aveni-ai/aveni-bench-convfinqa huggingface dataset:
entergy corporation and subsidiaries management's financial discussion and analysis the decrease in interest income in 2002 was primarily due to : fffd interest recognized in 2001 on grand gulf 1's decommissioning trust funds resulting from the final order addressing system energy's rate proceeding ; fffd interest recognized in 2001 at entergy mississippi and entergy new orleans on the deferred system energy costs that were not being recovered through rates ; and fffd lower interest earned on declining deferred fuel balances . the decrease in interest charges in 2002 is primarily due to : fffd a decrease of $ 31.9 million in interest on long-term debt primarily due to the retirement of long-term debt in late 2001 and early 2002 ; and fffd a decrease of $ 76.0 million in other interest expense primarily due to interest recorded on system energy's reserve for rate refund in 2001 . the refund was made in december 2001 . 2001 compared to 2000 results for the year ended december 31 , 2001 for u.s . utility were also affected by an increase in interest charges of $ 61.5 million primarily due to : fffd the final ferc order addressing the 1995 system energy rate filing ; fffd debt issued at entergy arkansas in july 2001 , at entergy gulf states in june 2000 and august 2001 , at entergy mississippi in january 2001 , and at entergy new orleans in july 2000 and february 2001 ; and fffd borrowings under credit facilities during 2001 , primarily at entergy arkansas . non-utility nuclear the increase in earnings in 2002 for non-utility nuclear from $ 128 million to $ 201 million was primarily due to the operation of indian point 2 and vermont yankee , which were purchased in september 2001 and july 2002 , respectively . the increase in earnings in 2001 for non-utility nuclear from $ 49 million to $ 128 million was primarily due to the operation of fitzpatrick and indian point 3 for a full year , as each was purchased in november 2000 , and the operation of indian point 2 , which was purchased in september 2001 . following are key performance measures for non-utility nuclear: .

1	2002	2001	2000
2	net mw in operation at december 31	3955	3445	2475
3	generation in gwh for the year	29953	22614	7171
4	capacity factor for the year	93% ( 93 % )	93% ( 93 % )	94% ( 94 % )

2002 compared to 2001 the following fluctuations in the results of operations for non-utility nuclear in 2002 were primarily caused by the acquisitions of indian point 2 and vermont yankee ( except as otherwise noted ) : fffd operating revenues increased $ 411.0 million to $ 1.2 billion ; fffd other operation and maintenance expenses increased $ 201.8 million to $ 596.3 million ; fffd depreciation and amortization expenses increased $ 25.1 million to $ 42.8 million ; fffd fuel expenses increased $ 29.4 million to $ 105.2 million ; fffd nuclear refueling outage expenses increased $ 23.9 million to $ 46.8 million , which was due primarily to a .

Question: what is the value of earning for non-utility nuclear in 2002?
Answer: 201
entergy corporation and subsidiaries management's financial discussion and analysis the decrease in interest income in 2002 was primarily due to : fffd interest recognized in 2001 on grand gulf 1's decommissioning trust funds resulting from the final order addressing system energy's rate proceeding ; fffd interest recognized in 2001 at entergy mississippi and entergy new orleans on the deferred system energy costs that were not being recovered through rates ; and fffd lower interest earned on declining deferred fuel balances . the decrease in interest charges in 2002 is primarily due to : fffd a decrease of $ 31.9 million in interest on long-term debt primarily due to the retirement of long-term debt in late 2001 and early 2002 ; and fffd a decrease of $ 76.0 million in other interest expense primarily due to interest recorded on system energy's reserve for rate refund in 2001 . the refund was made in december 2001 . 2001 compared to 2000 results for the year ended december 31 , 2001 for u.s . utility were also affected by an increase in interest charges of $ 61.5 million primarily due to : fffd the final ferc order addressing the 1995 system energy rate filing ; fffd debt issued at entergy arkansas in july 2001 , at entergy gulf states in june 2000 and august 2001 , at entergy mississippi in january 2001 , and at entergy new orleans in july 2000 and february 2001 ; and fffd borrowings under credit facilities during 2001 , primarily at entergy arkansas . non-utility nuclear the increase in earnings in 2002 for non-utility nuclear from $ 128 million to $ 201 million was primarily due to the operation of indian point 2 and vermont yankee , which were purchased in september 2001 and july 2002 , respectively . the increase in earnings in 2001 for non-utility nuclear from $ 49 million to $ 128 million was primarily due to the operation of fitzpatrick and indian point 3 for a full year , as each was purchased in november 2000 , and the operation of indian point 2 , which was purchased in september 2001 . following are key performance measures for non-utility nuclear: .

