Exhibit 99.4

MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (MD&A)





Managements Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) is intended to help the reader understand
Barrick Gold Corporation (Barrick, we, our or the Company), our operations, financial performance and the present and future business environment. This MD&A, which has been prepared as of
February 15, 2017, should be read in conjunction with our audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2016. Unless otherwise indicated, all amounts are presented in U.S. dollars. For the purposes of preparing our MD&A, we consider the materiality of information. Information is considered material if: (i) such information
results in, or would reasonably be expected to result in, a significant change in the market price or value of our shares; or (ii) there is a substantial likelihood that a


reasonable investor would consider it important in making an investment decision; or (iii) it would significantly alter the total mix of information available to investors. We evaluate
materiality with reference to all relevant circumstances, including potential market sensitivity. Continuous disclosure materials, including our
most recent Form 40-F/Annual Information Form, annual MD&A, audited consolidated financial statements, and Notice of Annual Meeting of Shareholders and Proxy Circular will be available on our website
at www.barrick.com, on SEDAR at www.sedar.com and on EDGAR at www.sec.gov. For an explanation of terminology unique to the mining industry, readers should refer to the glossary on page 87.








CAUTIONARY STATEMENT ON FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION



Certain information contained or incorporated by reference in this MD&A, including any information as
to our strategy, projects, plans or future financial or operating performance constitutes forward-looking statements. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, are forward-looking statements. The words
believe, expect, anticipate, contemplate, target, plan, objective, aim, intend, project, goal, continue,
budget, estimate, potential, may, will, can, could and similar expressions identify forward-looking statements. In particular, this MD&A contains forward-looking
statements including, without limitation, with respect to: (i) Barricks forward-looking production guidance; (ii) estimates of future cost of sales per ounce for gold and per pound for copper, all-in-sustaining costs per ounce/pound, cash costs per ounce and C1 cash costs per pound; (iii) cash flow forecasts; (iv) projected capital, operating and exploration expenditures;
(v) targeted debt and cost reductions; (vi) targeted investments by the Company; (vii) mine life and production rates; (viii) potential mineralization and metal or mineral recoveries; (ix) Barricks Best-in-Class program (including potential improvements to financial and operating performance that may result from certain Best-in-Class initiatives); (x) the Lama starter project and the potential for phased in development of the Pascua Lama project; (xi) timing and completion of acquisitions; (xii) asset sales or
joint ventures; and (xiii) expectations regarding future price assumptions, financial performance and other outlook or guidance.


Forward-looking statements are necessarily based upon a number of estimates and assumptions including
material estimates and assumptions related to the factors set forth below that, while considered reasonable by the Company as at the date of this MD&A in light of Managements experience and perception of current conditions and expected
developments, are inherently subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies. Known and unknown factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements
and undue reliance should not be placed on such statements and information. Such factors include, but are not limited to: fluctuations in the spot and forward price of gold, copper or certain other commodities (such as silver, diesel fuel, natural
gas and electricity); the speculative nature of mineral exploration and development; changes in mineral production performance, exploitation and exploration successes; risks associated with the fact that certain Best-in-Class initiatives are still in the early stages of evaluation and additional engineering and other analysis is required to fully assess their impact; diminishing quantities or grades of reserves;
increased costs, delays, suspensions and technical challenges associated with the construction of capital projects; operating or technical difficulties in connection with mining or development activities, including geotechnical challenges and
disruptions in the maintenance or provision of required infrastructure and information technology systems;






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 21 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

failure to comply with environmental and health and safety laws and regulations; timing of receipt of, or failure to comply with, necessary permits and approvals; uncertainty whether some or all
of the Best-in-Class initiatives and investments targeted by the Company will meet the companys capital allocation objectives; the impact of global liquidity and
credit availability on the timing of cash flows and the values of assets and liabilities based on projected future cash flows; adverse changes in our credit ratings; the impact of inflation; fluctuations in the currency markets; changes in U.S.
dollar interest rates; risks arising from holding derivative instruments; changes in national and local government legislation, taxation, controls or regulations and/or changes in the administration of laws, policies and practices, expropriation or
nationalization of property and political or economic developments in Canada, the United States and other jurisdictions in which the Company does or may carry on business in the future; lack of certainty with respect to foreign legal systems,
corruption and other factors that are inconsistent with the rule of law; damage to the Companys reputation due to the actual or perceived occurrence of any number of events, including negative publicity with respect to the Companys
handling of environmental matters or dealings with community groups, whether true or not; risk of loss due to acts of war, terrorism, sabotage and civil disturbances; litigation; contests over title to properties, particularly title to undeveloped
properties, or over access to water, power and other required infrastructure; business opportunities that may be presented to, or pursued by, the Company; our ability to successfully integrate acquisitions or complete divestitures; risks associated
with working with partners in jointly controlled assets; employee relations including loss of key employees; increased costs and physical risks, including extreme weather


events and resource shortages, related to climate change; availability and increased costs associated with mining inputs and labor; and the organization of our previously held African gold
operations and properties under a separate listed company. In addition, there are risks and hazards associated with the business of mineral exploration, development and mining, including environmental hazards, industrial accidents, unusual or
unexpected formations, pressures, cave-ins, flooding and gold bullion, copper cathode or gold or copper concentrate losses (and the risk of inadequate insurance, or inability to obtain insurance, to cover
these risks). Many of these uncertainties and contingencies can affect our actual results and could cause actual results to differ materially from
those expressed or implied in any forward-looking statements made by, or on behalf of, us. Readers are cautioned that forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance. All of the forward-looking statements made in this MD&A
are qualified by these cautionary statements. Specific reference is made to the most recent Form 40-F/Annual Information Form on file with the SEC and Canadian provincial securities regulatory authorities for
a more detailed discussion of some of the factors underlying forward-looking statements and the risks that may affect Barricks ability to achieve the expectations set forth in the forward-looking statements contained in this MD&A. We disclaim any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements whether as a result of new information, future events or
otherwise, except as required by applicable law.






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 22 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---



CHANGES IN
PRESENTATION OF NON-GAAP FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE MEASURES



We use the following non-GAAP financial performance measures in our
MD&A:  

adjusted net earnings 

free cash flow 

EBITDA 

adjusted EBITDA 

cash costs per ounce 

C1 cash costs per pound 

all-in sustaining costs per ounce/pound 

all-in costs per ounce and 

realized price For a detailed description of each of the
non-GAAP measures used in this MD&A and a detailed reconciliation, please refer to the Non-GAAP Financial Performance Measures section of this MD&A on pages 71
to 85. Each non-GAAP financial performance measure has been annotated with a reference to an endnote on page 86. The non-GAAP financial performance measures set out in
this MD&A are intended to provide additional information to investors and do not have any standardized meaning under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), and therefore may not be comparable to other issuers, and should
not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for measures of performance prepared in accordance with IFRS. In 2016, we made changes to the following non-GAAP performance measures: EBITDA Starting with the third quarter 2016 MD&A, we are
presenting a reconciliation of net earnings to EBITDA and adjusted EBITDA for each of our reportable operating segments. We believe this additional information will assist analysts, investors and other stakeholders of Barrick in understanding the
details of this non-GAAP metric on a segment-by-segment basis. Adjusted net earnings In the third quarter 2016 MD&A, we
amended the reconciliation of net earnings to adjusted net earnings to present the adjusting items on a pre-tax and fully consolidated basis, and including the tax effect and
non-controlling interest as a separate line. We believe that this change will assist analysts, investors and other stakeholders of Barrick to better understand how we calculate this non-GAAP performance measure and simplify how it reconciles to our financial statements. This change to the presentation of our reconciliation does not result in any change to the final calculation of adjusted net
earnings.


Cash costs per ounce, all-in sustaining cash costs per ounce and
all-in costs per ounce Starting with the third quarter 2016 MD&A, we have presented this
reconciliation for each of our reportable operating segments. We believe this additional information will assist analysts, investors and other stakeholders of Barrick in understanding the details of these
non-GAAP metrics on a segment-by-segment basis. Starting with the second quarter 2016 MD&A, we condensed and simplified the reconciliation from cost of sales to cash costs, all-in sustaining costs and all-in costs, including on a per ounce basis for gold and per pound basis for copper, to present items on a fully
consolidated basis and include non-controlling interest as a separate line. As part of this simplification, we have grouped several minor items into one line labeled Other, with further detail in
the footnote to the reconciliation. We believe that these changes will assist analysts, investors and other stakeholders of Barrick to better understand how we calculate these non-GAAP performance measures and
simplify how they reconcile to our financial statements. This change to the presentation of our reconciliation does not result in any change to the figures calculated, except as noted below for all-in
costs. Also starting with the second quarter 2016 MD&A, we adjusted the amount included as project exploration and evaluation costs
and project costs as part of our all-in costs measure to include all exploration and evaluation costs related to our advanced mining and business improvement projects and corporate
development activities, where previously it did not. The impact of this adjustment for the three and twelve month periods ended December 31, 2016 was $22/oz and $17/oz, respectively (2015: $27/oz and $30/oz, respectively; 2014: $25/oz). We
believe this change will assist analysts, investors and other stakeholders of Barrick in understanding all of the expenditures related to growing our business. The tables on pages 71 to 85 reconcile these non-GAAP measures to the most directly comparable IFRS measures and
previous period reconciliations have been modified to be presented in a manner consistent with our current format.






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 23 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

INDEX



|                                                                                 |  |     
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ----
|                                                                                 |  | page
|                                                                                 | 
|Overview                                                                         |  |     
|                                                                                 | 
|Our Business                                                                     |  | 25  
|                                                                                 | 
|Our Vision                                                                       |  | 25  
|                                                                                 | 
|Our Strategy                                                                     |  | 25  
|                                                                                 | 
|Full Year Financial and Operating Highlights                                     |  | 26  
|                                                                                 | 
|Outlook for 2017                                                                 |  | 33  
|                                                                                 | 
|Risks and Risk Management                                                        |  | 38  
|                                                                                 | 
|Market Overview                                                                  |  | 40  
|                                                                                 | 
|Review of Annual Financial Results                                               |  |     
|                                                                                 | 
|Revenue                                                                          |  | 43  
|                                                                                 | 
|Production Costs                                                                 |  | 43  
|                                                                                 | 
|Capital Expenditures                                                             |  | 44  
|                                                                                 | 
|General and Administrative Expenses                                              |  | 45  
|                                                                                 | 
|Exploration, Evaluation and Project Costs                                        |  | 45  
|                                                                                 | 
|Finance Costs, Net                                                               |  | 45  
|                                                                                 | 
|Additional Significant Statement of Income Items                                 |  | 46  
|                                                                                 | 
|Income Tax Expense                                                               |  | 46  
|                                                                                 | 
|Financial Condition Review                                                       |  | 48  
|                                                                                 | 
|Balance Sheet Review                                                             |  | 48  
|                                                                                 | 
|Shareholders Equity                                                             |  | 48  
|                                                                                 | 
|Financial Position and Liquidity                                                 |  | 48  
|                                                                                 | 
|Summary of Cash Inflow (Outflow)                                                 |  | 49  
|                                                                                 | 
|Summary of Financial Instruments                                                 |  | 51  
|                                                                                 | 
|Operating Segments Performance                                                   |  | 51  
|                                                                                 | 
|Cortez                                                                           |  | 52  
|                                                                                 | 
|Goldstrike                                                                       |  | 54  
|                                                                                 | 
|Pueblo Viejo                                                                     |  | 56  
|                                                                                 | 
|Lagunas Norte                                                                    |  | 58  
|                                                                                 | 
|Veladero                                                                         |  | 60  
|                                                                                 | 
|Turquoise Ridge                                                                  |  | 63  
|                                                                                 | 
|Acacia Mining plc                                                                |  | 65  
|                                                                                 | 
|Pascua-Lama                                                                      |  | 67  
|                                                                                 | 
|Commitments and Contingencies                                                    |  | 68  
|                                                                                 | 
|Review of Quarterly Results                                                      |  | 69  
|                                                                                 | 
|Internal Control over Financial Reporting and Disclosure Controls and Procedures |  | 70  
|                                                                                 | 
|IFRS Critical Accounting Policies and Accounting Estimates                       |  | 70  
|                                                                                 | 
|Non-GAAP Financial Performance Measures                                          |  | 71  
|                                                                                 | 
|Technical Information                                                            |  | 86  
|                                                                                 | 
|Glossary of Technical Terms                                                      |  | 87  



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 24 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---



OVERVIEW



Our Business Barrick is one of the worlds leading gold mining companies with annual gold production and gold reserves that are the largest in the industry. We
are principally engaged in the production and sale of gold and copper, as well as related activities such as exploration and mine development. We have 9 producing gold mines, which are located in Canada, the United States, Peru, Argentina,
Australia, the Dominican Republic and a 47.5% interest in a producing mine in Papua New Guinea. We also hold a 63.9% equity interest in Acacia Mining plc (Acacia), a company listed on the London Stock Exchange (LSE) that owns
gold mines and exploration properties in Africa. More than 75% of our gold production comes from the Americas region. Our copper business contains a wholly-owned copper mine in Zambia and 50% interests in copper mines in Chile and Saudi Arabia. We
also have projects located throughout the Americas. We sell our production in the world market through the following distribution channels: gold bullion is sold in the gold spot market; and gold and copper concentrate is sold to independent smelting
companies. Barricks shares trade on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and the Toronto Stock Exchange under the symbol ABX.  LOGO  LOGO


Our Vision Our
vision is the generation of wealth through responsible mining; wealth for our owners, our people, and the countries and communities with which we partner. In support of this vision, our overarching objective is to grow our free cash flow per share. Our Strategy Our strategy is to grow our free cash flow
per share over the long term. We expect to achieve this through three areas of focus: Growing free cash flow per share through industry-leading
margins Through our Best-in-Class approach, we pursue
industry-leading margins by continuously improving the productivity and efficiency of existing systems and operations. Equally, we pursue step changes in performance by re-designing those systems and
introducing new technologies; and we innovate to redefine what is possible. Our digital transformation partnership with Cisco will be another Best-in-Class priority for
2017. Growing free cash flow per share through superior portfolio management As part of our revamped capital allocation system, all proposals go through a rigorous, independent peer review process led by our Evaluations team,
before they go to the Investment Committee. They are then ranked, prioritized and sequenced to optimize capital spending over time on a strategic basis, allowing us to anticipate and plan for funding requirements. Over time, assets that are unable
to meet our return expectations will be divested. We are continuously evaluating external opportunities to increase the long-term value of our portfolio through acquisitions, joint ventures, and other partnerships. Growing free cash flow per share through partnerships We believe an authentic partnership culture is our most distinctive and sustainable competitive advantage. For Barrick, partnership means a trust-based
culture, and the currency of trust is transparency. It is a culture of peers. Those who are part of Barrick recognize that in general, the collective is stronger than the aggregation of individuals. By embracing these values, we aim to be the
preferred partner of host governments and communities, the most sought-after employer among the worlds best talent, and the natural choice for






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 25 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

long-term investors. We also created a new partnership with Cisco to drive Barricks digital transformation and have also continued to strengthen our relationships with other external
partners, including Zijin Mining, Maaden, and Antofagasta Plc our joint venture partners at the Porgera mine, the Jabal Sayid mine, and the Zaldívar mine. And we are working to develop new partnerships with the potential to unlock
value across our business, and grow free cash flow per share over the long term.


Last year, we created the Global Employee Share Plan, a program to make every Barrick employee  from
the rock face to the head office  an owner of the Company, with an initial allocation of 25 common shares per person. We expect this to grow over time, in line with Barricks performance. Our goal is not simply to be aligned with our
owners, we want our people to be owners. Implementation of the program began in late 2016 and we expect to complete the initial roll out in the first half of 2017.






FULL YEAR FINANCIAL AND OPERATING HIGHLIGHTS



LOGO  LOGO


LOGO  LOGO






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 26 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

|                                                                  |  |  |                                 |  |  |  |                                        |  |  |  |           |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |           | 
|----------------------------------------------------------------- |  |  | ------------------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------- |  |  |  | --------- |  |  |  | ----- |  |  |  | --------- | 
|($ millions, except per share amounts in dollars)                 |  |  | For the years ended December 31 |  |  |  | For the three months ended December 31 | 
|                                                                  |  |  |                                 |  | 
|                                                                  |  |  | 2016                            |  |  |  | 2015                                   |  |  |  | 2014      |  |  |  | 2016  |  |  |  | 2015      | 
|Net earnings (loss) attributable to equity holders of the Company |  |  | $ 655                           |  |  |  | $ (2,838)                              |  |  |  | $ (2,907) |  |  |  | $ 425 |  |  |  | $ (2,622) | 
|Per share (dollars)1                                              |  |  | 0.56                            |  |  |  | (2.44)                                 |  |  |  | (2.50)    |  |  |  | 0.36  |  |  |  | (2.25)    | 
|Adjusted net earnings2                                            |  |  | 818                             |  |  |  | 344                                    |  |  |  | 793       |  |  |  | 255   |  |  |  | 91        | 
|Per share (dollars)1,2                                            |  |  | 0.70                            |  |  |  | 0.30                                   |  |  |  | 0.68      |  |  |  | 0.22  |  |  |  | 0.08      | 
|Operating cash flow                                               |  |  | 2,640                           |  |  |  | 2,794                                  |  |  |  | 2,296     |  |  |  | 711   |  |  |  | 698       | 
|Free cash
flow2                                                   |  |  | $ 1,514                         |  |  |  | $ 1,081                                |  |  |  | $ (136)   |  |  |  | $ 385 |  |  |  | $ 387     | 



| | 1 | Calculated using weighted average number of shares outstanding under the basic method of earnings per share of
1,165 million shares in 2016 (2015: 1,165 million shares; 2014: 1,165 million shares).
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2 | Adjusted net earnings and free cash flow are non-GAAP financial performance
measures with no standardized meaning under IFRS and therefore may not be comparable to similar measures of performance presented by other issuers. For further information and a detailed reconciliation of the
non-GAAP measures used in this section of the MD&A to the most directly comparable IFRS measure, please see pages 71 to 85 of this MD&A.
| | - | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In 2016, we exceeded all of our key targets for the year. Our mines generated net cash flow provided by operating activities (operating cash
flow) of $2.6 billion in 2016 and free cash flow1 of $1.5 billion for the year, a record level of annual free cash flow for Barrick. We reduced our cost of sales applicable to gold
by seven percent to $798 per ounce, and our all-in sustaining costs1 fell by 12% to $730 per ounce, driven by Best-in-Class improvements in efficiency and productivity across our portfolio. At the same time, we continued to strengthen our balance sheet, and we further strengthened our capital allocation process with
the appointment of the companys first ever Chief Investment Officer.

Balance Sheet and Liquidity

In 2016, we reduced our total debt by $2.04 billion, or 20%, from $9.97 billion to $7.93 billion, exceeding our original target of
$2 billion. Approximately $5 billion of our $7.9 billion in outstanding debt matures after 2032. In 2015 and 2016 we have reduced our debt by a total of $5.15 billion, which will reduce
pre-tax interest payments by approximately $235 million on an annualized basis. Over the same period, the average tenor on our outstanding public debt has increased from approximately 14 years to
approximately 17 years. Our liquidity position is strong and continues to improve, with robust cash flow generation, modest near-term debt repayment obligations, a $4 billion undrawn credit facility and a consolidated cash balance of
approximately $2.4 billion3. We intend to reduce our total debt by $2.9 billion to $5 billion by the end of 2018, half of which we are targeting in 2017. We will achieve this by using
cash flow from operations, selling additional non-core assets, and creating new joint ventures and partnerships.

Cost
Performance

In 2016, we continued our focus on capital discipline, identifying productivity and efficiency savings opportunities through our Best-in-Class program and maintaining reductions in corporate overhead. Cost of sales per ounce4 in 2016 decreased 7% to
$798 per ounce and minesite sustaining capital expenditures decreased 31% compared to the prior year. Combined with an overall decrease in direct mining costs, a positive change in our sales mix with higher production at our lower cost mines and as
a result of the divestment of some of our higher cost mine sites, reduced our all-in sustaining costs1 for 2016 by 12% to $730 per ounce, compared to the
prior year.



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 27 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

Net Earnings (Loss), Adjusted Net Earnings, Operating Cash Flow and Free Cash Flow



LOGO

Net earnings attributable to equity holders of Barrick (net earnings) for 2016 was $655 million
compared with a net loss of $2,838 in the prior year. This significant improvement in earnings was largely due to $3,897 million of impairment charges recorded in 2015 compared to net impairment reversals of $250 million recorded in 2016,
partially offset by an income tax expense in 2016 compared to an income tax recovery in the prior year. The higher earnings were also caused by higher gold and copper prices combined with higher sales volumes (excluding the impact of divested
sites), decreased operating costs and lower exploration, evaluation and project expenses. These were partially offset by an increase in costs relating to closed mine rehabilitation combined with losses on currency translation primarily related to
the realization of deferred currency translation losses in Australia of $91 million during the first quarter of 2016. After adjusting for items that are not indicative of future operating earnings, adjusted net earnings1 of $818 million in 2016 were 138% higher than the prior year primarily due to the impact of higher gold and copper prices combined with higher gold and copper sales volumes (excluding the impact
of divested sites) and lower operating costs. These were partially offset by higher income tax expense and the impact of divested sites. For a breakdown of asset impairment charges/reversals recognized in 2016, see page 46 of this MD&A.

Significant adjusting items to net earnings (pre-tax and non-controlling
interest effects) in 2016 include:



|● |  | $199 million in foreign currency translation losses, including deferred currency translation losses released as a result of the disposal and reorganization of certain Australian entities in the first quarter of
2016 and unrealized foreign currency translation losses related to the devaluation of the Argentinean Peso on VAT receivables;
|- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|● |  | $114 million in other expense adjustments primarily relating to losses on debt extinguishment, partly offset by insurance proceeds relating to the 2015 oxygen plant motor failure at Pueblo Viejo;
|- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|● |  | $43 million in significant tax adjustments primarily relating to a tax provision in Acacia in the first quarter of 2016;
|- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|● |  | $42 million in disposition losses primarily relating to the divestment of 50% of Zaldívar;
|- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|● |  | The above are partially offset by $250 million in net impairment reversals at Veladero and Lagunas Norte in the fourth quarter of 2016, net of an impairment charge relating to the write-down of our retained equity
method investment in Zaldívar.
|- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 28 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

LOGO

In 2016, we generated $2,640 million in operating cash flow, compared to $2,794 million of operating cash
flow in the prior year. 2015 operating cash flow included a $610 million deposit relating to the gold and silver streaming arrangement with Royal Gold. Excluding this transaction, operating cash flow for 2016 was $456 million higher than
the prior year despite the $355 million reduction in operating cash flow associated with the divestment of some non-core assets. We benefited from higher market gold prices and lower direct mining costs
as a result of lower energy and fuel costs (despite being hedged on a significant portion of our fuel consumption) combined with the continued realization of lower labor and consumable costs and improved operating efficiencies resulting from our Best-in-Class initiatives and also lower cash interest paid. These improvements were largely offset by the impact of lower gold and copper volumes sold, primarily as a result
of the aforementioned divestitures, combined with the impact of unfavorable working capital movements compared to the prior year, mainly as a result of inventory balances, and higher income taxes paid.

Free cash flow1 for 2016 was $1,514 million, compared to $1,081 million in the prior year.
Excluding the $610 million streaming deposit transaction recorded in 2015, we generated $1,043 million additional free cash flow in the current year. The increase primarily reflects the higher operating cash flows combined with lower
capital expenditures. In 2016, capital expenditures on a cash basis were $1,126 million compared to $1,713 million in 2015. The decrease of $327 million, excluding the impact of $260 million in capital expenditures associated
with divested sites, is primarily due to lower capitalized stripping costs at our Veladero mine, a decrease in leach pad expansion costs at our Veladero mine and our Lagunas Norte mine and our continued focus on capital discipline across the
Company. This was combined with a decrease in project costs mainly relating to the completion of the thiosulfate circuit at Goldstrike in the prior year and decreased capital expenditures on a cash basis at Pascua-Lama.



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 29 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

LOGO


Safety Nothing
is more important to Barrick than the safety, health and well-being of workers and their families. In 2016, we continued our trend of improving our total reportable injury frequency rate5
(TRIFR) and since 2009, there has been a 67% improvement in the TRIFR (from 1.20 to 0.40). The foundation underpinning this improvement continues to be our Courageous Leadership program, which was updated in 2015 with a new program
called Courage to Care. Courage to Care is designed to help Barrick make the next step in safety performance through a team approach. In addition we continue to focus on compliance with elements of the Barrick Safety and Health
Management System. Although we are pleased with these trends, this performance was overshadowed by the tragic occurrence of an incident in 2016 when a truck operator at Lumwana suffered fatal injuries resulting from a fire on the truck he was
operating. Unfortunately, another tragic event occurred early in 2017 as a contract employee was involved in a fatal accident while performing scheduled maintenance work at Pascua-Lama. Barricks goal is zero fatalities with the implementation
of Critical Control Management based upon the guidance published by the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM) in 2015. In addition, following a successful trial of mobile equipment collision avoidance technology in 2015, a
full-scale deployment of the technology was implemented at the Cortez mine in 2016.






Environment

The unfortunate 2015 cyanide release at our Veladero site in Argentina and the consequent loss of confidence from regulators and investors was, in many
ways, a wake-up call for the Company. Since that time, the Board and Executive leadership of Barrick have been absolutely clear that our obligation to be a responsible steward of the environment is second only
to our commitment to protecting the health and safety of our workers and their families. Over the past three years, we have reduced the number of reportable environmental incidents by more than 75%. This reduction has been accomplished by
relentlessly scrutinizing our operations for sources of environmental risk. In 2016, we had a second incident at Veladero although no solution reached surface water or escaped the site, and extensive sampling confirmed that the incident did not
result in any environmental impact. Nonetheless, due to heightened regulatory sensitivity surrounding the site, production was temporarily suspended while the site completed upgrades to the berms surrounding the leach pad. In 2017, our operations
will be focused on adapting the ICMM Critical Control Management guidance to our environmental operations. By doing so, we expect to be able to further reduce the number of environmental incidents and continue to rebuild Barricks reputation
for environmental excellence and become the preferred partner of host governments and communities.

Climate Change

Climate change, including temperature and precipitation shifts as well as more frequent and severe extreme weather events, will have complex impacts on
the mining industry. Volatile climatic conditions can affect the stability and effectiveness of infrastructure and equipment; potentially impact environmental protection and site closure practices; lead to changes in the regulatory environment,
including increased financial exposure to carbon tax regimes; and potentially impact the stability and cost of water and energy supplies. Mining is an energy-intensive business and we understand the important link between energy use and climate
change. Barrick considers climate change to be a company, community, and global concern. By effectively managing our energy use, we are able to reduce our greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, achieve more efficient production, reduce our draw
from local energy grids, and save a significant proportion of our direct mining costs.

Through 2017, we will continue to align with the ICMM
Position Statement on Climate Change and support placing a market price on GHG emissions. We will also be participating in multi-stakeholder forums, such as the Carbon Pricing Leadership Coalition, to advance our understanding and share knowledge on
climate change solutions. In addition we have established an internal Climate Change Committee to build on our existing energy management plan and develop a comprehensive climate change strategy. By the end of 2017 we plan to conduct a climate
change risk assessment and establish targets to reduce our GHG emissions.



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 30 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

Reserves and Resources To calculate our 2016 reserves, we have applied a short-term gold price assumption of $1,000 per ounce for the next four years, and a long-term gold price
of $1,200 per ounce from 2021 onwards, consistent with our approach in 2015. As of December 31, 2016, Barricks proven and probable gold
reserves were 85.9 million ounces6, compared to 91.9 million ounces at the end of 2015. Approximately 1.9 million ounces were divested last year, and 6.8 million ounces were
depleted through mining and processing. We replaced approximately 60 percent of the ounces we depleted through drilling and cost improvements at our operating mines. Significant additions included 1.1 million ounces at Lagunas Norte,
920,000 ounces at Hemlo, and 640,000 ounces at the Goldstrike underground mine. Reserves at Pascua-Lama declined by 1.3 million ounces as a result of design modifications to enhance safety and environmental mitigation at the project. Reserves
at Acacias Bulyanhulu mine also declined by 430,000 ounces.


LOGO




In 2016, measured, indicated, and inferred resources were calculated using a gold price assumption of
$1,500 per ounce. This compares to $1,300 per ounce in 2015.

Measured and indicated gold resources decreased to 75.2 million ounces6 at the end of 2016, compared to 79.1 million ounces at the end of 2015. Approximately 4.3 million ounces of measured and indicated gold resources were divested in 2016, and 2.7 million
ounces were upgraded to proven and probable gold reserves. Approximately 5.3 million ounces were added to measured and indicated resources as a result of using a $1,500 per ounce gold price assumption.

Inferred gold resources increased to 30.7 million ounces at the end of 2016, compared to 27.4 million ounces6 at the end of 2015. Approximately 3.2 million ounces were upgraded to measured and indicated resources. Approximately 5.3 million ounces were added through drilling, including 2.0 million
ounces at Veladero, 1.3 million ounces at Hemlo, and 1.1 million ounces at Alturas. Approximately 1.7 million ounces were added to inferred resources as a result of using a $1,500 per ounce gold price assumption. The addition of
5.3 million ounces of inferred gold resources through drilling underscores the value of our investments in near-mine exploration and sets the stage for replenishing and upgrading our reserve and resource portfolio in future years.

Proven and probable copper reserves were calculated using a short-term copper price of $2.25 per pound and a long-term price of $2.75 per pound. This
compares to a short-term copper price of $2.75 and a long-term price of $3.00 per pound in 2015.

Copper reserves, including copper and gold
reserves, were 11.1 billion pounds6 at the end of 2016, compared to 11.7 billion pounds at the end of 2015. Measured and indicated copper resources, including copper within measured and
indicated gold reserves, increased slightly to 9.7 billion pounds4, compared to 9.6 billion pounds, at the end of 2016.

Exploration and Projects

After several years of exploration
focused primarily on existing core districts and projects, we are increasing our budget and broadening our focus to include new greenfield opportunities. In the short term, every one of our operating mines has the potential to identify new reserves
and resources through near-mine exploration. In many cases, these ounces can be quickly incorporated into mine plans, driving improvements in production, cash flow, and earnings. Over the medium term, we are advancing a pipeline of high-confidence
projects at or near our existing operations. These projects remain on track and are expected to begin contributing new production to our portfolio beginning in 2021. This includes three significant projects in Nevada: the Cortez Deep South
underground expansion; the potential development of an underground mine at Goldrush; and a significant expansion of throughput at the Turquoise Ridge mine. At the Lagunas Norte mine in Peru, we are advancing a project to extend the life of the mine
by approximately nine years by mining the refractory material below the oxide ore body in the current open pit. At the Alturas project in Chile, we have added an additional 1.1 million ounces of inferred gold resources, bringing the total
inferred resource to 6.8 million ounces6. We expect to complete a scoping study for Alturas in



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 31 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

2017. We have also initiated a prefeasibility study to evaluate the construction of an underground mine at Lama, on the Argentinean side of the Pascua-Lama project.

Highlights of our greenfield exploration program for 2017 include the Fourmile target, adjacent to our Goldrush discovery in Nevada, and the Frontera
District on the border of Argentina and Chile. We have also formed new partnerships with Alicanto Minerals in Guyana and Osisko Mining in the Labrador Trough of Northern Quebec, where we see the potential to develop new core mineral districts for
Barrick. Our portfolio also contains a number of the worlds largest undeveloped gold deposits, including Donlin Gold, Cerro Casale, and Pascua-Lama. These projects contain 31.5 million ounces of gold in proven and probable reserves
(Barricks share), and 29.3 million ounces in measured and indicated resources (Barricks share).

Management Structure Refinements

In December 2016, Michelle Ash, formerly Senior Vice President, Business Transformation & Innovation, was elevated to the position of Chief
Innovation Officer and Matt Gili, formerly Executive General Manager for the Cortez District in Nevada, was elevated to Chief Technical Officer.

In
August 2016, we announced the appointment of Mark Hill as Chief Investment Officer and a member of Barricks Executive Committee, a group of the Companys most senior partners. In this newly-created position, Mr. Hill will chair
Barricks Investment Committee and apply a high degree of consistency and rigor to all capital allocation decisions at the company  whether at existing operations, development projects, exploration (both near-mine and greenfields), or
potential acquisitions and divestments.

In March 2016, Shaun Usmar, then Barricks Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer,
announced his resignation from Barrick. Catherine Raw, formerly Executive Vice President, Business Performance, succeeded Mr. Usmar as Chief Financial Officer on April 27, 2016, subsequent to the Companys 2016 Annual General Meeting.
In March 2016, we also announced that Rob Krcmarov, formerly Senior Vice President, Global Exploration, had been elevated to the position of Executive Vice President, Exploration and Growth, and had become a member of Barricks Executive
Committee.

Board Renewal & Appointments

In 2016,
the Board of Directors appointed Kelvin Dushnisky, President of Barrick, as a director. Graham G. Clow, Chairman of Roscoe Postle Associates Inc., and Gary Doer, former Canadian Ambassador to the United States, were elected as new directors at
Barricks Annual General Meeting on April 26, 2016. William Birchall retired from the Board at the conclusion of the Companys 2016 Annual General Meeting. On December 6, 2016, the Company appointed Pablo Marcet to its Board of
Directors. Mr. Marcet is a seasoned mining professional with nearly 30 years of experience in the exploration, development, and operation of mines across Latin America and East Africa. He has held senior management positions in geology, mining
operations, and business development, including 15 years at BHP Billiton. Barrick continues to renew the talent on its Board, with nine of the 14 directors (excluding the Executive Chairman) being new to the Company since April 2014.



