Answer: 1.0

Question: Does the average value of As of January 1 in Number of Awards greater than that in Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value?

Context:
damages to natural resources allegedly caused by the discharge of hazardous substances from two former waste disposal sites in New Jersey. During the fourth quarter, the Company negotiated a settlement of New Jersey’s claims. Under the terms of the settlement, the company will transfer to the State of New Jersey 150 acres of undeveloped land with groundwater recharge potential, which the Company acquired for purposes of the settlement, and will pay the state’s attorneys’ fees. Notice of the settlement was published for public comment in December 2007, and no objections were received. As a result, the Company and the State of New Jersey have signed the formal settlement agreement pursuant to which the Company will transfer title to the property and will be dismissed from the lawsuit, which will continue against the codefendants. Accrued Liabilities and Insurance Receivables Related to Legal Proceedings The Company complies with the requirements of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.5, “Accounting for Contingencies,” and related guidance, and records liabilities for legal proceedings in those instances where it can reasonably estimate the amount of the loss and where liability is probable. Where the reasonable estimate of the probable loss is a range, the Company records the most likely estimate of the loss, or the low end of the range if there is no one best estimate. The Company either discloses the amount of a possible loss or range of loss in excess of established reserves if estimable, or states that such an estimate cannot be made. For those insured matters where the Company has taken a reserve, the Company also records receivables for the amount of insurance that it expects to recover under the Company’s insurance program. For those insured matters where the Company has not taken a reserve because the liability is not probable or the amount of the liability is not estimable, or both, but where the Company has incurred an expense in defending itself, the Company records receivables for the amount of insurance that it expects to recover for the expense incurred. The Company discloses significant legal proceedings even where liability is not probable or the amount of the liability is not estimable, or both, if the Company believes there is at least a reasonable possibility that a loss may be incurred. Because litigation is subject to inherent uncertainties, and unfavorable rulings or developments could occur, there can be no certainty that the Company may not ultimately incur charges in excess of presently recorded liabilities. A future adverse ruling, settlement, or unfavorable development could result in future charges that could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations or cash flows in the period in which they are recorded. The Company currently believes that such future charges, if any, would not have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial position of the Company, taking into account its significant available insurance coverage. Based on experience and developments, the Company periodically reexamines its estimates of probable liabilities and associated expenses and receivables, and whether it is able to estimate a liability previously determined to be not estimable and/or not probable. Where appropriate, the Company makes additions to or adjustments of its estimated liabilities. As a result, the current estimates of the potential impact on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations and cash flows for the legal proceedings and claims pending against the Company could change in the future. The Company estimates insurance receivables based on an analysis of its numerous policies, including their exclusions, pertinent case law interpreting comparable policies, its experience with similar claims, and assessment of the nature of the claim, and records an amount it has concluded is likely to be recovered. The following table shows the major categories of on-going litigation, environmental remediation and other environmental liabilities for which the Company has been able to estimate its probable liability and for which the Company has taken reserves and the related insurance receivables:

At December 31 (Millions)	2007	2006	2005

Breast implant liabilities	$1	$4	$7

Breast implant receivables	64	93	130

Respirator mask/asbestos liabilities	121	181	210

Respirator mask/asbestos receivables	332	380	447

Environmental remediation liabilities	37	44	30

Environmental remediation receivables	15	15	15

Other environmental liabilities	147	14	8

 For those significant pending legal proceedings that do not appear in the table and that are not the subject of pending settlement agreements, the Company has determined that liability is not probable or the amount of the liability is not estimable, or both, and the Company is unable to estimate the possible loss or range of loss at this time. The amounts in the preceding table with respect to breast implant and environmental remediation represent the Company’s best estimate of the respective liabilities. The Company does not believe that there is any single best estimate of the respirator/mask/asbestos liability or the other environmental liabilities shown above, nor that it can reliably estimate the amount or range of amounts by which those liabilities may exceed the reserves the Company has established. one year volatility, the median of the term of the expected life rolling volatility, the median of the most recent term of the expected life volatility of 3M stock, and the implied volatility on the grant date. The expected term assumption is based on the weighted average of historical grants. Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock Units The following table summarizes restricted stock and restricted stock unit activity for the years ended December 31:

	2015	2014	2013

	Number of Awards	Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value	Number of Awards	Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value	Number of Awards	Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value

Nonvested balance —

As of January 1	2,817,786	$104.41	3,105,361	$92.31	3,261,562	$85.17

Granted

Annual	671,204	165.86	798,615	126.79	946,774	101.57

Other	26,886	156.94	78,252	152.74	44,401	111.19

Vested	-1,010,612	89.99	-1,100,675	90.37	-1,100,095	79.93

Forfeited	-64,176	118.99	-63,767	97.23	-47,281	90.82

As of December 31	2,441,088	$127.47	2,817,786	$104.41	3,105,361	$92.31

 As of December 31, 2015, there was $84 million of compensation expense that has yet to be recognized related to nonvested restricted stock and restricted stock units. This expense is expected to be recognized over the remaining weightedaverage vesting period of 24 months. The total fair value of restricted stock and restricted stock units that vested during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 was $166 million, $145 million and $114 million, respectively. The Company’s actual tax benefits realized for the tax deductions related to the vesting of restricted stock and restricted stock units for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 was $62 million, $54 million and $43 million, respectively. Restricted stock units granted under the 3M 2008 Long-Term Incentive Plan generally vest three years following the grant date assuming continued employment. Dividend equivalents equal to the dividends payable on the same number of shares of 3M common stock accrue on these restricted stock units during the vesting period, although no dividend equivalents are paid on any of these restricted stock units that are forfeited prior to the vesting date. Dividends are paid out in cash at the vest date on restricted stock units, except for performance shares which do not earn dividends. Since the rights to dividends are forfeitable, there is no impact on basic earnings per share calculations. Weighted average restricted stock unit shares outstanding are included in the computation of diluted earnings per share. Performance Shares Instead of restricted stock units, the Company makes annual grants of performance shares to members of its executive management. The 2015 performance criteria for these performance shares (organic volume growth, return on invested capital, free cash flow conversion, and earnings per share growth) were selected because the Company believes that they are important drivers of long-term stockholder value. The number of shares of 3M common stock that could actually be delivered at the end of the three-year performance period may be anywhere from 0% to 200% of each performance share granted, depending on the performance of the Company during such performance period. Non-substantive vesting requires that expense for the performance shares be recognized over one or three years depending on when each individual became a 3M executive. Performance shares do not accrue dividends during the performance period. Therefore, the grant date fair value is determined by reducing the closing stock price on the date of grant by the net present value of dividends during the performance period. Pension and Postretirement Obligations: 3M has various company-sponsored retirement plans covering substantially all U. S.  employees and many employees outside the United States. The primary U. S.  defined-benefit pension plan was closed to new participants effective January 1, 2009. The Company accounts for its defined benefit pension and postretirement health care and life insurance benefit plans in accordance with Accounting Standard Codification (ASC) 715, Compensation — Retirement Benefits, in measuring plan assets and benefit obligations and in determining the amount of net periodic benefit cost. ASC 715 requires employers to recognize the underfunded or overfunded status of a defined benefit pension or postretirement plan as an asset or liability in its statement of financial position and recognize changes in the funded status in the year in which the changes occur through accumulated other comprehensive income, which is a component of stockholders’ equity. While the company believes the valuation methods used to determine the fair value of plan assets are appropriate and consistent with other market participants, the use of different methodologies or assumptions to determine the fair value of certain financial instruments could result in a different estimate of fair value at the reporting date. See Note 11 for additional discussion of actuarial assumptions used in determining pension and postretirement health care liabilities and expenses. Pension benefits associated with these plans are generally based primarily on each participant’s years of service, compensation, and age at retirement or termination. The benefit obligation represents the present value of the benefits that employees are entitled to in the future for services already rendered as of the measurement date. The Company measures the present value of these future benefits by projecting benefit payment cash flows for each future period and discounting these cash flows back to the December 31 measurement date, using the yields of a portfolio of high quality, fixed-income debt instruments that would produce cash flows sufficient in timing and amount to settle projected future benefits. Historically, the single aggregated discount rate used for each plan’s benefit obligation was also used for the calculation of all net periodic benefit costs, including the measurement of the service and interest costs. Beginning in 2016, 3M changed the method used to estimate the service and interest cost components of the net periodic pension and other postretirement benefit costs. The new method measures service cost and interest cost separately using the spot yield curve approach applied to each corresponding obligation. Service costs are determined based on duration-specific spot rates applied to the service cost cash flows. The interest cost calculation is determined by applying duration-specific spot rates to the year-by-year projected benefit payments. The spot yield curve approach does not affect the measurement of the total benefit obligations as the change in service and interest costs offset in the actuarial gains and losses recorded in other comprehensive income. The Company changed to the new method to provide a more precise measure of service and interest costs by improving the correlation between the projected benefit cash flows and the discrete spot yield curve rates. The Company accounted for this change as a change in estimate prospectively beginning in the first quarter of 2016. As a result of the change to the spot yield curve approach, 2016 defined benefit pension and postretirement net periodic benefit cost is expected to decrease by $180 million. Including this $180 million, 3M expects global defined benefit pension and postretirement expense in 2016 (before settlements, curtailments, special termination benefits and other) to decrease by approximately $320 million pre-tax when compared to 2015. Using this methodology, the Company determined discount rates for its plans as follow:

	U.S. Qualified Pension	International Pension (weighted average)	U.S. Postretirement Medical

December 31, 2014 Liability and 2015 Net Periodic Benefit Cost:

Single discount rate	4.10%	3.11%	4.07%

December 31, 2015 Liability:

Benefit obligation	4.47%	3.12%	4.32%

2016 Net Periodic Benefit Cost Components:

Service cost	4.72%	2.84%	4.60%

Interest cost	3.77%	2.72%	3.44%

 Another significant element in determining the Company’s pension expense in accordance with ASC 715 is the expected return on plan assets, which is based on historical results for similar allocations among asset classes. For the primary U. S.  qualified pension plan, the expected long-term rate of return on an annualized basis for 2016 is 7.50%, 0.25% lower than 2015. Refer to Note 11 for information on how the 2015 rate was determined. Return on assets assumptions for


Answer: 191913.0

Question: What's the sum of Client deposits of Average Balance Year Ended December 31, 2013, and U.S. of As of December 31, 2012 ?

Context:
countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2009 amounted to $1.26 billion (Italy). Aggregate cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2008 amounted to $3.45 billion (Canada and Germany). There were no cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets as of December 31, 2007. Capital The management of regulatory and economic capital both involve key metrics evaluated by management to assess whether our actual level of capital is commensurate with our risk profile, is in compliance with all regulatory requirements, and is sufficient to provide us with the financial flexibility to undertake future strategic business initiatives. Regulatory Capital Our objective with respect to regulatory capital management is to maintain a strong capital base in order to provide financial flexibility for our business needs, including funding corporate growth and supporting customers’ cash management needs, and to provide protection against loss to depositors and creditors. We strive to maintain an optimal level of capital, commensurate with our risk profile, on which an attractive return to shareholders is expected to be realized over both the short and long term, while protecting our obligations to depositors and creditors and satisfying regulatory capital adequacy requirements. Our capital management process focuses on our risk exposures, our regulatory capital requirements, the evaluations of the major independent credit rating agencies that assign ratings to our public debt and our capital position relative to our peers. Our Capital Committee, working in conjunction with our Asset and Liability Committee, referred to as ALCO, oversees the management of regulatory capital, and is responsible for ensuring capital adequacy with respect to regulatory requirements, internal targets and the expectations of the major independent credit rating agencies. The primary regulator of both State Street and State Street Bank for regulatory capital purposes is the Federal Reserve. Both State Street and State Street Bank are subject to the minimum capital requirements established by the Federal Reserve and defined in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991. State Street Bank must meet the regulatory capital thresholds for “well capitalized” in order for the parent company to maintain its status as a financial holding company. Regulatory capital ratios and related regulatory guidelines for State Street and State Street Bank were as follows as of December 31:

	REGULATORY GUIDELINES	STATE STREET	 STATE  STREET  BANK

	Minimum	Well Capitalized	2009	2008 -2	2009	 2008-2

Regulatory capital ratios:

Tier 1 risk-based capital	4%	6%	17.7%	20.3%	17.3%	19.8%

Total risk-based capital	8	10	19.1	21.6	19.0	21.3

Tier 1 leverage ratio-1	4	5	8.5	7.8	8.2	7.6

 (1) Regulatory guideline for well capitalized applies only to State Street Bank. (2) Tier 1 and total risk-based capital and tier 1 leverage ratios exclude the impact, where applicable, of the asset-backed commercial paper purchased under the Federal Reserve’s AMLF, as permitted by the AMLF’s terms and conditions. At December 31, 2009, State Street’s and State Street Bank’s tier 1 and total risk-based capital ratios decreased compared to year-end 2008. With respect to State Street, the loss associated with the May 2009 conduit consolidation and the June 2009 redemption of the equity received from the U. S.  Treasury in connection with the TARP Capital Purchase Program, partly offset by the aggregate impact of the May 2009 public offering MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued) on a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the level of housing prices and the timing of defaults. To the extent that such factors differ significantly from management's current expectations, resulting loss estimates may differ materially from those stated. Excluding other-than-temporary impairment recorded in 2014, management considers the aggregate decline in fair value of the remaining investment securities and the resulting gross unrealized losses as of December 31, 2014 to be temporary and not the result of any material changes in the credit characteristics of the securities. Additional information about these gross unrealized losses is provided in note 3 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K.  Loans and Leases TABLE 26: U. S.  AND NON- U. S.  LOANS AND LEASES

	As of December 31,

(In millions)	2014	2013	2012	2011	2010

Institutional:

U.S.	$14,908	$10,623	$9,645	$7,115	$7,001

Non-U.S.	3,263	2,654	2,251	2,478	4,192

Commercial real estate:

U.S.	28	209	411	460	764

Total loans and leases	$18,199	$13,486	$12,307	$10,053	$11,957

Average loans and leases	$15,912	$13,781	$11,610	$12,180	$12,094

 The increase in loans in the institutional segment as of December 31, 2014 as compared to December 31, 2013 was primarily driven by higher levels of short-duration advances and increased investment in the non-investment-grade lending market through participations in loan syndications, specifically senior secured bank loans. Short-duration advances to our clients included in the institutional segment were $3.54 billion and $2.45 billion as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. These short-duration advances provide liquidity to fund clients in support of their transaction flows associated with securities settlement activities. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, our investment in senior secured bank loans totaled approximately $2.07 billion and $724 million, respectively. In addition, we had binding unfunded commitments as of December 31, 2014 totaling $337 million to participate in such syndications. These senior secured bank loans, which we have rated “speculative” under our internal risk-rating framework (refer to note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K), are externally rated “BBB,” “BB” or “B,” with approximately 95% of the loans rated “BB” or “B” as of December 31, 2014, compared to 94% as of December 31, 2013. Our investment strategy involves limiting our investment to larger, more liquid credits underwritten by major global financial institutions, applying our internal credit analysis process to each potential investment, and diversifying our exposure by counterparty and industry segment. However, these loans have significant exposure to credit losses relative to higher-rated loans. As of December 31, 2014, our allowance for loan losses included approximately $26 million related to these senior secured bank loans. As this portfolio grows and becomes more seasoned, our allowance for loan losses related to these loans may increase through additional provisions for credit losses. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, unearned income deducted from our investment in leveraged lease financing was $109 million and $121 million, respectively, for U. S.  leases and $261 million and $298 million, respectively, for non-U. S.  leases. The commercial real estate, or CRE, loans are composed of the loans acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreements with an affiliate of Lehman as a result of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy. Additional information about all of our loan-and-lease segments, as well as underlying classes, is provided in note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K. The decrease in the CRE loans as of December 31, 2014 compared to December 31, 2013 resulted from one of the loans, acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreement with an affiliate of Lehman as a result of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy being repaid. As of December 31, 2014 no CRE loans were modified in troubled debt restructurings. As of December 31, 2013, we held a CRE loan for approximately $130 million which had previously been modified in a troubled debt restructuring. No loans were modified in troubled debt restructurings in 2014 or 2013. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued) Funding Deposits: We provide products and services including custody, accounting, administration, daily pricing, foreign exchange services, cash management, financial asset management, securities finance and investment advisory services. As a provider of these products and services, we generate client deposits, which have generally provided a stable, low-cost source of funds. As a global custodian, clients place deposits with State Street entities in various currencies. We invest these client deposits in a combination of investment securities and shortduration financial instruments whose mix is determined by the characteristics of the deposits. For the past several years, we have experienced higher client deposit inflows toward the end of the quarter or the end of the year. As a result, we believe average client deposit balances are more reflective of ongoing funding than period-end balances. TABLE 33: CLIENT DEPOSITS

