Nonrecurring fair value changes The following table presents the total change in value of financial instruments for which a fair value adjustment has been included in the Consolidated statement of income for the year ended December 31, 2007, related to financial instruments held at December 31, 2007.
## Table 0 ##
In the above table, Loans principally include changes in fair value for loans carried on the balance sheet at the lower of cost or fair value; and Accounts payable, accrued expense and other liabilities principally includes the change in fair value for unfunded lending-related commitments within the leveraged lending portfolio.
Level 3 assets analysis Level 3 assets (including assets measured at the lower of cost or fair value) were 5% of total Firm assets at December 31, 2007.
These assets increased during 2007 principally during the second half of the year, when liquidity in mortgages and other credit products fell dramatically.
The increase was primarily due to an increase in leveraged loan balances within level 3 as the ability of the Firm to syndicate this risk to third parties became limited by the credit environment.
In addition, there were transfers from level 2 to level 3 during 2007.
These transfers were principally for instruments within the mortgage market where inputs which are significant to their valuation became unobservable during the year.
Subprime and Alt-A whole loans, subprime home equity securities, commercial mortgage-backed mezzanine loans and credit default swaps referenced to asset-backed securities constituted the majority of the affected instruments, reflecting a significant decline in liquidity in these instruments in the third and fourth quarters of 2007, as new issue activity was nonexistent and independent pricing information was no longer available for these assets.
Transition In connection with the initial adoption of SFAS 157, the Firm recorded the following on January 1, 2007: ?
A cumulative effect increase to Retained earnings of $287 million, primarily related to the release of profit previously deferred in accordance with EITF 02-3; ?
An increase to pretax income of $166 million ($103 million after-tax) related to the incorporation of the Firm’s creditworthiness in the valuation of liabilities recorded at fair value; and ?
An increase to pretax income of $464 million ($288 million after-tax) related to valuations of nonpublic private equity investments.
Prior to the adoption of SFAS 157, the Firm applied the provisions of EITF 02-3 to its derivative portfolio.
EITF 02-3 precluded the recognition of initial trading profit in the absence of: (a) quoted market prices, (b) observable prices of other current market transactions or (c) other observable data supporting a valuation technique.
In accordance with EITF 02-3, the Firm recognized the deferred profit in Principal transactions revenue on a systematic basis (typically straightline amortization over the life of the instruments) and when observable market data became available.
Prior to the adoption of SFAS 157 the Firm did not incorporate an adjustment into the valuation of liabilities carried at fair value on the Consolidated balance sheet.
Commencing January 1, 2007, in accordance with the requirements of SFAS 157, an adjustment was made to the valuation of liabilities measured at fair value to reflect the credit quality of the Firm.
Prior to the adoption of SFAS 157, privately held investments were initially valued based upon cost.
The carrying values of privately held investments were adjusted from cost to reflect both positive and negative changes evidenced by financing events with third-party capital providers.
The investments were also subject to ongoing impairment reviews by private equity senior investment professionals.
The increase in pretax income related to nonpublic Private equity investments in connection with the adoption of SFAS 157 was due to there being sufficient market evidence to support an increase in fair values using the SFAS 157 methodology, although there had not been an actual third-party market transaction related to such investments.
Financial disclosures required by SFAS 107 SFAS 107 requires disclosure of the estimated fair value of certain financial instruments and the methods and significant assumptions used to estimate their fair values.
Many but not all of the financial instruments held by the Firm are recorded at fair value on the Consolidated balance sheets.
Financial instruments within the scope of SFAS 107 that are not carried at fair value on the Consolidated balance sheets are discussed below.
Additionally, certain financial instruments and all nonfinancial instruments are excluded from the scope of SFAS 107.
Accordingly, the fair value disclosures required by SFAS 107 provide only a partial estimate of the fair value of JPMorgan Chase.
For example, the Firm has developed long-term relationships with its customers through its deposit base and credit card accounts, commonly referred to as core deposit intangibles and credit card relationships.
In the opinion of management, these items, in the aggregate, add significant value to JPMorgan Chase, but their fair value is not disclosed in this Note.
