sharick008/convfinqa huggingface dataset:
entergy mississippi , inc . management 2019s financial discussion and analysis 2010 compared to 2009 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 charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2010 to 2009 . amount ( in millions ) .

amount ( in millions ): 2009 net revenue: 536.7
volume/weather: 18.9
other: -0.3
2010 net revenue: 555.3

the volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase of 1046 gwh , or 8% ( 8 % ) , in billed electricity usage in all sectors , primarily due to the effect of more favorable weather on the residential sector . gross operating revenues , fuel and purchased power expenses , and other regulatory charges ( credits ) gross operating revenues increased primarily due to an increase of $ 22 million in power management rider revenue as the result of higher rates , the volume/weather variance discussed above , and an increase in grand gulf rider revenue as a result of higher rates and increased usage , offset by a decrease of $ 23.5 million in fuel cost recovery revenues due to lower fuel rates . fuel and purchased power expenses decreased primarily due to a decrease in deferred fuel expense as a result of prior over-collections , offset by an increase in the average market price of purchased power coupled with increased net area demand . other regulatory charges increased primarily due to increased recovery of costs associated with the power management recovery rider . other income statement variances 2011 compared to 2010 other operation and maintenance expenses decreased primarily due to : a $ 5.4 million decrease in compensation and benefits costs primarily resulting from an increase in the accrual for incentive-based compensation in 2010 and a decrease in stock option expense ; and the sale of $ 4.9 million of surplus oil inventory . the decrease was partially offset by an increase of $ 3.9 million in legal expenses due to the deferral in 2010 of certain litigation expenses in accordance with regulatory treatment . taxes other than income taxes increased primarily due to an increase in ad valorem taxes due to a higher 2011 assessment as compared to 2010 , partially offset by higher capitalized property taxes as compared with prior year . depreciation and amortization expenses increased primarily due to an increase in plant in service . interest expense decreased primarily due to a revision caused by ferc 2019s acceptance of a change in the treatment of funds received from independent power producers for transmission interconnection projects. .

Questions:
what was the total increase in the volume/weather segment from 2009 to 2010?
and what is the average of this increase per gwh increased in the billed electricity usage?
in that same period, what was the total change in the net revenue?
and what is this change as a percentage of that net revenue in 2009?

Answers:
18900000
18068.8
18.6
3.5%
entergy arkansas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis results of operations net income 2017 compared to 2016 net income decreased $ 27.4 million primarily due to higher nuclear refueling outage expenses , higher depreciation and amortization expenses , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher interest expense , partially offset by higher other income . 2016 compared to 2015 net income increased $ 92.9 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower other operation and maintenance expenses , partially offset by a higher effective income tax rate and 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 charges ( credits ) . a0 a0following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2017 to 2016 . amount ( in millions ) .

amount ( in millions ): 2016 net revenue: 1520.5
retail electric price: 33.8
opportunity sales: 5.6
asset retirement obligation: -14.8
volume/weather: -29
other: 6.5
2017 net revenue: 1522.6

the retail electric price variance is primarily due to the implementation of formula rate plan rates effective with the first billing cycle of january 2017 and an increase in base rates effective february 24 , 2016 , each as approved by the apsc . a significant portion of the base rate increase was related to the purchase of power block 2 of the union power station in march 2016 . the increase was partially offset by decreases in the energy efficiency rider , as approved by the apsc , effective april 2016 and january 2017 . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case and formula rate plan filings . see note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the union power station purchase . the opportunity sales variance results from the estimated net revenue effect of the 2017 and 2016 ferc orders in the opportunity sales proceeding attributable to wholesale customers . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the opportunity sales proceeding. .

Questions:
what is the sum of net revenues from 2016 and 2017?
what is that divided by 2?