	December 31,	Average Balance Year Ended December 31,

(In millions)	2014	2013	2014	2013

Client deposits-1	$195,276	$182,268	$167,470	$143,043

 (1) Balance as of December 31, 2014 excluded term wholesale certificates of deposit, or CDs, of $13.76 billion; average balances for the year ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 excluded average CDs of $6.87 billion and $2.50 billion, respectively. Short-Term Funding: Our corporate commercial paper program, under which we can issue up to $3.0 billion of commercial paper with original maturities of up to 270 days from the date of issuance, had $2.48 billion and $1.82 billion of commercial paper outstanding as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Our on-balance sheet liquid assets are also an integral component of our liquidity management strategy. These assets provide liquidity through maturities of the assets, but more importantly, they provide us with the ability to raise funds by pledging the securities as collateral for borrowings or through outright sales. In addition, our access to the global capital markets gives us the ability to source incremental funding at reasonable rates of interest from wholesale investors. As discussed earlier under “Asset Liquidity,” State Street Bank's membership in the FHLB allows for advances of liquidity with varying terms against high-quality collateral. Short-term secured funding also comes in the form of securities lent or sold under agreements to repurchase. These transactions are short-term in nature, generally overnight, and are collateralized by high-quality investment securities. These balances were $8.93 billion and $7.95 billion as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. State Street Bank currently maintains a line of credit with a financial institution of CAD $800 million, or approximately $690 million as of December 31, 2014, to support its Canadian securities processing operations. The line of credit has no stated termination date and is cancelable by either party with prior notice. As of December 31, 2014, there was no balance outstanding on this line of credit. Long-Term Funding: As of December 31, 2014, State Street Bank had Board authority to issue unsecured senior debt securities from time to time, provided that the aggregate principal amount of such unsecured senior debt outstanding at any one time does not exceed $5 billion. As of December 31, 2014, $4.1 billion was available for issuance pursuant to this authority. As of December 31, 2014, State Street Bank also had Board authority to issue an additional $500 million of subordinated debt. We maintain an effective universal shelf registration that allows for the public offering and sale of debt securities, capital securities, common stock, depositary shares and preferred stock, and warrants to purchase such securities, including any shares into which the preferred stock and depositary shares may be convertible, or any combination thereof. We have issued in the past, and we may issue in the future, securities pursuant to our shelf registration. The issuance of debt or equity securities will depend on future market conditions, funding needs and other factors. Agency Credit Ratings Our ability to maintain consistent access to liquidity is fostered by the maintenance of high investment-grade ratings as measured by the major independent credit rating agencies. Factors essential to maintaining high credit ratings include diverse and stable core earnings; relative market position; strong risk management; strong capital ratios; diverse liquidity sources, including the global capital markets and client deposits; strong liquidity monitoring procedures; and preparedness for current or future regulatory developments. High ratings limit borrowing costs and enhance our liquidity by providing assurance for unsecured funding and depositors, increasing the potential market for our debt and improving our ability to offer products, serve markets, and engage in transactions in which clients value high credit ratings. A downgrade or reduction of our credit ratings could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity by restricting our ability to access the capital


Answer: -0.12537

Question: In the year with the most Granted for shares(in thousands), what is the growth rate of Outstanding ? (in %)

Context:
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC.  AND SUBSIDIARIES Management’s Discussion and Analysis Investing & Lending Investing & Lending includes our investing activities and the origination of loans, including our relationship lending activities, to provide financing to clients. These investments and loans are typically longer-term in nature. We make investments, some of which are consolidated, including through our merchant banking business and our special situations group, in debt securities and loans, public and private equity securities, infrastructure and real estate entities. Some of these investments are made indirectly through funds that we manage. We also make unsecured and secured loans to retail clients through our digital platforms, Marcus and Goldman Sachs Private Bank Select (GS Select), respectively. The table below presents the operating results of our Investing & Lending segment.

	Year Ended December

$ in millions	2017	2016	2015

Equity securities	$4,578	$2,573	$3,781

Debt securities and loans	2,003	1,507	1,655

Total net revenues	6,581	4,080	5,436

Operating expenses	2,796	2,386	2,402

Pre-taxearnings	$3,785	$1,694	$3,034

 Operating Environment. During 2017, generally higher global equity prices and tighter credit spreads contributed to a favorable environment for our equity and debt investments. Results also reflected net gains from companyspecific events, including sales, and corporate performance. This environment contrasts with 2016, where, in the first quarter of 2016, market conditions were difficult and corporate performance, particularly in the energy sector, was impacted by a challenging macroeconomic environment. However, market conditions improved during the rest of 2016 as macroeconomic concerns moderated. If macroeconomic concerns negatively affect company-specific events or corporate performance, or if global equity markets decline or credit spreads widen, net revenues in Investing & Lending would likely be negatively impacted.2017 versus 2016. Net revenues in Investing & Lending were $6.58 billion for 2017, 61% higher than 2016. Net revenues in equity securities were $4.58 billion, including $3.82 billion of net gains from private equities and $762 million in net gains from public equities. Net revenues in equity securities were 78% higher than 2016, primarily reflecting a significant increase in net gains from private equities, which were positively impacted by companyspecific events and corporate performance. In addition, net gains from public equities were significantly higher, as global equity prices increased during the year. Of the $4.58 billion of net revenues in equity securities, approximately 60% was driven by net gains from company-specific events, such as sales, and public equities. Net revenues in debt securities and loans were $2.00 billion, 33% higher than 2016, reflecting significantly higher net interest income (2017 included approximately $1.80 billion of net interest income). Net revenues in debt securities and loans for 2017 also included an impairment of approximately $130 million on a secured loan. Operating expenses were $2.80 billion for 2017, 17% higher than 2016, due to increased compensation and benefits expenses, reflecting higher net revenues, increased expenses related to consolidated investments, and increased expenses related to Marcus. Pre-tax earnings were $3.79 billion in 2017 compared with $1.69 billion in 2016.2016 versus 2015. Net revenues in Investing & Lending were $4.08 billion for 2016, 25% lower than 2015. Net revenues in equity securities were $2.57 billion, including $2.17 billion of net gains from private equities and $402 million in net gains from public equities. Net revenues in equity securities were 32% lower than 2015, primarily reflecting a significant decrease in net gains from private equities, driven by company-specific events and corporate performance. Net revenues in debt securities and loans were $1.51 billion, 9% lower than 2015, reflecting significantly lower net revenues related to relationship lending activities, due to the impact of changes in credit spreads on economic hedges. Losses related to these hedges were $596 million in 2016, compared with gains of $329 million in 2015. This decrease was partially offset by higher net gains from investments in debt instruments and higher net interest income. See Note 9 to the consolidated financial statements for further information about economic hedges related to our relationship lending activities. Operating expenses were $2.39 billion for 2016, essentially unchanged compared with 2015. Pre-tax earnings were $1.69 billion in 2016, 44% lower than 2015. the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan generally vest over four years and expire no later than ten years from the date of grant. For restricted stock awards issued under the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan, stock certificates are issued at the time of grant and recipients have dividend and voting rights. In general, these grants vest over three years. For deferred stock awards issued under the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan, no stock is issued at the time of grant. Generally, these grants vest over two-, three- or four-year periods. Performance awards granted under the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan are earned over a performance period based on achievement of goals, generally over twoto three-year periods. Payment for performance awards is made in cash or in shares of our common stock equal to its fair market value per share, based on certain financial ratios, after the conclusion of each performance period. We record compensation expense, equal to the estimated fair value of the options on the grant date, on a straight-line basis over the options’ vesting periods. We use a Black-Scholes option-pricing model to estimate the fair value of the options granted. The weighted-average assumptions used in connection with the option-pricing model were as follows for the years indicated:

	2009	2008	 2007

Dividend yield	4.82%	1.32%	1.34%

Expected volatility	26.70	21.00	23.30

Risk-free interest rate	2.49	3.17	4.69

Expected option lives (in years)	7.8	7.8	7.8

 Compensation expense related to stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock awards, deferred stock awards and performance awards, which we record as a component of salaries and employee benefits expense in our consolidated statement of income, was $126 million, $321 million and $272 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. The 2009 and 2008 expense excluded $13 million and $47 million, respectively, associated with accelerated vesting in connection with the restructuring plan described in note 6. The aggregate income tax benefit recorded in our consolidated statement of income related to the above-described compensation expense was $50 million, $127 million and $109 million for 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Information about the 2006 Plan and 1997 Plan as of December 31, 2009, and activity during the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2009, is presented below:

	Shares (in thousands)	 Weighted Average Exercise Price	 Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Term (in years)	 Aggregate Intrinsic Value (in millions)

Stock Options and Stock Appreciation Rights:

Outstanding at December 31, 2007	16,368	$48.94

Granted	921	81.71

Exercised	-2,926	44.99

Forfeited or expired	-47	47.40

Outstanding at December 31, 2008	14,316	51.86

Granted	516	19.31

Exercised	-832	40.57

Forfeited or expired	-833	46.32

Outstanding at December 31, 2009	13,167	$51.64	 4.10	$24.8

Exercisable at December 31, 2009	11,172	$50.12	 3.42	$12.0

 The weighted-average grant date fair value of options granted in 2009, 2008 and 2007 was $2.96, $21.06 and $22.44, respectively. The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, was $5 million, $102 million and $129 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2009, total unrecognized compensation cost, net of estimated forfeitures, related to stock options and stock appreciation rights was $7 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 21 months. value of our liquid assets, as defined, totaled $75.98 billion, compared to $85.81 billion as of December 31, 2008. The decrease was mainly attributable to unusually high 2008 deposit balances, as we experienced a significant increase in customer deposits during the second half of 2008 as the credit markets worsened. As customers accumulated liquidity, they placed cash with us, and these incremental customer deposits remained with State Street Bank at December 31, 2008. During 2009, as markets normalized, deposit levels moderated as customers returned to investing their cash, and our liquid asset levels declined accordingly. Due to the unusual size and volatile nature of these customer deposits, we maintained approximately $22.45 billion at central banks as of December 31, 2009, in excess of regulatory required minimums. Securities carried at $40.96 billion as of December 31, 2009, compared to $42.74 billion as of December 31, 2008, were designated as pledged for public and trust deposits, borrowed funds and for other purposes as provided by law, and are excluded from the liquid assets calculation, unless pledged to the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. Liquid assets included securities pledged to the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston to secure State Street Bank’s ability to borrow from their discount window should the need arise. This access to primary credit is an important source of back-up liquidity for State Street Bank. As of December 31, 2009, we had no outstanding primary credit borrowings from the discount window. Based upon our level of liquid assets and our ability to access the capital markets for additional funding when necessary, including our ability to issue debt and equity securities under our current universal shelf registration, management considers overall liquidity at December 31, 2009 to be sufficient to meet State Street’s current commitments and business needs, including supporting the liquidity of the commercial paper conduits and accommodating the transaction and cash management needs of our customers. As referenced above, our ability to maintain consistent access to liquidity is fostered by the maintenance of high investment-grade ratings on our debt, as measured by the major independent credit rating agencies. Factors essential to retaining high credit ratings include diverse and stable core earnings; strong risk management; strong capital ratios; diverse liquidity sources, including the global capital markets and customer deposits; and strong liquidity monitoring procedures. High ratings on debt minimize borrowing costs and enhance our liquidity by ensuring the largest possible market for our debt. A downgrade or reduction of these credit ratings could have an adverse impact to our ability to access funding at favorable interest rates. The following table presents information about State Street’s and State Street Bank’s credit ratings as of February 22, 2010.


Answer: 0.14509

Question: what percentage of employees are subject to collective bargaining agreements?

Context:
R.  ONEOK PARTNERS General Partner Interest - See Note B for discussion of the April 2006 acquisition of the additional general partner interest in ONEOK Partners. The limited partner units we received from ONEOK Partners were newly created Class B limited partner units. As of April 7, 2007, the Class B limited partner units are no longer subordinated to distributions on ONEOK Partners’ common units and generally have the same voting rights as the common units and are entitled to receive increased quarterly distributions and distributions on liquidation equal to 110 percent of the distributions paid with respect to the common units. On June 21, 2007, we, as the sole holder of ONEOK Partners Class B limited partner units, waived our right to receive the increased quarterly distributions on the Class B units for the period April 7, 2007, through December 31, 2007, and continuing thereafter until we give ONEOK Partners no less than 90 days advance notice that we have withdrawn our waiver. Any such withdrawal of the waiver will be effective with respect to any distribution on the Class B units declared or paid on or after 90 days following delivery of the notice. Under the ONEOK Partners’ partnership agreement and in conjunction with the issuance of additional common units by ONEOK Partners, we, as the general partner, are required to make equity contributions in order to maintain our representative general partner interest. Our investment in ONEOK Partners is shown in the table below for the periods presented.

	December 31, 2007	December 31, 2006	December 31, 2005

General partner interest	2.00%	2.00%	1.65%

Limited partner interest	43.70% (a)	43.70% (a)	1.05% (b)

Total ownership interest	45.70%	45.70%	2.70%

 (a) - Represents approximately 0.5 million common units and 36.5 million Class B units. (b) - Represents approximately 0.5 million common units. Cash Distributions - Under the ONEOK Partners’ partnership agreement, distributions are made to the partners with respect to each calendar quarter in an amount equal to 100 percent of available cash. Available cash generally consists of all cash receipts adjusted for cash disbursements and net changes to cash reserves. Available cash will generally be distributed 98 percent to limited partners and 2 percent to the general partner. As an incentive, the general partner’s percentage interest in quarterly distributions is increased after certain specified target levels are met. Under the incentive distribution provisions, the general partner receives: ?15 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.605 per unit, ?25 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.715 per unit, and ?50 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.935 per unit. ONEOK Partners’ income is allocated to the general and limited partners in accordance with their respective partnership ownership percentages. The effect of any incremental income allocations for incentive distributions that are allocated to the general partner is calculated after the income allocation for the general partner’s partnership interest and before the income allocation to the limited partners. The following table shows ONEOK Partners’ general partner and incentive distributions related to the periods indicated.

	 Years Ended December 31,

	 2007	 2006	 2005

	(Thousands of dollars)

General partner distributions	$7,842	$6,228	$2,632

Incentive distributions	50,627	31,102	6,568

Total distributions from ONEOK Partners	$58,469	$37,330	$9,200

 The quarterly distributions paid by ONEOK Partners to limited partners in the first, second, third and fourth quarters of 2007 were $0.98 per unit, $0.99 per unit, $1.00 per unit, and $1.01 per unit, respectively. gas. The use of these derivative instruments and the associated recovery of these costs have been approved by the OCC, KCC and regulatory authorities in certain of our Texas jurisdictions. ONEOK entered into forward-starting interest-rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges of the variability of interest payments on a portion of forecasted debt issuances that may result from changes in the benchmark interest rate before the debt is issued. ONEOK had interest-rate swaps with notional values totaling $500 million at December 31, 2011. In January 2012, ONEOK entered into additional interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $200 million. Upon issuance in January 2012 of our $700 million, 4.25-percent senior notes due 2022, ONEOK settled all $700 million of its interest-rate swaps and realized a loss of $44.1 million in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) that will be amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt. ONEOK Partners entered into forward-starting interest-rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges of the variability of interest payments on a portion of forecasted debt issuances that may result from changes in the benchmark interest rate before the debt is issued. At December 31, 2011, ONEOK Partners had interest-rate swaps with notional values totaling $750 million. During the year ended December 31, 2012, ONEOK Partners entered into additional interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $650 million. Upon ONEOK Partners’ debt issuance in September 2012, ONEOK Partners settled $1 billion of its interest-rate swaps and realized a loss of $124.9 million in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) that will be amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt. At December 31, 2012, ONEOK Partners’ remaining interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $400 million have settlement dates greater than 12 months. Fair Values of Derivative Instruments - The following table sets forth the fair values of our derivative instruments for our continuing and discontinued operations for the periods indicated:

	December 31, 2012 Fair Values of Derivatives (a)	December 31, 2011 Fair Values of Derivatives (a)

	Assets	(Liabilities)	Assets	(Liabilities)

	(Thousands of dollars)

Derivatives designated as hedging instruments

Commodity contracts

Financial contracts	$47,516(b)	$-4,885	$184,184(c)	$-73,346

Physical contracts	56	-126	62	-344

Interest-rate contracts	10,923	—	—	-128,666

Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments	58,495	-5,011	184,246	-202,356

Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments

Commodity contracts

Nontrading instruments

Financial contracts	24,970	-25,009	295,948	-323,170

Physical contracts	4,059	-153	38,733	-1,665

Trading instruments

Financial contracts	15,358	-14,192	111,920	-110,050

Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments	44,387	-39,354	446,601	-434,885

