling
Group, and the Production Group. The Reservoir Characterization Group consists of
technologies that help to find and develop hydrocarbon resources. The Drilling Group consists
of technologies that aid in the positioning of oil and gas wells. The Production Group includes
technologies that are involved in the lifetime production of oil and gas reservoirs. The company
is also the largest supplier of drilling fluids worldwide. The company's subsidiary, M‐1 SWACO,
is the leading supplier of drilling fluids globally.

15
Halliburton Company (HAL/NYSE)
Halliburton Company is based out of Houston, Texas and provides services and products to the
upstream oil and natural gas industry and operates in over 80 countries. Halliburton operates in
two different segments: the Completion and Production Segment and the Drilling and
Evaluation Segment. The Completion and Production Segment delivers all parts needed in a
complete production‐ready well ranging from cementing, different well‐stimulation and
maintenance technologies, to completion products and services. The Drilling and Evaluation
segment provides field modeling, well drilling, and precise wellbore placement solutions.
Baker Hughes Incorporated (BHI/NYSE)
Baker Hughes Incorporated is based out of Houston, Texas and is a supplier of oilfield services,
products, technologies, and systems globally. The company also provides industrial products
and services to the downstream segments in the oil and gas industry. The company operates in
four geographic segments: North America, Latin America, Europe/Africa/Russia/Caspian, and
the Middle East/Asia Pacific. Integrated operations include focused projects that need
oversight. The company offers well‐supervision, well construction, intervention, third‐party
contractor management, and procurement and rig management. Baker Hughes also uses a
water‐based drilling fluid system that directly competes with Newpark’s water‐based drilling
fluids, especially in the Gulf of Mexico.
TETRA Technologies Inc. (TTEK/NASDAQ)
TETRA Technologies, Inc. is an oil and gas services company based out of Pasadena California.
The company operates out of four divisions: Fluids, Production Testing, Compression, and
Offshore. The company is primarily focused on its completion fluids and associated products.
The Fluids segment manufactures and markets drilling fluids and associated products to oil and
gas E&P companies. This division is in direct competition with Newpark Resources. The
Production Testing division provides production well‐testing, offshore rig cooling and other
associated services. The Compression division provides compression services and equipment to
oilfields. The Offshore division provides subsea services to large oil and gas E&P companies. The
company also has a small domestic oil and gas production segment, but it does not contribute
much to revenue.
FMC Technologies, Inc. (FTI/NYSE)
FMC Technologies, Inc. is an oil and gas service company based out of Houston, Texas. FMC
operates in three different segments: Subsea Technologies, Surface Technologies, and Energy
Infrastructure. The Subsea Technologies segment build products and systems and provides
services to oil and gas E&P companies that operate in the production of deepwater oil and gas.
The Surface Technologies segment builds products and systems and provides services to land‐
based oil and gas E&P operations. The Energy Infrastructure Segment manufactures and
supplies measurement and transportation equipment for oil and natural gas.

16
Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc. (HLX/NYSE)
Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc. is a company based out of Houston, Texas that specializes in
offshore energy services. The company operates in four segments: Well intervention, Robotics,
Production Facilities, and Subsea Construction. The Well Construction segment includes vessels
and equipment used to perform well‐intervention services. The Robotics Segment operates
four chartered vessels designed for offshore subsea construction and well intervention services.
The Production Facilities Segment is based around the Helix Producer I (HP‐I), which is a floating
production vessel. The Subsea construction operation utilizes equipment to develop deepwater
oilfield solutions.
MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE AND BACKGROUND
Newpark Resources’ management team consists of industry veterans with connections to
oilfield service giants like Schlumberger Limited, Halliburton Company, and Baker Hughes
Incorporated. Newpark maintains six key executives and a board that consists of seven
directors, all of whom are accomplished in either the oilfield services industry or corporate
finance.
Return on Invested Capital (ROIC)
Return on invested capital (ROIC) measures the return to shareholders that have invested
capital in the firm. In terms of ROIC, Newpark has maintained strong profitability among its
larger peers. Newpark, by far, has the smallest market capitalization of its peers at $535.5
million. Schlumberger has the largest market capitalization $93.6 billion and Helix Energy has
the second smallest market capitalization, outside of Newpark, at $662.2 million. Despite its
size disadvantage, Newpark has grown steadily with the average returns rivaling some of the
largest firms in the oil and gas industry, as shown in Table 3.
Table 3: Return on Invested Capital for Newpark and Peers
Company TTM 2014 2013 2012
Newpark Resources Inc. 5.51% 12.98% 8.49% 9.04%
Schlumberger N.V. 8.42% 10.59% 13.96% 12.83%
Halliburton Company 7.92% 16.61% 11.33% 14.70%
Baker Hughes Incorporated 1.18% 8.35% 4.97% 6.27%
TETRA Technologies 8.12% 9.53% 0.25% 10.27%
FMC Technologies 15.18% 19.35% 14.65% 16.26%
Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc. 4.93% 9.70% 6.06% (0.60%)
Peer Average 7.63% 12.37% 8.54% 9.96%
Source: Thompson Reuters October 7, 2015

