2010 and 2009 Comparison Surrender rates have improved compared to the prior year for group retirement products, individual fixed annuities and individual variable annuities as surrenders have returned to more normal levels.
Surrender rates for individual fixed annuities have decreased significantly in 2010 due to the low interest rate environment and the relative competitiveness of interest credited rates on the existing block of fixed annuities versus interest rates on alternative investment options available in the marketplace.
Surrender rates for group retirement products are expected to increase in 2011 as certain large group surrenders are anticipated.2009 and 2008 Comparison Surrenders and other withdrawals increased in 2009 for group retirement products primarily due to higher large group surrenders.
However, surrender rates and withdrawals have improved for individual fixed annuities and individual variable annuities.
The following table presents reserves by surrender charge category and surrender rates:
## Table 0 ##
* Excludes mutual funds of $9.0 billion and $8.1 billion in 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Financial Services Operations AIG’s Financial Services subsidiaries engage in diversified activities including commercial aircraft leasing and the remaining Capital Markets portfolios, which are conducted through ILFC and AIGFP, respectively.
Following the classification of AGF as discontinued operations in the third quarter of 2010 (see Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial Statements), AIG’s remaining consumer finance businesses are now reported in AIG’s Other operations category as part of Divested businesses.
As discussed in Note 3 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, in order to align financial reporting with changes made during the third quarter of 2010 to the manner in which AIG’s chief operating decision makers review the businesses to make decisions about resources to be allocated and to assess performance, changes were made to AIG’s segment information.
During the third quarter of 2010, AIG’s Asset Management Group undertook the management responsibilities for non-derivative assets and liabilities of the Capital Markets’ businesses of the Financial Services segment.
These assets and liabilities are being managed on a spread basis, in concert with the MIP.
Accordingly, gains and losses related to these assets and liabilities, primarily consisting of credit valuation adjustment gains and losses are reported in AIG’s Other operations category as part of Asset Management — Direct Investment business.
Also, intercompany interest related to loans from AIG Funding Inc.  (AIG Funding) to AIGFP is no longer being allocated to Capital Markets from Other operations.
The remaining Capital Markets derivatives business continues to be reported in the Financial Services segment as part of Capital Markets results.
American International Group, Inc. , and Subsidiaries solely for illustrative purposes.
The selection of these specific events should not be construed as a prediction, but only as a demonstration of the potential effects of such events.
These scenarios should not be construed as the only risks AIG faces; these events are shown as an indication of several possible losses AIG could experience.
In addition, losses from these and other risks could be materially higher than illustrated.
The sensitivity factors utilized for 2010 and presented above were selected based on historical data from 1990 to 2010, as follows (see the table below): ?
a 100 basis point parallel shift in the yield curve is broadly consistent with a one standard deviation movement of the benchmark ten-year treasury yield; ?
a 20 percent drop for equity and alternative investments is broadly consistent with a one standard deviation movement in the S&P 500; and ?
a 10 percent depreciation of foreign currency exchange rates is consistent with a one standard deviation movement in the U. S.  dollar (USD)/Japanese Yen (JPY) exchange rate.
## Table 1 ##
Operational Risk Management AIG’s Operational Risk Management department (ORM) oversees AIG’s operational risk management practices.
The Director of ORM reports to the CRO.
ORM is responsible for establishing and maintaining the framework, principles and guidelines of AIG’s operational risk management program.
Each business unit is responsible for its operational risks and implementing the components of the operational risk management program to effectively identify, assess, monitor and mitigate such risks.
This responsibility includes developing and implementing policies, procedures, management oversight processes, and other governance-related activities consistent with AIG’s overall operational risk management process.
Senior operational risk executives in the businesses report to the Director of ORM and to business management.
This reporting structure facilitates development of business-specific knowledge of operational risk matters, while at the same time maintaining company-wide consistency in AIG’s overall approach to operational risk management.
A strong operational risk management program facilitates escalation and resolution of operational risk issues.
In order to accomplish this, AIG’s operational risk management program is designed to: ?
pro-actively address potential operational risk issues; ?
create transparency at all levels of the organization; and ?
assign clear ownership and accountability for addressing identified issues.
As part of the operational risk management framework, AIG has implemented a risk and control self assessment (RCSA) process.
The RCSA process is used to identify key operational risks and evaluate the effectiveness of existing controls to mitigate those risks.
Corrective action plans are developed to address any identified issues.
In 2010, business units continued to enhance their RCSA processes to perform more robust risk assessments.
