Corporate UpdateMarch 2016

Forward‐Looking Statements

2

Cautionary Statement This presentation contains certain information that constitutes “forward‐looking information” and “forward‐looking statements” as defined under Canadian and U.S. securities laws. All statements inthis presentation, other than statements of historical fact, are forward‐looking statements. The words “expect”, “believe”, “anticipate”, “contemplate”, “may”, “could”, “will”, “intend”, “estimate”,“forecast”, “target”, “budget”, “schedule” and similar expressions identify forward‐looking statements. Forward‐looking statements in this presentation include, without limitation, information as toour strategy, projected gold production from the Young‐Davidson, Hemlo – Williams, Eagle River, Fosterville and Stawell mines, which are not owned by the Company, project timelines, the planned2% net smelter return royalty on future production from the Kemess Underground mine, projected exploration results, resource and reserve estimates, projected production and costs of the KemessUnderground mine, other statements that express our expectations or estimates of future performance, value growth, value creation and shareholder returns, the success of exploration activities,mineral inventory including the Company’s ability to delineate additional resources and reserves as a result of such programs, mineral reserves and mineral resources and anticipated grades,exploration expenditures, costs and timing of any future development, costs and timing of future exploration and the presence of and continuity of metals at Kemess East at modeled grades.

Forward‐looking statements are necessarily based upon a number of factors and assumptions that, while considered reasonable by management at the time of making such statements, are inherentlysubject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies. Known and unknown factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in theforward‐looking statements. Such factors and assumptions underlying the forward‐looking statements in this presentation include, but are not limited to: changes to current estimates of mineralreserves and resources; fluctuations in the price of gold and copper; changes in foreign exchange rates (particularly the Canadian dollar and U.S. dollar); performance of the Young‐Davidson, Hemlo –Williams, Eagle River, Fosterville and Stawell mines, which may impact the future cash flows associated with the Company’s royalty holdings; the impact of inflation; employee relations; litigation;uncertainty with the Company’s ability to secure capital to execute its business plans; the speculative nature of mineral exploration and development, including the risks of obtaining necessarylicenses, permits, authorizations and/or approvals from the appropriate regulatory authorities for the Kemess Underground project; contests over title to properties; changes in national and localgovernment legislation in Canada and other jurisdictions in which the Company does or may carry on business in the future; risk of loss due to sabotage and civil disturbances; the impact of globalliquidity and credit availability and the values of assets and liabilities based on projected future cash flows; as well as business opportunities that may be pursued by the Company.

Actual results and developments are likely to differ, and may differ materially, from those expressed or implied by the forward‐looking statements contained in this presentation. Such statements arebased on a number of assumptions, including those noted elsewhere in this document, which may prove to be incorrect. Readers are cautioned that forward‐looking statements are not guarantees offuture performance. All of the forward‐looking statements made in this presentation are qualified by these cautionary statements.

There can be no assurance that forward‐looking statements or information will prove to be accurate, accordingly, investors should not place undue reliance on the forward‐looking statements orinformation contained herein. The Company disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward‐looking statements whether as a result of new information, future events orotherwise, except as required by applicable law.

Cautionary Note to U.S. Investors Concerning Measured, Indicated and Inferred ResourcesThis presentation uses the terms "measured", "indicated" and "inferred” resources. We advise investors that while those terms are recognized and required by Canadian regulations, the United StatesSecurities and Exchange Commission does not recognize them. “Inferred resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence and as to their economic and legal feasibility. It cannot beassumed that all or any part of an inferred resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian rules, estimates of inferred mineral resources may not form the basis of feasibility orother economic studies. United States investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of measured or indicated mineral resources will ever be converted into mineral reserves. United Statesinvestors are also cautioned not to assume that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource exists, or is economically or legally mineable.

Qualified Person as Defined by National Instrument 43‐101John Fitzgerald, Chief Operating Officer for AuRico Metals Inc. has reviewed and approved the scientific and technical information contained within this presentation. Mr. Fitzgerald is a “QualifiedPerson” as defined by National Instrument 43‐101.