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 32 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

Outlook for 2017

Operating Unit Guidance

Our
2016 gold and copper production, cost of sales, cash costs, all-in sustaining costs and 2017 forecast
gold and copper production, cost of sales, cash costs and all-in sustaining costs ranges by operating
unit are as follows:





Operating Unit


2016production
(000s ozs)



2016 cost of
sales ($/oz)



2016 cashcosts1($/oz)



2016
all-in
sustaining1costs ($/oz)



2017 forecastproduction
(000s ozs)



2017 forecastcost of sales
($/oz)



2017 forecast
cash costs1
($/oz)



2017 forecast
all-in
sustaining1
costs ($/oz)GoldCortez


1,059



$901



$430



$518



1,250 - 1,290



$730 - $760



$360 - $380



$430 - $470Goldstrike


1,096



852



572



714



910 - 950



950 - 990



650 - 680



910 - 980Pueblo Viejo (60%)


700



564



395



490



625 - 650



650 - 680



400 - 420



530 - 560Lagunas Norte


435



651



383



529



380 - 420



710 - 780



430 - 470



560 - 620Veladero


544



872



582



769



770 - 830



750 - 800



500 - 540



840 - 940Total Core Mines


3,834



$793



$480



$606



3,900 - 4,100



$770 - $810



$470 - $500



$665 - $710Turquoise Ridge (75%)


266



603



498



625



260 - 280



575 - 625



460 - 500



650 - 730Porgera (47.5%)


234



836



689



858



250 - 270



780 - 840



650 - 700



900 - 970Kalgoorlie (50%)


376



762



627



706



390 - 410



750 - 790



600 - 630



670 - 710Acacia (63.9%)


530



880



640



958



545 - 575



860 - 910



580 - 620



880 - 920Hemlo


235



795



679



839



205 - 220



800 - 860



640 - 690



880 - 980Golden Sunlight


34



1,512



1,376



1,493



35 - 50



900 - 1,200



900 - 950



950 - 1,040Total Continuing Operations


5,509



$844



$523



$659



5,600 - 5,900



$780 - $820



$510 - $535



$700 - $750Round Mountain (50%)2


5



701



608



601



-



-



-



-Bald Mountain2


3



1,112



723



1,692



-



-



-



-Pierina


92



911



662



1,301



-



-



-



-Total Divested/Closed Sites


100



$897



$658



$1,250



-



-



-



-Total Gold3


5,609



$798



$518



$668



5,600 - 5,900



$780 - $820



$510 - $535



$700 - $750Total Consolidated
Barrick4,5


5,609



$798



$546



$730



5,600 - 5,900



$780 - $820



$510 - $535



$720 - $7702016production
(millions lbs)



2016cost of
sales ($/lb)



2016C1 cash
costs1
($/lb)



2016all-in
sustaining1
costs ($/lb)



2017 forecastproduction
(millions lbs)



2017 forecastcost of sales
($/lb)



2017forecast
C1 cash1
costs ($/lb)



2017 forecastall-in
sustaining1
costs ($/lb)CopperZaldívar (50%)


114



$1.93



$1.55



$2.05



120 - 135



$2.00 - $2.20



~$1.50



$1.90 - $2.10Lumwana


271



1.16



1.44



1.97



250 - 275



1.20 - 1.40



1.40 - 1.60



2.10 - 2.30Jabal Sayid
(50%)


30



2.33



1.97



2.98



30 - 40



2.10 - 2.80



1.50 - 1.90



2.30 - 2.80Total Copper


415



$1.43



$1.49



$2.05



400 - 450



$1.50 - $1.70



$1.40 - $1.60



$2.10 - $2.40




| | 1 | Cash costs, all-in sustaining costs and C1 cash costs are non-GAAP financial
performance measures with no standardized meaning under IFRS and therefore may not be comparable to similar measures of performance presented by other issuers. For further information and a detailed reconciliation of the non-GAAP measures used in this section of the MD&A to the most directly comparable IFRS measure, please see pages 71 to 85 of this MD&A.
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 2 | Includes results from Bald Mountain and Round Mountain up to January 11, 2016, the effective date of sale of these assets.
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 3 | Total gold cash costs and all-in sustaining costs per ounce exclude the impact of hedges and/or costs allocated to non-operating sites.
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 4 | Operating unit guidance ranges reflect expectations at each individual operating unit, and may not add up to the company-wide guidance range total. The
company-wide guidance ranges exclude Pierina which is mining incidental ounces as it enters closure and Bald Mountain and Round Mountain which were disposed of in January 2016.
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 5 | Total Consolidated Barrick all-in sustaining costs include corporate administration costs and expected savings from
an improved capital management program that have not been reflected in the individual site guidance ranges at this time.
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 33 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

Operating Unit, Consolidated Expense and Capital Guidance

Our 2016 gold and copper production, cost of sales, cash costs1,
all-in sustaining costs1, consolidated expenses and capital expenditures and forecast gold and copper production, cost of sales, cash costs1, all-in sustaining costs1, consolidated expenses and capital expenditures for 2017 are as follows:



|                                            |  |                        |               |  |                  |  |               |             |  |  |               |  |  |  |               | 
|------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------- | ------------- |  | ---------------- |  | ------------- | ----------- |  |  | ------------- |  |  |  | ------------- | 
|($ millions, except per ounce/pound data)   |  | 2016 Original Guidance |               |  | Q3 2016 Guidance |  |               | 2016 Actual |  |  | 2017 Guidance | 
|                                            | 
|Gold production and costs                   |  |                        |               |  |                  |  |               |             |  |  |               |  |  |  |               | 
|Production (millions of ounces)             |  |                        | 5.00 - 5.50   |  |                  |  | 5.25 - 5.55   |             |  |  | 5.52          |  |  |  | 5.60 - 5.90   | 
|Gold unit production costs                  |  |                        |               |  |                  |  |               |             |  |  |               |  |  |  |               | 
|Cost of sales - gold ($ per oz)             |  |                        | -             |  |                  |  | 800 - 850     |             |  |  | 798           |  |  |  | 780 - 820     | 
|All-in sustaining costs ($ per oz) 1        |  |                        | 775 - 825     |  |                  |  | 740 - 775     |             |  |  | 730           |  |  |  | 720 - 770     | 
|Cash costs ($ per oz) 1                     |  |                        | 550 - 590     |  |                  |  | 540 - 565     |             |  |  | 546           |  |  |  | 510 - 535     | 
|Depreciation ($ per oz)                     |  |                        | 240 - 260     |  |                  |  | 240 - 260     |             |  |  | 249           |  |  |  | 245 - 265     | 
|                                            | 
|Copper production and costs                 |  |                        |               |  |                  |  |               |             |  |  |               |  |  |  |               | 
|Production (millions of pounds)             |  |                        | 370 - 410     |  |                  |  | 380 - 430     |             |  |  | 415           |  |  |  | 400 - 450     | 
|Copper unit production costs                |  |                        |               |  |                  |  |               |             |  |  |               |  |  |  |               | 
|Cost of sales - copper ($ per lb)           |  |                        | -             |  |                  |  | 1.35 - 1.55   |             |  |  | 1.43          |  |  |  | 1.50 - 1.70   | 
|C1 cash costs ($ per lb) 1                  |  |                        | 1.45 - 1.75   |  |                  |  | 1.40 - 1.60   |             |  |  | 1.49          |  |  |  | 1.40 - 1.60   | 
|Depreciation ($ per lb)                     |  |                        | 0.20 - 0.30   |  |                  |  | 0.20 - 0.30   |             |  |  | 0.23          |  |  |  | 0.30 - 0.40   | 
|Copper all-in sustaining costs ($ per lb) 1 |  |                        | 2.05 - 2.35   |  |                  |  | 2.00 - 2.20   |             |  |  | 2.05          |  |  |  | 2.10 - 2.40   | 
|                                            | 
|Exploration and project expenses            |  |                        | 225 - 275     |  |                  |  | 195 - 245     |             |  |  | 237           |  |  |  | 415 - 495     | 
|Exploration and evaluation                  |  |                        | 125 - 155     |  |                  |  | 115 - 145     |             |  |  | 132           |  |  |  | 185 - 225     | 
|Project expenses                            |  |                        | 100 - 120     |  |                  |  | 80 - 100      |             |  |  | 105           |  |  |  | 230 - 270     | 
|General and administrative expenses         |  |                        | ~215          |  |                  |  | ~260          |             |  |  | 256           |  |  |  | ~285          | 
|Corporate administration                    |  |                        | ~145          |  |                  |  | ~160          |             |  |  | 163           |  |  |  | ~200          | 
|Stock-based compensation 2                  |  |                        | ~45           |  |                  |  | ~40           |             |  |  | 38            |  |  |  | ~40           | 
|Acacia 3                                    |  |                        | ~25           |  |                  |  | ~60           |             |  |  | 55            |  |  |  | ~45           | 
|Other expense 4                             |  |                        | 20 - 40       |  |                  |  | 20 - 40       |             |  |  | 60            |  |  |  | 25 - 45       | 
|Finance costs                               |  |                        | 690 - 730     |  |                  |  | 710 - 750     |             |  |  | 788           |  |  |  | 600 - 650     | 
|Attributable capital expenditures:          |  |                        |               |  |                  |  |               |             |  |  |               |  |  |  |               | 
|Attributable minesite sustaining            |  |                        | 1,200 - 1,400 |  |                  |  | 1,050 - 1,100 |             |  |  | 977           |  |  |  | 1,050 - 1,200 | 
|Attributable project                        |  |                        | 150 - 250     |  |                  |  | 150 - 200     |             |  |  | 145           |  |  |  | 250 - 300     | 
|Total attributable capital
expenditures 5   |  |                        | 1,350 - 1,650 |  |                  |  | 1,200 - 1,300 |             |  |  | 1,122         |  |  |  | 1,300 - 1,500 | 
|                                            | 

|1 | Cash costs, all-in
sustaining costs and C1 cash costs are non-GAAP financial performance measures with no standardized meaning under IFRS and therefore may not be comparable to similar measures of performance presented by other
issuers. For further information and a detailed reconciliation of the non-GAAP measures used in this section of the MD&A to the most directly comparable IFRS measure, please see pages 71 to 85 of this
MD&A.
|- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|2 | 2016 actual based on US$15.98 and 2017 guidance based on a three month trailing average ending December 31, 2016 of
US$16.92 per share and excludes Acacia.
|- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|3 | 2016 actual includes $32 million in stock-based compensation. 2017 guidance includes ~$20 million in
stock-based compensation.
|- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|4 | 2016 actual includes a net loss on debt extinguishment of $129 million.
|- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------

|5 | 2016 actual attributable capital expenditures are presented on the same basis as 2016 guidance, which include our 60%
share of Pueblo Viejo and Arturo and our 50% share of Zaldívar and Jabal Sayid. 2017 Guidance includes our 60% share of Pueblo Viejo and Arturo, our 63.9% share of Acacia and our 50% share of Zaldívar and Jabal Sayid.
|- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 34 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

2017 Guidance Analysis



Estimates of future production, cost of sales, and cash costs presented in this MD&A are based on mine
plans that reflect the expected method by which we will mine reserves at each site. Actual gold and copper production and associated costs may vary from these estimates due to a number of operational and
non-operational risk factors (see the Cautionary Statement on Forward-Looking Information on page 21 of this MD&A for a description of certain risk factors that could cause actual results to
differ materially from these estimates). In 2017 we expect improvements to our mine site AISC and capital expenditures guidance as we identify
further savings from our continued focus on capital discipline, currently reflected in the overall company guidance. Production We expect 2017 gold production to be in the range of 5.6 to 5.9 million ounces. 2017 gold production is expected to be higher than 2016, primarily as
a result of increases at Cortez and Veladero, partially offset by Goldstrike and Pueblo Viejo. Production at Cortez in 2017 is expected to be 18% to
22% higher than the prior year due to an increase in open pit production, primarily from higher grade oxide ore as well as increased throughput at the mill processed on site and larger volumes of refractory ore being processed at Goldstrike. This is
partially offset by an expected decline in underground ore grade as the mine transitions to lower grade ore zones deeper in the deposit. Significantly higher production is expected at Veladero in 2017 compared to the prior year. The expected increase in production at Veladero is due to
higher grade ore being processed and faster recovery from the leach pad, as a result of better operational management. In addition, our 2017 production guidance for Veladero anticipates higher ore tonnes mined and processed in 2017, given the
suspension, environmental and bad weather incidents experienced in 2016. At Goldstrike, we expect 2017 production to be in the range of 910 to
950 thousand ounces, 13% to 17% lower than the prior year. Our emphasis at the underground in 2017 will be on development deeper in the mine and ore mined will also be impacted by a slightly higher percentage of cut and fill tonnage. Production
from the open pit is expected to be lower as we transition from ore mining at the Arturo pit to stripping the 3rd and 4th northwest laybacks at the Betze Post pit. Production at Pueblo Viejo is expected to be lower than the prior year due to reduced gold grades, partially offset by increased gold recovery from ore
blending and
Best-in-


Class initiatives improving availability and utilization of autoclaves. Cost of Sales On a per ounce basis, cost of sales attributable to gold, after removing the portion related to non-controlling
interests, is expected to be in the range of $780 to $820 per ounce, in line with the prior year. In our 2017 guidance, we do not anticipate inventory impairment charges (2016: $68 million) or hedge losses from our currency and fuel hedging programs
(2016: $89 million loss). We are currently projecting higher energy and consumables costs in 2017, increasing direct mining costs from the
prior year. We plan to offset those rising costs with a continued focus on lowering our other direct mining costs through Best-in-Class initiatives, which should improve
operating efficiencies and lower labor and contractor costs. Cash Costs per ounce Cash costs1 are expected to be in the range of $510 to $535 per ounce, in line with the prior year,
after excluding hedge losses of $13 per ounce from 2016. Expected improvements in cash costs at Cortez and Veladero are partially offset by increases at Goldstrike and Lagunas Norte. We expect significantly lower cash costs at Cortez in 2017 compared to the prior year, as
productivity improvements generated by digitization and Best-in-Class start contributing to additional mining and processing volumes which more than offset increases in
energy and consumable cost assumptions. Lower expected cash costs at Veladero in 2017 compared to the prior year, are the result of higher
production on unit costs which more than offsets our higher energy and consumable cost assumptions. These cash cost decreases are expected to be
partially offset by increases in cash costs at Goldstrike and Lagunas Norte due to lower expected production and higher expected energy and consumables costs, partially offset by improvements to direct mining costs as a result of Best-in-Class initiatives. All-In Sustaining Costs per ounce All-in sustaining costs1 are expected to be in the range of
$720 to $770 per ounce for gold, which is comparable to the $730 per ounce in 2016. In 2017, we will continue to focus on Best-in-Class initiatives to reduce mining and






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 35 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

labor costs, partially offsetting higher expected energy and consumable costs, digitization costs at our mine sites ($14 per ounce) and an increase in corporate administration expense ($7 per
ounce), as we seek to optimize our process and systems through business improvement initiatives, including digitization. The expected increase in
mine site sustaining capital in 2017 compared to the prior year is expected to be offset by the impact of higher expected production on unit costs and targeted capital savings from our continued focus on capital discipline process. Exploration and Project Expenses We
expect to incur approximately $185 to $225 million of exploration and evaluation (E&E) expenditures in 2017 with approximately 80 percent of that spend allocated to the Americas. The majority of the remaining budget is
allocated to Acacia. Our exploration programs balance high-quality brownfield projects, greenfield exploration, and emerging discoveries that have the potential to become profitable mines. We continue to take advantage of existing infrastructure and
advance key growth projects, including three significant projects in Nevada: the Cortez Deep South underground expansion, the potential development of an underground mine at Goldrush and a significant expansion of throughput at the Turquoise Ridge
mine. At the Lagunas Norte mine in Peru, we are advancing a project to extend the life of the mine by approximately nine years by mining the refractory material below the oxide ore body in the current open pit. Highlights of our greenfield exploration program for 2017 include the Fourmile target, adjacent to our Goldrush discovery in Nevada, and the Frontera
District on the border of Argentina and Chile. We expect to incur approximately $230 to $270 million of project expenses in 2017, compared to
$105 million in 2016. The increase in project expenses primarily reflects the cost to complete a prefeasibility study we have initiated to evaluate the construction of an underground mine at Lama, the Argentinean side of the Pascua-Lama
project. If successful, it could support a staged development of the Pascua-Lama deposit. Project expenses also includes the cost of Pascua-Lama water management and monitoring activities and other holding costs as part of the temporary closure
plan; and the costs associated with our Alturas, Donlin Gold and Cerro Casale projects. General and Administrative Expenses In 2017 we expect corporate administration costs to be in the range of $175 to $200 million, an increase from the prior year, as we seek to optimize
our process and


systems through business improvement initiatives, including digitization. Finance Costs Finance costs of $600 to $650 million primarily represent interest expense on long-term debt. We expect finance costs in 2017 to be
lower than 2016 levels primarily due to lower interest expense in 2017 following $2.04 billion of debt repayments in 2016. The impact of any further debt reductions accomplished in 2017 has not been reflected in our guidance on interest
expense. 2016 finance costs included a $129 million net loss on the extinguishment of debt and further debt repurchases could lead to additional losses on extinguishment that could cause an increase to forecasted finance costs. Capital Expenditures Total attributable
capital expenditures for 2017 are expected to be in the range of $1.3 to $1.5 billion, compared to $1.1 billion in 2016, which reflects an increase in both sustaining and project capital. Minesite sustaining capital expenditures reflect the capital spending required to support current planned production levels and those which do not meet
our definition of project capital. This includes capitalized production phase stripping costs at our open pit mines, underground mine development and mine site E&E expenditures that meet our criteria for capitalization. Attributable minesite sustaining capital expenditures are expected to increase from 2016 expenditure levels of $977 million to a range of $1,050 to
$1,200 million, mainly due to our digitization project, planned tailings expansions and increased stripping at Goldstrike and Veladero, equipment rebuilds and other process facility upgrades at Hemlo, Lumwana and Pueblo Viejo. These increases
in sustaining capital are partially offset by expected savings from our continued focus on capital discipline process. These savings are not reflected in the minesite guidance ranges at this time and are expected to be included in updates through
the year. At Goldstrike in 2017, sustaining capital expenditures are expected to increase primarily due to planned tailings expansions, process
improvements, and underground sustaining projects to enable mining at greater depth. Capitalized waste stripping is expected to increase compared to the prior year as we shift from mining ore at Arturo to stripping the 3rd and 4th northwest laybacks
in the Betze Post pit, partially offset by reduced operating spend driven by savings initiatives to optimize planned production at the lowest cost.






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 36 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

At Veladero, a significant increase in capital is expected in 2017, mainly related to expansion of the
leach pad, digitization, equipment purchases and increased capitalized waste stripping due to phases 5 and 6 of the Federico pit. At Pueblo Viejo,
the increase in sustaining capital in 2017 is related to initiatives to improve the plant and mine operational efficiency, process facility upgrades and construction of a substation. At Lumwana, the 2017 increases in sustaining capital are related to Chimi South 2 Embankment for water diversion and equipment rebuilds. At Hemlo, sustaining capital increases are primarily related to a tailings dam expansion and replacement of the semi-autogenous grinding mill shell in
2017. Project capital expenditures reflect capital expenditures at new projects and existing operations that are related to discrete projects
intended to increase production and will


not benefit production for at least 12 months. Project capital expenditures also include capital expenditures related to the initial construction of a project and include all of the expenditures
required to bring the project into operation and achieve commercial production levels. Attributable project capital expenditures are expected to
increase to a range of $250 to $300 million in 2017. The increase in project capital expenditures in 2017 compared to the prior year is primarily due to the Cortez Lower Zone expansion project, and an increase in
pre-production waste stripping at Crossroads phase 1 at Cortez compared to 2016, the finalization of the Robertson acquisition and a slight increase in spend at Pascua-Lama. This is partially offset by the
completion of pre-production waste stripping at Arturo in 2016. Effective Income Tax Rate At current spot gold prices, our expected effective tax rate for 2017 is approximately 45%.






Outlook Assumptions and Economic Sensitivity
Analysis



|                                  |  |               |  |              |  |                    |  |                   |  |             
|--------------------------------- |  | ------------- |  | ------------ |  | ------------------ |  | ----------------- |  | ------------
|                                  |  | 2017 Guidance |  | Hypothetical |  | Impact on          |  | Impact on Cost of |  | Impact on   
|                                  |  | Assumption    |  | Change       |  | Revenue (millions) |  | Sales (millions)  |  | AISC1       
|Gold revenue, net of royalties3   |  | $1,050/oz     |  | +/- $100/oz  |  | +/- $571           |  | n/a               |  | +/- $3/oz   
|Copper revenue, net of royalties2 |  | $2.25/lb      |  | + $0.50/lb   |  | + $213             |  | n/a               |  | + $0.03/lb  
|Copper revenue, net
of royalties2 |  | $2.25/lb      |  | - $0.50/lb   |  | - $171             |  | n/a               |  | - $0.03/lb  
|Gold all-in
sustaining costs      |  |               |  |              |  |                    |  |                   |  |             
|WTI crude oil price3              |  | $55/bbl       |  | +/- $10/bbl  |  | n/a                |  | +/- $17           |  | +/- $3/oz   
|Australian dollar exchange rate   |  | 0.75 : 1      |  | +/- 10%      |  | n/a                |  | +/- $29           |  | +/- $5/oz   
|Canadian dollar
exchange rate     |  | 1.32 : 1      |  | +/- 10%      |  | n/a                |  | +/- $32           |  | +/- $6/oz   
|Copper all-in
sustaining costs    |  |               |  |              |  |                    |  |                   |  |             
|WTI crude oil price3              |  | $55/bbl       |  | +/- $10/bbl  |  | n/a                |  | +/- $5            |  | +/- $0.01/lb
|Chilean peso exchange
rate        |  | 675 : 1       |  | +/- 10%      |  | n/a                |  | +/- $6            |  | +/- $0.01/lb



| | 1 | All-in sustaining costs is a non-GAAP
financial performance measure with no standardized definition under IFRS. For further information and a detailed reconciliation, please see page 71 to 85 of this MD&A.
| | - | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 2 | Utilizing option collar strategies, the company has protected the downside of a portion of its expected 2017 copper
production at an average floor price of $2.20 per pound and can participate on the same amount up to an average price of $2.82 per pound. Our remaining copper production is subject to market prices.
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 3 | Due to our hedging activities, which are reflected in these sensitivities, we are partially protected against changes in
these factors.
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 37 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

Risks and Risk Management



Overview The
ability to deliver on our vision, strategic objectives and operating guidance depends on our ability to understand and appropriately respond to the uncertainties or risks we face that may prevent us from achieving our objectives. In
order to achieve this we:  ●

Maintain a framework that ensures we manage risk effectively and in a manner that creates the greatest value; ●

Integrate a process for managing risk into all our important decision-making processes so that we reduce the effect of
uncertainty on achieving our objectives; ●

Ensure that the key controls we rely on to achieve the companys objectives are actively monitored so that they
remain in place and are effective at all times; and ●

Provide assurance to the Executives and relevant Committees of the Board of Directors on the effectiveness of key control
activities. Board and Committee Oversight We maintain strong risk oversight practices, with responsibilities outlined in the Boards and related committees mandates. The Boards
mandate makes clear the responsibility for reviewing and discussing with management the processes used to assess and manage risk, including the identification by management of the principal risks of the business, and the implementation of
appropriate systems to deal with such risks. The Risk Committee of the Board of Directors assists the Board in overseeing the Companys
management of principal risks as well as the implementation of policies and standards for monitoring and modifying such risks, and monitoring and reviewing the Companys financial position and financial risk management programs generally. The
Audit Committee and Corporate Responsibility Committee also provide oversight focusing on financial and operational (e.g. Safety & Health, Environmental, Community, Security, etc.) risk exposures, respectively. Management Oversight On a weekly basis, the global leadership
team, including the Executive Committee and representatives from each of Barricks country offices, mine sites and corporate functions, participate in a Business Plan Review (BPR) meeting. This forum allows for the timely
identification of


key risks that may prevent the Company from achieving its objectives. It also fosters a culture of transparent, real-time risk management as a collective and enables a learning organization. Principal Risks The following subsections describe some of our
key sources of uncertainty and most important risk modification activities. The risks described below are not the only ones facing Barrick. Our business is subject to inherent risks in financial, regulatory, strategic and operational areas. For a
more comprehensive discussion of those inherent risks, see Risk Factors in our most recent Form 40-F/Annual Information Form on file with the SEC and Canadian provincial securities regulatory
authorities. Also see the Cautionary Statement on Forward-Looking Information on page 21. Financial position and liquidity Our liquidity profile, level of indebtedness and credit ratings are all factors in our ability to meet short- and
long-term financial demands. Barricks outstanding debt balances impact liquidity through scheduled interest and principal repayments and the results of leverage ratio calculations, which could influence our investment grade credit ratings and
ability to access capital markets. In addition, the Companys ability to draw on our credit facility is subject to meeting its covenants. Our primary source of liquidity is our operating cash flow, which is dependent on the ability of our
operations to deliver projected future cash flows. The ability of our operations to deliver projected future cash flows, as well as future changes in gold and copper market prices, either favorable or unfavorable, will continue to have a material
impact on our cash flow and liquidity. Key risk modification activities:  ●

Reduced notional and lengthened average tenor of our outstanding debt through liability management activities; ●

Continued focus on generating positive free cash flow by improving the underlying cost structures of our operations in a
sustainable manner; ●

Disciplined capital allocation criteria for all investments; ●

Preparation of budgets and forecasts to understand the impact of different price scenarios on liquidity, and formulate
appropriate strategies; and






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 38 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

●

Other options to enhance liquidity include drawing on our $4.0 billion undrawn credit facility, asset sales, joint
ventures, or issuance of debt or equity securities. Improving free cash flow and AISC Our ability to improve productivity, drive down operating costs and reduce working capital remains a focus in 2017 and is subject to several sources of
uncertainty. This includes our ability to achieve and maintain industry-leading margins by improving the productivity and efficiency of our operations through our
Best-in-Class program which includes the digital transformation of Barrick. Key
risk modification activities:  ●

Formal project management protocols are established around these business transformation programs. The status of these
projects is reviewed on a weekly basis during the BPR meetings to ensure the timely identification of key risk exposures that may affect their successful delivery; ●

Ongoing implementation of a Best-in-Class
program to unleash the full potential of our mines and encompassing: ●

A standardized, performance-oriented, measurement scorecard linking top operational and economic measures; ●

Monthly optimization forums as a way to communicate and review the Best-in-Class projects and performance to targets; and ●

Innovation and digitization program focused on driving value across the business. Social license to operate At Barrick, we are committed to building, operating, and closing our mines in a safe and responsible manner. To do this, we develop long-term and
mutually-beneficial relationships with host governments and communities while working to minimize the social and environmental impacts of our activities. Incidents of corruption in the extractive industry are indicative of the risks related to
interaction with government officials and the potential consequences to our partnerships in the locations where we operate. Environmental incidents in the extractive industry emphasize the hazards (e.g. water management, tailings storage facilities,
etc.) and the potential consequences to both the environment and community health and safety. Our ability to maintain compliance with environmental, regulatory and community obligations remains one of our top priorities.


Key risk modification activities:  ●

Our external Corporate Social Responsibility Advisory Board was formed in 2012 and provides expert advice to the Company
on a range of corporate responsibility matters, including community relations, sustainable development, water, energy, climate change, security and human rights; ●

Our obligations, expectations and intentions are codified in our Vision and Values and the Code of Business Conduct and
Ethics, and they are reinforced regularly at all levels of the Company; ●

Barricks community relations, environment, safety and health, security and compliance management systems set
expectations, define performance standards and provide the necessary tools to modify the related risks; ●

We take a partnership approach with our home and host governments. This means we work to balance our own interests and
priorities with those of our government partners, working to ensure that everyone derives real value from our operations; ●

We participate in the annual CDP Climate Change and Water Disclosure process, providing investors and other interested
partners with detailed information on our water and energy use and emissions data; and ●

We open our social and environmental performance to third-party scrutiny, including through the ISO 14001 re-certification process, International Cyanide Management Code audits, annual human rights impact assessments, and an annual assurance against the International Council on Mining and Metals Sustainable
Development Framework. Resources and reserves and production outlook Like any mining company, we face the risk that we are unable to discover or acquire new resources or that we do not convert resources into production. As
we move into 2017 and beyond, our overriding objective of growing free cash flow per share is underpinned by a strong pipeline of organic projects and minesite expansion opportunities in our core regions as discussed on page 31. Uncertainty related
to these and other opportunities exists (potentially both favorable and unfavorable) due to the speculative nature of mineral exploration and development as well as the potential for increased costs, delays, suspensions and technical challenges
associated with the construction of capital projects. Key risk modification activities:  ●

Focus on responsible Mineral Resource Management and continuously improved orebody






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 39 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

knowledge, adding to and upgrading reserves and resources (organically and inorganically); ●

Develop and advance a balanced pipeline of high-return projects and seek to exit those that do not meet expectations; ●

Pursue high-return growth options with a mindset of innovation, cost control, and risk mitigation; ●

Enhance project design to stagger capital outlay and optimize timing of cash flows; and ●

Exploration activities including minesite exploration and global programs. Market Overview The market prices of gold, and, to a lesser
extent, copper are the primary drivers of our profitability and our ability to generate free cash flow for our shareholders. Gold The price of gold is subject to volatile price movements over short periods of time and is affected by numerous industry and macroeconomic factors. During
the year, the gold price ranged from $1,061 per ounce to $1,375 per ounce. The average market price for the year of $1,251 per ounce represented an increase of 8% versus 2015.  LOGO The price of gold in 2016 generally rose over the first half of the year, reaching its high for the year in early July,
and generally declined over the second half of the year. In the first half of 2016, the gold price was positively influenced by declining expectations regarding increases in the benchmark U.S. interest rate, low and negative interest rates on
sovereign debt issued by many of the worlds largest economies, global economic and political uncertainty highlighted by the British referendum in favor of leaving the European Union, and investor interest in gold as a safe haven asset. In the
second half of 2016, the gold price was negatively influenced by a stronger U.S. dollar, rising U.S. and global interest rates, expectations of fiscal stimulus measures in the U.S. to be put in place by the newly elected administration, subdued
physical


demand in key consuming countries of China and India due to government measures to maintain currency valuations, and a decline in investor sentiment. Copper During 2016, London Metal Exchange (LME)
copper prices traded in a range of $1.96 to $2.74 per pound, averaged $2.21 per pound, and closed the year at $2.50 per pound. Copper prices are significantly influenced by physical demand from emerging markets, especially China. The price of copper traded in a subdued range in 2016, before achieving significant price upside in the fourth quarter due to positive economic and copper
usage data from China, expectations of increased infrastructure spending in the U.S., an increase in the price of other non-precious mined commodities, and an increase in investor sentiment. Challenging
near-term fundamentals currently limit the potential copper price upside, but a dearth of new projects scheduled to enter production later in the decade could begin to positively impact prices in the coming years should physical demand continue to
grow.  LOGO Utilizing option collar strategies, and excluding co-product copper hedges put
in place by Acacia, we have protected the downside on approximately 65 million pounds of expected 2017 copper production at an average floor price of $2.20 per pound and can participate up to an average price of $2.82 per pound. These positions
expire evenly over the first six months of the year. In addition, Acacia has co-product copper collar hedges in place on approximately 13 million pounds of expected 2017 copper production at an average
floor price of $2.30 per pound and can participate up to an average price of $2.78 per pound. Our remaining copper production is subject to market prices. We have provisionally priced copper sales for which final price determination versus the relevant copper index is






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 40 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

outstanding at the balance sheet date. As at December 31, 2016, we recorded 44 million pounds of copper sales subject to final settlement at an average provisional price of $2.51 per
pound. The impact to net income before taxation of a 10% movement in the market price of copper would be approximately $11 million, holding all other variables constant. Silver Silver traded in a range of $13.75 to $21.14 per ounce
in 2016, averaged $17.14 per ounce and closed the year at $16.24 per ounce. The silver price is driven by factors similar to those influencing investment demand for gold. Silver prices do not significantly impact our current operating earnings, cash flows, or gold cash costs. Silver prices, however, will have a significant
impact on the overall economics for our Pascua-Lama project.  LOGO Currency Exchange Rates The
results of our mining operations outside of the United States are affected by US dollar exchange rates with non-US denominated currencies comprising approximately 25% of our operating and capital cost
exposures. Although we have made dispositions, we continue to have exposure to the Australian and Canadian dollars through a combination of mine operating and corporate administration costs, as well as exposure to the Chilean peso through expected
future capital and operating costs at our Pascua-Lama project and mine operating costs at Zaldívar. We also have exposure to the Argentinean peso through operating costs at our Veladero mine, peso denominated VAT receivable balances and
expected future capital and operating costs at our Pascua-Lama project. In addition, we have exposure to the Papua New Guinea kina, Peruvian sol, Zambian kwacha, Tanzanian shilling and Dominican peso through mine operating and capital costs.


Fluctuations in the US dollar increase the volatility of our costs reported in US dollars, subject to
positions put in place through our currency hedging program. In 2016, the Australian dollar traded in a range of $0.68 to $0.78 against the US dollar, while the US dollar against the Canadian dollar, Chilean peso and Argentinean peso ranged from
$1.25 to $1.47, CLP642 to CLP733 and ARS 12.90 to ARS 16.17, respectively. Due to expectations of a strengthened US dollar, in recent years we have
reduced our overall foreign currency derivative positions, whether by closing out positions before maturity or limiting the addition of new positions. As a result, at the end of 2016, we did not have any foreign currency hedge positions. During the year, we recorded losses in earnings of approximately $28 million from our foreign currency derivatives, primarily impacting our
operating and corporate administration costs (2015: $87 million loss; 2014: $97 million gain). A strengthening US
dollar versus our key currency exposures is beneficial to our cost structure in 2017, as we are unhedged against such exposures as at December 31, 2016.  LOGO  LOGO






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 41 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

LOGO 1
There were no CAD hedge positions in 2016.  LOGO 1
There were no CLP hedge positions in 2016. Fuel For 2016, the price of West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil traded in a wide range between $26 and $55 per barrel, averaged $43 per barrel
and closed the year at $54 per barrel. During 2016, the price of crude oil generally rose after reaching multi-year lows in the middle of the first quarter. Reduced supply and increasing demand have helped towards balancing the physical market, and
a recent agreement by major producing nations to cap production has improved overall market sentiment towards crude oil.  LOGO


In 2016, we recorded hedge losses in earnings of $47 million on our fuel hedge positions (2015:
$19 million loss and 2014: $4 million loss). Assuming December 31, 2016 market forward curves and year-end spot prices, we expect to realize fuel hedge losses of approximately $47 million
in 2017. A significant portion of these losses has already been recorded in the consolidated statements of income as an unrealized loss on non-hedge derivatives. Beginning in January 2015, upon early adoption
of IFRS 9, Barricks fuel hedges qualified for hedge accounting and unrealized gains and losses began being recorded in Other Comprehensive Income.  Financial Fuel Hedge SummaryBarrels(thousands)

Averageprice

% of totalexpectedexposure

Impact of $10  change on pre-taxearnings (USD  millions)12017

2,214

80

50%

222018

1,207

78

28%

31 1
Includes the impact of hedges currently in place. US Dollar Interest Rates Beginning in 2008, in response to the contraction of global credit markets and in an effort to spur economic activity and avoid potential deflation, the
US Federal Reserve reduced the range for its benchmark rate to between 0% and 0.25%. The benchmark was kept at this level until December 2015, when the range was increased by 25 basis points. The range was raised by an additional 25 basis points in
December 2016. As economic conditions in the US continue to normalize, we expect incremental increases to short-term rates to continue in 2017. At
present, our interest rate exposure mainly relates to interest receipts on our cash balances ($2.4 billion at December 31, 2016); the mark-to-market value of
derivative instruments; the fair value of and ongoing payments under US dollar interest-rate swaps; the carrying value of certain long lived assets and liabilities; and to the interest payments on our variable-rate debt ($0.4 billion at
December 31, 2016). Currently, the amount of interest expense recorded in our consolidated statement of income is not materially impacted by changes in interest rates, because the majority of debt was issued at fixed interest rates. The
relative amounts of variable-rate financial assets and liabilities may change in the future, depending on the amount of operating cash flow we generate, as well as the level of capital expenditures and our ability to borrow on favorable terms using
fixed rate debt instruments. Changes in interest rates affect the accretion expense recorded on our provision for environmental rehabilitation and therefore would affect our net earnings.






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 42 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---



REVIEW OF
ANNUAL FINANCIAL RESULTS



Revenue($ millions, except per ounce/pound
data in dollars)


For the years endedDecember 312016


2015


2014Gold000s oz sold1


5,503



6,083



6,284000s oz produced1


5,517



6,117



6,249Revenue


$ 7,908



$ 7,813



$ 8,744Market price2


1,251



1,160



1,266Realized price2,3


$ 1,248



$ 1,157



$ 1,265Coppermillions lbs sold1


405



510



435millions lbs
produced1


415



511



436Revenue


$ 466



$ 1,002



$ 1,224Market price2


2.21



2.49



3.11Realized price2,3


2.29



2.37



3.03Other sales


$ 184



$ 214



$ 271Total revenue


$ 8,558



$ 9,029



$ 10,239  1
Includes our equity share of gold ounces from Acacia and Pueblo Viejo and copper pounds from Zaldívar and Jabal
Sayid.  2
Per ounce/pound weighted average.  3
Realized price is a non-GAAP financial performance measure with no standardized
meaning under IFRS and therefore may not be comparable to similar measures of performance presented by other issuers. For further information and a detailed reconciliation of each non-GAAP measure used in this
section of the MD&A to the most directly comparable IFRS measure, please see pages 71 to 85 of this MD&A. In 2016, gold
revenues were up 1% compared to the prior year primarily due to a higher realized gold price, partially offset by a decrease in gold sales volume. Excluding the impact of divested sites, gold
revenues were up 14% compared to the prior year due to an increase in gold sales volume combined with higher realized gold prices. Realized gold
prices1 for 2016 were up $91 per ounce compared to the prior year reflecting the higher market gold prices in 2016, which were up 8% compared to 2015. In 2016, gold production was 600 thousand ounces or 10% lower than the prior year primarily as a result of the divestment of non-core assets. Excluding the impact of these divested sites, production increased by 2% or 114 thousand ounces due to higher grade and throughput at Pueblo Viejo, Cortez, Turquoise Ridge, Goldstrike and
Acacia, partially offset by lower production at Lagunas Norte and Veladero. Copper revenues for 2016 were down 53% compared to the prior year
primarily due to the divestment of 50% of our ownership in Zaldívar which was completed on December 1, 2015, combined with a lower realized copper


price1. In 2016, the realized copper price1 was down $0.08 per pound compared to 2015,
due to the 11% decline in market copper prices over the prior year and the negative provisional pricing adjustments recognized in 2016. Copper
production for 2016 decreased by 96 million pounds or 19% compared to the prior year due to lower production contribution from Zaldívar following the divestment of 50% of our ownership. Excluding the impact of the divestiture, copper
production increased by 7 million pounds primarily related to the achievement of commercial production at Jabal Sayid in July 2016, partially offset by lower production at Lumwana due to lower tonnes mined due to equipment availability and
lower grades.  Production Costs($ millions, except per ounce/pound datain dollars)


For the years ended December 312016


2015


2014Direct mining costs


$ 3,215



$ 4,006



$ 4,155Depreciation


1,503



1,613



1,414Royalty expense


224



235



263Community relations


37



50



61Cost of sales - gold


$ 4,979



$ 5,904



$ 5,893Cost of sales - gold (per oz)1


798



859



842Cash costs2,3


546



596



598All-in sustaining costs - gold2,3


730



831



864Cost of sales -  copper


$ 319



$ 814



$ 954Cost of sales - copper (per lb)1


1.43



1.65



2.19C1 cash costs2,3


1.49



1.73



1.92All-in sustaining costs - copper2,3


$2.05



$2.33



$ 2.79 1
Cost of sales related to gold per ounce is calculated using cost of sales related to gold on an attributable basis
(removing the non-controlling interest of 40% Pueblo Viejo and 36.1% Acacia from cost of sales), divided by attributable gold ounces. Cost of sales related to copper per pound is calculated using cost of sales
related to copper including our proportionate share of cost of sales attributable to equity method investments (Zaldívar and Jabal Sayid), divided by consolidated copper pounds (including our proportionate share of copper pounds from our
equity method investments).  2
Per ounce/pound weighted average.  3
Cash costs, all-in sustaining costs and C1 cash costs are non-GAAP financial performance measures with no standardized meaning under IFRS and therefore may not be comparable to similar measures of performance presented by other issuers. For further information and a
detailed reconciliation of each non-GAAP measure used in this section of the MD&A to the most directly comparable IFRS measure, please see pages 71 to 85 of this MD&A. In 2016, cost of sales applicable to gold was 16% lower than the prior year primarily due to lower ounces sold, as discussed above. On a per ounce basis,
cost of sales applicable to gold4 after removing the portion related to non-controlling interests, was 7% lower than the prior






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 43 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

year primarily due to a decrease in direct mining costs combined with a positive change in our sales mix as a result of the divestment of some of our higher cost mine sites. Direct mining costs
have decreased as a result of lower fuel and energy prices, despite a significant proportion of our oil exposure being hedged, as well as the impact of Best-in-Class
initiatives, including lower labor and consumable costs and improved operating efficiencies. Lower cost of sales was also attributable to lower inventory impairment charges combined with lower depreciation expense as a result of divested sites,
lower depreciation at Pueblo Viejo as a result of the impairment recorded in the fourth quarter of 2015 and a life of mine extension at Lagunas Norte; partially offset by higher depreciation expense at Cortez due to increased sales volume attributed
to the Cortez Hills open pit and Arturo as it entered commercial production on August 1, 2016. In 2016, gold
all-in sustaining costs1 were down $101 per ounce or 12% compared to the prior year primarily due to a reduction in minesite sustaining capital
expenditures, as a result of lower capitalized stripping costs and our continued capital discipline, combined with lower direct mining costs as described above. In addition, 2016 all-in sustaining costs were
favorably impacted by a higher proportion of our sales coming from lower cost operations such as Pueblo Viejo and Cortez. In 2016, cost of sales
applicable to copper was 61% lower than the prior year following the divestment of 50% of our ownership in the Zaldívar mine. Our remaining 50% interest in Zaldívar is equity accounted for and therefore we do not include
Zaldívars cost of sales in our consolidated copper cost of sales. On a per pound basis, cost of sales applicable to copper4, after including our proportionate share of cost of sales
at our equity method investees, decreased 13% compared to the prior year primarily due to lower direct mining costs as part of initiatives to reduce costs and increase efficiencies combined with lower royalty expense at Lumwana resulting from a
decreased royalty rate (as noted below) combined with lower depreciation expense. These were partially offset by the cost of sales associated with Jabal Sayid; our 50% owned copper mine in Saudi Arabia, which entered commercial production on
July 1, 2016 combined with lower sales volumes at Lumwana and Zaldívar. In June 2016, the Zambian government passed legislation to amend
the royalty tax for mining operations to a variable rate based on the prevailing copper price effective June 1, 2016. These rates are 4% at copper prices below $2.04 per pound; 5% at copper prices


between $2.04 per pound and $2.72 per pound; and 6% at copper prices of $2.72 per pound and above. Legislation was also passed to remove the 15% variable profit tax on income from mining
companies. Copper all-in sustaining costs1, which have
been adjusted to include our proportionate share of equity method investments, were 12% lower than the prior year primarily reflecting lower direct mining costs as a result of improved cost controls at Lumwana and lower fuel and acid costs at
Zaldívar, combined with lower royalty expense at Lumwana. These were partly offset by lower sales volumes.  Capital Expenditures1($ millions)

For the years ended December 312016


2015


2014Minesite sustaining2


$ 944



$ 1,359



$ 1,638Project capital  expenditures3,4


175



133



596Capitalized interest


-



17



30Total consolidated
capital
expenditures


$ 1,119



$ 1,509



$ 2,264Attributable
consolidated
capital expenditures5


$ 1,122



$ 1,477



$ 2,204  1
These amounts are presented on a 100% accrued basis, except for attributable consolidated capital expenditures.  2
Includes both minesite sustaining and mine development.  3
Project capital expenditures are included in our calculation of all-in costs, but
not included in our calculation of all-in sustaining costs.  4
Includes both minesite expansion and projects.  5
These amounts are presented on the same basis as our guidance. For 2016, these amounts include our 60% share of Pueblo
Viejo and Arturo and our 50% share of Zaldívar and Jabal Sayid. For 2015, these amounts include our 60% share of Pueblo Viejo and Arturo and our 50% share of Jabal Sayid. In 2016, total consolidated capital expenditures decreased 26% compared to the prior year or 10% excluding the impact of divested sites. The decrease is
primarily due to a decrease in minesite sustaining capital expenditures combined with lower capitalized interest, partially offset by increased project capital expenditures. The 31% decrease in minesite sustaining capital expenditures is primarily
due to the impact of divested sites. Excluding this impact, minesite sustaining capital expenditures decreased 14% primarily due to lower capitalized stripping costs, primarily at Veladero, and our continued focus on capital discipline across the
Company and in particular at Veladero and at Lagunas Norte. Capitalized interest decreased by $17 million compared to the prior year as a result of the completion of the thiosulfate circuit at Goldstrike, which entered commercial production in
the third quarter of 2015. Project capital expenditures increased by $42 million as a result of $81 million in reversals of accruals for contract claims and other






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 44 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

project costs at Pascua-Lama in the prior year, partially offset by a $33 million decrease in project expenditures on the thiosulfate circuit at Goldstrike. Significant project capital
expenditures in 2016 were Arturo, progressing with feasibility studies at Cortez Lower Zone and Lagunas Norte Refractory Ore Project. General and Administrative
Expenses  ($ millions)

For the years ended December 312016


2015


2014Corporate administration1


$ 163



$ 176



$ 332Stock-based compensation2


38



15



9Acacia


55



42



44General & administrative expenses


$ 256



$ 233



$ 385  1
For the year ended December 31, 2016, corporate administration costs include approximately $9 million of
severance costs (2015: $29 million). Starting in 2015, operating segment administration costs have been allocated to our operating sites and are now included in cost of sales. In 2014, this amount was $120 million.  2
Based on US$15.98 share price as at December 31, 2016 (2015: US$7.38; 2014: US$10.75) and excludes Acacia. General and administrative expenses were $23 million higher than the prior year, primarily related to higher stock-based
compensation expense combined with higher expenses at Acacia (also primarily relating to their stock-based compensation), partially offset by a reduction in overhead costs and severance costs as a result of actions taken to restructure our business
in the prior year. Higher stock-based compensation expense resulted from the 117% year-to-date increase in Barricks NYSE share price and the 108% year-to-date increase in Acacias LSE share price as at December 31, 2016. We exceeded our targeted reduction of $90 million in annualized minesite and corporate overhead costs (excluding severance, stock-based compensation
and Acacia corporate administration), which is recorded within general and administrative expense and cost of sales.


Exploration, Evaluation and Project Costs  ($ millions)

For the years ended December 312016


2015


2014Minesite exploration and
evaluation


$ 44



$ 47



$ 38Global exploration and
evaluation


88



116



146Advanced project
costs:Pascua-Lama


59



119



113Cerro Casale


6



8



14Jabal Sayid


-



-



30Other


11



4



16Corporate
development


14



42



35Business improvement


15



19



-Global exploration and evaluation and project expense


$ 193



$ 308



$ 354Total exploration, evaluation and project expenses


$ 237



$ 355



$ 392 Exploration, evaluation and project costs for 2016 decreased $118 million compared to the prior year. The decrease
is primarily due to a reduction in project costs at Pascua-Lama ($60 million) combined with a decrease in corporate development costs ($28 million). In addition, the decrease in global exploration costs primarily related to Goldrush as the project
has progressed to the study phase, and is now being capitalized. Finance Costs, Net  ($ millions)

For the years ended December 312016


2015


2014Interest expense1


$ 591



$ 737



$ 733Accretion


50



63



75Loss (gain) on debt
extinguishment


129



(68)



-Other finance
costs


18



7



(12)Finance income


(13)



(13)



(11)Finance costs, net


$ 775



$ 726



$ 785  1
For the year ended December 31, 2016, interest expense includes approximately $100 million of non-cash interest expense relating to the gold and silver streaming agreements with Silver Wheaton Corp. and Royal Gold, Inc. (2015: $61 million). In 2016, net finance costs were $49 million higher than the prior year primarily due to the recognition of $129 million of extinguishment costs
arising from the debt repurchases made through the year compared to the recognition of a $68 million net gain in the prior year. This was combined with an increase of $39 million of non-cash interest
expense on our gold and silver streaming agreements. These increases more than offset a $185 million reduction in interest expense as a result of debt reductions made over the






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 45 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

past two years. These debt reductions will reduce interest payments by approximately $235 million on an annualized basis. Additional Significant Statement of Income Items  ($ millions)

For the years ended December 312016


2015


2014Impairment charges
(reversals)


($ 250)



$ 3,897



$ 4,106Loss (income) on currency
translation


$199



$120



$ 132Other expense/(income)


$60



($ 113)



($ 14)Impairment Charges (Reversals)($ millions)

For the years ended December 312016


2015


2014Post-tax
(our share)


Post-tax
(our share)


Post-tax
(our share)Asset impairments
(reversals)Veladero


$ (179)



$     -



$     -Equity method investments


49



-



-Lagunas Norte


(20)



26



-Pascua-Lama


1



399



382Pueblo Viejo


-



386



-Buzwagi


-



30



-Round
Mountain/Bald Mountain


-



53



-Lumwana


-



-



720Cerro
Casale


-



-



778Jabal
Sayid


-



-



198Porgera


-



-



(160)Cortez


-



-



29Kalgoorlie


-



-



9Exploration sites


-



-



7AFS
investments


-



-



18Other


3



53



4Total asset impairment charges (reversals)


$ (146)



$ 947



$ 1,985GoodwillGoldstrike


$     -



$  730



$     -Zaldívar


-



427



712Pueblo Viejo


-



412



-Cortez


-



355



-Lagunas Norte


-



247



-Jabal
Sayid


-



-



316Lumwana


-



-



214Bald
Mountain


-



-



131Round Mountain


-



-



36Total goodwill impairment charges


$     -



$ 2,171



$ 1,409Tax effects and NCI


(104)



779



712Total impairment charges (reversals) (100%)


$ (250)



$ 3,897



$ 4,106


In 2016, primarily as a result of improvements in the cost structure at Veladero and Lagunas Norte, we
recognized $146 million (net of tax and non-controlling interests) of net impairment reversals for non-current assets. This compares to goodwill and non-current asset impairment losses of $2.2 billion and $947 million (net of tax and non-controlling interests), respectively, in the prior year. Refer to note 21 to
the Financial Statements for a full description of impairment charges, including pre-tax amounts and sensitivity analysis. Loss (Income) on Currency Translation Loss on currency
translation for 2016 increased $79 million compared to the prior year. The increased loss is primarily due to the release of $91 million of currency translation losses as a result of the disposal and reorganization of certain Australian
entities during the first quarter of 2016. This was combined with increased unrealized foreign currency translation losses relating to the Zambian kwacha, partly offset by lower unrealized foreign currency translation losses relating to the
Argentinean peso, Australian dollar and Tanzanian shilling. Other Expense (Income) Other expense was $60 million in 2016 compared to income of $113 million in the prior year. The expense in the current year was primarily due to
a $39 million additional loss on disposition relating to Zaldívar as a result of the final purchase price adjustments recorded in the third quarter of 2016. The income in the prior year was primarily a result of the realization of gains
on the sale of our Cowal mine and 50% of our interest in the Porgera mine, which closed in the third quarter of 2015; and partly offset by $30 million in office closure costs primarily relating to the exiting of leases at our Toronto and Salt
Lake City offices. For a further breakdown of other expense (income), refer to note 9 to the Financial Statements. Income Tax Expense Income tax expense was $917 million in 2016. The underlying effective tax rate for ordinary income in 2016 was 44% after adjusting for the net impact
of currency translation losses on deferred tax balances; the impact of the increase in income tax related contingent liabilities in Tanzania; the impact of tax rate changes; the impact of impairment (reversals) charges; the impact of asset sales and
non-hedge derivatives; and the impact of non-deductible foreign exchange losses. The unadjusted tax rate for income






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 46 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

in 2016 was 52% of the income before income taxes. We record deferred tax charges or credits
if changes in facts or circumstances affect the estimated tax basis of assets and therefore the amount of deferred tax assets or liabilities to reflect changing expectations in our ability to realize deferred tax assets. The interpretation of tax
regulations and legislation and their application to our business is complex and subject to change. We have significant amounts of deferred tax assets, including tax loss carry forwards, and also deferred tax liabilities. Potential changes of any of
these amounts, as well as our ability to realize deferred tax assets, could significantly affect net income or cash flow in future periods.  Reconciliation to Canadian Statutory RateFor the years ended December 31


2016



2015At 26.5% statutory rate

$
471


$
(833)Increase (decrease) due to:Allowances and special tax
deductions1


(134)



(103)Impact of foreign tax rates2


113



(110)Expenses not tax deductible


54



55Goodwill impairment charges not tax deductible


-



736Impairment charges not recognized in deferred tax assets


-



246Net currency translation losses on deferred tax balances


23



62Tax impact of profits from equity accounted investments


(5)



-Current year tax losses not recognized in deferred tax assets


35



56Internal restructures


-



(116)De-recognition of a deferred tax asset


-



20Non-recognition of US AMT credits


13



19Adjustments in respect of prior years


(4)



44Increase to income tax related contingent liabilities


70



13Impact of tax rate changes


(13)



-Other withholding taxes


11



12Mining taxes


267



(125)Other items


16



(7)Income tax expense
(recovery)

$
917


$
(31)  1
We are able to claim certain allowances and tax deductions unique to extractive industries that result in a lower
effective tax rate. 2
We operate in multiple foreign tax jurisdictions that have tax rates different than the Canadian statutory rate. The more significant items impacting income tax expense in 2016 and 2015 include the following: Currency Translation Deferred tax balances are subject to
remeasurement for changes in currency exchange rates each period. The


most significant balances are Argentinean deferred tax liabilities. In 2016 and 2015, tax expense of $23 million and $62 million, respectively, primarily arose from translation losses
due to the weakening of the Argentinean peso against the US dollar. These losses are included within deferred tax expense/recovery. Non-Recognition of US Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) Credits In the fourth quarter of 2016 and 2015, we recorded
a deferred tax expense of $13 million and $19 million, respectively, related to US AMT credits which are not probable to be realized based on our current life of mine plans. Increase in Income Tax Related Contingent Liabilities in Tanzania In the first quarter of 2016, Acacia received a judgement from the Tanzania Court of Appeal regarding a long-standing dispute over tax calculations at
Bulyanhulu from 2000-2006. The Court of Appeal was reviewing seven issues initially raised by the Tanzania Revenue Authority (TRA) in 2012 regarding certain historic tax loss carry forwards and ruled in favor of Bulyanhulu by the Tax Appeals Board
in 2013. The TRA appealed against this ruling and in 2014 the Tax Tribunal reversed the decision for all seven issues. The legal route in Tanzania has now been exhausted; however Acacia is considering its options for the next steps. Acacia is yet to
receive a revised tax assessment following the judgement, but has raised further tax provisions of US$70 million in Q1 2016 in order to address the direct impact of the ruling on Bulyanhulus tax loss carry forwards and the potential
impact this may have on the applicability of certain capital deductions for other years and our other mines in Tanzania. Tax Rate Changes In the fourth quarter of 2016, a tax rate change was enacted in Peru, increasing corporate income tax rates. This resulted in a deferred tax recovery of
$13 million due to recording the deferred tax asset in Peru at the higher rates. Internal Restructures In the fourth quarter of 2015, a deferred tax recovery of $116 million arose from a loss that was realized on internal restructuring of subsidiary
corporations. This resulted in a net increase in deferred tax assets. De-recognition of a Deferred Tax Asset In the second quarter of 2015, we recorded a deferred tax expense of $20 million related to de-recognition of
a deferred tax asset in Pueblo Viejo.






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 47 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

|                                                      |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                         | 
|----------------------------------------------------- |  |  | ----------------------- |  |  |  | ----------------------- |  |  |  | ----------------------- | 
|FINANCIAL CONDITION REVIEW                            |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                         | 
|                                                      |  | 
|Summary Balance Sheet and Key Financial
Ratios        |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                         |  | 
|($ millions, except ratios and share amounts)         |  |  | As at December 31, 2016 |  |  |  | As at December 31, 2015 |  |  |  | As at December 31, 2014 | 
|Total cash and equivalents                            |  |  | $ 2,389                 |  |  |  | $ 2,455                 |  |  |  | $ 2,699                 | 
|Current assets                                        |  |  | 2,485                   |  |  |  | 3,013                   |  |  |  | 3,451                   | 
|Non-current
assets                                    |  |  | 20,390                  |  |  |  | 20,840                  |  |  |  | 27,729                  | 
|Total Assets                                          |  |  | $ 25,264                |  |  |  | $ 26,308                |  |  |  | $ 33,879                | 
|Current liabilities excluding short-term debt         |  |  | $ 1,676                 |  |  |  | $ 1,644                 |  |  |  | $ 2,154                 | 
|Non-current liabilities excluding long-term debt1     |  |  | 5,344                   |  |  |  | 5,241                   |  |  |  | 5,782                   | 
|Debt (current and long-term)                          |  |  | 7,931                   |  |  |  | 9,968                   |  |  |  | 13,081                  | 
|Total Liabilities                                     |  |  | $ 14,951                |  |  |  | $ 16,853                |  |  |  | $ 21,017                | 
|Total shareholders equity                            |  |  | 7,935                   |  |  |  | 7,178                   |  |  |  | 10,247                  | 
|Non-controlling
interests                             |  |  | 2,378                   |  |  |  | 2,277                   |  |  |  | 2,615                   | 
|Total Equity                                          |  |  | $ 10,313                |  |  |  | $ 9,455                 |  |  |  | $ 12,862                | 
|Total common shares outstanding (millions of shares)2 |  |  | 1,166                   |  |  |  | 1,165                   |  |  |  | 1,165                   | 
|                                                      |  |  |                        
|Key Financial Ratios:                                 |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                         | 
|Current ratio3                                        |  |  | 2.68:1                  |  |  |  | 2.77:1                  |  |  |  | 2.47:1                  | 
|Debt-to-equity4                                       |  |  | 0.77:1                  |  |  |  | 1.05:1                  |  |  |  | 1.02:1                  | 

| | 1 | Non-current financial liabilities as at December 31, 2016 were $8,002 million (2015: $10,068 million; 2014: $13,108 million).
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 2 | Total common shares outstanding do not include 2.1 million stock options.
| | - | -------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 3 | Represents current assets (excluding assets held-for-sale) divided by current liabilities (including short-term debt and excluding
liabilities held-for-sale) as at December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015.
| | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 4 | Represents debt divided by total shareholders equity (including minority interest) as at December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015.
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Balance Sheet Review Total assets were $25.3 billion at December 31, 2016, approximately $1.0 billion lower than at December 31, 2015, primarily reflecting
the sale of Bald Mountain and our 50% interest in Round Mountain, which were presented as held-for-sale and included in current assets at December 31, 2015 and of which the cash proceeds were used to reduce our debt balance. Our asset base is
primarily comprised of non-current assets such as property, plant and equipment and goodwill, reflecting the capital-intensive nature of the mining business and our history of growing through acquisitions.
Other significant assets include production inventories, indirect taxes recoverable and receivable, concentrate sales receivable and other government transaction and joint venture related receivables, and cash and equivalents. Total liabilities at
December 31, 2016 totaled $15.0 billion; approximately $1.9 billion lower than at December 31, 2015, reflecting $2.0 billion of debt repayments made during the year.


Shareholders EquityAs at February 7, 2017


Number of sharesCommon shares


1,165,574,071Stock options


2,074,210 Financial Position and Liquidity Total cash and cash equivalents as at December 31, 2016 was $2.4 billion3. Our capital structure
comprises a mix of debt and shareholders equity. As at December 31, 2016, our total debt was $7.9 billion (debt net of cash and equivalents was $5.5 billion) and our
debt-to-equity ratio was 0.77:1. This compares to debt as at December 31, 2015 of $10.0 billion (debt net of cash and equivalents was $7.5 billion), and a debt-to-equity ratio of 1.05:1. At the beginning of 2016, we set a debt
reduction target of $2 billion. We have exceeded this target by reducing debt by $2.04 billion in 2016. We currently have less than $200 million2 in debt due before 2019, and
approximately $5 billion of our outstanding debt matures after 2032. In 2017, we have capital commitments of $52 million and expect to
incur attributable sustaining and project capital expenditures of approximately $1,300 to $1,500 million in 2017 based on our guidance range on page 33. In 2017,






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 48 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

we have contractual obligations and commitments of $402 million in purchase obligations for supplies and consumables and $51 million in derivative liabilities which will form part of
operating costs. In addition, we have $434 million in interest payments and other amounts as detailed in the table on page 68. We expect to fund these commitments through operating cash flow, which is our primary source of liquidity, as well as
existing cash balances. Our operating cash flow is dependent on the ability of our operations to deliver projected future cash flows. The market
prices of gold, and to a lesser extent copper, are the primary drivers of our operating cash flow. Other options to enhance liquidity include further non-core asset sales or joint venture opportunities;
issuance of debt or equity securities in the public markets or to private investors, which could be undertaken for liquidity enhancement and/or in connection with establishing a strategic partnership; and drawing the $4.0 billion available
under our fully undrawn credit facility (subject to compliance with covenants and the making of certain representations and warranties, this facility is available for drawdown as a source of financing). Many factors, including but not limited to general market conditions and then prevailing metals prices, could impact our ability to issue securities on
acceptable terms, as could our credit ratings. Moodys and S&P currently rate our long-term debt as investment grade, with ratings of Baa3 and BBB-, respectively. In August 2016, Moodys affirmed
the Companys Baa3 rating and revised its outlook to stable from negative. Also in August 2016, S&P affirmed the Companys BBB- rating and raised its outlook to positive from stable. Further
changes in our ratings could affect the trading prices of our securities and our cost of capital. If we were to borrow under our credit facility, the applicable interest rate on the amounts borrowed would be based, in part, on our credit ratings at
the time. The key financial covenant in our fully undrawn credit facility requires Barrick to maintain a net debt to total capitalization ratio of less than 0.60:1. Barricks net debt to total capitalization ratio was 0.35:1 as at
December 31, 2016 (0.44:1 as at December 31, 2015).


Summary of Cash Inflow (Outflow)($ millions)

For the years ended December 312016

2015Net cash provided by operating activities

$ 2,640

$ 2,794Investing activitiesCapital expenditures1

$ (1,126)

$ (1,713)Divestitures

588

1,904Other

126

59Total investing inflows/(outflows)

$ (412)

$ 250Financing activitiesNet change in debt

$ (2,057)

$ (3,133)Dividends2

(86)

(160)Other

(154)

18Total financing inflows/(outflows)

$ (2,297)

$ (3,275)Effect of exchange rate

3

(13)Increase/(decrease) in cash and
equivalents

$ (66)

$ (244)  1
The amounts include capitalized interest of $nil for the year ended December 31, 2016 (2015: $17 million). 2
In 2016, we declared and paid dividends in US dollars totaling $0.08 per share (2015: $0.14 per share; 2014: $0.20 per share). In 2016, we generated $2,640 million in operating cash flow, compared to $2,794 million of operating cash flow in the prior year. 2015
operating cash flow included a $610 million deposit relating to the gold and silver streaming arrangement with Royal Gold. Excluding this transaction, operating cash flow for 2016 was $456 million higher than the prior year despite the
reduction in operating cash flow associated with the divestment of some non-core assets. We benefited from higher market gold prices and lower operating costs, as a result of lower energy and fuel costs
(despite being hedged on a significant portion of our fuel consumption) combined with the continued realization of lower labor and consumable costs and improved operating efficiencies resulting from our Best-in-Class initiatives and also lower cash interest paid. These were largely offset by lower gold and copper volumes sold, primarily as a result of the aforementioned divestitures, combined with the impact
of unfavorable working capital movements, mainly as a result of higher inventory balances and income taxes paid compared to the prior year. The ability of our operations to deliver projected future cash flows within the parameters of a reduced
production profile, as well as future changes in gold and copper market prices, either favorable or unfavorable, will continue to have a material impact on our cash flow and liquidity. Cash outflows from investing activities in 2016 amounted to $412 million compared to $250 million of cash inflows






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 49 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

in the prior year. The decrease of $662 million compared to 2015 is primarily due to $1,316 million of additional proceeds from the divestitures in the prior year. In 2016, we received
proceeds from the sale of Bald Mountain and our 50% interest in Round Mountain. In 2015, we received proceeds from the divestitures of Cowal, Spring Valley, Ruby Hill and partial divestitures of Zaldívar and Porgera. This was partially offset
by a decrease in capital expenditures as 2016 capital expenditures on a cash basis were $1,126 million compared to $1,713 million in 2015. The decrease of $587 million is primarily due to the impact of divested sites combined with
lower capitalized stripping costs at Veladero and a decrease in leach pad expansion costs at Veladero and Lagunas Norte. This was combined with a decrease in project costs mainly relating to the completion of the thiosulfate circuit at Goldstrike in
the prior year and decreased spending at Pascua-Lama. Net financing cash outflows for 2016 amounted to $2,297 million, compared to
$3,275 million of cash outflows in the prior year. The net financing cash outflows in 2016 and 2015 primarily consist of net debt repayments of $2,057 million and $3,133 million, respectively, as we achieved our debt reduction goals.
This was combined with debt extinguishment costs of $129 million (2015: $68 million gains) and $86 million (2015: $160 million) of dividend payments.








|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 50 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

|                                                 |  |                           |                                   |  |  |         |                   |  |              |  |  |                          
|------------------------------------------------ |  | ------------------------- | --------------------------------- |  |  | ------- | ----------------- |  | ------------ |  |  | -------------------------
|Summary of Financial Instruments                 |  |                           |                                   |  |  |         |                   |  |              |  |  |                          
|As at December 31, 2016                          |  |                           |                                   |  |  |         |                   |  |              |  |  |                          
|Financial Instrument                             |  | Principal/Notional Amount |                                   |  |  |         | Associated Risks1
|                                                 |  |                           |                                   |  |  |         |                   |  |              |  |  | ●       Interest rate    
|Cash and equivalents                             |  |                           |                                   |  |  | $ 2,389 |                   |  | million      |  |  | ●       Credit           
|                                                 |  |                           |                                   |  |  |         |                   |  |              |  |  | ●       Credit           
|Accounts receivable                              |  |                           |                                   |  |  | $249    |                   |  | million      |  |  | ●       Market           
|                                                 |  |                           |                                   |  |  |         |                   |  |              |  |  | ●       Market           
|Other investments                                |  |                           |                                   |  |  | $18     |                   |  | million      |  |  | ●       Liquidity        
|Accounts payable                                 |  |                           |                                   |  |  | $ 1,084 |                   |  | million      |  |  | ●       Liquidity        
|Debt                                             |  |                           |                                   |  |  | $ 7,989 |                   |  | million      |  |  | ●       Interest rate    
|Restricted share units                           |  |                           |                                   |  |  | $ 62    |                   |  | million      |  |  | ●       Market           
|Deferred share units                             |  |                           |                                   |  |  | $ 9     |                   |  | million      |  |  | ●       Market           
|Derivative instruments - currency contracts      |  |                           | AUD                               |  |  | 23      |                   |  | million      |  |  | ●       Market/liquidity 
|                                                 |  |                           | PGK                               |  |  | 21      |                   |  | million      |  |  |                          
|Derivative instruments - gold contracts          |  |                           |                                   |  |  | 43      |                   |  | million oz   |  |  | ●       Market/liquidity 
|Derivative instruments - copper
contracts        |  |                           |                                   |  |  | 78      |                   |  | million lbs  |  |  | ●       Credit           
|                                                 |  |                           |                                   |  |  |         |                   |  |              |  |  | ●       Interest rate    
|Derivative instruments - energy contracts        |  |                           | Diesel                            |  |  | 3       |                   |  | million bbls |  |  | ●       Market/liquidity 
|                                                 |  |                           |                                   |  |  |         |                   |  |              |  |  | ●       Credit           
|                                                 |  |                           |                                   |  |  |         |                   |  |              |  |  | ●       Interest rate    
|Derivative instruments - interest rate contracts |  |                           | Receive float interest rate swaps |  |  | $ 99    |                   |  | million      |  |  | ●       
Market/liquidity



|1 | Refer to note 28 to the Financial Statements for more information regarding risks associated with financial instruments.
|- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------







OPERATING SEGMENTS PERFORMANCE

Review of Operating Segments Performance



Barricks business is organized into thirteen individual mine sites, one publicly traded company and
one project. Barricks Chief Operating Decision Maker (CODM), the President, reviews the operating results, assesses performance and makes capital allocation decisions at the minesite, Company and/or project level. Therefore, each
individual minesite, Acacia and the Pascua-Lama project are operating segments for financial reporting purposes. Following the divestitures that were completed in 2015 and early 2016, we re-evaluated our
reportable operating segments and no longer report on our interests in the following non-core properties: Porgera, Kalgoorlie, Zaldívar and Lumwana. Our updated presentation of our reportable operating
segments will now be limited to six individual gold mines, Acacia and our Pascua-Lama project. The remaining operating segments, including the non-core properties referred to


above and our remaining gold and copper mines, have been grouped into an other category and will not be reported on individually. The prior periods have been restated to reflect the
change in presentation. Segment performance is evaluated based on a number of measures including operating income before tax, production levels and unit production costs. Certain costs are managed on a consolidated basis and are therefore not
reflected in segment income.






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 51 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

Cortez, Nevada USA



|                                        |  |  |         |  |  |  |                                 |  |  |  |          |  |  |  |         | 
|--------------------------------------- |  |  | ------- |  |  |  | ------------------------------- |  |  |  | -------- |  |  |  | ------- | 
|Summary of Operating and Financial Data |  |  |         |  |  |  | For the years ended December 31 | 
|                                        |  |  | 2016    |  |  |  | 2015                            |  |  |  | % Change |  |  |  | 2014    | 
|Total tonnes mined (000s)               |  |  | 124,919 |  |  |  | 151,357                         |  |  |  | (17%)    |  |  |  | 152,146 | 
|Ore tonnes processed (000s)             |  |  | 25,112  |  |  |  | 22,406                          |  |  |  | 12%      |  |  |  | 25,957  | 
|Average grade (grams/tonne)             |  |  | 1.73    |  |  |  | 1.73                            |  |  |  | -        |  |  |  | 1.34    | 
|Gold produced (000s/oz)                 |  |  | 1,059   |  |  |  | 999                             |  |  |  | 6%       |  |  |  | 902     | 
|Gold sold (000s/oz)                     |  |  | 1,059   |  |  |  | 982                             |  |  |  | 8%       |  |  |  | 865     | 
|Segment revenue ($ millions)            |  |  | $ 1,314 |  |  |  | $ 1,129                         |  |  |  | 16%      |  |  |  | $ 1,093 | 
|Cost of sales ($ millions)              |  |  | 955     |  |  |  | 826                             |  |  |  | 16%      |  |  |  | 687     | 
|Segment income ($ millions)             |  |  | 340     |  |  |  | 287                             |  |  |  | 18%      |  |  |  | 393     | 
|Segment EBITDA ($ millions)1            |  |  | 839     |  |  |  | 630                             |  |  |  | 33%      |  |  |  | 648     | 
|Capital expenditures ($ millions)2      |  |  | 142     |  |  |  | 148                             |  |  |  | (4%)     |  |  |  | 189     | 
|Minesite sustaining                     |  |  | 75      |  |  |  | 101                             |  |  |  | (26%)    |  |  |  | 170     | 
|Project                                 |  |  | 67      |  |  |  | 47                              |  |  |  | 43%      |  |  |  | 19      | 
|Cost of sales (per oz)                  |  |  | 901     |  |  |  | 841                             |  |  |  | 7%       |  |  |  | 794     | 
|Cash costs (per oz)1                    |  |  | 430     |  |  |  | 486                             |  |  |  | (12%)    |  |  |  | 498     | 
|All-in sustaining costs (per oz)1       |  |  | 518     |  |  |  | 603                             |  |  |  | (14%)    |  |  |  | 706     | 
|All-in costs (per oz)1                  |  |  | $ 581   |  |  |  | $ 650                           |  |  |  | (11%)    |  |  |  | $ 728   | 



|1 | These are non-GAAP financial performance measures with no standardized meaning under IFRS and therefore may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other issuers. For
further information and a detailed reconciliation of each non-GAAP measure used in this section of the MD&A to the most directly comparable IFRS measure, please see pages 71 to 85 of this MD&A.
|- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|2 | Amounts presented exclude capitalized interest.
|- | -----------------------------------------------

Financial Results

Cortezs segment income for 2016 was 18% higher than the prior year primarily due to a higher gold
sales volume combined with a higher gold price, partly offset by higher depreciation due to an increase in ounces mined at the Cortez Hills pit, which have a higher depreciation charge per ounce than other areas at Cortez.  LOGO In 2016, gold production was 6% higher than the prior year primarily due to higher grades mined in the Cortez Hills
open pit (CHOP) for both mill feed and leach placement. While less total open pit tonnes were mined in the current year, ore tonnes were higher due to a focus on mining higher grade ore from CHOP compared to more waste mining in the
prior year. This was combined with Best-in-Class underground initiatives increasing mining time per shift and process improvements resulting in increased tonnes mined
and throughput, respectively, and partly offset by lower


grades than the prior year in the underground as mining is advancing from the high grade Breccia zone to the lower grade Middle zone.  LOGO Cost of sales per ounce4 for 2016 was $60 per ounce higher than
the prior year primarily due to the impact of higher depreciation from an increase in ounces mined at the CHOP combined with lower waste stripping activity associated with lower stripping at the Cortez Hills open pit in 2016 compared to 2015. The
increases in cost of sales were partially offset by lower open pit consumable costs, including lower fuel prices in 2016, and lower inventory write-downs compared to the prior year. Further offsetting higher depreciation in 2016, royalty payments
were lower compared to the prior year, as more ore was produced from the Cortez Hills open pit, which has lower associated royalties. For 2016, cost of sales per ounce4 was also positively
impacted by higher






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 52 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

sales volume. All-in sustaining costs1 decreased by $85 per ounce from the prior year primarily due to
the impact of higher sales volume combined with lower sustaining capital spend and lower inventory write-downs.  LOGO In 2016, capital expenditures decreased by 4% from the prior year as lower minesite sustaining capital expenditures
were almost offset by higher project expenditures. Lower sustaining capital is attributed to the completion of leach and tailings expansions in 2015, as well as continued efforts to reduce costs and optimize capital allocation in 2016. This was
combined with higher capitalized stripping at the Cortez Hills pit in the prior year compared to the current year. Project capital expenditures in 2016 are higher as a result of increased expenditures for the underground development at Cortez


Hills Lower Zone and stripping at Crossroads during the fourth quarter of 2016. Outlook At Cortez we expect 2017 gold production to be in the range of 1,250 to 1,290 thousand ounces, an increase from 2016 production levels. This is due
to a significant increase in open pit production, primarily from higher grade oxide ore and increased throughput at the mill processed on site and larger volumes of refractory ore, at grades similar to 2016, being processed at Goldstrike. This is
somewhat offset by an expected decline in underground ore grade as the mine transitions to lower grade ore zones deeper in the deposit. In 2017, we
expect cost of sales per ounce4 to be in the range of $730 to $760 per ounce, which is a material decrease from 2016 due to increased sales volume. Cost of sales show only a slight increase from
2016 to 2017. We expect cash costs1 to be in the range of $360 to $380 per ounce, a decrease from 2016. Operating costs are in line with 2016, while productivity improvements generated by
digitization and Best-in-Class initiatives are expected to start contributing to additional mining and processing volumes. All-in
sustaining costs1 are expected to be in the range of $430 to $470 per ounce, again a decrease from 2016, primarily due to higher sold ounces mentioned above.






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 53 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

Goldstrike, Nevada USA



|                                        |  |  |         |  |  |  |                                 |  |  |  |          |  |  |  |         | 
|--------------------------------------- |  |  | ------- |  |  |  | ------------------------------- |  |  |  | -------- |  |  |  | ------- | 
|Summary of Operating and Financial Data |  |  |         |  |  |  | For the years ended December 31 | 
|                                        |  |  | 2016    |  |  |  | 2015                            |  |  |  | % Change |  |  |  | 2014    | 
|Total tonnes mined (000s)1              |  |  | 67,834  |  |  |  | 72,304                          |  |  |  | (6%)     |  |  |  | 81,410  | 
|Ore tonnes processed (000s)             |  |  | 7,361   |  |  |  | 6,752                           |  |  |  | 9%       |  |  |  | 5,307   | 
|Average grade (grams/tonne)             |  |  | 5.65    |  |  |  | 6.01                            |  |  |  | (6%)     |  |  |  | 6.28    | 
|Gold produced (000s/oz)                 |  |  | 1,096   |  |  |  | 1,053                           |  |  |  | 4%       |  |  |  | 902     | 
|Gold sold (000s/oz)                     |  |  | 1,103   |  |  |  | 999                             |  |  |  | 10%      |  |  |  | 908     | 
|Segment revenue ($ millions)            |  |  | $ 1,389 |  |  |  | $ 1,143                         |  |  |  | 22%      |  |  |  | $ 1,154 | 
|Cost of sales ($ millions)              |  |  | 940     |  |  |  | 722                             |  |  |  | 30%      |  |  |  | 651     | 
|Segment income ($ millions)             |  |  | 442     |  |  |  | 408                             |  |  |  | 8%       |  |  |  | 496     | 
|Segment EBITDA ($ millions)2            |  |  | 749     |  |  |  | 600                             |  |  |  | 25%      |  |  |  | 628     | 
|Capital expenditures ($ millions)3      |  |  | 186     |  |  |  | 191                             |  |  |  | (3%)     |  |  |  | 540     | 
|Minesite sustaining                     |  |  | 142     |  |  |  | 110                             |  |  |  | 29%      |  |  |  | 245     | 
|Project                                 |  |  | 44      |  |  |  | 81                              |  |  |  | (46%)    |  |  |  | 295     | 
|Cost of sales (per oz)                  |  |  | 852     |  |  |  | 723                             |  |  |  | 18%      |  |  |  | 718     | 
|Cash costs (per oz)2                    |  |  | 572     |  |  |  | 522                             |  |  |  | 10%      |  |  |  | 571     | 
|All-in sustaining costs (per oz)2       |  |  | 714     |  |  |  | 658                             |  |  |  | 9%       |  |  |  | 854     | 
|All-in costs (per oz)2                  |  |  | $ 754   |  |  |  | $ 738                           |  |  |  | 2%       |  |  |  | $ 1,179 | 



|1 | Includes tonnes mined relating to Arturo.
|- | -----------------------------------------

|2 | These are non-GAAP financial performance measures with no standardized meaning under IFRS and therefore may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other issuers. For
further information and a detailed reconciliation of each non-GAAP measure used in this section of the MD&A to the most directly comparable IFRS measure, please see pages 71 to 85 of this MD&A.
|- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|3 | Includes our share of capital expenditures related to Arturo.
|- | -------------------------------------------------------------

Financial Results

Segment income for 2016 was 8% higher than the prior year primarily due to an increase in sales volume and
higher gold prices, partially offset by increased processing and depreciation expense associated with full year operation of the autoclave combined with higher depreciation from the Arturo pit, which entered commercial production August 1, 2016
and has a high depreciation charge per ounce due to the short mine life.  LOGO In 2016, gold production was 4% higher than the prior year primarily as a result of higher autoclave production,
slightly offset by processing ore from the 60% owned Arturo pit in the second half of 2016, compared to full ownership production in the prior year. The increase in production at similar grades and recoveries was further helped by an increase in
roaster throughput due to blend


optimization and Arturos ore chemistry, as well as further improvements at the autoclave facility.  LOGO Cost of sales per ounce4 in 2016 was $129 per ounce higher than
the prior year primarily due to higher operating costs and depreciation expense from the operation of the autoclave combined with higher depreciation from the Arturo pit, which has a high depreciation charge per ounce. The autoclave thiosulfate
circuit was commissioned in the third quarter of 2015 and operates at a higher cost than the roaster. The higher operating costs are also due in part to increases in stock-based compensation as a result of movements in Barricks share price and
consulting costs related to our Best-in-Class program. These increases are partially offset by favorable fuel prices, energy prices, and
Best-in-Class initiatives aimed at better utilizing open pit






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 54 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

equipment, improving underground mining efficiency, and lowering contractor costs, which are reflected in lower direct mining costs. In 2016, this was partially offset by the impact of an
increase in sales volume. All-in sustaining costs1 increased by $56 per ounce compared to the prior year primarily due to higher operating costs combined
with higher sustaining capital, partly offset by an increase in sales volume.  LOGO In 2016, capital expenditures decreased by 3%, compared to the prior year which was mainly due to lower project
expenditures associated with the autoclave thiosulfate circuit, which entered commercial production in the third quarter of 2015. This was partly offset by higher minesite sustaining capital expenditures in 2016 due to major projects such as the
roaster CIL tank expansion, dewatering well projects and stage 3 of the tailings storage facility compared to process equipment replacements and phase 2 construction of the tailings storage facility which were completed in the prior year.


Lower sustaining capital in the current year is also attributed to efforts to reduce costs and optimize capital allocation. Outlook At Goldstrike we expect 2017 production to be in the
range of 910 to 950 thousand ounces, which is lower than 2016 production levels. Lower ounce production is expected from both the underground and open pit operations. At the underground, emphasis in 2017 will be on development deeper in the
mine and ore mined will also be impacted by a slightly higher percentage of cut and fill tonnage. Contribution from open pit production is expected to be lower as we transition from ore mining at the Arturo pit to stripping the 3rd and 4th NW
laybacks in the Betze Post pit. For 2017, we expect cost of sales per ounce4 to be in the range
of $950 to $990 per ounce for 2017, higher than 2016 due to sold ounces decreasing over 2016 primarily, offset slightly by lower operating spend driven by Best-in-Class
initiatives. We expect cash costs1 to be in the range of $650 to $680 per ounce, higher than 2016 due to lower ounce production, primarily offset by slightly lower operating spend driven by
operational excellence. All-in sustaining costs1 are expected to be $910 to $980 per ounce, an increase from 2016 due to lower ounce production and higher
sustaining capital expenditures for tailings expansions, process improvements, and underground sustaining projects to enable mining deeper in the mine.






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 55 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

Pueblo Viejo (60% basis)1, Dominican Republic



|                                        |  |  |        |  |  |  |                                 |  |  |  |          |  |  |  |        | 
|--------------------------------------- |  |  | ------ |  |  |  | ------------------------------- |  |  |  | -------- |  |  |  | ------ | 
|Summary of Operating and Financial Data |  |  |        |  |  |  | For the years ended December 31 | 
|                                        |  |  | 2016   |  |  |  | 2015                            |  |  |  | % Change |  |  |  | 2014   | 
|Total tonnes mined (000s)               |  |  | 23,278 |  |  |  | 22,736                          |  |  |  | 2%       |  |  |  | 21,055 | 
|Ore tonnes processed (000s)             |  |  | 4,527  |  |  |  | 4,150                           |  |  |  | 9%       |  |  |  | 4,027  | 
|Average grade (grams/tonne)             |  |  | 5.29   |  |  |  | 4.94                            |  |  |  | 7%       |  |  |  | 5.53   | 
|Gold produced (000s/oz)                 |  |  | 700    |  |  |  | 572                             |  |  |  | 22%      |  |  |  | 665    | 
|Gold sold (000s/oz)                     |  |  | 700    |  |  |  | 597                             |  |  |  | 17%      |  |  |  | 667    | 
|Segment revenue ($ millions)            |  |  | $ 925  |  |  |  | $ 757                           |  |  |  | 22%      |  |  |  | $ 940  | 
|Cost of sales ($ millions)              |  |  | 395    |  |  |  | 525                             |  |  |  | (25%)    |  |  |  | 524    | 
|Segment income ($ millions)             |  |  | 528    |  |  |  | 230                             |  |  |  | 130%     |  |  |  | 417    | 
|Segment EBITDA ($ millions)2            |  |  | 621    |  |  |  | 390                             |  |  |  | 59%      |  |  |  | 555    | 
|Capital expenditures ($ millions)       |  |  | 61     |  |  |  | 61                              |  |  |  | -        |  |  |  | 80     | 
|Minesite sustaining                     |  |  | 61     |  |  |  | 61                              |  |  |  | -        |  |  |  | 80     | 
|Project                                 |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -                               |  |  |  | -        |  |  |  | -      | 
|Cost of sales (per oz)                  |  |  | 564    |  |  |  | 881                             |  |  |  | (36%)    |  |  |  | 786    | 
|Cash costs (per oz)2                    |  |  | 395    |  |  |  | 467                             |  |  |  | (15%)    |  |  |  | 446    | 
|All-in sustaining costs (per oz)2       |  |  | 490    |  |  |  | 597                             |  |  |  | (18%)    |  |  |  | 588    | 
|All-in costs (per oz)2                  |  |  | $ 490  |  |  |  | $ 597                           |  |  |  | (18%)    |  |  |  | $ 588  | 



|1 | Pueblo Viejo is accounted for as a subsidiary with a 40% non-controlling interest. The results in the table and the discussion that follows are based on our 60% share only.
|- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2 | These are non-GAAP financial performance measures with no standardized meaning under IFRS and therefore may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other issuers. For
further information and a detailed reconciliation of each non-GAAP measure used in this section of the MD&A to the most directly comparable IFRS measure, please see pages 71 to 85 of this MD&A.
|- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Financial Results

Pueblo Viejos segment income for 2016 was 130% higher than the prior year primarily due to an
increase in sales volumes combined with higher gold prices and lower cost of sales.  LOGO In 2016, gold production was 22% higher than the prior year primarily due to higher ore grades and recoveries compared
to the prior year due to a lower amount of carbonaceous ore processed in 2016. This was combined with lower throughput in 2015, as a result of the mechanical failure at the oxygen plant in the fourth quarter of 2015.


