Management’s Discussion and Analysis The table below presents a reconciliation of our common shareholders’ equity to the estimated Basel III Advanced CET1 on a fully phased-in basis.
## Table 0 ##
1.
This deduction, which represents the fully phased-in requirement, is the amount by which our investments in the capital of nonconsolidated financial institutions exceed certain prescribed thresholds.
During both the transitional period and thereafter, no deduction will be required if the applicable proportion of our investments in the capital of nonconsolidated financial institutions falls below the prescribed thresholds.2.
Principally includes credit valuation adjustments on derivative liabilities and debt valuation adjustments, as well as other required credit riskbased deductions.
In addition, beginning with the first quarter of 2015, subject to transitional provisions, we will also be required to disclose ratios calculated under the Standardized approach.
Our estimated CET1 ratio under the Standardized approach (Standardized CET1 ratio) on a fully phased-in basis was approximately 60 basis points lower than our estimated Basel III Advanced CET1 ratio in the table above.
Both the Basel III Advanced CET1 ratio and the Standardized CET1 ratio are subject to transitional provisions.
Reflecting the transitional provisions that became effective January 1, 2014, our estimated Basel III Advanced CET1 ratio and our estimated Standardized CET1 ratio are approximately 150 basis points higher than the respective CET1 ratios on a fully phased-in basis as of December 2013.
Effective January 1, 2014, Group Inc. ’s capital and leverage ratios are calculated under, and subject to the minimums as defined in, the Revised Capital Framework.
The changes to the definition of capital and minimum ratios, subject to transitional provisions, were effective beginning January 1, 2014.
RWAs are based on Basel I Adjusted, as defined in Note 20 to the consolidated financial statements.
The firm will transition to Basel III beginning on April 1, 2014.
Including the impact of the changes to the definition of regulatory capital and reflecting the transitional provisions effective in 2014, our estimated CET1 ratio (CET1 to RWAs on a Basel I Adjusted basis) as of December 2013 would have been essentially unchanged as compared to our Tier 1 common ratio under Basel I.
Regulatory Leverage Ratios.
The Revised Capital Framework increased the minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio applicable to us from 3% to 4% effective January 1, 2014.
In addition, the Revised Capital Framework will introduce a new Tier 1 supplementary leverage ratio (supplementary leverage ratio) for Advanced approach banking organizations.
The supplementary leverage ratio compares Tier 1 capital (as defined under the Revised Capital Framework) to a measure of leverage exposure, defined as the sum of the firm’s assets less certain CET1 deductions plus certain off-balance-sheet exposures, including a measure of derivatives exposures and commitments.
The Revised Capital Framework requires a minimum supplementary leverage ratio of 3%, effective January 1, 2018, but with disclosure required beginning in the first quarter of 2015.
In addition, subsequent to the approval of the Revised Capital Framework, the Agencies issued a proposal to increase the minimum supplementary leverage ratio requirement for the largest U. S.  banks (those deemed to be global systemically important banking institutions (G-SIBs) under the Basel G-SIB framework).
These proposals would require the firm and other G-SIBs to meet a 5% supplementary leverage ratio (comprised of the minimum requirement of 3% plus a 2% buffer).
As of December 2013, our estimated supplementary leverage ratio based on the Revised Capital Framework approximates this proposed minimum.
In addition, the Basel Committee recently finalized revisions that would increase the size of the leverage exposure for purposes of the supplementary leverage ratio, but would retain a minimum supplementary leverage ratio requirement of 3%.
It is not known with certainty at this point whether the U. S.  regulators will adopt this revised definition of leverage into their rules and proposals for the supplementary leverage ratio.
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC.  AND SUBSIDIARIES Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Gains and Losses on Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities Accounted for at Fair Value Under the Fair Value Option The table below presents the gains and losses recognized in earnings as a result of the firm electing to apply the fair value option to certain financial assets and financial liabilities.
These gains and losses are included in “Market making” and “Other principal transactions.
” The table below also includes gains and losses on the embedded derivative component of hybrid financial instruments included in unsecured short-term borrowings, unsecured long-term borrowings and deposits.
These gains and losses would have been recognized under other U. S.  GAAP even if the firm had not elected to account for the entire hybrid financial instrument at fair value.
## Table 1 ##
In the table above: ‰ Gains/(losses) exclude contractual interest, which is included in “Interest income” and “Interest expense,” for all instruments other than hybrid financial instruments.
See Note 23 for further information about interest income and interest expense.
‰ Unsecured short-term borrowings includes gains/(losses) on the embedded derivative component of hybrid financial instruments of $(1.05) billion for 2016, $339 million for 2015 and $(1.22) billion for 2014, respectively.
‰ Unsecured long-term borrowings includes gains/(losses) on the embedded derivative component of hybrid financial instruments of $737 million for 2016, $653 million for 2015 and $(697) million for 2014, respectively.
‰ Other liabilities and accrued expenses includes gains/ (losses) on certain subordinated liabilities of consolidated VIEs.