17
Corporate Governance
Paul. L Howes
Director, President, and Chief Executive Officer (59)
Paul L. Howes joined Newpark Resources’ Board of Directors and was appointed as Chief
Executive Officer in March 2006. In June 2006, Mr. Howes was also appointed as President. Mr.
Howes' career includes experience in the defense industry, chemicals and plastics
manufacturing, and the packaging industry. Following the sale of his former company in
October 2005 and prior to him joining the Board of Directors, Mr. Howes engaged in consulting
and private investing activities. From December 2002 until October 2005, he served as
President and Chief Executive Officer of Astaris LLC, a chemicals company headquartered in St.
Louis, Missouri, with operations in North America, Europe, and South America. Then, from
1997 until 2002, he served as Vice President and General Manager in the Packaging Division for
Flint Ink Corporation, a global ink company headquartered in Ann Arbor, Michigan with
operations in North America, Europe, Asia Pacific, and Latin America.
Gregg S. Piontek
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (44)
Gregg S. Piontek joined Newpark Resources in April 2007 as Vice President, Controller and
Chief Accounting Officer. He was appointed as Chief Financial Officer in October 2011. Before
joining Newpark, Mr. Piontek served in various financial roles for Stewart & Stevenson
Services, Inc. and Stewart & Stevenson, LLC from June 2001 through March 2007, including
Divisional Controller, Assistant Corporate Controller, and as Vice President and Chief
Accounting Officer. Prior to that, Mr. Piontek served in various financial roles at General
Electric, CNH Global N.V., and Deloitte & Touche LLP.
Bruce C. Smith
Executive Vice President and President of Fluid Systems (63)
Bruce C. Smith joined Newpark Resources in April 1998 as the International Vice President.
Since October 2000, he has served as President of Fluids Systems. He also held the title of Vice
President of Newpark beginning in 2006 and was named as Executive Vice President of
Newpark in March 2011. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Smith was the Managing Director of
the U.K. operations of M‐I Swaco, a competitor of Newpark Drilling Fluids.

18
Mark J. Airola
Senior Vice President, General Counsel, Chief Administrative Officer, Chief Compliance
Officer and Secretary (56)
Mark J. Airola joined Newpark Resources in October 2006 as Vice President, General Counsel
and Chief Administrative Officer and was appointed as Secretary in December 2006 and Chief
Compliance Officer in March 2007. In February 2011, he was named Senior Vice President. Mr.
Airola has practiced law for 30 years, primarily with large, publicly traded companies. Most
recently, from September 1995 through September 2006, Mr. Airola was employed by BJ
Services Company – a provider of pressure pumping and other oilfield services to the
petroleum industry. Mr. Airola initially served as Assistant General Counsel and in 2003 he was
named as Chief Compliance Officer. From February 1988 to September 1995, Mr. Airola held
the position of Senior Litigation Counsel at Cooper Industries, Inc., a global manufacturer of
electrical products and tools. Since 2011, Mr. Airola has served on the Board of Junior
Achievement of Southeast Texas.
Douglas L. White
Chief Accounting Officer and Corporate Controller (45)
Douglas L. White joined Newpark Resources in April 2014 as Corporate Controller. In May
2014, Mr. White was appointed as Chief Accounting Officer. From February 2008 until January
2014, Mr. White served as Director of Financial Reporting for Cooper Industries where he was
responsible for corporate accounting and external reporting. From July 2004 until February
2008, he served as Vice President and Corporate Controller of MMI Products, Inc. Prior to that,
Mr. White held various audit positions with Ernst & Young LLP. Mr. White is a Certified Public
Accountant.
Jeffery Juergens
Vice President and President of Mats and Integrated Services (59)
Jeffery L. Juergens joined Newpark Resources in October 2010 as President of Mats and
Integrated Services and Environmental Services. He served as the President of Environmental
Services until it was sold in March 2014. From February 2009 to March 2010, Mr. Juergens held
the position of Chief Executive Officer of B&B Oilfield Services, an oilfield wellhead equipment
supply company. Previously, from August 2007 to February 2009, he was at Omni Energy
Services as General Manager for the company's Seismic Drilling Division. From August 1997 to
August 2007, Mr. Juergens served as Vice President of International Operations for SPS
International, a wellbore cleanup tools and technology company. Mr. Juergens also held
management positions with both BJ Services and Baker Hughes before joining Newpark.

19
Board of Directors
Newpark Resources’ bylaws state that the board of directors must have a minimum of seven
members and a maximum of ten members on the board of directors. Currently, seven
members sit on the board of directors. The shareholders may add independent directors
through a majority vote. Board members include
 David C. Anderson has served as Chairman of the board since September 2006
 Paul L. Howes (CEO) has served on the board since March 2006
 James W. McFarland has served on the board since November 2006
 Gary L. Warren has served on the board since December 2005
 G. Stephen Finley has served on the board since June 2007
 Anthony J. Best has served on the board since March 2014
 Roderick A. Larson has served on the board since March 2014
SHAREHOLDER ANALYSIS
As of October 5, 2015, Newpark Resources had 84.15 million shares outstanding. Insiders hold
only 2.64 % of all common stock. In the past six months, there has been no change in the total
insider ownership. Currently, 247 institutions hold Newpark shares. Total institutional
ownership of the Company shares has declined by 0.54% in the last three months, signaling
that the institutions with positions in Newpark are selling off shares in an effort to minimize its
exposure to a potential decline in share price.
Table 4 lists the top‐ten institutional holders. Since October 2014, the number of institutions
with positions in Newpark has increased 63% from 151 to 247. In the last year, BlackRock
Institutional Trust Company, Newpark’s top institutional holder, has decreased the number of
shares held by roughly 1.1 million. In the last quarter, the top ten institutional holders have
sold approximately 1.38 million shares of its positions in Newpark. Wells Capital Management
has also significantly decreased its position in Newpark over the last year. Last October, Wells
Capital Management held 8.23 million shares and now holds 3.346 million, a decrease of
roughly 5 million shares. T. Rowe Price Associates, however, has increased its position in
Newpark by over 5.02 million shares since last quarter. The sizable increase in ownership by T.
Rowe Price has made them the fourth largest institutional holder. This large institutional
position hints that the firm believes that the stock price declined to the point where it is
undervalued, signaling a smart buy. For potential investors, this signals that now is the time to
take a position in Newpark Resources as it trades just $1.41 above its 52 week low and is
poised for growth as oil prices find a bottom and the industry prepares for a turnaround.