Answers:
3043.1
1521.55
stockholder return performance graphs the following graph compares the cumulative 5-year total stockholder return on our common stock relative to the cumulative total return of the nasdaq composite index and the s&p 400 information technology index . the graph assumes that the value of the investment in our common stock and in each index ( including reinvestment of dividends ) was $ 100 on december 29 , 2007 and tracks it through december 29 , 2012 . comparison of 5 year cumulative total return* among cadence design systems , inc. , the nasdaq composite index , and s&p 400 information technology cadence design systems , inc . nasdaq composite s&p 400 information technology 12/29/1212/31/111/1/111/2/101/3/0912/29/07 *$ 100 invested on 12/29/07 in stock or 12/31/07 in index , including reinvestment of dividends . indexes calculated on month-end basis . copyright a9 2013 s&p , a division of the mcgraw-hill companies inc . all rights reserved. .

12/29/2007: cadence design systems inc .: 100
nasdaq composite: 100
s&p 400 information technology: 100
1/3/2009: cadence design systems inc .: 22.55
nasdaq composite: 59.03
s&p 400 information technology: 54.6
1/2/2010: cadence design systems inc .: 35.17
nasdaq composite: 82.25
s&p 400 information technology: 82.76
1/1/2011: cadence design systems inc .: 48.5
nasdaq composite: 97.32
s&p 400 information technology: 108.11
12/31/2011: cadence design systems inc .: 61.07
nasdaq composite: 98.63
s&p 400 information technology: 95.48
12/29/2012: cadence design systems inc .: 78.92
nasdaq composite: 110.78
s&p 400 information technology: 109.88

the stock price performance included in this graph is not necessarily indicative of future stock price performance .

Questions:
for the five year period ended in 2012, what was the fluctuation of the stockholder return for cadence design systems inc .?
and what is this fluctuation as a percent of that return in 2007?
in that same period, what was that fluctuation for the nasdaq composite?
and what was this nasdaq composite fluctuation as a percentage of the return of that stock in 2007?
what was, then, the difference between the cadence design systems inc . percentage and this nasdaq composite one?

Answers:
-21.08
-21.08%
10.78
10.78%
-31.86
shareowner return performance graph the following performance graph and related information shall not be deemed 201csoliciting material 201d or to be 201cfiled 201d with the securities and exchange commission , nor shall such information be incorporated by reference into any future filing under the securities act of 1933 or securities exchange act of 1934 , each as amended , except to the extent that the company specifically incorporates it by reference into such filing . the following graph shows a five-year comparison of cumulative total shareowners 2019 returns for our class b common stock , the s&p 500 index , and the dow jones transportation average . the comparison of the total cumulative return on investment , which is the change in the quarterly stock price plus reinvested dividends for each of the quarterly periods , assumes that $ 100 was invested on december 31 , 2001 in the s&p 500 index , the dow jones transportation average , and the class b common stock of united parcel service , inc . comparison of five year cumulative total return $ 40.00 $ 60.00 $ 80.00 $ 100.00 $ 120.00 $ 140.00 $ 160.00 $ 180.00 $ 200.00 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 s&p 500 ups dj transport .

12/31/01: united parcel service inc .: 100
s&p 500 index: 100
dow jones transportation average: 100
12/31/02: united parcel service inc .: 117.19
s&p 500 index: 77.9
dow jones transportation average: 88.52
12/31/03: united parcel service inc .: 140.49
s&p 500 index: 100.24
dow jones transportation average: 116.7
12/31/04: united parcel service inc .: 163.54
s&p 500 index: 111.15
dow jones transportation average: 149.06
12/31/05: united parcel service inc .: 146.35
s&p 500 index: 116.61
dow jones transportation average: 166.42
12/31/06: united parcel service inc .: 148.92
s&p 500 index: 135.02
dow jones transportation average: 182.76

securities authorized for issuance under equity compensation plans the following table provides information as of december 31 , 2006 regarding compensation plans under which our class a common stock is authorized for issuance . these plans do not authorize the issuance of our class b common stock. .