American International Group, Inc. , and Subsidiaries AIG’s consolidated risk target is to maintain a minimum liquidity buffer such that AIG Parent’s liquidity needs under the ERM stress scenarios do not exceed 80 percent of AIG Parent’s overall liquidity sources over the specified two-year horizon.
If the 80 percent minimum threshold is projected to be breached over this defined time horizon, AIG will take appropriate actions to further increase liquidity sources or reduce liquidity needs to maintain the target threshold, although no assurance can be given that this would be possible under then-prevailing market conditions.
AIG expects to enter into additional capital maintenance agreements with its U. S.  insurance companies to manage the flow of capital and funds between AIG Parent and the insurance companies.
As a result of these ERM stress tests, AIG believes that it has sufficient liquidity at the AIG Parent level to satisfy future liquidity requirements and meet its obligations, including reasonably foreseeable contingencies or events.
See further discussion regarding AIG Parent and subsidiary liquidity considerations in Liquidity of Parent and Subsidiaries below.
Analysis of sources and uses of cash The following table presents selected data from AIG’s Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows:
## Table 2 ##
Net cash provided by operating activities was positive for both 2010 and 2009 compared to negative in 2008, principally due to positive cash flows from AIG’s life insurance subsidiaries.
Insurance companies generally receive most premiums in advance of the payment of claims or policy benefits, but the ability of Chartis to generate positive cash flow is affected by operating expenses, the frequency and severity of losses under its insurance policies and policy retention rates.
Cash provided by Chartis operations was $1.9 billion for 2010 compared to $2.8 billion in 2009 as a reduction in claims paid was more than offset by declines in premiums collected, arising primarily from a decrease in domestic production.
Catastrophic events and significant casualty losses, the timing and effect of which are inherently unpredictable, reduce operating cash flow for Chartis operations.
Cash provided by AIG’s life insurance subsidiaries, including entities presented as discontinued operations, was $15.5 billion for 2010 compared to $9.1 billion in 2009 as growth in international markets was partially offset by a decrease in cash flows from domestic operations.
Cash flows provided from Financial Services including entities presented as discontinued operations were $1.4 billion and $5.4 billion for 2010 and 2009, respectively.
The decrease can be attributed in part to the continued wind-down of AIGFP’s businesses and portfolio.
Cash provided by Chartis was $2.8 billion for 2009 compared to $4.8 billion in 2008 as a reduction in claims paid was more than offset by reduced premiums collected.
Cash provided by life insurance operations, including entities presented as discontinued operations, was $9.1 billion for 2009 compared to $22 billion in 2008.
Reduced cash flows were primarily driven by the continuing impact of the negative events during the second half of 2008.
Cash provided from Financial Services, including entities presented as discontinued operations, was $5.4 billion for 2009 compared to $28.9 billion operating cash outflows in 2008, primarily related to collateral posting requirements.
Although many clients use both active and passive strategies, the application of these strategies differs greatly.
For example, clients may use index products to gain exposure to a market or asset class pending reallocation to an active manager.
This has the effect of increasing turnover of index AUM.
In addition, institutional non-ETP index assignments tend to be very large (multibillion dollars) and typically reflect low fee rates.
This has the potential to exaggerate the significance of net flows in institutional index products on BlackRock’s revenues and earnings.
Equity Year-end 2012 equity AUM of $1.845 trillion increased by $285.4 billion, or 18%, from the end of 2011, largely due to flows into regional, country-specific and global mandates and the effect of higher market valuations.
Equity AUM growth included $54.0 billion in net new business and $3.6 billion in new assets related to the acquisition of Claymore.
Net new business of $54.0 billion was driven by net inflows of $53.0 billion and $19.1 billion into iShares and non-ETP index accounts, respectively.
Passive inflows were offset by active net outflows of $18.1 billion, with net outflows of $10.0 billion and $8.1 billion from fundamental and scientific active equity products, respectively.
Passive strategies represented 84% of equity AUM with the remaining 16% in active mandates.
Institutional investors represented 62% of equity AUM, while iShares, and retail and HNW represented 29% and 9%, respectively.
At year-end 2012, 63% of equity AUM was managed for clients in the Americas (defined as the United States, Caribbean, Canada, Latin America and Iberia) compared with 28% and 9% managed for clients in EMEA and Asia-Pacific, respectively.
BlackRock’s effective fee rates fluctuate due to changes in AUM mix.
Approximately half of BlackRock’s equity AUM is tied to international markets, including emerging markets, which tend to have higher fee rates than similar U. S.  equity strategies.
Accordingly, fluctuations in international equity markets, which do not consistently move in tandem with U. S.  markets, may have a greater impact on BlackRock’s effective equity fee rates and revenues.