20
Table 4: Top Ten Institutional Investors
Holder Name
% of Shares
Outstanding
Latest Change of
Shares
BlackRock Institutional Trust Company, N.A. 7,199,851 (255,697)
Dimensional Fund Advisors, L.P. 7,120,736 46,414
The Vanguard Group, Inc. 5,950,772 62,180
T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc. 5,062,230 5,022,730
EARNEST Partners, LLC 4,696,980 13,696
ClearBridge Investments, LLC 3,900,407 (18,966)
LSV Asset Management 3,482,947 (231,000)
Wells Capital Management Inc. 3,346,503 (875,886)
Thompson, Siegel & Walmsley LLC 3,317,733 1,051,941
Royce & Associates, LLC 2,297,363 411,757
Source: Thomson Reuters October 5, 2015
In April 2013, the Board of Directors approved a share repurchase program of up to $50 million
of the Company’s outstanding shares of common stock. In February 2014, the Board of
Directors approved an additional $50 million increase to the repurchase program, raising it to
$100 million. Recently, the Board announced in September 2015 that it has modified this
repurchase program, of which $42.6 million remains available, expanding the authorization to
include the repurchase of convertible senior debt and common stock. Management claims that
this modification will provide Newpark with greater flexibility to manage its capital structure
going forward. The rationale behind the repurchase program is to maximize shareholder profit
by increasing the market value of the Company’s common stock and withholding dividends.
Repurchases will be funded by a combination of cash generated from operations and
borrowings under the Company’s revolving credit facility. During the first half of 2014,
3,875,978 shares were repurchased for an average price of approximately $11.65 per share,
including commissions. No shares were repurchased under the program during the first half of
2015.
RISK ANALYSIS AND INVESTMENT CAVEATS
Newpark Resources is subject to systematic (market) risk as well as idiosyncratic (firm‐specific)
risk. First, the operational risks associated with the Company, such as the current state of the
oil market, operating hazards, and availability of new raw materials affect its ability to
generate revenue by securing long term contracts. Second, industry regulation of hydraulic
fracturing processes also poses a risk to Newpark’s ability to supply on‐site construction
services and drilling fluids. Third, the financial risk associated with the Company’s capital
liquidity and ability to repay debt obligations are important factors to consider when assessing
the risk profile of Newpark.

21
Operational Risk
Weak Oil Market
A weak oil market has led to the demise of stocks in the energy sector over the last year. The
current market conditions are characterized by a high supply and low demand for oil and gas,
which has driven down the price of oil. Low oil prices have led to a decrease in rig count in the
U.S. Newpark generates revenue by catering its services to exploration and production (E&P)
companies that rely heavily on the price of oil. With this downturn in the industry, Newpark
will face reduced demand for its services translating to a negative impact on customer pricing
in its North American operations because the price of oil has caused drilling activity to
decrease. Therefore Newpark’s quarterly and annual operating results may fluctuate during
the next year because of these expected changes.
Operating Hazards in the Oil and Gas Industry
Newpark’s operations are subject to common hazards in the oil and gas industry. Examples
include fires, explosions, blowouts, oil spills, and leaks of hazardous materials. Newpark
protects itself through insurance that may provide coverage for the incidents described above.
However, when an incident occurs, customers seek recovery for equipment or property
damages that occurred during the course of Newpark’s service. Therefore, an incident of
sufficient magnitude could result in a loss of Newpark’s brand equity, leading to a loss of
customers.
Limited Availability of Raw Materials
Newpark’s ability to provide services to customers hinges on its ability to obtain raw materials
necessary for business operations. A significant portion of Newpark’s drilling fluids is made up
of barite, a naturally occurring mineral. Newpark secures all of its barite ore from China and
India. The future supply of barite is not guaranteed. If transportation costs were to rise or
political upheaval occurred within either of these countries, then this event could lead to a
shortage of barite ore for Newpark. If China or India were not able to meet market demand for
barite, then it would create an inability for Newpark to meet its customers’ demands. Barite is
used to measure the correct density in the drilling fluids. If density of drilling fluids is incorrect,
the quality of the fluids decreases. A lower quality of drilling fluids leads to a decrease in
customer demand.
The mats business is dependent on polyethylene (HDPE), the main raw material used to
manufacture the mats. Newpark also relies on China and India for polyethylene. If the cost of
polyethylene were to increase, margins in the mats segment would decrease, which would
result in a reduction of future profitability.

