PROFITABILITY AND GROWTH Maersk Line Maersk Group Capital Markets Day, 9 September 2015

LEGAL NOTICE This presentation contains certain forward looking statements (all statements that are not entirely based on historical facts, among others expectations to future financial performance, developments, resources growth and production levels). Those forward looking statements reflect current views on future events and are by their nature subject to significant risks and uncertainties because they relate to events and depend on circumstances that will occur in the future. We consider such forward looking statements reasonable based on the information available to us at this time, but the actual results etc. may differ materially from our expectations because of external factors as well as changes to APMM’s goals and strategy. Thus, no undue reliance should be placed on such statements. Neither APMM, nor any other person, shall assume responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the forward looking statements and do not undertake any obligation to update such statements except as required by law. This Legal Notice shall be governed by Danish Law. Any dispute arising out of or in relation to this Legal Notice which can not be solved amicably shall be decided by the Danish Courts.

page 2

INTRODUCTION

Søren Skou Chief Executive Officer

page 3

1. Key highlights since last Capital Markets Day

2. Our performance

3. Industry analysis and outlook

4. Our response

AGENDA

page 4

01 We have done what we outlined last year

04 We continue to deliver value

02 We continue to deliver on our financial objectives

03 We have build a resilient company in a tough industry

page 5

We have executed what we outlined at Capital Markets Day last year…

COST CUT FURTHER

2M APPROVED AND IMPLEMENTED

NORTH / SOUTH SHARE PROTECTED

GROWTH INITIATIVES

Note: 1) At fixed bunker 2) Compared to not implementing 2M 3) North / South definition include Intra America Source: Maersk Line

Unit cost reduced 4.9% from Q2 2014 to q2 2015 1

Implemented according to plan and on track to deliver USD 350m annual savings2

Capacity share of 20% maintained across North / south trades3

Sealand successfully launched

Kotahi contract implemented successfully

page 6

2015 MAERSK LINE INVESTMENTS

…and we have invested in new capacity for the future growth

Source: Maersk Line

27 vessels

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

20

11

20

12

20

13

20

14

20

15

New building price per TEU index, (100=June 2008)

14k TEU segment

Current new build price are close to historically low

6.5k TEU segment

367K TEU (12% of current capacity)

2017 delivery of first vessels

8.6K USD/TEU Investment

page 7

We continue to deliver on all our medium term objectives

2015 H1 2014 H1 2013 H1

MEDIUM TERM OBJECTIVES

EBIT-margin 5%-points above peer average

Growing with the market

Funded by own free cash flow

Profitability: ROIC above 8.5%

9% points

USD +727m

+9.9%

8% points

USD +762m

+6.2%

Yes Yes

6% points

USD +781m

+12.2%

Yes

2012 H1

3% points

USD -2,348m

-3.8%

Yes

Source: Maersk Line

page 8

Having achieved cost leadership, we are now a much more resilient company

Note: (1)2009 Includes Damco, however not material Source: Maersk Line

Freight rates (USD/FFE) 2,288 2,370 +4%

Bunker prices (USD/Ton) 272 346 +27%

’09 H1 ’15 H1 Delta MARKET

Almost identical market conditions

NOPAT (USDm) -995 1,221 +2,216

ROIC, (%)1 -11.0% 12.2% +23.2pts

’09 H1 ’15 H1 Delta RESULTS

But distinctively different performance

page 9

In a tough industry and a difficult market environment we see opportunities for Maersk Line

PRESENTLY STRONG HEAD WINDS

• Lowest demand since financial crisis

• Historically high level of deliveries

• Rates at historically low level

POOR INDUSTRY FUNDAMENTALS

• Deteriorating and volatile rates...

