ARUMA RESOURCES LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2025

Sep 25, 2025

ASX Announcement 26 September 2025

==> picture [232 x 79] intentionally omitted <==

NEW HIGH-PRIORITY DRILL-READY TARGETS DEFINED AT SALTWATER PROJECT

Highlights

• Three new priority gold and copper drill-ready targets identified at the Tunnel Creek Prospect within the Saltwater Project in the Pilbara region of Western Australia

• Targets have been identified across a 5km strike from a review of historic exploration conducted by previous project owner Fortescue Metals Group Limited (ASX: FMG) :

• Luke target – a 2.5km[2] area with gold anomalism up to 27ppb Au in soils and supporting coincident arsenic, antimony, bismuth and lead anomalies

• Padme target – an elongated 1.2km[2] area of gold, copper (up to 83.6ppm Cu), lead, zinc and antimony soil anomalism

• Rabbit target – a 1.9km[2] area with copper, lead, zinc soil anomalism with supporting antimony

• Targets represent well-defined, low-cost and high-confidence exploration priorities for Aruma and are all yet to be drill tested – potential to host Orogenic Gold, Sedimentary Exhalative (SEDEX) and Mississippi Valley Type (MVT) base metals systems

• The new targets complement and strengthen Aruma’s exploration target pipeline at Saltwater and will be a focus of future fieldwork at the Project

• Next Steps: Planned 200m x 160m infill soil sampling program to refine drill ready targets ahead of planned first-phase RC drilling program

• Drilling at the Fiery Creek Copper Project in the Mt Isa region in Queensland is complete and results are expected in the near future

Aruma Resources Limited (ASX: AAJ) (Aruma or the Company ) is pleased to announce that it has defined multiple new priority drill targets at its 100%-owned Saltwater Project in the Pilbara region of Western Australia.

The new targets come from a comprehensive technical review compiled by Aruma of exploration results from previous Saltwater Project owner, Fortescue Metals Group Limited (ASX: FMG) at the Tunnel Creek Prospect in the eastern extent of the Project[1] .

Aruma Resources Ltd ACN 141 335 364 ASX: AAJ

Issued Capital Business Office Board and Management 327,940,525 Shares Units 8-9, 88 Forrest Street JAMES MOSES – Non-Executive Chairman 54,930,003 Listed options Cottesloe WA 6011 GRANT FERGUSON – Managing Director 176,382,353 Unlisted options T: + 61 8 9321 0177 BRETT SMITH – Non-Executive Director 19,700,000 Performance rights E: info@arumaresources.com

==> picture [58 x 41] intentionally omitted <==

www.arumaresources.com

==> picture [156 x 53] intentionally omitted <==

FMG conducted geological mapping and a soil orientation sampling program comprising 454 soil samples (collected across a 400m x 160m grid) in 2012-13. This program identified multiple significant gold and copper (plus other base metal) soil anomalies at three key targets, Luke, Padme and Rabbit, which span a 72km strike length at the Tunnel Creek area (Figure 1).

==> picture [450 x 362] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1: Saltwater Project E52/3846 Historical Soil Anomaly – Tunnel Creek Overall Area

Based on the encouraging results of the soil sampling program, FMG had planned a first-phase eight hole - 1,400 to 1,800 metre reverse circulation (RC) drill program to test these targets. This program was never conducted and the targets remained untested, presenting a high-priority exploration focus for Aruma.

The Company now plans to conduct an infill soil sampling program (on a 200m x 160m grid) to further refine the defined anomalies, ahead of a planned first-phase RC drilling program. The soil program is planned to commence in the next quarter (subject to approvals), with drilling planned to commence on grant of all requisite approvals (subject to results).

The three targets are interpreted by Aruma to host the potential for both mesothermal/orogenic gold mineralisation - similar in style to the Paulsens Gold Mine in the region - and Sedimentary Exhalative (SEDEX) and Mississippi Valley Type (MVT) base metals systems.

==> picture [45 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

www.arumaresources.com

2

==> picture [156 x 53] intentionally omitted <==

These styles of mineralisation are known to host globally significant deposits such as Century in Australia, Lisheen in Ireland and Sullivan in Canada. These mineralisation styles are structurally controlled and align with regional scale folding and alteration patterns mapped and observed across the Saltwater Project area.

The review has provided Aruma with a suite of well-defined, low-cost and high-confidence targets at the easternmost tenement of the Saltwater Project. The confirmation of these anomalies supports Aruma’s exploration strategy and reinforces the project’s potential to host significant gold and base metal systems.