22
Foreign Currency Exchange Risk
As an international company, Newpark faces foreign currency risk. Newpark’s foreign
operations are conducted in Latin America, EMEA, Asia Pacific, and Canada. Operations abroad
are conducted in the foreign currency including Euros, Romanian dinar, Canadian dollars,
Australian dollars, British pound, and Brazilian Real. In 2015, the appreciation of the U.S. dollar
caused companies with international business incentives to suffer. The strong U.S. dollar will
make it difficult for foreign investors to afford U.S. products, specifically crude oil. Thus, oilfield
service companies will realize a decrease in foreign sales. If exploration and production
companies suffer revenue losses in foreign markets, Newpark will also likely see its revenues
decrease. When the price of crude oil drops, many producers can hedge against falling crude
oil prices by taking a position in the crude oil futures market. Currently, Newpark does not
have a hedged position to manage foreign currency risks. This could lead to losses with existing
and new foreign contracts denominated in a currency other than the U.S. dollar.
Seasonality and Cyclicality Risk
Newpark faces high revenue volatility due to the seasonality and cyclicality of E&P companies.
During the winter, drilling is usually slow because oil wells are not able to maximize
production. Therefore, oil companies usually refrain from drilling during the winter. When the
demand for drilling decreases, the demand for Newpark’s services decreases. The summer is
the opposite; oil wells can maximize production and drilling activity increases. When E&P
companies increase drilling during the summer, the demand for Newpark’s services increases.
Certain factors such as oil and gas prices, the ability of oil and gas companies to raise capital,
the stringency of federal environmental regulations, and the cost of exploration and
production for oil, are all cyclical in the E&P industry.
Regulatory Risks
Increased Regulations Due to Fracking
Government regulations pertaining to spill cleanup costs, hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”), and
new drilling leases (on and off shore) affect Newpark’s ability to serve its customers. As a
diversified supplier of drilling fluids and on‐site well construction mats, Newpark generates
revenue based on drilling activity. As increased regulations make it harder for Newpark’s
customers to drill in the U.S., these projects may be moved abroad where regulations are
looser or abandoned as a whole. As a result, domestic drilling activity may slow down because
of these harsh domestic regulations. This slowdown in activity would affect industry strategy
and Newpark’s ability to serve its customers.
Deepwater Horizon Drilling Incident Effect on Gulf of Mexico
After nearly five years of litigation, the corporations responsible for the Deepwater Horizon oil
spill have agreed to pay settlements totaling over $25 billion. Through the arduous legal
proceedings, it became clear that British Petroleum would become increasingly responsible for
environmental damages. Since the spill occurred in April 2010, the U.S. Department of the
Interior has taken action to reduce the level of drilling activity in the Gulf Coast.

23
Since this is one of Newpark’s major domestic markets, drilling activity in this area generates a
large portion of the Company’s revenue. Consequently, the aftermath of the accident could
bring about similar restrictions in the near future and could affect Newpark’s ability to provide
solutions and services to its E&P customers.
Financial Risks
Credit Risks in Terms of Repayment
Due to the nature of Newpark’s contract based business, the Company faces risk relating to
fulfilling its accounts payable purchases. Over the past three quarters, Newpark met accounts
payable obligations in 55 days on average. However, the Company’s accounts receivable
obligations also pose a risk. Over the past three quarters, Newpark’s customers paid their
financial obligations in 108 days on average. Maintaining a strong cash position is vital for
Newpark to make payments covering its operating expenses. If current average accounts
receivable payment schedules continue, then Newpark could lose money on customers that
are unusually late on its payments.
Newpark maintains low debt levels and credit risk. This is advantageous during the current low
price environment because it allows Newpark to borrow capital if needed. As of June 30, 2015,
Newpark held $181.73 million in total debt and $610.45 million in shareholder equity, with a
debt‐to‐equity ratio of 0.2977. This ratio reveals the low risk nature of the Company’s credit
when it is compared to the mean and median of 10 of its most similar peers such as
Schlumberger, Halliburton, Baker Hughes, and TETRA Technologies. Table 5, illustrates that
Newpark holds significantly less debt compared to its equity. Another important metric when
analyzing the risk profile is Newpark’s total debt to capital ratio. The debt to capital ratio
provides insight into the flexibility of financing activities that a company can pursue. Newpark’s
total capital as of June 30, 2015 was $782.95 million, showing a low total debt to capital ratio
of 0.22. Compared to its peers, Newpark is exposed to less risk because of the Company’s high
amount of cash, which can be used to finance its operations instead of issuing more debt.
Table 5: Comparing Capital Structures
Company Debt/Equity Total Debt/Total Capital
Newpark Resources (NR) 0.30 0.22
Mean (10 Peers) 0.57 0.31
Median (10 Peers) 0.47 0.27
Liquidity Risk
Liquidity risk is the risk that a company will not be able to meet its short‐term expenditures.
One way to measure liquidity is through a company’s current ratio, which is current assets
divided by current liabilities. Over that past year, Newpark’s current ratio has actually
increased from 3.4 to 4.6 as shown in Table 6. This means that Newpark’s has $4.6 in current
assets for every $1 dollar of liabilities, representing a highly liquid company. This is mainly due
to the small amount of debt held by the Company.

24
Another way to measure liquidity is through a company’s quick ratio. Quick ratio is a similar
measure to current ratio in that it reveals a company’s ability to pay off its short‐term
obligations with the most liquid assets on hand. Newpark’s current ratio, which is current
assets divided by current liabilities, has also increased over the last year. This healthy ratio
lowers the impact of liquidity risk.
Table 6: Newpark’s Historical Liquidity Ratios
6/30/2015 3/1/2015 12/31/2014 9/30/2014 6/30/2014
Quick Ratio 2.8 2.8 2.3 2.3 2.1
Current Ratio 4.6 4.4 3.6 3.7 3.4
FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE AND PROJECTIONS
Our team made predictions about Newpark and the current conditions in the energy market
that helped us derive our 12‐month target price of $7.00. Newpark has retained its strong
capital structure year to year which has led to consistent growth and has allowed the Company
to expand its operations in both its fluids and mats segments. However, the energy industry
has declined in profitability in the last year due to the low price of oil brought about by the
oversupplied market. Low oil prices have decreased profit margins of all oilfield services (OFS)
companies during the last twelve months. In order for Newpark to outperform our current
target price, there would have to be an increase in oil prices, spurring drilling activity and
domestic rig count. With no signs of oil prices rebounding over the next twelve months, we
believe that Newpark’s current stock price will not endure a great amount of volatility.
Operating Activity
Newpark’s main revenue drivers are the growth of property, plant, and equipment, goodwill,
and intangibles. The Company’s revenue relies heavily on the price of oil, the U.S. oil rig and
well count, and industry drilling activity. In 2014, Newpark sold its Environmental Services
segment to focus more on the drilling fluids and mats segments, emphasizing the
management’s commitment to boosting revenues in both drilling fluids and the integrated
mats segments. Also, with Newpark currently developing its new Defenders spill‐containment
system by year‐end, we expect revenues in the drilling fluids segment to rise. We predict that
Newpark will generate $1.2 billion in revenue in 2016, an increase of $81 million from 2015,
and over $13.6 billion in revenue from 2017‐2024.
Investing Activity
In March 2015, Newpark completed an expansion of its mat manufacturing facility, located in
Carencro, Louisiana. Newpark also intends to make capital investments focused on upgrading
its drilling fluids business. Management is investing $30 million to expand existing capacity and
upgrade the drilling fluids plant’s blending and storage capabilities in Fourchon, Louisiana. This
facility serves as the hub for Newpark’s deepwater operations in the Gulf of Mexico.

