Ayushnangia/finbench-data huggingface dataset:
entergy mississippi , inc .
management 2019s financial discussion and analysis results of operations net income 2016 compared to 2015 net income increased $ 16.5 million primarily due to lower other operation and maintenance expenses , higher net revenues , and a lower effective income tax rate , partially offset by higher depreciation and amortization expenses .
2015 compared to 2014 net income increased $ 17.9 million primarily due to the write-off in 2014 of the regulatory assets associated with new nuclear generation development costs as a result of a joint stipulation entered into with the mississippi public utilities staff , subsequently approved by the mpsc , partially offset by higher depreciation and amortization expenses , higher taxes other than income taxes , higher other operation and maintenance expenses , and lower net revenue .
see note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the new nuclear generation development costs and the joint stipulation .
net revenue 2016 compared to 2015 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) .
following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2016 to 2015 .
amount ( in millions ) .

amount ( in millions )
2015 net revenue
$ 696.3
retail electric price
12.9
volume/weather
4.7
net wholesale revenue
-2.4 ( 2.4 )
reserve equalization
-2.8 ( 2.8 )
other
-3.3 ( 3.3 )
2016 net revenue
$ 705.4

the retail electric price variance is primarily due to a $ 19.4 million net annual increase in revenues , as approved by the mpsc , effective with the first billing cycle of july 2016 , and an increase in revenues collected through the storm damage rider .
see note 2 to the financial statements for more discussion on the formula rate plan and the storm damage rider .
the volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase of 153 gwh , or 1% ( 1 % ) , in billed electricity usage , including an increase in industrial usage , partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential and commercial sales .
the increase in industrial usage is primarily due to expansion projects in the pulp and paper industry , increased demand for existing customers , primarily in the metals industry , and new customers in the wood products industry. .

Question: for 2016 , what percentage of net revenue was due to the retail electric price adjustment?
Answer: 1.8%
Calculation: divide(12.9, 705.4)
compensation plan approved by security holders .
the employee stock purchase plan and the 2005 director stock plan were approved by shareholders at our 2005 annual meeting of shareholders .
in connection with our mergers with cbot holdings and nymex holdings , we assumed their existing equity plans .
the shares relating to the cbot holdings and nymex holdings plans are listed in the table below as being made under an equity compensation plan approved by security holders based upon the fact that shareholders of the company approved the related merger transactions .
plan category number of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options ( a ) weighted-average exercise price of outstanding options ( b ) number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) ( c ) equity compensation plans approved by security holders .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1211143 $ 308.10 5156223 equity compensation plans not approved by security holders .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5978 22.00 2014 .

plan category
number of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options ( a )
weighted-average exercise price of outstanding options ( b )
number of securities remaining available for future issuance underequity compensation plans ( excluding securities reflected in column ( a ) ) ( c )
equity compensation plans approved by security holders
1211143
$ 308.10
5156223
equity compensation plans not approved by security holders
5978
22.00
2014
total
1217121
5156223

item 13 .
certain relationships , related transactions and director independence the information required by this item is included in cme group 2019s proxy statement under the heading 201ccertain business relationships with related parties 201d and 201ccorporate governance 2014director independence 201d and is incorporated herein by reference , pursuant to general instruction g ( 3 ) .
item 14 .
principal accountant fees and services the information required by this item is included in cme group 2019s proxy statement under the heading 201caudit committee disclosures 2014principal accountant fees and services 201d and 201caudit committee disclosures 2014audit committee policy for approval of audit and permitted non-audit services 201d and is incorporated herein by reference , pursuant to general instruction g ( 3 ) . .

Question: whats is the percentage of equity compensation plans that were not approved by security holders?
Answer: 0.491%
Explanation: its the division between the equity compensation plans that were not approved and the total equity compensation plans .
Calculation: divide(5978, 1217121)
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. .

( in thousands )
at december 31 , 2016
at december 31 , 2015
at december 31 , 2014
at december 31 , 2013
at december 31 , 2012
cash and cash equivalents
$ 250470
$ 129852
$ 593175
$ 347489
$ 341841
working capital ( 1 )
1279337
1019953
1127772
702181
651370
inventories
917491
783031
536714
469006
319286
total assets
3644331
2865970
2092428
1576369
1155052
total debt including current maturities
817388
666070
281546
151551
59858
total stockholders 2019 equity
$ 2030900
$ 1668222
$ 1350300
$ 1053354
$ 816922

( 1 ) working capital is defined as current assets minus current liabilities. .

