BP plc Stock on 4 December 2025: Near Record Highs, Buyback Blitz and a Hydrogen U‑Turn Drive the 2026 Story

BP plc enters the final weeks of 2025 with its share price near record levels, an aggressive new share‑buyback tranche underway, and a controversial decision to scrap a flagship UK hydrogen project in favour of an AI data‑centre redevelopment. Together, these moves are reshaping how investors view BP’s balance between cash generation, fossil‑fuel growth and its longer‑term transition ambitions.

Below is a structured look at the latest BP stock price action, the company’s most recent financial results, its updated strategy and the range of forecasts now circulating for 2026 and beyond as of 4 December 2025.

BP share price on 4 December 2025: pressing up against the highs

On Wall Street, BP’s New York–listed American depositary receipts (ADRs) closed on 3 December 2025 at $37.24, up roughly 2.4% on the day and just over 1% below the stock’s 52‑week high of $37.64 set in mid‑November. ^[1] Intraday quotes on the morning of 4 December show the ADR trading around the same level, leaving BP within touching distance of its all‑time closing high.

In London, BP shares finished the 3 December session around 462p, gaining about 1.3% and outperforming a slightly weaker FTSE 100 index. The stock now trades less than 3% below its 52‑week peak of about 476p reached in November, with recent data showing steady price gains and robust trading volumes. ^[2]

Over the past six months, the London‑listed shares have climbed roughly 27%, according to UK financial press analysis, reflecting both improved sentiment toward European oil majors and BP‑specific catalysts such as stronger cash returns and strategy clarification. ^[3]

For investors, the headline is simple: BP is no longer a “distressed transition laggard” trading at the bottom of its range. It is now priced as a high‑yield, cash‑rich oil and gas major whose share price is already discounting a meaningful recovery – but not, in most analysts’ view, its full upside potential.

Q3 2025 results: solid earnings and a fresh $750m buyback

BP’s latest hard data point is its third‑quarter 2025 earnings, released on 4 November.

Key figures from the report and associated coverage include: ^[4]

Replacement cost (RC) profit rose to about $1.22bn, up from $1.11bn a year earlier.
Underlying RC profit – BP’s preferred measure – was roughly $2.21bn, modestly below the prior year but ahead of analyst expectations.
Revenue and other income climbed to around $49.25bn, versus $48.33bn a year before.
Underlying earnings per ADS came in around $0.85, significantly above the Wall Street consensus of about $0.77 per ADS.
BP declared a quarterly dividend of 8.32 US cents per ordinary share/ADS and reiterated its intention to grow the dividend at least 4% per year.
Capital expenditure for 2025 is expected to land around $14.5bn, within a medium‑term frame of $13–15bn per year.

Most importantly for equity holders, BP confirmed it would execute a $750 million share‑buyback before reporting fourth‑quarter results. This comes on top of a $750m tranche completed by the end of October. ^[5]

On 4 November, BP formally launched a fresh buyback programme of up to $750m of ordinary shares, expected to run through early February 2026. ^[6] Regulatory filings from the London Stock Exchange show that on 3 December alone BP repurchased 1,495,824 ordinary shares on the LSE and Cboe UK, part of these ongoing daily buyback operations. ^[7]

Taken together, quarterly buybacks of roughly three‑quarters of a billion dollars, layered on top of a rising dividend, leave BP at the more generous end of shareholder‑return policies among the global supermajors.

Strategy reset: more hydrocarbons, leaner transition

The current investment case for BP can’t be understood without its February 2025 “reset”.

In that update, BP sharply rebalanced its strategy back toward oil and gas, announcing plans to: ^[8]

Boost annual oil and gas investment to around $10bn, reversing earlier plans to aggressively shrink upstream production.
Cut annual spending on renewables and other transition businesses by more than $5bn relative to previous guidance.
Hold total capital expenditure broadly in a $13–15bn range through 2027.
Target at least 4% annual growth in the dividend per share and maintain regular share buybacks funded from surplus cash flow.

BP framed this as a pragmatic response to slower‑than‑expected energy‑transition economics and shareholder demands for higher returns. ^[9]

That shareholder pressure has a name: Elliott Management. The activist hedge fund has built a large economic stake in BP and is reportedly pushing for: ^[10]

Free cash flow to rise by around 40% to $20bn by 2027.
Annual capex near $12bn, at the low end of BP’s current range.
Deeper cost cuts and potential divestments in solar and offshore wind assets.