1	2002	2001	2000
2	net mw in operation at december 31	3955	3445	2475
3	generation in gwh for the year	29953	22614	7171
4	capacity factor for the year	93% ( 93 % )	93% ( 93 % )	94% ( 94 % )

2002 compared to 2001 the following fluctuations in the results of operations for non-utility nuclear in 2002 were primarily caused by the acquisitions of indian point 2 and vermont yankee ( except as otherwise noted ) : fffd operating revenues increased $ 411.0 million to $ 1.2 billion ; fffd other operation and maintenance expenses increased $ 201.8 million to $ 596.3 million ; fffd depreciation and amortization expenses increased $ 25.1 million to $ 42.8 million ; fffd fuel expenses increased $ 29.4 million to $ 105.2 million ; fffd nuclear refueling outage expenses increased $ 23.9 million to $ 46.8 million , which was due primarily to a .

Previous questions in this conversation: what is the value of earning for non-utility nuclear in 2002?
Previous answers: 201.0
Question: what is the 2001 value?
Answer: 128
entergy corporation and subsidiaries management's financial discussion and analysis the decrease in interest income in 2002 was primarily due to : fffd interest recognized in 2001 on grand gulf 1's decommissioning trust funds resulting from the final order addressing system energy's rate proceeding ; fffd interest recognized in 2001 at entergy mississippi and entergy new orleans on the deferred system energy costs that were not being recovered through rates ; and fffd lower interest earned on declining deferred fuel balances . the decrease in interest charges in 2002 is primarily due to : fffd a decrease of $ 31.9 million in interest on long-term debt primarily due to the retirement of long-term debt in late 2001 and early 2002 ; and fffd a decrease of $ 76.0 million in other interest expense primarily due to interest recorded on system energy's reserve for rate refund in 2001 . the refund was made in december 2001 . 2001 compared to 2000 results for the year ended december 31 , 2001 for u.s . utility were also affected by an increase in interest charges of $ 61.5 million primarily due to : fffd the final ferc order addressing the 1995 system energy rate filing ; fffd debt issued at entergy arkansas in july 2001 , at entergy gulf states in june 2000 and august 2001 , at entergy mississippi in january 2001 , and at entergy new orleans in july 2000 and february 2001 ; and fffd borrowings under credit facilities during 2001 , primarily at entergy arkansas . non-utility nuclear the increase in earnings in 2002 for non-utility nuclear from $ 128 million to $ 201 million was primarily due to the operation of indian point 2 and vermont yankee , which were purchased in september 2001 and july 2002 , respectively . the increase in earnings in 2001 for non-utility nuclear from $ 49 million to $ 128 million was primarily due to the operation of fitzpatrick and indian point 3 for a full year , as each was purchased in november 2000 , and the operation of indian point 2 , which was purchased in september 2001 . following are key performance measures for non-utility nuclear: .

1	2002	2001	2000
2	net mw in operation at december 31	3955	3445	2475
3	generation in gwh for the year	29953	22614	7171
4	capacity factor for the year	93% ( 93 % )	93% ( 93 % )	94% ( 94 % )

2002 compared to 2001 the following fluctuations in the results of operations for non-utility nuclear in 2002 were primarily caused by the acquisitions of indian point 2 and vermont yankee ( except as otherwise noted ) : fffd operating revenues increased $ 411.0 million to $ 1.2 billion ; fffd other operation and maintenance expenses increased $ 201.8 million to $ 596.3 million ; fffd depreciation and amortization expenses increased $ 25.1 million to $ 42.8 million ; fffd fuel expenses increased $ 29.4 million to $ 105.2 million ; fffd nuclear refueling outage expenses increased $ 23.9 million to $ 46.8 million , which was due primarily to a .

Previous questions in this conversation: what is the value of earning for non-utility nuclear in 2002? what is the 2001 value?
Previous answers: 201.0 128.0
Question: what is the net change?
Answer: 73
entergy corporation and subsidiaries management's financial discussion and analysis the decrease in interest income in 2002 was primarily due to : fffd interest recognized in 2001 on grand gulf 1's decommissioning trust funds resulting from the final order addressing system energy's rate proceeding ; fffd interest recognized in 2001 at entergy mississippi and entergy new orleans on the deferred system energy costs that were not being recovered through rates ; and fffd lower interest earned on declining deferred fuel balances . the decrease in interest charges in 2002 is primarily due to : fffd a decrease of $ 31.9 million in interest on long-term debt primarily due to the retirement of long-term debt in late 2001 and early 2002 ; and fffd a decrease of $ 76.0 million in other interest expense primarily due to interest recorded on system energy's reserve for rate refund in 2001 . the refund was made in december 2001 . 2001 compared to 2000 results for the year ended december 31 , 2001 for u.s . utility were also affected by an increase in interest charges of $ 61.5 million primarily due to : fffd the final ferc order addressing the 1995 system energy rate filing ; fffd debt issued at entergy arkansas in july 2001 , at entergy gulf states in june 2000 and august 2001 , at entergy mississippi in january 2001 , and at entergy new orleans in july 2000 and february 2001 ; and fffd borrowings under credit facilities during 2001 , primarily at entergy arkansas . non-utility nuclear the increase in earnings in 2002 for non-utility nuclear from $ 128 million to $ 201 million was primarily due to the operation of indian point 2 and vermont yankee , which were purchased in september 2001 and july 2002 , respectively . the increase in earnings in 2001 for non-utility nuclear from $ 49 million to $ 128 million was primarily due to the operation of fitzpatrick and indian point 3 for a full year , as each was purchased in november 2000 , and the operation of indian point 2 , which was purchased in september 2001 . following are key performance measures for non-utility nuclear: .