• …leads to strive for cost efficiency through larger vessels…

• …leads to strong new ordering…

• … leads to continued imbalanced supply/demand

COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES

• Cost leadership leading to margin gap

• Best and largest network offering

• Strong brand and values

• Improving customer experience

VALUE CREATION

• Pricing competitively while still delivering returns above objectives

• Increase market share

• Continue to create positive free cash flow to fund growth and invest in new IT to provide a better customer experience

Source: Maersk Line

page 10

Søren Skou Chief Executive Officer

• Joined Maersk in 1983 • Various positions

globally • CEO of Maersk Tankers

from 2001-11 • CEO of Maersk Line

since Jan. 2012 • Executive board of

Maersk Group since 2006

Michael Chivers Chief Human Resource Officer

• Joined Maersk in 2012 • Sony Ericsson, 17

years in various positions ending as Head of Global HR

Stephen Schueler Chief Commercial Officer

• Joined Maersk in 2013 • Microsoft, head of sales

& marketing • 20 years in Procter &

Gamble latest as Head of Retail Operations

Vincent Clerc Chief Trade & Marketing Officer

• Joined Maersk in 1997 • Various positions in

USA and Europe • Prior to current position,

Head of Transpacific & Asia Europe service

Jakob Stausholm Chief Strategy & Transformation Officer

• Joined Maersk in 2012 • Shell, 19 years in various

positions in EU, Latin America and Asia

• ISS, 4 years as CFO • Board of directors of

Statoil since 2009

Søren Toft Chief Operating Officer

• Joined Maersk in 1994 • Various positions in

Denmark, Europe and Asia

• Prior to current position, Head of Network Planning

Pierre Danet Chief Financial Officer

• Joined Maersk in 2015 • Procter & Gamble for 19

years in different financial leadership roles

• HP, 4 years most recently as CFO of HP’s Printing & Personal Systems division for EMEA

A COMPETENT LEADERSHIP TEAM Todays speaker Todays speaker Todays speaker

Source: Maersk Line

page 11

OUR PERFORMANCE

Pierre Danet Chief Financial Officer

page 12

01 Improved already strong results

04 We have build a resilient company in a tough industry

02 Adding to an already established track record

03 Driven by strong cost and balance sheet fundamentals

page 13

The continued strong financial performance enables self funding of new investments

Continued strong NOPAT… …and free cash flow allowing for extraordinary delivery of EEEs in Q2

-599

227 498

335 204 439 555

313 454 547 685 655 714 507

-2,000

-1,500

-1,000

-500

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

Q112

Q212

Q312

Q412

Q113

Q213

Q313

Q413

Q114

Q214

Q314

Q414

Q115

Q215

-1,387 -960

368 223 283 478 768 595

345 382 546 872 769

13

-5,000

-4,000

-3,000

-2,000

-1,000

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

Q112

Q212

Q312

Q412

Q113

Q213

Q313

Q413

Q114

Q214

Q314

Q414

Q115

Q215

Free cash flow, (USDm) LTM QTR NOPAT, (USDm) LTM QTR

Delivery of 5 EEEs impacting free cash flow by USD556m

Source: Maersk Line

page 14

-12.7%

4.6%

9.7%

6.5%

4.0%

8.5%

10.9%

6.2%

9.0% 10.8%

13.5% 13.0%

14.3%

10.1%

8.5%

-16%

-12%

-8%

-4%

0%

4%

8%

12%

16%

Q112

Q212

Q312

Q412

Q113

Q213

Q313

Q413

Q114

Q214

Q314

Q414

Q115

Q215

For 6 consecutive quarters we have delivered ROIC above medium term target

Source: Maersk Line

ROIC, (%) LTM Quarterly 8.5%

page 15

Volume, (‘000 FFE)

Volumes recovered in Q2 improving utilization

Volumes improved in Q2… …resulting in utilization recovering

1,800

2,000

2,200

2,400

2,600

2,800

3,000

3,200

1,800

2,000

2,200

2,400

2,600

2,800

3,000

3,200

Q112

Q212

Q312

Q412

Q113

Q213

Q313

Q413

Q114

Q214

Q314

Q414

Q115

Q215

Notes: Capacity turn = Volume / Nominal capacity adj. for idling and vessels added for slow steaming Source: Maersk Line, Alphaliner

0.70

0.75

0.80

0.85

0.90

0.95

1.00

Q112

Q212

Q312

Q412

Q113

Q213

Q313

Q413

Q114

Q214

Q314

Q414

Q115

Q215

Capacity turn, (FFE/TEU) Nominal Capacity, (‘000 TEU)

Avg. Capacity Volume

page 16

We have increased capacity much less than industry

Growing capacity less than industry… …also compared to top 10 carriers1

90

95

100

105

110

115

120

Q1 12 Q3 12 Q1 13 Q3 13 Q1 14 Q3 14 Q1 15

Note: 1) Top 10 carriers based on July ‘15 capacity market share Source: Maersk Line, Alphaliner