Aruma Resources managing director Grant Ferguson said;

“We are highly encouraged by the results of this technical review of historic exploration data at the Saltwater Project, which has confirmed multiple new high-priority gold and copper targets at the Tunnel Creek Prospect in the eastern part of the Project. The findings further enhance our confidence in the Project’s potential to deliver significant value, and validates our strategic focus on this underexplored region of the Pilbara.

The targets all exhibit strong, multi-element soil anomalism, and present an exciting new exploration opportunity at Saltwater – in addition to the already defined Apoc and Talmine Prospects. The new targets remain completely untested by drilling and are associated with favourable geological settings known to host world-class deposits. We now plan to undertake a focused infill soil sampling program to further refine the targets ahead of a first-phase RC drilling campaign subject to results.”

Overview of key targets

A review of historical exploration data from previous fieldwork conduct by FMG has confirmed the presence of significant gold and base metal anomalism across three northeast/southwest trending target areas.

The targets are open-ended soil anomalies extending over three separate areas each with an individual strike of greater than 1km, and are interpreted to offer significant exploration potential. The three targets are;

• Luke Prospect: covers an area of 1.7km x 1.5km comprising two gold trends extending across a strike length of 3.2km, with gold grades up to 27ppb Au. Coincident arsenic, lead, bismuth, tungsten and antimony are also present.

• Padme Prospect: covers an elongated area of 1.6km x 800m with gold, arsenic, antimony, copper and zinc present along a gossanous sedimentary boundary between sandstone and shale. This is interpreted as a potential redox boundary or remobilisation of deeper-seated

==> picture [45 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

www.arumaresources.com

3

==> picture [156 x 53] intentionally omitted <==

mineralisation along structural trends. Silicification is strong in this area and is represented as outcropping chert ridges and hills, indicative of a good environment for fluid flow.

• Rabbit Prospect: covers an area of 1.6km x 1.2km with two discrete copper, lead and zinc, plus antimony trends.

Commentary and rationale

A detailed review of historical exploration data from fieldwork undertaken by FMG in 2012-13, and previously unreported by Aruma, has identified multiple high-priority prospects within the Saltwater Project, at the Tunnel Creek prospect in EL52/3846 on the eastern extent of the Project. Aruma’s review was conducted by a leading independent geochemist, and was designed to assess and validate the integrity and interpretation of the historical data - and evaluate its alignment with Aruma’s current geological models for the Saltwater Project.

The review has been successful, and has provided strong validation of the original exploration data and its relevance to the Company’s exploration strategy.

The review also confirmed the presence of significant gold and copper (and other base metal) anomalism, with potential for SEDEX and MVT mineralisation.

The historic exploration data was sourced from the Western Australian Mineral Exploration (WAMEX) database and has resulted in the definition of well-defined , low-cost and high-confidence targets in the eastern area of the Saltwater Project.

Aruma’s technical review significantly enhances its confidence in the Project’s prospectivity and supports the Company’s commitment to the ongoing exploration of the Saltwater Project.

This announcement has been authorised for release by the Board of Aruma Resources Ltd.

ENDS

For further information, please contact:

Grant Ferguson

Managing Director

Aruma Resources Limited

Telephone: +61 8 9321 0177

E: info@arumaresources.com

==> picture [45 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

www.arumaresources.com

4

==> picture [156 x 53] intentionally omitted <==

About Aruma Resources

Aruma Resources Limited (ASX: AAJ) is an ASX-listed minerals exploration company focused on the exploration and development of a portfolio of prospective projects in high-demand commodities – copper and uranium - in world-class mineral belts, in South Australia and Queensland. It also holds gold, lithium and REE prospective projects in Western Australia.

Referenced Documents

1 - A105442: Annual Report Tunnel Creek CRG (C180/2007) for the period of 1 October to 30 September 2014. P Geerdte and R Healy, Fortescue Metals Group Ltd/Iron Bull Ashburton Pty Ltd.

2 - A122189: Annual Report Tunnel Creek CRG (C180/2007) for the period of 1 October 2018 to 30 September 2019. C Smith and B Tansacha. (referenced in JORC table)

3 - TC_WASG4_ROCK2014A.txt (referenced in JORC table)

==> picture [483 x 400] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2 - Aruma Resources project portfolio.

==> picture [45 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

www.arumaresources.com

5

==> picture [156 x 53] intentionally omitted <==

Competent person statement

The information in this release that relates to Exploration Results, Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves is based on information compiled open file information and verified by Grant Ferguson, who is a Fellow of the Australian Institute of Geoscience(AIG) and has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserve’. Mr Ferguson consents to the inclusion in the release of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears. All exploration results that have been reported previously and released to ASX are available to be viewed on the Company website www.arumaresurces.com. The Company confirms it is not aware of any new information that materially affects the information included in the original announcement. The Company confirms that the form and context in which the Competent Person’s findings are presented have not been materially modified from the original announcements.

