Range Resources (RRC) Deep Research Report: Overvalued or a Gas-Levered Opportunity for 2026 Investors?

Range Resources is a fascinating paradox for value‑oriented energy investors: a genuinely well‑run, low‑cost, gas‑levered producer whose stock, in our view, already bakes in a very optimistic future.

On one hand, Range sits on 18.1 Tcfe of long‑life reserves in the Marcellus, runs a tight manufacturing‑style drilling program, and has steadily shifted from “growth at all costs” toward a disciplined capital return strategy. According to the company’s 2024 Form 10‑K, 2024 production reached 796 Bcfe, with low cash operating costs and an emphasis on free cash flow and balance sheet strength.

On the other hand, the equity market is already paying a premium multiple for this story. With shares around $35 and a market cap of roughly $8.35 billion, Range trades at about 14.6x trailing earnings and an EV/EBITDA near 13.4x, based on data from FMP cited in our report. Our conservative discounted cash flow analysis comes in close to $18 per share—almost 50% below the current quote—suggesting the stock offers little margin of safety for a cyclical, single‑basin gas producer.

As a result, our stance is Potential Sell, especially for investors who have enjoyed the run and want to de‑risk. That does not mean Range is a bad business. It means the price, in our view, is too demanding for the risk profile.

If you want to see exactly how we derived that DCF and how it compares across other gas names, it’s the kind of deep‑dive analysis we now generate in minutes using our own AI research engine. Read our AI-powered value investing guide to see how tools like DeepValue compress hours of 10‑K reading into a few minutes of structured, citation‑backed insight.

Range Resources at a Glance: A Pure‑Play Marcellus Gas Story

Range Resources is a Fort Worth‑based independent exploration and production company focused almost entirely on natural gas and NGL development in the Marcellus Shale in Pennsylvania. The business is essentially a single segment: onshore upstream, with gathering, processing, and marketing treated as part of the upstream operation rather than as a separate midstream business, per the 2024 Form 10‑K.

Key snapshot metrics from our research:

• Market cap: ~$8.35 billion
• Production (2024): 796 Bcfe, roughly 68% gas, 30% NGLs, 2% oil
• Proved reserves: 18.1 Tcfe (64% gas, 35% NGLs, 1% oil)
• 2024 operating cash flow: about $945 million on $2.2–2.4 billion of hydrocarbon sales
• Net debt/EBITDA: ~2.1x
• Interest coverage: ~7x

According to the Q3 2025 10‑Q, Range operated 1,509 gross wells and produced around 2.23 Bcfe/d in the quarter, with realized prices (including hedges) of $3.29/mcfe and cash operating costs of $1.91/mcfe, highlighting its low‑cost positioning in Appalachia.

From a business‑quality standpoint, that’s a solid setup: long‑life reserves, low unit costs, and a fairly clean balance sheet. The concentration in one basin and one commodity, however, is a double‑edged sword: it amplifies upside leverage to gas prices but also magnifies cyclical and regulatory risk.

How Does Range Make Money, and What’s Changed Strategically?

Range’s business model is straightforward but capital‑intensive. The company drills, completes, and operates horizontal wells in the Marcellus Shale, sells produced natural gas and NGLs into U.S. markets, and uses a mix of firm transport contracts and marketing arrangements to access multiple demand centers.

According to the 2024 Form 10‑K:

• Gathering, processing, and marketing are run as part of a single upstream segment.
• All operations and sales are U.S.-based, with heavy geographic concentration in Pennsylvania.
• The company has deep inventory and expects more than 50 years of productive life from its proved reserves, supported by a PV‑10 of about $5.5 billion.

Strategically, management has clearly pivoted over the last decade. Range sold off non‑core basins and doubled down on the Marcellus, increasing gas leverage but also increasing basin concentration risk. Capital allocation now prioritizes:

• Funding capex within operating cash flow where possible
• Reducing debt
• Returning capital through dividends and opportunistic buybacks

In 2024, for example, Range:

• Spent ~$654 million on capex (within guidance)
• Paid $77.5 million in dividends
• Repurchased $65.3 million of stock
• Retired $79.7 million of 2025 notes at a discount

These actions are detailed in the 2024 10‑K. By Q3 2025, the quarterly dividend had been raised to $0.09 per share, and another $56.3 million of stock had been repurchased, with roughly $840 million in remaining authorization, as disclosed in the Q3 2025 10‑Q.

