NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS JPMorgan Chase & Co.  142 JPMorgan Chase & Co.  / 2007 Annual Report In addition to the amounts reported for securitization activity in the preceding table, the Firm sold residential mortgage loans totaling $81.8 billion, $53.7 billion and $52.5 billion during 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively, primarily for securitization by the Government National Mortgage Association (“GNMA”), Federal National Mortgage Association (“FNMA”) and Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“Freddie Mac”); these sales resulted in pretax gains of $47 million, $251 million and $293 million, respectively.
Retained servicing JPMorgan Chase retains servicing responsibilities for all originated and for certain purchased residential mortgage, credit card and automobile loan securitizations and for certain commercial activity securitizations it sponsors, and receives servicing fees based upon the securitized loan balance plus certain ancillary fees.
The Firm also retains the right to service the residential mortgage loans it sells to GNMA, FNMA and Freddie Mac.
For a discussion of mortgage servicing rights, see Note 18 on pages 154–157 of this Annual Report.
The Firm provides mortgage servicing on a recourse and nonrecourse basis.
In nonrecourse servicing, the principal credit risk to the Firm is the cost of temporary servicing advances of funds (i. e. , normal servicing advances).
In recourse servicing, the servicer agrees to share credit risk with the owner of the mortgage loans such as FNMA or Freddie Mac or with a private investor, insurer or guarantor.
Losses on recourse servicing occur primarily when foreclosure sale proceeds of the property underlying a defaulted mortgage are less than the outstanding principal balance and accrued interest of the loan and the cost of holding and disposing of the underlying property.
The Firm’s mortgage loan securitizations are primarily nonrecourse, thereby effectively transferring the risk of future credit losses to the purchaser of the securities issued by the trust.
As of December 31, 2007 and 2006, the amount of recourse obligations totaled $557 million and $649 million, respectively.
Retained securitizations interest At both December 31, 2007 and 2006, the Firm had, with respect to its credit card master trusts, $18.6 billion and $19.3 billion, respectively, related to undivided interests, and $2.7 billion and $2.5 billion, respectively, related to subordinated interests in accrued interest and fees on the securitized receivables, net of an allowance for uncollectible amounts.
Credit card securitization trusts require the Firm to maintain a minimum undivided interest of 4% to 12% of the principal receivables in the trusts.
The Firm maintained an average undivided interest in principal receivables in the trusts of approximately 19% for 2007 and 21% for 2006.
The Firm also maintains escrow accounts up to predetermined limits for some credit card, automobile and education securitizations to cover the unlikely event of deficiencies in cash flows owed to investors.
The amounts available in such escrow accounts are recorded in Other assets and, as of December 31, 2007, amounted to $97 million, $21 million and $3 million for credit card, automobile and education securitizations, respectively; as of December 31, 2006, these amounts were $153 million and $56 million for credit card and automobile securitizations, respectively.
The following table summarizes other retained securitization interests, which are primarily subordinated or residual interests, and are carried at fair value on the Firm’s Consolidated balance sheets.
## Table 0 ##
(a) Pretax unrealized gains/(losses) recorded in Stockholders’ equity that relate to retained securitization interests on consumer activities totaled $(14) million and $3 million for credit card; $3 million and $4 million for automobile and $44 million and $51 million for residential mortgage at December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively.
(b) The credit card retained interest amount noted above includes subordinated securities retained by the Firm totaling $284 million and $301 million at December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively, that are classified as AFS securities.
The securities are valued using quoted market prices and therefore are not included in the key economic assumptions and sensitivities table that follows.
(c) In addition to these auto retained interests, the Firm had $188 million of senior securities at December 31, 2006, that were classified as AFS securities.
These securities were valued using quoted market prices and therefore were not included in the key economic assumption and sensitivities table that follows.
The Firm did not have any such securities at December 31, 2007.
(d) Includes Alt-A loans.
(e) In addition to these wholesale retained interests, the Firm also retained subordinated securities totaling $22 million and $23 million at December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively, predominately from resecuritizations activities that are classified as Trading assets.
These securities are valued using quoted market prices and therefore are not included in the key assumptions and sensitivities table that follows.