Total derivatives	$102,882	$-44,365	$630,847	$-637,241

 (a) - Included on a net basis in energy marketing and risk-management assets and liabilities, other assets and other deferred credits on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. (b) - Includes $16.9 million of derivative net assets and ineffectiveness associated with cash flow hedges of inventory related to certain financial contracts that were used to hedge forecasted purchases and sales of natural gas. The deferred gains associated with these assets have been reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). (c) - Includes $88.9 million of derivative assets associated with cash flow hedges of inventory that were adjusted to reflect the lower of cost or market value. The deferred gains associated with these assets have been reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). guidance to amend or clarify portions of the final rule in 2013. We anticipate that if the EPA issues additional responses, amendments and/or policy guidance on the final rule, it will reduce the anticipated capital, operations and maintenance costs resulting from the regulation. Generally, the NSPS final rule will require expenditures for updated emissions controls, monitoring and record-keeping requirements at affected facilities in the crude-oil and natural gas industry. We do not expect these expenditures will have a material impact on our results of operations, financial position or cash flows. CERCLA - The federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, also commonly known as Superfund (CERCLA), imposes strict, joint and several liability, without regard to fault or the legality of the original act, on certain classes of “persons” (defined under CERCLA) that caused and/or contributed to the release of a hazardous substance into the environment. These persons include but are not limited to the owner or operator of a facility where the release occurred and/or companies that disposed or arranged for the disposal of the hazardous substances found at the facility. Under CERCLA, these persons may be liable for the costs of cleaning up the hazardous substances released into the environment, damages to natural resources and the costs of certain health studies. Neither we nor ONEOK Partners expect our respective responsibilities under CERCLA, for this facility and any other, will have a material impact on our respective results of operations, financial position or cash flows. Chemical Site Security - The United States Department of Homeland Security released an interim rule in April 2007 that requires companies to provide reports on sites where certain chemicals, including many hydrocarbon products, are stored. We completed the Homeland Security assessments, and our facilities subsequently were assigned one of four risk-based tiers ranging from high (Tier 1) to low (Tier 4) risk, or not tiered at all due to low risk. To date, four of our facilities have been given a Tier 4 rating. Facilities receiving a Tier 4 rating are required to complete Site Security Plans and possible physical security enhancements. We do not expect the Site Security Plans and possible security enhancements cost will have a material impact on our results of operations, financial position or cash flows. Pipeline Security - The United States Department of Homeland Security’s Transportation Security Administration and the DOT have completed a review and inspection of our “critical facilities” and identified no material security issues. Also, the Transportation Security Administration has released new pipeline security guidelines that include broader definitions for the determination of pipeline “critical facilities. ” We have reviewed our pipeline facilities according to the new guideline requirements, and there have been no material changes required to date. Environmental Footprint - Our environmental and climate change strategy focuses on taking steps to minimize the impact of our operations on the environment. These strategies include: (i) developing and maintaining an accurate greenhouse gas emissions inventory according to current rules issued by the EPA; (ii) improving the efficiency of our various pipelines, natural gas processing facilities and natural gas liquids fractionation facilities; (iii) following developing technologies for emission control and the capture of carbon dioxide to keep it from reaching the atmosphere; and (iv) utilizing practices to reduce the loss of methane from our facilities. We participate in the EPA’s Natural Gas STAR Program to voluntarily reduce methane emissions. We continue to focus on maintaining low rates of lost-and-unaccounted-for natural gas through expanded implementation of best practices to limit the release of natural gas during pipeline and facility maintenance and operations. EMPLOYEESWe employed 4,859 people at January 31, 2013, including 705 people at Kansas Gas Service who are subject to collective bargaining agreements. The following table sets forth our contracts with collective bargaining units at January 31, 2013:


Answer: 678752.8997

Question: What will Interest Income reach in 2008 if it continues to grow at its current rate?

Context:
Interest expense related to capital lease obligations was $1.6 million during the year ended December 31, 2015, and $1.6 million during both the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013. Purchase Commitments In the table below, we set forth our enforceable and legally binding purchase obligations as of December 31, 2015. Some of the amounts are based on management’s estimates and assumptions about these obligations, including their duration, the possibility of renewal, anticipated actions by third parties, and other factors. Because these estimates and assumptions are necessarily subjective, our actual payments may vary from those reflected in the table. Purchase orders made in the ordinary course of business are excluded below. Any amounts for which we are liable under purchase orders are reflected on the Consolidated Balance Sheets as accounts payable and accrued liabilities. These obligations relate to various purchase agreements for items such as minimum amounts of fiber and energy purchases over periods ranging from one year to 20 years. Total purchase commitments were as follows (dollars in millions):

2016	$95.3

2017	60.3

2018	28.0

2019	28.0

2020	23.4

Thereafter	77.0

Total	$312.0

 The Company purchased a total of $299.6 million, $265.9 million, and $61.7 million during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and 2013, respectively, under these purchase agreements. The increase in purchases The increase in purchases under these agreements in 2014, compared with 2013, relates to the acquisition of Boise in fourth quarter 2013. Environmental Liabilities The potential costs for various environmental matters are uncertain due to such factors as the unknown magnitude of possible cleanup costs, the complexity and evolving nature of governmental laws and regulations and their interpretations, and the timing, varying costs and effectiveness of alternative cleanup technologies. From 2006 through 2015, there were no significant environmental remediation costs at PCA’s mills and corrugated plants. At December 31, 2015, the Company had $24.3 million of environmental-related reserves recorded on its Consolidated Balance Sheet. Of the $24.3 million, approximately $15.8 million related to environmental-related asset retirement obligations discussed in Note 12, Asset Retirement Obligations, and $8.5 million related to our estimate of other environmental contingencies. The Company recorded $7.9 million in “Accrued liabilities” and $16.4 million in “Other long-term liabilities” on the Consolidated Balance Sheet. Liabilities recorded for environmental contingencies are estimates of the probable costs based upon available information and assumptions. Because of these uncertainties, PCA’s estimates may change. The Company believes that it is not reasonably possible that future environmental expenditures for remediation costs and asset retirement obligations above the $24.3 million accrued as of December 31, 2015, will have a material impact on its financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. Guarantees and Indemnifications We provide guarantees, indemnifications, and other assurances to third parties in the normal course of our business. These include tort indemnifications, environmental assurances, and representations and warranties in commercial agreements. At December 31, 2015, we are not aware of any material liabilities arising from any guarantee, indemnification, or financial assurance we have provided. If we determined such a liability was probable and subject to reasonable determination, we would accrue for it at that time. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED SHAREHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES The Company's common stock is traded on the NYSE under the symbol “RJF”. At November 19, 2007 there were approximately 14,000 holders of the Company's common stock. The following table sets forth for the periods indicated the high and low trades for the common stock (as adjusted for the three-fortwo stock split in March 2006):

	2007	2006

	High	Low	High	Low

First Quarter	$ 33.63	$ 28.53	$ 25.72	$ 20.25

Second Quarter	32.52	27.38	31.45	24.47

Third Quarter	34.62	29.10	31.66	26.34

Fourth Quarter	36.00	28.65	30.57	26.45

 See Quarterly Financial Information on page 87 of this report for the amount of the quarterly dividends paid. The Company expects to continue paying cash dividends. However, the payment and rate of dividends on the Company's common stock is subject to several factors including operating results, financial requirements of the Company, and the availability of funds from the Company's subsidiaries, including the brokerdealer subsidiaries, which may be subject to restrictions under the net capital rules of the SEC, FINRA and the IDA; and RJBank, which may be subject to restrictions by federal banking agencies. Such restrictions have never limited the Company's dividend payments. (See Note 19 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more information on the capital restrictions placed on RJBank and the Company's broker-dealer subsidiaries). See Note 15 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding repurchased shares of the Company's common stock. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS Factors Affecting “Forward-Looking Statements” From time to time, the Company may publish “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or make oral statements that constitute forward-looking statements. These forwardlooking statements may relate to such matters as anticipated financial performance, future revenues or earnings, business prospects, projected ventures, new products, anticipated market performance, and similar matters. The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides a safe harbor for forward-looking statements. In order to comply with the terms of the safe harbor, the Company cautions readers that a variety of factors could cause the Company's actual results to differ materially from the anticipated results or other expectations expressed in the Company's forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond the Company's control, are discussed in the section entitled Risk Factors on page 42 of this report. The Company does not undertake any obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements. Overview The following Management’s Discussion and Analysis is intended to help the reader understand the results of operations and the financial condition of the Company. Management’s Discussion and Analysis is provided as a supplement to, and should be read in conjunction with, the Company’s consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements. The Company’s results continue to be highly correlated to the direction of the U. S.  equity markets and are subject to volatility due to changes in interest rates, valuation of financial instruments, economic and political trends and industry competition. During 2007, the market was impacted by rising energy prices, a housing market slowdown, a subprime lending collapse, a growing economy, a weakening US dollar and stable interest rates. The Company’s Private Client Group’s recruiting and retention of Financial Advisors was positively impacted by industry consolidation. RJBank benefited from the widening interest rate spreads and the availability of attractive loan purchases as a result of the subprime lending crisis. Results of Operations - RJBank The following table presents consolidated financial information for RJBank for the years indicated:

	Year Ended

	September 30, 2007	% Incr. (Decr.)	September 30, 2006	% Incr. (Decr.)	September 30, 2005

	($ in 000's)