From our perspective, this is an encouraging capital allocation framework. The issue we see is not how management is running the business but what investors are paying for that execution given the underlying cyclicality.

Industry Backdrop: A Constructive but Volatile Gas Market

To understand Range, you have to understand U.S. gas.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration’s December 2025 Short‑Term Energy Outlook projects Henry Hub prices rising from about $2.19/MMBtu in 2024 to $3.56 in 2025 and $4.01 in 2026, largely on the back of growing LNG exports and modest supply growth. You can see this in the EIA’s natural gas outlook and associated press release.

At the same time, domestic gas consumption is expected to remain roughly flat around 91 Bcf/d, with incremental production mainly going to LNG export terminals. For low‑cost producers like Range, this is a constructive demand story: they are levered to rising global gas demand via U.S. exports, even though all of their actual sales are domestic.

But there are real headwinds:

• Regional takeaway constraints: Appalachia has long struggled with pipeline capacity and permitting. That can compress local price realizations and widen basis differentials.
• Regulatory and ESG pressure: EPA methane regulations and the IRA methane fee, which the American Petroleum Institute has criticized as overlapping and punitive, could raise compliance costs. See API’s commentary on the methane fee here and here.
• Renewables growth: Increasing renewable generation in the power sector may cap long‑term growth in domestic gas burn, even if gas retains a large base load role.

In other words, the medium‑term price deck looks better than the last couple of years, but the structural picture is not a one‑way secular growth story. That’s important because Range’s earnings and free cash flow are extremely sensitive to price, as history has shown.

According to Macrotrends, Range’s net income swung from deep losses during the 2015–2020 downturn to $1.16 billion in 2022, only to drop back to around $265 million in 2024 as gas prices rolled over. This volatility is a core reason we demand a valuation discount in cyclical E&P names.

Does Range Have a Durable Competitive Advantage?

Range is not a commodity producer in the sense of being undifferentiated on costs, but we would not call it a classic “wide moat” either.

Evidence from the 2024 10‑K shows:

• Lease operating expense around $0.12/mcfe, and total gathering, processing, and transportation plus compression at $1.48/mcfe in 2024
• Long‑life reserves and a large inventory of drilling locations in the core of the Marcellus, supporting manufacturing‑mode development
• Firm transport contracts into multiple U.S. regions and international LNG‑linked markets, which helps mitigate Appalachia basis risk

This adds up to a relative cost advantage and inventory depth compared with many higher‑cost basins. Range also benefits from industry‑wide technical progress in extended laterals and pad drilling, as discussed in technical articles from JPT and here.

But we need to be realistic:

• The techniques and services Range uses are widely available to peers.
• Competitors like EQT, CNX, and Antero operate in the same rocks, with similar service providers and access to capital.
• Range lacks vertically integrated midstream or downstream assets that would create a deeper structural moat, as noted in comparisons with peers like EQT Corporation.

Our conclusion: Range has a good but not impregnable position. Its low cost and deep inventory should support competitive returns as long as the Marcellus remains on the low end of the global gas cost curve, but the edge is relative, not absolute.

Free Cash Flow, Balance Sheet, and Capital Returns

From a financial health perspective, Range looks solidly middle‑of‑the‑pack but very acceptable for a cyclical commodity producer.

Key metrics from our report:

• Net debt/EBITDA: ~2.08x
• Interest coverage: ~6.98x
• Liquidity: around $1.2 billion of undrawn revolver availability at Q3 2025, according to the Q3 2025 10‑Q

The free cash flow trend has been positive, though inherently lumpy. Using the SPARK data embedded in our report, free cash flow ranged from about $724 million at year‑end 2022 to mid‑hundreds of millions per quarter over 2023–2025, with one negative quarter in late 2025 as prices and working capital swung.

