Responsible and secure sourcing and local procurement

Our global footprint means we operate in many diverse jurisdictions, procuring from and engaging with a broad range of entities, ranging in scope and size.

Geita, Tanzania

To support this, our approach to our supply chain extends cost and quality, as we consider the labour, ethics and environmental practices of both our direct and indirect suppliers.

We recognise that access to economic opportunity, either through employment or business opportunities, can create sustainable economic growth, reducing poverty and inequality in the communities where we operate. By focusing on procuring locally, we seek to create value for our host communities and address issues that may impede domestic industry development and growth.

Our commitment

We ensure responsibly sourced products, and expect the same commitment from those we procure from. We also support local procurement as far as possible, by collaborating with local businesses and communities.

Strategic focus areas:

A review of Supply Chain hazards and risks to improve safety management in logistics and warehouses
Formalisation of the Supply Chain Risk Management strategy
Strengthening Supply Chain talent and upskilling through internal and external programmes
The design and implementation of the Supply Chain governance framework
Development of commercial and capital strategies
Development of an inventory and materials management optimisation strategy
Continuation of the Supply Chain system implementation programme
Support for full asset potential outcomes
Design of the Supply Chain management operating system
Continued implementation of the Supply Chain operating model

Responsible sourcing, value chain strengthening and local procurement

As part of our commitment to responsible sourcing, we go beyond the conventional considerations of cost and quality to investigate the labour, ethics, and environmental practices of our direct and indirect suppliers.

We expect our suppliers to conduct their business with respect for human rights and we engage in inclusive procurement practices by collaborating with local businesses and communities, and prioritise employing individuals from communities surrounding our operations.

A stringent governance policy informs our global procurement activities, and we expect the same ethical standards from both our operations and suppliers. Suppliers are required to commit to our Supplier Code of Conduct, aligning their business practices with our policies and ethical codes related to human rights, labour relations, employment practices, environmental standards, anti-bribery and corruption policies, and safety procedures.

Our Supplier Self-Assessment Questionnaire serves as a process for the registration and disclosure of supplier information before contract award.

Combating bribery, corruption and conflict of interest

Our Anti-Bribery and Anti-Corruption Standard, guides employees and suppliers in upholding non-negotiable values in an effort to combat bribery and corruption. An updated version of the standard was published during 2024, reinforcing our dedication to ethical practices. Similarly, an updated version of the Conflicts of Interest Standard was also published during 2024, mandating disclosure of any conflicts related to procurement activities.

Local procurement

Our local procurement programmes demonstrate partnerships with locally owned and operated companies. In 2024, we published our framework and guideline on local business development to formalise the process through which we contribute to local business development through local procurement.

International firms are encouraged to establish a local presence through in-country operations or local joint ventures. While regulatory requirements do not mandate local procurement in Australia and Brazil, we actively seek local partners in these jurisdictions. In jurisdictions where local-content participation is mandated by law — such as in Tanzania — we comply fully with applicable regulations by integrating qualified local suppliers or establishing approved local partnerships. In these markets, our approach prioritises early engagement with local stakeholders to ensure alignment with statutory obligations while maintaining delivery quality and commercial integrity.

Targets are established to drive continuous improvement in local procurement for each country, recognising that capacity building in each jurisdiction requires time. Our sourcing and adjudication process prioritises local suppliers, with a preference for in-country partnerships.

As a signatory of the UN Women Empowerment Principles and Global Compact, we integrate these principles into our procurement requirements. While woman ownership and empowerment ratios were not tracked in all our jurisdictions, changes were introduced in the vendor onboarding process during late 2024 and implemented in the SAP Ariba system during 2025. These metrics will be tracked and reported going forward once reporting on these have been formalised.

Vendor evaluations

During the reporting period, we completed 751 vendor evaluations, representing approximately 76% of our 2025 new vendor onboarding requests. This excludes re-evaluations of existing vendors, which are conducted regularly, and oneoff vendors that do not complete Supplier Self- Assessment Questionnaires.

The number of vendor evaluations conducted during the year depends on: (1) the volume of new vendors onboarded; (2) the scheduled follow-up cycle for existing vendors; (3) changes to the vendor master database (including deactivations, blocks, removals and additions); (4) changes in operational status (such as acquisitions, care and maintenance, or divestments) affecting vendor volumes; and (5) the capacity of the global vendor management team.

Vendors that do not complete the evaluation process are not permitted to do business with AngloGold Ashanti, except approved one-off vendors exempt from the supplier self-assessment questionnaire requirement.