Index, (Q2 2012 = 100)

ML nominal capacity

Industry volume Industry nominal capacity

51%

46%

43%

31%

25%

22%

21%

16%

15%

13%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Hapag-Lloyd

Evergreen

Hamburg Süd

CMA CGM

MOL

CSCL

Cosco

MSC

Hanjin

Maersk Line

Nominal capacity growth, (Q2 2012 – Q2 2015)

page 17

We are continuously taking out costs

We continue to take out costs… … and are at an all time low on unit cost

Note: Unit cost excluding gain/loss, restructuring, share of profit/loss from associated companies and including VSA income. Unit cost at fixed bunker price calculated based on 400 USD/Ton all years. Source: Maersk Line

2,000

2,200

2,400

2,600

2,800

3,000

3,200

Q112

Q212

Q312

Q412

Q113

Q213

Q313

Q413

Q114

Q214

Q314

Q414

Q115

Q215

Unit cost at fixed bunker price, (USD/FFE)

2,000

2,200

2,400

2,600

2,800

3,000

3,200

Q112

Q212

Q312

Q412

Q113

Q213

Q313

Q413

Q114

Q214

Q314

Q414

Q115

Q215

Unit cost, (USD/FFE)

CAGR -5.1% CAGR -8.7%

page 18

Continued focus on SG&A capturing scale benefits

Declining SG&A trend… …significant improvement per FFE

2,000

2,050

2,100

2,150

2,200

2,250

Q112

Q212

Q312

Q412

Q113

Q213

Q313

Q413

Q114

Q214

Q314

Q414

Q115

Q215

200

220

240

260

280

300

Q112

Q212

Q312

Q412

Q113

Q213

Q313

Q413

Q114

Q214

Q314

Q414

Q115

Q215

Note: 1) Selling, general & administrative expenses Source: Maersk Line

CAGR -5.5%

CAGR -2.3%

Quarter based LTM SG&A unit cost, (USD/FFE) Quarter based LTM SG&A cost, (USDm)

page 19

Keeping the balance sheet fit despite growing volumes

Decline in invested capital since Q2 2012

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

18,000

19,000

20,000

21,000

22,000

Q1 12 Q2 12 Q3 12 Q4 12 Q1 13 Q2 13 Q3 13 Q4 13 Q1 14 Q2 14 Q3 14 Q4 14 Q1 15 Q2 15

Invested capital, (USDm)

Invested capital per FFE, (USD/FFE)

Invested capital Invested capital per FFE (rha)

CAGR -0.1%

Note: Volumes are annualized. Invested capital ultimo period. Source: Maersk Line

CAGR -4,0%

page 20

Key financial disclosures

Financial Performance Q2 2015 Q2 2014 Change %-change

Revenue (USDm) 6,263 6,902 -638 -9.2%

Total cost (USDm) 5,756 6,355 599 -9.4%

NOPAT (USDm) 507 547 -39 -7.2%

Underlying result1 499 542 -43 -8.0%

Volume (‘000 FFE) 2,484 2,396 88 3.7%

Average freight rate (USD/FFE) 2,261 2,634 -373 -14.1%

Unit cost at floating bunker prices (USD/FFE) 2,246 2,585 -338 -13.1%

Unit cost at fixed bunker prices2 (USD/FFE) 2,305 2,423 -118 -4.9%

Invested capital3 (USDm) 20,340 20,176 164 0,8%

ROIC (%) 10.1% 10.8% n.a. -0.7%

Note: 1. Underlying result is equal to the result of continuing business excluding net impact from divestments and impairments 2. Unit cost at fixed bunker price of 400 USD/ton and including VSA income, 3. Invested capital avg. of period Source: Maersk Line