Questions:
what was the performance value of the united parcel service , inc . in 2006?
and what was the change in this performance value from 2001 to 2006?
what was the performance value of the s&p 500 index in 2006?
and what was the change in this performance value from 2001 to 2006?
what is, then, the difference between the performance value change of the united parcel service , inc . and the one of s&p 500 index?

Answers:
148.92
48.92
135.02
35.02
13.9
entergy texas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis results of operations net income 2016 compared to 2015 net income increased $ 37.9 million primarily due to lower other operation and maintenance expenses , the asset write-off of its receivable associated with the spindletop gas storage facility in 2015 , and higher net revenue . 2015 compared to 2014 net income decreased $ 5.2 million primarily due to the asset write-off of its receivable associated with the spindletop gas storage facility and higher other operation and maintenance expenses , partially offset by higher net revenue and a lower effective tax rate . net revenue 2016 compared to 2015 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 charges . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2016 to 2015 . amount ( in millions ) .

amount ( in millions ): 2015 net revenue: 637.2
reserve equalization: 14.3
purchased power capacity: 12.4
transmission revenue: 7
retail electric price: 5.4
net wholesale: -27.8
other: -4.3
2016 net revenue: 644.2

the reserve equalization variance is primarily due to a reduction in reserve equalization expense primarily due to changes in the entergy system generation mix compared to the same period in 2015 as a result of the execution of a new purchased power agreement and entergy mississippi 2019s exit from the system agreement , each in november 2015 , and entergy texas 2019s exit from the system agreement in august 2016 . see note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the system agreement . the purchased power capacity variance is primarily due to decreased expenses due to the termination of the purchased power agreements between entergy louisiana and entergy texas in august 2016 , as well as capacity cost changes for ongoing purchased power capacity contracts . the transmission revenue variance is primarily due to an increase in attachment o rates charged by miso to transmission customers and a settlement of attachment o rates previously billed to transmission customers by miso. .

Questions:
what was the net revenue in 2016 for entergy texas , inc.?
and what was it in 2015?
what was, then, the change over the year?
what was the net revenue in 2015 for entergy texas , inc.?
and how much does that change represent in relation to this 2015 net revenue?

Answers:
644.2
637.2
7
637.2
1.1%
entergy texas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis plan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business see the 201cplan to spin off the utility 2019s transmission business 201d section of entergy corporation and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis for a discussion of this matter , including the planned retirement of debt and preferred securities . results of operations net income 2011 compared to 2010 net income increased by $ 14.6 million primarily due to higher net revenue , partially offset by higher taxes other than income taxes , higher other operation and maintenance expenses , and higher depreciation and amortization expenses . 2010 compared to 2009 net income increased by $ 2.4 million primarily due to higher net revenue and lower interest expense , partially offset by lower other income , higher taxes other than income taxes , and higher other operation and maintenance expenses . net revenue 2011 compared to 2010 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 charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2011 to 2010 . amount ( in millions ) .

amount ( in millions ): 2010 net revenue: 540.2
retail electric price: 36
volume/weather: 21.3
purchased power capacity: -24.6
other: 4.9
2011 net revenue: 577.8

the retail electric price variance is primarily due to rate actions , including an annual base rate increase of $ 59 million beginning august 2010 , with an additional increase of $ 9 million beginning may 2011 , as a result of the settlement of the december 2009 rate case . see note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case settlement . the volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase of 721 gwh , or 4.5% ( 4.5 % ) , in billed electricity usage , including the effect of more favorable weather on residential and commercial sales compared to last year . usage in the industrial sector increased 8.2% ( 8.2 % ) primarily in the chemicals and refining industries . the purchased power capacity variance is primarily due to price increases for ongoing purchased power capacity and additional capacity purchases. .

Questions:
what was the total variance in net revenue from 2010 to 2011?
and what was the variance in volume/weather in that same period?
how much, then, does this volume/weather variance represent in relation to the net revenue one, in percentage?