25
Additionally, management has invested $20 million focused on a new fluid blending facility in
Conroe, Texas, that should be completed by December 2015. The Conroe facility will support
the increasing demand for the Company’s proprietary fluid technologies, including the
Evolution systems. Our team believes that Newpark will keep investing in research and
development to improve its fluids and mats businesses in the future.
Financing Activity
Newpark is pressured to hold a large amount of free cash due to the length of time that it
takes to quickly collect revenue from its customers and its need to make use of a quick
turnaround time on invoices. This is why Newpark keeps a relatively small amount of debt in its
capital structure. Currently, Newpark maintains a 0.22 debt‐to‐capital ratio. After meeting with
top management, we believe that Newpark has no intention of dramatically increasing its
leverage above its current level to chase new growth opportunities. Thus, Newpark will
continue to keep low levels of debt in its capital structure and maintain a strong balance sheet
in the future.
SITE VISIT
After meeting with Gregg Piontek, the Chief Financial Officer, and Brian Feldott, the Director of
Corporate Finance & Treasurer, we were able to get first‐hand insight into Newpark Resources
corporate strategy. Mr. Piontek spoke first, providing a big picture view of Newpark’s place in
the industry as a specialized supplier to oil and gas companies. He discussed the major players;
Halliburton, Schlumberger, and Baker Hughes, who have roughly 30% market share in the
fluids market. The rest of the supplier market, he explained, is extremely fragmented and
made up of many smaller “mom and pop” fluids suppliers. Newpark has an advantage over
these smaller companies because of its conservative capital structure and technological
advantages.
Current Trends
Newpark’s management then discussed expansion strategies and positions in international
markets. Newpark is looking to expand more into the Middle East and Africa as opportunities
for contracts arise, noting the Company’s recent contract with Total S.A. to provide ultra‐
deepwater fluid services for an offshore well in Uruguay. This contract, expected to begin in
the second quarter of 2016, is projected to generate approximately $10 million in revenue.
Management was, however, less optimistic regarding its position in Brazil with Petrobras and
stressed its effort to “right size” Newpark’s position in the market until the Company can safely
provide solutions with assurance of receiving payment for Company services. Domestically, Mr.
Piontek emphasized managements’ excitement about expanding in the Gulf Coast, which has
always been a large revenue source for Newpark. Additionally, the Baker Hughes‐Halliburton
merger and the potential divestiture of Gulf Coast fluids operations would leave Newpark as
one of the only eligible suitors for these operations, as determined by regulators. The merger
also increases competitiveness in the global fluids market, as exploration and production (E&P)
companies will want to deal with more than just two suppliers.

26
Corporate Strategy
Regarding the product lines, management is focused on long‐term mat contracts. The new mat
manufacturing plant will allow for higher output to meet higher levels of demand that
management is anticipating from new long‐term contracts. Newpark’s mats have been
involved in many interesting public events, such as the London Olympics and various concerts
and festivals, but contract length is too short to recognize any real income. Specifically,
Newpark is more heavily focused on achieving contracts that have a time horizon longer than
nine months because the logistics involved in the installation of spill containment mats is too
costly to focus on short‐term events. We mentioned the potential ability to cross‐sell the
products and services, from drilling fluids to mats, or vice versa. Management said that while
this is not of high importance, if a cross‐selling opportunity arose, it would come from the
fluids segment, then the mat segment.
In the short term, Newpark is focused on keeping its debt levels at current lows while
increasing free cash flow through long term mat contracts, improving the quality of its
workforce, and expanding its presence in Europe, Middle East, and African (“EMEA”) markets.

27
INDEPENDENT OUTSIDE RESEARCH
We used both primary and secondary sources to create our report on Newpark Resources.
Along with opinions from professional analysts, we also gathered information from various
online sources such as ThomsonOne, Yahoo Finance, the U.S. Energy Information
Administration, Standard & Poor’s Net Advantage, and SEC filings. Our understanding of
Newpark and its place in the oil and gas industry began by looking at the Company’s SEC filings.
After extensive research we determined certain revenue drivers such as the Baker Hughes
Rotary Rig Count. By examining Newpark’s historical balance sheets, we inferred that cash on
hand and a low debt structure are important goals for Newpark. Gregg Piontek, the Chief
Financial Officer, confirmed this assumption when we met with him as did Brian Feldott, the
Director of Corporate Finance and Treasurer. Our team also reached out to analysts following
Newpark to gain valuable outside perspectives on Newpark and the oilfield services industry.
One analyst, Kyle May of Capital One Southcoast, gave thoughtful insight into the state of the
industry as a whole. May inferred that over the course of the second half of 2015 and going
into 2016, oil and gas companies will have to alter the outlook on the potential rebound in oil
prices. May stated that now “companies and investors are expecting prices to remain relatively
flat from current levels into the first half of 2016, possibly even the second half of next year.”
With a rebound in commodities to come sometime into the future, some analysts are putting a
buy rating on Newpark Resources; however, after talking with Mr. May about the current state
of the industry, we believe that it may not be worth buying just yet. Overall, other analysts are
simply uncertain about E&P and oilfield service securities like Newpark. However, as the
“Lower for Longer” price period continues, it should become clear which companies will prove
profitable.