Question: what is the debt-to-equity ratio in 2016?
Answer: 40.2%
Calculation: divide(817388, 2030900)
entergy corporation and subsidiaries management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue utility following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2011 to 2010 .
amount ( in millions ) .

amount ( in millions )
2010 net revenue
$ 5051
mark-to-market tax settlement sharing
-196 ( 196 )
purchased power capacity
-21 ( 21 )
net wholesale revenue
-14 ( 14 )
volume/weather
13
ano decommissioning trust
24
retail electric price
49
other
-2 ( 2 )
2011 net revenue
$ 4904

the mark-to-market tax settlement sharing variance results from a regulatory charge because a portion of the benefits of a settlement with the irs related to the mark-to-market income tax treatment of power purchase contracts will be shared with customers , slightly offset by the amortization of a portion of that charge beginning in october 2011 .
see notes 3 and 8 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the settlement and benefit sharing .
the purchased power capacity variance is primarily due to price increases for ongoing purchased power capacity and additional capacity purchases .
the net wholesale revenue variance is primarily due to lower margins on co-owner contracts and higher wholesale energy costs .
the volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase of 2061 gwh in weather-adjusted usage across all sectors .
weather-adjusted residential retail sales growth reflected an increase in the number of customers .
industrial sales growth has continued since the beginning of 2010 .
entergy 2019s service territory has benefited from the national manufacturing economy and exports , as well as industrial facility expansions .
increases have been offset to some extent by declines in the paper , wood products , and pipeline segments .
the increase was also partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales .
the ano decommissioning trust variance is primarily related to the deferral of investment gains from the ano 1 and 2 decommissioning trust in 2010 in accordance with regulatory treatment .
the gains resulted in an increase in interest and investment income in 2010 and a corresponding increase in regulatory charges with no effect on net income .
the retail electric price variance is primarily due to : rate actions at entergy texas , including a base rate increase effective august 2010 and an additional increase beginning may 2011 ; a formula rate plan increase at entergy louisiana effective may 2011 ; and a base rate increase at entergy arkansas effective july 2010 .
these were partially offset by formula rate plan decreases at entergy new orleans effective october 2010 and october 2011 .
see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of these proceedings. .

Question: what is the percentage change in net revenue from 2010 to 2011?
Answer: -2.9%
Calculation: subtract(4904, 5051), divide(#0, 5051)
property and equipment property and equipment are recorded at cost .
the company provides for depreciation and amortization on a straight-line basis over the following estimated useful lives: .

land improvements
20
buildings
39-40
furniture fixtures and equipment
3-10

improvements of leased properties are amortized over the shorter of the life of the applicable lease term or the estimated useful life of the asset .
impairment of long-lived assets when indicators of impairment are present , the company evaluates the carrying value of long-lived assets , other than goodwill , in relation to the operating performance and future cash flows or the appraised values of the underlying assets .
in accordance with sfas 144 , 201caccounting for the impairment or disposal of long-lived assets , 201d the company reviews for impairment stores open more than two years for which current cash flows from operations are negative .
impairment results when the carrying value of the assets exceeds the undiscounted future cash flows over the life of the lease .
the company 2019s estimate of undiscounted future cash flows over the lease term is based upon historical operations of the stores and estimates of future store profitability which encompasses many factors that are subject to variability and difficult to predict .
if a long-lived asset is found to be impaired , the amount recognized for impairment is equal to the difference between the carrying value and the asset 2019s fair value .
the fair value is estimated based primarily upon future cash flows ( discounted at the company 2019s credit adjusted risk-free rate ) or other reasonable estimates of fair market value .
assets to be disposed of are adjusted to the fair value less the cost to sell if less than the book value .
the company recorded impairment charges included in sg&a expense of approximately $ 0.2 million in the 2007 predecessor period , $ 9.4 million in 2006 and $ 0.6 million in 2005 to reduce the carrying value of certain of its stores 2019 assets as deemed necessary due to negative sales trends and cash flows at these locations .
the majority of the 2006 charges were recorded pursuant to certain strategic initiatives discussed in note 3 .
goodwill and other intangible assets the company amortizes intangible assets over their estimated useful lives unless such lives are deemed indefinite .
amortizable intangible assets are tested for impairment based on undiscounted cash flows , and , if impaired , written down to fair value based on either discounted cash flows or appraised values .
intangible assets with indefinite lives are tested annually for impairment and written down to fair value as required .
no impairment of intangible assets has been identified during any of the periods presented. .

Question: what was the amount of the total impairment charges included in sg&a expense from 2005 to 2007 in millions
Explanation: the total amount in question is the sum of all amounts
Calculation: add(0.2, 9.4), add(#0, 0.6)
measurement point december 31 the priceline group nasdaq composite index s&p 500 rdg internet composite .

measurement pointdecember 31
the priceline group inc .
nasdaqcomposite index
s&p 500index
rdg internetcomposite
2011
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
2012
132.64
116.41
116.00
119.34
2013
248.53
165.47
153.58
195.83
2014
243.79
188.69
174.60
192.42
2015
272.59
200.32
177.01
264.96
2016
313.45
216.54
198.18
277.56

.

