## Table 0 ##
Businesses marked with * are sometimes referred to as the “competitive businesses.
”?
?Eliminations are primarily intersegment activity. ?
?Almost all of Entergy’s goodwill is related to the Utility segment.
On December 29, 2014, the Vermont Yankee plant ceased power production and entered its decommissioning phase.
In December 2015, Rhode Island State Energy Center, a natural gas-fired combined cycle generating plant, was sold.
In October 2015 management announced the intention to shutdown the FitzPatrick plant in 2017 and the Pilgrim plant in 2019, earlier than previously expected.
In 2016 management announced the planned sale of Vermont Yankee in 2018, the planned sale of FitzPatrick in 2017, and the planned amendment of the Consumers Energy PPA to terminate early, in May 2018, and the subsequent plan to shut down the Palisades plant in 2018, earlier than expected.
In January 2017 management announced a settlement with New York State to shut down Indian Point 2 in 2020 and Indian Point 3 in 2021, both earlier than expected.
In March 2017 the FitzPatrick plant was sold to Exelon.
In September 2017 management announced the termination of the PPA amendment agreement with Consumers Energy and the revised plan to continue to operate Palisades under the current PPA and to shut down Palisades permanently on May 31, 2022.
Management expects these transactions to result in the cessation of merchant power generation at all Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants owned and operated by Entergy by 2022.
Entergy will continue to have the obligation to decommission the nuclear plants owned by Entergy.
These decisions and transactions resulted in asset impairments; employee retention and severance expenses and other benefits-related costs; and contracted economic development contributions.
The employee retention and severance expenses and other benefits-related costs, and contracted economic development contributions are included in "Other operation and maintenance" in the consolidated statement of operations.
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis Assumptions regarding the possibility that a plant may have an operating life shorter than previously assumed will likely result in the need for additional contributions to decommissioning trust funds, or the posting of parent guarantees, letters of credit, or other surety mechanisms.
Entergy Wholesale Commodities includes the ownership of the following nuclear reactors:
## Table 1 ##
As discussed below, Entergy sold the FitzPatrick nuclear power plant to Exelon in March 2017.
Entergy Wholesale Commodities also includes the ownership of two non-operating nuclear facilities, Big Rock Point in Michigan and Indian Point 1 in New York that were acquired when Entergy purchased the Palisades and Indian Point 2 nuclear plants, respectively. ?
?These facilities are in various stages of the decommissioning process.
In addition, Entergy Wholesale Commodities provides operations and management services, including decommissioning services, to nuclear power plants owned by other utilities in the United States.
A relatively minor portion of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business is the ownership of interests in non-nuclear power plants that sell the electric power produced by those plants to wholesale customers.
Shutdown and Planned Sale of Vermont Yankee On December 29, 2014, the Vermont Yankee plant ceased power production and entered its decommissioning phase.
In November 2016, Entergy entered into an agreement to sell 100% of the membership interests in Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC to a subsidiary of NorthStar.
Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee is the owner of the Vermont Yankee plant and is in the Entergy Wholesale Commodities segment.
The sale of Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee to NorthStar will include the transfer of the nuclear decommissioning trust fund and the asset retirement obligation for the spent fuel management and decommissioning of the plant.
Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee has an outstanding credit facility with borrowing capacity of $145 million to pay for dry fuel storage costs.
This credit facility is guaranteed by Entergy Corporation.
At or before closing, a subsidiary of Entergy will assume the obligations under the existing credit facility or enter into a new credit facility, and Entergy will guarantee the credit facility.
At the closing of the sale transaction, NorthStar will pay $1,000 for the membership interests in Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, and NorthStar will cause Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee to issue a promissory note to an Entergy affiliate.
The amount of the promissory note issued will be equal to the amount drawn under the credit facility or the amount drawn under the new credit facility, plus borrowing fees and costs incurred by Entergy in connection with such facility.
The principal amount drawn under the outstanding credit facility was $104 million as of December 31, 2017, and the net book value of Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, including unrealized gains on the decommissioning trust fund, as of December 31, 2017, was approximately $123 million.
Entergy plans to transfer all spent nuclear fuel to dry cask storage by the end of 2018 in advance of the planned transaction close.
Under the sale agreement and related agreements to be entered into at the closing, NorthStar will commit to initiate decommissioning and site restoration by 2021 and complete those activities by 2030.
The original planned completion date, as outlined in Entergy’s Post Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report filed with the NRC, was 2075.
Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, under NorthStar ownership, will be required to repay the promissory note issued to Entergy with certain of the proceeds from the recovery of damages under its claims against the DOE related to spent nuclear fuel disposal, with any balance remaining due at partial site release, subject to extension not to exceed two years from partial site release.
ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, INC.  MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS Results of Operations Net Income 2017 Compared to 2016 Net income increased $0.8 million primarily due to higher other income, lower other operation and maintenance expenses, and lower interest expense, substantially offset by higher depreciation and amortization expenses and a higher effective income tax rate.2016 Compared to 2015 Net income increased $16.5 million primarily due to lower other operation and maintenance expenses, higher net revenues, and a lower effective income tax rate, partially offset by higher depreciation and amortization expenses.
Net Revenue 2017 Compared to 2016 Net revenue consists of operating revenues net of: 1) fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale, 2) purchased power expenses, and 3) other regulatory credits.
Following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2017 to 2016.
## Table 2 ##
The volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of less favorable weather on residential and commercial sales.
The retail electric price variance is primarily due to a $19.4 million net annual increase in rates, effective with the first billing cycle of July 2016, and an increase in the energy efficiency rider, effective with the first billing cycle of February 2017, each as approved by the MPSC.
The increase was partially offset by decreased storm damage rider revenues due to resetting the storm damage provision to zero beginning with the November 2016 billing cycle.
Entergy Mississippi resumed billing the storm damage rider effective with the September 2017 billing cycle.
See Note 2 to the financial statements for more discussion of the formula rate plan and the storm damage rider.
the same counterparty on a net basis.
For exchange-traded contracts, fair value is based on quoted market prices.
For non-exchange traded contracts, fair value is based on dealer quotes, pricing models or quoted prices for instruments with similar characteristics.
The fair value of the Corporation’s derivative assets and liabilities is presented in Note 4 of the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Loans Fair values were estimated for groups of similar loans based upon type of loan and maturity.
The fair value of loans was determined by discounting estimated cash flows using interest rates approximating the Corporation’s current origination rates for similar loans and adjusted to reflect the inherent credit risk.
Where quoted market prices were available, primarily for certain residential mortgage loans and commercial loans, such market prices were utilized as estimates for fair values.
Substantially all of the foreign loans reprice within relatively short timeframes.
Accordingly, for foreign loans, the net carrying values were assumed to approximate their fair values.
Deposits The fair value for deposits with stated maturities was calculated by discounting contractual cash flows using current market rates for instruments with similar maturities.
The carrying value of foreign time deposits approximates fair value.
For deposits with no stated maturities, the carrying amount was considered to approximate fair value and does not take into account the significant value of the cost advantage and stability of the Corporation’s long-term relationships with depositors.
The book and fair values of certain financial instruments at December 31, 2004 and 2003 were as follows:
## Table 3 ##
Note 19 Business Segment Information In connection with the Merger, the Corporation realigned its business segment reporting to reflect the new business model of the combined company.
The Corporation reports the results of its operations through four business segments: Global Consumer and Small Business Banking, Global Business and Financial Services, Global Capital Markets and Investment Banking, and Global Wealth and Investment Management.
Certain operating segments have been aggregated into a single business segment.
The Corporation may periodically reclassify business segment results based on modifications to its management reporting and profitability measurement methodologies, and changes in organizational alignment.
Global Consumer and Small Business Banking provides a diversified range of products and services to individuals and small businesses through multiple delivery channels.
Global Business and Financial Services primarily provides commercial lending and treasury management services to middle-market companies.
Global Capital Markets and Investment Banking provides capital-raising solutions, advisory services, derivatives capabilities, equity and debt sales and trading for the Corporation’s clients as well as traditional bank deposit and loan products, treasury management and payment services to large corporations and institutional clients.
Global Wealth and Investment Management offers investment, fiduciary and comprehensive banking and credit expertise, asset management services to institutional clients, high-net-worth individuals and retail customers, investment, securities and financial planning services to affluent and high-net-worth individuals, and retail clearing services for broker/dealers.
All Other consists primarily of Latin America, Equity Investments, Noninterest Income and Expense amounts associated with the ALM process, including Gains on Sales of Debt Securities, the allowance for credit losses process, the residual impact of methodology allocations, intersegment eliminations, and the results of certain consumer finance and commercial lending businesses that are being liquidated.
