Description of business segment reporting methodology Results of the business segments are intended to reflect each segment as if it were essentially a stand-alone business.
The management reporting process that derives these results allocates income and expense using market-based methodologies.
At the time of the Merger, several of the allocation methodologies were revised, as noted below.
The changes became effective July 1, 2004.
As prior periods have not been revised to reflect these new methodologies, they are not comparable to the presentation of periods beginning with the third quarter of 2004.
Further, the Firm intends to continue to assess the assumptions, methodologies and reporting reclassifications used for segment reporting, and it is anticipated that further refinements may be implemented in future periods.
Revenue sharing When business segments join efforts to sell products and services to the Firm’s clients, the participating business segments agree to share revenues from those transactions.
These revenue sharing agreements were revised on the Merger date to provide consistency across the lines of businesses.
Funds transfer pricing Funds transfer pricing (“FTP”) is used to allocate interest income and interest expense to each line of business and also serves to transfer interest rate risk to Corporate.
While business segments may periodically retain interest rate exposures related to customer pricing or other business-specific risks, the balance of the Firm’s overall interest rate risk exposure is included and managed in Corporate.
In the third quarter of 2004, FTP was revised to conform the policies of the combined firms.
Expense allocation Where business segments use services provided by support units within the Firm, the costs of those support units are allocated to the business segments.
Those expenses are allocated based on their actual cost, or the lower of actual cost or market cost, as well as upon usage of the services provided.
Effective with the third quarter of 2004, the cost allocation methodologies of the heritage firms were aligned to provide consistency across the business segments.
In addition, expenses related to certain corporate functions, technology and operations ceased to be allocated to the business segments and are retained in Corporate.
These retained expenses include parent company costs that would not be incurred if the segments were stand-alone businesses; adjustments to align certain corporate staff, technology and operations allocations with market prices; and other one-time items not aligned with the business segments.
Capital allocation Each business segment is allocated capital by taking into consideration standalone peer comparisons, economic risk measures and regulatory capital requirements.
The amount of capital assigned to each business is referred to as equity.
Effective with the third quarter of 2004, new methodologies were implemented to calculate the amount of capital allocated to each segment.
As part of the new methodology, goodwill, as well as the associated capital, is allocated solely to Corporate.
Although U. S.  GAAP requires the allocation of goodwill to the business segments for impairment testing (see Note 15 on page 109 of this Annual Report), the Firm has elected not to include goodwill or the related capital in each of the business segments for management reporting purposes.
See the Capital management section on page 50 of this Annual Report for a discussion of the equity framework.
Credit reimbursement TSS reimburses the IB for credit portfolio exposures the IB manages on behalf of clients the segments share.
At the time of the Merger, the reimbursement methodology was revised to be based on pre-tax earnings, net of the cost of capital related to those exposures.
Prior to the Merger, the credit reimbursement was based on pre-tax earnings, plus the allocated capital associated with the shared clients.
Tax-equivalent adjustments Segment results reflect revenues on a tax-equivalent basis for segment reporting purposes.
Refer to page 25 of this Annual Report for additional details.
## Table 0 ##
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS JPMorgan Chase & Co.  162 JPMorgan Chase & Co.  / 2007 Annual Report Note 25 – Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) includes the after-tax change in SFAS 115 unrealized gains and losses on AFS securities, SFAS 52 foreign currency translation adjustments (including the impact of related derivatives), SFAS 133 cash flow hedging activities and SFAS 158 net loss and prior service cost (credit) related to the Firm’s defined benefit pension and OPEB plans.
## Table 1 ##
(a) Represents the after-tax difference between the fair value and amortized cost of the AFS securities portfolio and retained interests in securitizations recorded in Other assets.
(b) The net change during 2005 was due primarily to higher interest rates, partially offset by the reversal of unrealized losses from securities sales.
(c) The net change during 2006 was due primarily to the reversal of unrealized losses from securities sales.