Interest Earnings

Interest Income	$ 278,248	144%	$ 114,065	153%	$ 45,017

Interest Expense	193,747	163%	73,529	234%	22,020

Net Interest Income	84,501	108%	40,536	76%	22,997

Other Income	1,324	111%	627	45%	431

Net Revenues	85,825	109%	41,163	76%	23,428

Non-Interest Expense

Employee Compensation and Benefits	7,778	27%	6,135	14%	5,388

Communications and Information Processing	1,052	16%	907	14%	799

Occupancy and Equipment	719	14%	629	32%	478

Provision for Loan Losses and Unfunded

Commitments	32,150	134%	13,760	891%	1,388

Other	17,121	359%	3,729	218%	1,171

Total Non-Interest Expense	58,820	134%	25,160	173%	9,224

Pre-tax Earnings	$ 27,005	69%	$ 16,003	13%	$ 14,204

 Year ended September 30, 2007 Compared with the Year ended September 30, 2006 - RJBank The Company completed its second bulk transfer of cash balances into the RJBank Deposit Program in March 2007, moving another $1.3 billion. This, combined with organic growth from the influx of new client assets, resulted in a $2.6 billion increase in average deposit balances. This increase in average deposit balances provided the funding for the $1.6 billion increase in average loan balances. This increase was 38% purchased residential mortgage pools and 62% corporate loans, 98% of which are purchased interests in corporate loan syndications with the remainder originated by RJBank. As a result of this growth, RJBank net interest income increased 108% to $84.5 million. Due to robust loan growth, the associated allowance for loan losses that are established upon recording a new loan and making new unfunded commitments required a provision of over $32 million in 2007. Accordingly, RJBank’s pre-tax income increased only 69%. During periods of growth when new loans are originated or purchased, an allowance for loan losses is established for potential losses inherent in those new loans. Accordingly, a robust period of growth generally results in charges to earnings in that period, while the benefits of higher interest earnings are realized in later periods. Year ended September 30, 2006 Compared with the Year ended September 30, 2005 - RJBank Assets at RJBank grew a substantial $1.8 billion during the year. The increase was driven by a $1.7 billion increase in deposits, $1.3 billion of which were redirected from the Company’s Heritage Cash Trust or customer brokerage accounts, representing the introduction of a new sweep program for certain brokerage accounts. This alternative offers clients a money market equivalent interest rate and FDIC insurance. The Company intends to expand this offering over the next several years, transferring an additional $2 to $4 billion. During the year, RJBank deployed $1.3 billion of the increased deposits into loans. Purchased residential loan pools increased $700 million and corporate loans increased $600 million. This growth, combined with increased rates, generated an increase in net interest income of nearly $18 million. Pre-tax income increased only $1.8 million, due to the $13.8 million provision for loan loss associated with the increase in loans outstanding


Answer: 210184.0

Question: what's the total amount of U.S. of As of December 31, 2014, and Client deposits of December 31, 2014 ?


Answer: 1.748

Question: what is the percent change in average cds that were excluded between 2013 and 2014?


Answer: 44454.5

Question: What is the average amount of Land of December 31, 2016, and Interest expense, net of Year Ended December 31, 2014 ?

Context:
ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA The following selected financial data is qualified by reference to, and should be read in conjunction with, the Consolidated Financial Statements, including the notes thereto, and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included elsewhere in this Form 10-K.

	Year Ended December 31,

(In thousands, except per share amounts)	2016	2015	2014	2013	2012

Net revenues	$4,825,335	$3,963,313	$3,084,370	$2,332,051	$1,834,921

Cost of goods sold	2,584,724	2,057,766	1,572,164	1,195,381	955,624

Gross profit	2,240,611	1,905,547	1,512,206	1,136,670	879,297

Selling, general and administrative expenses	1,823,140	1,497,000	1,158,251	871,572	670,602

Income from operations	417,471	408,547	353,955	265,098	208,695

Interest expense, net	-26,434	-14,628	-5,335	-2,933	-5,183

Other expense, net	-2,755	-7,234	-6,410	-1,172	-73

Income before income taxes	388,282	386,685	342,210	260,993	203,439

Provision for income taxes	131,303	154,112	134,168	98,663	74,661

Net income	256,979	232,573	208,042	162,330	128,778

Adjustment payment to Class C	59,000	—	—	—	—

Net income available to all stockholders	$197,979	$232,573	$208,042	$162,330	$128,778

Net income available per common share

Basic net income per share of Class A and B common stock	$0.45	$0.54	$0.49	$0.39	$0.31

Basic net income per share of Class C common stock	$0.72	$0.54	$0.49	$0.39	$0.31

Diluted net income per share of Class A and B common stock	$0.45	$0.53	$0.47	$0.38	$0.30

Diluted net income per share of Class C common stock	$0.71	$0.53	$0.47	$0.38	$0.30

Weighted average common shares outstanding Class A and B common stock

Basic	217,707	215,498	213,227	210,696	208,686

Diluted	221,944	220,868	219,380	215,958	212,760

Weighted average common shares outstanding Class C common stock

Basic	218,623	215,498	213,227	210,696	208,686

Diluted	222,904	220,868	219,380	215,958	212,760

Dividends declared	$59,000	$—	$—	$—	$—

 Our net revenues for the full year 2016 were $4,825.3 million, which reflects a revision from the $4,828.2 million reported in our earnings release, filed January 31, 2017, on Form 8-K. This revision reflects a $2.9 million adjustment related to a return credit for footwear that was identified in connection with the closing of our January 2017 books and records, following the earnings release. As a result, other items on our Consolidated Financial Statements have been appropriately adjusted from the amounts provided in the earnings release, including a reduction of our full year 2016 gross profit and income from operations by $2.9 million, and a reduction of net income by $1.7 million.

	At December 31,

(In thousands)	2016	2015	2014	2013	2012

Cash and cash equivalents	$250,470	$129,852	$593,175	$347,489	$341,841

Working capital -1	1,279,337	1,019,953	1,127,772	702,181	651,370

Inventories	917,491	783,031	536,714	469,006	319,286

Total assets	3,644,331	2,865,970	2,092,428	1,576,369	1,155,052

Total debt, including current maturities	817,388	666,070	281,546	151,551	59,858

Total stockholders’ equity	$2,030,900	$1,668,222	$1,350,300	$1,053,354	$816,922

 (1) Working capital is defined as current assets minus current liabilities. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, which effects all entities that issue share-based payment awards to their employees. The amendments in this ASU cover such areas as the recognition of excess tax benefits and deficiencies, the classification of those excess tax benefits on the statement of cash flows, an accounting policy election for forfeitures, the amount an employer can withhold to cover income taxes and still qualify for equity classification and the classification of those taxes paid on the statement of cash flows. This ASU is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2016. This guidance can be applied either prospectively, retrospectively or using a modified retrospective transition method. Early adoption is permitted. The Company will not early adopt this ASU. The adoption of this guidance may have a material impact on the Company’s effective tax rate and income tax expense, depending in part on whether significant employee stock option exercises occur. In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15, which eliminates the diversity in practice related to the classification of certain cash receipts and payments in the statement of cash flows, by adding or clarifying guidance on eight specific cash flow issues. This ASU is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company does not believe this ASU will have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements. In October 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-16, which will require an entity to recognize the income tax consequences of an intra-entity transfer of an asset, other than inventory, when the transfer occurs. This ASU is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted in the first interim period of 2017. Upon adoption, any deferred charge established upon an intra-company transfer would be recorded as a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings. At December 31, 2016, the Company had a deferred charge of $26.0 million with $1.8 million and $24.2 million recorded within Prepaid expenses and Other long term assets, respectively. The Company plans to adopt this ASU during the interim period ending March 31, 2017. Recently Adopted Accounting Standards In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-03, which requires costs incurred to issue debt to be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying value of the debt. This ASU is effective for annual and interim reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015, with early adoption permitted. The Company adopted the provisions of this ASU in the first quarter of 2016, and reclassified approximately $2.9 million from “Other long term assets” to “Long term debt, net of current maturities” as of December 31, 2015.3. Property and Equipment, Net Property and equipment consisted of the following:

	December 31,

(In thousands)	2016	2015

Leasehold and tenant improvements	$326,617	$214,834

Furniture, fixtures and displays	168,720	132,736

Buildings	47,216	47,137

Software	151,059	99,309

Office equipment	75,196	50,399

Plant equipment	124,140	118,138

Land	83,574	17,628

Construction in progress	204,362	147,581

Other	20,383	4,002

Subtotal property and equipment	1,201,267	831,764

Accumulated depreciation	-397,056	-293,233

Property and equipment, net	$804,211	$538,531


Answer: 6536.0

Question: What is the sum of Net written premiums in the range of 1 and 3000 in 2014? (in million)

Context:
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 11. Income Taxes – (Continued) The federal income tax return for 2006 is subject to examination by the IRS. In addition for 2007 and 2008, the IRS has invited the Company to participate in the Compliance Assurance Process (“CAP”), which is a voluntary program for a limited number of large corporations. Under CAP, the IRS conducts a real-time audit and works contemporaneously with the Company to resolve any issues prior to the filing of the tax return. The Company has agreed to participate. The Company believes this approach should reduce tax-related uncertainties, if any. The Company and/or its subsidiaries also file income tax returns in various state, local and foreign jurisdictions. These returns, with few exceptions, are no longer subject to examination by the various taxing authorities before 2000. As discussed in Note 1, the Company adopted the provisions of FIN No.48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes,” on January 1, 2007. As a result of the implementation of FIN No.48, the Company recognized a decrease to beginning retained earnings on January 1, 2007 of $37 million. The total amount of unrecognized tax benefits as of the date of adoption was approximately $70 million. Included in the balance at January 1, 2007, were $51 million of tax positions that if recognized would affect the effective tax rate. A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits is as follows:

Balance, January 1, 2007	$70

Additions based on tax positions related to the current year	12

Additions for tax positions of prior years	3

Reductions for tax positions related to the current year	-23

Settlements	-6

Expiration of statute of limitations	-3

Balance, December 31, 2007	$53

 The Company anticipates that it is reasonably possible that payments of approximately $2 million will be made primarily due to the conclusion of state income tax examinations within the next 12 months. Additionally, certain state and foreign income tax returns will no longer be subject to examination and as a result, there is a reasonable possibility that the amount of unrecognized tax benefits will decrease by $7 million. At December 31, 2007, there were $42 million of tax benefits that if recognized would affect the effective rate. The Company recognizes interest accrued related to: (1) unrecognized tax benefits in Interest expense and (2) tax refund claims in Other revenues on the Consolidated Statements of Income. The Company recognizes penalties in Income tax expense (benefit) on the Consolidated Statements of Income. During 2007, the Company recorded charges of approximately $4 million for interest expense and $2 million for penalties. Provision has been made for the expected U. S.  federal income tax liabilities applicable to undistributed earnings of subsidiaries, except for certain subsidiaries for which the Company intends to invest the undistributed earnings indefinitely, or recover such undistributed earnings tax-free. At December 31, 2007, the Company has not provided deferred taxes of $126 million, if sold through a taxable sale, on $361 million of undistributed earnings related to a domestic affiliate. The determination of the amount of the unrecognized deferred tax liability related to the undistributed earnings of foreign subsidiaries is not practicable. In connection with a non-recurring distribution of $850 million to Diamond Offshore from a foreign subsidiary, a portion of which consisted of earnings of the subsidiary that had not previously been subjected to U. S.  federal income tax, Diamond Offshore recognized $59 million of U. S.  federal income tax expense as a result of the distribution. It remains Diamond Offshore’s intention to indefinitely reinvest future earnings of the subsidiary to finance foreign activities. Total income tax expense for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, was different than the amounts of $1,601 million, $1,557 million and $639 million, computed by applying the statutory U. S.  federal income tax rate of 35% to income before income taxes and minority interest for each of the years. Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Results of Operations – CNA Financial – (Continued)

Year Ended December 31, 2014	Specialty	Commercial	International	Total

(In millions, except %)

Net written premiums	$2,839	$2,817	$880	$6,536

Net earned premiums	2,838	2,906	913	6,657

Net investment income	560	723	61	1,344

Net operating income	569	276	63	908

Net realized investment gains (losses)	9	9	-1	17

Net income	578	285	62	925

Other performance metrics:

Loss and loss adjustment expense ratio	57.3%	75.3%	53.5%	64.6%

Expense ratio	30.1	33.7	38.9	32.9

Dividend ratio	0.2	0.3		0.2

Combined ratio	87.6%	109.3%	92.4%	97.7%

Rate	3%	5%	-1%	3%

Retention	87%	73%	74%	78%

New Business (a)	$309	$491	$115	$915

 (a) Includes Hardy new business of $133 million for the year ended December 31, 2016. Prior years amounts are not included for Hardy.2016 Compared with 2015 Net written premiums increased $21 million in 2016 as compared with 2015. Net written premiums for Commercial increased $23 million in 2016 as compared with 2015, driven by strong retention in middle markets, partially offset by a decrease in small business, which included a premium rate adjustment, as discussed in Note 18 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements under Item 8. Net written premiums for Specialty in 2016 were consistent with 2015 as growth in warranty was offset by a decrease in management and professional liability and health care due to underwriting actions undertaken in certain business lines. Net written premiums for International in 2016 were consistent with 2015 and include favorable period over period premium development of $24 million. Excluding the effect of foreign currency exchange rates and premium development, net written premiums increased 1.4% in 2016 in International. The increase in net earned premiums was consistent with the trend in net written premiums in Commercial. Excluding the effect of foreign currency exchange rates and premium development, the increase in net earned premiums was consistent with the trend in net written premiums in International. Net operating income increased $15 million in 2016 as compared with 2015. The increase in net operating income was primarily due to higher favorable net prior year reserve development and net investment income, partially offset by an increase in the current accident year loss ratio and higher underwriting expenses. Catastrophe losses were $100 million (after tax and noncontrolling interests) in 2016 as compared to catastrophe losses of $85 million (after tax and noncontrolling interests) in 2015. Favorable net prior year development of $316 million and $218 million was recorded in 2016 and 2015. Specialty recorded favorable net prior year development of $305 million and $152 million in 2016 and 2015, Commercial recorded unfavorable net prior year development of $53 million in 2016 as compared with favorable net prior year development of $30 million in 2015 and International recorded favorable net prior year development of $64 million and $36 million in 2016 and 2015. Further information on net prior year development is included in Note 8 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8. Specialty’s combined ratio decreased 3.7 points in 2016 as compared with 2015. The loss ratio decreased 4.6 points due to higher favorable net prior year reserve development, partially offset by a higher current accident year loss ratio. Specialty’s expense ratio increased 0.9 points in 2016 as compared with 2015 due to higher employee costs and higher information technology (“IT”) spending primarily related to new underwriting platforms. Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Results of Operations – Boardwalk Pipeline – (Continued) Results of Operations The following table summarizes the results of operations for Boardwalk Pipeline for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 as presented in Note 20 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8:

 Year Ended December 31	2016	2015	2014

 (In millions)

Revenues:

Other revenue, primarily operating	$ 1,316	$ 1,253	$ 1,235

Net investment income		1	1

Total	1,316	1,254	1,236

Expenses:

Operating	835	851	931

Interest	183	176	165

Total	1,018	1,027	1,096

Income before income tax	298	227	140

Income tax expense	-61	-46	-11

Amounts attributable to noncontrolling interests	-148	-107	-111

Net income attributable to Loews Corporation	$ 89	$ 74	$ 18

 2016 Compared with 2015 Total revenues increased $62 million in 2016 as compared with 2015. Excluding the net effect of $13 million of proceeds received from the settlement of a legal matter in 2016, $9 million of proceeds received from a business interruption claim in 2015 and items offset in fuel and transportation expense, primarily retained fuel, operating revenues increased $83 million. The increase was driven by an increase in transportation revenues of $71 million, which resulted primarily from growth projects recently placed into service, incremental revenues from the Gulf South rate case of $18 million and a full year of revenues from the Evangeline pipeline. Storage and PAL revenues were higher by $17 million primarily from the effects of favorable market conditions on time period price spreads. Operating expenses decreased $16 million in 2016 as compared with 2015. Excluding receipt of a franchise tax refund of $10 million in 2015 and items offset in operating revenues, operating costs and expenses increased $5 million primarily due to higher employee related costs, partially offset by decreases in maintenance activities and depreciation expense. Interest expense increased $7 million primarily due to higher average interest rates compared to 2015. Net income increased $15 million in 2016 as compared with 2015, primarily reflecting higher revenues and lower operating expenses, partially offset by higher interest expense as discussed above.2015 Compared with 2014 Total revenues increased $18 million in 2015 as compared with 2014. Excluding the business interruption claim proceeds of $8 million and items offset in fuel and transportation expense, primarily retained fuel, operating revenues increased $33 million. This increase is primarily due to higher transportation revenues of $39 million from growth projects recently placed into service, including the Evangeline pipeline which was acquired in October of 2014 and $20 million of additional revenues resulting from the Gulf South rate case, partially offset by the effects of comparably warm weather experienced in the early part of the 2015 period in Boardwalk Pipeline’s market areas and unfavorable market conditions. Storage and PAL revenues decreased $20 million primarily as a result of the effects of unfavorable market conditions on time period price spreads. Operating expenses decreased $80 million in 2015 as compared with 2014. This decrease is primarily due to a $94 million prior year charge to write off all capitalized costs associated with the terminated Bluegrass project, a $10 million franchise tax refund related to settlement of prior tax periods and a decrease in fuel and transportation expense due to lower natural gas prices. These decreases were partially offset by higher depreciation expense of $35


Answer: 0.11247

Question: what is the percentage change in the balance of asset allocation from 2016 to 2017?