page 21

Jakob Stausholm Chief Strategy & Transformation Officer

INDUSTRY ANALYSIS & OUTLOOK

page 22

01 Adverse business environment leads to deflationary freight rate development

02 Fragmented industry where scale matters

03 Competitive results

page 23

Industry demand growth at its lowest since the financial crisis

-20%

-16%

-12%

-8%

-4%

0%

4%

8%

12%

16%

20%

Q1 01 Q4 01 Q3 02 Q2 03 Q1 04 Q4 04 Q3 05 Q2 06 Q1 07 Q4 07 Q3 08 Q2 09 Q1 10 Q4 10 Q3 11 Q2 12 Q1 13 Q4 13 Q3 14 Q2 15E

Note: LTM based on last 4 quarters Source: Maersk Line

Demand growth, (%) LTM Quarterly y/y growth

CAGR 9.5% CAGR 3.2% CAGR 3.7%

page 24

5%

7%

-1%

-6%

-2%

2%

-4%

4%

-8%

-6%

-4%

-2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

2013 2014 Q1 15 Q2 15 2015E 2016-17E

-25-20-15-10

-505

2013 2014 2015 2016-17

Recent drop in European import from Far East expected to bounce back from Russia and re-stocking improvements

2015 drop in European imports from Far East… … due to Russia and EU retail inventories

Container demand growth y/y, (%)1

Russian container import from Far East, growth (%)1

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

2013 2014 2015 2016-17

EU retail inventory investments, growth (%)

Note: 1) Westbound container demand on trades E1 and E2 Source: CTS, European Commission and Maersk internal calculations

Actuals Forecast Actuals Forecast

EU inventories expected to normalize in 2016

page 25

3.7%

3.2%

9.5%

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%

2-4%

3-5%

Container demand is likely to recover as GDP-multiplier expected to normalize from historically low 2015 level Global GDP growth, (%) GDP

Multiplier

Source: Focus Economics, IMF and Maersk internal calculations

3.0

1.9

1.5

0.9-1.4

1.2-1.7

2.5%

1.6%

3.1%

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%

2016E-2017E

2015E

2012-2014

2008-2011

2001-2007

2.4-2.7%

2.4-3.2%

Global Container demand, (%) Actual Forecast

Impacted by e.g. • Russia • Europe de-stocking • Port congestion US

West Coast

High pre-crisis GDP-multiplier, driven by massive offshoring to e.g. China, and containerization

page 26

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

20

11

20

12

20

13

20

14

20

15

E

20

16

-1

7E

Supply has outgrown demand past 9 years except for 2010 and trend expected to continue Y/Y Growth, (%) Y/Y Demand Growth Y/Y Supply Growth

Forecast

Note: Capacity growth compares standing container vessel capacity beginning of year to end of year, while demand growth compares total amount of containers in two consecutive years. Capacity forecast assumes no additional slow steaming, as the low oil price gives less incentive to slow down vessel speed. Also, idling is assumed to remain broadly unchanged. Forecast demand growth is for illustration purpose shown as midpoint for the expected interval. Source: Alphaliner, Maersk Line

Excess capacity primarily absorbed by slow steaming

Less incentive for further slow

steaming

page 27

Rates will continue to be under pressure from supply/demand imbalance

2,300

2,500

2,700

2,900

3,100

3,300

3,500

3,700

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 H1 15

Notes: Bunker price fixed at 2012 level of 662 USD/FFE. Comparison of freight rate with 2004, 2008 and 2010 based on yearly freight rate average. Source: Maersk Line

Maersk Line’s average freight rate has declined 1.9% p.a. since 2004

Since CAGR (%)

2004 -1.9

2008 -3.9

2010 -4.3

2012 -2.2

2014 – H1 15 -5.2

CAGR -1.9%

Maersk Line freight rate – fixed bunker, (USD/FFE)

Vicious circle

page 28

Significant orders placed in the first half of 2015 with increasing ordering of largest vessels

12%

7%

18%

37% 36%

24%

37%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

12H1 12H2 13H1 13H2 14H1 14H2 15H1

Note: LTM based on half years. 1) Orders placed as percent of fleet based on capacity in given years, 2) >10,000 orders share of >10,000 TEU fleet, 3) <10,000 orders share of <10,000 TEU fleet Source: Maersk Line, Alphaliner

Orders placed, (TEU ‘000)1

>10,000 TEU <9999 TEU LTM orders share of fleet, (%)