1	2002	2001	2000
2	net mw in operation at december 31	3955	3445	2475
3	generation in gwh for the year	29953	22614	7171
4	capacity factor for the year	93% ( 93 % )	93% ( 93 % )	94% ( 94 % )

2002 compared to 2001 the following fluctuations in the results of operations for non-utility nuclear in 2002 were primarily caused by the acquisitions of indian point 2 and vermont yankee ( except as otherwise noted ) : fffd operating revenues increased $ 411.0 million to $ 1.2 billion ; fffd other operation and maintenance expenses increased $ 201.8 million to $ 596.3 million ; fffd depreciation and amortization expenses increased $ 25.1 million to $ 42.8 million ; fffd fuel expenses increased $ 29.4 million to $ 105.2 million ; fffd nuclear refueling outage expenses increased $ 23.9 million to $ 46.8 million , which was due primarily to a .

Previous questions in this conversation: what is the value of earning for non-utility nuclear in 2002? what is the 2001 value? what is the net change?
Previous answers: 201.0 128.0 73.0
Question: what is the 2001 value?
Answer: 128
stockholder return performance graphs the following graph compares the cumulative 5-year total stockholder return on our common stock relative to the cumulative total return of the nasdaq composite index and the s&p 400 information technology index . the graph assumes that the value of the investment in our common stock and in each index ( including reinvestment of dividends ) was $ 100 on december 29 , 2007 and tracks it through december 29 , 2012 . comparison of 5 year cumulative total return* among cadence design systems , inc. , the nasdaq composite index , and s&p 400 information technology cadence design systems , inc . nasdaq composite s&p 400 information technology 12/29/1212/31/111/1/111/2/101/3/0912/29/07 *$ 100 invested on 12/29/07 in stock or 12/31/07 in index , including reinvestment of dividends . indexes calculated on month-end basis . copyright a9 2013 s&p , a division of the mcgraw-hill companies inc . all rights reserved. .

1	12/29/2007	1/3/2009	1/2/2010	1/1/2011	12/31/2011	12/29/2012
2	cadence design systems inc .	100.00	22.55	35.17	48.50	61.07	78.92
3	nasdaq composite	100.00	59.03	82.25	97.32	98.63	110.78
4	s&p 400 information technology	100.00	54.60	82.76	108.11	95.48	109.88

the stock price performance included in this graph is not necessarily indicative of future stock price performance .

Question: what is the net change in the price of the nasdaq composite from 2008 to 2012?
Answer: 10.78
stockholder return performance graphs the following graph compares the cumulative 5-year total stockholder return on our common stock relative to the cumulative total return of the nasdaq composite index and the s&p 400 information technology index . the graph assumes that the value of the investment in our common stock and in each index ( including reinvestment of dividends ) was $ 100 on december 29 , 2007 and tracks it through december 29 , 2012 . comparison of 5 year cumulative total return* among cadence design systems , inc. , the nasdaq composite index , and s&p 400 information technology cadence design systems , inc . nasdaq composite s&p 400 information technology 12/29/1212/31/111/1/111/2/101/3/0912/29/07 *$ 100 invested on 12/29/07 in stock or 12/31/07 in index , including reinvestment of dividends . indexes calculated on month-end basis . copyright a9 2013 s&p , a division of the mcgraw-hill companies inc . all rights reserved. .

1	12/29/2007	1/3/2009	1/2/2010	1/1/2011	12/31/2011	12/29/2012
2	cadence design systems inc .	100.00	22.55	35.17	48.50	61.07	78.92
3	nasdaq composite	100.00	59.03	82.25	97.32	98.63	110.78
4	s&p 400 information technology	100.00	54.60	82.76	108.11	95.48	109.88

the stock price performance included in this graph is not necessarily indicative of future stock price performance .

Previous questions in this conversation: what is the net change in the price of the nasdaq composite from 2008 to 2012?
Previous answers: 10.78
Question: what is that over 100?
Answer: 0.1078
at december 31 , 2015 and 2014 , we had a modest working capital surplus . this reflects a strong cash position that provides enhanced liquidity in an uncertain economic environment . in addition , we believe we have adequate access to capital markets to meet any foreseeable cash requirements , and we have sufficient financial capacity to satisfy our current liabilities . cash flows .