LOGO  LOGO Cost of sales per ounce4 in 2016 was $317 per ounce lower than the
prior year primarily due to lower depreciation as a result of the impairment recorded in the fourth quarter of 2015 and an increase in the life of mine, combined with insurance proceeds recorded in the third quarter of 2016 relating to the 2015
oxygen plant motor failure. Cost of sales per ounce4 was further impacted by lower maintenance costs due to the timing of maintenance activities and lower costs attributed to shutdowns as a result
of Best-in-Class initiatives






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 56 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

combined with lower energy and fuel prices and the impact of higher sales volume on unit production costs. In 2016, all-in sustaining costs1 decreased by $107 per ounce compared to the prior year due to lower direct mining costs combined with the impact of higher sales volume on unit production costs.
All-in sustaining costs1 did not benefit from the aforementioned insurance proceeds as they were excluded from our calculation. In 2016, capital expenditures were in line with the prior year as an increase in capitalized stripping costs was offset by the deferral and cancellation
of non-critical sustaining capital expenditures. Outlook At Pueblo Viejo, we expect our equity share of 2017 gold production to be in the range of 625 to 650 thousand ounces, below 2016 production levels,
driven by reduced gold head grade offset by increased gold recovery related to improved availability and utilization achieved through the optimization of maintenance strategies and ore blending. In 2017, we expect cost of sales per ounce4 to be in the range of $650 to $680 per ounce, cash costs1 to be $400 to $420 per ounce and all-in-sustaining costs1 to be
$530 to $560 per ounce. All three indicators will be higher than 2016 primarily due to a reduction in total ounces sold affected by head grades, cost increases related to corporate allocations, higher maintenance costs, and higher sustaining costs
owing to the deferral of projects from 2016 into 2017 which also affects depreciation. By-product credits are expected to be higher than 2016, impacted both by prices and recoveries for silver and copper,
while power sales will benefit from the proceeds from frequency and capacity fees that Quisqueya I Power Plant will start to receive in 2017.








|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 57 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

Lagunas Norte, Peru



|                                        |  |  |        |  |  |  |                                 |  |  |  |          |  |  |  |        | 
|--------------------------------------- |  |  | ------ |  |  |  | ------------------------------- |  |  |  | -------- |  |  |  | ------ | 
|Summary of Operating and Financial Data |  |  |        |  |  |  | For the years ended December 31 | 
|                                        |  |  | 2016   |  |  |  | 2015                            |  |  |  | % Change |  |  |  | 2014   | 
|Total tonnes mined (000s)               |  |  | 40,847 |  |  |  | 49,126                          |  |  |  | (17%)    |  |  |  | 50,030 | 
|Ore tonnes processed (000s)             |  |  | 17,253 |  |  |  | 21,880                          |  |  |  | (21%)    |  |  |  | 22,110 | 
|Average grade (grams/tonne)             |  |  | 1.12   |  |  |  | 1.02                            |  |  |  | 10%      |  |  |  | 0.99   | 
|Gold produced (000s/oz)                 |  |  | 435    |  |  |  | 560                             |  |  |  | (22%)    |  |  |  | 582    | 
|Gold sold (000s/oz)                     |  |  | 425    |  |  |  | 565                             |  |  |  | (25%)    |  |  |  | 604    | 
|Segment revenue ($ millions)            |  |  | $ 548  |  |  |  | $ 673                           |  |  |  | (19%)    |  |  |  | $ 775  | 
|Cost of sales ($ millions)              |  |  | 276    |  |  |  | 378                             |  |  |  | (27%)    |  |  |  | 335    | 
|Segment income ($ millions)             |  |  | 260    |  |  |  | 285                             |  |  |  | (9%)     |  |  |  | 439    | 
|Segment EBITDA ($ millions)1            |  |  | 356    |  |  |  | 454                             |  |  |  | (22%)    |  |  |  | 531    | 
|Capital expenditures ($ millions)       |  |  | 56     |  |  |  | 67                              |  |  |  | (16%)    |  |  |  | 81     | 
|Minesite sustaining                     |  |  | 51     |  |  |  | 67                              |  |  |  | (24%)    |  |  |  | 81     | 
|Project                                 |  |  | 5      |  |  |  | -                               |  |  |  | 100%     |  |  |  | -      | 
|Cost of sales (per oz)                  |  |  | 651    |  |  |  | 669                             |  |  |  | (3%)     |  |  |  | 555    | 
|Cash costs (per oz)1                    |  |  | 383    |  |  |  | 329                             |  |  |  | 16%      |  |  |  | 379    | 
|All-in sustaining costs (per oz)1       |  |  | 529    |  |  |  | 509                             |  |  |  | 4%       |  |  |  | 543    | 
|All-in costs (per oz)1                  |  |  | $ 540  |  |  |  | $ 509                           |  |  |  | 6%       |  |  |  | $ 543  | 



|1 | These are non-GAAP financial performance measures with no standardized meaning under IFRS and therefore may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other issuers. For
further information and a detailed reconciliation of each non-GAAP measure used in this section of the MD&A to the most directly comparable IFRS measure, please see pages 71 to 85 of this MD&A.
|- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Financial Results

Lagunas Nortes segment income for 2016 was 9% lower than the prior year primarily due to lower sales
volumes, partially offset by lower depreciation expense, higher gold prices and lower operating costs mostly driven by lower tonnage mined due to ore depletion of the oxide deposit and lower fuel prices.  LOGO In 2016, gold production was 22% lower than the prior year primarily due to fewer ounces placed on the leach pad as a
result of lower equipment availability, combined with processing harder material and a higher percentage of older stock material, in line with expectations as the mine matures. The decrease in gold production was partially offset by higher ore
grades.


LOGO  LOGO Cost of sales per ounce4 for 2016 was $18 per ounce lower than the
prior year mainly due to a decrease in depreciation expense and lower direct mining costs resulting from lower tonnage mined and processed, lower fuel prices and lower royalties derived from lower sales. These were combined with realized cost
savings from the Best-in-Class program such as the initiatives to improve






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 58 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

efficiencies in the carbon in column circuit, implementation of short interval control, improvements in planned maintenance and renegotiation of certain service contracts. In 2016, all-in sustaining costs1 increased by $20 per ounce compared to the prior year primarily due to lower sales volume, partially offset by the lower direct mining
costs and royalty costs combined with a decrease in minesite sustaining capital expenditures. In 2016, capital expenditures decreased by 16%
compared to the prior year due to lower minesite sustaining capital relating to the end of construction of phase 6 of the leach pad in 2015 partially offset by higher capitalized stripping in 2016. Project expenditures in 2016 relate to the
Refractory Ore Project. Outlook At Lagunas Norte we
expect 2017 production to be in the range of 380 to 420 thousand ounces, lower than 2016 production levels, as a result of the progressive


depletion of oxide ores, which are being replaced with sulfide ores with lower kinetics and recoveries. We expect cost of sales per ounce4 to be in the range of $710 to $780 per ounce. This increase, in
comparison with 2016, is mainly driven by higher cost of sales attributed to an expected increase in depreciation expense, higher direct operating costs and CSR expenses, partially offset by Best-in-Class initiatives. We expect cash costs1 to be in the range of $430 to $470 per ounce and all-in sustaining
costs1 to be in the range of $560 to $620 per ounce. The increase in all-in sustaining costs1 in
comparison with 2016 is driven mainly by the decrease in production; sustaining capital expenditures are decreasing in 2017. Operational cost increases are expected to be partially offset by Best-in-Class operational initiatives including service and material contract renegotiation, increased component life, improvements in preventative maintenance, and energy optimization programs. Structural
cost reduction in mine stripping and employee profit sharing are expected to occur due to the reduced mine production plan.






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 59 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

Veladero, Argentina



|                                        |  |  |        |  |  |  |                                 |  |  |  |          |  |  |  |        | 
|--------------------------------------- |  |  | ------ |  |  |  | ------------------------------- |  |  |  | -------- |  |  |  | ------ | 
|Summary of Operating and Financial Data |  |  |        |  |  |  | For the years ended December 31 | 
|                                        |  |  | 2016   |  |  |  | 2015                            |  |  |  | % Change |  |  |  | 2014   | 
|Total tonnes mined (000s)               |  |  | 62,227 |  |  |  | 83,409                          |  |  |  | (25%)    |  |  |  | 67,686 | 
|Ore tonnes processed (000s)             |  |  | 28,028 |  |  |  | 28,385                          |  |  |  | (1%)     |  |  |  | 29,500 | 
|Average grade (grams/tonne)             |  |  | 0.82   |  |  |  | 0.82                            |  |  |  | -        |  |  |  | 1.00   | 
|Gold produced (000s/oz)                 |  |  | 544    |  |  |  | 602                             |  |  |  | (10%)    |  |  |  | 722    | 
|Gold sold (000s/oz)                     |  |  | 532    |  |  |  | 629                             |  |  |  | (15%)    |  |  |  | 724    | 
|Segment revenue ($ millions)            |  |  | $ 685  |  |  |  | $ 720                           |  |  |  | (5%)     |  |  |  | $ 894  | 
|Cost of sales ($ millions)              |  |  | 464    |  |  |  | 499                             |  |  |  | (7%)     |  |  |  | 554    | 
|Segment income ($ millions)             |  |  | 220    |  |  |  | 216                             |  |  |  | 2%       |  |  |  | 330    | 
|Segment EBITDA ($ millions)1            |  |  | 338    |  |  |  | 324                             |  |  |  | 4%       |  |  |  | 446    | 
|Capital expenditures ($ millions)       |  |  | 95     |  |  |  | 242                             |  |  |  | (61%)    |  |  |  | 173    | 
|Minesite sustaining                     |  |  | 95     |  |  |  | 242                             |  |  |  | (61%)    |  |  |  | 173    | 
|Project                                 |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -                               |  |  |  | -        |  |  |  | -      | 
|Cost of sales (per oz)                  |  |  | 872    |  |  |  | 792                             |  |  |  | 10%      |  |  |  | 764    | 
|Cash costs (per oz)1                    |  |  | 582    |  |  |  | 552                             |  |  |  | 5%       |  |  |  | 566    | 
|All-in sustaining costs (per oz)1       |  |  | 769    |  |  |  | 946                             |  |  |  | (19%)    |  |  |  | 815    | 
|All-in costs (per oz)1                  |  |  | $ 769  |  |  |  | $ 946                           |  |  |  | (19%)    |  |  |  | $ 815  | 



|1 | These are non-GAAP financial performance measures with no standardized meaning under IFRS and therefore may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other issuers. For
further information and a detailed reconciliation of each non-GAAP measure used in this section of the MD&A to the most directly comparable IFRS measure, please see pages 71 to 85 of this MD&A.
|- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Financial Results

Veladeros segment income for 2016 was 2% higher than the prior year primarily due to lower operating
costs combined with higher gold prices, partially offset by a decrease in sales volume.  LOGO In 2016, gold production was 10% lower compared to the prior year mainly reflecting lower grade tonnes placed on the
leach pad in efforts to manage water balances in the leach pad. This was further impacted by the temporary suspension of operations late in the third quarter of 2016 combined with unexpected severe winter weather conditions in the second quarter of
2016.


LOGO  LOGO Cost of sales per ounce4 in 2016 was $80 per ounce higher than the
prior year primarily due to the impact of lower sales volume on unit production costs relating to the severe weather conditions and temporary suspension of operations during 2016 combined with lower waste stripping activity and higher depreciation
expense. This was partially offset by lower direct mining costs as a result of lower tonnes mined due to severe weather conditions and the temporary suspension of operations, combined with Best-in-Class savings initiatives such as optimizing consumables usage, improving efficiencies in mine operations and the impact of lower contractor costs. In 2016,
all-in sustaining costs1 decreased by $177






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 60 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

per ounce compared to the prior year primarily due to a decrease in minesite sustaining capital expenditures combined with lower direct mining costs, partly offset by the impact of lower sales
volume on unit production costs. In 2016, capital expenditures decreased by 61% compared to the prior year primarily due to a decrease in minesite
sustaining expenditures mainly related to lower capitalized stripping costs and the construction of the phase 4B leach pad combined with higher capitalized infrastructure improvement costs in the prior year as a result of the cyanide incident that
occurred in the third quarter of 2015. On October 9, 2015, the San Juan mining authority initiated an administrative sanction process against
Minera Argentina Gold SRL (MAG), Barricks Argentine subsidiary that operates the Veladero mine, for alleged violations of the mining code relating to a valve failure and release of cyanide-bearing process solution in September
2015. On March 11, 2016, the San Juan Provincial mining authority announced its intention to impose an administrative fine against MAG in connection with the solution release. MAG was formally notified of this decision on March 15, 2016.
On April 6, 2016, MAG sought reconsideration of certain aspects of the decision but did not challenge the amount of the administrative fine. On April 14, 2016, in accordance with local requirements, MAG paid the administrative fine of
approximately $10 million (at the then-applicable Argentine peso/$ exchange rate) while the request for reconsideration is pending. MAG is implementing a remedial action plan at Veladero in response to the incident as required by the San Juan
mining authority. Certain construction-related activities in the Valley Fill Leach Facility (VLF) are still pending. Refer to note 36 to the Financial Statements for more information regarding this matter. On September 8, 2016, ice rolling down the slope of the leach pad at the Veladero mine damaged a pipe carrying process solution, causing some
material to leave the leach pad. This material, primarily crushed ore saturated with process solution, was contained on the mine site and returned to the leach pad. Extensive water monitoring in the area conducted by MAG has confirmed that the
incident did not result in any environmental impact. A temporary suspension of operations at the Veladero mine was ordered by the San Juan Provincial mining authority and a San Juan Provincial court on September 15, 2016 and September 22,
2016, respectively, as a result of this incident. On October 4, 2016, following, among other


matters, the completion of certain urgent works required by the San Juan Provincial mining authority and a judicial inspection of the mine, the San Juan Provincial court lifted the suspension of
operations and ordered that mining activities be resumed. On September 14, 2016, the San Juan Provincial mining authority commenced an
administrative proceeding in connection with this incident that included, in addition to the issue of the suspension order, an infringement proceeding against MAG. On December 2, 2016, the San Juan Provincial mining authority notified MAG of
two charges under the infringement proceeding for alleged violations of the Mining Code. Refer to note 36 to the Financial Statements for more information regarding this matter. On December 15, 2016, MAG was served notice of a lawsuit by certain persons who claim to be living in Jachal, Argentina and to be affected by the
Veladero mine and, in particular, the VLF. In the lawsuit, which was filed in the San Juan Provincial court, the plaintiffs have requested a court order that MAG cease leaching metals with cyanide solutions, mercury and other similar substances at
the Veladero mine and replace that process with one that is free of hazardous substances, that MAG implement a closure and remediation plan for the VLF and surrounding areas, and create a committee to monitor this process. The lawsuit is proceeding
as an ordinary civil action. The Company expects to reply to the lawsuit in mid-February 2017, and the case will then proceed to the evidentiary stage. Refer to note 36 to the Financial Statements for more
information regarding this matter. On December 30, 2016, the San Juan Mining Authority approved the fifth update to the Veladero mines
environmental impact study (EIS), which as submitted by the Company had included a request for approval of the leach pad expansion for Phases 6 to 9. The fifth EIA update did not include an approval of Phases 6 to 9. Rather, the San Juan
Mining Authority required additional technical information. Veladero submitted an initial response to the San Juan Mining Authority on January 12, 2017, and expects to provide additional information in late February 2017 as requested by the San
Juan Mining Authority. Future production at Veladero after 2017 could be impacted if the leach pad expansion is not timely approved. Outlook At Veladero we expect 2017 production to be in the range of 770 to 830 thousand ounces, higher than






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 61 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

2016 production levels. The increase is mainly a result of a higher head grade in ore processed due to mine sequence phases at Federico pit. This is combined with higher ore tonnes mined and
processed given the suspension, environmental and bad weather incidents in 2016 all leading to improved mining productivity, higher operating hours, and fewer days lost. In addition, a higher inventory draw-down, due to better operational management
of the leach pad, will contribute to higher production. Cost of sales per ounce4 is expected to
be decreasing from $872 to an expected range of $750 to $800, mainly due to the impact of higher sales compared to 2016 and higher mining costs capitalized as stripping. These positive variances are expected to be partly offset by higher direct
operating costs and the impact of higher charges from the production inventory movements stemming from the expected drawdown of leach pad inventories. Higher gross direct operating costs are expected in 2017 as a consequence of higher operating
hours and higher tonnage to be moved combined with higher costs in process area in order to improve the management of leach facilities.


We expect cash costs1 in 2017 to be in the range of
$500 to $540 per ounce, lower than 2016 levels mainly due to the increase in gold production driving higher sales combined with higher credits from capitalized stripping. All-in sustaining costs1 are expected to be between $840 and $940 per ounce, higher than 2016 levels mainly due to the increase in capital expenditures requirements combined with higher direct operating costs. At Veladero, a
number of initiatives are underway to reduce operating costs, mainly in the areas of supply chain and inventory management, maintenance practices, mining productivity and energy costs. Higher gross direct operating costs are expected in 2017 as a
consequence of higher operating hours and higher tonnage to be moved combined with higher costs in process area in order to improve the management of leach facilities. Operating costs at Veladero are also highly sensitive to local inflation and
fluctuations in foreign exchange rates. We have assumed an average ARS:USD exchange rate of $16.5 and a local inflation rate of 20% for the purposes of preparing our cash cost and all-in sustaining cost guidance for 2017.






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 62 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

Turquoise Ridge (75% basis), Nevada USA



|                                        |  |  |       |  |  |  |                                 |  |  |  |          |  |  |  |       | 
|--------------------------------------- |  |  | ----- |  |  |  | ------------------------------- |  |  |  | -------- |  |  |  | ----- | 
|Summary of Operating and Financial Data |  |  |       |  |  |  | For the years ended December 31 | 
|                                        |  |  | 2016  |  |  |  | 2015                            |  |  |  | % Change |  |  |  | 2014  | 
|Total tonnes mined (000s)               |  |  | 598   |  |  |  | 349                             |  |  |  | 71%      |  |  |  | 312   | 
|Ore tonnes processed (000s)             |  |  | 523   |  |  |  | 390                             |  |  |  | 34%      |  |  |  | 335   | 
|Average grade (grams/tonne)             |  |  | 17.04 |  |  |  | 18.82                           |  |  |  | (9%)     |  |  |  | 19.62 | 
|Gold produced (000s/oz)                 |  |  | 266   |  |  |  | 217                             |  |  |  | 23%      |  |  |  | 195   | 
|Gold sold (000s/oz)                     |  |  | 257   |  |  |  | 202                             |  |  |  | 27%      |  |  |  | 200   | 
|Segment revenue ($ millions)            |  |  | $ 322 |  |  |  | $ 235                           |  |  |  | 37%      |  |  |  | $ 252 | 
|Cost of sales ($ millions)              |  |  | 155   |  |  |  | 141                             |  |  |  | 10%      |  |  |  | 111   | 
|Segment income ($ millions)             |  |  | 166   |  |  |  | 92                              |  |  |  | 80%      |  |  |  | 139   | 
|Segment EBITDA ($ millions)1            |  |  | 193   |  |  |  | 115                             |  |  |  | 68%      |  |  |  | 156   | 
|Capital expenditures ($ millions)       |  |  | 32    |  |  |  | 32                              |  |  |  | -        |  |  |  | 30    | 
|Minesite sustaining                     |  |  | 32    |  |  |  | 32                              |  |  |  | -        |  |  |  | 30    | 
|Project                                 |  |  | -     |  |  |  | -                               |  |  |  | -        |  |  |  | -     | 
|Cost of sales (per oz)                  |  |  | 603   |  |  |  | 697                             |  |  |  | (13%)    |  |  |  | 559   | 
|Cash costs (per oz)1                    |  |  | 498   |  |  |  | 581                             |  |  |  | (14%)    |  |  |  | 473   | 
|All-in sustaining costs (per oz)1       |  |  | 625   |  |  |  | 742                             |  |  |  | (16%)    |  |  |  | 628   | 
|All-in costs (per oz)1                  |  |  | $ 625 |  |  |  | $ 742                           |  |  |  | (16%)    |  |  |  | $ 628 | 



|1 | These are non-GAAP financial performance measures with no standardized meaning under IFRS and therefore may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other issuers. For
further information and a detailed reconciliation of each non-GAAP measure used in this section of the MD&A to the most directly comparable IFRS measure, please see pages 71 to 85 of this MD&A.
|- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Financial Results

Turquoise Ridges segment income for 2016 was 80% higher than the prior year primarily due to an
increase in sales volume due to increased mining productivity combined with higher gold prices.  LOGO In 2016, gold production was 23% higher than the prior year primarily due to an increase in tonnes mined and processed
resulting from increasing labor to support production growth combined with improved equipment availability and improved mine engineering to take advantage of the larger ore geometry. In the first quarter of 2015, the mine transitioned to fully
mechanized topcuts, larger excavations and other Best-in-Class activities, which resulted in increased productivity and the processing of more ore tonnes in subsequent
quarters. The aim of the productivity improvements is to have a more consistent ore flow from the mine from month to month.


LOGO Cost of sales per ounce4 in 2016 was $94 per ounce lower than the
prior year mainly reflecting the impact of higher sales volume on unit production costs combined with an increase in capitalized underground development costs. Although operating costs have increased due to the increased productivity rates in 2016,
they have decreased on a per unit basis compared to the prior year. The increased productivity and unit cost reductions are due to the investment in equipment and facilities made in 2015 as well as a focus on equipment utilization, equipment
maintenance and consumables consumption as part of our Best-in-Class program. In 2016, all-in sustaining costs1 decreased by $117 per ounce compared to the prior year primarily reflecting the impact of lower cost of sales per ounce4.






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 63 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

LOGO In 2016, capital expenditures were in line with the prior year as higher capitalized development costs were offset by
lower minesite sustaining capital.


Outlook At
Turquoise Ridge we expect 2017 production to be in the range of 260 to 280 thousand ounces (Barricks share), in line with 2016 production levels, as mine productivity improves slightly, offset by slightly lower grade. Turquoise Ridge has
completely transitioned to standardized equipment allowing for greater mining flexibility with higher reliability and less equipment. Capital and waste development requirements are in line with 2016 mining rates. The cost of sales per ounce4 is expected to be in the range of $575 to $625 per ounce which is in
line with 2016. We expect cash costs1 in 2016 to be in the range of $460 to $500 per ounce, consistent with 2016, and all-in sustaining costs1 to be in the range of $650 to $730 per ounce. All-in sustaining costs1 in 2017 are expected to be higher
than 2016 due to increased spend on sustaining capital for the initial construction and final engineering of a third shaft.






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 64 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

Acacia Mining plc (100% basis), Africa



|                                        |  |  |         |  |  |  |                                 |  |  |  |          |  |  |  |         | 
|--------------------------------------- |  |  | ------- |  |  |  | ------------------------------- |  |  |  | -------- |  |  |  | ------- | 
|Summary of Operating and Financial Data |  |  |         |  |  |  | For the years ended December 31 | 
|                                        |  |  | 2016    |  |  |  | 2015                            |  |  |  | % Change |  |  |  | 2014    | 
|Total tonnes mined (000s)               |  |  | 38,491  |  |  |  | 41,390                          |  |  |  | (7%)     |  |  |  | 41,684  | 
|Ore tonnes processed (000s)             |  |  | 9,818   |  |  |  | 9,268                           |  |  |  | 6%       |  |  |  | 8,413   | 
|Average grade (grams/tonne)             |  |  | 3.00    |  |  |  | 2.80                            |  |  |  | 7%       |  |  |  | 3.00    | 
|Gold produced (000s/oz)                 |  |  | 830     |  |  |  | 732                             |  |  |  | 13%      |  |  |  | 719     | 
|Gold sold (000s/oz)                     |  |  | 817     |  |  |  | 721                             |  |  |  | 13%      |  |  |  | 704     | 
|Segment revenue ($ millions)            |  |  | $ 1,045 |  |  |  | $ 860                           |  |  |  | 22%      |  |  |  | $ 923   | 
|Cost of sales ($ millions)              |  |  | 719     |  |  |  | 837                             |  |  |  | (14%)    |  |  |  | 693     | 
|Segment income ($ millions)             |  |  | 299     |  |  |  | (1)                             |  |  |  | 30,000%  |  |  |  | 191     | 
|Segment EBITDA ($ millions)1            |  |  | 465     |  |  |  | 142                             |  |  |  | 227%     |  |  |  | 320     | 
|Capital expenditures ($ millions)       |  |  | 191     |  |  |  | 177                             |  |  |  | 8%       |  |  |  | 251     | 
|Minesite sustaining                     |  |  | 190     |  |  |  | 178                             |  |  |  | 7%       |  |  |  | 195     | 
|Project                                 |  |  | 1       |  |  |  | (1)                             |  |  |  | 200%     |  |  |  | 56      | 
|Cost of sales (per oz)                  |  |  | 880     |  |  |  | 1,161                           |  |  |  | (24%)    |  |  |  | 985     | 
|Cash costs (per oz)1                    |  |  | 640     |  |  |  | 772                             |  |  |  | (17%)    |  |  |  | 732     | 
|All-in sustaining costs (per oz)1       |  |  | 958     |  |  |  | 1,112                           |  |  |  | (14%)    |  |  |  | 1,105   | 
|All-in costs (per oz)1                  |  |  | $ 960   |  |  |  | $ 1,111                         |  |  |  | (14%)    |  |  |  | $ 1,190 | 



|1 | These are non-GAAP financial performance measures with no standardized meaning under IFRS and therefore may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other issuers. For
further information and a detailed reconciliation of each non-GAAP measure used in this section of the MD&A to the most directly comparable IFRS measure, please see pages 71 to 85 of this MD&A.
|- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Financial Results

Acacias segment income for 2016 was $300 million higher than the prior year primarily due to
lower cost of sales combined with a higher gold price and an increase in sales volume.  LOGO In 2016, gold production was 13% higher than the prior year primarily due to an increase in production at North Mara as
a result of higher grade ore from the underground Gokona mine combined with higher recovery rates.  LOGO


Cost of sales per ounce4 in 2016 was 24% lower than
the prior year primarily reflecting the impact of $109 million of impairments at Buzwagi relating to supplies inventory and the long-term stockpile in 2015 combined with higher sales volume on unit production costs. This was partly offset by
higher capitalized operating costs at North Mara relating to capitalized stripping combined with lower labor costs as a result of headcount reductions. All-in sustaining costs1 were 14% lower than the prior year as the lower cost of sales per ounce4 was partially offset by an increase in minesite sustaining capital
expenditures.  LOGO In 2016, capital expenditures increased by 8% compared to the prior year primarily due to an increase in capitalized
stripping costs at North Mara primarily related to higher waste stripping at Nyabirama Stage 4, partially offset by a reduction in minesite sustaining






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 65 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

capital expenditures primarily relating to capitalized development, equipment and infrastructure expenditures. Outlook We expect Acacias 2017 gold production to be in
the range of 545 to 575 thousand ounces (Barricks share), which is higher than 2016 production levels. Acacias production is expected to be higher than 2016 mainly due to a revision to the mine plan at Buzwagi, where mining has been
extended by approximately six months. Production at Bulyanhulu is expected to be in line with 2016 and North Mara is expected to be lower in 2017 as an increased


proportion of underground ore is sourced from the lower grade West Zone which will offset the impact of the increase in underground tonnes mined. We expect cost of sales per ounce4 to be in the range of $860 to $910 per ounce. We expect cash
costs1 to be in the range of $580 to $620 per ounce and all-in sustaining costs1 to be in the range of
$880 to $920 per ounce. The decrease in all-in sustaining costs in comparison with 2016 is driven mainly by the increased production at Buzwagi.






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 66 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

Pascua-Lama, Argentina/Chile



The Pascua-Lama project, located on the border between Chile and Argentina, is one of the worlds
largest undeveloped gold and silver deposits, with the potential to generate significant free cash flow over a long mine life. In the third quarter of 2016, we announced the appointment of George Bee as Senior Vice President for Lama and Frontera
District Development. Mr. Bee and his team have initiated a prefeasibility study for an underground mine at Lama in Argentina, which represents an opportunity to unlock the value of this deposit, and the wider district, through a phased
approach that reduces execution risks and upfront capital requirements. Concurrently, the team in Chile remains focused on optimizing the Chilean components of the project, while addressing outstanding legal, regulatory, and permitting matters. Our Investment Committee will continue to scrutinize the project as it advances, applying a high degree of consistency and rigor  as we do for all
capital allocation decisions at the company  before further review by the Executive Committee and the Board at each stage of advancement. U.S. Shareholder
Class Action On May 31, 2016, the Company confirmed that it had reached a $140 million settlement in this matter.
The settlement was approved by the Court on December 2, 2016. The amount of the settlement is insured. The Company continues to believe that the allegations by the lead plaintiffs in this matter are unfounded, and under the terms of the
settlement agreement, the Company has not accepted any allegations of wrongdoing or liability. Refer to note 36 to the Financial Statements for more information regarding this matter. SMA Regulatory Sanctions On June 8, 2016, Chiles
environmental regulator (the Superintendencia del Medio Ambiente, or SMA) consolidated the two administrative proceedings against Compañía Minera Nevada (CMN), Barricks Chilean subsidiary that holds the
Chilean portion of the Pascua-Lama project, into a single proceeding encompassing both the reconsideration of the 2013 Resolution in accordance with the decision of the Environmental Court and the alleged deviations from the Projects
environmental approval notified by the SMA in April 2015. A final resolution from the SMA with respect to these matters is pending and could result in additional sanctions including new administrative fines and/or the revocation of the
Projects environmental permit. Refer to note 36 to the Financial Statements for more information regarding this matter.


Constitutional Protection Action On August 12, 2016, the court ruled in favor of CMN and the Chilean mining authority (Sernageomin), rejecting the plaintiffs challenges to the
Temporary and Partial Closure Plan for the Pascua-Lama project. On August 19, 2016, the plaintiffs appealed the courts decision to the Chilean Supreme Court. A decision from the Supreme Court on this matter is pending. Refer to note 36 to
the Financial Statements for more information regarding this matter. Water Quality Review CMN initiated a review of the baseline water quality of the Rio Estrecho in August 2013 as required by a July 15, 2013 decision of the Court of
Appeals of Copiapo, Chile. The purpose of the review was to establish whether the water quality baseline has changed since the Pascua-Lama project received its environmental approval in February 2006 and, if so, to require CMN to adopt the
appropriate corrective measures. As a result of that study, CMN requested certain modifications to its environmental permit water quality requirements. On June 6, 2016, the responsible agency approved a partial amendment of the environmental
permit to better reflect the water quality baseline from 2009. That approval was appealed by certain water users and indigenous residents of the Huasco Valley. On October 19, 2016, the Chilean Committee of Ministers for the Environment, which
has jurisdiction over claims of this nature, voted to uphold the permit amendments. On January 27, 2017, the Environmental Court agreed to consider an appeal of the Committees decision brought by CMN and the water users and indigenous
residents. Refer to note 36 to the Financial Statements for more information regarding this matter. Water Treatment Plant The water treatment plant on the Chilean side of the Pascua-Lama project was damaged during the second quarter of 2016 as a result of heavy snowfall. The
water treatment plant consists of two main components, the high density sludge unit followed by the reverse osmosis unit. The damage to the reverse osmosis plant is still under repair. On August 10, operation of the high density sludge unit and
discharges were reestablished. Exceptional snowfall during the winter and an early melt has increased inflows to the plant to an extent that it is difficult to keep discharges within permit limits. CMN has reviewed its contingency plan with Chilean
regulatory authorities.






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 67 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---



COMMITMENTS AND
CONTINGENCIES

Litigation and Claims

We are currently
subject to various litigation proceedings as disclosed in note 36 to the Financial Statements, and we may be involved in disputes with other parties in the future that may result in litigation. If we are unable to resolve these disputes favorably,
it may have a material adverse impact on our financial condition, cash flow and results of operations.

Contractual Obligations and Commitments

In the normal course of business, we enter into contracts that give rise to commitments for future minimum payments. The following table summarizes the
remaining contractual maturities of our financial liabilities and operating and capital commitments shown on an undiscounted basis:



|                                                    |  |                                      |         |  |      |  |       |      |  |  |         |  |  |      |       |  |                    |  |         |       |  |  |          |  |  |  |          | 
|--------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------------ | ------- |  | ---- |  | ----- | ---- |  |  | ------- |  |  | ---- | ----- |  | ------------------ |  | ------- | ----- |  |  | -------- |  |  |  | -------- | 
|($ millions)                                        |  | Payments due
as at December 31, 2016 |        
|                                                    |  | 2017                                 |         |  | 2018 |  |       | 2019 |  |  | 2020    |  |  | 2021 |       |  | 2022 andthereafter |  |         | Total | 
|Debt1                                               |  |                                      |         |  |      |  |       |      |  |  |         |  |  |      |       |  |                    |  |         |       |  |  |          |  |  |  |          | 
|Repayment of principal                              |  |                                      | $ 105   |  |      |  | $ 105 |      |  |  | $ 381   |  |  |      | $ 304 |  |                    |  | $ 678   |       |  |  | $ 6,302  |  |  |  | $ 7,875  | 
|Capital leases                                      |  |                                      | 38      |  |      |  | 31    |      |  |  | 16      |  |  |      | 9     |  |                    |  | 6       |       |  |  | 14       |  |  |  | 114      | 
|Interest                                            |  |                                      | 434     |  |      |  | 430   |      |  |  | 415     |  |  |      | 398   |  |                    |  | 371     |       |  |  | 5,410    |  |  |  | 7,458    | 
|Provisions for environmental rehabilitation2        |  |                                      | 75      |  |      |  | 78    |      |  |  | 84      |  |  |      | 110   |  |                    |  | 102     |       |  |  | 1,804    |  |  |  | 2,253    | 
|Operating leases                                    |  |                                      | 17      |  |      |  | 18    |      |  |  | 12      |  |  |      | 11    |  |                    |  | 7       |       |  |  | 8        |  |  |  | 73       | 
|Restricted share units                              |  |                                      | 46      |  |      |  | 14    |      |  |  | 2       |  |  |      | -     |  |                    |  | -       |       |  |  | -        |  |  |  | 62       | 
|Pension benefits and other post-retirement benefits |  |                                      | 20      |  |      |  | 20    |      |  |  | 20      |  |  |      | 20    |  |                    |  | 20      |       |  |  | 408      |  |  |  | 508      | 
|Derivative liabilities3                             |  |                                      | 51      |  |      |  | 25    |      |  |  | 2       |  |  |      | -     |  |                    |  | -       |       |  |  | -        |  |  |  | 78       | 
|Purchase obligations for supplies and consumables4  |  |                                      | 402     |  |      |  | 254   |      |  |  | 144     |  |  |      | 100   |  |                    |  | 68      |       |  |  | 2        |  |  |  | 970      | 
|Capital commitments5                                |  |                                      | 52      |  |      |  | 16    |      |  |  | 4       |  |  |      | 4     |  |                    |  | 4       |       |  |  | 23       |  |  |  | 103      | 
|Social development costs6                           |  |                                      | 13      |  |      |  | 3     |      |  |  | 4       |  |  |      | 2     |  |                    |  | 1       |       |  |  | 146      |  |  |  | 169      | 
|Total                                               |  |                                      | $ 1,253 |  |      |  | $ 994 |      |  |  | $ 1,084 |  |  |      | $ 958 |  |                    |  | $ 1,257 |       |  |  | $ 14,117 |  |  |  | $ 19,663 | 

| | 1 | Debt and Interest - Our debt obligations do not include any subjective acceleration clauses or other clauses that enable
the holder of the debt to call for early repayment, except in the event that we breach any of the terms and conditions of the debt or for other customary events of default. The debt and interest amounts include 100% of the Pueblo Viejo financing,
even though our attributable share is 60% of this total, consistent with our ownership interest in the mine. We are not required to post any collateral under any debt obligations. Projected interest payments on variable rate debt were based on
interest rates in effect at December 31, 2016. Interest is calculated on our long-term debt obligations using both fixed and variable rates.
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 2 | Provisions for Environmental Rehabilitation - Amounts presented in the table represent the undiscounted uninflated future
payments for the expected cost of provisions for environmental rehabilitation.
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 3 | Derivative Liabilities - Amounts presented in the table relate to derivative contracts disclosed under note 25C to the
Financial Statements. Payments related to derivative contracts may be subject to change given variable market conditions.
| | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 4 | Purchase Obligations for Supplies and Consumables - Includes commitments related to new purchase obligations to secure a
supply of acid, tires and cyanide for our production process.
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 5 | Capital Commitments - Purchase obligations for capital expenditures include only those items where binding commitments
have been entered into.
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 6 | Social Development Costs  Includes Pascua-Lamas commitment of $146 million related to the potential funding
of a power transmission line in Argentina, which is not expected to be paid prior to 2022.
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 68 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---



REVIEW OF
QUARTERLY RESULTS

Quarterly Information1



|                                     |  |      |        |  |      |  |        |    |  |  |        |  |  |    |         |  |    |  |         |    |  |  |         |  |  |  |         |  |  |  |         | 
|------------------------------------ |  | ---- | ------ |  | ---- |  | ------ | -- |  |  | ------ |  |  | -- | ------- |  | -- |  | ------- | -- |  |  | ------- |  |  |  | ------- |  |  |  | ------- | 
|                                     |  | 2016 |        |  | 2015 | 
|($ millions, except where
indicated) |  | Q4   |        |  | Q3   |  |        | Q2 |  |  | Q1     |  |  | Q4 |         |  | Q3 |  |         | Q2 |  |  | Q1      | 
|Revenues                             |  |      | $2,319 |  |      |  | $2,297 |    |  |  | $2,012 |  |  |    | $ 1,930 |  |    |  | $ 2,238 |    |  |  | $ 2,315 |  |  |  | $ 2,231 |  |  |  | $ 2,245 | 
|Realized price per ounce 
gold2     |  |      | 1,217  |  |      |  | 1,333  |    |  |  | 1,259  |  |  |    | 1,181   |  |    |  | 1,105   |    |  |  | 1,125   |  |  |  | 1,190   |  |  |  | 1,219   | 
|Realized price per pound 
copper2   |  |      | 2.62   |  |      |  | 2.18   |    |  |  | 2.14   |  |  |    | 2.18    |  |    |  | 2.16    |    |  |  | 2.18    |  |  |  | 2.66    |  |  |  | 2.55    | 
|Cost of sales                        |  |      | 1,454  |  |      |  | 1,291  |    |  |  | 1,336  |  |  |    | 1,324   |  |    |  | 1,768   |    |  |  | 1,742   |  |  |  | 1,689   |  |  |  | 1,708   | 
|Net earnings (loss)                  |  |      | 425    |  |      |  | 175    |    |  |  | 138    |  |  |    | (83)    |  |    |  | (2,622) |    |  |  | (264)   |  |  |  | (9)     |  |  |  | 57      | 
|Per share (dollars)3                 |  |      | 0.36   |  |      |  | 0.15   |    |  |  | 0.12   |  |  |    | (0.07)  |  |    |  | (2.25)  |    |  |  | (0.23)  |  |  |  | (0.01)  |  |  |  | 0.05    | 
|Adjusted net earnings2               |  |      | 255    |  |      |  | 278    |    |  |  | 158    |  |  |    | 127     |  |    |  | 91      |    |  |  | 131     |  |  |  | 60      |  |  |  | 62      | 
|Per share (dollars)2,3               |  |      | 0.22   |  |      |  | 0.24   |    |  |  | 0.14   |  |  |    | 0.11    |  |    |  | 0.08    |    |  |  | 0.11    |  |  |  | 0.05    |  |  |  | 0.05    | 
|Operating cash flow4                 |  |      | 711    |  |      |  | 951    |    |  |  | 527    |  |  |    | 451     |  |    |  | 698     |    |  |  | 1,255   |  |  |  | 525     |  |  |  | 316     | 
|Cash capital expenditures            |  |      | 326    |  |      |  | 277    |    |  |  | 253    |  |  |    | 270     |  |    |  | 311     |    |  |  | 389     |  |  |  | 499     |  |  |  | 514     | 
|Free cash flow2,4                    |  |      | $ 385  |  |      |  | $674   |    |  |  | $274   |  |  |    | $ 181   |  |    |  | $ 387   |    |  |  | $ 866   |  |  |  | $ 26    |  |  |  | ($ 198) | 

|  |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       
|- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|1 |  | Sum of all the quarters may not add up to the annual total due to rounding.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
|2 |  | Realized price, adjusted net earnings, adjusted net earnings per share and free cash flow are
non-GAAP financial performance measures with no standardized meaning under IFRS and therefore may not be comparable to similar measures of performance presented by other issuers. For further information and a
detailed reconciliation of each non-GAAP measure used in this section of the MD&A to the most directly comparable IFRS measure, please see pages 71 to 85 of this MD&A.
|3 |  | Calculated using weighted average number of shares outstanding under the basic method of earnings per share.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          
|4 |  | Q3 2015 includes $610 million of proceeds from the gold and silver streaming transaction with Royal Gold, Inc.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        



Our recent financial results reflect our emphasis on cost control and growing operating cash flow and free
cash flow. While gold prices have fluctuated around $1,200 per ounce, we have been able to record positive free cash flow1 in seven consecutive quarters. In the fourth quarter of 2016, we recorded
a net asset impairment reversal of $146 million (net of tax effects and non-controlling interests) primarily relating to impairment reversals at Veladero and Lagunas Norte. In the fourth quarter of 2015,
we recorded asset and goodwill impairments of $2.6 billion (net of tax effects and non-controlling interests), primarily related to our Pueblo Viejo and Goldstrike mines and Pascua-Lama project. In the
third quarter of 2015, we recorded a goodwill impairment charge of $476 million relating to our Zaldívar mine upon reclassification of the mines net assets as
held-for-sale as the agreed selling price is lower than previously recognized carrying values. Fourth Quarter Results In the fourth quarter of 2016, we
reported net earnings of $425 million and adjusted net earnings1 of $255 million, compared to a net loss of $2.6 billion and adjusted net earnings1 of $91 million in the fourth quarter of 2015. The net earnings in the fourth quarter of 2016 reflect the recording of $146 million (net of tax effects and
non-controlling interests) in net impairment reversals compared to impairment charges of $2.6 billion (net of tax effects and non-controlling interests) recorded in
the fourth quarter of 2015.