However, with the Company’s transition to the new Ariba system as part of its global source to invoice process initiative, and the go-live of the supplier module for Australia, South Africa and North America during February 2025, and Africa and Latin America during 2026, suppliers are being invited to register onto the new platform. Registration on the new platform will improve the vendor evaluation process and the ability of the vendor management team to perform vendor evaluations.

If suppliers elect not to migrate to the new Ariba system, an escalation process will be introduced to encourage the migration take-up rate and to ensure a continued relationship between AngloGold Ashanti and the supplier.

Enterprise and supplier development

In 2025, one enterprise development and 11 supplier development initiatives were completed, including one relating to assisting suppliers to improve their processes, productivity, cycle times and efficiency, making their businesses more profitable; one relating to developing skills and mentorship of suppliers, including targeted interventions aimed at improving management capacity; and nine relating to the arrangement of supplier day events where the Company and the vendor work together on promoting full asset potential initiatives. These initiatives were provided in South Africa, Australia and Latin America.

Inclusive employment and procurement

Valuable employment and procurement opportunities are offered to our host communities at our operating sites. We support inclusive procurement practices and actively collaborate with local businesses and communities, prioritising the employment of people from host communities.

In 2025, AngloGold Ashanti’s commitment to sourcing goods and services locally resulted in a total expenditure of ~$5.05bn, encompassing both operational and capital expenditure (2024: $4.26bn). This accounted for 92% of the total procurement spend for the year, which is in line with what was achieved during 2024.

We follow local employment procedures and programmes and seek to ensure we meet the regulatory requirements in our employment practices across the Group. One of our main value-sharing initiatives, which has improved both the quality of life of our host communities and our social licence to operate, is sourcing talent from nearby areas. Our hiring efforts are only one aspect of our employment localisation initiatives; we have also made a deliberate effort when selecting our contractors to uphold our commitment to using locally available skills.

Supplier technical visits

In 2025, 34 on-site supplier technical visits were completed, including seven in Brazil, nine in South Africa, one in India, three in Tanzania and 14 in Australia. All assessments were conducted by internal Company resources and one of these visits was performed in Australia based on ISO 14001 guidelines. Corrective actions were introduced for 15 of these suppliers, with four based in Australia, one in South Africa, three in Tanzania and seven in Brazil.

Measuring progress

We actively track and report on the top 50 strategic suppliers from a higher risk perspective. While this is consistent with the approach that we followed during 2024, we introduced an additional market intelligence supplier risk monitoring process to augment the top 50 strategic supplier review process. The additional process includes the supplier risk monitoring of:

Around 600 high-risk suppliers, including continuous monitoring of:
- Financial risk
- Adverse media reporting covering any adverse news reporting on such aspects as regulatory, corruption issues, fraud, sanctions, anti competitiveness, director/ management issues
- Environmental and production, social and labour, discrimination/workplace issues, human rights, or health and safety issues
- Event disruptions monitoring any disruption occurring and insights on the impact on demand supply/potential price impact (preliminary real time severity and impact assessment)
- News alerts allowing for the filtering, such as M&A (covers anything related to a supplier in the given time frame)
- Sanctions
- ESG
- Cyber risk
7,500 suppliers, focusing on:
- Annual financial risk
- Adverse media risk screening

A Supplier Risk Score (SRS) is determined via a ratings methodology and attached as a quantifiable metric that offers a snapshot of the risk associated with a supplier by aggregating multiple evaluation criteria. evaluation criteria.

These risk factors include:

Sanctions: Determines if a supplier faces any sanctions, impacting their risk level
Supply chain disruption: Assesses the robustness of a supplier’s cybersecurity measures
Financial: Evaluates financial health through creditworthiness assessments
Adverse Media Events (AME): Monitors negative media coverage that could affect reputation
Politically Exposed Persons (PEP): Identifies risks tied to individuals in significant public roles
Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG): Reviews compliance with ESG performance metrics
Cybersecurity: Analyses cybersecurity strength and potential vulnerabilities

The SRS and the Supplier Health Score both evaluate key risk factors — including sanctions, supply chain disruption, financial stability, adverse media, PEP exposure, ESG, and cybersecurity — but they serve different purposes in supplier assessment. The SRS provides a focused snapshot of a supplier’s risk level by aggregating these factors into a single quantitative measure used to monitor and prioritise risk. In contrast, the Supplier Health Score offers a broader, integrated perspective by weighting each risk factor to present an overall view of a supplier’s stability and resilience, enabling quicker, more holistic decision making.