AMI: Recent Developments

Royalty Portfolio Kemess Gold – Copper Project Young‐Davidson ramp‐up progressing

Fosterville reserves        34%

Hemlo reserves  12%

Eagle River reserves  13%

Stawell resources       14%

5.7 to 6.1Koz in 2016 attributable production (per guidance)

… and gold is      13% YTD

Release of positive feasibility update NPV of C$289M, IRR of 12.6%

Release of Kemess East Resource update Delineation of high grade core to deposit

EA Application has been submitted to the BC Environmental Assessment Office

3

Capital StructureTSX Ticker Symbol AMI

Share Price (as of Mar. 21, 2016) C$0.71

Shares Outstanding 130M

Cash (as of Dec. 31, 2015) C$11M

Market Capitalization C$93M

Management TeamChris Richter President & CEO

Robert Chausse Chief Financial Officer

John Fitzgerald Chief Operating Officer

Chris Rockingham Vice President, Development

Harold Bent Director, Environment

Susan Craig Advisor, Government & Community Affairs

Board of DirectorsRichard Colterjohn Scott Perry

John McCluskey Anne Day

Anthony Garson Janice Stairs

Joseph Spiteri Chris Richter

Major Shareholders1

Sandstorm Gold 15%

Alamos Gold 11%

Van Eck Associates 10%

Donald Smith & Company 4%

AMI Management & Directors 3%

4

Market Overview

Analyst CoverageNational Bank (Adam Melnyk)

Macquarie (Michael Siperco)

Scotia Capital (Mark Turner)

Mackie Research (Barry Allan)

Property Locations

5

All properties located in stable, desirable mining jurisdictions

Development Property

CANADA

AUSTRALIA

KEMESS (100%)British Columbia, Canada

YOUNG‐DAVIDSON (1.5% NSR)Ontario, Canada STAWELL (1% NSR)

Victoria, Australia

FOSTERVILLE (2% NSR)Victoria, Australia

Royalty

LEVIATHAN (1% NSR)Victoria, Australia

KEMESS UG(Potential Royalty or Stream) British Columbia, Canada

HEMLO – WILLIAMS (0.25% NSR)Ontario, Canada

HEMLO – DAVID BELL (1.5% NSR)Ontario, Canada

EAGLE RIVER (0.5% NSR)Ontario, Canada

Actively pursuing accretive opportunities to grow royalty portfolio

Producing Royalty

Risk – Reward

Source: S&P Capital IQPrecious Metal Royalty companies include: FNV, OR (since inception), RGLD, SLW, and SSLGold/Copper Developers include: Augusta, CUU, GUY, Lumina, NCU, NGQ, R, RMC (since inception), RMX, TXG, WRN 6

Goal is to Deliver Superior Shareholder Returns in Any Market

“Bull Market” “Bear Market”

53%

‐7%

148%

‐25%‐40%

0%

40%

80%

120%

160%

2009 ‐ 2011 2011 ‐ 2015

Precious Metal Royalty Companies Gold/Copper Developers

Annualized Returns Through Bull and Bear Markets

"Bear Markets always turn into Bull Markets and you need to be positioned for when they turn.“ – Ross Beaty

Royalty Portfolio Overview

7

Royalty Mineral Inventory (years)1

Royalty EBITDA (C$ M) at Various Gold Prices2

Royalty Value Drivers AuRicoRoyalties

Asset Stage

Geographic Location

Core Asset of Operator

High‐Quality Operator

Precious Metals

Mine Life

Cost Profile

Scale of Production

Exploration Upside US$

0

4

8

12

16

20

24

$1,000 $1,200 $1,400 $1,600Kemess UG (dev't stage) Stawell Eagle River Hemlo Fosterville YD

0 5 10 15 20 25

Kemess East(3)

Kemess UG(3)

Stawell

Eagle River

Hemlo

Fosterville

YD

Royalty Mineral Inventory (years)

P&P

M&I

Inferred

Kemess (100% Owned) Overview

8

Past Present Future

Kemess South (Production: 1998 – 2011)

C$1 Billion of Infrastructure on Care and Maintenance

Kemess Underground (KUG) & Kemess East (KE)

3Mozof Gold Produced(at 0.6 g/t)

750Mlbsof Copper Produced (at 0.2%)

KUG Feasibility Update  KE Resource Update  Environmental Application 

Submission 

30,000m drill campaign in 2015 included intersection of 772m at 0.465g/t Au and 0.365% Cu (0.72% CuE)1

(4.6Moz AuE1)

3,215

4,028

3,197

KUG + KE: AuE Ounces ('000)

