In the financial disclosure it released on Monday, Aramco said its net income had fallen 12 percent, from $53 billion in the same period a year earlier, when oil prices were higher. The company also said it had earned $66 a barrel for its oil, 4 percent less than a year earlier.

The results indicated that, even with the decline , Aramco was much more profitable than its oil-producing peers. Exxon Mobil, the largest American oil company, brought in $5.5 billion in the first half of 2019; Royal Dutch Shell, Europe’s largest oil company, reported net income of $9 billion for the first six months of the year .

“Despite lower oil prices during the first half of 2019, we continued to deliver solid earnings,” Aramco’s chief executive, Amin H. Nasser , said in a statement. Disclosing the financial results, he said, was “a significant milestone in Saudi Aramco’s history.”

The company had long declined to disclose key metrics, including how much oil it produces and how much money it brings in. In April, though, it broke precedent and accompanied its well-received bond offering with a detailed prospectus that provided investors a wealth of financial and oil statistics.

Because the bonds are publicly traded, Aramco is now required to publish financial results.

The company also said Monday that it had paid dividends of $46.4 billion, an amount almost equal to its net income figure, to the Saudi government in the first half of the year. Analysts had told investors that the state-owned company did not have a clear policy on dividends.

“So far there is little clarity on how dividends are determined,” analysts at the market research firm Energy Intelligence, wrote in a note to clients last week.

On Monday, analysts at Bernstein, another market research firm, questioned whether Aramco could continue to pay such large dividends. Noting that the company had reported a measure called “free cash flow” of $38 billion for the first half of the year, the Bernstein analysts wrote, “This implies that Aramco is borrowing to pay the dividend, which is unlikely to be sustainable over the long run.”