Each risk factor’s rating is then weighted and compiled into the Supplier Health Score. This integrated approach enables procurement professionals to make swift, informed decisions by providing a streamlined, comprehensive view of supplier risk.

Related SDGs

SDG 8

Decent work and economic growth

SDG 10

Reduced inequalities

SDG 12

Responsible consumption and production

Material sustainability issues

Securing our social licence to operate through effective engagement and community support
Securing and maintaining regulatory
compliance, including environmental
licences and permits

For more information on principal risks see the 2025 Annual Report

Principal risks

Adverse regulatory changes (mining rights, fiscal)
Failure to maintain social licence to operate
Failure to maintain sufficient resilience to external financial drivers

Disclosure against standards

GRI 14-9: Economic Impacts
GRI 14-10: Local Communities
GRI 14-19: Forced labour and modern slavery
GRI 14-21: Non-discrimination and equal opportunity
SASB EM-MM-510.a: Description of the management system for prevention of corruption and bribery throughout the value chain
ICMM SERF Indicator 6: Local procurement: Pursue continual improvement in social performance and contribute to the social, economic and institutional development of host countries and communities.
WGC Responsible Gold Mining Principle 3: Supply chain: We will require that our suppliers conduct their businesses ethically and responsibly as a condition of doing business with us.

What we measure

Vendor evaluations undertaken

RA | New vendors evaluated (%)

Top 50 vendors – cyber risk summary

Top 50 vendors – freedom status summary

SRS ratings

SRS Ratings provide a spectrum of risks from ‘Low’ to ‘High’, with each score derived from a calculated average of weighted partner assessments, enabling you to discern risk levels quickly.

Risk factors

Sanctions

Sanctions are the initial step is assessing a supplier’s risk level, determined as either ‘yes’ or ‘no’. A supplier with sanctions is classified as high risk, overweighting all other risk factors. A Supplier without sanctions will be evaluated for an overall Risk Score based all other available risk factors.

Other available risk factors	Weightage in %
Events Analyses the supplier changes, risks, or incidents effecting supply chain stability.
Financial Measures the financial stability and creditworthiness of entities. If multiple partner sets are available, the score conveying highest level of risk will be used for calculations.	29
Adverse Media Events (AME) Tracks adverse media coverage over the last three months, which may impact supplier reputation.	14
Politically Exposed Persons (PEP) Identifiers risks associated with individuals in prominent public functions. PEP is measured as present or not present. Suppliers with no PEP are considered lower risk.	14
Environmental, Social and Governance Evaluates the ESG performance and compliance.	24
Cybersecurity Evaluates the robustness of cybersecurity measures and potential vulnerabilities.	19
Total weightage	100

Normalised score to 1—100 scale based on industry standards

1 – 25 =

Low Risk

25.1 – 50 =

Medium Risk

50.1 – 75 =

Medium – High Risk

75.1 – 100 =

High Risk

The weighted scoring system ranks suppliers on a risk scale of High Risk, Medium to High Risk, Medium Risk, and Low Risk. Based on this classification, we determine the appropriate engagement approach, including mitigation measures and follow-up actions.

Due to the magnitude of vendors being included into the additional market intelligence supplier risk monitoring process and the significant effort involved in setting up this evaluation tool, the agreed implementation approach was to start focusing on the 596 high-risk vendors first during 2025.

Incorporated into the SRS calculation are considerations from recognised ratings agencies and platforms, including:

Severity Levels

1—9 Scale

Descriptive Scale

A—E Scale

A1—F Scale

1—100 Scale

Other Existing
Partners

1—100 Scale

Upcoming Partner /
Customised scores

1—100 Scale

Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) SER

The Supplier Evaluation Risk Rating (SER) is an easy-to-use risk metric that helps supply management professionals evaluate the long-term risk of doing business with a supplier. The SER score is based on a scale of 1—9, with 1 representing lowest level of risk and 9 implying highest level of risk.

The SER Rating predicts the likelihood that a supplier will cease operations, regardless of debts outstanding, or become inactive over the next 12 months based on the depth of predictive data attributes available on the business.

For suppliers whose headquarters are located outside the United States, the SER predicts the likelihood that a supplier will cease operations or reorganise without paying all creditors in full or obtain relief from creditors under state/federal law over the next 12 months.

The SER provides a consistent risk ranking across the globe; SER of 1—6 is at or below average risk and 7—9 is above average risk, irrespective of supplier location.