Forward Looking Statement

Certain statements contained in this document constitute forward looking statements. Such forwardlooking statements are based on a number of estimates and assumptions made by the Company and its consultants in light of experience, current conditions and expectations of future developments which the Company believes are appropriate in the current circumstances. These estimates and assumptions while considered reasonable by the Company are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, achievements and performance of the Company to be materially different from the future results and achievements expressed or implied by such forwardlooking statements. Forward looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements preceded by words such as “planned”, “expected”, “projected”, “estimated”, “may”, “scheduled”, “intends”, “anticipates”, “believes”, “potential”, “could”, “nominal”, “conceptual” and similar expressions. There can be no assurance that Aruma plans to develop exploration projects that will proceed with the current expectations. There can be no assurance that Aruma will be able to conform the presence of Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves, that any mineralisation will prove to be economic and will be successfully developed on any of Aruma’s mineral properties. Investors are cautioned that forward looking information is no guarantee of future performance and accordingly, investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements

==> picture [45 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

www.arumaresources.com

6

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Tunnel Creek Historical Soil Sampling

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections.)

Results reported here are not being used towards Mineral Resource Estimate or Reserve calculations.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sampling techniques	• Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. • Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. • Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. • In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively simple (e.g. ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay’). In other cases, more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (e.g. submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.	o Soil Sampling Program: was undertaken by Fortescue Metals Group Ltd and reported in a122189as part of an ongoing systematic exploration program in the Hamersley Range to identify significant mineralisation other than iron ore. o Samples were analysed by Genalysis using a 4-acid digest. o Soil sampling formed part of an ongoing systematic exploration program in the Hamersley Range to identify significant mineralisation other than iron ore. o Historical soil sampling by other parties: Due to the historical nature of this work, detailed non Aruma soil sample information is not fully accessible but documented where possible in this press release.

7

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Drilling techniques	• Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, open- hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (e.g. core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face- sampling bit or other type, whether core is _oriented and if so, by what method, etc). _	No drilling has been undertaken in this program and reported in this announcement.
Drill sample recovery	• Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. • Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. • Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.	Drilling results are not being reported, no drilling data is included within this announcement.
Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. • Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. • The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.	Drilling results are not being reported, no drilling data is included within this announcement.
Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation	• If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all cores taken. • If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry. • For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. • Quality control procedures adopted for all sub- sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples. • Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in-situ material collected,	o Historical soil sampling by other parties: Due to the historical nature of this work, detailed non Aruma soil sample information is not fully accessible but documented where possible in this press release.

8

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling. • Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. • For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. • Nature of quality control procedures adopted (e.g. standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been established.	o Genalysis insert their own QAQC samples, including resplits, checks, blanks and standards. No QAQC issues were reported.
Verification of sampling and assaying	• The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel. • The use of twinned holes. • Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. • Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	o The sampling programs are the first phase of testing; however previous sparse rock chip samples reflect similar grades. o Drilling results are not being reported, no drilling data is included within this announcement. o Soil samples and geological information is reported ina122189
Location of data points	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. • Specification of the grid system used. • Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	o As recorded in TC_WASG4_ROCK2014A.txt, a handheld GPS was used to recorded each sample coordinate.

9

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Data spacing and distribution	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. • Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied. • Whether sample compositing has been applied.	o The soil sampling program was conducted on a 400x 160m spaced grid and orientated to approximately 330 degrees. This wide spaced survey was considered a 1stphase soil program. o Drilling results are not being reported, no drilling data is included within this announcement.
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. • If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.	o Drilling results are not being reported, no drilling data is included within this announcement. o At this early stage of exploration, mineralisation thickness’s, orientation and dips are not known
Sample security	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	o Drilling results are not being reported, no drilling data is included within this announcement. o The sample security measures are expected to be to industry standard but are not mentioned in the report
Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	o Drilling results are not being reported, no drilling data is included within this announcement. o No audits were completed on the Saltwater project. o Sampling methodologies are considered industry standard practice.