The higher net earnings in the fourth quarter of 2016 reflect an increase in realized gold and copper
prices and lower cost of sales combined with the recognition of impairment reversals rather than impairment charges, partly offset by lower sales volumes due to divested sites compared to the same prior year period. The increase in adjusted net
earnings primarily reflects the higher realized gold and copper prices, partly offset by a decrease in gold and copper sales volumes compared to the fourth quarter of 2015. In the fourth quarter of 2016, gold and copper sales were 1.52 million ounces and 107 million pounds, respectively, compared to
1.64 million ounces (1.48 million ounces excluding the impact of divested sites) and 132 million pounds (114 million pounds excluding the impact of divested sites), respectively, in the fourth quarter of 2015. Revenues in the
fourth quarter of 2016 were higher than the same prior year period, reflecting higher market prices for gold and copper, partially offset by lower gold and copper sales volumes. In the fourth quarter of 2016, cost of sales was $1.5 billion, a
decrease of $314 million compared to the same prior year period, reflecting lower direct mining costs and depreciation expense attributed mainly to divested sites, combined with lower consumable prices and Best-in-Class initiatives. Cost of sales per ounce4 was $784 per ounce, a decrease of $64 per ounce, primarily due to a positive change in our sales mix as
a result of the divestment of some of our higher cost mine sites combined with lower consumable costs, inventory impairment charges and






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 69 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

lower depreciation expense. Cost of sales per pound4 was $1.45 per pound, an increase of $0.36 per pound from the same prior year period due
to lower sales volume at Lumwana and Zaldívar, partially offset by higher cost of sales at Jabal Sayid combined with lower royalty expense at Lumwana. In the fourth quarter of 2016, operating cash flow was $711 million, up 2% from the same prior year period. The increase in operating cash flow
primarily reflects higher realized gold and copper prices, partially offset by lower gold and copper sales volume combined with an increase in income tax payments.


In the fourth quarter of 2016, free cash flow1 was
$385 million, in line with the $387 million in the same prior year period. The higher operating cash flow generated in the fourth quarter of 2016 compared to the same prior year period was offset by higher cash capital expenditures of
$326 million, compared to $311 million in the fourth quarter of 2015. The higher cash capital expenditures were a result of greater spending at Cortez, Veladero and Goldstrike, partially offset by the impact of divested sites.






INTERNAL
CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING AND DISCLOSURE CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES



Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial
reporting and disclosure controls and procedures. Internal control over financial reporting is a framework designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for
external purposes in accordance with IFRS. The Companys internal control over financial reporting framework includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and
fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with IFRS, and that
receipts and expenditures of the Company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the Company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized
acquisition, use or disposition of the Companys assets that could have a material effect on the Companys consolidated financial statements. Disclosure controls and procedures form a broader framework designed to provide reasonable assurance that other financial information disclosed publicly
fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company for the periods presented in this MD&A and Barricks Annual Report. The Companys disclosure controls and procedures
framework includes processes designed to ensure that material information relating to the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made


known to management by others within those entities to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. Together, the internal control over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures frameworks provide internal control over financial
reporting and disclosure. Due to its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting and disclosure may not prevent or detect all misstatements. Further, the effectiveness of internal control is subject to the risk that controls may
become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with policies or procedures may change. The management of
Barrick, at the direction of our President and Chief Financial Officer, evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of internal control over financial reporting as of the end of the period covered by this report based on the framework
and criteria established in Internal Control  Integrated Framework (2013) as issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Based on that evaluation, Management concluded that the Companys
internal control over financial reporting was effective as at December 31, 2016. Barricks annual management report on internal control
over financial reporting and the integrated audit report of Barricks auditors for the year ended December 31, 2016 will be included in Barricks 2016 Annual Report and its 2016 Form 40-F/Annual
Information Form on file with the US Securities and Exchange Commission and Canadian provincial securities regulatory authorities.






IFRS CRITICAL
ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES



Management has discussed the development and selection of our critical accounting estimates with the


Audit Committee of the Board of Directors, and the Audit Committee has reviewed the disclosure relating to such






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 70 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

estimates in conjunction with its review of this MD&A. The accounting policies and methods we utilize determine how we report our financial condition and results of operations, and they may
require management to make estimates or rely on assumptions about matters that are inherently uncertain. The consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with IFRS as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board
(IASB) under the historical cost convention, as modified by revaluation of certain financial assets, derivative contracts and post-retirement assets. Our significant accounting policies are disclosed in note 2 of the consolidated
financial statements, including a


summary of current and future changes in accounting policies. Critical Accounting Estimates and Judgments Certain accounting estimates have been identified as being critical to the presentation of our financial condition and results of
operations because they require us to make subjective and/or complex judgments about matters that are inherently uncertain; or there is a reasonable likelihood that materially different amounts could be reported under different conditions or using
different assumptions and estimates. Our significant accounting judgments, estimates and assumptions are disclosed in note 3 of the accompanying financial statements.








NON-GAAP FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE MEASURES

Adjusted Net Earnings and Adjusted Net Earnings per Share

Adjusted net earnings is a non-GAAP financial measure which
excludes the following from net earnings: 

Impairment charges (reversals) related to intangibles, goodwill, property, plant and equipment, and investments; 

Acquisition/disposition gains/losses; 

Foreign currency translation gains/losses; 

Significant tax adjustments; 

Unrealized gains/losses on non-hedge derivative instruments; and 

Tax effect and non-controlling interest of the above items. Management uses this measure internally to evaluate our underlying operating performance for the reporting periods presented and
to assist with the planning and forecasting of future operating results. Management believes that adjusted net earnings is a useful measure of our performance because impairment charges, acquisition/disposition gains/losses and significant tax
adjustments do not reflect the underlying operating performance of our core mining business and are not necessarily indicative of future operating results. Furthermore, foreign currency translation gains/losses and unrealized gains/losses from non-hedge derivatives are not necessarily reflective of the underlying operating results for the reporting periods presented. The tax effect and non-controlling interest of
the adjusting items are also excluded to reconcile the amounts to Barricks share on a post-tax basis, consistent with net earnings. As noted, we use this measure for internal purposes. Managements internal budgets and forecasts and public guidance do not reflect the types of
items we adjust for.


Consequently, the presentation of adjusted net earnings enables investors and analysts to better understand
the underlying operating performance of our core mining business through the eyes of Management. Management periodically evaluates the components of adjusted net earnings based on an internal assessment of performance measures that are useful for
evaluating the operating performance of our business segments and a review of the non-GAAP measures used by mining industry analysts and other mining companies. Adjusted net earnings is intended to provide additional information only and does not have any standardized definition under IFRS and should not be
considered in isolation or as a substitute for measures of performance prepared in accordance with IFRS. The measures are not necessarily indicative of operating profit or cash flow from operations as determined under IFRS. Other companies may
calculate these measures differently. The following table reconciles these non-GAAP measures to the most directly comparable IFRS measure. Starting with the second quarter 2016 MD&A, we have amended the reconciliation from net earnings to adjusted net earnings to present the adjusting
items on a pre-tax and fully consolidated basis and including the tax effect and non-controlling interest as a separate line. We believe that this change will assist
analysts, investors and other stakeholders of Barrick to better understand how we calculate this non-GAAP performance measure and simplify how it reconciles to our financial statements. This change to the
presentation of our reconciliation does not result in any change to the final calculation of adjusted net earnings.






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 71 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

Reconciliation of Net Earnings to Net Earnings per Share, Adjusted Net Earnings and Adjusted Net Earnings per Share



|                                                                                                    |  |                                 |       |  |                                        |  |           |      |  |  |          |  |  |      |       |  |  |  |           | 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------- | ----- |  | -------------------------------------- |  | --------- | ---- |  |  | -------- |  |  | ---- | ----- |  |  |  | --------- | 
|($ millions, except per share amounts in dollars)                                                   |  | For the years ended December 31 |       |  | For the three months ended December 31 | 
|                                                                                                    |  | 2016                            |       |  | 2015                                   |  |           | 2014 |  |  | 2016     |  |  | 2015 |      
|Net earnings (loss) attributable to equity holders of the Company                                   |  |                                 | $ 655 |  |                                        |  | ($ 2,838) |      |  |  | ($2,907) |  |  |      | $ 425 |  |  |  | $ (2,622) | 
|Impairment charges related to intangibles, goodwill, property, plant and equipment, and investments |  |                                 | (250) |  |                                        |  | 3,897     |      |  |  | 4,106    |  |  |      | (304) |  |  |  | 3,405     | 
|Acquisition/disposition (gains)/losses                                                              |  |                                 | 42    |  |                                        |  | (187)     |      |  |  | (50)     |  |  |      | 7     |  |  |  | (107)     | 
|Foreign currency translation (gains)/losses                                                         |  |                                 | 199   |  |                                        |  | 120       |      |  |  | 132      |  |  |      | 18    |  |  |  | 132       | 
|Significant tax adjustments1                                                                        |  |                                 | 43    |  |                                        |  | 134       |      |  |  | (3)      |  |  |      | (16)  |  |  |  | 95        | 
|Other expense adjustments2                                                                          |  |                                 | 114   |  |                                        |  | 135       |      |  |  | 119      |  |  |      | 39    |  |  |  | 40        | 
|Unrealized gains on non-hedge derivative instruments                                                |  |                                 | (32)  |  |                                        |  | 11        |      |  |  | 181      |  |  |      | (9)   |  |  |  | 4         | 
|Tax effect and non-controlling interest                                                             |  |                                 | 47    |  |                                        |  | (928)     |      |  |  | (785)    |  |  |      | 95    |  |  |  | (856)     | 
|Adjusted net earnings                                                                               |  |                                 | $ 818 |  |                                        |  | $ 344     |      |  |  | $793     |  |  |      | $ 255 |  |  |  | $ 91      | 
|Net earnings (loss) per share3                                                                      |  |                                 | 0.56  |  |                                        |  | (2.44)    |      |  |  | (2.50)   |  |  |      | 0.36  |  |  |  | (2.25)    | 
|Adjusted net earnings per
share3                                                                    |  |                                 | 0.70  |  |                                        |  | 0.30      |      |  |  | 0.68     |  |  |      | 0.22  |  |  |  | 0.08      | 

| | 1 | Significant tax adjustments for the current year primarily relate to a tax provision booked by Acacia in Q1 2016.
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 2 | Other expense adjustments for the current year relate to losses on debt extinguishment, the impact of the decrease in the
discount rate used to calculate the provision for environmental remediation at our closed mines and a reduction in cost of sales attributed to insurance proceeds recorded in the third quarter of 2016 relating to the 2015 oxygen plant motor failure
at Pueblo Viejo.
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 3 | Calculated using weighted average number of shares outstanding under the basic method of earnings per share.
| | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Free Cash Flow

Free cash flow is a measure that excludes capital expenditures from net cash provided by operating
activities. Management believes this to be a useful indicator of our ability to operate without reliance on additional borrowing or usage of existing cash. Free cash flow is intended to provide additional information only and does not have any standardized definition under IFRS, and should not be considered
in


isolation or as a substitute for measures of performance prepared in accordance with IFRS. The measure is
not necessarily indicative of operating profit or cash flow from operations as determined under IFRS. Other companies may calculate this measure differently. The following table reconciles this non-GAAP
measure to the most directly comparable IFRS measure.






Reconciliation of Net Cash Provided by Operating
Activities to Free Cash Flow



|                                          |  |                                 |         |  |                                        |  |         |      |  |  |         |  |  |      |       |  |  |  |       | 
|----------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------- | ------- |  | -------------------------------------- |  | ------- | ---- |  |  | ------- |  |  | ---- | ----- |  |  |  | ----- | 
|($ millions)                              |  | For the years ended December 31 |         |  | For the three months ended December 31 | 
|                                          |  | 2016                            |         |  | 2015                                   |  |         | 2014 |  |  | 2016    |  |  | 2015 |      
|Net cash provided by operating activities |  |                                 | $ 2,640 |  |                                        |  | $ 2,794 |      |  |  | $ 2,296 |  |  |      | $ 711 |  |  |  | $ 698 | 
|Capital expenditures                      |  |                                 | (1,126) |  |                                        |  | (1,713) |      |  |  | (2,432) |  |  |      | (326) |  |  |  | (311) | 
|Free cash flow                            |  |                                 | $ 1,514 |  |                                        |  | $ 1,081 |      |  |  | ($ 136) |  |  |      | $ 385 |  |  |  | $ 387 | 



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 72 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

Cash costs per ounce, All-in sustaining costs per ounce, All-in costs per ounce, C1 cash costs per pound and All-in sustaining costs per pound

Cash costs per ounce, all-in sustaining costs per ounce and all-in costs per ounce are non-GAAP financial measures which are calculated based on the definition published by the World Gold Council (WGC) (a market development
organization for the gold industry comprised of and funded by 18 gold mining companies from around the world, including Barrick). The WGC is not a regulatory organization. Management uses these measures to monitor the performance of our gold mining
operations and its ability to generate positive cash flow, both on an individual site basis and an overall company basis. Cash costs start with our
cost of sales related to gold production and removes depreciation, the non-controlling interest of cost of sales and includes by-product credits. All-in sustaining costs
start with cash costs and include sustaining capital expenditures, general & administrative costs, minesite exploration and evaluation costs and reclamation cost accretion and amortization. These additional costs reflect the expenditures
made to maintain current production levels. All-in costs start with
all-in sustaining costs and adds additional costs that reflect the varying costs of producing gold over the life-cycle of a mine, including: non-sustaining capital
expenditures (capital expenditures at new projects and discrete projects at existing operations intended to increase production capacity and will not benefit production for at least 12 months) and other
non-sustaining costs (primarily exploration and evaluation costs, community relations costs and general and administrative costs that are not associated with current operations). These definitions recognize
that there are different costs associated with the life-cycle of a mine, and that it is therefore appropriate to distinguish between sustaining and non-sustaining costs. We believe that our use of cash costs, all-in sustaining costs and all-in
costs will assist analysts, investors and other stakeholders of Barrick in understanding the costs associated with producing gold, understanding the economics of gold mining, assessing our operating performance and also our ability to generate free
cash flow from current operations and to generate free cash flow on an overall company basis. Due to the capital-intensive nature of the industry and the long useful lives over which these items are depreciated, there can be a significant timing
difference between net earnings calculated in accordance with IFRS and the amount of free cash flow that is being generated by a mine and therefore we believe these measures are useful non-


GAAP operating metrics and supplement our IFRS disclosures. These measures are not representative of all of
our cash expenditures as they do not include income tax payments, interest costs or dividend payments. These measures do not include depreciation or amortization. Cash costs per ounce, all-in sustaining costs and all-in costs are
intended to provide additional information only and do not have standardized definitions under IFRS, and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for measures of performance prepared in accordance with IFRS. These measures are not
equivalent to net income or cash flow from operations as determined under IFRS. Although the WGC has published a standardized definition, other companies may calculate these measures differently. In addition to presenting these metrics on a by-product basis, we have calculated these metrics on a co-product basis. Our co-product metrics remove the impact of other metal sales that are produced as a by-product of our gold
production from cost per ounce calculations, but does not reflect a reduction in costs for costs associated with other metal sales. C1 cash costs
per pound and All-in sustaining costs per pound are non-GAAP financial measures related to our copper mine operations. We believe that C1 cash costs per pound enables
investors to better understand the performance of our copper operations in comparison to other copper producers who present results on a similar basis. C1 cash costs per pound excludes royalties and
non-routine charges as they are not direct production costs. All-in sustaining costs per pound is similar to the gold all-in
sustaining costs metric and Management uses this to better evaluate the costs of copper production. We believe this change will enable investors to better understand the operating performance of our copper mines as this measure reflects all of the
sustaining expenditures incurred in order to produce copper. All-in sustaining costs per pound includes C1 cash costs, corporate general and administrative costs, minesite exploration and evaluation costs,
royalties, environmental rehabilitation costs and write-downs taken on inventory to net realizable value. Starting with the third quarter 2016
MD&A, we have presented this reconciliation for each of our reportable operating segments. We believe this additional information will assist analysts, investors and other stakeholders of Barrick in understanding the details of






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 73 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

these non-GAAP metrics on a segment-by-segment basis. Starting with the second quarter 2016 MD&A, we have condensed and simplified the reconciliation from cost of sales to cash costs, all-in sustaining costs and all-in costs, including on a per ounce basis for gold and per pound basis for copper, to present items on a fully
consolidated basis and include non-controlling interest as a separate line. As part of this simplification, we have grouped several minor items into one line labeled Other, with further detail in
the footnote to the reconciliation. We believe that these changes will assist analysts, investors and other stakeholders of Barrick to better understand how we calculate these non-GAAP performance measures and
simplify how they reconcile to our financial statements. This change to the presentation of our reconciliation does not result in any change to the figures calculated, except as noted below for all-in
costs. Also starting with the second quarter 2016 MD&A, we have adjusted the amount included as project exploration and evaluation
costs and project costs as part of our all-in costs measure to include all exploration and evaluation costs related to our advanced mining and business improvement projects and corporate
development activities, where previously it did not. The impact of this adjustment for the three and twelve month periods ended December 31, 2016, was $22/oz and $17/oz, respectively (2015: $27/oz and $30/oz, respectively; 2014: $25/oz). We
believe this change will assist analysts, investors and other stakeholders of Barrick in understanding all of the expenditures related to growing our business.








|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 74 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

Reconciliation of Gold Cost of Sales to Cash costs, All-in sustaining costs and All-in costs, including on a per ounce basis



|                                                                  |  |          |       |  |      |  |                                 |      |  |  |                                        |  |  |      |         |  |      |  |         |  |  |  |         | 
|----------------------------------------------------------------- |  | -------- | ----- |  | ---- |  | ------------------------------- | ---- |  |  | -------------------------------------- |  |  | ---- | ------- |  | ---- |  | ------- |  |  |  | ------- | 
|($ millions, except per ounce information in dollars)             |  |          |       |  |      |  | For the years ended December 31 |      |  |  | For the three months ended December 31 | 
|                                                                  |  | Footnote |       |  | 2016 |  |                                 | 2015 |  |  | 2014                                   |  |  | 2016 |         |  | 2015 | 
|Cost of sales related to gold
production                          |  |          |       |  |      |  | $ 4,979                         |      |  |  | $ 5,904                                |  |  |      | $ 5,893 |  |      |  | $ 1,347 |  |  |  | $ 1,575 | 
|Depreciation                                                      |  |          |       |  |      |  | (1,503)                         |      |  |  | (1,613)                                |  |  |      | (1,414) |  |      |  | (396)   |  |  |  | (462)   | 
|By-product credits                                                |  |          | 1     |  |      |  | (184)                           |      |  |  | (214)                                  |  |  |      | (271)   |  |      |  | (41)    |  |  |  | (48)    | 
|Realized (gains)/losses on hedge and non-hedge derivatives        |  |          | 2     |  |      |  | 89                              |      |  |  | 128                                    |  |  |      | (94)    |  |      |  | 18      |  |  |  | 50      | 
|Non-recurring items                                               |  |          | 3     |  |      |  | 24                              |      |  |  | (210)                                  |  |  |      | -       |  |      |  | -       |  |  |  | (149)   | 
|Other                                                             |  |          | 4     |  |      |  | (44)                            |      |  |  | 25                                     |  |  |      | 26      |  |      |  | (20)    |  |  |  | 7       | 
|Non-controlling interests (Pueblo Viejo and
Acacia)               |  |          | 5     |  |      |  | (358)                           |      |  |  | (394)                                  |  |  |      | (379)   |  |      |  | (91)    |  |  |  | (78)    | 
|Cash costs                                                        |  |          |       |  |      |  | $ 3,003                         |      |  |  | $ 3,626                                |  |  |      | $ 3,761 |  |      |  | $ 817   |  |  |  | $ 895   | 
|General & administrative
costs                                    |  |          |       |  |      |  | 256                             |      |  |  | 233                                    |  |  |      | 385     |  |      |  | 39      |  |  |  | 52      | 
|Minesite exploration and evaluation costs                         |  |          | 6     |  |      |  | 44                              |      |  |  | 47                                     |  |  |      | 38      |  |      |  | 18      |  |  |  | 11      | 
|Minesite sustaining capital expenditures                          |  |          | 7     |  |      |  | 944                             |      |  |  | 1,359                                  |  |  |      | 1,638   |  |      |  | 298     |  |  |  | 303     | 
|Rehabilitation - accretion and amortization (operating sites)     |  |          | 8     |  |      |  | 59                              |      |  |  | 145                                    |  |  |      | 135     |  |      |  | 18      |  |  |  | 26      | 
|Non-controlling interest, copper operations and
other             |  |          | 9     |  |      |  | (287)                           |      |  |  | (362)                                  |  |  |      | (532)   |  |      |  | (78)    |  |  |  | (86)    | 
|All-in sustaining costs                                           |  |          |       |  |      |  | $ 4,019                         |      |  |  | $ 5,048                                |  |  |      | $ 5,425 |  |      |  | $ 1,112 |  |  |  | $ 1,201 | 
|Project exploration and evaluation and project costs              |  |          | 6     |  |      |  | 193                             |      |  |  | 308                                    |  |  |      | 354     |  |      |  | 64      |  |  |  | 75      | 
|Community relations costs not related to current operations       |  |          |       |  |      |  | 8                               |      |  |  | 12                                     |  |  |      | 29      |  |      |  | 2       |  |  |  | -       | 
|Project capital expenditures                                      |  |          | 7     |  |      |  | 175                             |      |  |  | 133                                    |  |  |      | 596     |  |      |  | 51      |  |  |  | (48)    | 
|Rehabilitation - accretion and amortization (non-operating sites) |  |          | 8     |  |      |  | 11                              |      |  |  | 12                                     |  |  |      | 11      |  |      |  | 4       |  |  |  | 3       | 
|Non-controlling interest and copper
operations                    |  |          | 9     |  |      |  | (42)                            |      |  |  | (43)                                   |  |  |      | (74)    |  |      |  | (4)     |  |  |  | (20)    | 
|All-in costs                                                      |  |          |       |  |      |  | $ 4,364                         |      |  |  | $ 5,470                                |  |  |      | $ 6,341 |  |      |  | $ 1,229 |  |  |  | $ 1,211 | 
|Ounces sold - equity basis (000s ounces)                          |  |          | 10    |  |      |  | 5,503                           |      |  |  | 6,083                                  |  |  |      | 6,284   |  |      |  | 1,519   |  |  |  | 1,636   | 
|Cost of sales per ounce                                           |  |          | 11,12 |  |      |  | $ 798                           |      |  |  | $ 859                                  |  |  |      | $ 842   |  |      |  | $ 784   |  |  |  | $ 848   | 
|Cash costs per ounce                                              |  |          | 12    |  |      |  | $ 546                           |      |  |  | $ 596                                  |  |  |      | $ 598   |  |      |  | $ 540   |  |  |  | $ 547   | 
|Cash costs per ounce (on a
co-product basis)                      |  |          | 12,13 |  |      |  | $ 569                           |      |  |  | $ 619                                  |  |  |      | $ 618   |  |      |  | $ 557   |  |  |  | $ 566   | 
|All-in sustaining costs per ounce                                 |  |          | 12    |  |      |  | $ 730                           |      |  |  | $ 831                                  |  |  |      | $ 864   |  |      |  | $ 732   |  |  |  | $ 733   | 
|All-in sustaining costs per ounce (on a co-product basis)         |  |          | 12,13 |  |      |  | $ 753                           |      |  |  | $ 854                                  |  |  |      | $ 884   |  |      |  | $ 749   |  |  |  | $ 752   | 
|All-in costs per ounce                                            |  |          | 12    |  |      |  | $ 792                           |      |  |  | $ 900                                  |  |  |      | $ 1,010 |  |      |  | $ 809   |  |  |  | $ 741   | 
|All-in costs per ounce (on
a co-product basis)                    |  |          | 12,13 |  |      |  | $ 815                           |      |  |  | $ 923                                  |  |  |      | $ 1,030 |  |      |  | $ 826   |  |  |  | $ 760   | 



|1 | By-product credits
|- | ------------------

Revenues include the sale of by-products for our gold and copper mines for the three months ended
December 31, 2016 of $41 million (2015: $34 million) and the year ended December 31, 2016 of $151 million (2015: $140 million; 2014: $183 million) and energy sales from the Monte Rio power plant at our Pueblo Viejo mine for
the three months ended December 31, 2016 of $nil (2015: $14 million) and the year ended December 31, 2016, of $33 million (2015: $74 million; 2014: $88 million) up until its disposition on August 18, 2016.



|2 | Realized (gains)/losses on hedge and non-hedge derivatives
|- | ----------------------------------------------------------

Includes realized hedge losses of $14 million and $73 million for the three months and year ended December 31,
2016, respectively (2015: $40 million and $106 million, respectively; 2014: $86 million gains), and realized non-hedge losses of $4 million and $16 million for the three months and
year ended December 31, 2016, respectively (2015: $10 million and $22 million, respectively; 2014: $8 million gains). Refer to Note 5 of the Financial Statements for further information.



|3 | Non-recurring items
|- | -------------------

Non-recurring items in 2016 consist of $34 million in a reduction in cost of sales attributed to insurance
proceeds recorded in the third quarter of 2016 relating to the 2015 oxygen plant motor failure at Pueblo Viejo and $10 million in abnormal costs at Veladero relating to the administrative fine in connection with the cyanide incident that
occurred in 2015. These gains/costs are not indicative of our cost of production and have been excluded from the calculation of cash costs.



|4 | Other
|- | -----

Other adjustments include adding the net margins related to power sales at Pueblo Viejo of $nil and $5 million, respectively (2015: $2 million
and $12 million, respectively; 2014: $16 million) and adding the cost of treatment and refining charges of $4 million and $16 million, respectively (2015: $4 million and $14 million, respectively; 2014: $11 million). 2016
includes the removal of cash costs associated with our Pierina mine, which is mining incidental ounces as it enters closure, of $24 million and $66 million, respectively.



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 75 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

|5 | Non-controlling interests (Pueblo Viejo and Acacia)
|- | ---------------------------------------------------

Non-controlling interests include
non-controlling interests related to gold production of $127 million and $508 million, respectively, for the three months and year ended December 31, 2016 (2015: $188 million and
$681 million, respectively; 2014: $602 million). Refer to Note 5 of the Financial Statements for further information.



|6 | Exploration and evaluation costs
|- | --------------------------------

Exploration, evaluation and project expenses are presented as minesite sustaining if it supports current mine operations and project if it relates to
future projects. Refer to page 45 of this MD&A.



|7 | Capital expenditures
|- | --------------------

Capital expenditures are related to our gold sites only and are presented on a 100% accrued basis. They are split between minesite sustaining and
project capital expenditures. Project capital expenditures are distinct projects designed to increase the net present value of the mine and are not related to current production. Significant projects in the current year are Arturo, Cortez Lower Zone
and Lagunas Norte Refractory Ore Project. Refer to page 44 of this MD&A.



|8 | Rehabilitation - accretion and amortization
|- | -------------------------------------------

Includes depreciation on the assets related to rehabilitation provisions of our gold operations and accretion on the rehabilitation provision of our
gold operations, split between operating and non-operating sites.



|9 | Non-controlling interest and copper operations
|- | ----------------------------------------------

Removes general & administrative costs related to non-controlling interests and copper based on a
percentage allocation of revenue. Also removes exploration, evaluation and project costs, rehabilitation costs and capital expenditures incurred by our copper sites and the non-controlling interest of our
Acacia and Pueblo Viejo operating segment and Arturo. In 2016, figures remove the impact of Pierina. The impact is summarized as the following:



|                                                              |  |                                 |         |  |                                       |  |         |      |  |  |         |  |  |      |        |  |  |  |        | 
|------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------- | ------- |  | ------------------------------------- |  | ------- | ---- |  |  | ------- |  |  | ---- | ------ |  |  |  | ------ | 
|($ millions)                                                  |  | For the years ended December 31 |         |  | For the three monthsended December 31 | 
|Non-controlling interest, copper operations and other         |  | 2016                            |         |  | 2015                                  |  |         | 2014 |  |  | 2016    |  |  | 2015 |       
|General &
administrative costs                                |  |                                 | ($ 36)  |  |                                       |  | ($ 53)  |      |  |  | ($ 86)  |  |  |      | ($ 5)  |  |  |  | ($ 5)  | 
|Minesite exploration and evaluation costs                     |  |                                 | (9)     |  |                                       |  | (8)     |      |  |  | (18)    |  |  |      | (3)    |  |  |  | (3)    | 
|Rehabilitation - accretion and amortization (operating sites) |  |                                 | (9)     |  |                                       |  | (13)    |      |  |  | (12)    |  |  |      | (4)    |  |  |  | (4)    | 
|Minesite sustaining capital expenditures                      |  |                                 | (233)   |  |                                       |  | (288)   |      |  |  | (416)   |  |  |      | (66)   |  |  |  | (74)   | 
|All-in sustaining costs total                                 |  |                                 | ($ 287) |  |                                       |  | ($ 362) |      |  |  | ($ 532) |  |  |      | ($ 78) |  |  |  | ($ 86) | 
|Project exploration and
evaluation and project costs          |  |                                 | (12)    |  |                                       |  | (11)    |      |  |  | (43)    |  |  |      | (4)    |  |  |  | (9)    | 
|Project capital expenditures                                  |  |                                 | (30)    |  |                                       |  | (32)    |      |  |  | (31)    |  |  |      | -      |  |  |  | (11)   | 
|All-in costs total                                            |  |                                 | ($ 42)  |  |                                       |  | ($ 43)  |      |  |  | ($ 74)  |  |  |      | ($ 4)  |  |  |  | ($ 20) | 



|10 | Ounces sold - equity basis
|-- | --------------------------

In 2016, figures remove the impact of Pierina as the mine is currently going through closure.



|11 | Cost of sales per ounce
|-- | -----------------------

In 2016, figures remove the cost of sales impact of Pierina of $30 million and $82 million, respectively, for the three months and year ended
December 31, 2016, as the mine is currently going through closure. Cost of sales per ounce excludes non-controlling interest related to gold production. Cost of sales related to gold per ounce is
calculated using cost of sales on an attributable basis (removing the non-controlling interest of 40% Pueblo Viejo and 36.1% Acacia from cost of sales), divided by attributable gold ounces.



|12 | Per ounce figures
|-- | -----------------

Cost of sales per ounce, cash costs per ounce, all-in sustaining costs per ounce and all-in costs per ounce may not calculate based on amounts presented in this table due to rounding.



|13 | Co-product costs per ounce
|-- | --------------------------

Cash costs per ounce, all-in sustaining costs per ounce and all-in costs
per ounce presented on a co-product basis remove the impact of by-product credits of our gold production (net of non-controlling
interest) calculated as:



|                                                     |  |                                 |       |  |                                       |  |       |      |  |  |       |  |  |      |      |  |  |  |      | 
|---------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------- | ----- |  | ------------------------------------- |  | ----- | ---- |  |  | ----- |  |  | ---- | ---- |  |  |  | ---- | 
|($ millions)                                         |  | For the years ended December 31 |       |  | For the three monthsended December 31 | 
|                                                     |  | 2016                            |       |  | 2015                                  |  |       | 2014 |  |  | 2016  |  |  | 2015 |     
|By-product credits                                   |  |                                 | $ 184 |  |                                       |  | $ 214 |      |  |  | $ 271 |  |  |      | $ 41 |  |  |  | $ 48 | 
|Non-controlling
interest                             |  |                                 | (53)  |  |                                       |  | (62)  |      |  |  | (80)  |  |  |      | (13) |  |  |  | (14) | 
|By-product credits (net of non-controlling interest) |  |                                 | $ 131 |  |                                       |  | $ 152 |      |  |  | $ 191 |  |  |      | $ 28 |  |  |  | $ 34 | 



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 76 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

Reconciliation of Gold Cost of Sales to Cash costs, All-in sustaining costs and All-in costs, including on a per ounce basis, by operating segment



|                                                      |  |                                                           |  |          |     |  |        |  |        |            |  |  |             |  |  |              |        |  |                                              |  |       |                |  |  |        |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |        | 
|----------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------- |  | -------- | --- |  | ------ |  | ------ | ---------- |  |  | ----------- |  |  | ------------ | ------ |  | -------------------------------------------- |  | ----- | -------------- |  |  | ------ |  |  |  | ----- |  |  |  | ------ | 
|($ millions, except per ounce information in dollars) |  |                                                           |  |          |     |  |        |  |        |            |  |  |             |  |  |              |        |  | For the three months ended December 31, 2016 | 
|                                                      |  |                                                           |  | Footnote |     |  | Cortez |  |        | Goldstrike |  |  | PuebloViejo |  |  | LagunasNorte |        |  | Veladero                                     |  |       | TurquoiseRidge |  |  | Acacia | 
|                                                      |  | Cost of sales related to gold production                  |  |          |     |  |        |  | $  235 |            |  |  | $  269      |  |  |              | $  144 |  |                                              |  | $  60 |                |  |  | $  173 |  |  |  | $  41 |  |  |  | $  195 | 
|                                                      |  | Depreciation                                              |  |          |     |  |        |  | (119)  |            |  |  | (105)       |  |  |              | (21)   |  |                                              |  | (19)  |                |  |  | (42)   |  |  |  | (8)   |  |  |  | (44)   | 
|                                                      |  | By-product credits                                        |  |          | 1   |  |        |  | -      |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | (17)   |  |                                              |  | (4)   |                |  |  | (7)    |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | (10)   | 
|                                                      |  | Non-recurring items                                       |  |          | 2   |  |        |  | -      |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | -      |  |                                              |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | -      | 
|                                                      |  | Other                                                     |  |          | 3   |  |        |  | -      |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | 1      |  |                                              |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | 1      | 
|                                                      |  | Non-controlling
interests                                 |  |          |     |  |        |  | -      |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | (39)   |  |                                              |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | (52)   | 
|                                                      |  | Cash costs                                                |  |          |     |  |        |  | $ 116  |            |  |  | $ 164       |  |  |              | $ 68   |  |                                              |  | $ 37  |                |  |  | $ 124  |  |  |  | $ 33  |  |  |  | $ 90   | 
|                                                      |  | General & administrative costs                            |  |          |     |  |        |  | -      |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | -      |  |                                              |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | (1)    | 
|                                                      |  | Minesite exploration and evaluation costs                 |  |          | 4   |  |        |  | 6      |            |  |  | 1           |  |  |              | -      |  |                                              |  | -     |                |  |  | 1      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | 1      | 
|                                                      |  | Minesite sustaining capital expenditures                  |  |          | 5   |  |        |  | 19     |            |  |  | 55          |  |  |              | 32     |  |                                              |  | 3     |                |  |  | 49     |  |  |  | 9     |  |  |  | 56     | 
|                                                      |  | Rehabilitation - accretion and amortization               |  |          |     |  |        |  |        |            |  |  |             |  |  |              |        |  |                                              |  |       |                |  |  |        |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |        | 
|                                                      |  | (operating sites)                                         |  |          | 6   |  |        |  | 3      |            |  |  | 6           |  |  |              | 2      |  |                                              |  | 2     |                |  |  | 1      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | 2      | 
|                                                      |  | Non-controlling
interests                                 |  |          |     |  |        |  | -      |            |  |  | (4)         |  |  |              | (13)   |  |                                              |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | (21)   | 
|                                                      |  | All-in sustaining costs                                   |  |          |     |  |        |  | $ 144  |            |  |  | $ 222       |  |  |              | $ 89   |  |                                              |  | $ 42  |                |  |  | $ 175  |  |  |  | $ 42  |  |  |  | $ 127  | 
|                                                      |  | Project capital expenditures                              |  |          | 5   |  |        |  | 33     |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | -      |  |                                              |  | 1     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | -      | 
|                                                      |  | Non-controlling
interests                                 |  |          |     |  |        |  | -      |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | -      |  |                                              |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | -      | 
|                                                      |  | All-in costs                                              |  |          |     |  |        |  | $ 177  |            |  |  | $ 222       |  |  |              | $ 89   |  |                                              |  | $ 43  |                |  |  | $ 175  |  |  |  | $ 42  |  |  |  | $ 127  | 
|                                                      |  | Ounces sold -
equity basis (000s ounces)                  |  |          |     |  |        |  | 277    |            |  |  | 305         |  |  |              | 198    |  |                                              |  | 98    |                |  |  | 194    |  |  |  | 69    |  |  |  | 134    | 
|                                                      |  | Cost of sales per ounce                                   |  |          | 7,8 |  |        |  | $846   |            |  |  | $880        |  |  |              | $450   |  |                                              |  | $612  |                |  |  | $892   |  |  |  | $595  |  |  |  | $935   | 
|                                                      |  | Cash costs per ounce                                      |  |          | 8   |  |        |  | $ 418  |            |  |  | $ 534       |  |  |              | $ 341  |  |                                              |  | $ 379 |                |  |  | $ 642  |  |  |  | $ 484 |  |  |  | $ 679  | 
|                                                      |  | Cash costs per ounce (on a co-product
basis)              |  |          | 8,9 |  |        |  | $ 418  |            |  |  | $ 536       |  |  |              | $ 471  |  |                                              |  | $ 418 |                |  |  | $ 716  |  |  |  | $ 484 |  |  |  | $ 713  | 
|                                                      |  | All-in sustaining costs per ounce                         |  |          | 8   |  |        |  | $ 517  |            |  |  | $ 734       |  |  |              | $ 443  |  |                                              |  | $ 436 |                |  |  | $ 905  |  |  |  | $ 610 |  |  |  | $ 952  | 
|                                                      |  | All-in sustaining costs per ounce (on a co-product basis) |  |          | 8,9 |  |        |  | $ 517  |            |  |  | $ 736       |  |  |              | $ 573  |  |                                              |  | $ 475 |                |  |  | $ 979  |  |  |  | $ 610 |  |  |  | $ 986  | 
|                                                      |  | All-in costs per
ounce                                    |  |          | 8   |  |        |  | $ 637  |            |  |  | $ 734       |  |  |              | $ 443  |  |                                              |  | $ 447 |                |  |  | $ 905  |  |  |  | $ 610 |  |  |  | $ 953  | 
|                                                      |  | All-in costs per ounce (on a co-product basis)            |  |          | 8,9 |  |        |  | $ 637  |            |  |  | $ 736       |  |  |              | $ 573  |  |                                              |  | $ 486 |                |  |  | $ 979  |  |  |  | $ 610 |  |  |  | $ 987  | 