The SER Rating scoring models use D&B’s information database of approximately 300 million businesses including business activity signals, detailed commercial payment experiences that capture month-to-month trends, public filing, demographic, and financial information when available.

Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) SSI

The Supplier Stability Indicator (SSI) represents the probability that a supplier will experience significant financial stress over the next 90 days.

The SSI Scoring System uses statistical probabilities to classify businesses into a 0—10 Score Scale where 0 represents businesses that have the lowest probability of ceasing operations/becoming inactive, and 10 represents businesses with the highest probability of ceasing operations/becoming inactive.

The SSI Rating scoring models use D&B’s applicable information database of approximately 197 million businesses including business activity signals, detailed commercial payment experiences that capture month-to-month trends, public filing, demographic, and financial information when available.

CreditSafe

The scores range from A—E; A being the lowest risk, D being the highest risk and E being unrated. It measures the likelihood of a company becoming insolvent within the next 12 months. This A—E scale uses the same scoring range and risk descriptions for all countries, allowing us to compare company credit scores across the globe, regardless of the country where we trade.

Data is collected from over 200 sources where possible information is collected from official registries like Companies House, UK. CreditSafe has a network of 16 offices and trusted local partners allow them to collect information locally: ensuring the delivery of high-quality and up-to-date information.

CreditorWatch

RiskScore indicates a business’ creditworthiness and predicts the likelihood of default in the next 12 months. The score also ranks entities based on their riskiness with one of 14 credit ratings (from A1 to F) and a numerical score from 0—850. The higher the score, the lower risk the entity poses.

Dow Jones

The Dow Jones Adverse Media Entities count is essential as a company’s brand reputation is among its most valuable assets. Regulators, especially those of financial institutions, are now requiring ‘adverse media’ coverage as part of due diligence and compliance matters. By knowing the illegal, immoral or unethical conduct of a third party, companies can better evaluate the cost/ benefit balance of proposed business relationships.

Dow Jones identifies adverse media coverage on companies across 17 categories of reputational risk, providing negative news intelligence on company conduct under formal investigation or alleged to have taken place.

Dow Jones – Politically Exposed Persons (PEP) identifies data on individuals and entities under the Dow Jones Watchlist,

Around 1.5 million individual profiles with coverage across 22 high-risk job categories
More than 28,000 state-owned organisations across 185 countries that are owned or controlled by individuals, entities, countries, or regions that are sanctioned by the (OFAC – US) and/or the European Union or other regulations

Data is compiled from sources in over 200 countries and includes details such as names in native language script and corporate identifiers, as well as cross-references to Special Interest Persons who are profiled for the same issues.

Security Scorecard

The cybersecurity ratings can be compared to financial credit ratings. Just as a poor credit rating associated with a greater probability of default, a poor cybersecurity rating is associated with a higher probability of sustaining a data breach and other adverse cyber events.

Security Scorecard scans the entire IPv4 web space at a regular cadence to identify vulnerable digital assets and monitors signals across the internet, relying on a global network of sensors that span the Americas, Asia, and Europe. It supplements its data collection with an external feed from approximately 40 third-party public and commercial data sources. The Company ingests approximately 1.5 Terabytes of data daily as part of a signal collections program.

Security Scorecard calculates and provides detailed reports on 10 different factor scores. The factor scores group and describe different aspects of cyber risk along multiple axes. They allow security teams to identify vulnerable areas and focus their remediation efforts on where they will have the greatest impact.
Each factor has a numerical weight, which reflects the severity or risk that the factor contributes to the overall cybersecurity posture. The magnitude of the weights is presented categorically in the table displayed here.
An organisation’s Total Score is calculated as the weighted average of its Factor Scores.
Individual Factor Scores are calculated based on the severity and quantity of security issues or findings associated with the factor.

Ecovadis Sustainability Rating (BYOL)

EcoVadis evaluates a company’s sustainability performance by examining its policies, actions, and results. This assessment is built upon seven core principles and aligns with major international sustainability standards, including the UN Global Compact and GRI. The evaluation covers a broad spectrum of sustainability issues, grouped into four key themes, with a particular focus on the environmental impact throughout a product’s entire life cycle, from production to disposal. Importantly, the rating agency assesses the sustainability practices of a company’s entire supply chain, extending beyond direct suppliers to include second and third-tier partners. Essentially, EcoVadis provides a comprehensive and standardised way to measure and benchmark a company’s commitment to sustainable business practices.