Latin America includes the Corporation’s full-service Latin American operations in Brazil, Argentina and Chile.
Total Revenue includes Net Interest Income on a fully taxableequivalent basis and Noninterest Income.
The adjustment of Net Interest Income to a fully taxable-equivalent basis results in a corresponding increase in Income Tax Expense.
The Net Interest Income of the business segments includes the results of a funds transfer pricing process that matches assets and liabilities with similar interest rate sensitivity and maturity characteristics.
Net Interest Income also reflects an allocation of Net Interest Income generated by assets and liabilities used in the Corporation’s ALM process.
Certain expenses not directly attributable to a specific business segment are allocated to the segments based on pre-determined means.
The most significant of these expenses include data processing costs, item processing costs and certain centralized or shared functions.
Data processing costs are allocated to the segments based on equipment usage.
Item processing costs are allocated to the segments based on the volume of items processed for each segment.
The costs of certain centralized or shared functions are allocated based on methodologies which reflect utilization.
## Table 4 ##
(1) Total market-based earning assets represents earning assets included in CMAS but excludes loans for which the fair value option has been elected.
(2) Total earning assets and total assets include asset allocations to match liabilities (i. e. , deposits).
GCIB provides a wide range of financial services to both our issuer and investor clients that range from business banking clients to large international corporate and institutional investor clients using a strategy to deliver value-added financial products and advisory solutions.
GCIB’s products and services are delivered from three primary businesses: Business Lending, CMAS, and Treasury Services, and are provided to our clients through a global team of client relationship managers and product partners.
In addition, ALM/Other includes the results of ALM activities and other GCIB activities (e. g. , Commercial Insurance business which was sold in the fourth quarter of 2007).
Our clients are supported through offices in 22 countries that are divided into four distinct geographic regions: U. S.  and Canada; Asia; Europe, Middle East, and Africa; and Latin America.
For more information on our foreign operations, see Foreign Portfolio beginning on page 81.
Effective January 1, 2007, the Corporation adopted SFAS 159 and elected to account for loans and loan commitments to certain large corporate clients at fair value.
For more information on the adoption of SFAS 159, see Note 19 – Fair Value Disclosures to the Consolidated Financial Statements and see page 74 for a discussion of loans and loan commitments measured at fair value in accordance with SFAS 159.
The results of loans and loan commitments to certain large corporate clients for which the Corporation elected the fair value option (including the associated risk mitigation tools) are recorded in CMAS.
Net income decreased $5.5 billion, or 91 percent, to $538 million and total revenue decreased $7.7 billion, or 37 percent, to $13.4 billion in 2007 compared to 2006.
These decreases were driven by $5.6 billion of losses resulting from our CDO exposure and other trading losses.
Additionally, we experienced increases in provision for credit losses and noninterest expense, which were partially offset by an increase in net interest income.
Net interest income increased $1.3 billion, or 14 percent, due to higher market-based net interest income of $1.1 billion and the FTE impact of a one-time tax benefit from restructuring our existing non-U.
S.  based commercial aircraft leasing business.
Additionally, the benefit of growth in average loans and leases of $41.4 billion, or 18 percent, was partially offset by spread compression on core lending and deposit-related activities, and a change in the mix between interest-bearing and noninterest-bearing deposits as clients maintained lower noninterestbearing compensating balances by shifting to interest bearing and/or higher yielding investment alternatives.
The growth in average loans and average deposits was due to organic growth as well as the LaSalle merger.
Noninterest income decreased $9.1 billion, or 81 percent, in 2007 compared to 2006, driven by declines in trading account profits (losses) of $8.1 billion and all other income of $1.1 billion.
For more information on these decreases, see the CMAS discussion.
Provision for credit losses was $652 million in 2007 compared to $9 million in 2006.
The increase was driven by the absence of 2006 releases of reserves, higher net charge-offs and an increase in reserves during 2007 reflecting the impact of the weak housing market particularly on the homebuilder loan portfolio.
Net charge-offs increased in the retail automotive and other dealer-related portfolios due to growth, seasoning and deterioration, as well as from a lower level of commercial recoveries.
Noninterest expense increased $347 million, or three percent, mainly due to the addition of LaSalle and Visa-related litigation costs, equally allocated to Treasury Services and Card Services on a management accounting basis, partially offset by a reduction in performance-based incentive compensation in CMAS.
For additional information on Visarelated litigation, see Note 13 – Commitments and Contingencies to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Business Lending Business Lending provides a wide range of lending-related products and services to our clients through client relationship teams along with various product partners.