Answers:
37.6
21.3
56.6%
market price and dividends d u k e r e a l t y c o r p o r a t i o n 3 8 2 0 0 2 a n n u a l r e p o r t the company 2019s common shares are listed for trading on the new york stock exchange , symbol dre . the following table sets forth the high and low sales prices of the common stock for the periods indicated and the dividend paid per share during each such period . comparable cash dividends are expected in the future . on january 29 , 2003 , the company declared a quarterly cash dividend of $ .455 per share , payable on february 28 , 2003 , to common shareholders of record on february 14 , 2003. .

2002 high (1): december 31: 25.84
september 30: 28.88
june 30: 28.95
march 31: 26.5
2002 low (1): december 31: 21.5
september 30: 21.4
june 30: 25.46
march 31: 22.92
2002 dividend: december 31: 455
september 30: 455
june 30: 450
march 31: 450
2002 high (2): december 31: 24.8
september 30: 26.17
june 30: 24.99
march 31: 25.44
2002 low (2): december 31: 22
september 30: 21.6
june 30: 22
march 31: 21.85
dividend: december 31: 45
september 30: 45
june 30: 43
march 31: 43

.

Questions:
what was the cash dividend per share in the last quarter of 2002?
and what was it in the first quarter?
what was, then, the change in that cash dividend throughout 2002?
and how much does this change represent in relation in relation to that cash dividend in the first quarter?
how much is that in percentage?

Answers:
.455
.450
.005
.0111
1.11%
note 8 2014 benefit plans the company has defined benefit pension plans covering certain employees in the united states and certain international locations . postretirement healthcare and life insurance benefits provided to qualifying domestic retirees as well as other postretirement benefit plans in international countries are not material . the measurement date used for the company 2019s employee benefit plans is september 30 . effective january 1 , 2018 , the legacy u.s . pension plan was frozen to limit the participation of employees who are hired or re-hired by the company , or who transfer employment to the company , on or after january 1 , net pension cost for the years ended september 30 included the following components: .

pension plans 2018: service cost: 136
interest cost: 90
expected return on plan assets: -154
amortization of prior service credit: -13
amortization of loss: 78
settlements: 2
net pension cost: 137
net pension cost included in the preceding table that is attributable to international plans: 34
pension plans 2017: service cost: 110
interest cost: 61
expected return on plan assets: -112
amortization of prior service credit: -14
amortization of loss: 92
settlements: 2014
net pension cost: 138
net pension cost included in the preceding table that is attributable to international plans: 43
pension plans 2016: service cost: 81
interest cost: 72
expected return on plan assets: -109
amortization of prior service credit: -15
amortization of loss: 77
settlements: 7
net pension cost: 113
net pension cost included in the preceding table that is attributable to international plans: 35

net pension cost included in the preceding table that is attributable to international plans $ 34 $ 43 $ 35 the amounts provided above for amortization of prior service credit and amortization of loss represent the reclassifications of prior service credits and net actuarial losses that were recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income ( loss ) in prior periods . the settlement losses recorded in 2018 and 2016 primarily included lump sum benefit payments associated with the company 2019s u.s . supplemental pension plan . the company recognizes pension settlements when payments from the supplemental plan exceed the sum of service and interest cost components of net periodic pension cost associated with this plan for the fiscal year. .

Questions:
what was the interest cost for 2018?
and in 2017?
combined, what was the total cost for the two years?
and in 2016?
so what was the total for the three years?
and what was the average during this period?