Kloopify ESG

Kloopify ESG scores provide a comprehensive assessment of a company’s ESG performance by leveraging structured data, publicly available information, and industry context. The methodology ensures a balanced and data-driven evaluation, prioritising real actions over commitments while incorporating industryspecific risks and benchmarks. The Kloopify ESG scores covers a broad universe of companies — including public and private entities, including approximately 130 million active companies in 250 geographies (as of February 2025). Some companies may have partial ESG data; minimum data thresholds are applied to ensure credibility.

The ESG Scores include an overall ESG score, individual ESG scores, and 26 additional scores for each of the risk criteria, where applicable.

The overall ESG score will be between 0—100, where 100 would be the best performing company and 0 the worst performing.

Supplier.io — supplier diversity

Through the partnership with Supplier.io we leverage the largest and most accurate database of certified small and diverse suppliers. Supplier.io database aggregates data from over 370+ certification agencies and tracks over 1.7 million diverse suppliers.

Supplier events

Comprehensive event insights are tracked and reported for our suppliers providing near real-time insights and alerts for over 200 event types, including production delays, financial instability, regulatory changes, and natural disasters. The ability to focus the tracking to specific locations and category risks are provided to enable proactive mitigation.

The events monitored include:

Production and operational disruptions
Financial and business performance
Merger and acquisition events
Regulatory and legal compliances
Health and safety issues
Environmental impact
IP rights violations
Unethical business practices
Natural disaster disruptions
Business practice disruption events

The results of monitoring are reported on advanced analytics dashboards to:

Help prioritise actions by identifying topimpacted suppliers and categories
Provide insights into adverse and cheerful events, delivering a balanced view of supplier performance
Highlight risk scores which have been dynamically derived from recently impacted events, ensuring dynamic and realistic supplier risk assessments
Assess event severity, impacted suppliers, affected categories, and associated spend for informed decision making
Interactively visually view events on an interactive map for enhanced analysis and monitoring
Receive near real-time email alerts for timely updates and quick response

Reviews monitor key risk indicators across multiple dimensions, including adverse media, financial risk, cybersecurity, ESG performance, sanctions, and PEP. Each risk category is assigned a weight to ensure balanced evaluation:

Financials	20%
Supply chain	20%
Adverse media	20%
ESG	20%
Cybersecurity	10%
Others	10%

Managing supplier risk

In 2025, 76% of suppliers were screened using human rights priorities.

While we do receive some risk assessment information from our external independent market intelligence provider and some supplier risk assessors, the outcome of those findings is woven into the internal assessment process, which is consistent with the way assessments have been performed historically.

The supply chain function has a strong corporate leadership team, with regional and site supply chain teams as support. These teams’ roles are supported by functional disciplines, including Compliance, Risk, Finance, Internal Audit, Safety, Health and Security, as well as by business stakeholders.

Principal concerns of suppliers in 2025 included:

Responsible sourcing
Procurement opportunities
Localisation
Supply chain risks, including modern slavery and labour rights abuses
Supplier relationship management
Supplier performance
Contractor management
Contract management
ESG performance monitoring
Promotion of transparency and access to information

Results for 2025 indicated that 54% of suppliers are in countries/regions that are considered free, where the civil liberties of its citizens are protected, while 40% are considered partially free, where citizens have some political rights and civil liberties, and 6% are considered not free, where citizens have no political rights or civil liberties.

Additionally, 25% of suppliers presented low to very low cyber risks, with 4% presenting medium cyber risks; 68% of suppliers do not have a cyber risk rating.

When modern slavery, human rights or other risks are identified, we collaborate with the Supplier and Compliance teams to evaluate the severity, define corrective actions, and follow the approach recommended by Group Compliance.

Mitigative efforts include the implementation of corrective action plans, including contractual commitments, training programmes, and followup reviews. Reassessments of vendor evaluations are performed at a minimum on a 24- month basis to confirm the status of the initial assessment and evaluate changes to status thereof.

Performance in 2025

Significant progress has been achieved during 2025 as the Company continues to actively work toward improving responsible sourcing and local procurement processes. We progressed on the standardisation of the supplier life cycle, procurement, and contract management processes, with advancements in the design and implementation of the SAP Ariba system to accommodate these processes.

Localisation spend and spend rate for 2025 amounted to $5.05bn and 92%, respectively. Some of the targets and progress achieved in 2025 included the implementation and development of the programme to assign the right resources and prioritise tracking and measuring gender diversity in the supply chain group. Continuing from the onset of the Bravo global leadership development programme for women in Procurement and Supply Chain during 2024, the Company was awarded the Bravo Member Organization of the Year Award that exemplifies The Faculty’s Bravo values through active participation, collaboration, innovation, leadership, and positive contribution to the network.