(f) Some consumer activities securitization interests are retained by the Investment Bank and reported under Wholesale activities.
(g) In addition to the retained interests described above, the Firm also held investmentgrade interests of $9.7 billion and $3.1 billion at December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively, that the Firm expects to sell to investors in the normal course of its underwriting activity or that are purchased in connection with secondary marketmaking activities.
The following table shows the current credit risk of derivative receivables after netting adjustments, and the current liquidity risk of derivative payables after netting adjustments, as of December 31, 2009.
## Table 1 ##
In addition to the collateral amounts reflected in the table above, at December 31, 2009, the Firm had received and posted liquid securities collateral in the amount of $15.5 billion and $11.7 billion, respectively.
The Firm also receives and delivers collateral at the initiation of derivative transactions, which is available as security against potential exposure that could arise should the fair value of the transactions move in the Firm’s or client’s favor, respectively.
Furthermore, the Firm and its counterparties hold collateral related to contracts that have a non-daily call frequency for collateral to be posted, and collateral that the Firm or a counterparty has agreed to return but has not yet settled as of the reporting date.
At December 31, 2009, the Firm had received $16.9 billion and delivered $5.8 billion of such additional collateral.
These amounts were not netted against the derivative receivables and payables in the table above, because, at an individual counterparty level, the collateral exceeded the fair value exposure at December 31, 2009.  Credit derivatives Credit derivatives are financial instruments whose value is derived from the credit risk associated with the debt of a third-party issuer (the reference entity) and which allow one party (the protection purchaser) to transfer that risk to another party (the protection seller).
Credit derivatives expose the protection purchaser to the creditworthiness of the protection seller, as the protection seller is required to make payments under the contract when the reference entity experiences a credit event, such as a bankruptcy, a failure to pay its obligation or a restructuring.
The seller of credit protection receives a premium for providing protection but has the risk that the underlying instrument referenced in the contract will be subject to a credit event.
The Firm is both a purchaser and seller of protection in the credit derivatives market and uses these derivatives for two primary purposes.
First, in its capacity as a market-maker in the dealer/client business, the Firm actively risk manages a portfolio of credit derivatives by purchasing and selling credit protection, predominantly on corporate debt obligations, to meet the needs of customers.
As a seller of protection, the Firm’s exposure to a given reference entity may be offset partially, or entirely, with a contract to purchase protection from another counterparty on the same or similar reference entity.
Second, the Firm uses credit derivatives to mitigate credit risk associated with its overall derivative receivables and traditional commercial credit lending exposures (loans and unfunded commitments) as well as to manage its exposure to residential and commercial mortgages.
See Note 3 on pages 156--- 173 of this Annual Report for further information on the Firm’s mortgage-related exposures.
In accomplishing the above, the Firm uses different types of credit derivatives.
Following is a summary of various types of credit derivatives.
Credit default swaps Credit derivatives may reference the credit of either a single reference entity (“single-name”) or a broad-based index, as described further below.
The Firm purchases and sells protection on both single- name and index-reference obligations.
Single-name CDS and index CDS contracts are both OTC derivative contracts.
Singlename CDS are used to manage the default risk of a single reference entity, while CDS index are used to manage credit risk associated with the broader credit markets or credit market segments.
Like the S&P 500 and other market indices, a CDS index is comprised of a portfolio of CDS across many reference entities.
New series of CDS indices are established approximately every six months with a new underlying portfolio of reference entities to reflect changes in the credit markets.
If one of the reference entities in the index experiences a credit event, then the reference entity that defaulted is removed from the index.
CDS can also be referenced against specific portfolios of reference names or against customized exposure levels based on specific client demands: for example, to provide protection against the first $1 million of realized credit losses in a $10 million portfolio of exposure.
Such structures are commonly known as tranche CDS.
For both single-name CDS contracts and index CDS, upon the occurrence of a credit event, under the terms of a CDS contract neither party to the CDS contract has recourse to the reference entity.
The protection purchaser has recourse to the protection seller for the difference between the face value of the CDS contract and the fair value of the reference obligation at the time of settling the credit derivative contract, also known as the recovery value.
The protection purchaser does not need to hold the debt instrument of the underlying reference entity in order to receive amounts due under the CDS contract when a credit event occurs.
Credit-linked notes A credit linked note (“CLN”) is a funded credit derivative where the issuer of the CLN purchases credit protection on a referenced entity from the note investor.
Under the contract, the investor pays the issuer par value of the note at the inception of the transaction, and in return, the issuer pays periodic payments to the investor, based on the credit risk of the referenced entity.
The issuer also repays the investor the par value of the note at maturity unless the reference entity experiences a specified credit event.
In that event, the issuer is not obligated to repay the par value of the note, but rather, the issuer pays the investor the difference between the par value of the note
Off–balance sheet lending-related financial instruments, guarantees and other commitments
## Table 2 ##
(a) Represents the contractual amount net of risk participations totaling $24.6 billion and $26.4 billion for standby letters of credit and other financial guarantees at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, $690 million and $1.1 billion for other letters of credit at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, and $643 million and $789 million for other unfunded commitments to extend credit at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
In regulatory filings with the Federal Reserve Board these commitments are shown gross of risk participations.
(b) JPMorgan Chase held collateral relating to $31.5 billion and $31.0 billion of standby letters of credit and $1.3 billion and $1.0 billion of other letters of credit at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
(c) Includes unissued standby letter of credit commitments of $38.4 billion and $39.5 billion at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
(d) Collateral held by the Firm in support of securities lending indemnification agreements was $173.2 billion and $170.1 billion at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Securities lending collateral comprises primarily cash, and securities issued by governments that are members of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (“OECD”) and U. S.  government agencies.
(e) Represents notional amounts of derivatives qualifying as guarantees.
The carrying value at December 31, 2009 and 2008, reflects derivative payables of $981 million and $5.6 billion, respectively, less derivative receivables of $219 million and $184 million, respectively.
(f) Includes unfunded commitments to third-party private equity funds of $1.5 billion and $1.4 billion at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Also includes unfunded commitments for other equity investments of $897 million and $1.0 billion at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
These commitments include $1.5 billion at December 31, 2009, related to investments that are generally fair valued at net asset value as discussed in Note 3 on pages 156–173 of this Annual Report.
(g) Indemnifications for breaches of representations and warranties in loan sale and securitization agreements.
For additional information, see Loan sale and securitizationrelated indemnifications on page 241 of this Note.
(h) For lending-related products the carrying value represents the allowance for lending-related commitments and the fair value of the guarantee liability, for derivative-related products the carrying value represents the fair value, and for all other products the carrying value represents the valuation reserve.
Other unfunded commitments to extend credit Other unfunded commitments to extend credit include commitments to U. S.  domestic states and municipalities, hospitals and other not-for-profit entities to provide funding for periodic tenders of their variable-rate demand bond obligations or commercial paper.
Performance by the Firm is required in the event that the variable-rate demand bonds or commercial paper cannot be remarketed to new investors.
The amount of commitments related to variable-rate demand bonds and commercial paper of U. S.  domestic states and municipalities, hospitals and not-for-profit entities was $23.3 billion and $23.5 billion at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Similar commitments exist to extend credit in the form of liquidity facility agreements with nonconsolidated municipal bond VIEs.
For further information, see Note 16 on pages 214–222 of this Annual Report.
Also included in other unfunded commitments to extend credit are commitments to investment- and noninvestment-grade counterparties in connection with leveraged acquisitions.
These commitments are dependent on whether the acquisition by the borrower is successful, tend to be short-term in nature and, in most cases, are subject to certain conditions based on the borrower’s financial condition or other factors.
The amounts of commitments related to leveraged acquisitions at December 31, 2009 and 2008, were $2.9 billion and $3.6 billion, respectively.
For further information, see Note 3 and Note 4 on pages 156–173 and 173–175 respectively, of this Annual Report.