28
ANOTHER WAY TO LOOK AT IT
ALTMAN Z‐SCORE
The Altman Z‐Score is a standardized test to predict the probability that a company will go
bankrupt in the next two years. Edward Altman developed the test in 1968. The test uses five
key financial ratios: work capital/total assets, earnings before interest and tax expenses
(EBIT)/total assets, retained earnings/total assets, market value of equity/book value of total
liabilities, and net sales/total assets. The ratios are each given a certain weight in Altman’s
equation. The resulting number places the firm into one of three “zones.” Anything below 1.8
is considered the “distress” zone. Anything between 1.8 and 2.99 is considered the “grey”
zone. Finally, anything above 2.99 is considered to be in the “safe” zone.
Newpark Resources has a Z‐Score of 3.63 and is, therefore, in the “safe” zone. This means
that Newpark has a very low probability of going bankrupt in the next two years. As you can
see in Table 7, Newpark has a higher than average Z‐Score for its peer group. This reveals that
the Company is in a safer financial situation than many of its peers. This is mostly due to
Newpark’s dedication to keeping a good balance sheet. The Company does not hold much
debt and has a lot of cash on hand. Despite a drop in EBIT from last year, Newpark has still
increased its retained earnings, sales, and total assets.
Table 7: Newpark Resources and Peers Z‐Score
Company
Altman Z‐
Score
Schlumberger Limited 4.25
Halliburton Company 3.61
Baker Hughes Incorporated 3.18
Newpark Resources 3.63
Peer Average 2.17
Source: Bloomberg November 13, 2015

29
PETER LYNCH EARNINGS MULTIPLE VALUATION
In his book One Up On Wall Street, Peter Lynch describes a simple but effective charting
strategy that he uses to make investment decisions. The chart, deemed “the Peter Lynch
chart,” is a simple graph that plots the stock price against its “earnings line,” a theoretical
price equal to 15 times earnings per share. When a stock traded well below the line, Lynch
would buy it. When a stock rose above the line, Lynch would sell it. The chart below
demonstrates the earnings to price relationship for our Company over the past five years to
the current date. At a current price of $5.66 for Newpark Resources trading at 29.79x
earnings, Peter Lynch would sell the stock.
Figure 5: Newpark’s Historical Stock Price vs. EPS Multiple
Source: Bloomberg November 16, 2015

$0.00
$2.00
$4.00
$6.00
$8.00
$10.00
$12.00
$14.00
Last Price Trailing 12M Earnings Per Share (15x Multiple)

30
WWBD?
What Would Ben (Graham) Do?

Ben Graham is frequently recognized as the original value investor. He created a checklist of
eight “hurdles” to evaluate the attractiveness of a specific security. These hurdles
determined if a stock was trading at a price below its true value, which made it a bargain.
The hurdles also helped determine a stock’s previous growth as well as its potential for
continued growth. For Graham to consider the stock attractive, it had to overcome at least
four out of the eight hurdles.
Newpark Resources currently meets the criteria to beat four out the eight hurdles: 1) The
Company’s stock price is less than 1.5 of the Company’s book value; 2) Newpark’s total debt
is less than its book value; 3) Newpark has a current ratio of 2 or more; and 4) The
Company’s earnings growth has been 7% or higher over the last five years. However,
Newpark failed to overcome the other four hurdles, which evaluate the bargain price of the
stock, the potential dividend earnings of the stock, and the consistency of its long term
growth.
Newpark’s earnings to price yield of 3.88% is not as great as two times the ten‐year Treasury
Note rate. The Company’s price to earnings ratio is huge compared to historical average,
which makes it too expensive for Graham. Because Newpark does not pay a dividend, it
cannot meet the third hurdle, which requires a dividend yield of half the yield on a ten‐year
Treasury Note. Newpark also fails to beat the last hurdle, as its earnings growth over the last
five years has been very stable. However, with half of the hurdles accomplished, Ben Graham
would find this stock interesting.
Figure 6: Ben Graham Dial

31
Earnings per share (ttm) 0.24$ Price: 6.19$
Earnings to Price Yield 3.88%
10 Year Treasury (2X) 4.46%
P/E ratio as of 12/31/10 13.4
P/E ratio as of 12/31/11 11.9
P/E ratio as of 12/31/12 12.7
P/E ratio as of 12/31/13 17.8
P/E ratio as of 12/31/14 8.9
Current P/E Ratio 25.8
Dividends per share (ttm) ‐$ Price: 6.19$
Dividend Yield 0.00%
1/2 Yield on 10 Year Treasury 1.12%
Stock Price 6.19$
Book Value per share as of 12/31/14 7.17$
150% of book Value per share as of 12/31/14 10.76$
Interest‐bearing debt as of 12/31/14 181,301,000$
Book value as of 12/31/14 603,613,000$
Current assets as of 12/31/14 501,801,000$
Current liabilities as of 12/31/14 114,038,000$
Current ratio as of 12/31/14 4.4
EPS for year ended 12/31/14 1.07$
EPS for year ended 12/31/13 0.69$ ‐36%
EPS for year ended 12/31/11 0.80$ 29%
Stock price data as of November 4, 2015
NEWPARK RESOURCES INC. (NYSE: NR)
Ben Graham Analysis
Hurdle # 1: An Earnings to Price Yield of 2X the Yield on 10 Year Treasury
No
Hurdle # 2: A P/E Ratio Down to 1/2 of the Stocks Highest in 5 Yrs
No
Hurdle # 3: A Dividend Yield of 1/2 the Yield on 10 Year Treasury
No
Hurdle # 4: A Stock Price less than 1.5 BV
Yes
Hurdle # 5: Total Debt less than Book Value
Yes
Hurdle # 6: Current Ratio of Two or More
Yes
Hurdle # 7: Earnings Growth of 7% or Higher over past 5 years
Yes
Hurdle # 8: Stability in Growth of Earnings
No