Other investors, including Legal & General Investment Management, have publicly warned that such a pivot risks undermining BP’s climate‑transition credentials. ^[11] The result is a company now trying to sit between two stools: promising robust cash returns from hydrocarbons while maintaining a still‑meaningful, but narrower, low‑carbon portfolio.

For BP’s share price, the near‑term impact has been positive: the market tends to reward visible cash returns. The open question is whether the strategy can deliver both long‑term resilience and acceptable climate‑transition progress.

Hydrogen U‑turn: Teesside project scrapped for an AI data centre

Nothing symbolises BP’s current strategic tension more than its decision this week to abandon the H2Teesside blue hydrogen project in north‑east England.

In early December, BP formally withdrew its development consent application for the multi‑billion‑pound hydrogen and carbon capture scheme planned at the former Redcar steelworks. ^[12]

Several factors drove the reversal:

The UK government and local authorities have designated the same site for what is billed as one of Europe’s largest AI data centres, leaving insufficient room for both projects given power, land‑use and infrastructure constraints. ^[13]
The closure of a nearby Sabic chemical plant, expected to be a key hydrogen customer, undermined demand visibility for H2Teesside. ^[14]
Persistent questions remain over the commercial viability of blue hydrogen, especially given high production costs and uncertain long‑term policy support. ^[15]

BP has stressed that it remains active in Teesside through projects such as Net Zero Teesside and the Northern Endurance Partnership, which focus on gas‑fired power generation with carbon capture and storage. ^[16]

From an equity perspective, the Teesside exit reinforces two narratives:

Pro‑cash investors see it as confirmation that BP will not sink large amounts of capital into low‑return, policy‑dependent projects.
ESG‑focused investors view it as another step back from climate leadership – particularly awkward for a company that once marketed itself as going “Beyond Petroleum”.

How that trade‑off plays out in BP’s cost of capital and investor base is one of the big strategic questions heading into 2026.

Income appeal: dividends, buybacks and double‑digit total yield

For now, income investors are firmly in the driving seat.

BP has gradually rebuilt its dividend since the 2020 pandemic cut. In 2025 the company raised its quarterly payout to 8.32 US cents per ordinary share/ADS, representing roughly a 4% increase versus the prior year’s level. This rate has been confirmed in both the second‑ and third‑quarter 2025 declarations. ^[17]

At current prices, multiple data providers estimate BP’s forward dividend yield at about: ^[18]

5.4–5.6% on the London listing.
Around 5.5% on the NYSE ADR.

When ongoing buybacks are included, the total shareholder yield — dividend plus buyback yield — currently exceeds 11%, with buybacks themselves contributing roughly 5.7–5.8%. ^[19]

Analyst commentaries in the UK press suggest this income stream is likely to edge higher, with forecasts putting the cash dividend yield around 5.4% for 2025 and 5.6% for 2026, assuming BP delivers on its “at least 4% annual growth” guidance and the share price does not re‑rate dramatically. ^[20]

This combination of a mid‑single‑digit cash yield and regular buybacks is a central plank of the bullish case for BP stock.

Analyst ratings and price targets: cautious upside with wide dispersion

US‑listed BP ADR (NYSE: BP)

On the NYSE‑traded ADR, analyst sentiment has turned broadly constructive but not euphoric.

MarketBeat collates 19 analyst ratings and classifies the consensus as “Moderate Buy”, with 1 sell, 9 holds and 9 buy/strong‑buy recommendations.
The average 12‑month price target stands at $43.14, implying roughly 16% upside from the current $37.24 level.
Targets range from a low of $26.50 to a high of $66, highlighting substantial disagreement over BP’s earnings power and risk profile. ^[21]

StockAnalysis, which follows a slightly different analyst set, shows a more muted stance: an average rating of “Hold” based on around 11 analysts, with a mean price target near $39.87 – about 7% above the recent price – and the same $29–$66 range. ^[22]

London‑listed BP (LSE: BP.)

For the UK‑listed shares, recent data pulled together by TradingView indicates: ^[23]

A consensus target price around 501p, modestly above the current 460–465p trading band.
Individual targets stretching from roughly 405p on the low side to about 845p on the high side.