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 77 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

|                                                      |  |                                                           |  |          |     |  |        |  |       |            |  |  |             |  |  |              |       |  |                                              |  |       |                |  |  |        |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |         | 
|----------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------- |  | -------- | --- |  | ------ |  | ----- | ---------- |  |  | ----------- |  |  | ------------ | ----- |  | -------------------------------------------- |  | ----- | -------------- |  |  | ------ |  |  |  | ----- |  |  |  | ------- | 
|($ millions, except per ounce information in dollars) |  |                                                           |  |          |     |  |        |  |       |            |  |  |             |  |  |              |       |  | For the three months ended December 31, 2015 | 
|                                                      |  |                                                           |  | Footnote |     |  | Cortez |  |       | Goldstrike |  |  | PuebloViejo |  |  | LagunasNorte |       |  | Veladero                                     |  |       | TurquoiseRidge |  |  | Acacia | 
|                                                      |  | Cost of sales related to gold production                  |  |          |     |  |        |  | $ 242 |            |  |  | $ 251       |  |  |              | $ 197 |  |                                              |  | $ 81  |                |  |  | $ 123  |  |  |  | $ 35  |  |  |  | $ 303   | 
|                                                      |  | Depreciation                                              |  |          |     |  |        |  | (122) |            |  |  | (73)        |  |  |              | (55)  |  |                                              |  | (37)  |                |  |  | (29)   |  |  |  | (6)   |  |  |  | (44)    | 
|                                                      |  | By-product credits                                        |  |          | 1   |  |        |  | (1)   |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | (26)  |  |                                              |  | (4)   |                |  |  | (4)    |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | (9)     | 
|                                                      |  | Non-recurring items                                       |  |          | 2   |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | (38)  |  |                                              |  | -     |                |  |  | (2)    |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | (109)   | 
|                                                      |  | Other                                                     |  |          | 3   |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | 3     |  |                                              |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | 4       | 
|                                                      |  | Non-controlling
interests                                 |  |          |     |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | (27)  |  |                                              |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | (51)    | 
|                                                      |  | Cash costs                                                |  |          |     |  |        |  | $ 119 |            |  |  | $ 178       |  |  |              | $ 54  |  |                                              |  | $ 40  |                |  |  | $ 88   |  |  |  | $ 29  |  |  |  | $ 94    | 
|                                                      |  | General & administrative costs                            |  |          |     |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | -     |  |                                              |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | 9       | 
|                                                      |  | Minesite exploration and evaluation costs                 |  |          | 4   |  |        |  | 1     |            |  |  | 2           |  |  |              | 1     |  |                                              |  | 1     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | -       | 
|                                                      |  | Minesite sustaining capital expenditures                  |  |          | 5   |  |        |  | 15    |            |  |  | 16          |  |  |              | 19    |  |                                              |  | 17    |                |  |  | 55     |  |  |  | 9     |  |  |  | 43      | 
|                                                      |  | Rehabilitation - accretion and amortization               |  |          |     |  |        |  |       |            |  |  |             |  |  |              |       |  |                                              |  |       |                |  |  |        |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |         | 
|                                                      |  | (operating sites)                                         |  |          | 6   |  |        |  | 4     |            |  |  | 3           |  |  |              | 7     |  |                                              |  | 2     |                |  |  | 1      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | 2       | 
|                                                      |  | Non-controlling
interests                                 |  |          |     |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | (11)  |  |                                              |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | (20)    | 
|                                                      |  | All-in sustaining costs                                   |  |          |     |  |        |  | $ 139 |            |  |  | $ 199       |  |  |              | $ 70  |  |                                              |  | $ 60  |                |  |  | $ 144  |  |  |  | $ 38  |  |  |  | $ 128   | 
|                                                      |  | Project capital expenditures                              |  |          | 5   |  |        |  | 5     |            |  |  | 24          |  |  |              | -     |  |                                              |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | -       | 
|                                                      |  | Non-controlling
interests                                 |  |          |     |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | (9)         |  |  |              | -     |  |                                              |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | -       | 
|                                                      |  | All-in costs                                              |  |          |     |  |        |  | $ 144 |            |  |  | $ 214       |  |  |              | $ 70  |  |                                              |  | $ 60  |                |  |  | $ 144  |  |  |  | $ 38  |  |  |  | $ 128   | 
|                                                      |  | Ounces sold - equity basis (000s ounces)                  |  |          |     |  |        |  | 344   |            |  |  | 345         |  |  |              | 141   |  |                                              |  | 118   |                |  |  | 156    |  |  |  | 51    |  |  |  | 127     | 
|                                                      |  | Cost of sales per ounce                                   |  |          | 7,8 |  |        |  | $703  |            |  |  | $727        |  |  |              | $849  |  |                                              |  | $690  |                |  |  | $785   |  |  |  | $685  |  |  |  | $1,526  | 
|                                                      |  | Cash costs per ounce                                      |  |          | 8   |  |        |  | $ 348 |            |  |  | $ 514       |  |  |              | $ 383 |  |                                              |  | $ 337 |                |  |  | $ 556  |  |  |  | $ 571 |  |  |  | $ 728   | 
|                                                      |  | Cash costs per ounce (on a co-product
basis)              |  |          | 8,9 |  |        |  | $ 348 |            |  |  | $ 516       |  |  |              | $ 505 |  |                                              |  | $ 370 |                |  |  | $ 594  |  |  |  | $ 571 |  |  |  | $ 756   | 
|                                                      |  | All-in sustaining costs per ounce                         |  |          | 8   |  |        |  | $ 406 |            |  |  | $ 581       |  |  |              | $ 496 |  |                                              |  | $ 506 |                |  |  | $ 915  |  |  |  | $ 735 |  |  |  | $ 1,004 | 
|                                                      |  | All-in sustaining costs per ounce (on a co-product basis) |  |          | 8,9 |  |        |  | $ 406 |            |  |  | $ 583       |  |  |              | $ 618 |  |                                              |  | $ 539 |                |  |  | $ 953  |  |  |  | $ 735 |  |  |  | $ 1,032 | 
|                                                      |  | All-in costs per ounce                                    |  |          | 8   |  |        |  | $ 419 |            |  |  | $ 623       |  |  |              | $ 496 |  |                                              |  | $ 506 |                |  |  | $ 915  |  |  |  | $ 735 |  |  |  | $ 1,005 | 
|                                                      |  | All-in costs per ounce (on a co-product basis)            |  |          | 8,9 |  |        |  | $ 419 |            |  |  | $ 625       |  |  |              | $ 618 |  |                                              |  | $ 539 |                |  |  | $ 953  |  |  |  | $ 735 |  |  |  | $ 1,033 | 



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 78 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

|                                                      |  |                                                           |  |          |     |  |        |  |       |            |  |  |             |  |  |              |       |  |                                      |  |       |                |  |  |        |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |       | 
|----------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------- |  | -------- | --- |  | ------ |  | ----- | ---------- |  |  | ----------- |  |  | ------------ | ----- |  | ------------------------------------ |  | ----- | -------------- |  |  | ------ |  |  |  | ----- |  |  |  | ----- | 
|($ millions, except per ounce information in dollars) |  |                                                           |  |          |     |  |        |  |       |            |  |  |             |  |  |              |       |  | For the year ended December 31, 2016 | 
|                                                      |  |                                                           |  | Footnote |     |  | Cortez |  |       | Goldstrike |  |  | PuebloViejo |  |  | LagunasNorte |       |  | Veladero                             |  |       | TurquoiseRidge |  |  | Acacia | 
|                                                      |  | Cost of sales related to gold production                  |  |          |     |  |        |  | $ 955 |            |  |  | $ 940       |  |  |              | $ 644 |  |                                      |  | $ 276 |                |  |  | $ 464  |  |  |  | $ 155 |  |  |  | $ 719 | 
|                                                      |  | Depreciation                                              |  |          |     |  |        |  | (499) |            |  |  | (307)       |  |  |              | (147) |  |                                      |  | (96)  |                |  |  | (118)  |  |  |  | (27)  |  |  |  | (166) | 
|                                                      |  | By-product credits                                        |  |          | 1   |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | (1)         |  |  |              | (90)  |  |                                      |  | (17)  |                |  |  | (27)   |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | (39)  | 
|                                                      |  | Non-recurring items                                       |  |          | 2   |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | 34    |  |                                      |  | -     |                |  |  | (10)   |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | -     | 
|                                                      |  | Other                                                     |  |          | 3   |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | 5     |  |                                      |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | 8     | 
|                                                      |  | Non-controlling
interests                                 |  |          |     |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | (170) |  |                                      |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | (188) | 
|                                                      |  | Cash costs                                                |  |          |     |  |        |  | $ 456 |            |  |  | $ 632       |  |  |              | $ 276 |  |                                      |  | $ 163 |                |  |  | $ 309  |  |  |  | $ 128 |  |  |  | $ 334 | 
|                                                      |  | General & administrative costs                            |  |          |     |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | -     |  |                                      |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | 55    | 
|                                                      |  | Minesite exploration and evaluation costs                 |  |          | 4   |  |        |  | 6     |            |  |  | 4           |  |  |              | -     |  |                                      |  | 2     |                |  |  | 1      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | 3     | 
|                                                      |  | Minesite sustaining capital expenditures                  |  |          | 5   |  |        |  | 75    |            |  |  | 142         |  |  |              | 101   |  |                                      |  | 51    |                |  |  | 95     |  |  |  | 32    |  |  |  | 190   | 
|                                                      |  | Rehabilitation - accretion and amortization               |  |          |     |  |        |  |       |            |  |  |             |  |  |              |       |  |                                      |  |       |                |  |  |        |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |       | 
|                                                      |  | (operating sites)                                         |  |          | 6   |  |        |  | 12    |            |  |  | 14          |  |  |              | 10    |  |                                      |  | 8     |                |  |  | 4      |  |  |  | 1     |  |  |  | 6     | 
|                                                      |  | Non-controlling
interests                                 |  |          |     |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | (4)         |  |  |              | (44)  |  |                                      |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | (88)  | 
|                                                      |  | All-in sustaining costs                                   |  |          |     |  |        |  | $ 549 |            |  |  | $ 788       |  |  |              | $ 343 |  |                                      |  | $ 224 |                |  |  | $ 409  |  |  |  | $ 161 |  |  |  | $ 500 | 
|                                                      |  | Project capital expenditures                              |  |          | 5   |  |        |  | 67    |            |  |  | 74          |  |  |              | -     |  |                                      |  | 5     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | 1     | 
|                                                      |  | Non-controlling
interests                                 |  |          |     |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | (30)        |  |  |              | -     |  |                                      |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | -     | 
|                                                      |  | All-in costs                                              |  |          |     |  |        |  | $ 616 |            |  |  | $ 832       |  |  |              | $ 343 |  |                                      |  | $ 229 |                |  |  | $ 409  |  |  |  | $ 161 |  |  |  | $ 501 | 
|                                                      |  | Ounces sold - equity basis (000s ounces)                  |  |          |     |  |        |  | 1,059 |            |  |  | 1,103       |  |  |              | 700   |  |                                      |  | 425   |                |  |  | 532    |  |  |  | 257   |  |  |  | 522   | 
|                                                      |  | Cost of sales per ounce                                   |  |          | 7,8 |  |        |  | $901  |            |  |  | $852        |  |  |              | $564  |  |                                      |  | $651  |                |  |  | $872   |  |  |  | $603  |  |  |  | $880  | 
|                                                      |  | Cash costs per ounce                                      |  |          | 8   |  |        |  | $ 430 |            |  |  | $ 572       |  |  |              | $ 395 |  |                                      |  | $ 383 |                |  |  | $ 582  |  |  |  | $ 498 |  |  |  | $ 640 | 
|                                                      |  | Cash costs per ounce (on a co-product
basis)              |  |          | 8,9 |  |        |  | $ 430 |            |  |  | $ 573       |  |  |              | 473   |  |                                      |  | $ 423 |                |  |  | $ 632  |  |  |  | $ 498 |  |  |  | $ 677 | 
|                                                      |  | All-in sustaining costs per ounce                         |  |          | 8   |  |        |  | $ 518 |            |  |  | $ 714       |  |  |              | $ 490 |  |                                      |  | $ 529 |                |  |  | $ 769  |  |  |  | $ 625 |  |  |  | $ 958 | 
|                                                      |  | All-in sustaining costs per ounce (on a co-product basis) |  |          | 8,9 |  |        |  | $ 518 |            |  |  | $ 715       |  |  |              | $ 568 |  |                                      |  | $ 569 |                |  |  | $ 819  |  |  |  | $ 625 |  |  |  | $ 995 | 
|                                                      |  | All-in costs per ounce                                    |  |          | 8   |  |        |  | $ 581 |            |  |  | $ 754       |  |  |              | $ 490 |  |                                      |  | $ 540 |                |  |  | $ 769  |  |  |  | $ 625 |  |  |  | $ 960 | 
|                                                      |  | All-in costs per ounce (on a co-product basis)            |  |          | 8,9 |  |        |  | $ 581 |            |  |  | $ 755       |  |  |              | $ 568 |  |                                      |  | $ 580 |                |  |  | $ 819  |  |  |  | $ 625 |  |  |  | $ 997 | 



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 79 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

|                                                      |  |                                                           |  |          |     |  |        |  |       |            |  |  |             |  |  |              |       |  |                                      |  |       |                |  |  |        |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |         | 
|----------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------- |  | -------- | --- |  | ------ |  | ----- | ---------- |  |  | ----------- |  |  | ------------ | ----- |  | ------------------------------------ |  | ----- | -------------- |  |  | ------ |  |  |  | ----- |  |  |  | ------- | 
|($ millions, except per ounce information in dollars) |  |                                                           |  |          |     |  |        |  |       |            |  |  |             |  |  |              |       |  | For the year ended December 31, 2015 | 
|                                                      |  |                                                           |  | Footnote |     |  | Cortez |  |       | Goldstrike |  |  | PuebloViejo |  |  | LagunasNorte |       |  | Veladero                             |  |       | TurquoiseRidge |  |  | Acacia | 
|                                                      |  | Cost of sales related to gold production                  |  |          |     |  |        |  | $ 826 |            |  |  | $ 722       |  |  |              | $ 904 |  |                                      |  | $ 378 |                |  |  | $ 499  |  |  |  | $ 141 |  |  |  | $ 837   | 
|                                                      |  | Depreciation                                              |  |          |     |  |        |  | (343) |            |  |  | (192)       |  |  |              | (277) |  |                                      |  | (169) |                |  |  | (108)  |  |  |  | (23)  |  |  |  | (143)   | 
|                                                      |  | By-product credits                                        |  |          | 1   |  |        |  | (1)   |            |  |  | (1)         |  |  |              | (120) |  |                                      |  | (18)  |                |  |  | (22)   |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | (36)    | 
|                                                      |  | Non-recurring items                                       |  |          | 2   |  |        |  | (5)   |            |  |  | (7)         |  |  |              | (47)  |  |                                      |  | (5)   |                |  |  | (21)   |  |  |  | (1)   |  |  |  | (109)   | 
|                                                      |  | Other                                                     |  |          | 3   |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | 13    |  |                                      |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | 8       | 
|                                                      |  | Non-controlling
interests                                 |  |          |     |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | (194) |  |                                      |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | (200)   | 
|                                                      |  | Cash costs                                                |  |          |     |  |        |  | $ 477 |            |  |  | $ 522       |  |  |              | $ 279 |  |                                      |  | $ 186 |                |  |  | $ 348  |  |  |  | $ 117 |  |  |  | $ 357   | 
|                                                      |  | General & administrative costs                            |  |          |     |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | -     |  |                                      |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | 42      | 
|                                                      |  | Minesite exploration and evaluation costs                 |  |          | 4   |  |        |  | 2     |            |  |  | 10          |  |  |              | 1     |  |                                      |  | 3     |                |  |  | 2      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | 2       | 
|                                                      |  | Minesite sustaining capital expenditures                  |  |          | 5   |  |        |  | 101   |            |  |  | 110         |  |  |              | 102   |  |                                      |  | 67    |                |  |  | 242    |  |  |  | 32    |  |  |  | 178     | 
|                                                      |  | Rehabilitation - accretion and amortization               |  |          |     |  |        |  |       |            |  |  |             |  |  |              |       |  |                                      |  |       |                |  |  |        |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |         | 
|                                                      |  | (operating sites)                                         |  |          | 6   |  |        |  | 12    |            |  |  | 15          |  |  |              | 25    |  |                                      |  | 32    |                |  |  | 4      |  |  |  | 1     |  |  |  | 9       | 
|                                                      |  | Non-controlling
interests                                 |  |          |     |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | (51)  |  |                                      |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | (75)    | 
|                                                      |  | All-in sustaining costs                                   |  |          |     |  |        |  | $ 592 |            |  |  | $ 657       |  |  |              | $ 356 |  |                                      |  | $ 288 |                |  |  | $ 596  |  |  |  | $ 150 |  |  |  | $ 513   | 
|                                                      |  | Project capital expenditures                              |  |          | 5   |  |        |  | 47    |            |  |  | 112         |  |  |              | -     |  |                                      |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | (1)     | 
|                                                      |  | Non-controlling
interests                                 |  |          |     |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | (31)        |  |  |              | -     |  |                                      |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | -       | 
|                                                      |  | All-in costs                                              |  |          |     |  |        |  | $ 639 |            |  |  | $ 738       |  |  |              | $ 356 |  |                                      |  | $ 288 |                |  |  | $ 596  |  |  |  | $ 150 |  |  |  | $ 512   | 
|                                                      |  | Ounces sold - equity basis (000s ounces)                  |  |          |     |  |        |  | 982   |            |  |  | 999         |  |  |              | 597   |  |                                      |  | 565   |                |  |  | 629    |  |  |  | 202   |  |  |  | 461     | 
|                                                      |  | Cost of sales per ounce                                   |  |          | 7,8 |  |        |  | $841  |            |  |  | $723        |  |  |              | $881  |  |                                      |  | $669  |                |  |  | $792   |  |  |  | $697  |  |  |  | $1,161  | 
|                                                      |  | Cash costs per ounce                                      |  |          | 8   |  |        |  | $ 486 |            |  |  | $ 522       |  |  |              | $ 467 |  |                                      |  | $ 329 |                |  |  | $ 552  |  |  |  | $ 581 |  |  |  | $ 772   | 
|                                                      |  | Cash costs per ounce (on a co-product
basis)              |  |          | 8,9 |  |        |  | $ 487 |            |  |  | $ 523       |  |  |              | $ 595 |  |                                      |  | $ 361 |                |  |  | $ 587  |  |  |  | $ 581 |  |  |  | $ 810   | 
|                                                      |  | All-in sustaining costs per ounce                         |  |          | 8   |  |        |  | $ 603 |            |  |  | $ 658       |  |  |              | $ 597 |  |                                      |  | $ 509 |                |  |  | $ 946  |  |  |  | $ 742 |  |  |  | $ 1,112 | 
|                                                      |  | All-in sustaining costs per ounce (on a co-product basis) |  |          | 8,9 |  |        |  | $ 604 |            |  |  | $ 659       |  |  |              | $ 725 |  |                                      |  | $ 541 |                |  |  | $ 981  |  |  |  | $ 742 |  |  |  | $ 1,150 | 
|                                                      |  | All-in costs per ounce                                    |  |          | 8   |  |        |  | $ 650 |            |  |  | $ 738       |  |  |              | $ 597 |  |                                      |  | $ 509 |                |  |  | $ 946  |  |  |  | $ 742 |  |  |  | $ 1,111 | 
|                                                      |  | All-in costs per ounce (on a co-product basis)            |  |          | 8,9 |  |        |  | $ 651 |            |  |  | $ 739       |  |  |              | $ 725 |  |                                      |  | $ 541 |                |  |  | $ 981  |  |  |  | $ 742 |  |  |  | $ 1,149 | 



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 80 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

|                                                      |  |                                                           |  |          |     |  |        |  |       |            |  |  |             |  |  |              |       |  |                                      |  |       |                |  |  |        |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |         | 
|----------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------- |  | -------- | --- |  | ------ |  | ----- | ---------- |  |  | ----------- |  |  | ------------ | ----- |  | ------------------------------------ |  | ----- | -------------- |  |  | ------ |  |  |  | ----- |  |  |  | ------- | 
|($ millions, except per ounce information in dollars) |  |                                                           |  |          |     |  |        |  |       |            |  |  |             |  |  |              |       |  | For the year ended December 31, 2014 | 
|                                                      |  |                                                           |  | Footnote |     |  | Cortez |  |       | Goldstrike |  |  | PuebloViejo |  |  | LagunasNorte |       |  | Veladero                             |  |       | TurquoiseRidge |  |  | Acacia | 
|                                                      |  | Cost of sales related to gold production                  |  |          |     |  |        |  | $ 687 |            |  |  | $ 651       |  |  |              | $ 885 |  |                                      |  | $ 335 |                |  |  | $ 554  |  |  |  | $ 111 |  |  |  | $ 693   | 
|                                                      |  | Depreciation                                              |  |          |     |  |        |  | (255) |            |  |  | (132)       |  |  |              | (243) |  |                                      |  | (92)  |                |  |  | (116)  |  |  |  | (17)  |  |  |  | (129)   | 
|                                                      |  | By-product credits                                        |  |          | 1   |  |        |  | (1)   |            |  |  | (1)         |  |  |              | (163) |  |                                      |  | (14)  |                |  |  | (28)   |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | (45)    | 
|                                                      |  | Non-recurring items                                       |  |          | 2   |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | -     |  |                                      |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | -       | 
|                                                      |  | Other                                                     |  |          | 3   |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | 16    |  |                                      |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | (8)     | 
|                                                      |  | Non-controlling
interests                                 |  |          |     |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | (197) |  |                                      |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | (182)   | 
|                                                      |  | Cash costs                                                |  |          |     |  |        |  | $ 431 |            |  |  | $ 518       |  |  |              | $ 298 |  |                                      |  | $ 229 |                |  |  | $ 410  |  |  |  | $ 94  |  |  |  | $ 329   | 
|                                                      |  | General & administrative costs                            |  |          |     |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | -     |  |                                      |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | 44      | 
|                                                      |  | Minesite exploration and evaluation costs                 |  |          | 4   |  |        |  | 1     |            |  |  | 2           |  |  |              | -     |  |                                      |  | 1     |                |  |  | 3      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | 1       | 
|                                                      |  | Minesite sustaining capital expenditures                  |  |          | 5   |  |        |  | 170   |            |  |  | 245         |  |  |              | 134   |  |                                      |  | 81    |                |  |  | 173    |  |  |  | 30    |  |  |  | 195     | 
|                                                      |  | Rehabilitation - accretion and amortization               |  |          |     |  |        |  |       |            |  |  |             |  |  |              |       |  |                                      |  |       |                |  |  |        |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |         | 
|                                                      |  | (operating sites)                                         |  |          | 6   |  |        |  | 9     |            |  |  | 10          |  |  |              | 23    |  |                                      |  | 17    |                |  |  | 4      |  |  |  | 1     |  |  |  | 8       | 
|                                                      |  | Non-controlling
interests                                 |  |          |     |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | -           |  |  |              | (62)  |  |                                      |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | (80)    | 
|                                                      |  | All-in sustaining costs                                   |  |          |     |  |        |  | $ 611 |            |  |  | $ 775       |  |  |              | $ 393 |  |                                      |  | $ 328 |                |  |  | $ 590  |  |  |  | $ 125 |  |  |  | $ 497   | 
|                                                      |  | Project capital expenditures                              |  |          | 5   |  |        |  | 19    |            |  |  | 300         |  |  |              | -     |  |                                      |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | 56      | 
|                                                      |  | Non-controlling
interests                                 |  |          |     |  |        |  | -     |            |  |  | (5)         |  |  |              | -     |  |                                      |  | -     |                |  |  | -      |  |  |  | -     |  |  |  | (17)    | 
|                                                      |  | All-in costs                                              |  |          |     |  |        |  | $ 630 |            |  |  | $ 1,070     |  |  |              | $ 393 |  |                                      |  | $ 328 |                |  |  | $ 590  |  |  |  | $ 125 |  |  |  | $ 536   | 
|                                                      |  | Ounces sold - equity
basis (000s ounces)                  |  |          |     |  |        |  | 865   |            |  |  | 908         |  |  |              | 667   |  |                                      |  | 604   |                |  |  | 724    |  |  |  | 200   |  |  |  | 450     | 
|                                                      |  | Cost of sales per ounce                                   |  |          | 7,8 |  |        |  | $ 794 |            |  |  | $ 718       |  |  |              | $ 786 |  |                                      |  | $ 555 |                |  |  | $ 764  |  |  |  | $ 559 |  |  |  | $ 985   | 
|                                                      |  | Cash costs per ounce                                      |  |          | 8   |  |        |  | $ 498 |            |  |  | $ 571       |  |  |              | $ 446 |  |                                      |  | $ 379 |                |  |  | $ 566  |  |  |  | $ 473 |  |  |  | $ 732   | 
|                                                      |  | Cash costs per ounce (on a co-product
basis)              |  |          | 8,9 |  |        |  | $ 499 |            |  |  | $ 572       |  |  |              | $ 521 |  |                                      |  | $ 403 |                |  |  | $ 604  |  |  |  | $ 473 |  |  |  | $ 786   | 
|                                                      |  | All-in sustaining costs per ounce                         |  |          | 8   |  |        |  | $ 706 |            |  |  | $ 854       |  |  |              | $ 588 |  |                                      |  | $ 543 |                |  |  | $ 815  |  |  |  | $ 628 |  |  |  | $ 1,105 | 
|                                                      |  | All-in sustaining costs per ounce (on a co-product basis) |  |          | 8,9 |  |        |  | $ 707 |            |  |  | $ 855       |  |  |              | $ 663 |  |                                      |  | $ 567 |                |  |  | $ 853  |  |  |  | $ 628 |  |  |  | $ 1,159 | 
|                                                      |  | All-in costs per
ounce                                    |  |          | 8   |  |        |  | $ 728 |            |  |  | $ 1,179     |  |  |              | $ 588 |  |                                      |  | $ 543 |                |  |  | $ 815  |  |  |  | $ 628 |  |  |  | $ 1,190 | 
|                                                      |  | All-in costs per ounce (on a co-product basis)            |  |          | 8,9 |  |        |  | $ 729 |            |  |  | $ 1,180     |  |  |              | $ 663 |  |                                      |  | $ 567 |                |  |  | $ 853  |  |  |  | $ 628 |  |  |  | $ 1,244 | 



|1 | By-product credits
|- | ------------------

Revenues include the sale of by-products for our gold mines and energy sales from the Monte Rio power plant at
our Pueblo Viejo mine for the three months and year ended December 31, 2016, of $nil and $33 million, respectively (2015: $14 million and $74 million, respectively; 2014: $88 million).



|2 | Non-recurring items
|- | -------------------

Non-recurring items in 2016 consist of $34 million in a reduction in cost of sales attributed to insurance
proceeds recorded in the third quarter of 2016 relating to the 2015 oxygen plant motor failure at Pueblo Viejo and $10 million in abnormal costs at Veladero relating to the administrative fine in connection with the cyanide incident that
occurred in 2015. These gains/costs are not indicative of our cost of production and have been excluded from the calculation of cash costs.



|3 | Other
|- | -----

Other adjustments include adding the net margins related to power sales at Pueblo Viejo of $nil and $5 million, respectively (2015: $2 million
and $12 million, respectively; 2014: $16 million) and adding the cost of treatment and refining charges of $2 million and $9 million, respectively (2015: $3 million and $8 million, respectively; 2014: $7 million).



|4 | Exploration and evaluation costs
|- | --------------------------------

Exploration, evaluation and project expenses are presented as minesite sustaining if it supports current mine operations and project if it relates to
future projects. Refer to page 45 of this MD&A.



|5 | Capital expenditures
|- | --------------------

Capital expenditures are related to our gold sites only and are presented on a 100% accrued basis. They are split between minesite sustaining and
project capital expenditures. Project capital expenditures are distinct projects designed to increase the net present value of the mine and are not related to current production. Significant projects in the current year are Arturo, Cortez Lower Zone
and Lagunas Norte Refractory Ore Project. Refer to page 44 of this MD&A.



|6 | Rehabilitation - accretion and amortization
|- | -------------------------------------------

Includes depreciation on the assets related to rehabilitation provisions of our gold operations and accretion on the rehabilitation provision of our
gold operations, split between operating and non-operating sites.



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 81 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

|7 | Cost of sales per ounce
|- | -----------------------

Cost of sales related to gold per ounce is calculated using cost of sales on an attributable basis (removing the
non-controlling interest of 40% Pueblo Viejo and 36.1% Acacia from cost of sales), divided by attributable gold ounces.



|8 | Per ounce figures
|- | -----------------

Cost of sales per ounce, cash costs per ounce, all-in sustaining costs per ounce and all-in costs per ounce may not calculate based on amounts presented in this table due to rounding.



|9 | Co-product costs per ounce
|- | --------------------------

Cash costs per ounce, all-in sustaining costs per ounce and all-in costs
per ounce presented on a co-product basis remove the impact of by-product credits of our gold production (net of non-controlling
interest) calculated as:



|                                                     |  |                                              |     |  |            |  |     |              |  |  |               |  |  |          |      |  |                 |  |      |        |  |  |    |  |  |  |      | 
|---------------------------------------------------- |  | -------------------------------------------- | --- |  | ---------- |  | --- | ------------ |  |  | ------------- |  |  | -------- | ---- |  | --------------- |  | ---- | ------ |  |  | -- |  |  |  | ---- | 
|($ millions)                                         |  | For the three months ended December 31, 2016 |    
|                                                     |  |                                              |     |  |            |  |    
|                                                     |  | Cortez                                       |     |  | Goldstrike |  |     | Pueblo Viejo |  |  | Lagunas Norte |  |  | Veladero |      |  | Turquoise Ridge |  |      | Acacia | 
|By-product credits                                   |  |                                              | $-  |  |            |  | $-  |              |  |  | $ 17          |  |  |          | $ 4  |  |                 |  | $ 7  |        |  |  | $- |  |  |  | $ 10 | 
|Non-controlling interest                             |  |                                              | -   |  |            |  | -   |              |  |  | (9)           |  |  |          | -    |  |                 |  | -    |        |  |  | -  |  |  |  | (4)  | 
|By-product credits (net of non-controlling interest) |  |                                              | $-  |  |            |  | $-  |              |  |  | $ 8           |  |  |          | $ 4  |  |                 |  | $ 7  |        |  |  | $- |  |  |  | $ 6  | 
|                                                     | 
|                                                     |  | For the three months ended December 31, 2015 |    
|                                                     |  |                                              |     |  |            |  |    
|                                                     |  | Cortez                                       |     |  | Goldstrike |  |     | Pueblo Viejo |  |  | Lagunas Norte |  |  | Veladero |      |  | Turquoise Ridge |  |      | Acacia | 
|By-product credits                                   |  |                                              | $ 1 |  |            |  | $-  |              |  |  | $ 26          |  |  |          | $ 4  |  |                 |  | $ 4  |        |  |  | $- |  |  |  | $ 9  | 
|Non-controlling interest                             |  |                                              | -   |  |            |  | -   |              |  |  | (10)          |  |  |          | -    |  |                 |  | -    |        |  |  | -  |  |  |  | (3)  | 
|By-product credits (net of non-controlling interest) |  |                                              | $ 1 |  |            |  | $-  |              |  |  | $ 16          |  |  |          | $ 4  |  |                 |  | $ 4  |        |  |  | $- |  |  |  | $ 6  | 
|                                                     | 
|                                                     |  | For year ended December 31, 2016             |    
|                                                     |  |                                              |     |  |            |  |    
|                                                     |  | Cortez                                       |     |  | Goldstrike |  |     | Pueblo Viejo |  |  | Lagunas Norte |  |  | Veladero |      |  | Turquoise Ridge |  |      | Acacia | 
|By-product credits                                   |  |                                              | $-  |  |            |  | $ 1 |              |  |  | $ 90          |  |  |          | $ 17 |  |                 |  | $ 27 |        |  |  | $- |  |  |  | $ 39 | 
|Non-controlling interest                             |  |                                              | -   |  |            |  | -   |              |  |  | (39)          |  |  |          | -    |  |                 |  | -    |        |  |  | -  |  |  |  | (14) | 
|By-product credits (net of non-controlling interest) |  |                                              | $-  |  |            |  | $ 1 |              |  |  | $ 51          |  |  |          | $ 17 |  |                 |  | $ 27 |        |  |  | $- |  |  |  | $ 25 | 
|                                                     | 
|                                                     |  | For the year ended December 31, 2015         |    
|                                                     |  |                                              |     |  |            |  |    
|                                                     |  | Cortez                                       |     |  | Goldstrike |  |     | Pueblo Viejo |  |  | Lagunas Norte |  |  | Veladero |      |  | Turquoise Ridge |  |      | Acacia | 
|By-product credits                                   |  |                                              | $ 1 |  |            |  | $ 1 |              |  |  | $ 120         |  |  |          | $ 18 |  |                 |  | $ 22 |        |  |  | $- |  |  |  | $ 36 | 
|Non-controlling interest                             |  |                                              | -   |  |            |  | -   |              |  |  | (49)          |  |  |          | -    |  |                 |  | -    |        |  |  | -  |  |  |  | (13) | 
|By-product credits (net of non-controlling interest) |  |                                              | $ 1 |  |            |  | $ 1 |              |  |  | $ 71          |  |  |          | $ 18 |  |                 |  | $ 22 |        |  |  | $- |  |  |  | $ 23 | 
|                                                     | 
|                                                     |  | For the year ended December 31, 2014         |    
|                                                     |  |                                              |     |  |            |  |    
|                                                     |  | Cortez                                       |     |  | Goldstrike |  |     | Pueblo Viejo |  |  | Lagunas Norte |  |  | Veladero |      |  | Turquoise Ridge |  |      | Acacia | 
|By-product credits                                   |  |                                              | $ 1 |  |            |  | $ 1 |              |  |  | $ 163         |  |  |          | $ 14 |  |                 |  | $ 28 |        |  |  | $- |  |  |  | $ 45 | 
|Non-controlling interest                             |  |                                              | -   |  |            |  | -   |              |  |  | (64)          |  |  |          | -    |  |                 |  | -    |        |  |  | -  |  |  |  | (16) | 
|By-product credits (net of non-controlling interest) |  |                                              | $ 1 |  |            |  | $ 1 |              |  |  | $ 99          |  |  |          | $ 14 |  |                 |  | $ 28 |        |  |  | $- |  |  |  | $ 29 | 



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 82 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

Reconciliation of Copper Cost of Sales to C1 cash costs and All-in sustaining
costs, including on a per pound basis



|                                                            |  |                                 |        |  |                                        |  |         |      |  |  |         |  |  |      |        |  |  |  |        | 
|----------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------- | ------ |  | -------------------------------------- |  | ------- | ---- |  |  | ------- |  |  | ---- | ------ |  |  |  | ------ | 
|($ millions, except per pound information in dollars)       |  | For the years ended December 31 |        |  | For the three months ended December 31 | 
|                                                            |  | 2016                            |        |  | 2015                                   |  |         | 2014 |  |  | 2016    |  |  | 2015 |       
|Cost of sales                                               |  |                                 | $ 319  |  |                                        |  | $ 814   |      |  |  | $ 954   |  |  |      | $ 84   |  |  |  | $ 116  | 
|Depreciation/amortization1                                  |  |                                 | (45)   |  |                                        |  | (104)   |      |  |  | (171)   |  |  |      | (15)   |  |  |  | (23)   | 
|Treatment and refinement
charges                            |  |                                 | 161    |  |                                        |  | 178     |      |  |  | 120     |  |  |      | 41     |  |  |  | 49     | 
|Cash cost of sales applicable to equity method investments2 |  |                                 | 209    |  |                                        |  | 23      |      |  |  | -       |  |  |      | 55     |  |  |  | 23     | 
|Less: royalties                                             |  |                                 | (41)   |  |                                        |  | (101)   |      |  |  | (39)    |  |  |      | (9)    |  |  |  | (16)   | 
|Non-routine charges                                         |  |                                 | -      |  |                                        |  | -       |      |  |  | (1)     |  |  |      | -      |  |  |  | -      | 
|Other metal sales                                           |  |                                 | -      |  |                                        |  | (1)     |      |  |  | (1)     |  |  |      | -      |  |  |  | -      | 
|Other                                                       |  |                                 | -      |  |                                        |  | 72      |      |  |  | (27)    |  |  |      | -      |  |  |  | 72     | 
|C1 cash cost of sales                                       |  |                                 | $ 603  |  |                                        |  | $ 881   |      |  |  | $ 835   |  |  |      | $ 156  |  |  |  | $ 221  | 
|General & administrative
costs                              |  |                                 | 14     |  |                                        |  | 21      |      |  |  | 40      |  |  |      | 3      |  |  |  | 4      | 
|Rehabilitation - accretion and
amortization                 |  |                                 | 7      |  |                                        |  | 6       |      |  |  | 8       |  |  |      | 2      |  |  |  | -      | 
|Royalties                                                   |  |                                 | 41     |  |                                        |  | 101     |      |  |  | 39      |  |  |      | 9      |  |  |  | 16     | 
|Minesite exploration and evaluation
costs                   |  |                                 | -      |  |                                        |  | -       |      |  |  | 1       |  |  |      | -      |  |  |  | -      | 
|Minesite sustaining capital
expenditures                    |  |                                 | 169    |  |                                        |  | 177     |      |  |  | 294     |  |  |      | 48     |  |  |  | 44     | 
|Inventory write-downs                                       |  |                                 | -      |  |                                        |  | -       |      |  |  | 1       |  |  |      | -      |  |  |  | -      | 
|All-in sustaining costs                                     |  |                                 | $ 834  |  |                                        |  | $ 1,186 |      |  |  | $ 1,218 |  |  |      | $ 218  |  |  |  | $ 285  | 
|Pounds sold - consolidated basis (millions pounds)          |  |                                 | 405    |  |                                        |  | 510     |      |  |  | 435     |  |  |      | 107    |  |  |  | 132    | 
|Cost of sales per pound3,4                                  |  |                                 | $ 1.43 |  |                                        |  | $ 1.65  |      |  |  | $ 2.19  |  |  |      | $ 1.45 |  |  |  | $ 1.09 | 
|C1 cash cost per pound3                                     |  |                                 | $ 1.49 |  |                                        |  | $ 1.73  |      |  |  | $ 1.92  |  |  |      | $ 1.47 |  |  |  | $ 1.66 | 
|All-in sustaining costs per
pound3                          |  |                                 | $ 2.05 |  |                                        |  | $ 2.33  |      |  |  | $ 2.79  |  |  |      | $ 2.04 |  |  |  | $ 2.15 | 



| | 1 | For the year ended December 31, 2016, depreciation excludes $50 million (2015: $6 million; 2014: $nil) of
depreciation applicable to equity method investments.
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 2 | For the year ended December 31, 2016, figures include $177 million (2015: $23 million; 2014: $nil) of cash
costs related to our 50% share of Zaldívar due to the divestment of 50% of our interest in the mine on December 1 , 2015, as well as $32 million (2015: $nil; 2014: $nil) of cash costs related to our 50% share of Jabal Sayid due to
the divestment of 50% of our interest in the mine on December 4, 2014 and subsequent accounting as equity method investments.
| | - | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 3 | Cost of sales per pound, C1 cash costs per pound and all-in sustaining costs per
pound may not calculate based on amounts presented in this table due to rounding.
| | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 4 | Cost of sales related to copper per pound is calculated using cost of sales including our proportionate share of cost of
sales attributable to equity method investments (Zaldívar and Jabal Sayid), divided by consolidated copper pounds (including our proportionate share of copper pounds from our equity method investments).
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA

EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure, which excludes the
following from net earnings: 

Income tax expense; 

Finance costs; 

Finance income; and 

Depreciation. Management believes that EBITDA is a valuable indicator of our ability to generate
liquidity by producing operating cash flow to: fund working capital needs, service debt obligations, and fund capital expenditures. Management uses EBITDA for this purpose. EBITDA is also frequently used by investors and analysts for valuation
purposes whereby EBITDA is multiplied by a factor or EBITDA multiple that is based on an observed or inferred relationship between EBITDA and market values to determine the approximate total enterprise value of a company.