Newpark Resources Inc. (NR) BURKENROAD REPORTS (www.burkenroad.org)November 6, 2015
32
NEWPARKRESOURCESINC.(NYSE:NR)
QuarterlyandAnnualEarnings
Inthousands
Fortheperiodended
Revenues
Costofrevenues
Grossprofit
Selling,generalandadministrative
Otherincome,net
Operatingincome(loss)
Otherincome(expense):
Foreigncurrencyexchange(gain)loss
Interestexpense,net
Incomefromcontiniuingoperationsbeforeincometaxes
Incometaxexpense(benefit)
Incomefromcontinuingoperations
Incomefromdiscontinuedoperations,netoftax
Gainfromdisposalofdiscontinuedoperations,netoftax
Netincome(loss)
Netincome(loss)percommonshare:
Basic
Incomefromdiscontinuedoperations
Netincome(loss)percommonshare
Diluted
Incomefromdiscontinuedoperations
Netincome(loss)percommonshare
2012A
983,953$
811,048
172,905
81,500
(870)
92,275
749
9,727
81,799
31,346
50,453
9,579
60,032$
0.58$
0.11$
0.69$
0.53$
0.09$
0.62$
2013A
1,042,356$
858,467
183,889
93,657
(4,213)
94,445
1,819
11,279
81,347
28,725
52,622
12,701
65,323$
0.62$
0.15$
0.77$
0.69$
2014A31‐MarA30‐JunA30‐SepA31‐DecE2015E31‐MarE30‐JunE30‐SepE31‐DecE2016E
1,118,416$208,464$163,644$154,170$172,837$699,115$177,005$180,160$182,860$186,567$726,592$
876,999176,634142,155138,283152,583609,655156,263159,048161,432164,705641,448
241,41731,83021,48915,88720,25389,45920,74221,11121,42821,86285,144
112,64825,97823,96325,85923,42499,22423,98924,41624,78225,28598,471
(1,827)(276)(792)(709)(1,777)
130,5966,128(1,682)(9,263)(3,170)(7,987)(3,247)(3,305)(3,354)(3,422)(13,328)
1081,564(410)3,2364,390
10,4312,2552,2242,1292,2138,8212,2002,2002,2002,2008,800
120,0572,309(3,496)(14,628)(5,383)(21,198)(5,447)(5,505)(5,554)(5,622)(22,127)
41,0481,316758(10,157)(1,992)(10,075)(2,015)(2,037)(2,055)(2,080)(8,187)
79,009993(4,254)(4,471)(3,392)(11,124)(3,431)(3,468)(3,499)(3,542)(13,940)
1,152
22,117
102,278$993$(4,254)$(4,471)$(3,392)$(11,124)$(3,431)$(3,468)$(3,499)$(3,542)$(13,940)$
0.95$0.01$(0.05)$(0.05)$(0.04)$(0.13)$(0.04)$(0.04)$(0.04)$(0.04)$(0.16)$
0.28$
1.23$0.01$(0.05)$(0.05)$(0.04)$(0.13)$(0.04)$(0.04)$(0.04)$(0.04)$(0.16)$
0.84$0.01$(0.05)$(0.05)$(0.04)$(0.13)$(0.04)$(0.04)$(0.04)$(0.04)$(0.16)$
0.23$
1.07$0.01$(0.05)$(0.05)$(0.04)$(0.13)$(0.04)$(0.04)$(0.04)$(0.04)$(0.16)$
2016E2015E
Weightedaveragesharesoutstanding:
Basic
Diluted
SELECTEDCOMMON‐SIZEAMOUNTS
87,522
104,080
85,095
102,544
82,99982,29982,52982,99082,86182,86183,49984,15084,87386,12086,120
100,41483,80482,52982,99082,86182,86183,49984,15084,87386,12086,120
Costofrevenues
Grossprofit
82.43%
17.57%
8.28%
9.38%
82.36%
17.64%
8.99%
9.06%
78.41%84.73%86.87%89.70%88.28%87.20%88.28%88.28%88.28%88.28%88.28%
21.59%15.27%13.13%10.30%11.72%12.80%11.72%11.72%11.72%11.72%11.72%
10.07%12.46%14.64%16.77%13.55%14.19%13.55%13.55%13.55%13.55%13.55%
62.65%3.74%‐1.09%‐5.36%‐1.79%‐4.43%‐1.78%‐1.77%‐0.46%‐0.45%0.00%
Netincome(loss)
YEARTOYEARCHANGE
Revenues
Costofrevenues
Grossprofit
8.31%
3.19%
6.10%
8.20%
13.72%
‐11.85%
6.66%
‐23.65%
7.80%
2.76%
6.27%
5.94%
5.85%
6.35%
14.92%
2.35%
57.59%1.41%‐2.27%‐8.46%‐3.04%‐11.77%‐2.98%‐2.95%‐0.76%‐0.74%0.00%
19.69%0.80%0.49%‐5.88%‐1.13%‐5.59%‐1.10%‐1.09%‐0.28%‐0.27%0.00%
49.06%0.61%‐2.76%‐2.59%‐1.92%‐6.17%‐1.88%‐1.86%‐0.48%‐0.46%1.10%
‐80.00%‐32.61%‐43.42%‐41.80%‐42.19%‐13.58%11.74%21.01%320.39%331.02%‐1.02%
2.16%‐10.14%‐33.79%‐39.52%‐35.64%‐30.48%‐11.53%11.88%16.74%7.94%5.21%
31.28%‐31.20%‐62.79%‐76.74%‐70.69%‐62.94%‐34.84%‐1.76%34.88%7.94%‐4.82%
20.28%‐86.78%‐14.36%‐10.07%‐22.92%‐11.92%‐86.42%1.89%‐4.16%7.94%‐0.76%
38.28%‐70.48%‐105.29%‐123.49%‐108.22%‐106.12%‐152.98%96.47%‐63.79%7.94%66.86%
Netincome(loss)
‐26.38%
‐21.39%
‐24.98%
‐0.55%
‐8.36%
8.81%
47.59%‐87.02%‐111.35%‐140.76%‐115.12%‐117.66%‐335.89%57.45%‐62.03%4.43%4.38%
42.90%‐78.22%‐92.75%‐181.92%‐116.40%‐124.54%‐253.14%‐368.69%‐79.77%4.43%‐18.74%
56.57%‐97.16%‐120.93%‐119.03%‐114.47%‐110.88%‐445.56%‐18.48%‐21.74%4.43%25.32%