Some UK commentators have highlighted that a handful of bullish analysts now see scope for BP to reach 850p by the end of 2026 – around 90% upside from the ~450p level earlier this week. ^[24] Those views remain outliers, but they do underline the extent of upside some forecasters see if BP executes well on its cash‑return and growth plans.

Earlier in 2025, analysis compiled by Capital.com from TipRanks showed a “moderate buy” consensus with an average target of 444p and a range of 347–525p, alongside broker‑specific targets such as 500p (Berenberg), 470p (RBC), 440p (J.P. Morgan Cazenove) and 390p (Jefferies). ^[25]

Quant and technical signals

While fundamental analysts lean cautiously positive, some technical‑analysis dashboards are less enthusiastic. Capital.com notes that TradingView’s one‑month indicator set has periodically flashed “sell” on BP, with more negative than positive signals in mid‑2025 despite resilient earnings. ^[26]

This divergence between fundamental upside and mixed technical readings helps explain why BP’s share price has moved steadily rather than explosively, even as buybacks and dividends remain aggressive.

Valuation and peer comparison: still a discount story

Several strands of research emphasise that, despite the recent rally, BP still trades at a valuation discount to US‑based peers and even to some European rivals.

Historically, BP has traded at 0.24–0.80x price‑to‑sales; recent analysis suggests the stock sits around 0.5x P/S, below the mid‑range of that band but not at a distressed extreme. ^[27]
Broader comparisons show European majors such as BP and Shell valued at notably lower earnings multiples than ExxonMobil and Chevron, partly due to more aggressive climate‑policy exposure and weaker investor appetite for European hydrocarbons. ^[28]

Earlier in 2025, a series of Breakingviews and Trefis pieces went as far as suggesting BP could be a takeover or break‑up candidate, arguing that splitting its businesses or pairing with a rival might unlock material value. ^[29] Subsequent rumours of a Shell–BP merger were formally quashed by Shell under the UK takeover code, limiting such speculation for now. ^[30]

For current shareholders, the key takeaway is that the stock is no longer “cheap at any price”, but still appears to embed a discount versus the cash‑flow profile that bullish analysts project for the back half of the decade.

Key risks: oil prices, policy and transition credibility

Even with the recent momentum, BP’s investment case carries substantial risks frequently highlighted across analyst and media coverage:

Commodity price risk – Most forecasts for BP’s cash flow assume oil prices that remain in a comfortable but not extreme range; a sustained downturn in crude or gas would quickly squeeze free cash flow and force slower buybacks or flatter dividends. ^[31]
Policy and tax risk – BP is heavily exposed to UK and European fiscal and regulatory regimes, where windfall taxes and tougher emissions rules remain live possibilities. ^[32]
Energy‑transition execution – Pivoting back toward hydrocarbons may help near‑term returns but could leave BP vulnerable if policy or investor sentiment swings back sharply toward low‑carbon assets. The Teesside hydrogen exit has already amplified concerns over BP’s long‑term transition credibility. ^[33]
Operational and environmental events – Like all oil majors, BP carries tail risks related to accidents, spills and major unplanned outages, which can impose large costs and sudden reputational damage. TechStock²+1

Analysts generally factor these into their price targets via higher discount rates or lower terminal multiples than those applied to US peers, helping to explain why BP’s valuation gap has been persistent.

Bottom line: what BP’s December 2025 set‑up means for investors

As of 4 December 2025, BP sits at an intriguing crossroads:

The share price is near record levels, reflecting improved sentiment and strong recent returns of capital. ^[34]
The company is delivering solid earnings and cash generation, backing a dividend yield around 5.5% and a quarterly $750m buyback programme. ^[35]
Strategically, BP has moved decisively toward an oil‑and‑gas‑heavy, cash‑first model, while paring back some of its most ambitious transition projects, such as H2Teesside. ^[36]
Analyst forecasts cluster around single‑digit to mid‑teens upside over 12 months, with a long tail of more bullish scenarios pointing much higher if valuation gaps to peers narrow. ^[37]

For income‑oriented investors who are comfortable with fossil‑fuel exposure and policy risk, BP currently offers one of the highest total shareholder yields in the global energy sector. For more climate‑sensitive or growth‑focused investors, the company’s renewed emphasis on hydrocarbons and its retreat from some flagship transition projects may be harder to reconcile with long‑term portfolio objectives.