Adjusted EBITDA removes the effect of impairment charges. These charges are not reflective of
our ability to generate liquidity by producing operating cash flow, and therefore this adjustment will result in a more meaningful valuation measure for investors and analysts to evaluate our performance in the period and assess our future ability
to generate liquidity. EBITDA and adjusted EBITDA are intended to provide additional information to investors and analysts and do not have any
standardized definition under IFRS, and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for measures of performance prepared in accordance with IFRS. EBITDA and adjusted EBITDA exclude the impact of cash costs of financing activities and
taxes, and the effects of changes in operating working capital balances, and therefore are not necessarily indicative of operating profit or cash flow from operations as determined under IFRS. Other companies may calculate EBITDA and adjusted EBITDA
differently.






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 83 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

Starting with the third quarter 2016 MD&A, we have presented this reconciliation for each of our
reportable operating segments. We believe this additional


information will assist analysts, investors and other stakeholders of Barrick in understanding the details of these non-GAAP metrics on a segment-by-segment basis.






Reconciliation of Net Earnings to EBITDA and
Adjusted EBITDA

|                    |  |                                 |         |  |                                        |  |           |      |  |  |           |  |  |      |         |  |  |  |           | 
|------------------- |  | ------------------------------- | ------- |  | -------------------------------------- |  | --------- | ---- |  |  | --------- |  |  | ---- | ------- |  |  |  | --------- | 
|                    |  |                                
|($ millions)        |  | For the years ended December 31 |         |  | For the three months ended December 31 | 
|                    |  |                                 |         |  |                                       
|                    |  | 2016                            |         |  | 2015                                   |  |           | 2014 |  |  | 2016      |  |  | 2015 |        
|Net earnings (loss) |  |                                 | $ 861   |  |                                        |  | $ (3,113) |      |  |  | $ (2,959) |  |  |      | $ 512   |  |  |  | $ (2,941) | 
|Income tax expense  |  |                                 | 917     |  |                                        |  | (31)      |      |  |  | 306       |  |  |      | 223     |  |  |  | (361)     | 
|Finance costs, net1 |  |                                 | 725     |  |                                        |  | 663       |      |  |  | 710       |  |  |      | 200     |  |  |  | 120       | 
|Depreciation        |  |                                 | 1,574   |  |                                        |  | 1,771     |      |  |  | 1,648     |  |  |      | 418     |  |  |  | 499       | 
|EBITDA              |  |                                 | $ 4,077 |  |                                        |  | $ (710)   |      |  |  | $ (295)   |  |  |      | $ 1,353 |  |  |  | $ (2,683) | 
|Impairment charges  |  |                                 | (250)   |  |                                        |  | 3,897     |      |  |  | 4,106     |  |  |      | (304)   |  |  |  | 3,405     | 
|Adjusted EBITDA     |  |                                 | $ 3,827 |  |                                        |  | $ 3,187   |      |  |  | $ 3,811   |  |  |      | $ 1,049 |  |  |  | $ 722     | 

|1 | Finance costs exclude accretion.
|- | --------------------------------



Reconciliation of Segment Income to Segment EBITDA

|               |  |                                      |       |  |            |  |       |                    |  |  |               |  |  |          |       |  |                 |  |       |        |  |  |       |  |  |  |       | 
|-------------- |  | ------------------------------------ | ----- |  | ---------- |  | ----- | ------------------ |  |  | ------------- |  |  | -------- | ----- |  | --------------- |  | ----- | ------ |  |  | ----- |  |  |  | ----- | 
|               | 
|($ millions)   |  | For the year ended December 31, 2016 |      
|               |  |                                      |       |  |            |  |      
|               |  | Cortez                               |       |  | Goldstrike |  |       | Pueblo Viejo (60%) |  |  | Lagunas Norte |  |  | Veladero |       |  | Turquoise Ridge |  |       | Acacia | 
|Segment Income |  |                                      | $ 340 |  |            |  | $ 442 |                    |  |  | $ 528         |  |  |          | $ 260 |  |                 |  | $ 220 |        |  |  | $ 166 |  |  |  | $ 299 | 
|Depreciation   |  |                                      | 499   |  |            |  | 307   |                    |  |  | 93            |  |  |          | 96    |  |                 |  | 118   |        |  |  | 27    |  |  |  | 166   | 
|Segment EBITDA |  |                                      | $ 839 |  |            |  | $ 749 |                    |  |  | $ 621         |  |  |          | $ 356 |  |                 |  | $ 338 |        |  |  | $ 193 |  |  |  | $ 465 | 
|               | 
|               |  | For the year ended December 31, 2015 |      
|               |  | Cortez                               |       |  | Goldstrike |  |       | Pueblo Viejo (60%) |  |  | Lagunas Norte |  |  | Veladero |       |  | Turquoise Ridge |  |       | Acacia | 
|Segment Income |  |                                      | $ 287 |  |            |  | $ 408 |                    |  |  | $ 230         |  |  |          | $ 285 |  |                 |  | $ 216 |        |  |  | $ 92  |  |  |  | ($1)  | 
|Depreciation   |  |                                      | 343   |  |            |  | 192   |                    |  |  | 160           |  |  |          | 169   |  |                 |  | 108   |        |  |  | 23    |  |  |  | 143   | 
|Segment EBITDA |  |                                      | $ 630 |  |            |  | $ 600 |                    |  |  | $ 390         |  |  |          | $ 454 |  |                 |  | $ 324 |        |  |  | $ 115 |  |  |  | $ 142 | 
|               | 
|               |  | For the year ended December 31, 2014 |      
|               |  | Cortez                               |       |  | Goldstrike |  |       | Pueblo Viejo (60%) |  |  | Lagunas Norte |  |  | Veladero |       |  | Turquoise Ridge |  |       | Acacia | 
|Segment Income |  |                                      | $ 393 |  |            |  | $ 496 |                    |  |  | $ 417         |  |  |          | $ 439 |  |                 |  | $ 330 |        |  |  | $ 139 |  |  |  | $ 191 | 
|Depreciation   |  |                                      | 255   |  |            |  | 132   |                    |  |  | 138           |  |  |          | 92    |  |                 |  | 116   |        |  |  | 17    |  |  |  | 129   | 
|Segment EBITDA |  |                                      | $ 648 |  |            |  | $ 628 |                    |  |  | $ 555         |  |  |          | $ 531 |  |                 |  | $ 446 |        |  |  | $ 156 |  |  |  | $ 320 | 



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 84 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

Realized Price Realized price is a non-GAAP financial measure which excludes from sales: 

Unrealized gains and losses on non-hedge derivative contracts; 

Unrealized mark-to-market gains and
losses on provisional pricing from copper and gold sales contracts; 

Sales attributable to ore purchase arrangements; 

Treatment and refining charges; and 

Export duties. This measure is intended to enable Management to better understand the price realized in
each reporting period for gold and copper sales because unrealized mark-to-market values of non-hedge gold and copper derivatives
are subject to change each period due to changes in market factors such as market and forward gold and copper prices so that prices ultimately realized may differ from those recorded. The exclusion of such unrealized
mark-to-market gains and losses from the presentation of this performance measure enables investors to understand performance based on the realized proceeds of selling
gold and copper production. The gains and losses on non-hedge derivatives and receivable balances relate to
instruments/balances that mature in future periods, at which time the gains and


losses will become realized. The amounts of these gains and losses reflect fair values based on market valuation assumptions at the end of each period and do not necessarily represent the amounts
that will become realized on maturity. We also exclude export duties that are paid upon sale and netted against revenues as well as treatment and refining charges that are paid to the refiner on gold and copper concentrate sales that are netted
against revenues. We believe this provides investors and analysts with a more accurate measure with which to compare to market gold prices and to assess our gold sales performance. For those reasons, management believes that this measure provides a
more accurate reflection of our past performance and is a better indicator of its expected performance in future periods. The realized price
measure is intended to provide additional information, and does not have any standardized definition under IFRS and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for measures of performance prepared in accordance with IFRS. The measure is
not necessarily indicative of sales as determined under IFRS. Other companies may calculate this measure differently. The following table reconciles realized prices to the most directly comparable IFRS measure.






Reconciliation of Sales to Realized Price per
ounce/pound

|                                                            |  |                                 |         |  |        |  |         |      |  |  |         |  |  |      |        |  |      |  |         |  |  |  |         | 
|----------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------- | ------- |  | ------ |  | ------- | ---- |  |  | ------- |  |  | ---- | ------ |  | ---- |  | ------- |  |  |  | ------- | 
|                                                            |  | For the years ended December 31 |        
|($ millions, except per ounce/pound information in dollars) |  | Gold                            |         |  | Copper | 
|                                                            |  | 2016                            |         |  | 2015   |  |         | 2014 |  |  | 2016    |  |  | 2015 |        |  | 2014 | 
|Sales                                                       |  |                                 | $ 7,908 |  |        |  | $ 7,813 |      |  |  | $ 8,744 |  |  |      | $ 466  |  |      |  | $ 1,002 |  |  |  | $ 1,224 | 
|Sales applicable to non-controlling interests               |  |                                 | (948)   |  |        |  | (826)   |      |  |  | (851)   |  |  |      | -      |  |      |  | -       |  |  |  | -       | 
|Sales applicable to equity method investments1              |  |                                 | -       |  |        |  | -       |      |  |  | -       |  |  |      | 299    |  |      |  | 26      |  |  |  | -       | 
|Realized non-hedge gold/copper derivative (losses) gains    |  |                                 | (2)     |  |        |  | -       |      |  |  | 1       |  |  |      | -      |  |      |  | -       |  |  |  | (11)    | 
|Sales applicable to Pierina2                                |  |                                 | (112)   |  |        |  | -       |      |  |  | -       |  |  |      | -      |  |      |  | -       |  |  |  | -       | 
|Treatment and refinement charges                            |  |                                 | 16      |  |        |  | 14      |      |  |  | 11      |  |  |      | 161    |  |      |  | 178     |  |  |  | 120     | 
|Export duties                                               |  |                                 | 2       |  |        |  | 34      |      |  |  | 48      |  |  |      | -      |  |      |  | -       |  |  |  | -       | 
|Other3                                                      |  |                                 | -       |  |        |  | -       |      |  |  | -       |  |  |      | -      |  |      |  | -       |  |  |  | (17)    | 
|Revenues - as adjusted                                      |  |                                 | $ 6,864 |  |        |  | $ 7,035 |      |  |  | $ 7,953 |  |  |      | $ 926  |  |      |  | $ 1,206 |  |  |  | $ 1,316 | 
|Ounces/pounds sold (000s ounces/millions pounds)2           |  |                                 | 5,503   |  |        |  | 6,083   |      |  |  | 6,284   |  |  |      | 405    |  |      |  | 510     |  |  |  | 435     | 
|Realized gold/copper price per
ounce/pound4                 |  |                                 | $ 1,248 |  |        |  | $ 1,157 |      |  |  | $ 1,265 |  |  |      | $ 2.29 |  |      |  | $ 2.37  |  |  |  | $ 3.03  | 



|1 | Represents sales of $259 million for the year ended December 31, 2016 (2015: $26 million; 2014: $nil)
applicable to our 50% equity method investment in Zaldívar effective December 1, 2015 as well as $40 million (2015: $nil; 2014: $nil) applicable to our 50% equity method investment in Jabal Sayid effective December 3, 2014 and
subsequent accounting as equity method investments.
|- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|2 | 2016 figures exclude Pierina from the calculation of realized price per ounce as the mine is currently going through
closure.
|- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|3 | Revenue related to copper cathode purchases made in the second quarter of 2014.
|- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|4 | Realized price per ounce/pound may not calculate based on amounts presented in this table due to rounding.
|- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 85 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---



TECHNICAL
INFORMATION

The scientific and technical information contained in this MD&A has been reviewed and approved by Steven Haggarty, P. Eng.,
Senior Director, Metallurgy of Barrick; Rick Sims, Registered Member SME, Senior Director, Resources and Reserves of Barrick; and Patrick Garretson, Registered Member SME, Senior Director, Life of Mine Planning of Barrick who are each a
Qualified Person as defined in National Instrument 43-101 - Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects.







ENDNOTES



|1 | These are non-GAAP financial performance measures with no standardized meaning
under IFRS and therefore may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other issuers. For further information and a detailed reconciliation of each non-GAAP measure to the most directly comparable
IFRS measure, please see pages 71 to 85 of this MD&A.
|- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2 | Amount excludes capital leases and includes project financing payments at Pueblo Viejo (60% basis) and Acacia (100%
basis).
|- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|3 | Includes $943 million cash primarily held at Acacia and Pueblo Viejo, which may not be readily deployed outside of
Acacia and/or Pueblo Viejo.
|- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|4 | Cost of sales related to gold per ounce is calculated using cost of sales related to gold on an attributable basis
(removing the non-controlling interest of 40% Pueblo Viejo and 36.1% Acacia from cost of sales), divided by attributable gold ounces. Cost of sales related to copper per pound is calculated using cost of sales
related to copper including our proportionate share of cost of sales attributable to equity method investments (Zaldívar and Jabal Sayid), divided by consolidated copper pounds (including our proportionate share of copper pounds from our
equity method investments).
|- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|5 | Total reportable incident frequency rate (TRIFR) is a ratio calculated as follows: number of reportable injuries x
200,000 hours divided by the total number of hours worked. Reportable injuries include fatalities, lost time injuries, restricted duty injuries, and medically treated injuries.
|- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|6 | Estimated in accordance with National Instrument 43-101 as required by Canadian securities regulatory authorities.
Estimates are as of December 31, 2016, unless otherwise noted. Proven reserves of 480.3 million tonnes grading 1.68 g/t, representing 25.9 million ounces of gold, and 173.3 million tonnes grading 0.533%, representing 2.035 billion pounds of copper.
Probable reserves of 1.5 billion tonnes grading 1.22 g/t, representing 60.1 million ounces of gold, and 276 million tonnes grading 0.638%, representing 3.886 billion pounds of copper. Measured resources of 82.9 million tonnes grading 2.52 g/t,
representing 6.7 million ounces of gold, and 83.2 million tonnes grading 0.410%, representing 753.4 million pounds of copper. Indicated resources of 1.2 billion tonnes grading 1.74 g/t, representing 68.5 million ounces of gold, and 650.3 million
tonnes grading 0.526%, representing 7.545 billion pounds of copper. inferred resources of 781 million tonnes grading 1.22 g/t, representing 30.7 million ounces of gold, and 114.1 million tonnes grading 0.501%, representing 1.259 billion pounds of
copper. Complete mineral reserve and mineral resource data for all mines and projects referenced in this press released, including tonnes, grades, and ounces, can be found on pages 88-93 of Barricks Fourth Quarter and Year-End 2016 Report.
|- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 86 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS



ALL-IN SUSTAINING COSTS: A measure of cost per ounce/pound
for gold/copper. Refer to page 75 of this MD&A for further information and a reconciliation of the measure. AUTOCLAVE: Oxidation process
in which high temperatures and pressures are applied to convert refractory sulfide mineralization into amenable oxide ore. BY-PRODUCT: A secondary metal or mineral product recovered in the milling process such as silver. C1 CASH
COSTS: A measure of cost per pound for copper. Refer to page 83 of this MD&A for further information and a reconciliation of the measure. CASH COSTS: A measure of cost per ounce for gold. Refer to page 75 of this MD&A for further information and a reconciliation of the measure. CONCENTRATE: A very fine, powder-like product containing the valuable ore mineral from which most of the waste mineral has been eliminated. CONTAINED OUNCES: Represents ounces in the ground before reduction of ounces not able to be recovered by the applicable metallurgical
process. DEVELOPMENT: Work carried out for the purpose of opening up a mineral deposit. In an underground mine this includes shaft sinking,
crosscutting, drifting and raising. In an open pit mine, development includes the removal of overburden. DILUTION: The effect of waste or low-grade ore which is unavoidably included in the mined ore, lowering the recovered grade. DORÉ:
Unrefined gold and silver bullion bars usually consisting of approximately 90 percent precious metals that will be further refined to almost pure metal. DRILLING: Core: drilling with a hollow
bit with a diamond cutting rim to produce a cylindrical core that is used for geological study and assays. Used in mineral exploration. In-fill: any method of drilling intervals between existing holes, used to provide greater geological detail and to help establish reserve estimates. EXPLORATION: Prospecting, sampling, mapping, diamond-drilling and other work involved in searching for ore. FREE CASH FLOW: A measure that reflects our ability to generate cash flow. Refer to page 72 of this MD&A for a definition. GRADE: The amount of metal in each tonne of ore, expressed as troy ounces per ton or grams per tonne for precious metals and as a percentage for
most other metals. Cut-off grade: the minimum metal grade at which an ore body can be economically
mined (used in the calculation of ore reserves). Mill-head grade: metal content of mined ore going into a mill for processing. Recovered grade: actual metal content of ore determined after processing.


Reserve grade: estimated metal content of an ore body, based on reserve calculations. HEAP LEACHING: A process whereby gold/copper is extracted by heaping broken ore on sloping impermeable pads and continually applying
to the heaps a weak cyanide solution/sulfuric acid which dissolves the contained gold/copper. The gold/copper-laden solution is then collected for gold/copper recovery. HEAP LEACH PAD: A large impermeable foundation or pad used as a base for ore during heap leaching. MERRILL-CROWE PROCESS: A separation technique for removing gold from a cyanide solution. MILL: A processing facility where ore is finely ground and thereafter undergoes physical or chemical treatment to extract the valuable metals. MINERAL RESERVE: See pages 88 to 93  Summary Gold/ Copper Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources. MINERAL RESOURCE: See pages 88 to 93  Summary Gold/Copper Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources. MINING RATE: Tonnes of ore mined per day or even specified time period. OPEN PIT: A mine where the minerals are mined entirely from the surface. ORE: Rock, generally containing metallic or nonmetallic minerals, which can be mined and processed at a profit. ORE BODY: A sufficiently large amount of ore that can be mined economically. OUNCES: Troy ounces of a fineness of 999.9 parts per 1,000 parts. RECLAMATION: The process by which lands disturbed as a result of mining activity are modified to support beneficial land use. Reclamation activity
may include the removal of buildings, equipment, machinery and other physical remnants of mining, closure of tailings storage facilities, leach pads and other mine features, and contouring, covering and revegetation of waste rock and other
disturbed areas. RECOVERY RATE: A term used in process metallurgy to indicate the proportion of valuable material physically recovered in the
processing of ore. It is generally stated as a percentage of the material recovered compared to the total material originally present. REFINING: The final stage of metal production in which impurities are removed from the molten metal. STRIPPING: Removal of overburden or waste rock overlying an ore body in preparation for mining by open pit methods. Expressed as the total number
of tonnes mined or to be mined for each ounce of gold or pound of copper. TAILINGS: The material that remains after all economically and
technically recoverable precious metals have been removed from the ore during processing.






|                      |  |    |  |                                     
|--------------------- |  | -- |  | ------------------------------------
|BARRICK YEAR-END 2016 |  | 87 |  | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS



---

GOLD MINERAL RESERVES
(1,2)



|                              |  |               |         |  |              |  |       |                         |  |  |         |  |  |               |  |  |              |  |           |                         |  |  |       |  |  |               |         |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  |           |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |         | 
|----------------------------- |  | ------------- | ------- |  | ------------ |  | ----- | ----------------------- |  |  | ------- |  |  | ------------- |  |  | ------------ |  | --------- | ----------------------- |  |  | ----- |  |  | ------------- | ------- |  | ----------- |  |  | ----------------------- |  |  | --------- |  |  |  | ----- |  |  |  | ------- | 
|As at December 31, 2016       |  | PROVEN        |         |  |              |  |       | PROBABLE                |  |  |         |  |  | TOTAL         | 
|Based on attributable ounces  |  | Tonnes(000s) |         |  | Grade (gm/t) |  |       | Contained ozs(000s)    |  |  |         |  |  | Tonnes(000s) |  |  | Grade (gm/t) |  |           | Contained ozs(000s)    |  |  |       |  |  | Tonnes(000s) |         |  | Grade(gm/t) |  |  | Contained ozs(000s)    | 
|NORTH AMERICA                 |  |               |         |  |              |  |       |                         |  |  |         |  |  |               |  |  |              |  |           |                         |  |  |       |  |  |               |         |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  |           |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |         | 
|Goldstrike Open Pit           |  |               | 54,473  |  |              |  | 2.86  |                         |  |  | 5,012   |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 10,527    |                         |  |  | 3.72  |  |  |               | 1,259   |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 65,000    |  |  |  | 3.00  |  |  |  | 6,271   | 
|Goldstrike Underground        |  |               | 2,996   |  |              |  | 11.11 |                         |  |  | 1,070   |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 2,689     |                         |  |  | 8.51  |  |  |               | 736     |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 5,685     |  |  |  | 9.88  |  |  |  | 1,806   | 
|Goldstrike Property Total     |  |               | 57,469  |  |              |  | 3.29  |                         |  |  | 6,082   |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 13,216    |                         |  |  | 4.70  |  |  |               | 1,995   |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 70,685    |  |  |  | 3.55  |  |  |  | 8,077   | 
|Pueblo Viejo (60.00%)         |  |               | 60,668  |  |              |  | 2.82  |                         |  |  | 5,505   |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 25,153    |                         |  |  | 3.19  |  |  |               | 2,582   |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 85,821    |  |  |  | 2.93  |  |  |  | 8,087   | 
|Cortez                        |  |               | 16,196  |  |              |  | 1.52  |                         |  |  | 793     |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 134,806   |                         |  |  | 2.18  |  |  |               | 9,427   |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 151,002   |  |  |  | 2.11  |  |  |  | 10,220  | 
|Turquoise Ridge (75.00%)      |  |               | 4,288   |  |              |  | 15.54 |                         |  |  | 2,143   |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 4,003     |                         |  |  | 14.65 |  |  |               | 1,886   |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 8,291     |  |  |  | 15.11 |  |  |  | 4,029   | 
|South Arturo (60.00%)         |  |               | 851     |  |              |  | 3.95  |                         |  |  | 108     |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 129       |                         |  |  | 3.38  |  |  |               | 14      |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 980       |  |  |  | 3.87  |  |  |  | 122     | 
|Hemlo                         |  |               | 1,018   |  |              |  | 3.64  |                         |  |  | 119     |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 24,764    |                         |  |  | 1.85  |  |  |               | 1,469   |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 25,782    |  |  |  | 1.92  |  |  |  | 1,588   | 
|Golden Sunlight               |  |               | 288     |  |              |  | 1.30  |                         |  |  | 12      |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 539       |                         |  |  | 3.40  |  |  |               | 59      |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 827       |  |  |  | 2.67  |  |  |  | 71      | 
|SOUTH AMERICA                 |  |               |         |  |              |  |       |                         |  |  |         |  |  |               |  |  |              |  |           |                         |  |  |       |  |  |               |         |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  |           |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |         | 
|Cerro Casale (75.00%)         |  |               | 172,276 |  |              |  | 0.65  |                         |  |  | 3,586   |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 725,926   |                         |  |  | 0.59  |  |  |               | 13,848  |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 898,202   |  |  |  | 0.60  |  |  |  | 17,434  | 
|Pascua-Lama                   |  |               | 29,247  |  |              |  | 1.94  |                         |  |  | 1,828   |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 248,623   |                         |  |  | 1.53  |  |  |               | 12,222  |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 277,870   |  |  |  | 1.57  |  |  |  | 14,050  | 
|Veladero                      |  |               | 23,986  |  |              |  | 0.78  |                         |  |  | 602     |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 228,139   |                         |  |  | 0.84  |  |  |               | 6,147   |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 252,125   |  |  |  | 0.83  |  |  |  | 6,749   | 
|Lagunas Norte                 |  |               | 26,322  |  |              |  | 1.83  |                         |  |  | 1,548   |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 44,348    |                         |  |  | 1.87  |  |  |               | 2,670   |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 70,670    |  |  |  | 1.86  |  |  |  | 4,218   | 
|AUSTRALIA PACIFIC             |  |               |         |  |              |  |       |                         |  |  |         |  |  |               |  |  |              |  |           |                         |  |  |       |  |  |               |         |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  |           |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |         | 
|Porgera (47.50%)              |  |               | 444     |  |              |  | 12.26 |                         |  |  | 175     |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 14,011    |                         |  |  | 4.51  |  |  |               | 2,032   |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 14,455    |  |  |  | 4.75  |  |  |  | 2,207   | 
|Kalgoorlie (50.00%)           |  |               | 72,472  |  |              |  | 0.94  |                         |  |  | 2,193   |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 27,601    |                         |  |  | 2.19  |  |  |               | 1,947   |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 100,073   |  |  |  | 1.29  |  |  |  | 4,140   | 
|AFRICA                        |  |               |         |  |              |  |       |                         |  |  |         |  |  |               |  |  |              |  |           |                         |  |  |       |  |  |               |         |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  |           |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |         | 
|Bulyanhulu (63.90%)           |  |               | 1,464   |  |              |  | 10.52 |                         |  |  | 495     |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 12,494    |                         |  |  | 6.91  |  |  |               | 2,776   |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 13,958    |  |  |  | 7.29  |  |  |  | 3,271   | 
|North Mara (63.90%)           |  |               | 4,683   |  |              |  | 3.25  |                         |  |  | 489     |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 10,519    |                         |  |  | 2.13  |  |  |               | 720     |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 15,202    |  |  |  | 2.47  |  |  |  | 1,209   | 
|Buzwagi (63.90%)              |  |               | 5,798   |  |              |  | 0.95  |                         |  |  | 178     |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 3,826     |                         |  |  | 1.74  |  |  |               | 214     |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 9,624     |  |  |  | 1.27  |  |  |  | 392     | 
|Jabal Sayid (50.00%)          |  |               | 2,855   |  |              |  | 0.26  |                         |  |  | 24      |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 8,476     |                         |  |  | 0.23  |  |  |               | 62      |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 11,331    |  |  |  | 0.24  |  |  |  | 86      | 
|                              |  |               |         |  |              |  |       |                         |  |  |        
|TOTAL                         |  |               | 480,325 |  |              |  | 1.68  |                         |  |  | 25,880  |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 1,526,573 |                         |  |  | 1.22  |  |  |               | 60,070  |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 2,006,898 |  |  |  | 1.33  |  |  |  | 85,950  | 
|COPPER MINERAL RESERVES (1,2) |  |               |         |  |              |  |       |                         |  |  |         |  |  |               |  |  |              |  |           |                         |  |  |       |  |  |               |         |  |             |  |  |                         | 
|                              |  |               |         |  |             
|As at December 31, 2016       |  | PROVEN        |         |  |              |  |       | PROBABLE                |  |  |         |  |  | TOTAL         | 
|Based on attributable pounds  |  | Tonnes(000s) |         |  | Grade(%)     |  |       | Contained lbs(millions) |  |  |         |  |  | Tonnes(000s) |  |  | Grade(%)     |  |           | Contained lbs(millions) |  |  |       |  |  | Tonnes(000s) |         |  | Grade(%)    |  |  | Contained lbs(millions) | 
|Zaldivar (50.00%)             |  |               | 142,666 |  |              |  | 0.501 |                         |  |  | 1,575.1 |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 87,736    |                         |  |  | 0.535 |  |  |               | 1,035.0 |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 230,402   |  |  |  | 0.514 |  |  |  | 2,610.1 | 
|Lumwana                       |  |               | 27,786  |  |              |  | 0.516 |                         |  |  | 315.8   |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 179,860   |                         |  |  | 0.597 |  |  |               | 2,367.9 |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 207,646   |  |  |  | 0.586 |  |  |  | 2,683.7 | 
|Jabal Sayid (50.00%)          |  |               | 2,855   |  |              |  | 2.289 |                         |  |  | 144.1   |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 8,476     |                         |  |  | 2.585 |  |  |               | 483.0   |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 11,331    |  |  |  | 2.510 |  |  |  | 627.1   | 
|TOTAL                         |  |               | 173,307 |  |              |  | 0.533 |                         |  |  | 2,035.0 |  |  |               |  |  |              |  | 276,072   |                         |  |  | 0.638 |  |  |               | 3,885.9 |  |             |  |  |                         |  |  | 449,379   |  |  |  | 0.598 |  |  |  | 5,920.9 | 

|(1) | See accompanying endnote #1.
|--- | ----------------------------



|(2) | See accompanying endnote #2.
|--- | ----------------------------



| |  |    |  | 
| |  | -- |  | 
| |  | 88 |  | 



---

GOLD MINERAL RESOURCES (1,2)

|                               |  |                |        |  |               |  |       |                          |  |  |                |  |  |              |           |  |                          |  |       |                          |  |  |                |  |  |              |         |  |                          |  |         |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |         | 
|------------------------------ |  | -------------- | ------ |  | ------------- |  | ----- | ------------------------ |  |  | -------------- |  |  | ------------ | --------- |  | ------------------------ |  | ----- | ------------------------ |  |  | -------------- |  |  | ------------ | ------- |  | ------------------------ |  | ------- |  |  |  | ----- |  |  |  | ------- | 
|As at December 31, 2016        |  | MEASURED (M)   |        |  | INDICATED (I) |  |       | (M) + (I)                |  |  | INFERRED       | 
|                               |  |                |        |  |               |  |       |                          |  |  |                |  | 
|Based on attributable ounces   |  | Tonnes
(000s) |        |  | Grade
(gm/t)  |  |       | Contained ozs
(000s)    |  |  | Tonnes
(000s) |  |  | Grade
(gm/t) |           |  | Contained ozs
(000s)    |  |       | Contained ozs (000s)    |  |  | Tonnes
(000s) |  |  | Grade
(gm/t) |         |  | Contained ozs
(000s)    | 
|                               |  |                |        |  |               |  |       |                          |  |  |                |  | 
|NORTH AMERICA                  |  |                |        |  |               |  |       |                          |  |  |                |  |  |              |           |  |                          |  |       |                          |  |  |                |  |  |              |         |  |                          |  |         |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |         | 
|Goldstrike Open Pit            |  |                | 1,329  |  |               |  | 2.74  |                          |  |  | 117            |  |  |              | 3,896     |  |                          |  | 2.63  |                          |  |  | 330            |  |  |              | 447     |  |                          |  | 81      |  |  |  | 1.92  |  |  |  | 5       | 
|Goldstrike Underground         |  |                | 984    |  |               |  | 11.73 |                          |  |  | 371            |  |  |              | 2,022     |  |                          |  | 9.81  |                          |  |  | 638            |  |  |              | 1,009   |  |                          |  | 1,064   |  |  |  | 10.06 |  |  |  | 344     | 
|Goldstrike Property Total      |  |                | 2,313  |  |               |  | 6.56  |                          |  |  | 488            |  |  |              | 5,918     |  |                          |  | 5.09  |                          |  |  | 968            |  |  |              | 1,456   |  |                          |  | 1,145   |  |  |  | 9.48  |  |  |  | 349     | 
|Pueblo Viejo (60.00%)          |  |                | 10,183 |  |               |  | 2.33  |                          |  |  | 764            |  |  |              | 95,459    |  |                          |  | 2.33  |                          |  |  | 7,146          |  |  |              | 7,910   |  |                          |  | 2,845   |  |  |  | 2.04  |  |  |  | 187     | 
|Cortez                         |  |                | 2,199  |  |               |  | 2.04  |                          |  |  | 144            |  |  |              | 29,137    |  |                          |  | 2.13  |                          |  |  | 1,999          |  |  |              | 2,143   |  |                          |  | 14,506  |  |  |  | 1.64  |  |  |  | 763     | 
|Goldrush                       |  |                | 161    |  |               |  | 10.43 |                          |  |  | 54             |  |  |              | 30,837    |  |                          |  | 9.60  |                          |  |  | 9,522          |  |  |              | 9,576   |  |                          |  | 7,343   |  |  |  | 8.18  |  |  |  | 1,931   | 
|Turquoise Ridge (75.00%)       |  |                | 13,426 |  |               |  | 6.97  |                          |  |  | 3,009          |  |  |              | 37,364    |  |                          |  | 5.39  |                          |  |  | 6,476          |  |  |              | 9,485   |  |                          |  | 15,979  |  |  |  | 6.34  |  |  |  | 3,257   | 
|South Arturo (60.00%)          |  |                | 7      |  |               |  | 1.33  |                          |  |  | 0.3            |  |  |              | 22        |  |                          |  | 1.41  |                          |  |  | 1              |  |  |              | 1.3     |  |                          |  | 6       |  |  |  | 5.18  |  |  |  | 1       | 
|Hemlo                          |  |                | 126    |  |               |  | 2.72  |                          |  |  | 11             |  |  |              | 58,771    |  |                          |  | 0.90  |                          |  |  | 1,709          |  |  |              | 1,720   |  |                          |  | 7,765   |  |  |  | 1.94  |  |  |  | 484     | 
|Golden Sunlight                |  |                | 825    |  |               |  | 1.51  |                          |  |  | 40             |  |  |              | 14,320    |  |                          |  | 1.37  |                          |  |  | 631            |  |  |              | 671     |  |                          |  | 5,123   |  |  |  | 1.32  |  |  |  | 218     | 
|Donlin Gold (50.00%)           |  |                | 3,865  |  |               |  | 2.52  |                          |  |  | 313            |  |  |              | 266,803   |  |                          |  | 2.24  |                          |  |  | 19,190         |  |  |              | 19,503  |  |                          |  | 46,108  |  |  |  | 2.02  |  |  |  | 2,997   | 
|SOUTH AMERICA                  |  |                |        |  |               |  |       |                          |  |  |                |  |  |              |           |  |                          |  |       |                          |  |  |                |  |  |              |         |  |                          |  |         |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |         | 
|Cerro Casale (75.00%)          |  |                | 17,217 |  |               |  | 0.30  |                          |  |  | 167            |  |  |              | 205,268   |  |                          |  | 0.36  |                          |  |  | 2,362          |  |  |              | 2,529   |  |                          |  | 371,580 |  |  |  | 0.38  |  |  |  | 4,493   | 
|Pascua-Lama                    |  |                | 13,562 |  |               |  | 1.69  |                          |  |  | 736            |  |  |              | 143,111   |  |                          |  | 1.43  |                          |  |  | 6,561          |  |  |              | 7,297   |  |                          |  | 15,400  |  |  |  | 1.74  |  |  |  | 863     | 
|Veladero                       |  |                | 7,637  |  |               |  | 0.48  |                          |  |  | 118            |  |  |              | 204,698   |  |                          |  | 0.48  |                          |  |  | 3,185          |  |  |              | 3,303   |  |                          |  | 21,389  |  |  |  | 0.33  |  |  |  | 229     | 
|Lagunas Norte                  |  |                | 3,253  |  |               |  | 0.65  |                          |  |  | 68             |  |  |              | 54,192    |  |                          |  | 0.63  |                          |  |  | 1,100          |  |  |              | 1,168   |  |                          |  | 3,946   |  |  |  | 0.71  |  |  |  | 90      | 
|Alturas                        |  |                | -      |  |               |  | -     |                          |  |  | -              |  |  |              | -         |  |                          |  | -     |                          |  |  | -              |  |  |              | -       |  |                          |  | 210,965 |  |  |  | 1.00  |  |  |  | 6,793   | 
|AUSTRALIA PACIFIC              |  |                |        |  |               |  |       |                          |  |  |                |  |  |              |           |  |                          |  |       |                          |  |  |                |  |  |              |         |  |                          |  |         |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |         | 
|Porgera (47.50%)               |  |                | 168    |  |               |  | 5.92  |                          |  |  | 32             |  |  |              | 13,607    |  |                          |  | 4.05  |                          |  |  | 1,770          |  |  |              | 1,802   |  |                          |  | 13,528  |  |  |  | 3.39  |  |  |  | 1,476   | 
|Kalgoorlie (50.00%)            |  |                | 3,123  |  |               |  | 0.67  |                          |  |  | 67             |  |  |              | 10,991    |  |                          |  | 0.95  |                          |  |  | 335            |  |  |              | 402     |  |                          |  | 553     |  |  |  | 2.47  |  |  |  | 44      | 
|AFRICA                         |  |                |        |  |               |  |       |                          |  |  |                |  |  |              |           |  |                          |  |       |                          |  |  |                |  |  |              |         |  |                          |  |         |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |         | 
|Bulyanhulu (63.90%)            |  |                | 874    |  |               |  | 11.53 |                          |  |  | 324            |  |  |              | 8,011     |  |                          |  | 8.62  |                          |  |  | 2,220          |  |  |              | 2,544   |  |                          |  | 15,469  |  |  |  | 9.75  |  |  |  | 4,848   | 
|North Mara (63.90%)            |  |                | 2,174  |  |               |  | 2.66  |                          |  |  | 186            |  |  |              | 10,714    |  |                          |  | 2.30  |                          |  |  | 793            |  |  |              | 979     |  |                          |  | 6,703   |  |  |  | 2.51  |  |  |  | 540     | 
|Buzwagi (63.90%)               |  |                | 83     |  |               |  | 1.50  |                          |  |  | 4              |  |  |              | 16,449    |  |                          |  | 1.23  |                          |  |  | 650            |  |  |              | 654     |  |                          |  | 1,315   |  |  |  | 1.37  |  |  |  | 58      | 
|Nyanzaga (57.51%)              |  |                | 1,685  |  |               |  | 3.78  |                          |  |  | 205            |  |  |              | 12,520    |  |                          |  | 3.45  |                          |  |  | 1,389          |  |  |              | 1,594   |  |                          |  | 2,933   |  |  |  | 3.49  |  |  |  | 329     | 
|Golden Ridge (63.90%)          |  |                | -      |  |               |  | -     |                          |  |  | -              |  |  |              | 5,076     |  |                          |  | 2.78  |                          |  |  | 454            |  |  |              | 454     |  |                          |  | 904     |  |  |  | 2.27  |  |  |  | 66      | 
|Tankoro (31.95%)               |  |                | -      |  |               |  | -     |                          |  |  | -              |  |  |              | -         |  |                          |  | -     |                          |  |  | -              |  |  |              | -       |  |                          |  | 13,739  |  |  |  | 1.52  |  |  |  | 671     | 
|Jabal Sayid (50.00%)           |  |                | 57     |  |               |  | -     |                          |  |  | -              |  |  |              | 3,125     |  |                          |  | 0.60  |                          |  |  | 60             |  |  |              | 60      |  |                          |  | 1,765   |  |  |  | 0.42  |  |  |  | 24      | 
|                               |  |                |        |  |               |  |       |                          |  |  |                |  |  |              |           | 
|                               |  |                |        |  |               |  |       |                          |  | 
|TOTAL                          |  |                | 82,938 |  |               |  | 2.52  |                          |  |  | 6,730          |  |  |              | 1,226,393 |  |                          |  | 1.74  |                          |  |  | 68,521         |  |  |              | 75,251  |  |                          |  | 781,009 |  |  |  | 1.22  |  |  |  | 30,711  | 
|                               |  |                |        |  |               |  |       |                          |  |  |                |  | 
|                              
|COPPER MINERAL RESOURCES (1,2) | 
|As at December 31, 2016        |  | MEASURED (M)   |        |  | INDICATED (I) |  |       | (M) + (I)                |  |  | INFERRED       | 
|                               |  |                |        |  |               |  |       |                          |  |  |                |  | 
|Based on attributable pounds   |  | Tonnes
(000s) |        |  | Grade
(%)     |  |       | Contained lbs
(millions) |  |  | Tonnes
(000s) |  |  | Grade
(%)    |           |  | Contained lbs
(millions) |  |       | Contained lbs (millions) |  |  | Tonnes
(000s) |  |  | Grade
(%)    |         |  | Contained lbs
(millions) | 
|                               |  |                |        |  |               |  |       |                          |  |  |                |  | 
|Zaldivar (50.00%)              |  |                | 58,039 |  |               |  | 0.410 |                          |  |  | 524.9          |  |  |              | 22,354    |  |                          |  | 0.399 |                          |  |  | 196.7          |  |  |              | 721.6   |  |                          |  | 4,062   |  |  |  | 0.529 |  |  |  | 47.4    | 
|Lumwana                        |  |                | 25,154 |  |               |  | 0.409 |                          |  |  | 226.8          |  |  |              | 624,826   |  |                          |  | 0.522 |                          |  |  | 7,191.8        |  |  |              | 7,418.6 |  |                          |  | 108,266 |  |  |  | 0.468 |  |  |  | 1,116.3 | 
|Jabal Sayid (50.00%)           |  |                | 57     |  |               |  | 1.353 |                          |  |  | 1.7            |  |  |              | 3,125     |  |                          |  | 2.277 |                          |  |  | 156.9          |  |  |              | 158.6   |  |                          |  | 1,765   |  |  |  | 2.454 |  |  |  | 95.5    | 
|                               |  |                |        |  |               |  |       |                          |  | 
|TOTAL                          |  |                | 83,250 |  |               |  | 0.410 |                          |  |  | 753.4          |  |  |              | 650,305   |  |                          |  | 0.526 |                          |  |  | 7,545.4        |  |  |              | 8,299   |  |                          |  | 114,093 |  |  |  | 0.501 |  |  |  | 1,259.2 | 
|                               |  |                |        |  |               |  |       |                          |  |  |                |  | 