‰ Other primarily consists of gains/(losses) on receivables from customers and counterparties, deposits and other secured financings.
Excluding the gains and losses on the instruments accounted for under the fair value option described above, “Market making” and “Other principal transactions” primarily represent gains and losses on “Financial instruments owned, at fair value” and “Financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value.
” Loans and Lending Commitments The table below presents the difference between the aggregate fair value and the aggregate contractual principal amount for loans and long-term receivables for which the fair value option was elected.
In the table below, the aggregate contractual principal amount of loans on nonaccrual status and/or more than 90 days past due (which excludes loans carried at zero fair value and considered uncollectible) exceeds the related fair value primarily because the firm regularly purchases loans, such as distressed loans, at values significantly below the contractual principal amounts.
## Table 2 ##
As of December 2016 and December 2015, the fair value of unfunded lending commitments for which the fair value option was elected was a liability of $80 million and $211 million, respectively, and the related total contractual amount of these lending commitments was $7.19 billion and $14.01 billion, respectively.
See Note 18 for further information about lending commitments.
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC.  AND SUBSIDIARIES Management’s Discussion and Analysis Funding Sources Our primary sources of funding are deposits, collateralized financings, unsecured short-term and long-term borrowings, and shareholders’ equity.
We seek to maintain broad and diversified funding sources globally across products, programs, markets, currencies and creditors to avoid funding concentrations.
The table below presents information about our funding sources.
## Table 3 ##
Our funding is primarily raised in U. S.  dollar, Euro, British pound and Japanese yen.
We generally distribute our funding products through our own sales force and thirdparty distributors to a large, diverse creditor base in a variety of markets in the Americas, Europe and Asia.
We believe that our relationships with our creditors are critical to our liquidity.
Our creditors include banks, governments, securities lenders, corporations, pension funds, insurance companies, mutual funds and individuals.
We have imposed various internal guidelines to monitor creditor concentration across our funding programs.
Deposits.
Our deposits provide us with a diversified source of funding and reduce our reliance on wholesale funding.
A growing portion of our deposit base consists of consumer deposits.
Deposits are primarily used to finance lending activity, other inventory and a portion of our GCLA.
We raise deposits, including savings, demand and time deposits, through internal and third-party broker-dealers, and from consumers and institutional clients, and primarily through Goldman Sachs Bank USA (GS Bank USA) and Goldman Sachs International Bank (GSIB).
In September 2018, we launched Marcus: by Goldman Sachs in the U. K.  to accept deposits.
See Note 14 to the consolidated financial statements for further information about our deposits.
Secured Funding.
We fund a significant amount of inventory on a secured basis.
Secured funding includes collateralized financings in the consolidated statements of financial condition.
We may also pledge our inventory as collateral for securities borrowed under a securities lending agreement.
We also use our own inventory to cover transactions in which we or our clients have sold securities that have not yet been purchased.
Secured funding is less sensitive to changes in our credit quality than unsecured funding, due to our posting of collateral to our lenders.
Nonetheless, we continually analyze the refinancing risk of our secured funding activities, taking into account trade tenors, maturity profiles, counterparty concentrations, collateral eligibility and counterparty roll over probabilities.
We seek to mitigate our refinancing risk by executing term trades with staggered maturities, diversifying counterparties, raising excess secured funding, and pre-funding residual risk through our GCLA.
We seek to raise secured funding with a term appropriate for the liquidity of the assets that are being financed, and we seek longer maturities for secured funding collateralized by asset classes that may be harder to fund on a secured basis, especially during times of market stress.
Our secured funding, excluding funding collateralized by liquid government and agency obligations, is primarily executed for tenors of one month or greater and is primarily executed through term repurchase agreements and securities loaned contracts.
The weighted average maturity of our secured funding included in collateralized financings in the consolidated statements of financial condition, excluding funding that can only be collateralized by liquid government and agency obligations, exceeded 120 days as of December 2018.
Assets that may be harder to fund on a secured basis during times of market stress include certain financial instruments in the following categories: mortgage and other assetbacked loans and securities, non-investment-grade corporate debt securities, equity securities and emerging market securities.
Assets that are classified in level 3 of the fair value hierarchy are generally funded on an unsecured basis.
See Notes 5 and 6 to the consolidated financial statements for further information about the classification of financial instruments in the fair value hierarchy and “Unsecured Long-Term Borrowings” below for further information about the use of unsecured long-term borrowings as a source of funding.
We also raise financing through other types of collateralized financings, such as secured loans and notes.
GS Bank USA has access to funding from the Federal Home Loan Bank.
Our outstanding borrowings against the Federal Home Loan Bank were $528 million as of December 2018 and $3.40 billion as of December 2017.