Guarantees The Firm considers the following off–balance sheet lending-related arrangements to be guarantees under U. S.  GAAP: certain asset

<table><tr><td>December 31, (in millions)</td><td> 2007</td><td>2006</td></tr><tr><td>Consumer activities</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Credit card<sup>(a)(b)</sup></td><td>$887</td><td>$833</td></tr><tr><td>Auto<sup>(a)(c)</sup></td><td>85</td><td>168</td></tr><tr><td>Residential mortgage<sup>(a)</sup>:</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Prime<sup>(d)</sup></td><td>128</td><td>43</td></tr><tr><td>Subprime</td><td>93</td><td>112</td></tr><tr><td>Education loans</td><td>55</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Wholesale activities<sup>(e)(f)</sup></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Residential mortgages:</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Prime<sup>(d)</sup></td><td>253</td><td>204</td></tr><tr><td>Subprime</td><td>294</td><td>828</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial and other</td><td>42</td><td>117</td></tr><tr><td> Total<sup>(g)</sup></td><td>$1,837</td><td>$2,305</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>December 31, 2009 (in millions)</td><td>Derivative receivables</td><td>Derivative payables</td></tr><tr><td>Gross derivative fair value</td><td>$1,565,518</td><td>$1,519,183</td></tr><tr><td>Nettingadjustment – offsetting receivables/payables</td><td>-1,419,840</td><td>-1,419,840</td></tr><tr><td>Nettingadjustment – cash collateral received/paid</td><td>-65,468</td><td>-39,218</td></tr><tr><td>Carrying value on Consolidated Balance Sheets</td><td>$80,210</td><td>$60,125</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Contractual amount</td><td colspan="2">Carrying Value<sup>(h)</sup></td></tr><tr><td>December 31, (in millions)</td><td> 2009</td><td>2008</td><td> 2009</td><td>2008</td></tr><tr><td> Lending-related</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Consumer:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Home equity – senior lien</td><td>$19,246</td><td>$27,998</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td></tr><tr><td>Home equity – junior lien</td><td>37,231</td><td>67,745</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Prime mortgage</td><td>1,654</td><td>5,079</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Subprime mortgage</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Option ARMs</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Auto loans</td><td>5,467</td><td>4,726</td><td>7</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Credit card</td><td>569,113</td><td>623,702</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>All other loans</td><td>11,229</td><td>12,257</td><td>5</td><td>22</td></tr><tr><td> Total consumer</td><td>643,940</td><td>741,507</td><td>12</td><td>25</td></tr><tr><td>Wholesale:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Other unfunded commitments to extend credit<sup>(a)</sup></td><td>192,145</td><td>189,563</td><td>356</td><td>349</td></tr><tr><td>Asset purchase agreements</td><td>22,685</td><td>53,729</td><td>126</td><td>147</td></tr><tr><td>Standby letters of credit and financial guarantees<sup>(a)(b)(c)</sup></td><td>91,485</td><td>95,352</td><td>919</td><td>671</td></tr><tr><td>Unused advised lines of credit</td><td>35,673</td><td>36,300</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Other letters of credit<sup>(a)(b)</sup></td><td>5,167</td><td>4,927</td><td>1</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td> Total wholesale</td><td>347,155</td><td>379,871</td><td>1,402</td><td>1,169</td></tr><tr><td> Total lending-related</td><td>$991,095</td><td>$1,121,378</td><td>$1,414</td><td>$1,194</td></tr><tr><td> Other guarantees and commitments</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Securities lending guarantees<sup>(d)</sup></td><td>$170,777</td><td>$169,281</td><td>$NA</td><td>$NA</td></tr><tr><td>Residual value guarantees</td><td>672</td><td>670</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Derivatives qualifying as guarantees<sup>(e)</sup></td><td>87,191</td><td>83,835</td><td>762</td><td>5,418</td></tr><tr><td>Equity investment commitments<sup>(f)</sup></td><td>2,374</td><td>2,424</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Loan sale and securitization-related indemnifications:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Repurchase liability<sup>(g)</sup></td><td> NA</td><td>NA</td><td>1,705</td><td>1,093</td></tr><tr><td>Loans sold with recourse</td><td>13,544</td><td>15,020</td><td>271</td><td>241</td></tr></table>

Question: at december 31 , 2009 , what was the ratio of the firm had received to the additional collateral .
Answer: 2.91379