Financial instruments for which fair value approximates carrying value Certain financial instruments that are not carried at fair value on the Consolidated balance sheets are carried at amounts that approximate fair value due to their short-term nature and generally negligible credit risk.
These instruments include cash and due from banks, deposits with banks, federal funds sold, securities purchased under resale agreements with short-dated maturities, securities borrowed, short-term receivables and accrued interest receivable, commercial paper, federal funds purchased, securities sold under repurchase agreements with short-dated maturities, other borrowed funds, accounts payable and accrued liabilities.
In addition, SFAS 107 requires that the fair value for deposit liabilities with no stated maturity (i. e. , demand, savings and certain money market deposits) be equal to their carrying value.
SFAS 107 does not allow for the recognition of the inherent funding value of these instruments.
follows and the judgments made in evaluating the risk factors related to its loss estimates, management believes that its current estimate of the allowance for credit losses is appropriate.
Fair value of financial instruments, MSRs and commodities inventory JPMorgan Chase carries a portion of its assets and liabilities at fair value.
The majority of such assets and liabilities are measured at fair value on a recurring basis.
Certain assets and liabilities are measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis, including certain mortgage, home equity and other loans, where the carrying value is based on the fair value of the underlying collateral.
Assets measured at fair value The following table includes the Firm’s assets measured at fair value and the portion of such assets that are classified within level 3 of the valuation hierarchy.
For further information, see Note 3.
## Table 1 ##
(a) For purposes of table above, the derivative receivables total reflects the impact of netting adjustments; however, the $5.8 billion of derivative receivables classified as level 3 does not reflect the netting adjustment as such netting is not relevant to a presentation based on the transparency of inputs to the valuation of an asset.
The level 3 balances would be reduced if netting were applied, including the netting benefit associated with cash collateral.
(b) Private equity instruments represent investments within Corporate.
Valuation Details of the Firm’s processes for determining fair value are set out in Note 3.
Estimating fair value requires the application of judgment.
The type and level of judgment required is largely dependent on the amount of observable market information available to the Firm.
For instruments valued using internally developed models that use significant unobservable inputs and are therefore classified within level 3 of the valuation hierarchy, judgments used to estimate fair value are more significant than those required when estimating the fair value of instruments classified within levels 1 and 2.
In arriving at an estimate of fair value for an instrument within level 3, management must first determine the appropriate model to use.
Second, the lack of observability of certain significant inputs requires management to assess all relevant empirical data in deriving valuation inputs including, for example, transaction details, yield curves, interest rates, prepayment rates, default rates, volatilities, correlations, equity or debt prices, valuations of comparable instruments, foreign exchange rates and credit curves.
For further discussion of the valuation of level 3 instruments, including unobservable inputs used, see Note 3.
For instruments classified in levels 2 and 3, management judgment must be applied to assess the appropriate level of valuation adjustments to reflect counterparty credit quality, the Firm’s creditworthiness, market funding rates, liquidity considerations, unobservable parameters, and for portfolios that meet specified criteria, the size of the net open risk position.
The judgments made are typically affected by the type of product and its specific contractual terms, and the level of liquidity for the product or within the market as a whole.
For further discussion of valuation adjustments applied by the Firm see Note 3.
Imprecision in estimating unobservable market inputs or other factors can affect the amount of gain or loss recorded for a particular position.
Furthermore, while the Firm believes its valuation methods are appropriate and consistent with those of other market participants, the methods and assumptions used reflect management judgment and may vary across the Firm’s businesses and portfolios.
The Firm uses various methodologies and assumptions in the determination of fair value.
The use of methodologies or assumptions different than those used by the Firm could result in a different estimate of fair value at the reporting date.
For a detailed discussion of the Firm’s valuation process and hierarchy, and its determination of fair value for individual financial instruments, see Note 3.
Goodwill impairment Under U. S.  GAAP, goodwill must be allocated to reporting units and tested for impairment at least annually.
The Firm’s process and methodology used to conduct goodwill impairment testing is described in Note 17.
Management applies significant judgment when estimating the fair value of its reporting units.
