Woodside Energy Group Ltd (ASX: WDS; NYSE: WDS via American Depositary Shares) heads into the final week of 2025 with investors focused less on day-to-day commodity noise and more on a high-stakes mix of leadership change, mega‑project execution, and Australia’s increasingly political gas debate. [1]
With the Australian market closed for the Christmas/Boxing Day break, the most recent reference price many investors are anchoring to is Woodside’s A$23.16 close, after an ~8% slide over the past month (and roughly flat over the last three months). [2] In the US, Woodside’s NYSE‑listed ADS last traded at US$15.42 (latest trade timestamp: Dec. 24, 2025). [3]
Below is the full picture of the current news, forecasts, and analyses in play as of 26 December 2025—and why the next few months could matter more than the next few sessions.
The headline driver: Woodside’s CEO is leaving for BP
The biggest narrative shift in December wasn’t a production update—it was a people update.
- BP appointed Woodside CEO Meg O’Neill as its next chief executive, with a start date in April 2026, following the abrupt exit of BP CEO Murray Auchincloss. [4]
- Woodside named Liz Westcott as acting CEO while the board runs a search for a permanent replacement. [5]
- On the day of the BP announcement, Woodside shares fell nearly 3% (per Reuters reporting), reflecting investor sensitivity to timing—this is happening while Woodside is mid‑build on multiple capital‑heavy projects. [6]
This isn’t just about a leadership vacuum. It’s about who owns the next set of “go/no‑go” calls: contracting strategy, sell‑downs to partners, cost discipline, and how hard Woodside leans into US LNG versus Australian developments.
Reuters’ analysis framed it bluntly: the next CEO inherits construction risk and market risk at the same time, with global LNG supply growth raising “glut” concerns just as Woodside is expanding. [7]
The growth engine: Scarborough + Pluto Train 2 (and why labour risk matters)
Woodside’s near-term Australian growth story still runs through Scarborough and Pluto Train 2.
On Woodside’s own project page, the company says:
- Scarborough is over 91% complete (excluding Pluto Train 1 modifications)
- Target first LNG cargo: H2 2026
- Project capacity: 8 Mtpa LNG (100% of project) [8]
That schedule is central to the bull case: get Scarborough online, turn capex into cashflow, and defend Woodside’s position as LNG demand evolves in Asia.
But December added a complicating variable: industrial action risk at Pluto LNG 2.
- In late November, Australia’s Fair Work Commission approved a strike ballot covering workers at Woodside’s Pluto LNG 2 project amid a pay dispute with contractor Bechtel; Reuters reported a strike “could occur before the end of 2025” and could risk the project timeline. [9]
- On Dec. 4, Reuters reported ~99% of Offshore Alliance members voted to strike, and a separate Electrical Trades Union cohort also voted heavily in favour of protected action. [10]
Even if disputes are resolved without major stoppages, markets tend to price the risk early because LNG construction schedules are famous for turning “small delays” into “big invoices.”
The mega-bet: Louisiana LNG (FID achieved, but execution and marketing remain the debate)
If Scarborough is the near‑term growth engine, Woodside Louisiana LNG is the ambition play—the project that could redefine Woodside’s global position in the 2030s, or test its balance sheet if markets turn.
Woodside’s Louisiana LNG overview page positions it as:
- 27.6 Mtpa total permitted capacity
- Construction commenced in 2022 (under prior ownership)
- Woodside acquired the project on 9 Oct 2024
- Phase 1 FID achieved in April 2025
- The foundational phase is described as a three‑train, 16.5 Mtpa development [11]
The financial frame Woodside has put on the project
In Woodside’s April 29, 2025 FID announcement, the company stated:
- Forecast total capex (LNG project + pipeline + management reserve): US$17.5 billion (100%)
- Stonepeak would provide US$5.7 billion, contributing 75% of capex in 2025 and 2026
- Woodside’s share of forecast total capex at that time: US$11.8 billion
- Project economics cited: IRR above 13% and a payback period of seven years
- At full capacity, the foundation project is expected to generate ~US$2 billion annual net operating cash in the 2030s [12]
Those numbers are the spine of the bullish narrative: big capex, yes—but structured to be partner‑funded early and cash generative later.
October’s Williams deal: reducing Woodside’s exposure (and adding operational muscle)
In late October, Woodside announced and closed a major integrated transaction with Williams:
- Sale of a 10% interest in Louisiana LNG LLC (HoldCo) and an 80% interest + operatorship of Driftwood Pipeline LLC to Williams
- Purchase price: US$250 million (effective date Jan 1, 2025); total proceeds received US$378 million including capital reimbursement
- Williams’ capex contribution: ~US$1.9 billion, and Williams assumes LNG offtake obligations for 10% of produced volumes
- Woodside said its total capex for Louisiana LNG was expected to fall to US$9.9 billion, down from US$11.8 billion at FID
- Woodside reiterated it was on track for first LNG in 2029 [13]
From a stock perspective, this matters because it directly addresses what ratings agencies and skeptics have been worried about: how much of the risk Woodside is carrying alone.
The bear case Reuters keeps circling: “find buyers into a looser LNG market”
Reuters’ December analysis highlighted the core strategic challenge: the incoming CEO must manage construction/cost risk while securing long‑term buyers in a market that may be showing early signs of oversupply. [14]
That debate—“LNG supercycle extension” vs “LNG glut risk”—is likely to remain the key valuation swing factor for Woodside stock through 2026.