(d) The net change during 2007 was due primarily to a decline in interest rates.
(e) For further discussion of SFAS 158, see Note 9 on pages 124–130 of this Annual Report.
Consumer loan portfolio Consumer loans, excluding credit card loans, consist primarily of residential mortgages, home equity loans, auto loans, business banking loans, and student and other loans, with a primary focus on serving the prime consumer credit market.
The portfolio also includes home equity loans secured by junior liens and mortgage loans with interest-only payment options to predominantly prime borrowers, as well as certain payment-option loans originated by Washington Mutual that may result in negative amortization.
The table below provides information about consumer retained loans by class, excluding the credit card loan portfolio segment.
## Table 2 ##
(a) Represents loans where JPMorgan Chase holds the first security interest on the property.
(b) Represents loans where JPMorgan Chase holds a security interest that is subordinate in rank to other liens.
(c) Effective January 1, 2010, the Firm adopted accounting guidance related to VIEs.
Upon adoption of the guidance, the Firm consolidated $4.8 billion of certain consumer loan securitization entities, primarily mortgage-related.
For further information, see Note 16 on pages 244–259 of this Annual Report.
Delinquency rates are a primary credit quality indicator for consumer loans.
Loans that are more than 30 days past due provide an early warning of borrowers that may be experiencing financial difficulties and/or who may be unable or unwilling to repay the loan.
As the loan continues to age, it becomes more clear that the borrower is likely either unable or unwilling to pay.
In the case of residential real estate loans, late-stage delinquencies (greater than 150 days past due) are a strong indicator of loans that will ultimately result in a short sale or foreclosure.
In addition to delinquency rates, other credit quality indicators for consumer loans vary based on the class of loan, as follows: ?
For residential real estate loans, including both non-PCI and PCI portfolios, the current estimated loan-to-value (“LTV”) ratio, or the combined LTV ratio in the case of loans with a junior lien, is an indicator of the potential loss severity in the event of default.
Additionally, LTV or combined LTV can provide insight into a borrower’s continued willingness to pay, as the delinquency rate of high-LTV loans tends to be greater than that for loans where the borrower has equity in the collateral.
The geographic distribution of the loan collateral also provides insight as to the credit quality of the portfolio, as factors such as the regional economy, home price changes and specific events such as hurricanes, earthquakes, etc.
will affect credit quality.
The borrowers’ current or “refreshed” FICO score is a secondary credit-quality indicator for certain loans, as FICO scores are an indication of the borrower’s credit payment history.
Thus, a loan to a borrower with a low FICO score (660 or below) is considered to be of higher risk than a loan to a borrower with a high FICO score.
Further, a loan to a borrower with a high LTV ratio and a low FICO score is at greater risk of default than a loan to a borrower that has both a high LTV ratio and a high FICO score.  ?
For auto, scored business banking and student loans, geographic distribution is an indicator of the credit performance of the portfolio.
Similar to residential real estate loans, geographic distribution provides insights into the portfolio performance based on regional economic activity and events.  ?
Risk-rated business banking and auto loans are similar to wholesale loans in that the primary credit quality indicators are the risk rating that is assigned to the loan and whether the loans are considered to be criticized and/or nonaccrual.
Risk ratings are reviewed on a regular and ongoing basis by Credit Risk Management and are adjusted as necessary for updated information affecting borrowers’ ability to fulfill their obligations.
Consistent with other classes of consumer loans, the geographic distribution of the portfolio provides insights into portfolio performance based on regional economic activity and events.

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td>Year ended December 31,</td><td colspan="3">Operating earnings</td><td colspan="2">Return on common equity - goodwill<sup>(c)</sup></td></tr><tr><td>(in millions, except ratios)</td><td> 2004</td><td>2003</td><td>Change</td><td>2004</td><td>2003</td></tr><tr><td>Investment Bank</td><td>$2,948</td><td>$2,805</td><td>5%</td><td>17%</td><td>15%</td></tr><tr><td>Retail Financial Services</td><td>2,199</td><td>1,547</td><td>42</td><td>24</td><td>37</td></tr><tr><td>Card Services</td><td>1,274</td><td>683</td><td>87</td><td>17</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial Banking</td><td>608</td><td>307</td><td>98</td><td>29</td><td>29</td></tr><tr><td>Treasury & Securities Services</td><td>440</td><td>422</td><td>4</td><td>17</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>Asset & Wealth Management</td><td>681</td><td>287</td><td>137</td><td>17</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Corporate</td><td>61</td><td>668</td><td>-91</td><td>NM</td><td> NM</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$8,211</td><td>$6,719</td><td>22%</td><td>16%</td><td>19%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>(in millions)</td><td>Unrealized gains (losses) on AFS securities<sup></sup><sup>(a)</sup><sup></sup></td><td>Translation adjustments, net of hedges</td><td>Cash flow hedges</td><td>Net loss andprior service (credit) of defined benefit pension and OPEB plans<sup></sup><sup>(e)</sup><sup></sup></td><td>Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2004</td><td>$ -61</td><td>$ -8</td><td>$ -139</td><td>$ —</td><td>$ -208</td></tr><tr><td>Net change</td><td>-163<sup></sup><sup>(b)</sup><sup></sup></td><td>—</td><td>-255</td><td>—</td><td>-418</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2005</td><td>-224</td><td>-8</td><td>-394</td><td>—</td><td>-626</td></tr><tr><td>Net change</td><td>253<sup></sup><sup>(c)</sup><sup></sup></td><td>13</td><td>-95</td><td>—</td><td>171</td></tr><tr><td>Adjustment to initially apply SFAS 158, net of taxes</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-1,102</td><td>-1,102</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2006</td><td>29</td><td>5</td><td>-489</td><td>-1,102</td><td>-1,557</td></tr><tr><td>Cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles (SFAS 159)</td><td>-1</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-1</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at January 1, 2007, adjusted</td><td>28</td><td>5</td><td>-489</td><td>-1,102</td><td>-1,558</td></tr><tr><td>Net change</td><td>352<sup>(d)</sup></td><td>3</td><td>-313</td><td>599</td><td>641</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2007</td><td>$ 380</td><td>$ 8</td><td>$ -802</td><td>$ -503</td><td>$ -917</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>December 31, (in millions)</td><td> 2010</td><td>2009</td></tr><tr><td> Residential real estate –excluding PCI</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Home equity:</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Senior lien<sup>(a)</sup></td><td>$24,376</td><td>$27,376</td></tr><tr><td>Junior lien<sup>(b)</sup></td><td>64,009</td><td>74,049</td></tr><tr><td>Mortgages:</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Prime, including option ARMs<sup>(c)</sup></td><td>74,539</td><td>75,428</td></tr><tr><td>Subprime<sup>(c)</sup></td><td>11,287</td><td>12,526</td></tr><tr><td> Other consumer loans</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Auto<sup>(c)</sup></td><td>48,367</td><td>46,031</td></tr><tr><td>Business banking</td><td>16,812</td><td>16,974</td></tr><tr><td>Student and other<sup>(c)</sup></td><td>15,311</td><td>14,726</td></tr><tr><td> Residential real estate – PCI</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Home equity</td><td>24,459</td><td>26,520</td></tr><tr><td>Prime mortgage</td><td>17,322</td><td>19,693</td></tr><tr><td>Subprime mortgage</td><td>5,398</td><td>5,993</td></tr><tr><td>Option ARMs</td><td>25,584</td><td>29,039</td></tr><tr><td> Total retained loans</td><td>$327,464</td><td>$348,355</td></tr></table>

Question: what was the percentage change in unrealized gains ( losses ) on afs securities from december 31 , 2006 to december 31 , 2007?
Answer: 12.1035
Reasoning program: subtract(380,29), divide(#0,29)