Context:
Long-term product offerings include alpha-seeking active and index strategies. Our alpha-seeking active strategies seek to earn attractive returns in excess of a market benchmark or performance hurdle while maintaining an appropriate risk profile, and leverage fundamental research and quantitative models to drive portfolio construction. In contrast, index strategies seek to closely track the returns of a corresponding index, generally by investing in substantially the same underlying securities within the index or in a subset of those securities selected to approximate a similar risk and return profile of the index. Index strategies include both our non-ETF index products and iShares ETFs. Although many clients use both alpha-seeking active and index strategies, the application of these strategies may differ. For example, clients may use index products to gain exposure to a market or asset class, or may use a combination of index strategies to target active returns. In addition, institutional non-ETF index assignments tend to be very large (multi-billion dollars) and typically reflect low fee rates. Net flows in institutional index products generally have a small impact on BlackRock’s revenues and earnings. Equity Year-end 2017 equity AUM totaled $3.372 trillion, reflecting net inflows of $130.1 billion. Net inflows included $174.4 billion into iShares ETFs, driven by net inflows into Core funds and broad developed and emerging market equities, partially offset by non-ETF index and active net outflows of $25.7 billion and $18.5 billion, respectively. BlackRock’s effective fee rates fluctuate due to changes in AUM mix. Approximately half of BlackRock’s equity AUM is tied to international markets, including emerging markets, which tend to have higher fee rates than U. S.  equity strategies. Accordingly, fluctuations in international equity markets, which may not consistently move in tandem with U. S.  markets, have a greater impact on BlackRock’s equity revenues and effective fee rate. Fixed Income Fixed income AUM ended 2017 at $1.855 trillion, reflecting net inflows of $178.8 billion. In 2017, active net inflows of $21.5 billion were diversified across fixed income offerings, and included strong inflows into municipal, unconstrained and total return bond funds. iShares ETFs net inflows of $67.5 billion were led by flows into Core, corporate and treasury bond funds. Non-ETF index net inflows of $89.8 billion were driven by demand for liability-driven investment solutions. Multi-Asset BlackRock’s multi-asset team manages a variety of balanced funds and bespoke mandates for a diversified client base that leverages our broad investment expertise in global equities, bonds, currencies and commodities, and our extensive risk management capabilities. Investment solutions might include a combination of long-only portfolios and alternative investments as well as tactical asset allocation overlays. Component changes in multi-asset AUM for 2017 are presented below.

(in millions)	December 31,2016	Net inflows (outflows)	Marketchange	FXimpact	December 31,2017

Asset allocation and balanced	$176,675	$-2,502	$17,387	$4,985	$196,545

Target date/risk	149,432	23,925	24,532	1,577	199,466

Fiduciary	68,395	-1,047	7,522	8,819	83,689

FutureAdvisor-1	505	-46	119	—	578

Total	$395,007	$20,330	$49,560	$15,381	$480,278

 (1) FutureAdvisor amounts do not include AUM held in iShares ETFs. Multi-asset net inflows reflected ongoing institutional demand for our solutions-based advice with $18.9 billion of net inflows coming from institutional clients. Defined contribution plans of institutional clients remained a significant driver of flows, and contributed $20.8 billion to institutional multi-asset net inflows in 2017, primarily into target date and target risk product offerings. Retail net inflows of $1.1 billion reflected demand for our Multi-Asset Income fund family, which raised $5.8 billion in 2017. The Company’s multi-asset strategies include the following: ? Asset allocation and balanced products represented 41% of multi-asset AUM at year-end. These strategies combine equity, fixed income and alternative components for investors seeking a tailored solution relative to a specific benchmark and within a risk budget. In certain cases, these strategies seek to minimize downside risk through diversification, derivatives strategies and tactical asset allocation decisions. Flagship products in this category include our Global Allocation and Multi-Asset Income fund families.  ? Target date and target risk products grew 16% organically in 2017, with net inflows of $23.9 billion. Institutional investors represented 93% of target date and target risk AUM, with defined contribution plans accounting for 87% of AUM. Flows were driven by defined contribution investments in our LifePath offerings. LifePath products utilize a proprietary active asset allocation overlay model that seeks to balance risk and return over an investment horizon based on the investor’s expected retirement timing. Underlying investments are primarily index products.  ? Fiduciary management services are complex mandates in which pension plan sponsors or endowments and foundations retain BlackRock to assume responsibility for some or all aspects of investment management. These customized services require strong partnership with the clients’ investment staff and trustees in order to tailor investment strategies to meet client-specific risk budgets and return objectives. not to exceed a maximum leverage ratio (ratio of net debt to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, where net debt equals total debt less unrestricted cash) of 3 to 1, which was satisfied with a ratio of less than 1 to 1 at December 31, 2017. The 2017 credit facility provides back-up liquidity to fund ongoing working capital for general corporate purposes and various investment opportunities. At December 31, 2017, the Company had no amount outstanding under the 2017 credit facility Commercial Paper Program. The Company can issue unsecured commercial paper notes (the “CP Notes”) on a private-placement basis up to a maximum aggregate amount outstanding at any time of $4.0 billion. The commercial paper program is currently supported by the 2017 credit facility. At December 31, 2017, BlackRock had no CP Notes outstanding Long-Term Borrowings The carrying value of long-term borrowings at December 31, 2017 included the following:

(in millions)	Maturity Amount	Carrying Value	Maturity

5.00% Notes	$1,000	$999	December 2019

4.25% Notes	750	747	May 2021

3.375% Notes	750	746	June 2022

3.50% Notes	1,000	994	March 2024

1.25% Notes-1	841	835	May 2025

3.20% Notes	700	693	March 2027

Total Long-term Borrowings	$5,041	$5,014

 (1) The carrying value of the 1.25% Notes estimated using foreign exchange rate as of December 31, 2017. For more information on Company’s borrowings, see Note 12, Borrowings, in the notes to the consolidated financial statements contained in Part II, Item 8 of this filing. Contractual Obligations, Commitments and Contingencies The following table sets forth contractual obligations, commitments and contingencies by year of payment at December 31, 2017:

(in millions)	2018	2019	2020	2021	2022	Thereafter-1	Total

Contractual obligations and commitments-1:

Long-term borrowings-2:

Principal	$—	$1,000	$—	$750	$750	$2,541	$5,041

Interest	175	175	125	109	81	185	850

Operating leases	141	132	126	118	109	1,580	2,206

Purchase obligations	128	101	29	22	19	28	327

Investment commitments	298	—	—	—	—	—	298

Total contractual obligations and commitments	742	1,408	280	999	959	4,334	8,722

Contingent obligations:

Contingent payments related to business acquisitions-3	33	179	39	34	—	—	285

Total contractual obligations, commitments andcontingent obligations-4	$775	$1,587	$319	$1,033	$959	$4,334	$9,007

 (1) Amounts do not include $350 million of cash payment consideration and contingent consideration related to the Company’s agreement to acquire the asset management business of Citibanamex. (2) The amount of principal and interest payments for the 2025 Notes (issued in Euros) represents the expected payment amounts using foreign exchange rates as of December 31, 2017. (3) The amount of contingent payments reflected for any year represents the expected payments using foreign currency exchange rates as of December 31, 2017. The fair value of the remaining aggregate contingent payments at December 31, 2017 totaled $236 million and is included in other liabilities on the consolidated statements of financial condition. (4) At December 31, 2017, the Company had approximately $365 million of net unrecognized tax benefits. Due to the uncertainty of timing and amounts that will ultimately be paid, this amount has been excluded from the table above. Operating Leases. The Company leases its primary office locations under agreements that expire on varying dates through 2043. In connection with certain lease agreements, the Company is responsible for escalation payments. The contractual obligations table above includes only guaranteed minimum lease payments for such leases and does not project potential escalation or other lease-related payments. These leases are classified as operating leases and, as such, are not recorded as liabilities on the consolidated statements of financial condition. In May 2017, the Company entered into an agreement with 50 HYMC Owner LLC, for the lease of approximately 847,000 square feet of office space located at 50 Hudson Yards, New York, New York. The term of the lease is twenty years from the date that rental payments begin, expected to occur in McKESSON CORPORATION FINANCIAL REVIEW (Continued) 46 In July 2008, the Board authorized the retirement of shares of the Company’s common stock that may be repurchased from time-to-time pursuant to its stock repurchase program. During the second quarter of 2009, all of the 4 million repurchased shares, which we purchased for $204 million, were formally retired by the Company. The retired shares constitute authorized but unissued shares. We elected to allocate any excess of share repurchase price over par value between additional paid-in capital and retained earnings. As such, $165 million was recorded as a decrease to retained earnings. The Company anticipates that it will continue to pay quarterly cash dividends in the future. However, the payment and amount of future dividends remain within the discretion of the Board and will depend upon the Company’s future earnings, financial condition, capital requirements and other factors. Although we believe that our operating cash flow, financial assets, current access to capital and credit markets, including our existing credit and sales facilities, will give us the ability to meet our financing needs for the foreseeable future, there can be no assurance that continued or increased volatility and disruption in the global capital and credit markets will not impair our liquidity or increase our costs of borrowing. Selected Measures of Liquidity and Capital Resources: