锘縄nterest Revenue/Expense and Net Interest Margin
## Table 0 ##
In millions of dollars, except as otherwise noted
Note: All interest expense amounts include FDIC deposit insurance assessments.
Net interest revenue includes the taxable equivalent adjustments related to the tax-exempt bond portfolio (based on the U. S.  federal statutory tax rate of 35%) of $487 million, $498 million, and $521 million for 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
Excludes expenses associated with certain hybrid financial instruments, which are classified as Long-term debt and accounted for at fair value with changes recorded in Principal transactions.
Citi鈥檚 net interest margin (NIM) is calculated by dividing gross interest revenue less gross interest expense by average interest earning assets.
Citi鈥檚 NIM was 2.92% in the fourth quarter of 2015, a slight decrease from 2.94% in the third quarter of 2015, and improved to 2.93% for the full year 2015, compared to 2.90% in 2014.
The improvement in Citi鈥檚 NIM for the full year 2015 was driven by trading NIM and the impact of lower cost of funds, primarily declines in the cost of long-term debt, partially offset by lower loan yields.
Going into 2016, Citi鈥檚 NIM will reflect the sale of OneMain Financial, which will be partially offset by the benefit of debt repurchases during 2015, including in the fourth quarter of 2015.
Accordingly, Citi currently expects a decrease in its NIM in the first half of 2016.
As noted in the tables above, Citi鈥檚 interest expense includes the impact of FDIC deposit insurance assessments.
As part of the Dodd-Frank Act, the FDIC is required to ensure that its deposit insurance fund reserve ratio reaches 1.35% by September 30, 2020.
In the fourth quarter of 2015, the FDIC issued a notice of proposed rulemaking that would impose on insured depository institutions with at least $10 billion in assets (large banks), which includes Citibank, a surcharge of 4.5 basis points per annum until the fund reaches the required ratio, which the FDIC estimates would take approximately two years.
Based on its current assessment base, Citi estimates the net impact to Citibank would be approximately $500 million over the two-year period.
As part of its proposed rulemaking, the FDIC also discussed an alternative to the surcharge proposal which would impose a one-time assessment, similar to a shortfall assessment, on large banks in order to reach the 1.35% target.
As discussed by the FDIC, this shortfall assessment would be approximately 12 basis points on the
PERFORMANCE GRAPH Comparison of Five-Year Cumulative Total Return The following graph and table compare the cumulative total return on Citi’s common stock, which is listed on the NYSE under the ticker symbol “C” and held by 81,805 common stockholders of record as of January 31, 2016, with the cumulative total return of the S&P 500 Index and the S&P Financial Index over the five-year period through December 31, 2015.
The graph and table assume that $100 was invested on December 31, 2010 in Citi’s common stock, the S&P 500 Index and the S&P Financial Index, and that all dividends were reinvested.
## Table 1 ##
with lower interest costs due to a lower debt leverage ratio while we continued to grow.
The increase in 2002 was due to improved operational efficiencies and strength in the homebuilding markets in which we operated, partially offset by softness primarily in the Texas market.
Selling, general and administrative expenses as a percentage of revenues from home sales increased to 10.9% in 2003, compared to 10.7% and 10.5% in 2002 and 2001, respectively.
The increase in 2003 was primarily due to higher personnel-related expenses, compared to 2002.
The increase in 2002 was primarily due to an increase in insurance costs, compared to 2001.
Gross profits on land sales totaled $73.3 million in the year ended November 30, 2003, compared to $2.0 million in 2002 and $1.7 million in 2001.
Profits in 2003 were positively impacted by each of our regions, with strong contributions from our East and West regions.
Equity in earnings from unconsolidated partnerships was $81.9 million in the year ended November 30, 2003, compared to $42.7 million in 2002 and $27.1 million in 2001.
Management fees and other income, net, totaled $21.9 million in the year ended November 30, 2003, compared to $33.3 million in 2002 and $18.4 million in 2001.
Land sales, equity in earnings from unconsolidated partnerships, and management fees and other income, net, may vary significantly from period to period depending on the timing of land sales and other transactions by us and our unconsolidated partnerships.
At November 30, 2003, we owned approximately 74,000 homesites and had access to an additional 135,000 homesites through either option contracts or our unconsolidated partnerships.
At November 30, 2003, approximately 15% of the homesites we owned were subject to home purchase contracts.
Our backlog of sales contracts was 13,905 homes ($3.9 billion) at November 30, 2003, compared to 12,108 homes ($3.2 billion) at November 30, 2002.
The higher backlog was primarily attributable to our homebuilding acquisitions and growth in the number of active communities, which resulted in higher new orders in 2003, compared to 2002.
As a result of these acquisitions combined with our organic growth, inventories increased 13% during 2003, while revenues from sales of homes increased 22% for the year ended November 30, 2003, compared to prior year.
Financial Services Our Financial Services Division provides mortgage financing, title insurance, closing services and insurance agency services for both buyers of our homes and others.
The Division sells the loans it originates in the secondary mortgage market.
The Division also provides high-speed Internet access, cable television and alarm installation and monitoring services to residents of our communities and others.
The following table sets forth selected financial and operational information relating to our Financial Services Division.
The results of operations of companies we acquired during these years are included in the information since the respective dates of the acquisitions.
## Table 2 ##
Operating earnings from our Financial Services Division increased to $154.5 million in 2003, compared to $127.6 million and $89.1 million in 2002 and 2001, respectively.
The increase in 2003 was primarily due to improved results from our mortgage and title operations, which benefited from low interest rates and a strong refinance and housing environment.
The increase in 2002 was primarily due to improved results from our

<table><tr><td>In millions of dollars, except as otherwise noted</td><td>2015</td><td></td><td>2014</td><td></td><td>2013</td><td></td><td>Change2015 vs. 2014</td><td></td><td>Change2014 vs. 2013</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Interest revenue<sup>-1</sup></td><td>$59,040</td><td></td><td>$62,180</td><td></td><td>$63,491</td><td></td><td>-5%</td><td></td><td>-2%</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Interest expense</td><td>11,921</td><td></td><td>13,690</td><td></td><td>16,177</td><td></td><td>-13</td><td></td><td>-15</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net interest revenue<sup>-1(2)</sup></td><td>$47,119</td><td></td><td>$48,490</td><td></td><td>$47,314</td><td></td><td>-3%</td><td></td><td>2%</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Interest revenue—average rate</td><td>3.68%</td><td></td><td>3.72%</td><td></td><td>3.83%</td><td></td><td>-4</td><td>bps</td><td>-11</td><td>bps</td></tr><tr><td>Interest expense—average rate</td><td>0.95</td><td></td><td>1.02</td><td></td><td>1.19</td><td></td><td>-7</td><td>bps</td><td>-17</td><td>bps</td></tr><tr><td>Net interest margin</td><td>2.93</td><td></td><td>2.90</td><td></td><td>2.85</td><td></td><td>3</td><td>bps</td><td>5</td><td>bps</td></tr><tr><td>Interest-rate benchmarks</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Two-year U.S. Treasury note—average rate</td><td>0.69%</td><td></td><td>0.46%</td><td></td><td>0.31%</td><td></td><td>23</td><td>bps</td><td>15</td><td>bps</td></tr><tr><td>10-year U.S. Treasury note—average rate</td><td>2.14</td><td></td><td>2.54</td><td></td><td>2.35</td><td></td><td>-40</td><td>bps</td><td>19</td><td>bps</td></tr><tr><td>10-year vs. two-year spread</td><td>145</td><td>bps</td><td>208</td><td>bps</td><td>204</td><td>bps</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>DATE</td><td>CITI</td><td>S&P 500</td><td>S&P FINANCIALS</td></tr><tr><td>31-Dec-2010</td><td>100.00</td><td>100.00</td><td>100.00</td></tr><tr><td>30-Dec-2011</td><td>55.67</td><td>102.11</td><td>82.94</td></tr><tr><td>31-Dec-2012</td><td>83.81</td><td>118.45</td><td>106.84</td></tr><tr><td>31-Dec-2013</td><td>110.49</td><td>156.82</td><td>144.90</td></tr><tr><td>31-Dec-2014</td><td>114.83</td><td>178.28</td><td>166.93</td></tr><tr><td>31-Dec-2015</td><td>110.14</td><td>180.75</td><td>164.39</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> Years Ended November 30, </td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2003</td><td>2002</td><td> 2001 </td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> (Dollars in thousands)</td></tr><tr><td> Revenues</td><td>$558,974</td><td>484,219</td><td>425,354</td></tr><tr><td> Costs and expenses</td><td>404,521</td><td>356,608</td><td>336,223</td></tr><tr><td> Operating earnings</td><td>$154,453</td><td>127,611</td><td>89,131</td></tr><tr><td>Dollar value of mortgages originated</td><td>$7,603,000</td><td>6,132,000</td><td>5,226,000</td></tr><tr><td>Number of mortgages originated</td><td>41,000</td><td>34,100</td><td>30,600</td></tr><tr><td>Mortgage capture rate of Lennar homebuyers</td><td>72%</td><td>80%</td><td>79%</td></tr><tr><td>Number of title closing transactions (excluding title policies issued)</td><td>245,000</td><td>189,000</td><td>162,000</td></tr><tr><td>Number of title policies issued</td><td>175,000</td><td>146,000</td><td>111,000</td></tr></table>

Question: what was the overall percentage growth of the cumulative total return for citi from 2010 to 2015
Answer: 0.1014