Also, during 2025, the World Gold Council’s Mining Share Value team highlighted the AngloGold Ashanti Local Procurement Policy as Leading Practice.

Looking ahead

The focus during 2026 and beyond is expected to relate to the migration of the supplier life cycle, procurement, and contract management processes from SAP ECC to SAP Ariba in a standardised global system, governed by standardised global processes, with some regional nuances where necessary and continue with the focus on the strategic areas in progress during 2025.

Supplementary information on the scoring systems and parameters used by each of the recognised rating agencies listed below is available in the full 2025 Sustainability report.

As at the end of 2025, 453 high-risk vendors were evaluated, returning the following results:

Suppliers by Risk Level

High Risk

0 suppliers

Medium – High Risk

4 suppliers

Medium Risk

175 suppliers

Low Risk

274 suppliers

No Rating

0 suppliers

Suppliers by Risk Factor

High Risk

3 suppliers

Medium – High Risk

3 suppliers

Medium Risk

25 suppliers

Low Risk

406 suppliers

No Rating

16 suppliers

2025 Suite of reports

Disclaimer

This webpage does not purport to be a complete summary of the applicable underlying report and is qualified in its entirety by reference to the applicable underlying report. This webpage should be read in conjunction with the applicable underlying report, including the qualifications and limitations described therein, as there may be information in the applicable underlying report that may be important.

All Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve information should be read in conjunction with Item 4D. Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve in AngloGold Ashanti’s annual report on Form-20F for the fiscal year ended 31 December 2025, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, as well as AngloGold Ashanti’s 2025 Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Report.

Forward-looking statements

Certain statements contained in this webpage, other than statements of historical fact, including, without limitation, those concerning the economic outlook for the gold mining industry, expectations regarding gold prices, production, mine life, total cash costs, all-in sustaining costs, cost savings and other operating results, return on equity, productivity improvements, growth prospects, preliminary financial and production metrics for in-process projects, the ability to convert Mineral Resource into Mineral Reserve and replace Mineral Reserves net of depletion from production and outlook of AngloGold Ashanti’s operations, individually or in the aggregate, including the achievement of project milestones, commencement and completion of commercial operations of certain of AngloGold Ashanti’s exploration and production projects and the completion of acquisitions, dispositions or joint venture transactions, AngloGold Ashanti’s liquidity and capital resources and capital expenditures and the outcome and consequences of any potential or pending litigation or regulatory proceedings or environmental, health and safety issues, are forward-looking statements regarding AngloGold Ashanti’s financial reports, operations, economic performance and financial condition.

These forward-looking statements or forecasts are not based on historical facts, but rather reflect our current beliefs and expectations concerning future events and generally may be identified by the use of forward-looking words, phrases and expressions such as “believe”, “expect”, “aim”, “anticipate”, “intend”, “foresee”, “forecast”, “predict”, “project”, “estimate”, “likely”, “may”, “might”, “could”, “should”, “would”, “seek”, “plan”, “scheduled”, “possible”, “continue”, “potential”, “outlook”, “target” or other similar words, phrases, and expressions; provided that the absence thereof does not mean that a statement is not forward-looking. Similarly, statements that describe our objectives, plans or goals are or may be forward-looking statements.

These forward-looking statements or forecasts involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause AngloGold Ashanti’s actual results, performance, actions or achievements to differ materially from the anticipated results, performance, actions or achievements expressed or implied in these forward-looking statements. Although AngloGold Ashanti believes that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements and forecasts are reasonable, no assurance can be given that such expectations will prove to have been correct. Accordingly, results, performance, actions or achievements could differ materially from those set out in the forward-looking statements as a result of, among other factors, changes in economic, social, political and market conditions, including related to inflation or international conflicts, the success of business and operating initiatives, changes in the regulatory environment and other government actions, including environmental approvals, fluctuations in gold prices and exchange rates, the outcome of pending or future litigation proceedings, any supply chain disruptions, any public health crises, pandemics or epidemics, the failure to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting or effective disclosure controls and procedures, the inability to remediate one or more material weaknesses, or the discovery of additional material weaknesses, in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting, and other business and operational risks and challenges and other factors, including mining accidents. For a discussion of such risk factors, refer to the Company’s annual report on Form 20-F for the financial year ended 31 December 2025, filed with the U.S. Securities Exchange Commission. These factors are not necessarily all of the important factors that could cause AngloGold Ashanti’s actual results, performance, actions or achievements to differ materially from those expressed in any forward-looking statements. Other unknown or unpredictable factors could also have material adverse effects on AngloGold Ashanti’s future results, performance, actions or achievements. Consequently, readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements.