|(1) | Resources which are not reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(2) | See accompanying endnote #1.
|--- | ----------------------------



| |  |    |  | 
| |  | -- |  | 
| |  | 89 |  | 



---

SUMMARY GOLD MINERAL RESERVES AND MINERAL RESOURCES (1,2,3,4)

|                                     |  |                       |  |  |               |  |  |  |             |  |  |  |               |  |  |  |               |  |  |  |             |  |  |  |               | 
|------------------------------------ |  | --------------------- |  |  | ------------- |  |  |  | ----------- |  |  |  | ------------- |  |  |  | ------------- |  |  |  | ----------- |  |  |  | ------------- | 
|For the year ended December 31, 2016 |  |                       |  |  | 2016          |  |  |  | 2015        | 
|Based on attributable ounces         |  |                       |  |  | Tonnes(000s) |  |  |  | Grade(gm/t) |  |  |  | Ounces(000s) |  |  |  | Tonnes(000s) |  |  |  | Grade(gm/t) |  |  |  | Ounces(000s) | 
|NORTH AMERICA                        |  |                       |  |  |               |  |  |  |             |  |  |  |               |  |  |  |               |  |  |  |             |  |  |  |               | 
|Goldstrike Open Pit                  |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | 65,000        |  |  |  | 3.00        |  |  |  | 6,271         |  |  |  | 69,073        |  |  |  | 3.11        |  |  |  | 6,911         | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 5,225         |  |  |  | 2.66        |  |  |  | 447           |  |  |  | 5,116         |  |  |  | 2.46        |  |  |  | 404           | 
|Goldstrike Underground               |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | 5,685         |  |  |  | 9.88        |  |  |  | 1,806         |  |  |  | 4,952         |  |  |  | 10.23       |  |  |  | 1,628         | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 3,006         |  |  |  | 10.44       |  |  |  | 1,009         |  |  |  | 4,107         |  |  |  | 10.47       |  |  |  | 1,382         | 
|Goldstrike Property Total            |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | 70,685        |  |  |  | 3.55        |  |  |  | 8,077         |  |  |  | 74,025        |  |  |  | 3.59        |  |  |  | 8,539         | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 8,231         |  |  |  | 5.50        |  |  |  | 1,456         |  |  |  | 9,223         |  |  |  | 6.02        |  |  |  | 1,786         | 
|Pueblo Viejo (60.00%)                |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | 85,821        |  |  |  | 2.93        |  |  |  | 8,087         |  |  |  | 93,877        |  |  |  | 2.97        |  |  |  | 8,960         | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 105,642       |  |  |  | 2.33        |  |  |  | 7,910         |  |  |  | 97,881        |  |  |  | 2.46        |  |  |  | 7,731         | 
|Cortez                               |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | 151,002       |  |  |  | 2.11        |  |  |  | 10,220        |  |  |  | 153,232       |  |  |  | 2.26        |  |  |  | 11,129        | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 31,336        |  |  |  | 2.13        |  |  |  | 2,143         |  |  |  | 43,709        |  |  |  | 1.53        |  |  |  | 2,150         | 
|Goldrush                             |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | -             |  |  |  | -           |  |  |  | -             |  |  |  | -             |  |  |  | -           |  |  |  | -             | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 30,998        |  |  |  | 9.61        |  |  |  | 9,576         |  |  |  | 25,166        |  |  |  | 10.58       |  |  |  | 8,557         | 
|Bald Mountain (0.00%)5               |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | -             |  |  |  | -           |  |  |  | -             |  |  |  | 49,083        |  |  |  | 0.72        |  |  |  | 1,142         | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | -             |  |  |  | -           |  |  |  | -             |  |  |  | 172,472       |  |  |  | 0.67        |  |  |  | 3,698         | 
|Turquoise Ridge (75.00%)             |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | 8,291         |  |  |  | 15.11       |  |  |  | 4,029         |  |  |  | 8,564         |  |  |  | 15.30       |  |  |  | 4,214         | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 50,790        |  |  |  | 5.81        |  |  |  | 9,485         |  |  |  | 74,989        |  |  |  | 4.74        |  |  |  | 11,426        | 
|Round Mountain (0.00%)5              |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | -             |  |  |  | -           |  |  |  | -             |  |  |  | 33,072        |  |  |  | 0.69        |  |  |  | 736           | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | -             |  |  |  | -           |  |  |  | -             |  |  |  | 21,079        |  |  |  | 0.50        |  |  |  | 342           | 
|South Arturo (60.00%)                |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | 980           |  |  |  | 3.87        |  |  |  | 122           |  |  |  | 1,289         |  |  |  | 5.62        |  |  |  | 233           | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 29            |  |  |  | 1.07        |  |  |  | 1             |  |  |  | 158           |  |  |  | 1.38        |  |  |  | 7             | 
|Hemlo                                |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | 25,782        |  |  |  | 1.92        |  |  |  | 1,588         |  |  |  | 13,191        |  |  |  | 2.16        |  |  |  | 917           | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 58,897        |  |  |  | 0.91        |  |  |  | 1,720         |  |  |  | 42,746        |  |  |  | 1.06        |  |  |  | 1,451         | 
|Golden Sunlight                      |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | 827           |  |  |  | 2.67        |  |  |  | 71            |  |  |  | 1,054         |  |  |  | 2.18        |  |  |  | 74            | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 15,145        |  |  |  | 1.38        |  |  |  | 671           |  |  |  | 14,806        |  |  |  | 1.45        |  |  |  | 691           | 
|Donlin Gold (50.00%)                 |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | -             |  |  |  | -           |  |  |  | -             |  |  |  | -             |  |  |  | -           |  |  |  | -             | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 270,668       |  |  |  | 2.24        |  |  |  | 19,503        |  |  |  | 270,668       |  |  |  | 2.24        |  |  |  | 19,503        | 
|SOUTH AMERICA                        |  |                       |  |  |               |  |  |  | -           |  |  |  |               |  |  |  |               |  |  |  | -           |  |  |  |               | 
|Cerro Casale (75.00%)                |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | 898,202       |  |  |  | 0.60        |  |  |  | 17,434        |  |  |  | 898,202       |  |  |  | 0.60        |  |  |  | 17,434        | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 222,485       |  |  |  | 0.35        |  |  |  | 2,529         |  |  |  | 222,485       |  |  |  | 0.35        |  |  |  | 2,529         | 
|Pascua-Lama                          |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | 277,870       |  |  |  | 1.57        |  |  |  | 14,050        |  |  |  | 324,626       |  |  |  | 1.47        |  |  |  | 15,384        | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 156,673       |  |  |  | 1.45        |  |  |  | 7,297         |  |  |  | 157,465       |  |  |  | 1.28        |  |  |  | 6,459         | 
|Veladero                             |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | 252,125       |  |  |  | 0.83        |  |  |  | 6,749         |  |  |  | 276,933       |  |  |  | 0.85        |  |  |  | 7,544         | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 212,335       |  |  |  | 0.48        |  |  |  | 3,303         |  |  |  | 75,228        |  |  |  | 0.53        |  |  |  | 1,287         | 
|Lagunas Norte                        |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | 70,670        |  |  |  | 1.86        |  |  |  | 4,218         |  |  |  | 63,641        |  |  |  | 1.82        |  |  |  | 3,729         | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 57,445        |  |  |  | 0.63        |  |  |  | 1,168         |  |  |  | 37,553        |  |  |  | 1.36        |  |  |  | 1,644         | 
|AUSTRALIA PACIFIC                    |  |                       |  |  |               |  |  |  | -           |  |  |  |               |  |  |  |               |  |  |  | -           |  |  |  |               | 
|Porgera (47.50%)6                    |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | 14,455        |  |  |  | 4.75        |  |  |  | 2,207         |  |  |  | 14,471        |  |  |  | 4.24        |  |  |  | 1,971         | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 13,775        |  |  |  | 4.07        |  |  |  | 1,802         |  |  |  | 9,444         |  |  |  | 5.47        |  |  |  | 1,660         | 
|Kalgoorlie (50.00%)                  |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | 100,073       |  |  |  | 1.29        |  |  |  | 4,140         |  |  |  | 100,838       |  |  |  | 1.28        |  |  |  | 4,154         | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 14,114        |  |  |  | 0.89        |  |  |  | 402           |  |  |  | 15,450        |  |  |  | 0.88        |  |  |  | 439           | 
|AFRICA                               |  |                       |  |  |               |  |  |  | -           |  |  |  |               |  |  |  |               |  |  |  | -           |  |  |  |               | 
|Bulyanhulu (63.90%)                  |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | 13,958        |  |  |  | 7.29        |  |  |  | 3,271         |  |  |  | 17,488        |  |  |  | 6.99        |  |  |  | 3,930         | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 8,885         |  |  |  | 8.91        |  |  |  | 2,544         |  |  |  | 14,159        |  |  |  | 7.03        |  |  |  | 3,201         | 
|North Mara (63.90%)                  |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | 15,202        |  |  |  | 2.47        |  |  |  | 1,209         |  |  |  | 14,685        |  |  |  | 2.67        |  |  |  | 1,262         | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 12,888        |  |  |  | 2.36        |  |  |  | 979           |  |  |  | 8,099         |  |  |  | 2.66        |  |  |  | 692           | 
|Buzwagi (63.90%)                     |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | 9,624         |  |  |  | 1.27        |  |  |  | 392           |  |  |  | 9,382         |  |  |  | 1.32        |  |  |  | 399           | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 16,532        |  |  |  | 1.23        |  |  |  | 654           |  |  |  | 28,213        |  |  |  | 1.35        |  |  |  | 1,221         | 
|Nyanzaga (57.51%)                    |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | -             |  |  |  | -           |  |  |  | -             |  |  |  | -             |  |  |  | -           |  |  |  | -             | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 14,205        |  |  |  | 3.49        |  |  |  | 1,594         |  |  |  | 62,208        |  |  |  | 1.31        |  |  |  | 2,621         | 
|Golden Ridge (63.90%)                |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | -             |  |  |  | -           |  |  |  | -             |  |  |  | -             |  |  |  | -           |  |  |  | -             | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 5,076         |  |  |  | 2.78        |  |  |  | 454           |  |  |  | -             |  |  |  | -           |  |  |  | -             | 
|OTHER                                |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | 11,331        |  |  |  | 0.24        |  |  |  | 86            |  |  |  | 12,496        |  |  |  | 0.27        |  |  |  | 107           | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 3,182         |  |  |  | 0.59        |  |  |  | 60            |  |  |  | 19            |  |  |  | -           |  |  |  | -             | 
|TOTAL                                |  | (proven and probable) |  |  | 2,006,898     |  |  |  | 1.33        |  |  |  | 85,950        |  |  |  | 2,160,149     |  |  |  | 1.32        |  |  |  | 91,858        | 
|                                     |  | (mineral resource)    |  |  | 1,309,331     |  |  |  | 1.79        |  |  |  | 75,251        |  |  |  | 1,403,220     |  |  |  | 1.75        |  |  |  | 79,095        | 

|(1) | Resources which are not reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(2) | See accompanying endnote #1.
|--- | ----------------------------

|(3) | Measured plus indicated resources
|--- | ---------------------------------

|(4) | See accompanying endnote #2.
|--- | ----------------------------

|(5) | See accompanying endnote #3.
|--- | ----------------------------

|(6) | See accompanying endnote #4.
|--- | ----------------------------



| |  |    |  | 
| |  | -- |  | 
| |  | 90 |  | 



---

CONTAINED SILVER WITHIN REPORTED GOLD RESERVES (1)

|                                                                                                       |  |                         |                         |  |  |  |                 |                           |  |  |                           |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |                      |  |  |  |             |  |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                      |  |  |  |                 |  |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                   | 
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |  | ----------------------- | ----------------------- |  |  |  | --------------- | ------------------------- |  |  | ------------------------- |  |  |  | ----- |  |  |  | -------------------- |  |  |  | ----------- |  |  |  | ----------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------- |  |  |  | --------------- |  |  |  | ----------------------- |  |  |  | ----------------- | 
|For the year ended Dec. 31, 2016                                                                       |  | IN PROVEN GOLD RESERVES |                         |  |  |  |                 | IN PROBABLE GOLD RESERVES |  |  | TOTAL                     | 
|                                                                                                       |  |                         |                         |  |  |  |                 |                           |  |  |                           |  | 
|                                                                                                       |  |                         |                         |  |  |  |                 |                           |  |  |                          
|Based on attributable ounces                                                                           |  |                         | Tonnes        (000s)    |  |  |  | Grade    (gm/t) |                           |  |  | Contained ozs(000s)       |  |  |  |       |  |  |  | Tonnes        (000s) |  |  |  | Grade(gm/t) |  |  |  | Contained ozs(000s)     |  |  |  | Tonnes        (000s) |  |  |  | Grade    (gm/t) |  |  |  | Contained ozs(000s)     |  |  |  | Process recovery% | 
|                                                                                                       |  |                         |                         |  |  |  |                 |                           |  |  |                           |  | 
|NORTH AMERICA                                                                                          |  |                         |                         |  |  |  |                 |                           |  |  |                           |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |                      |  |  |  |             |  |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                      |  |  |  |                 |  |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                   | 
|Pueblo Viejo (60.00%)                                                                                  |  |                         | 60,668                  |  |  |  | 18.678          |                           |  |  | 36,432                    |  |  |  |       |  |  |  | 25,153               |  |  |  | 14.07       |  |  |  | 11,377                  |  |  |  | 85,821               |  |  |  | 17.33           |  |  |  | 47,809                  |  |  |  | 80.0%             | 
|SOUTH AMERICA                                                                                          |  |                         |                         |  |  |  |                 |                           |  |  |                           |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |                      |  |  |  |             |  |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                      |  |  |  |                 |  |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                   | 
|Cerro Casale (75.00%)                                                                                  |  |                         | 172,276                 |  |  |  | 1.907           |                           |  |  | 10,565                    |  |  |  |       |  |  |  | 725,926              |  |  |  | 1.43        |  |  |  | 33,451                  |  |  |  | 898,202              |  |  |  | 1.52            |  |  |  | 44,016                  |  |  |  | 69.0%             | 
|Pascua-Lama                                                                                            |  |                         | 29,247                  |  |  |  | 70.342          |                           |  |  | 66,143                    |  |  |  |       |  |  |  | 248,623              |  |  |  | 67.64       |  |  |  | 540,657                 |  |  |  | 277,870              |  |  |  | 67.92           |  |  |  | 606,800                 |  |  |  | 82.0%             | 
|Lagunas Norte                                                                                          |  |                         | 26,322                  |  |  |  | 3.686           |                           |  |  | 3,119                     |  |  |  |       |  |  |  | 44,348               |  |  |  | 5.74        |  |  |  | 8,180                   |  |  |  | 70,670               |  |  |  | 4.97            |  |  |  | 11,299                  |  |  |  | 31.5%             | 
|Veladero                                                                                               |  |                         | 23,986                  |  |  |  | 7.714           |                           |  |  | 5,949                     |  |  |  |       |  |  |  | 228,139              |  |  |  | 14.81       |  |  |  | 108,602                 |  |  |  | 252,125              |  |  |  | 14.13           |  |  |  | 114,551                 |  |  |  | 9.8%              | 
|AFRICA                                                                                                 |  |                         |                         |  |  |  |                 |                           |  |  |                           |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |                      |  |  |  |             |  |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                      |  |  |  |                 |  |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                   | 
|Bulyanhulu (63.90%)2                                                                                   |  |                         | 1,464                   |  |  |  | 6.05            |                           |  |  | 285                       |  |  |  |       |  |  |  | 8,544                |  |  |  | 8.46        |  |  |  | 2,325                   |  |  |  | 10,008               |  |  |  | 8.11            |  |  |  | 2,610                   |  |  |  | 65.0%             | 
|                                                                                                       |  |                         |                         |  |  |  |                 |                           |  |  |                           |  | 
|TOTAL                                                                                                  |  |                         | 313,963                 |  |  |  | 12.14           |                           |  |  | 122,493                   |  |  |  |       |  |  |  | 1,280,733            |  |  |  | 17.11       |  |  |  | 704,592                 |  |  |  | 1,594,696            |  |  |  | 16.13           |  |  |  | 827,085                 |  |  |  | 70.4%             | 
|                                                                                                       |  |                         |                         |  |  |  |                 |                           |  |  |                           |  | 
|(1)Silver is accounted for as a by-product credit against reported or projected gold production costs. | 
|                                                                                                      
|CONTAINED COPPER WITHIN REPORTED GOLD RESERVES (1)                                                     | 
|For the year ended Dec. 31, 2016                                                                       |  |                         | IN PROVEN GOLD RESERVES |  |  |  |                 |                           |  |  | IN PROBABLE GOLD RESERVES |  |  |  | TOTAL | 
|                                                                                                       |  |                         |                         |  |  |  |                 |                           |  |  |                           |  | 
|                                                                                                       |  |                         |                         |  |  |  |                 |                           |  |  |                          
|Based on attributable pounds                                                                           |  |                         | Tonnes        (000s)    |  |  |  | Grade    (%)    |                           |  |  | Contained lbs(millions)   |  |  |  |       |  |  |  | Tonnes        (000s) |  |  |  | Grade(%)    |  |  |  | Contained lbs(millions) |  |  |  | Tonnes        (000s) |  |  |  | Grade    (%)    |  |  |  | Contained lbs(millions) |  |  |  | Process recovery% | 
|                                                                                                       |  |                         |                         |  |  |  |                 |                           |  |  |                           |  | 
|NORTH AMERICA                                                                                          |  |                         |                         |  |  |  |                 |                           |  |  |                           |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |                      |  |  |  |             |  |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                      |  |  |  |                 |  |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                   | 
|Pueblo Viejo (60.00%)                                                                                  |  |                         | 60,668                  |  |  |  | 0.093           |                           |  |  | 124.9                     |  |  |  |       |  |  |  | 25,153               |  |  |  | 0.100       |  |  |  | 55.3                    |  |  |  | 85,821               |  |  |  | 0.095           |  |  |  | 180.2                   |  |  |  | 47.6%             | 
|                                                                                                       |  |                         |                         |  |  |  |                 |                           |  |  |                           |  | 
|SOUTH AMERICA                                                                                          |  |                         |                         |  |  |  |                 |                           |  |  |                           |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |                      |  |  |  |             |  |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                      |  |  |  |                 |  |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                   | 
|Cerro Casale (75.00%)                                                                                  |  |                         | 172,276                 |  |  |  | 0.190           |                           |  |  | 721.3                     |  |  |  |       |  |  |  | 725,926              |  |  |  | 0.226       |  |  |  | 3,613.3                 |  |  |  | 898,202              |  |  |  | 0.219           |  |  |  | 4,334.6                 |  |  |  | 87.4%             | 
|Pascua-Lama                                                                                            |  |                         | 29,247                  |  |  |  | 0.101           |                           |  |  | 65.0                      |  |  |  |       |  |  |  | 248,623              |  |  |  | 0.080       |  |  |  | 440.3                   |  |  |  | 277,870              |  |  |  | 0.082           |  |  |  | 505.3                   |  |  |  | 29.9%             | 
|                                                                                                       |  |                         |                         |  |  |  |                 |                           |  |  |                           |  | 
|AFRICA                                                                                                 |  |                         |                         |  |  |  |                 |                           |  |  |                           |  |  |  |       |  |  |  |                      |  |  |  |             |  |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                      |  |  |  |                 |  |  |  |                         |  |  |  |                   | 
|Bulyanhulu (63.90%)2                                                                                   |  |                         | 1,464                   |  |  |  | 0.431           |                           |  |  | 13.9                      |  |  |  |       |  |  |  | 8,544                |  |  |  | 0.565       |  |  |  | 106.4                   |  |  |  | 10,008               |  |  |  | 0.545           |  |  |  | 120.3                   |  |  |  | 90.0%             | 
|Buzwagi (63.90%)                                                                                       |  |                         | 5,798                   |  |  |  | 0.070           |                           |  |  | 9.0                       |  |  |  |       |  |  |  | 3,826                |  |  |  | 0.140       |  |  |  | 11.8                    |  |  |  | 9,624                |  |  |  | 0.098           |  |  |  | 20.8                    |  |  |  | 64.9%             | 
|                                                                                                       |  |                         |                         |  |  |  |                 |                           |  |  |                           |  | 
|TOTAL                                                                                                  |  |                         | 269,453                 |  |  |  | 0.157           |                           |  |  | 934.1                     |  |  |  |       |  |  |  | 1,012,072            |  |  |  | 0.189       |  |  |  | 4,227.1                 |  |  |  | 1,281,525            |  |  |  | 0.183           |  |  |  | 5,161.2                 |  |  |  | 80.4%             | 
|                                                                                                       |  |                         |                         |  |  |  |                 |                           |  |  |                           |  | 

(1)Copper is accounted for as a by-product
credit against reported or projected gold production costs.

(2) See accompanying
endnote #5.



| |  |    |  | 
| |  | -- |  | 
| |  | 91 |  | 



---

CONTAINED SILVER WITHIN REPORTED GOLD RESOURCES (1)

|                                                                                   |  |  |                                |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                                 |   |  |  |           |  |  |  |               |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                         |   |  |  |  |  |  |  |                         |   |  |  |  |  |  |  |               |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                         |  
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  |  | ------------------------------ | - |  |  | ---------- | - |  |  | ------------------------------- | - |  |  | --------- |  |  |  | ------------- | - |  |  | ---------- | - |  |  | ----------------------- | - |  |  |  |  |  |  | ----------------------- | - |  |  |  |  |  |  | ------------- | - |  |  | ---------- | - |  |  | ----------------------- | -
|For the year ended Dec. 31, 2016                                                   |  |  | MEASURED (M)                   |   |  |  |            |   |  |  | INDICATED (I)                   |   |  |  |           |  |  |  | (M) + (I)     |   |  |  |            |   |  |  | INFERRED                |  
|Based on attributable ounces                                                       |  |  | Tonnes(000s                   | ) |  |  | Grade(gm/t | ) |  |  | Contained ozs(000s             | ) |  |  |           |  |  |  | Tonnes(000s  | ) |  |  | Grade(gm/t | ) |  |  | Contained ozs(000s     | ) |  |  |  |  |  |  | Ounces(000s            | ) |  |  |  |  |  |  | Tonnes(000s  | ) |  |  | Grade(gm/t | ) |  |  | Contained ozs(000s     | )
|NORTH AMERICA                                                                      |  |  |                                |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                                 |   |  |  |           |  |  |  |               |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                         |   |  |  |  |  |  |  |                         |   |  |  |  |  |  |  |               |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                         |  
|Pueblo Viejo (60.00%)                                                              |  |  | 10,183                         |   |  |  | 14.53      |   |  |  | 4,758                           |   |  |  |           |  |  |  | 95,459        |   |  |  | 11.22      |   |  |  | 34,449                  |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 39,207                  |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 2,845         |   |  |  | 9.76       |   |  |  | 893                     |  
|SOUTH AMERICA                                                                      |  |  |                                |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                                 |   |  |  |           |  |  |  |               |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                         |   |  |  |  |  |  |  |                         |   |  |  |  |  |  |  |               |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                         |  
|Cerro Casale
(75.00%)                                                              |  |  | 17,217                         |   |  |  | 1.19       |   |  |  | 661                             |   |  |  |           |  |  |  | 205,268       |   |  |  | 1.06       |   |  |  | 6,985                   |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 7,646                   |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 371,580       |   |  |  | 1.04       |   |  |  | 12,379                  |  
|Pascua-Lama                                                                        |  |  | 13,562                         |   |  |  | 28.91      |   |  |  | 12,604                          |   |  |  |           |  |  |  | 143,111       |   |  |  | 25.44      |   |  |  | 117,060                 |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 129,664                 |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 15,400        |   |  |  | 17.83      |   |  |  | 8,830                   |  
|Lagunas Norte                                                                      |  |  | 3,253                          |   |  |  | 2.91       |   |  |  | 304                             |   |  |  |           |  |  |  | 54,192        |   |  |  | 3.01       |   |  |  | 5,250                   |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 5,554                   |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,946         |   |  |  | 4.17       |   |  |  | 529                     |  
|Veladero                                                                           |  |  | 7,637                          |   |  |  | 9.38       |   |  |  | 2,304                           |   |  |  |           |  |  |  | 204,698       |   |  |  | 12.38      |   |  |  | 81,459                  |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 83,763                  |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 21,389        |   |  |  | 10.13      |   |  |  | 6,966                   |  
|AFRICA                                                                             |  |  |                                |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                                 |   |  |  |           |  |  |  |               |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                         |   |  |  |  |  |  |  |                         |   |  |  |  |  |  |  |               |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                         |  
|Bulyanhulu (63.90%)                                                                |  |  | 874                            |   |  |  | 7.15       |   |  |  | 201                             |   |  |  |           |  |  |  | 8,011         |   |  |  | 6.58       |   |  |  | 1,696                   |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 1,897                   |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 15,469        |   |  |  | 6.96       |   |  |  | 3,461                   |  
|TOTAL                                                                              |  |  | 52,726                         |   |  |  | 12.29      |   |  |  | 20,832                          |   |  |  |           |  |  |  | 710,739       |   |  |  | 10.80      |   |  |  | 246,899                 |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 267,731                 |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 430,629       |   |  |  | 2.39       |   |  |  | 33,058                  |  
|(1)  Resources which are not
reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. | 
|                                                                                  
|CONTAINED COPPER WITHIN REPORTED GOLD RESOURCES (1)                                | 
|For the year ended Dec. 31, 2016                                                   |  |  | IN MEASURED (M) GOLD RESOURCES |   |  |  |            |   |  |  | IN INDICATED (I) GOLD RESOURCES |   |  |  | (M) + (I) |  |  |  |               |   |  |  | INFERRED   |  
|Based on attributable pounds                                                       |  |  | Tonnes(000s)                  |   |  |  | Grade(%)   |   |  |  | Contained lbs(millions)         |   |  |  |           |  |  |  | Tonnes(000s) |   |  |  | Grade(%)   |   |  |  | Contained lbs(millions) |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | Contained lbs(millions) |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | Tonnes(000s) |   |  |  | Grade(%)   |   |  |  | Contained lbs(millions) |  
|NORTH AMERICA                                                                      |  |  |                                |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                                 |   |  |  |           |  |  |  |               |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                         |   |  |  |  |  |  |  |                         |   |  |  |  |  |  |  |               |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                         |  
|Pueblo Viejo (60.00%)                                                              |  |  | 10,183                         |   |  |  | 0.090      |   |  |  | 20.2                            |   |  |  |           |  |  |  | 95,459        |   |  |  | 0.085      |   |  |  | 179.7                   |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 199.9                   |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 2,845         |   |  |  | 0.022      |   |  |  | 1.4                     |  
|SOUTH AMERICA                                                                      |  |  |                                |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                                 |   |  |  |           |  |  |  |               |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                         |   |  |  |  |  |  |  |                         |   |  |  |  |  |  |  |               |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                         |  
|Cerro Casale
(75.00%)                                                              |  |  | 17,217                         |   |  |  | 0.132      |   |  |  | 50.1                            |   |  |  |           |  |  |  | 205,268       |   |  |  | 0.164      |   |  |  | 743.8                   |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 793.9                   |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 371,580       |   |  |  | 0.192      |   |  |  | 1,570.2                 |  
|Pascua-Lama                                                                        |  |  | 13,562                         |   |  |  | 0.103      |   |  |  | 30.7                            |   |  |  |           |  |  |  | 143,111       |   |  |  | 0.084      |   |  |  | 264.3                   |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 295.0                   |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 15,400        |   |  |  | 0.049      |   |  |  | 16.5                    |  
|AFRICA                                                                             |  |  |                                |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                                 |   |  |  |           |  |  |  |               |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                         |   |  |  |  |  |  |  |                         |   |  |  |  |  |  |  |               |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                         |  
|Bulyanhulu
(63.90%)                                                                |  |  | 874                            |   |  |  | 0.405      |   |  |  | 7.8                             |   |  |  |           |  |  |  | 8,011         |   |  |  | 0.449      |   |  |  | 79.3                    |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 87.1                    |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 15,469        |   |  |  | 0.632      |   |  |  | 215.5                   |  
|Buzwagi (63.90%)                                                                   |  |  | 83                             |   |  |  | 0.109      |   |  |  | 0.2                             |   |  |  |           |  |  |  | 16,449        |   |  |  | 0.116      |   |  |  | 42.1                    |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 42.3                    |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 1,315         |   |  |  | 0.128      |   |  |  | 3.7                     |  
|TOTAL                                                                              |  |  | 41,919                         |   |  |  | 0.118      |   |  |  | 109.0                           |   |  |  |           |  |  |  | 468,298       |   |  |  | 0.127      |   |  |  | 1,309.2                 |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 1,418.2                 |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 406,609       |   |  |  | 0.202      |   |  |  | 1,807.3                 |  
|(1)  Resources which are not
reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. | 
|                                                                                  
|NICKEL MINERAL RESOURCES (1)                                                       | 
|For the year ended Dec. 31, 2016                                                   |  |  | MEASURED (M)                   |   |  |  |            |   |  |  | INDICATED (I)                   |   |  |  | (M) + (I) |  |  |  |               |   |  |  | INFERRED   |  
|Based on attributable pounds                                                       |  |  | Tonnes(000s)                  |   |  |  | Grade(%)   |   |  |  | Contained lbs(millions)         |   |  |  |           |  |  |  | Tonnes(000s) |   |  |  | Grade(%)   |   |  |  | Contained lbs(millions) |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | Contained lbs(millions) |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | Tonnes(000s) |   |  |  | Grade(%)   |   |  |  | Contained lbs(millions) |  
|AFRICA                                                                             |  |  |                                |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                                 |   |  |  |           |  |  |  |               |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                         |   |  |  |  |  |  |  |                         |   |  |  |  |  |  |  |               |   |  |  |            |   |  |  |                         |  
|Kabanga (50.00%)                                                                   |  |  | -                              |   |  |  |            |   |  |  | 0.0                             |   |  |  |           |  |  |  | -             |   |  |  |            |   |  |  | 0.0                     |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | 0.0                     |   |  |  |  |  |  |  | -             |   |  |  |            |   |  |  | 0.0                     |  

|(1) | Resources which are not reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |    |  | 
| |  | -- |  | 
| |  | 92 |  | 



---

Mineral Reserves and Resources Endnotes

1. Mineral reserves (reserves) and mineral resources (resources) have been estimated as at December 31, 2016 in accordance
with National Instrument 43-101 as required by Canadian securities regulatory authorities. For United States reporting purposes, Industry Guide 7 under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (as interpreted
by Staff of the SEC), applies different standards in order to classify mineralization as a reserve. Accordingly, for U.S. reporting purposes, approximately 1.9 million ounces of proven and probable gold reserves at Cortez are classified as
mineralized material. In addition, while the terms measured, indicated and inferred mineral resources are required pursuant to National Instrument 43-101, the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission does not recognize such terms. Canadian standards differ significantly from the requirements of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, and mineral resource information contained herein is not comparable to
similar information regarding mineral reserves disclosed in accordance with the requirements of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. U.S. investors should understand that inferred mineral resources have a great amount of
uncertainty as to their existence and great uncertainty as to their economic and legal feasibility. In addition, U.S. investors are cautioned not to assume that any part or all of Barricks mineral resources constitute or will be converted into
reserves. Calculations have been prepared by employees of Barrick, its joint venture partners or its joint venture operating companies, as applicable, under the supervision of Rick Sims, Senior Director, Resources and Reserves, of Barrick, Steven
Haggarty, Senior Director, Metallurgy, of Barrick and Patrick Garretson, Senior Director, Life of Mine Planning, of Barrick. Except as noted below, reserves have been estimated based on an assumed gold price of US$1,000 per ounce for 2017 through
2020 and US$1,200 per ounce from 2021 onwards, an assumed silver price of US$13.75 per ounce for 2017 through 2020 and US$16.50 from 2021 onwards, and an assumed copper price of US$2.25 per pound for 2017 through 2020 and US$2.75 per pound from 2021
onwards (for more information about Barricks two-tiered approach to estimating reserves, see page 31 of the Fourth Quarter and Year-End Report 2016) and long-term
average exchange rates of 1.30 CAD/US$ and 0.75 US$/AUD. Reserves at Kalgoorlie assumed a gold price of AUD$1,600 and Bulyanhulu, North Mara and Buzwagi assumed a gold price of US$1,100. Reserve estimates incorporate current and/or expected mine
plans and cost levels at each property. Varying cut-off grades have been used depending on the mine and type of ore contained in the reserves. Barricks normal data verification procedures have been
employed in connection with the calculations. Verification procedures include industry-standard quality control practices. Resources as at December 31, 2016 have been estimated using varying cut-off
grades, depending on both the type of mine or project, its maturity and ore types at each property. For a breakdown of reserves and resources by category and for a more detailed description of the key assumptions, parameters, and methods used in
estimating Barricks reserves and resources, see Barricks most recent Annual Information Form/Form 40-F on file with Canadian provincial securities regulatory authorities and the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission.

2. In confirming our annual reserves for each of our mineral properties, projects, and operations we conduct a reserve test on
December 31 of each year to verify that the future undiscounted cash flow from reserves is positive. The cash flow ignores all sunk costs and only considers future operating and closure expenses as well as any future capital costs.

3. On January 11, 2016, the Company divested the Bald Mountain mine and its interest in the Round Mountain mine. For additional information
regarding this matter, see page 116 of Barricks Fourth Quarter and Year-End Report 2016.

4. On
August 31, 2015, the Company divested 50% of its interest in the Porgera mine. For additional information regarding this matter, see page 116 of Barricks Fourth Quarter and Year-End Report 2016.

5. Silver and copper probable reserve tonnage at the Bulyanhulu mine is less than the gold probable reserve tonnage because the gold reserve
includes 3.95 million tonnes of tailings material which are being separately reprocessed for recovery of gold only.



| |  |    |  | 
| |  | -- |  | 
| |  | 93 |  |