P&P Indicated Inferred

Kemess UG – Feasibility Study Update

9

• Meaningful production:  238Koz Gold Equivalent (AuE) annually for first 5 years, 207Koz AuEover life of mine (LOM) (12 years)1

• Low cost:  All‐in Sustaining Costs2 per AuE of US$682/oz for first 5 years, US$718/oz LOM

• Solid economics: • After‐tax NPV (5%) of C$289M and IRR of 12.6% assuming $1,250/oz Au, $2.50/lb Cu, and 

a C$/US$ of 0.75• After‐tax NPV (5%) becomes C$421M and IRR becomes 15.4% at $3/lb Cu

• Pre‐commercial production capital3 of C$603M (US$452M)• Capital reduction opportunity exists by leasing all or a portion of the C$86M in 

underground mobile equipment purchases

• Low risk:  Project infrastructure is already in place (processing facility, grid power, access road, camp, admin and maintenance facilities, etc.)

• Significant upside:  Large (246Mt) of M&I resource (including 107Mt of reserves) situated vertical to the extraction level (of the planned KUG panel cave)

• Potential further upside from Kemess East (including high grade core) – which remains open in several directions

• Location:  One of the best mining jurisdictions: British Columbia, Canada

• Advanced:  Expect to enter 180 day Environmental Assessment review period in early April

Kemess: Initial Capital

10

KemessAdvantages

C$603M (US$452M) in pre‐commercial production capex  “Low risk” capex given infrastructure in place; Proven logistics 87% of capital expenditures are C$ denominated Capex is heavily weighted to final 2 years prior to commercial 

production Opportunity to reduce capex through equipment leasing (C$86M) Project financing opportunity (marketable clean concentrate)

Kemess: Low Capital Intensity

11

• Potential to add additional low‐cost ounces at KUG and Kemess East

Source: Canaccord Genuity (March 23, 2016).

Kemess: Production and Costs

12

Low Cost Mining

Total LOM cash costs of US$639 and AISC of US$718 per AuE AISC of US$682/oz over first 5 years

Caving initiated in the highest value ore Low ‘break‐even’ in early years to allow for debt repayment Payback period of 3.9 years at base case assumptions

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

 ‐1  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13

Annual Gold Equivalent Production vs. USD AISC

Gold Equivalent Production AISC(USD)

Reserves and Resources (all categories) of 10.9Moz AuE Property‐Wide

Kemess East – High Grade Discovery

13

~51Mt in high grade core of Kemess East with Cu grade 69% higher and Au grade 23% higher than KUG Reserves

K UGK East

K South

Kemess Alternatives

KemessAdvantages

Attractive economics “2/3rds built” (~C$1B of infrastructure) Moderate capex (mostly UG dev’t) Proven (‘98 – ’11) Advanced stage

~55/45 Au/Cu split BC government very 

supportive Fully unencumbered Clean concentrate

14

Smelter (offtake‐linked) Financing

Joint Venture / Earn‐in

Project Financing

Royalty / Stream Private Equity

Net Asset Value per Share

15

* Consensus royalty NAVs do not yet reflect positive resource updates, production guidance or recent gold price appreciation

** Consensus Kemess value will be updated upon release of Kemess Underground Feasibility Study Update and Kemess East Resource Update (imminent)

Share Price

0.74 

0.85 

0.09 

0.43 

1.33 

 ‐

 0.20

 0.40

 0.60

 0.80

 1.00

 1.20

 1.40

 1.60

 1.80

 2.00

Royalties* Kemess** Cash Corporate Outflow

Kemess – Embedded Royalty Value

16

ILLUSTRATIVE NSR (2%)

AssumptionsGold Price $1,250 per ounceCopper Price $2.50 per poundSilver Price $16 per ounceForeign Exchange 0.75 USD per CAD

Up to $9M in Annual Cash Flow (KUG Only1)

Up to $9M in Annual Cash Flow (KUG Only1)

$45M NAV (KUG Reserves Only1)

$45M NAV (KUG Reserves Only1)

Kemess is 100% owned and 100% unencumbered (no royalties or streams) Presents material “organic” royalty‐growth opportunity

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

$300,000

$350,000

$400,000

In‐Situ Metal Value (2%)

(C$ ‘000)

Reserves M&I Inferred

KE

KUG

Undervalued…

17

EV/EBITDA (2016E)