A few takeaways we emphasize to investors:

1. Range can generate substantial free cash flow in a mid‑$3–4 gas environment. That’s consistent with the EIA’s base case.

2. Leverage is manageable but not ultra‑conservative. At a little over 2x EBITDA, the company has room to maneuver but would feel real stress in a prolonged low‑price environment.

3. Capital return is meaningful but still subordinate to capex and balance sheet needs. Dividends and buybacks are attractive, but they depend heavily on commodity prices and must be weighed against the need to protect the balance sheet in down cycles.

We like this balance sheet for a cyclical name, but it’s not so fortress‑like that we would ignore valuation risk or commodity downside.

Is RRC Stock a Buy in 2026?

This is the core investor question, and our answer, at today’s price, is no.

Here is how we frame it:

• Valuation multiples: Around 14.6x trailing EPS and EV/EBITDA of about 13.4x, with only a modest 12‑month price gain (~6%), according to FMP data cited in our work.
• Asset/value anchors:
• Standardized measure of discounted future cash flows from proved reserves: $4.69 billion at year‑end 2024
• PV‑10 of proved reserves: $5.45 billion
• Equity value: about $8.35 billion currently

These figures from the 2024 10‑K suggest the market is capitalizing not only proved reserves but also assumed upside from undeveloped resource, better-than-SEC price decks, and capital allocation benefits.

• DCF valuation: Our conservative DCF, using historical free cash flow and cautious assumptions about normalization in a cyclical business, yields an intrinsic value of around $17.8 per share. That’s roughly half the current price. While DCFs are always sensitive to assumptions, a 50% gap is too large for us to ignore.

For a commodity‑exposed, single‑basin E&P with a history of severe earnings swings, we want a decent discount to conservative value, not a premium.

Our bottom‑line view:

• At ~$35, RRC embeds a bullish gas‑price trajectory and strong execution with little room for error.
• There is limited margin of safety if gas prices undershoot the EIA’s outlook, if basis differentials widen, or if regulatory costs increase.
• For new capital, we prefer to wait for either a meaningful pullback into the low‑to‑mid $20s or to deploy into cheaper gas‑levered peers with similar quality but lower expectations baked in.

Existing holders with substantial gains may reasonably consider trimming and redeploying into more discounted opportunities.

What Could Change the Story Over the Next 12–24 Months?

While our current stance is Potential Sell, we always define what would make us change our minds. For Range, the key watch items are clear.

1. Gas Price and Basis Trajectory

If Henry Hub and Appalachia realizations sustain at or above the EIA’s mid‑$3–4/MMBtu outlook and Range consistently converts that into visibly higher, stable free cash flow—without levering up—we would become more comfortable with today’s valuation.

Evidence to monitor:

• Quarterly realized prices vs. Henry Hub
• Hedging strategy, including volumes, strike prices, and counterparty risk
• Basis differentials and utilization of firm transport capacity

The EIA’s STEO and Drilling Productivity Report are key macro tools here.

A scenario where gas trades near $4 for several years, Range holds capex discipline, and free cash flow ramps without higher leverage would gradually make the current multiple more defensible.

2. Valuation vs. Asset Anchors

We would also change our posture if price did the work for us. Specifically:

• A pullback into the low‑to‑mid $20s, without any deterioration in reserves, costs, or liquidity, would move the stock closer to both our DCF and PV‑10 anchors.
• At those levels, the risk/reward profile would look more balanced, especially if the gas macro remained constructive.

We don’t need perfection to get more constructive; we just need either better fundamentals at today’s price or a better price for today’s fundamentals.

3. Leverage, Regulation, and Basin Risk

On the downside, there are several red flags that would push us toward a Strong Sell stance if they emerged:

• Net debt/EBITDA creeping well above ~2.5x
• Adverse methane or pipeline rulings that significantly raise costs or cap volumes
• Significant reserve downgrades or evidence that drilling results are weaker than expected

Environmental and ESG overhangs are non‑trivial as well. Past controversies relating to water and waste in Pennsylvania and Texas are documented in public sources, and any major new enforcement actions or legal judgments could hit both costs and social license.