Question: what was the percentage change in priceline group for the five year period ended 2016?
Answer: 213.45%
Calculation: subtract(313.45, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)
stock performance graph the graph depicted below shows a comparison of our cumulative total stockholder returns for our common stock , the nasdaq stock market index , and the nasdaq pharmaceutical index , from the date of our initial public offering on july 27 , 2000 through december 26 , 2003 .
the graph assumes that $ 100 was invested on july 27 , 2000 , in our common stock and in each index , and that all dividends were reinvested .
no cash dividends have been declared on our common stock .
stockholder returns over the indicated period should not be considered indicative of future stockholder returns .
comparison of total return among illumina , inc. , the nasdaq composite index and the nasdaq pharmaceutical index december 26 , 2003december 27 , 2002december 28 , 2001december 29 , 2000july 27 , 2000 illumina , inc .
nasdaq composite index nasdaq pharmaceutical index july 27 , december 29 , december 28 , december 27 , december 26 , 2000 2000 2001 2002 2003 .

july 27 2000
december 29 2000
december 28 2001
december 27 2002
december 26 2003
illumina inc .
100.00
100.39
71.44
19.50
43.81
nasdaq composite index
100.00
63.84
51.60
35.34
51.73
nasdaq pharmaceutical index
100.00
93.20
82.08
51.96
74.57

.

Question: what was the cumulative total stockholder return percentage for illumina inc . common stock for the four years end 2003?
Answer: -56.19%
Calculation: subtract(43.81, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)
stock performance graph the line graph that follows compares the cumulative total stockholder return on our common stock with the cumulative total return of the dow jones u.s .
technology index* and the standard & poor 2019s s&p 500* index for the five years ended december 28 , 2013 .
the graph and table assume that $ 100 was invested on december 26 , 2008 ( the last day of trading for the fiscal year ended december 27 , 2008 ) in each of our common stock , the dow jones u.s .
technology index , and the s&p 500 index , and that all dividends were reinvested .
cumulative total stockholder returns for our common stock , the dow jones u.s .
technology index , and the s&p 500 index are based on our fiscal year .
comparison of five-year cumulative return for intel , the dow jones u.s .
technology index* , and the s&p 500* index .

2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
intel corporation
$ 100
$ 148
$ 157
$ 191
$ 163
$ 214
dow jones u.s . technology index
$ 100
$ 170
$ 191
$ 191
$ 209
$ 270
s&p 500 index
$ 100
$ 132
$ 151
$ 154
$ 175
$ 236

table of contents .

Question: what was the percentage five-year cumulative return for intel for the five years ended 2013?
Answer: 114%
Calculation: subtract(214, 100), divide(#0, 100)
five-year stock performance graph the graph below illustrates the cumulative total shareholder return on snap-on common stock since december 31 , 2008 , assuming that dividends were reinvested .
the graph compares snap-on 2019s performance to that of the standard & poor 2019s 500 stock index ( 201cs&p 500 201d ) and a peer group .
snap-on incorporated total shareholder return ( 1 ) fiscal year ended ( 2 ) snap-on incorporated peer group ( 3 ) s&p 500 .

fiscal year ended ( 2 )
snap-onincorporated
peer group ( 3 )
s&p 500
december 31 2008
$ 100.00
$ 100.00
$ 100.00
december 31 2009
111.40
127.17
126.46
december 31 2010
153.24
169.36
145.51
december 31 2011
140.40
165.85
148.59
december 31 2012
223.82
195.02
172.37
december 31 2013
315.72
265.68
228.19

( 1 ) assumes $ 100 was invested on december 31 , 2008 , and that dividends were reinvested quarterly .
( 2 ) the company's fiscal year ends on the saturday that is on or nearest to december 31 of each year ; for ease of calculation , the fiscal year end is assumed to be december 31 .
( 3 ) the peer group consists of : stanley black & decker , inc. , danaher corporation , emerson electric co. , genuine parts company , newell rubbermaid inc. , pentair ltd. , spx corporation and w.w .
grainger , inc .
24 snap-on incorporated 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 snap-on incorporated peer group s&p 500 .

Question: in the five-year stock performance graph what was the ratio of the of the snap-on incorporated to the peer group performance in december 31 2012
Answer: 1.15
Calculation: divide(223.82, 195.02)
24 2017 annual report performance graph the following chart presents a comparison for the five-year period ended june 30 , 2017 , of the market performance of the company 2019s common stock with the s&p 500 index and an index of peer companies selected by the company : comparison of 5 year cumulative total return among jack henry & associates , inc. , the s&p 500 index , and a peer group the following information depicts a line graph with the following values: .