Source: Peers per CIBC (Mar. 21, 2016) – Analyst consensus; AMI NAV per Consensus, *AMI EBITDA shown only for royalty business

P/NAV vs. Royalty Co’s

28.4 x 29.0 x

19.0 x16.2 x 14.2 x

10.3 x

19.5 x

10.2 x

0.0 x

10.0 x

20.0 x

30.0 x

Osisko Royalties Franco‐Nevada Altius Minerals Silver Wheaton Royal Gold Sandstorm Gold Average AuRico Metals*

EV/EBITDA (2016E)

2.0 x

1.2 x 1.4 x 1.2 x 1.3 x1.0 x

1.3 x0.8 x 0.6 x

0.0 x

1.0 x

2.0 x

Franco‐Nevada Osisko Royalties Silver Wheaton Sandstorm Gold Royal Gold Altius Minerals Average AMI (RoyaltiesOnly)

AMI(Consensus)

P/NAV

… With Excellent Leverage to Gold

18Source: NBF Estimates (February 19, 2016); NAVPS Leverage shown for a 10% change in Au price

P/NAVPS NAVPS Leverage to Au

Undervalued… with excellent leverage to gold

Undervalued vs. Development Co’s

19Source: Peers per CIBC (Mar. 21, 2016) – Analyst consensus 

P/NAV vs. Development Companies

0.4 x

0.6 x

0.4 x0.3 x

0.2 x

0.6 x

0.8 x0.8 x 0.7 x

0.6 x

0.4 x0.4 x

0.3 x

0.0 x0.1 x0.2 x0.3 x0.4 x0.5 x0.6 x0.7 x0.8 x0.9 x1.0 x

CopperDevelopers

Exeter Polymet NevadaCopper

NGEx GoldDevelopers

LundinGold

Sabina Kaminak Dalradian Victoria Lydian Continental

P/NAV

* Current AMI market capitalization justified by royalty portfolio alone

20

APPENDIX

21

Young‐Davidson Royalty

Ramping‐Up to be One of the Largest Gold Mines in Canada

Overview

Royalty 1.5% NSR

Location Ontario, Canada

Operator Alamos Gold

Asset Overview Underground mine

2016E Production 170‐180 Koz

Mine Life 17+ years

ResourceP&P: 3,823KozM&I: 1,499KozInferred: 321Koz

20

17

14 13 13

109

7

5 5

Detour

Youn

g‐Da

vidson

Macassa

Phoe

nix

Canadian

Malartic

Casa

Berardi

New

 Afton

Holt‐

Hollaway

Seabee

Timmins‐Be

llCo

mplex

Canadian Gold Mines ‐ Reserve Life (years)1

Fosterville Royalty

Overview

Royalty 2% NSR

Location Victoria, Australia

Operator Newmarket Gold

Asset Overview Underground mine

2016E Production 110‐120Koz

Reserves & Resources

P&P: 388Koz M&I: 1,878KozInferred: 665Koz

22

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

Q1 2012

Q2 2012

Q3 2012

Q4 2012

Q1 2013

Q2 2013

Q3 2013

Q4 2013

Q1 2014

Q2 2014

Q3 2014

Q4 2014

Q1 2015

Q2 2015

Q3 2015

Q4 2015

Newmarket Gold’s Flagship Mine 2015 was 3rd consecutive year of 

record production Significant exploration success in 2015 

(e.g. Eagle Fault) Significant increase in 2015 reserves 

and reserve grade

Record Annual Gold Production up 17% in 2015 to 123,095 ozs

Gold Ounces Produced (‘12 – ’15)

Hemlo – Williams Royalty

Overview

Royalty 0.25% NSR

Location Ontario, Canada

Operator Barrick Gold

Asset Overview Underground and  Open Pit mine

2016E Production1 200 – 220Koz

Reserves & Resources

P&P: 917KozM&I: 1,451KozInferred: 306Koz

23

Q4/15 production of 74Koz at Hemlo Hemlo in operation since 1985 and has 

produced over 24Moz  Strong history of reserve replacement Exploration ongoing (promising results 

outlined in 2015)

Recent Production History

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Eagle River Royalty

Overview

Royalty 0.5% NSR

Location Ontario, Canada

Operator Wesdome Gold Mines

Asset Overview Underground

2016E Production 43 – 47Koz

Reserves & Resources

P&P: 300KozInferred: 170Koz

24

2015 production of 41Koz (at 7.8g/t) Continuous production since 1995 

(over 1Moz produced) Long history of reserve replacement Significant upside from continued 

exploration of identified ore zones including 300 zone

Recent Production History

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Other Royalties

25

Kemess (Potential)

David Bell (1.5% NSR)

Stawell (1% NSR)

Leviathan (1% NSR)

26

2016 Outlook

Royalty revenue: US$6.6M – US$7.1M After‐tax: US$5.7M – US$6.1M Assumes gold price of US$1,150/oz; Every $50/oz change in gold price has 

US$0.3M impact on revenue G&A: ~ US$2.5M Kemess Care and Maintenance: ~US$4.5M

Targeting a reduction of annualized C&M to US$3M or below by year‐end Kemess project expenditures: US$1.5M – US$2.5M

KUG FS update, KE resource update, EA, permitting, and First Nations activities

Kemess East exploration: US$1.7M

Expect to be FCF positive in 2017 following completion of this year’s investments and with cost cutting measures being pursued at Kemess

27

Mineral Reserve Estimates ‐ Gold

Category Tonnes (000's) Grade (g/t) Ounces (000's)

Kemess UndergroundProven ‐ ‐ ‐Probable 107,381 0.54 1,868

Total Kemess Underground P&P 107,381 0.54 1,868Mineral Resource Estimates ‐ Gold

Category Tonnes (000's) Grade (g/t) Ounces (000's)

Kemess Underground

Measured ‐ ‐ ‐Indicated 139,019 0.33 1,460

Total Kemess UndergroundM&I 139,019 0.33 1,460

Inferred 21,600 0.40 277

Kemess East

Measured ‐ ‐ ‐Indicated 39,200 0.50 627

Total Kemess EastM&I 39,200 0.50 627

Inferred 109,600 0.38 1,331

Mineral Reserve and Resource Estimates – Copper and SilverGrade Contained Metal

Category Tonnes (000’s) Ag (g/t) Cu (%) Ag (000’s) oz Cu (000’s) lbs

Kemess Underground Probable Reserves 107,381 2.0 0.27 6,878 629,595Indicated Resources 139,019 1.6 0.18 6,988 565,705Inferred Resources 21,600 1.7 0.22 1,179 104,700

Kemess EastIndicated Resources 39,200 2.0 0.40 2,512 344,000Inferred Resources 109,600 2.0 0.37 6,994 888,000

Kemess Reserves & Resources

Endnotes

28

Slide 4 ‐Market Overview1) Per Scotia, Sedi, and company filings

Slide 7 ‐ Royalty Portfolio Overview:1) Reserves and resources per most recent resource updates from asset owners; Assumes annual production levels for YD, Fosterville,

Hemlo, Eagle River, Kemess UG and East, and Stawell of 200Koz, 115Koz, 200Koz, 50Koz, 140Koz, and 30Koz respectively and recoveries of 90%, 88%, 95%, 95%, 90%, and 90% respectively

2) Annual production assumptions per mid‐point of guidance; For Kemess UG, the copper price is being adjusted up/down by the same percentage, i.e. the parallel copper price assumptions for the gold price range of $1,100 ‐ $1,600/oz is $2.54, $2.77, $3.00, $3.23, $3.46, $3.69

Slide 8 ‐ Kemess Overview: AuE ounces calculated on the basis of $1,250/oz Au and $2.50/lb CuSlide 9 – Kemess Feasibility Study Update

1) All figures sourced from press release dated March 23, 2016 entitled “AuRico Metals Announces Positive Feasibility Study Update for the Kemess Underground Gold – Copper Project”2) All‐in sustaining costs (“AISC”) is a non‐GAAP measures that does not have a standardized meaning3) Pre‐commercial production capital represents total capital expenditures required to achieve commercial production including capitalized pre‐commercial operating costs less revenue from pre‐commercial production (at pricing used in Feasibility Study)(See note 1)

Slide 13 (Kemess East):1) AuE calculation assumes Au price of $1,250/oz and Cu price of $2.50/oz

Slide 16 – Kemess Embedded Royalty Value 1) Per 2015 Feasibility Study update

Slide 22  ‐ YD Royalty:1) Scotia analysis

Slide 24 ‐ Hemlo ‐Williams Royalty1) Total 2015 production for Hemlo Complex per  Barrick disclosure; not 100% attributable to Williams mine