LTM Order share of >10,000 fleet2

page 29

Current order book is large, and will worsen supply/demand imbalance

Competition order to grow capacity at faster pace

Open orders firmly exceed demand growth expectations

5.4%

5.8%

6.4%

15.4%

15.5%

20.7%

23.9%

24.7%

39.3%

39.5%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Hapag-Lloyd

Hanjin

Hamburg Süd

CSCL

Maersk Line

CMA CGM

MOL

MSC

COSCO

Evergreen

Current order book share of carrier fleet for top 10 carriers3, (%)

9%

11%

14%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

H112

H212

H113

H213

H114

H214

at 5% demand growth

at 4% demand growth

at 3% demand growth

Industry order book share of fleet1, (%)

Current order book (H1 15)

Note: 1) Fleet at given period ultimo, 2) Expected duration of an order book is 2.5 years with 1,1% expected scrapings per year based on historical period 2000 onwards; 3) Capacity and order book as of ultimo July Source: Maersk Line, Alphaliner

Needed order book size of current fleet to address demand growth forecast range2

page 30

Our tonnage plan is robust and value creating even in adverse market conditions

Source: Maersk Line

Even in adverse market scenarios, newly ordered vessels create value… … with recent orders we can now plan ahead

We need capacity to grow

We order vessels where no alternative

2M enable us to utilize major vessels

Small investments compared to network size

page 31

As the largest carrier we have delivered sustainable EBIT margin gap

Gap to peers above target… …also when peers have improved results

4.6% -2.1%

-1.3% 0.7% 1.1%

1.9% 2.1%

5.1% 5.3%

6.0% 7.0%

7.9% 9.1%

10.8%

-15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15%

Peer group AvgMOL

Hyundai MM.CSCL

APLK Line

NYKZIM

Hapag LloydHanjin

OOCLCOSCO

CMA CGMMaersk Line

Note: Peer group includes CMA CGM, APL, Hapag Lloyd, Hanjin, ZIM, Hyundai MM, K Line, CSAV, OOCL, NYK, MOL, COSCO, CSCL. Peer average is TEU-weighted. EBIT margins are adjusted for gains/losses on sale of assets, restructuring charges, income/loss from associates. Maersk Line’ EBIT margin is also adjusted for depreciations to match industry standards (25 years). Source: Alphaliner, Company reports, Maersk Line

2%

5%

8% 9% 9% 9%

6%

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

10%

12H1 12H2 13H1 13H2 14H1 14H2 15H1

5% Target

H1 2015 Core EBIT margin, (%) Core EBIT margin gap, (% pts.)

page 32

We are on average operating in an unhealthy industry, but large carriers can earn a decent profit

On average an unhealthy industry… …however large carriers can earn profits

Source: Maersk Line

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

12

Q1

12

Q2

12

Q3

12

Q4

13

Q1

13

Q2

13

Q3

13

Q4

14

Q1

14

Q2

14

Q3

14

Q4

15

Q1

15

Q2

EBIT Margin, (%) Industry EBIT-Margin Trend

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

12

Q1

12

Q2

12

Q3

12

Q4

13

Q1

13

Q2

13

Q3

13

Q4

14

Q1

14

Q2

14

Q3

14

Q4

15

Q1

15

Q2

Best in class

EBIT Margin, (%) Best in Class Best in Class average

page 33

Maersk Line

APL

CSCL

CMA

Hanjin COSCO

Hapaq Lloyd

Hyundai MOL

NYK

K Line

OOCL

ZIM

Evergreen

Yang Ming

Wan Hai

SITC

-6%

-4%

-2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000

Average capacity 2012-2015H1, (‘000 TEU)

CSCL+COSCO1

Scale is a lever of profitability

Regional focus Global scale leaders

Average EBIT-margin 2012-2015H1, (%)

Note: 1) Post-merger scenario based on weighted EBIT-margin and combined volume Source: Maersk Line, Company Reports, Alphaliner

?

page 34

13.2%

15.9%

0%2%4%6%8%

10%12%14%16%18%20%

'00

'01

'02

'03

'04

'05

'06

'07

'08

'09

'10

'11

'12

'13

'14

'15

E'1

6E

'17

E4.7%

14.0%

'00

'01

'02

'03

'04

'05

'06

'07

'08

'09

'10

'11

'12

'13

'14

'15

E

'16

E

'17

E

2.7%

9.0%

'00

'01

'02

'03

'04

'05

'06

'07

'08

'09

'10

'11

'12

'13

'14

'15

E

'16

E

'17

E

The three largest carriers have historically grown very differently

Capacity market share (%)

Note: Forecast based on current order book Source: Maersk Line, Alphaliner

MLB MSC CMA CGM

TEU CAGR 1995-04

20.8% 2005-14

9.3% 2015-17

4.4% 1995-04

26.4% 2005-14

14.0% 2015-17

7.9% 1995-04

27.3% 2005-14

13.9% 2015-17

7.0%

Growth strategy Organic + M&A (‘big’) Pure organic Organic + M&A (multiple smaller)

Maersk Line MSC CMA CGM

PONL acquisition

page 35

A deflationary mindset continue to be key while defending market leader position

Forward looking statements 2003-2013 2013 2014 2015E 2016E

Industry demand (CAGR growth, %)

7% 4% 4% 2-4% 3-5%

Industry nominal capacity (CAGR growth, %)

10% 6% 6% 9% ~5%

Cost (Maersk Line)

Deflationary mindset: Continue to drive cost reductions

Market share (Maersk Line)

Growing at least with the market to defend our market leading position

Investments (Maersk Line) CFFI (Net), USD bn

2.3 1.6 2.0

Notes: Nominal capacity growth is expected deliveries less expected scrappings. Investments from 2003-2013 are an avg. for the period and includes Damco, Maersk Container Industry and Container Inland Services from 2003-08, while APM Terminals is excluded. The P&O Nedlloyd acquisition in 2005 is included. Investments include committed investments, approved but not committed investments and non-approved investments. Source: Maersk Line, Alphaliner.

Avg. 2.5 p.a.

Adjusted since 2014 capital markets day We expect to invest on average USD ~3 bn p.a. (vessels, containers, retrofits and other investments) until 2020

page 36

OUR RESPONSE

Søren Skou Chief Executive Officer

page 37

Our short term response to current tough market conditions

+30 blanked sailings August-October 2015 (vs. 15 same period 2014)

2M network reductions as already communicated

Additional 2-4 larger string reductions planned in Q4 2015 to adjust capacity to demand

page 38

Source: Maersk Line

We will continue to drive cost out and have plenty of opportunities

We have a toolbox for cost cutting Tonnage plan impact on slot cost Example: Asia – North Europe

Network rationalization

Speed equalization & Slow steaming

Improve utilization

SG&A 2M Improve procurement

Inland optimization

Deployment of larger vessels

Retrofits 82

84

86

88

90

92

94

96

98

100

102

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Slot cost index 2014 = 100, (USD/TEU)

CAGR -3.1%

page 39

Having cost leadership has enabled us to grow both volume and margins

8,073 8,452 8,803 9,418

-3.1%

2.3%

7.4%

11.6%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

2011 2012 2013 2014

Source: Maersk Line

Volume, (FFE ‘000) ROIC Volume ROIC, (%)

CAGR 5.3%

page 40

…and with returns consistently above objectives, growth create value

-12.7%

4.6%

9.7% 6.5%

4.0% 8.5%

10.9% 6.2%

9.0% 10.8% 13.5% 13.0% 14.3%

10.1%

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Q1

12

Q2

12

Q3

12

Q4

12

Q1

13

Q2

13

Q3

13

Q4

13

Q1

14

Q2

14

Q3

14

Q4

14

Q1

15

Q2

15

Note: 1) LTM ROIC based on quarterly figures Source: Maersk Line

ROIC ROIC, (%)

8.5%

8.5% ROIC LTM ROIC1

We have room to invest for growth and still deliver returns

above the lower band target

page 41

Maersk Line’s new objectives

Note: 1) Performance rank based on EBIT margin Source: Maersk Line

Top quartile performer1

EBIT-margin 5%-points above peer average

Growing at least with the market to defend our market leading position

Funded by own cash flow

Average returns of 8.5-12.0% (ROIC)

Revised objective

page 42

We have a toolbox for growth with various paths

Source: Maersk Line

E-W Grow based on cost leadership and best network proposition

N-S Protect strong position, grow with market

INTRA Grow MCC, Seago, and Sealand

REEFER Pursue conversion projects

page 43

01 We have done what we outlined last year

04 We continue to deliver value

02 We continue to deliver on our financial objectives

03 We have build a resilient company in a tough industry

page 44

Thank you

page 45