AngloGold Ashanti undertakes no obligation to update publicly or release any revisions to these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of publication or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events, except to the extent required by applicable law. All subsequent written or oral forward-looking statements attributable to AngloGold Ashanti or any person acting on its behalf are qualified by the cautionary statements herein.

NON-GAAP financial measures

This document may contain certain “Non-GAAP” financial measures, including, without limitation, “total cash costs”, “total cash costs per ounce”, “all-in sustaining costs”, “all-in sustaining costs per ounce”, “average gold price received per ounce”, “sustaining capital expenditure”, “non-sustaining capital expenditure”, “Adjusted EBITDA”, “Adjusted net debt (cash)”, “operating cash flow” and “free cash flow”. AngloGold Ashanti utilises certain Non-GAAP performance measures and ratios in managing its business. Non-GAAP financial measures should be viewed in addition to, and not as an alternative for, the reported operating results or cash flow from operations or any other measures of performance prepared in accordance with IFRS. In addition, the presentation of these measures may not be comparable to similarly titled measures other companies may use. Reconciliations from IFRS to the Non-GAAP financial measures used in this document can be found either in this document, or in AngloGold Ashanti’s Earnings Release for the three months and the year ended 31 December 2025, which is available on AngloGold Ashanti’s website, or in its annual report on Form 20-F for the financial year ended 31 December 2025 as filed with  the SEC.

2025 Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve information

The Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve stated herein were prepared in compliance with Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K (17 CFR § 229.1300) (“Regulation S-K 1300”). Refer to Item 1300 (Definitions) of Regulation S-K for the meaning of the terms used in AngloGold Ashanti’s Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve reporting. The Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve represent the amount of gold, copper, silver, sulphur and molybdenum estimated at 31 December 2025 and are based on information available at the time of estimation. Such estimates are, or will be, to a large extent, based on the prices of the respective commodities and interpretations of geologic data obtained from drill holes and other exploration techniques, which data may not necessarily be indicative of future results. The Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates are published at 31 December 2025, taking into account economic assumptions, changes to future production and capital costs, depletion, additions as well as any acquisitions or disposals during 2025. The legal tenure of each material property has been verified to the satisfaction of the accountable Qualified Person and all of the Mineral Reserve has been confirmed to be covered by the required mining permits or there exists a realistic expectation, based on applicable laws and regulations, that issuance of permits or resolution of legal issues necessary for mining and processing at a particular deposit will be accomplished in the ordinary course and in a timeframe consistent with AngloGold Ashanti’s (or its joint venture partners’) current mine plans. For the Mineral Reserve, the term “economically viable” means that profitable extraction or production has been established or analytically demonstrated in, at a minimum, a pre-feasibility study, to be economically viable under reasonable investment and market assumptions. Mineral Reserve is subdivided and reported, in order of increasing geoscientific knowledge and confidence, into Probable and Proven Mineral Reserve categories. Mineral Reserve is aggregated from the Probable and Proven Mineral Reserve categories. Ounces of gold or silver or pounds of copper or sulphur included in the Probable and Proven Mineral Reserve are estimated and reported as delivered to plant (i.e., the point where material is delivered to the processing facility) and exclude losses during metallurgical treatment. In compliance with Regulation S-K 1300, the Mineral Resource herein is reported as exclusive of the Mineral Reserve before dilution and other factors are applied, unless otherwise stated. Mineral Resource is subdivided and reported, in order of increasing geoscientific knowledge and confidence, into Inferred, Indicated and Measured Mineral Resource categories. Ounces of gold or silver or pounds of copper, sulphur or molybdenum included in the Inferred, Indicated and Measured Mineral Resource are those contained in situ prior to losses during extraction and processing. While it would be reasonable to expect that the majority of Inferred Mineral Resource would upgrade to Indicated Mineral Resource with continued exploration, due to the uncertainty of Inferred Mineral Resource, it should not be assumed that such upgrading will always occur.

If estimations must be revised due to significantly lower commodity prices, increases in operating costs, reductions in metallurgical recovery or other factors, the Mineral Resource or Mineral Reserve may not be mined or processed profitably. In addition, material write-downs of AngloGold Ashanti’s investment in its mining properties may be required, including impacts on goodwill, as well as increased amortisation, reclamation and closure charges. If AngloGold Ashanti determines that certain parts of its Mineral Resource or Mineral Reserve have become uneconomic, this may ultimately lead to a reduction in its reported aggregate Mineral Resource or Mineral Reserve, respectively. Consequently, if AngloGold Ashanti’s actual Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve is less than current estimates, its business, prospects, results of operations and financial position may be materially impaired.