2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
jkhy
100.00
138.34
177.10
195.72
267.64
322.60
peer group
100.00
117.87
161.90
203.87
233.39
271.10
s&p 500
100.00
120.60
150.27
161.43
167.87
197.92

this comparison assumes $ 100 was invested on june 30 , 2012 , and assumes reinvestments of dividends .
total returns are calculated according to market capitalization of peer group members at the beginning of each period .
peer companies selected are in the business of providing specialized computer software , hardware and related services to financial institutions and other businesses .
companies in the peer group are aci worldwide , inc. ; bottomline technology , inc. ; broadridge financial solutions ; cardtronics , inc. ; convergys corp. ; corelogic , inc. ; dst systems , inc. ; euronet worldwide , inc. ; fair isaac corp. ; fidelity national information services , inc. ; fiserv , inc. ; global payments , inc. ; moneygram international , inc. ; ss&c technologies holdings , inc. ; total systems services , inc. ; tyler technologies , inc. ; verifone systems , inc. ; and wex , inc.. .

Question: what was the 2015 total return for the peer group?
Answer: 41.97
Calculation: subtract(203.87, 161.90)
performance graph the table below compares the cumulative total shareholder return on our common stock with the cumulative total return of ( i ) the standard & poor 2019s 500 composite stock index ( 201cs&p 500 index 201d ) , ( ii ) the standard & poor 2019s industrials index ( 201cs&p industrials index 201d ) and ( iii ) the standard & poor 2019s consumer durables & apparel index ( 201cs&p consumer durables & apparel index 201d ) , from december 31 , 2007 through december 31 , 2012 , when the closing price of our common stock was $ 16.66 .
the graph assumes investments of $ 100 on december 31 , 2007 in our common stock and in each of the three indices and the reinvestment of dividends .
performance graph 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 s&p 500 index s&p industrials index s&p consumer durables & apparel index the table below sets forth the value , as of december 31 for each of the years indicated , of a $ 100 investment made on december 31 , 2007 in each of our common stock , the s&p 500 index , the s&p industrials index and the s&p consumer durables & apparel index and includes the reinvestment of dividends. .

2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
masco
$ 55.78
$ 71.52
$ 67.12
$ 52.15
$ 92.49
s&p 500 index
$ 63.45
$ 79.90
$ 91.74
$ 93.67
$ 108.55
s&p industrials index
$ 60.60
$ 72.83
$ 92.04
$ 91.50
$ 105.47
s&p consumer durables & apparel index
$ 66.43
$ 90.54
$ 118.19
$ 127.31
$ 154.72

in july 2007 , our board of directors authorized the purchase of up to 50 million shares of our common stock in open-market transactions or otherwise .
at december 31 , 2012 , we had remaining authorization to repurchase up to 24 million shares .
during the first quarter of 2012 , we repurchased and retired one million shares of our common stock , for cash aggregating $ 8 million to offset the dilutive impact of the 2012 grant of one million shares of long-term stock awards .
we have not purchased any shares since march 2012. .

Question: what was the percentage cumulative return of masco for the five year period ending 2012?
Answer: -7.51%
Calculation: subtract(92.49, 100), divide(#0, 100)
there were no share repurchases in 2016 .
stock performance graph the graph below matches fidelity national information services , inc.'s cumulative 5-year total shareholder return on common stock with the cumulative total returns of the s&p 500 index and the s&p supercap data processing & outsourced services index.aa the graph tracks the performance of a $ 100 investment in our common stock and in each index ( with the reinvestment of all dividends ) from december 31 , 2011 to december 31 , 2016. .

12/11
12/12
12/13
12/14
12/15
12/16
fidelity national information services inc .
100.00
134.12
210.97
248.68
246.21
311.81
s&p 500
100.00
116.00
153.58
174.60
177.01
198.18
s&p supercap data processing & outsourced services
100.00
126.06
194.91
218.05
247.68
267.14

the stock price performance included in this graph is not necessarily indicative of future stock price performance .
item 6 .
selected financial ss the selected financial data set forth below constitutes historical financial data of fis and should be read in conjunction with "item 7 , management 2019s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations , " and "item 8 , financial statements and supplementary data , " included elsewhere in this report. .

Question: what is the total return if $ 100000 are invested in fidelity national information system in 12/11 and sold in 12/16?
Answer: 211810
Calculation: subtract(311.81, const_100), divide(const_1000000, const_100), multiply(#1, #0)