Drill between 265 and 285 gross wells
Not delivered by the deadline
AI-assessed · human review in progress Found and assessed by AI from the cited sources. Shown with its evidence; it is not counted in any Kept Score until confirmed.
- Announced
- 20 Feb 2024
- Due
- 31 Dec 2024
- Checked
- 17 Oct 2026
- Deadline
- Met
- Late
- Not met
- Today
What the company said
“The Company expects to drill between 265 - 285 gross (244 - 263 net) wells... in 2024”
What we found
Evidence strength A What the grades mean
The company drilled 372 gross wells in 2024, which exceeded the upper bound of its commitment to drill between 265 and 285 gross wells.
-
A Diamondback Energy 10-K filed 2025-02-26
“During the year ended December 31, 2024, we drilled 372 gross (351 net) and completed 410 gross (386 net) operated horizontal wells” ✓ confirmed on the page
Market reaction: the shares moved +4.6% against the S&P 500 over the three sessions around the disclosure (25 Feb 2025 to 28 Feb 2025). What this measures
Checked 17 Oct 2026.
Commitment lineage
Every time the company restated this commitment. The original is never changed, and the outcome is always measured against version 1.
- Scope drift +7.5%
- 2 versions
-
Version 1 · original · stated 20 Feb 2024
Deadline 31 Dec 2024 (“in 2024”) · target 265 wells · wording expected
-
Version 2 · stated 30 Apr 2024
Deadline 31 Dec 2024 (“2024”) · target 285 wells
“Gross horizontal wells drilled (net): 265 - 285 (244 - 263)”
Commitment DNA
The structured record of this commitment. Fields the company did not state are left blank rather than guessed.
- Event type
- Project other
- Indicative materiality
- Low rules
- Action
- Drill
- Deliverable
- gross wells
- Target
- 265 wells
- Language
- Expected (“expects”, “plans”)
- In the company’s control
- High
- Specificity
- High
How this entry was checked
- Commitment recordedThe company's words were matched word for word against the filing.
- First checkAn AI model, Gemini (Google), read the company's later filings and recorded the outcome with a quoted passage.
- Second check: disagreesClaude (Anthropic) re-read the evidence blind and read it as “Met”.
- Tie-breakA stronger model read the evidence and both earlier answers, without knowing which was recorded, and agrees with the second check.
Not yet confirmed. Shown on the record, but it will not count in any score until it is confirmed. How verification works
Are you Diamondback Energy? You can publish an official statement next to this entry, free. Add a statement.
Is something here wrong or out of date? Companies and readers can ask us to check it. Please bring a link to a public source.
Report an error in this entry Reference: KI-C-2024-FANG-009327 · Corrections policy