Estimates of fair value are dependent upon estimates of (a) the future earnings potential of the Firm’s reporting units, including the estimated effects of regulatory and legislative changes, (b) long-term growth rates and (c) the estimated market cost of equity.
Imprecision in estimating these factors can affect the estimated fair value of the reporting units.
Based upon the updated valuations for all of its reporting units, the Firm concluded that the goodwill allocated to its reporting units was not impaired at December 31, 2016.
The fair values of these reporting units exceeded their carrying values by approximately 10% - 130% for all
Derivatives netting The following tables present, as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, gross and net derivative receivables and payables by contract and settlement type.
Derivative receivables and payables, as well as the related cash collateral from the same counterparty, have been netted on the Consolidated balance sheets where the Firm has obtained an appropriate legal opinion with respect to the master netting agreement.
Where such a legal opinion has not been either sought or obtained, amounts are not eligible for netting on the Consolidated balance sheets, and those derivative receivables and payables are shown separately in the tables below.
In addition to the cash collateral received and transferred that is presented on a net basis with derivative receivables and payables, the Firm receives and transfers additional collateral (financial instruments and cash).
These amounts mitigate counterparty credit risk associated with the Firm’s derivative instruments, but are not eligible for net presentation: ?
collateral that consists of non-cash financial instruments (generally U. S.  government and agency securities and other G7 government bonds) and cash collateral held at third party custodians, which are shown separately as “Collateral not nettable on the Consolidated balance sheets” in the tables below, up to the fair value exposure amount.  ?
the amount of collateral held or transferred that exceeds the fair value exposure at the individual counterparty level, as of the date presented, which is excluded from the tables below; and ?
collateral held or transferred that relates to derivative receivables or payables where an appropriate legal opinion has not been either sought or obtained with respect to the master netting agreement, which is excluded from the tables below.
## Table 2 ##

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td>Year ended December 31, 2007(in millions)</td><td>2007</td></tr><tr><td>Loans</td><td>$-720</td></tr><tr><td>Other assets</td><td>-161</td></tr><tr><td>Accounts payable, accrued expense and other liabilities</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Total nonrecurring fair value gains (losses)</td><td>$-879</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>December 31, 2016(in billions, except ratio data)</td><td>Total assets at fair value</td><td>Total level 3 assets</td></tr><tr><td>Trading debt and equity instruments</td><td>$308.0</td><td>$7.9</td></tr><tr><td>Derivative receivables<sup>(a)</sup></td><td>64.1</td><td>5.8</td></tr><tr><td>Trading assets</td><td>372.1</td><td>13.7</td></tr><tr><td>AFS securities</td><td>238.9</td><td>0.7</td></tr><tr><td>Loans</td><td>2.2</td><td>0.6</td></tr><tr><td>MSRs</td><td>6.1</td><td>6.1</td></tr><tr><td>Private equity investments<sup>(b)</sup></td><td>1.7</td><td>1.6</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>26.4</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets measuredat fair value on a recurring basis</td><td>647.4</td><td>23.2</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis</td><td>1.6</td><td>0.8</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets measuredat fair value</td><td>$649.0</td><td>$24.0</td></tr><tr><td>Total Firm assets</td><td>$2,491.0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Level 3 assets as a percentage of total Firm assets<sup>(a)</sup></td><td></td><td>1.