Fixed Income Fixed income AUM ended 2012 at $1.259 trillion, rising $11.6 billion, or 1%, relative to December 31, 2011.
Growth in AUM reflected $43.3 billion in net new business, excluding the two large previously mentioned low-fee outflows, $75.4 billion in market and foreign exchange gains and $3.0 billion in new assets related to Claymore.
Net new business was led by flows into domestic specialty and global bond mandates, with net inflows of $28.8 billion, $13.6 billion and $3.1 billion into iShares, non-ETP index and model-based products, respectively, partially offset by net outflows of $2.2 billion from fundamental strategies.
Fixed Income AUM was split between passive and active strategies with 48% and 52%, respectively.
Institutional investors represented 74% of fixed income AUM while iShares and retail and HNW represented 15% and 11%, respectively.
At year-end 2012, 59% of fixed income AUM was managed for clients in the Americas compared with 33% and 8% managed for clients in EMEA and AsiaPacific, respectively.
Multi-Asset Class Component Changes in Multi-Asset Class AUM

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="3">2010</td><td colspan="3"> 2009</td></tr><tr><td> At December 31, <i>(in millions)</i> </td><td>Group Retirement Products*</td><td>Individual Fixed Annuities</td><td>Individual Variable Annuities</td><td>Group Retirement Products*</td><td>Individual Fixed Annuities</td><td>Individual Variable Annuities </td></tr><tr><td>No surrender charge</td><td>$52,742</td><td>$14,006</td><td>$11,859</td><td>$47,854</td><td>$11,444</td><td>$11,161</td></tr><tr><td>0% - 2%</td><td>1,292</td><td>3,510</td><td>4,083</td><td>1,509</td><td>3,054</td><td>4,094</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than 2% - 4%</td><td>1,754</td><td>5,060</td><td>2,040</td><td>1,918</td><td>5,635</td><td>2,066</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than 4%</td><td>2,753</td><td>22,777</td><td>7,361</td><td>3,213</td><td>23,885</td><td>6,758</td></tr><tr><td>Non-Surrenderable</td><td>792</td><td>3,136</td><td>238</td><td>850</td><td>3,184</td><td>558</td></tr><tr><td>Total reserves</td><td>$59,333</td><td>$48,489</td><td>$25,581</td><td>$55,344</td><td>$47,202</td><td>$24,637</td></tr><tr><td>Surrender rates</td><td>10.3%</td><td>7.4%</td><td>11.4%</td><td>12.3%</td><td>14.4%</td><td>12.1%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>Period</td><td>StandardDeviation</td><td>Suggested2010Scenario</td><td>2010 Scenarioas aMultiple ofStandardDeviation</td><td>2010 Change/ Return</td><td>2010 as aMultiple ofStandardDeviation</td><td>Original2009 Scenario(based onStandardDeviation for1989-2009Period)</td></tr><tr><td>10-Year Treasury</td><td>1990-2010</td><td>0.01</td><td>0.01</td><td>1.01</td><td>-0.01</td><td>0.56</td><td>0.01</td></tr><tr><td>S&P 500</td><td>1990-2010</td><td>0.19</td><td>0.20</td><td>1.05</td><td>0.13</td><td>0.67</td><td>0.20</td></tr><tr><td>USD/JPY</td><td>1990-2010</td><td>0.11</td><td>0.10</td><td>0.92</td><td>0.15</td><td>1.34</td><td>0.10</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> Years Ended December 31, <i>(in millions)</i> </td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td></tr><tr><td>Summary:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities</td><td>$16,910</td><td>$18,584</td><td>$-122</td></tr><tr><td>Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities</td><td>-10,225</td><td>5,778</td><td>47,176</td></tr><tr><td>Net cash used in financing activities</td><td>-9,261</td><td>-28,997</td><td>-40,734</td></tr><tr><td>Effect of exchange rate changes on cash</td><td>39</td><td>533</td><td>38</td></tr><tr><td>Change in cash</td><td>-2,537</td><td>-4,102</td><td>6,358</td></tr><tr><td>Cash at beginning of year</td><td>4,400</td><td>8,642</td><td>2,284</td></tr><tr><td>Reclassification of assets held for sale</td><td>-305</td><td>-140</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Cash at end of year</td><td>$1,558</td><td>$4,400</td><td>$8,642</td></tr></table>

Question: What is the average amount of No surrender charge of 2010 Individual Variable Annuities, and Net cash used in financing activities of 2009 ?
Answer: 20428
Reasoning program: add(11859.0,28997.0), divide(#0,const_2)