Australia policy and approvals: the North West Shelf extension (and the emissions fight)
Woodside’s Australian operating base remains politically charged, and 2025 delivered a major decision:
Reuters reported Australia granted final approval for Woodside to operate the North West Shelf gas plant until 2070, with 48 environmental conditions that include significant nitrogen oxide reductions aimed at protecting the Murujuga rock art area (which Reuters noted had been added to the UNESCO World Heritage List). [15]
The approval matters for two investor reasons:
- It helps de‑risk the longevity of key infrastructure (the plant), which can underpin future tie‑backs and developments. [16]
- It does not end the climate/political debate—Reuters also referenced criticism framing the extension as a “carbon bomb,” reflecting ongoing headline risk for Australian LNG. [17]
In parallel, Woodside has faced domestic scrutiny in Western Australia over gas reservation and delivery expectations; Reuters’ December CEO‑succession analysis explicitly noted criticism around WA under‑delivery allegations tied to Pluto. [18]
Policy is not just “background noise” anymore—it’s a variable that can affect project timing, contracting confidence, and the market’s willingness to underwrite long‑dated capex.
Financial snapshot: profits, dividends, and what management has already guided
Woodside’s investor material summarising its half‑year 2025 results highlights:
- US$1.3 billion net profit after tax
- US$6.6 billion operating revenue
- US$1.2 billion underlying net profit after tax
- 53 US cents per share interim dividend [19]
And while it’s not “fresh‑today” news, the most recent production guidance still shapes analyst models. Reuters reported Woodside revised its fiscal 2025 production forecast higher to 192–197 million boe, while also noting third‑quarter revenue fell year‑on‑year. [20]
For income investors, the core point is simple: Woodside remains a dividend‑relevant energy stock, but the dividend path is tied to commodity pricing, project spend, and the extent to which large builds are de‑risked via partners.
Analyst forecasts and valuation: what targets imply for Woodside stock
Forecasting a commodity‑linked stock is like forecasting the mood of a cat—possible, but the cat did not agree to your model assumptions.
Still, here’s what widely circulated analyst/consensus-style figures are saying around late December 2025:
ASX:WDS consensus-style targets (Australia)
Simply Wall St’s December 25 analysis reported:
- Woodside closed at A$23.16
- A narrative fair value around A$27.42 (implying ~15.5% undervaluation in their framing)
- Analyst consensus price target of A$26.999
- Wide dispersion: A$42.16 bull case vs A$22.76 bear case [21]
The dispersion is the story: analysts are not arguing about whether Woodside sells LNG—they’re arguing about what LNG margins and execution risk deserve as a multiple.
NYSE:WDS (ADS) 12‑month target range (US)
A Nasdaq-hosted Fintel summary dated December 16 reported:
- Average 1‑year price target: US$18.07 per share
- Range: US$15.16 to US$23.25 [22]
Read those targets less like prophecy and more like a map of assumptions: higher targets generally presume cleaner execution + supportive LNG pricing; lower targets typically price in weaker LNG spreads, cost inflation, or a tougher financing/partnering environment.
The 2026 catalyst calendar: what investors will watch next
Woodside’s own investor calendar flags key upcoming report dates:
- 28 Jan 2026: Fourth Quarter 2025 Report
- 24 Feb 2026: 2025 Annual Report [23]
Between now and those releases, the market will likely stay laser‑focused on a few “high signal” questions:
- CEO succession: internal vs external hire—and whether the appointment signals continuity or a strategic pivot. [24]
- Pluto Train 2 labour resolution: whether protected action materialises into schedule impacts. [25]
- Scarborough commissioning confidence: continued confirmation of H2 2026 first LNG. [26]
- Louisiana LNG de‑risking: further sell‑downs/offtake, and evidence that contracting keeps pace with buildout. [27]
Bottom line: Woodside stock is trading like a “project confidence” referendum
As of December 26, 2025, Woodside’s share price action and analyst debate make one thing clear: this isn’t being valued as a sleepy “oil and gas incumbent.” It’s being valued as a company in the middle of a capital cycle, where execution quality + LNG market structure will decide whether today’s dip is a value entry—or a warning label.
The near-term narrative is dominated by the CEO handover and labour risk. The medium-term narrative is Scarborough’s start-up. The long-term narrative is whether Louisiana LNG becomes a cash machine in the 2030s—or arrives into a softer LNG market with less pricing power than optimists assume. [28]
References
1. www.woodside.com, 2. simplywall.st, 3. stockanalysis.com, 4. www.reuters.com, 5. www.reuters.com, 6. www.reuters.com, 7. www.reuters.com, 8. www.woodside.com, 9. www.reuters.com, 10. www.reuters.com, 11. www.woodside.com, 12. www.woodside.com, 13. www.woodside.com, 14. www.reuters.com, 15. www.reuters.com, 16. www.reuters.com, 17. www.reuters.com, 18. www.reuters.com, 19. www.woodside.com, 20. www.reuters.com, 21. simplywall.st, 22. www.nasdaq.com, 23. www.woodside.com, 24. www.reuters.com, 25. www.reuters.com, 26. www.woodside.com, 27. www.reuters.com, 28. www.reuters.com