1	millions	2015	2014	2013
2	cash provided by operating activities	$ 7344	$ 7385	$ 6823
3	cash used in investing activities	-4476 ( 4476 )	-4249 ( 4249 )	-3405 ( 3405 )
4	cash used in financing activities	-3063 ( 3063 )	-2982 ( 2982 )	-3049 ( 3049 )
5	net change in cash and cash equivalents	$ -195 ( 195 )	$ 154	$ 369

operating activities cash provided by operating activities decreased in 2015 compared to 2014 due to lower net income and changes in working capital , partially offset by the timing of tax payments . federal tax law provided for 100% ( 100 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2011 and 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2012-2013 . as a result , the company deferred a substantial portion of its 2011-2013 income tax expense , contributing to the positive operating cash flow in those years . congress extended 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for 2014 , but this extension occurred in december , and the related benefit was realized in 2015 , rather than 2014 . similarly , in december of 2015 , congress extended bonus depreciation through 2019 , which delayed the benefit of 2015 bonus depreciation into 2016 . bonus depreciation will be at a rate of 50% ( 50 % ) for 2015 , 2016 and 2017 , 40% ( 40 % ) for 2018 and 30% ( 30 % ) for 2019 . higher net income in 2014 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2013 , despite higher income tax payments . 2014 income tax payments were higher than 2013 primarily due to higher income , but also because we paid taxes previously deferred by bonus depreciation . investing activities higher capital investments in locomotives and freight cars , including $ 327 million in early lease buyouts , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions , drove the increase in cash used in investing activities in 2015 compared to 2014 . higher capital investments , including the early buyout of the long-term operating lease of our headquarters building for approximately $ 261 million , drove the increase in cash used in investing activities in 2014 compared to 2013 . significant investments also were made for new locomotives , freight cars and containers , and capacity and commercial facility projects . capital investments in 2014 also included $ 99 million for the early buyout of locomotives and freight cars under long-term operating leases , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions. .

Question: what was the cash provided by operating activities for 2015?
Answer: 7344
at december 31 , 2015 and 2014 , we had a modest working capital surplus . this reflects a strong cash position that provides enhanced liquidity in an uncertain economic environment . in addition , we believe we have adequate access to capital markets to meet any foreseeable cash requirements , and we have sufficient financial capacity to satisfy our current liabilities . cash flows .

1	millions	2015	2014	2013
2	cash provided by operating activities	$ 7344	$ 7385	$ 6823
3	cash used in investing activities	-4476 ( 4476 )	-4249 ( 4249 )	-3405 ( 3405 )
4	cash used in financing activities	-3063 ( 3063 )	-2982 ( 2982 )	-3049 ( 3049 )
5	net change in cash and cash equivalents	$ -195 ( 195 )	$ 154	$ 369

operating activities cash provided by operating activities decreased in 2015 compared to 2014 due to lower net income and changes in working capital , partially offset by the timing of tax payments . federal tax law provided for 100% ( 100 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2011 and 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for qualified investments made during 2012-2013 . as a result , the company deferred a substantial portion of its 2011-2013 income tax expense , contributing to the positive operating cash flow in those years . congress extended 50% ( 50 % ) bonus depreciation for 2014 , but this extension occurred in december , and the related benefit was realized in 2015 , rather than 2014 . similarly , in december of 2015 , congress extended bonus depreciation through 2019 , which delayed the benefit of 2015 bonus depreciation into 2016 . bonus depreciation will be at a rate of 50% ( 50 % ) for 2015 , 2016 and 2017 , 40% ( 40 % ) for 2018 and 30% ( 30 % ) for 2019 . higher net income in 2014 increased cash provided by operating activities compared to 2013 , despite higher income tax payments . 2014 income tax payments were higher than 2013 primarily due to higher income , but also because we paid taxes previously deferred by bonus depreciation . investing activities higher capital investments in locomotives and freight cars , including $ 327 million in early lease buyouts , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions , drove the increase in cash used in investing activities in 2015 compared to 2014 . higher capital investments , including the early buyout of the long-term operating lease of our headquarters building for approximately $ 261 million , drove the increase in cash used in investing activities in 2014 compared to 2013 . significant investments also were made for new locomotives , freight cars and containers , and capacity and commercial facility projects . capital investments in 2014 also included $ 99 million for the early buyout of locomotives and freight cars under long-term operating leases , which we exercised due to favorable economic terms and market conditions. .

Previous questions in this conversation: what was the cash provided by operating activities for 2015?
Previous answers: 7344.0
Question: and in 2014?
Answer: 7385