10

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral tenement and land tenure status	• Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings. • The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.	o The Saltwater Project, 120km SW of Newman is a 100% owned, managed, explored and maintained by Aruma Resources Limited. o The project contains four exploration licenses (EL52/3818, EL52/3846, EL52/3857 and EL52/3966) and covers a total area of 445km² o All tenements are 100% owned by Aruma Resources. o All work is done under POW’s o Aruma has agreements in place with the Native Title holders the Jidi Jidi Aboriginal Corporation
Exploration done by other parties	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	o The reports are acknowledged in the announcement and is numbered as a report in Minedex o 1973 Mt Newman Mining Co Pty Ltd- Exploration over tertiary pisolitic iron ore overlying Lower Proterozoic banded iron formation of the Marra Mamba Iron formation (A3896). o 1972-1982 Noranda Australia Limited- Identified the potential of the Bresnahan Basin to host a similar style uranium deposit as the Alligator River deposit in the Northern Territory. Subsequent exploration activities included aerial photography, airborne radiometric and magnetic surveys, surface mapping, rock chip sampling, percussion and diamond drilling. This work resulted in the discovery of the Turee Creek uranium deposit, which to date hasn’t encountered significant uranium mineralisation. o Another radiometric anomaly coincided with the Collenia Creek calcrete outcrop. This area was trenched, but failed to locate significant uranium mineralisation. (A12237, A10583, A9509, A7795, A5273). o 1983 Uranerz -First years exploration included gridding, geological mapping, airborne magnetometerspectrometer survey, ground radiometric survey and drilling of 96 rotary air blast holes. Only minor anomalies were detected (A12822). o 1997-1999 Hamersley Iron Pty Ltd -Exploration for mineralisation in Marra Mamba and Brockman Formation. Geological mapping, gravity surveying, rock chip sampling and drilling of 10 RC holes was carried out duringthe reporting period. No resource of hematite or magnetite was

11

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		identified (A36216, A58308). o 2005 Marengo Mining Limited -Exploring for sediment hosted gold deposits (Mt. Olympus-style mineralisation) at their Kunderong project. The company has been testing old drill spoil samples, taken rock chip and stream sediment samples. All project tenements were surrendered due to excessive demands by lawyers acting on behalf of the native title group (A68819, A70905). o 2007 Fortescue Metals Group Limited -Previous drilling on tenement E52/1779 by Fortescue took place in June 2007 with PH0O001, PHO002 and PHO003 being drilled to around 100 m in depth. These holes are located to the east of the 2011 drilling area. The data is limited and there were minor intercepts of the Nammuldi Member. These found minimal iron enrichment. o 2012-2013 Iron Bull Ashburton Pty Ltd -Work performed by Force Consulting on behalf of Iron Bull Ashburton in 2013 included: Desktop review of historical exploration and targeting study. ▪ Geological mapping and rock chip sampling of the Mulgarana Pool (Luke, Padme and Rabbit Prospects) and Yindabiddy prospect areas, including ground truthing of identified EM anomalies. ▪ Ground gravity survey over the entire project area. ▪ Geochemical soil survey within Mulgarana Pool (Luke, Padme and Rabbit Prospects) and Yindabiddy prospect areas. ▪ 3D modelling of geophysical (gravity) data.
Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	o The Saltwater Project is located over Wyloo Group metasediments and the Bresnahan Group in the Ashburton Basin. o The Saltwater Project is prospective for orogenic gold, volcanogenic base-metals and unconformity related REEs. o Drilling results are not being reported, no drilling data is included within this announcement.

12

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Drill hole Information	• A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: o easting and northing of the drill hole collar o elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar o dip and azimuth of the hole o down hole length and interception depth o hole length. • If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case.	o Drilling results are not being reported, no drilling data is included within this announcement.
Data aggregation methods	• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (e.g. cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. • Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high-grade results and longer lengths of low-grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. • The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated.	o Drilling results are not being reported, no drilling data is included within this announcement. o No metal equivalents reported o Single point surface sample results only have been reported. No data aggregation has been done

13

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths	• These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. • If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. • If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (e.g. ‘down hole length, true width not known’).	o Drilling results are not being reported, no drilling data is included within this announcement.
Diagrams	• Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported These should include but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.	o Please refer to the accompanying document for figures and maps for locations of surface sampling.
Balanced reporting	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results.	o Public reporting of exploration results by Aruma and past tenement holders and explorers are considered balanced. o Drilling results are not being reported, no drilling data is included within this announcement.
Other substantive exploration data	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.	o Drilling results are not being reported, no drilling data is included within this announcement. o Suitable commentary of the geology encountered are given within the text of this document.

14

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Further work	• The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g. tests for • lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). • Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, • including the main geological interpretations and future • drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.	o Geological mapping o Surface sampling o Geophysical re-evaluation o Aircore, RC and Diamond Drilling

15