From an investor’s perspective, the key is to build a simple monitoring dashboard and update it quarterly—exactly the kind of repetitive deep research workflow we built DeepValue to automate for our own process.

Will Range Resources Deliver Long-Term Growth?

Over a 2–5 year horizon, Range has a credible roadmap but not a guaranteed growth engine.

According to the Q3 2025 10‑Q and 2024 10‑K:

• The 2025 capex budget of $650–$690 million targets modest production growth while maintaining free cash flow focus.
• Management describes “counter‑cyclical” investment in drilled but uncompleted inventory, supporting efficient growth through 2027 with roughly flat capital.
• ESG initiatives such as MiQ “A” certification and high water recycling rates are intended to buttress the company’s long‑term operating license.

If gas prices track the EIA’s mid‑$3–4 forecast and U.S. LNG growth unfolds as expected, Range should be able to:

• Modestly grow volumes
• Maintain or improve free cash flow
• Continue paying and potentially growing its dividend
• Execute opportunistic buybacks while keeping leverage in check

This would not transform Range into a secular compounder, but it could deliver decent total returns from a lower valuation starting point.

The problem we see is that the current share price already seems to assume this scenario—or something close to it—without fully reflecting the downside if gas undershoots or regulatory risks increase.

Our Investment Take: Quality Business, Demanding Price

Putting it all together, here is how we frame Range Resources for investors:

• Business quality: Above average for an E&P. Low costs, long‑life reserves, disciplined capital allocation, and a credible free cash flow focus.
• Moat: Relative, not absolute. Cost advantages and inventory depth in a top‑tier basin, but techniques are replicable and there is no integrated midstream moat.
• Balance sheet: Solid but exposed to sustained low prices. Around 2.1x net debt/EBITDA with good liquidity and acceptable interest coverage.
• Macro setup: Constructive medium‑term gas outlook driven by LNG exports, but with real risks from regulation, ESG pressure, and regional infrastructure constraints.
• Valuation: Full to rich. Multiples in the mid‑teens on earnings and low‑teens on EBITDA, equity value well above standardized reserve measures, and a conservative DCF pointing to roughly 50% downside from current levels.

For long‑term, value‑oriented investors, our stance is:

• Existing holders: Consider trimming or at least rebalancing if RRC has grown into an outsized position. You’re now holding a good asset at a price that leaves little room for macro or execution missteps.
• Prospective buyers: We would wait for either:
• A pullback into the $20s that restores margin of safety, or
• Evidence that sustainably higher free cash flow is emerging at current gas prices with stable leverage, making today’s premium multiples more defensible.

Range will likely remain an important bellwether for U.S. gas‑levered E&Ps. We plan to keep it on our watchlist and update our stance as prices, fundamentals, and policy evolve.

In the meantime, the larger lesson, in our view, is that even high‑quality resource businesses should be bought with a clear valuation anchor—PV‑10, standardized measures, and scenario‑tested DCFs—not simply on narrative or price momentum. That’s exactly why we built a research stack that can pull from SEC filings, EIA outlooks, industry publications, and historical financials all at once and surface a structured, citation‑backed view in minutes.

Sources

• Range Resources 10‑K (2025)
• Range Resources 10‑Q (Q3 2025)
• Range Resources 8‑K (2025)
• Range Resources 11‑K (2025)
• Range Resources DEF 14A (2025 Proxy Statement)
• Range Resources – Company overview (Wikipedia)
• EQT Corporation – Peer comparison (Wikipedia)
• EIA Short‑Term Energy Outlook – Natural Gas
• EIA Press Release on STEO
• EIA Drilling Productivity Report
• American Petroleum Institute – Methane Fee Statement (2024)
• American Petroleum Institute – Resolution to End EPA Methane Fee (2025)
• Macrotrends – Range Resources Net Income History
• JPT – Drilling Miles: Marcellus Laterals Reach New Lengths
• JPT – Technology, Efficiency, and Midstream Growth in Marcellus/Utica