Products include commercial and corporate bank loans and commitment facilities which cover our business banking clients, middle market commercial clients and our large multinational corporate clients.
Real estate lending products are issued primarily to public and private developers, homebuilders and commercial real estate firms.
Leasing and asset-based lending products offer our clients innovative financing solutions.
Products also include indirect consumer loans which allow us to offer financing through automotive, marine, motorcycle and recreational vehicle dealerships across the U. S.  Business Lending also contains the results for the economic hedging of our risk to certain credit counterparties utilizing various risk mitigation tools.
Net income decreased $128 million, or six percent, to $2.1 billion in 2007 compared to 2006 as increases in net interest income and noninterest income were more than offset by increases in provision for credit losses and noninterest expense.
Net interest income increased $445 million, or 10 percent, driven by the FTE impact of approximately $350 million related to a one-time tax benefit from restructuring our existing non-U.
S.  based commercial aircraft leasing business, and average loan growth of 14 percent.
These increases were partially offset by the impact of spread compression on the loan portfolio.
The increase in average loans and leases was attributable to growth in commercial loans, the LaSalle merger and increases in the indirect consumer loan portfolio related to bulk purchases of retail automotive loans.
The increase in noninterest income of $112 million, or 11 percent, was driven by improved economic hedging results of our exposures to certain large corporate clients and higher tax credits from community development activities partially offset by derivative fair value adjustments related to an option to purchase retail automotive loans.
Provision for credit losses was $647 million in 2007 compared to negative $2 million in 2006.
The increase was driven by the absence of 2006 releases of reserves related to favorable commercial credit market conditions, higher net charge-offs and an increase in reserves during 2007 reflecting the impact of the weak housing market particularly on the homebuilder loan portfolio.
Net charge-offs increased in 2007 as retail automotive and other dealer-related portfolio losses rose due to growth,
During 2011, we terminated all of our monoline contracts referencing super senior ABS CDOs and reclassified net monoline exposure with a carrying value of $1.3 billion ($4.7 billion gross receivable less impairment) at December 31, 2011 from derivative assets to other assets because of the inherent default risk.
Because these contracts no longer provide a hedge benefit, they are no longer considered derivative trading instruments.
This exposure relates to a single counterparty and is recorded at fair value based on current net recovery projections.
The net recovery projections take into account the present value of projected payments expected to be received from the counterparty.
Monoline derivative credit exposure had a notional value of $21.1 billion and $38.4 billion at December 31, 2011 and 2010.
Mark-to-market monoline derivative credit exposure was $1.8 billion and $9.2 billion at December 31, 2011 and 2010 with the decrease driven by positive valuation adjustments on legacy assets, terminated monoline contracts and the reclassification of net monoline exposure to other assets mentioned above.
The counterparty credit valuation adjustment related to monoline derivative exposure was $417 million and $5.3 billion at December 31, 2011 and 2010.
This adjustment reduced our net mark-to-market exposure to $1.3 billion at December 31, 2011 compared to $3.9 billion at December 31, 2010 and covered 24 percent of the mark-to-market exposure at December 31, 2011, down from 57 percent at December 31, 2010.
We do not hold collateral against these derivative exposures.
For more information on our monoline exposure, termination of certain monoline contracts and the transfer of monoline exposure to other assets, see GBAM on page 43.
We also have indirect exposure to monolines as we invest in securities where the issuers have purchased wraps.
For example, municipalities and corporations purchase insurance in order to reduce their cost of borrowing.
If the rating agencies downgrade the monolines, the credit rating of the bond may fall and may have an adverse impact on the market value of the security.
In the case of default, we first look to the underlying securities and then to the purchased insurance for recovery.
Investments in securities with purchased wraps issued by municipalities and corporations had a notional amount of $150 million and $2.4 billion at December 31, 2011 and 2010.
Mark-to-market investment exposure was $89 million at December 31, 2011 compared to $2.2 billion at December 31, 2010.
## Table 5 ##
(1) Includes U. S.  small business commercial exposure.
(2) Industries are viewed from a variety of perspectives to best isolate the perceived risks.
For purposes of this table, the real estate industry is defined based on the borrowers’ or counterparties’ primary business activity using operating cash flows and primary source of repayment as key factors.
(3) Represents net notional credit protection purchased.
See Risk Mitigation below for additional information.
Contributions and Expected Benefit Payments The funding of our qualified defined benefit pension plans is determined in accordance with ERISA, as amended by the PPA, and in a manner consistent with CAS and Internal Revenue Code rules.
In 2015, we made $5 million in contributions to our new Sikorsky bargained qualified defined benefit pension plan and we plan to make approximately $25 million in contributions to this plan in 2016.

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td>2015</td><td>Utility</td><td>Entergy Wholesale Commodities*</td><td>All Other</td><td>Eliminations</td><td>Consolidated</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">(In Thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>Operating revenues</td><td>$9,451,486</td><td>$2,061,827</td><td>$—</td><td>-$62</td><td>$11,513,251</td></tr><tr><td>Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges</td><td>$68,672</td><td>$2,036,234</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$2,104,906</td></tr><tr><td>Depreciation, amortization, & decommissioning</td><td>$1,238,832</td><td>$376,560</td><td>$2,156</td><td>$—</td><td>$1,617,548</td></tr><tr><td>Interest and investment income</td><td>$191,546</td><td>$148,654</td><td>$34,303</td><td>-$187,441</td><td>$187,062</td></tr><tr><td>Interest expense</td><td>$543,132</td><td>$26,788</td><td>$129,750</td><td>-$56,201</td><td>$643,469</td></tr><tr><td>Income taxes</td><td>$16,761</td><td>-$610,339</td><td>-$49,349</td><td>$—</td><td>-$642,927</td></tr><tr><td>Consolidated net income (loss)</td><td>$1,114,516</td><td>-$1,065,657</td><td>-$74,353</td><td>-$131,240</td><td>-$156,734</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets</td><td>$38,356,906</td><td>$8,210,183</td><td>-$461,505</td><td>-$1,457,903</td><td>$44,647,681</td></tr><tr><td>Investment in affiliates - at equity</td><td>$199</td><td>$4,142</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$4,341</td></tr><tr><td>Cash paid for long-lived asset additions</td><td>$2,495,194</td><td>$569,824</td><td>$236</td><td>$—</td><td>$3,065,254</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>Location</td><td>Market</td><td>Capacity</td><td>Planned Transaction</td></tr><tr><td>Vermont Yankee</td><td>Vernon, VT</td><td>ISO-NE</td><td>605 MW</td><td>Plant in decommissioning phase, planned sale in 2018</td></tr><tr><td>Pilgrim</td><td>Plymouth, MA</td><td>ISO-NE</td><td>688 MW</td><td>Planned shutdown in 2019</td></tr><tr><td>Indian Point 2</td><td>Buchanan, NY</td><td>NYISO</td><td>1,028 MW</td><td>Planned shutdown in 2020</td></tr><tr><td>Indian Point 3</td><td>Buchanan, NY</td><td>NYISO</td><td>1,041 MW</td><td>Planned shutdown in 2021</td></tr><tr><td>Palisades</td><td>Covert, MI</td><td>MISO</td><td>811 MW</td><td>Planned shutdown in 2022</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>Amount (In Millions)</td></tr><tr><td>2016 net revenue</td><td>$705.4</td></tr><tr><td>Volume/weather</td><td>-18.2</td></tr><tr><td>Retail electric price</td><td>13.5</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>2.4</td></tr><tr><td>2017 net revenue</td><td>$703.1</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4"> December 31 </td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> 2004 </td><td colspan="2">2003 </td></tr><tr><td> (Dollars in millions)</td><td> Book Value </td><td> Fair Value </td><td>Book Value </td><td>Fair Value </td></tr><tr><td> Financial assets</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Loans</td><td>$491,615</td><td>$496,873</td><td>$353,924</td><td>$357,770</td></tr><tr><td> Financial liabilities</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Deposits</td><td>618,570</td><td>618,409</td><td>414,113</td><td>414,379</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt</td><td>98,078</td><td>102,439</td><td>75,343</td><td>79,442</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> December 31</td><td colspan="2"> Average Balance</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td> 2007</td><td>2006</td><td> 2007</td><td>2006</td></tr><tr><td>Total loans and