The Company’s investment sector allocations as a percentage of total fixed maturities have significantly changed since December 31, 2007 primarily due to efforts to reallocate the portfolio to higher quality, risk averse assets, such as U. S.  government/government agencies, and recession resistant sectors, such as consumer non-cyclical, while reducing its exposure to CMBS, financial services and consumer cyclical sectors.
The available-for-sale net unrealized loss position increased $12.5 billion since December 31, 2007 primarily as a result of credit spread widening, partially offset by declining interest rates and impairments.
Credit spreads widened primarily due to continued deterioration in the U. S.  housing market, tightened lending conditions and the market’s flight to quality securities, as well as, a U. S.  recession and a declining global economy.
Despite steps taken by the government to stabilize the financial system, liquidity and confidence in the markets have not yet been restored.
The sectors most significantly impacted include financial services, residential and commercial mortgage backed investments, and consumer loan backed investments.
The following sections illustrate the Company’s holdings and provide commentary on these sectors.
Financial Services Financial companies remain under significant stress driven initially by the housing market collapse which led to massive asset write-downs, an inability to source capital, funding pressure and a loss of confidence in the financial system.
Numerous government initiatives were put forth over the course of 2008 to address the seizure in the financial and capital markets, including the injection of capital into financial institutions through the Treasury’s Capital Purchase Program, and the establishment of the FDIC Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (“TLGP”) whereby the FDIC guarantees newly issued unsecured debt for participating institutions.
While the government’s efforts have provided some stability, financial institutions remain vulnerable to ongoing asset write-downs, increasing credit losses associated with a deteriorating economy, weak earnings prospects, and potentially the need for additional capital if losses further weaken current capital positions.
The Company has exposure to the financial services sector predominantly through banking, insurance and finance firms.
A comparison of fair value to amortized cost is not indicative of the pricing of individual securities as rating downgrades and impairments have occurred.
The following table represents the Company’s exposure to the financial services sector included in the corporate and equity securities, available-for-sale lines in the Consolidated Available-for-Sale Securities by Type table above.
Of the Company’s $7.9 billion on a fair value basis, $3.4 billion is senior debt, $1.9 billion is subordinate and Tier 2 holdings and $2.6 billion is Tier 1 and preferred exposure.
The Company’s exposure to European financial institutions comprises $702 of senior debt, $816 of subordinate and Tier 2 holdings and $875 of Tier 1 and preferred holdings.
Financial Services by Credit Quality
## Table 0 ##
Table of Contents Statutory Surplus The table below sets forth statutory surplus for the Company’s insurance companies as of December 31, 2012 and 2011:
## Table 1 ##
Statutory capital and surplus for the U. S.  life insurance subsidiaries, including domestic captive insurance subsidiaries, decreased by $978, primarily due to variable annuity surplus impacts of approximately $425, a $200 increase in reserves on a change in valuation basis, $200 transfer of the Mutual Funds business from the U. S.  life insurance companies to the life holding company, and an increase in the asset valuation reserve of $115.
As a result of the January 2013 statutory gain from the sale of the Retirement Plans and Individual Life businesses, the Company's pro forma January 2, 2013 U. S.  life statutory surplus was estimated to be $8.1 billion, before approximately $1.5 billion in extraordinary dividends and return of capital to HFSG Holding Company.
Statutory capital and surplus for the property and casualty insurance subsidiaries increased by $233, primarily due to statutory net income, after tax, of $727, unrealized gains of $249, and an increase in statutory admitted deferred tax assets of $77, capital contributions of $14, and an increase of statutory admitted assets of $7, partially offset by dividends to the HFSG Holding Company of $841.
Both net income and dividends are net of interest payments and dividends, respectively, on an intercompany note between Hartford Holdings, Inc.  and Hartford Fire Insurance Company.
The Company also holds regulatory capital and surplus for its operations in Japan.
Under the accounting practices and procedures governed by Japanese regulatory authorities, the Company’s statutory capital and surplus was $1.1 billion and $1.3 billion as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
Statutory Capital The Company’s stockholders’ equity, as prepared using U. S.  generally accepted accounting principles (“U.
S.  GAAP”) was $22.4 billion as of December 31, 2012.
The Company’s estimated aggregate statutory capital and surplus, as prepared in accordance with the National Association of Insurance Commissioners’ Accounting Practices and Procedures Manual (“U.
S.  STAT”) was $14.1 billion as of December 31, 2012.
Significant differences between U. S.  GAAP stockholders’ equity and aggregate statutory capital and surplus prepared in accordance with U. S.  STAT include the following: ?
U. S.  STAT excludes equity of non-insurance and foreign insurance subsidiaries not held by U. S.  insurance subsidiaries.  ?
Costs incurred by the Company to acquire insurance policies are deferred under U. S.  GAAP while those costs are expensed immediately under U. S.  STAT.  ?
Temporary differences between the book and tax basis of an asset or liability which are recorded as deferred tax assets are evaluated for recoverability under U. S.  GAAP while those amounts deferred are subject to limitations under U. S.  STAT.  ?
The assumptions used in the determination of Life benefit reserves is prescribed under U. S.  STAT, while the assumptions used under U. S.  GAAP are generally the Company’s best estimates.
The methodologies for determining life insurance reserve amounts may also be different.