['

$ in millions	As of December 2013
Common shareholders’ equity	$ 71,267
Goodwill	-3,705
Identifiable intangible assets	-671
Deferred tax liabilities	908
Goodwill and identifiable intangible assets, net of deferred tax liabilities	-3,468
Deductions for investments in nonconsolidated financial institutions1	-9,091
Otheradjustments2	-489
Basel III CET1	$ 58,219
Basel III Advanced RWAs	$594,662
Basel III Advanced CET1 Ratio	9.8%

', '

Year Ended December
$ in millions	2016	2015	2014
Unsecured short-term borrowings	$-1,028	$ 346	$-1,180
Unsecured long-term borrowings	584	771	-592
Other liabilities and accrued expenses	-55	-684	-441
Other	-630	-217	-366
Total	$-1,129	$ 216	$-2,579

', '

As of December
$ in millions	2016	2015
Performing loans and long-term receivables
Aggregate contractual principal in excess of fair value	$ 478	$1,330
Loans on nonaccrual status and/or more than 90 days past due
Aggregate contractual principal in excess of fair value	8,101	9,600
Aggregate fair value of loans on nonaccrual status and/or more than90 days past due	2,138	2,391

', '

As of December
$ in millions	2018	2017
Deposits	$158,257	25%	$138,604	23%
Collateralized financings:
Repurchase agreements	78,723	13%	84,718	14%
Securities loaned	11,808	2%	14,793	2%
Other secured financings	21,433	3%	24,788	4%
Total collateralized financings	111,964	18%	124,299	20%
Unsecured short-term borrowings	40,502	7%	46,922	8%
Unsecured long-term borrowings	224,149	36%	217,687	36%
Total shareholders’ equity	90,185	14%	82,243	13%
Total funding sources	$625,057	100%	$609,755	100%

']

Question: what is the percentage change in common shareholders 2019 equity due to the adjustments presented in the table to reach basel iii cet1?
Answer: -0.18309