leases</td><td>$324,198</td><td>$242,700</td><td>$274,015</td><td>$232,623</td></tr><tr><td>Total trading-related assets</td><td>308,315</td><td>309,097</td><td>362,193</td><td>336,860</td></tr><tr><td>Total market-based earning assets<sup>-1</sup></td><td>359,730</td><td>348,717</td><td>412,326</td><td>370,187</td></tr><tr><td>Total earning assets<sup>-2</sup></td><td>673,552</td><td>599,326</td><td>676,500</td><td>609,100</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets<sup>-2</sup></td><td>776,107</td><td>685,935</td><td>770,360</td><td>691,414</td></tr><tr><td>Total deposits</td><td>246,788</td><td>212,028</td><td>220,724</td><td>194,972</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>Table 47</td><td colspan="4">Commercial Credit Exposure by Industry<sup>-1</sup> December 31</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Commercial Utilized</td><td colspan="2">Total Commercial Committed</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td></tr><tr><td>Diversified financials</td><td>$64,957</td><td>$58,698</td><td>$94,969</td><td>$86,750</td></tr><tr><td>Real estate<sup>-2</sup></td><td>48,138</td><td>58,531</td><td>62,566</td><td>72,004</td></tr><tr><td>Government and public education</td><td>43,090</td><td>44,131</td><td>57,021</td><td>59,594</td></tr><tr><td>Healthcare equipment and services</td><td>31,298</td><td>30,420</td><td>48,141</td><td>47,569</td></tr><tr><td>Capital goods</td><td>24,025</td><td>21,940</td><td>48,013</td><td>46,087</td></tr><tr><td>Retailing</td><td>25,478</td><td>24,660</td><td>46,290</td><td>43,950</td></tr><tr><td>Banks</td><td>35,231</td><td>26,831</td><td>38,735</td><td>29,667</td></tr><tr><td>Consumer services</td><td>24,445</td><td>24,759</td><td>38,498</td><td>39,694</td></tr><tr><td>Materials</td><td>19,384</td><td>15,873</td><td>38,070</td><td>33,046</td></tr><tr><td>Energy</td><td>15,151</td><td>9,765</td><td>32,074</td><td>26,328</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial services and supplies</td><td>20,089</td><td>20,056</td><td>30,831</td><td>30,517</td></tr><tr><td>Food, beverage and tobacco</td><td>15,904</td><td>14,777</td><td>30,501</td><td>28,126</td></tr><tr><td>Utilities</td><td>8,102</td><td>6,990</td><td>24,552</td><td>24,207</td></tr><tr><td>Media</td><td>11,447</td><td>11,611</td><td>21,158</td><td>20,619</td></tr><tr><td>Transportation</td><td>12,683</td><td>12,070</td><td>19,036</td><td>18,436</td></tr><tr><td>Individuals and trusts</td><td>14,993</td><td>18,316</td><td>19,001</td><td>22,937</td></tr><tr><td>Insurance, including monolines</td><td>10,090</td><td>17,263</td><td>16,157</td><td>24,417</td></tr><tr><td>Technology hardware and equipment</td><td>5,247</td><td>4,373</td><td>12,173</td><td>10,932</td></tr><tr><td>Pharmaceuticals and biotechnology</td><td>4,141</td><td>3,859</td><td>11,328</td><td>11,009</td></tr><tr><td>Religious and social organizations</td><td>8,536</td><td>8,409</td><td>11,160</td><td>10,823</td></tr><tr><td>Telecommunication services</td><td>4,297</td><td>3,823</td><td>10,424</td><td>9,321</td></tr><tr><td>Software and services</td><td>4,304</td><td>3,837</td><td>9,579</td><td>9,531</td></tr><tr><td>Consumer durables and apparel</td><td>4,505</td><td>4,297</td><td>8,965</td><td>8,836</td></tr><tr><td>Automobiles and components</td><td>2,813</td><td>2,090</td><td>7,178</td><td>5,941</td></tr><tr><td>Food and staples retailing</td><td>3,273</td><td>3,222</td><td>6,476</td><td>6,161</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>4,888</td><td>9,821</td><td>7,636</td><td>13,593</td></tr><tr><td>Total commercial credit exposure by industry</td><td>$466,509</td><td>$460,422</td><td>$750,532</td><td>$740,095</td></tr><tr><td>Net credit default protection purchased on total commitments<sup>-3</sup></td><td></td><td></td><td>$-19,356</td><td>$-20,118</td></tr></table>

Question: In the year with largest amount of Diversified financials in table 2, what's the increasing rate of Capital goods in table 2?
Answer: 0.05896
Reasoning program: add(24025,48013), subtract(#0,21940), subtract(#1,46087), add(21940,46087), divide(#2,#3)