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Level 3 assets as a percentage of total Firm assets at fair value<sup>(a)</sup></td><td></td><td>3.7%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">2016</td><td colspan="4">2015</td></tr><tr><td>December 31, (in millions)</td><td>Gross derivative receivables</td><td colspan="2">Amounts netted on the Consolidated balance sheets</td><td>Net derivative receivables</td><td>Gross derivative receivables</td><td colspan="2">Amounts netted on the Consolidated balance sheets</td><td>Net derivative receivables</td></tr><tr><td>U.S. GAAP nettable derivative receivables</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Interest rate contracts:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>OTC</td><td>$365,227</td><td>$-342,173</td><td></td><td>$23,054</td><td>$417,386</td><td>$-396,506</td><td></td><td>$20,880</td></tr><tr><td>OTC–cleared</td><td>235,399</td><td>-235,261</td><td></td><td>138</td><td>246,750</td><td>-246,742</td><td></td><td>8</td></tr><tr><td>Exchange-traded<sup>(a)</sup></td><td>241</td><td>-227</td><td></td><td>14</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td></td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total interest rate contracts</td><td>600,867</td><td>-577,661</td><td></td><td>23,206</td><td>664,136</td><td>-643,248</td><td></td><td>20,888</td></tr><tr><td>Credit contracts:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>OTC</td><td>23,130</td><td>-22,612</td><td></td><td>518</td><td>44,082</td><td>-43,182</td><td></td><td>900</td></tr><tr><td>OTC–cleared</td><td>5,746</td><td>-5,739</td><td></td><td>7</td><td>6,866</td><td>-6,863</td><td></td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Total credit contracts</td><td>28,876</td><td>-28,351</td><td></td><td>525</td><td>50,948</td><td>-50,045</td><td></td><td>903</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign exchange contracts:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>OTC</td><td>226,271</td><td>-208,962</td><td></td><td>17,309</td><td>175,060</td><td>-162,377</td><td></td><td>12,683</td></tr><tr><td>OTC–cleared</td><td>1,238</td><td>-1,165</td><td></td><td>73</td><td>323</td><td>-321</td><td></td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Exchange-traded<sup>(a)</sup></td><td>104</td><td>-27</td><td></td><td>77</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td></td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total foreign exchange contracts</td><td>227,613</td><td>-210,154</td><td></td><td>17,459</td><td>175,383</td><td>-162,698</td><td></td><td>12,685</td></tr><tr><td>Equity contracts:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>OTC</td><td>20,868</td><td>-20,570</td><td></td><td>298</td><td>20,690</td><td>-20,439</td><td></td><td>251</td></tr><tr><td>OTC–cleared</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td></td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td></td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Exchange-traded<sup>(a)</sup></td><td>11,439</td><td>-9,431</td><td></td><td>2,008</td><td>12,285</td><td>-9,891</td><td></td><td>2,394</td></tr><tr><td>Total equity contracts</td><td>32,307</td><td>-30,001</td><td></td><td>2,306</td><td>32,975</td><td>-30,330</td><td></td><td>2,645</td></tr><tr><td>Commodity contracts:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>OTC</td><td>11,571</td><td>-5,605</td><td></td><td>5,966</td><td>15,001</td><td>-6,772</td><td></td><td>8,229</td></tr><tr><td>OTC–cleared</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td></td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td></td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Exchange-traded<sup>(a)</sup></td><td>6,794</td><td>-6,766</td><td></td><td>28</td><td>9,199</td><td>-9,108</td><td></td><td>91</td></tr><tr><td>Total commodity contracts</td><td>18,365</td><td>-12,371</td><td></td><td>5,994</td><td>24,200</td><td>-15,880</td><td></td><td>8,320</td></tr><tr><td>Derivative receivables with appropriate legal opinions</td><td>908,028</td><td>-858,538</td><td><sup>(b)</sup></td><td>49,490</td><td>947,642</td><td>-902,201</td><td><sup>(b)</sup></td><td>45,441</td></tr><tr><td>Derivative receivables where an appropriate legal opinion has not been either sought or obtained</td><td>14,588</td><td></td><td></td><td>14,588</td><td>14,236</td><td></td><td></td><td>14,236</td></tr><tr><td>Total derivative receivables recognized on the Consolidated balance sheets</td><td>$922,616</td><td></td><td></td><td>$64,078</td><td>$961,878</td><td></td><td></td><td>$59,677</td></tr><tr><td>Collateral not nettable on the Consolidated balance sheets<sup>(c)(d)</sup></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>-18,638</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>-13,543</td></tr><tr><td>Net amounts</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>$45,440</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>$46,134</td></tr></table>

Question: What is the sum of Gross derivative receivables in the range of 0 and 250 in 2016? (in million)
Answer: 345
Reasoning program: add(241,104)