For example, reserving for living benefit reserves under U. S.  STAT is generally addressed by the Commissioners’ Annuity Reserving Valuation Methodology and the related Actuarial Guidelines, while under U. S.  GAAP, those same living benefits may be considered embedded derivatives and recorded at fair value or they may be considered SOP 03-1 reserves.
The sensitivity of these life insurance reserves to changes in equity markets, as applicable, will be different between U. S.  GAAP and U. S.  STAT.  ?
The difference between the amortized cost and fair value of fixed maturity and other investments, net of tax, is recorded as an increase or decrease to the carrying value of the related asset and to equity under U. S.  GAAP, while U. S.  STAT only records certain securities at fair value, such as equity securities and certain lower rated bonds required by the NAIC to be recorded at the lower of amortized cost or fair value.  ?
U. S.  STAT for life insurance companies establishes a formula reserve for realized and unrealized losses due to default and equity risks associated with certain invested assets (the Asset Valuation Reserve), while U. S.  GAAP does not.
Also, for those realized gains and losses caused by changes in interest rates, U. S.  STAT for life insurance companies defers and amortizes the gains and losses, caused by changes in interest rates, into income over the original life to maturity of the asset sold (the Interest Maintenance Reserve) while U. S.  GAAP does not.  ?
Goodwill arising from the acquisition of a business is tested for recoverability on an annual basis (or more frequently, as necessary) for U. S.  GAAP, while under U. S.  STAT goodwill is amortized over a period not to exceed 10 years and the amount of goodwill is limited.
Table of Contents THE HARTFORD FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, INC.  NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATMENTS (continued) 5.
Fair Value Measurements (continued) Significant Unobservable Inputs for Level 3 Assets Measured at Fair Values The following tables present information about significant unobservable inputs used in Level 3 assets measured at fair value.
As of December 31, 2012
## Table 2 ##
[1] The weighted average is determined based on the fair value of the securities.
[2] Conversely, the impact of a decrease in input would have the opposite impact to the fair value as that presented in the table above.
[3] Level 3 corporate securities excludes those for which the Company bases fair value on broker quotations as discussed below.
[4] Decrease for above market rate coupons and increase for below market rate coupons.

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">December 31, 2008</td><td colspan="3"> December 31, 2007</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Amortized  Cost</td><td> Fair Value</td><td>Percent of Total Fair Value</td><td> Amortized  Cost</td><td> Fair Value</td><td> Percent of  Total Fair  Value</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>AAA</td><td>$728</td><td>$628</td><td>7.9%</td><td>$635</td><td>$614</td><td>4.8%</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>AA</td><td>2,067</td><td>1,780</td><td>22.5%</td><td>4,141</td><td>4,008</td><td>31.5%</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>A</td><td>5,479</td><td>4,606</td><td>58.1%</td><td>6,755</td><td>6,525</td><td>51.3%</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>BBB</td><td>1,015</td><td>816</td><td>10.3%</td><td>1,378</td><td>1,283</td><td>10.1%</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>BB & below</td><td>106</td><td>93</td><td>1.2%</td><td>306</td><td>289</td><td>2.3%</td><td></td></tr><tr><td> Total</td><td>$9,395</td><td>$7,923</td><td>100.0%</td><td>$13,215</td><td>$12,719</td><td> 100.0</td><td> %</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td></tr><tr><td>U.S. life insurance subsidiaries, includes domestic captive insurance subsidiaries</td><td>$6,410</td><td>$7,388</td></tr><tr><td>Property and casualty insurance subsidiaries</td><td>7,645</td><td>7,412</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$14,055</td><td>$14,800</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="7">As of December 31, 2012</td></tr><tr><td>Securities</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td colspan="3">Unobservable Inputs</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Assets accounted for at fair value on a recurring basis</td><td>FairValue</td><td>PredominantValuationMethod</td><td>Significant Unobservable Input</td><td>Minimum</td><td>Maximum</td><td>Weighted Average [1]</td><td>Impact ofIncrease in Inputon Fair Value [2]</td></tr><tr><td>CMBS</td><td>$859</td><td>Discountedcash flows</td><td>Spread (encompasses prepayment, default risk and loss severity)</td><td>320 bps</td><td>3,615 bps</td><td>1,031 bps</td><td>Decrease</td></tr><tr><td>Corporate [3]</td><td>1,371</td><td>Discountedcash flows</td><td>Spread</td><td>106 bps</td><td>900 bps</td><td>328 bps</td><td>Decrease</td></tr><tr><td>Municipal</td><td>227</td><td>Discountedcash flows</td><td>Spread</td><td>227 bps</td><td>344 bps</td><td>258 bps</td><td>Decrease</td></tr><tr><td>RMBS</td><td>1,373</td><td>Discountedcash flows</td><td>Spread</td><td>54 bps</td><td>1,689 bps</td><td>367 bps</td><td>Decrease</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Constant prepayment rate</td><td>—%</td><td>12.0%</td><td>2.0%</td><td>Decrease [4]</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Constant default rate</td><td>1.0%</td><td>24.0%</td><td>8.0%</td><td>Decrease</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Loss severity</td><td>—%</td><td>100.0%</td><td>80.0%</td><td>Decrease</td></tr></table>

Question: How many FairValue exceed the average of FairValue in 2012?
Answer: 2