Pre-feasibility and feasibility studies for undeveloped ore bodies present estimated capital expenditure and operating costs based on anticipated tonnage and grades of ore to be mined and processed. Other factors underlying the estimations include, among others, the predicted configuration of the ore body, anticipated metal recovery rates, and estimated costs of operating and processing equipment and facilities. Actual operating and capital expenditure cost and economic returns on projects may differ significantly from original estimates. Further, it may take many years from the initial phases of exploration until commencement of production, during which time, the economic feasibility of production may change. The Mineral Resource is subject to further exploration and development, and is subject to additional risks, and no assurance can be given that they will eventually convert to Mineral Reserve.

For additional information, refer to Table 1 (Summary Mineral Resource) and Table 2 (Summary Mineral Reserve) to Paragraph (b) of Item 1303 (Summary disclosure) of Regulation S-K, which are in AngloGold Ashanti’s annual report on Form 20-F for the financial year ended  31 December 2025 filed with the SEC. These summary tables include each class of Mineral Resource (Inferred, Indicated and Measured) together with total Measured and Indicated Mineral Resource, and each class of Mineral Reserve (Probable and Proven) together with total Mineral Reserve. The Mineral Resource at the end of the financial year ended 31 December 2025 was estimated using a gold price of $2,000/oz (2024: $1,900/oz), a copper price of $3.50/lb (2024: $3.50/lb), a silver price of $23.00/oz (2024: $23.00/oz) and a molybdenum price of $12.00/lb (2024: $12.00/lb), unless otherwise stated. The Mineral Reserve at the end of the financial year ended 31 December 2025 was estimated using a gold price of $1,700/oz (2024: $1,600/oz), a copper price of $3.10/lb (2024: $2.90/lb) and a silver price of $19.50/oz  (2024: $19.50/oz), unless otherwise stated. The net difference between the Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve at the end of the last completed financial year and the preceding financial year will be detailed for material properties, if applicable, in AngloGold Ashanti’s annual report on Form 20-F for the financial year ended 31 December 2025.

Notes:

The Mineral Resource exclusive of Mineral Reserve is defined as the inclusive Mineral Resource less the Mineral Reserve before dilution and other factors are applied.

Continue to the online summary report

Sustainability report 2025

2025 at a glance

Creating value

Revenue

Gold production

Gold Mineral Reserve

Empowering people

People employed

Total recordable injury frequency rate (TRIFR)

Training and development expenditure

Salaries, wages and benefits paid to employees

Empowering communities

Community investment

Expenditure with local suppliers

Grievances resolved

Caring for the environment

Reportable environmental incidents

Cumulative amount of land rehabilitated

Renewable energy supply

Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions

Ensuring best practice governance

Employees that completed ethics training*

Payments to government ∧

Security personnel trained on human rights policies

Leadership

Determining materiality

Impact materiality

Financial materiality

Phase 1

Phase 2

Phase 3

Our commitments

Creating value

Empowering people

Empowering communities

Caring for the environment

Ensuring best practice governance

Case studies

Assurance

Responsible and secure sourcing and local procurement

Our commitment

Strategic focus areas:

Responsible sourcing, value chain strengthening and local procurement

Combating bribery, corruption and conflict of interest

Local procurement

Vendor evaluations

Enterprise and supplier development

Inclusive employment and procurement

Supplier technical visits

Measuring progress

Related SDGs

SDG 8

SDG 10

SDG 12

Material sustainability issues

Principal risks

Disclosure against standards

What we measure

Vendor evaluations undertaken

RA | New vendors evaluated (%)

Top 50 vendors – cyber risk summary

Top 50 vendors – freedom status summary

SRS ratings

Risk factors

Sanctions

Normalised score to 1—100 scale based on industry standards

Other ExistingPartners

Upcoming Partner /Customised scores

Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) SER

Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) SSI

CreditSafe

CreditorWatch

Dow Jones

Security Scorecard

Ecovadis Sustainability Rating (BYOL)

Kloopify ESG

Supplier.io — supplier diversity

Supplier events

Managing supplier risk

Performance in 2025

Payments to government^∧

Creating  value

Other Existing
Partners

Upcoming Partner /
Customised scores