How a supermajor stress-tests major investment costs with independent data
Less than an hour
to benchmark internal estimates before committing to a major capital decision
<3% difference
between internal and Rystad Energy's independent bottom-up estimate
Within 30 minutes
from demonstration, the team could apply the Rystad Energy solution to a real bidding opportunity
A global oil and gas supermajor used Rystad Energy's Cost Estimating solution to benchmark internal estimates against independent, bottom-up cost intelligence, validating hundred-million-dollar decisions in under an hour.
The challenge: Building estimates that hold up under scrutiny
A supermajor's project cost-estimating team carried a dual mandate: developing cost estimates for major projects and providing independent cost assurance for investment decisions above $100 million. Both roles demanded accuracy, and both were under growing pressure.
Executive leadership needed to validate cost estimates quickly against real-world benchmarks before committing to bids or major capital decisions. In an environment of rising project costs and volatile supply chains, a credible external reference was no longer optional.
The team needed a tool that could deliver fast, defensible confirmation of internal estimates without requiring days of additional research. Cost models had to be grounded in real project data, clear in their assumptions and flexible enough to reflect the organization’s own cost structure, including owner costs and contingency.
Key highlights:
- The stakes: In an environment of rising project costs and volatile supply chains, a credible external reference was no longer optional
- The workflow: The tool fit seamlessly into how the team already operated, taking them from analog selection to final estimate in a single session
- The scalability: The team identified that the tool could also serve as a quick way to cross-check other software outputs at an asset level, creating a repeatable framework for cost assurance across future projects.
Partnering with Rystad Energy: Bottom-up cost intelligence built on real project analogs
Amid volatile market conditions and shifting energy valuations, investment banks face increasing pressure to deliver smarter, faster, and more reliable analysis with leaner teams. For one leading global investment bank specializing in mergers and acquisitions (M&A) within the energy sector, these challenges highlighted the need for more agile, data-driven workflows.
Partnering with Rystad Energy, the bank implemented a bespoke Upstream Screening Dashboard — a powerful tool that transformed how analysts identified opportunities, prepared client pitches, and evaluated assets. By automating previously manual and time-consuming tasks, the new solution helped the M&A division achieve unprecedented speed and precision, freeing up valuable time for strategic decision-making and client engagement.
Results: Faster validation, stronger decisions
The impact was immediate. Within 30 minutes of the demonstration, the team applied the tool to a live, high-priority bidding opportunity.
That degree of alignment between two independently derived estimates delivered three clear benefits:
Stronger estimate credibility. The close alignment with Rystad Energy's independent model reduced risk in discussions with external partners and investment committees, giving the team a defensible external reference point.
Better decision quality on the bid. With validated cost inputs, the team moved forward with greater clarity and stronger justification for its investment case.
A scalable validation method. The team identified that the tool could also serve as a quick way to cross-check other software outputs at an asset level, creating a repeatable framework for cost assurance across future projects.
Rystad Energy is committed to client confidentiality. Names have been altered for privacy.
“I was able to use the Cost Estimating tool to benchmark our internal estimates in less than an hour. Once I identified the best analog and normalized for our owner's cost and contingency, our internal estimates were less than 3% different from Rystad Energy's independent bottom-up estimate. ”