Answers:
90
61
151
72
223
74.33
the following graph compares the cumulative 5-year total return to shareholders of cadence design systems , inc . 2019s common stock relative to the cumulative total returns of the s & p 500 index , the nasdaq composite index and the s & p information technology index . the graph assumes that the value of the investment in the company 2019s common stock and in each of the indexes ( including reinvestment of dividends ) was $ 100 on december 29 , 2001 and tracks it through december 30 , 2006 . comparison of 5 year cumulative total return* among cadence design systems , inc. , the s & p 500 index , the nasdaq composite index and the s & p information technology index 12/30/0612/31/051/1/051/3/0412/28/0212/29/01 cadence design systems , inc . nasdaq composite s & p information technology s & p 500 * $ 100 invested on 12/29/01 in stock or on 12/31/01 in index-incuding reinvestment of dividends . indexes calculated on month-end basis . copyright b7 2007 , standard & poor 2019s , a division of the mcgraw-hill companies , inc . all rights reserved . www.researchdatagroup.com/s&p.htm december 29 , december 28 , january 3 , january 1 , december 31 , december 30 .

december 29 2001: cadence design systems inc .: 100
s & p 500: 100
nasdaq composite: 100
s & p information technology: 100
december 28 2002: cadence design systems inc .: 54.38
s & p 500: 77.9
nasdaq composite: 71.97
s & p information technology: 62.59
january 3 2004: cadence design systems inc .: 81.52
s & p 500: 100.24
nasdaq composite: 107.18
s & p information technology: 92.14
january 1 2005: cadence design systems inc .: 61.65
s & p 500: 111.15
nasdaq composite: 117.07
s & p information technology: 94.5
december 31 2005: cadence design systems inc .: 75.54
s & p 500: 116.61
nasdaq composite: 120.5
s & p information technology: 95.44
december 30 2006: cadence design systems inc .: 79.96
s & p 500: 135.03
nasdaq composite: 137.02
s & p information technology: 103.47

.

Questions:
what was the performance value of the cadence design systems inc in 2004?
what was, then, the change in its performance value, considering 2004 and the original amount invested in it in 2001?
and how much does this change represent in relation to that original amount invested?

Answers:
81.52
-18.48
-18.5%
item 5 . market for the registrant 2019s common equity , related stockholder matters and issuer purchases of equity securities the following graph compares annual total return of our common stock , the standard & poor 2019s 500 composite stock index ( 201cs&p 500 index 201d ) and our peer group ( 201cloews peer group 201d ) for the five years ended december 31 , 2015 . the graph assumes that the value of the investment in our common stock , the s&p 500 index and the loews peer group was $ 100 on december 31 , 2010 and that all dividends were reinvested. .

2010: loews common stock: 100
s&p 500 index: 100
loews peer group ( a ): 100
2011: loews common stock: 97.37
s&p 500 index: 102.11
loews peer group ( a ): 101.59
2012: loews common stock: 106.04
s&p 500 index: 118.45
loews peer group ( a ): 115.19
2013: loews common stock: 126.23
s&p 500 index: 156.82
loews peer group ( a ): 145.12
2014: loews common stock: 110.59
s&p 500 index: 178.29
loews peer group ( a ): 152.84
2015: loews common stock: 101.72
s&p 500 index: 180.75
loews peer group ( a ): 144.7

( a ) the loews peer group consists of the following companies that are industry competitors of our principal operating subsidiaries : ace limited , w.r . berkley corporation , the chubb corporation , energy transfer partners l.p. , ensco plc , the hartford financial services group , inc. , kinder morgan energy partners , l.p . ( included through november 26 , 2014 when it was acquired by kinder morgan inc. ) , noble corporation , spectra energy corp , transocean ltd . and the travelers companies , inc . dividend information we have paid quarterly cash dividends on loews common stock in each year since 1967 . regular dividends of $ 0.0625 per share of loews common stock were paid in each calendar quarter of 2015 and 2014. .

Questions:
from 2010 to 2011, what was the change in the value of the loews common stock?
and what was this change as a portion of the 2010 value of that stock?
and from 2010 to 2012, what was the change in the value of that stock?
how much did this change represent in relation to that 2010 value?

Answers:
-2.63
-2.6%
6.04
6.0%