Newpark Resources Inc. (NR) BURKENROAD REPORTS (www.burkenroad.org)November 6, 2015
33
NEWPARKRESOURCESINC.(NYSE:NR)
QuarterlyandAnnualBalanceSheets
Inthousands
Asof
Cashandcashequivalents
Receivables,net
Inventories
Deferredtaxasset
Prepaidexpenses&othercurrentassets
Assetsofdiscontinuedoperations
Totalcurrentassets
Goodwill
Otherintangibleassets
Otherassets
Property,plant&equipment,netofaccumulateddepreciation
Assetsofdiscontinuedoperations
Deferredtaxasset
Totalassets
Currentliabilities:
Short‐termdebt
Accountspayable
Accruedliabilities
Liabilitiesofdiscontinuedoperations
30‐Dec‐12A
46,846$
312,292
209,734
11,251
11,860
12,073
604,056
87,388
37,661
7,831
190,402
67,203
994,541$
2,599$
109,117
42,133
5,747
31‐Dec‐13A
65,840$
268,529
189,680
11,272
11,016
13,103
559,440
94,064
25,900
6,086
217,010
65,917
968,417$
12,867$
88,586
46,341
5,957
31‐Dec‐14A31‐MarA30‐JunA30‐SepA31‐DecE31‐Dec‐15E31‐MarE30‐JunE30‐SepE31‐DecE31‐Dec‐16E
85,052$91,692$123,257$113,850$167,191$167,191$159,180$155,395$155,153$150,767$150,767$
318,600260,718193,306176,640202,915202,915210,091213,836214,682219,034219,034
196,556183,821188,000176,828139,175139,175144,097146,666147,246150,231150,231
11,0137,5635,0754,3678,8228,8228,9939,0829,1019,2059,205
12,61512,36914,88430,11613,40313,40313,72613,97114,18014,46814,468
623,836556,163524,522501,801531,505531,505536,088538,949540,363543,705543,705
91,89390,03290,64489,74989,74989,74989,74989,74989,74989,74989,749
15,66614,23913,31512,19011,03111,03110,2029,3738,5437,7147,714
5,3667,0225,3486,5266,5266,5266,5266,5266,5266,5266,526
283,361291,713297,764302,404301,668301,668300,839299,914298,893297,774297,774
1,020,122$959,169$931,593$912,670$940,480$940,480$943,403$944,511$944,074$945,469$945,469$
11,648$9,909$9,237$5,913$3,803$3,803$46,927$90,052$133,176$176,300$176,300$
108,24277,91767,89365,23070,47770,47772,94374,22774,50876,00176,001
53,34239,46735,97242,89536,93136,93138,22438,89739,04439,82639,826
2016E2015E
Totalcurrentliabilities
Long‐termdebt,lesscurrentmaturities
Othernon‐currentliabilities
Deferredincometaxes
Liabilitiesofdiscontinuedoperations
Totalliabilities
159,596
256,832
10,061
34,219
20,255
480,963
153,751
172,786
11,026
27,060
22,740
387,363
173,232127,293113,102114,038111,211111,211158,094203,176246,728292,127292,127
172,498172,497172,497172,497172,497172,497129,37386,24943,124
11,24010,7078,8235,4645,4645,4645,4645,4645,4645,4645,464
37,69435,84926,72117,05839,65739,65739,56839,46939,35939,23939,239
394,664346,346321,143309,057328,829328,829332,498334,357334,675336,830336,830
Stockholders'equity:
Commonstock,$.01parvalue:
Paid‐incapital
Retainedearnings(deficit)
Accumulatedothercomprehensiveloss
Treasurystock
Totalstockholders'equity
Totalliabilitiesandstockholders'equity
957
484,962
95,015
(734)
(66,622)
513,578
994,541$
980
504,675
160,338
(9,484)
(75,455)
581,054
968,417$
992993994994994994994994994994994
521,228524,492525,965530,059541,488541,488544,174546,891549,635552,416552,416
262,616263,609259,355254,884251,492251,492248,061244,593241,094237,552237,552
(31,992)(49,201)(47,882)(54,339)(54,339)(54,339)(54,339)(54,339)(54,339)(54,339)(54,339)
(127,386)(127,070)(127,982)(127,985)(127,985)(127,985)(127,985)(127,985)(127,985)(127,985)(127,985)
625,458612,823610,450603,613611,651611,651610,905610,154609,399608,638608,638
1,020,122$959,169$931,593$912,670$940,480$940,480$943,403$944,511$944,074$945,469$945,469$

NR Equity Report

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (16)

Similar to NR Equity Report

Similar to NR Equity Report (20)

NR Equity Report