management 2019s discussion and analysis 126 jpmorgan chase & co./2014 annual report while useful as a current view of credit exposure , the net fair value of the derivative receivables does not capture the potential future variability of that credit exposure .
to capture the potential future variability of credit exposure , the firm calculates , on a client-by-client basis , three measures of potential derivatives-related credit loss : peak , derivative risk equivalent ( 201cdre 201d ) , and average exposure ( 201cavg 201d ) .
these measures all incorporate netting and collateral benefits , where applicable .
peak exposure to a counterparty is an extreme measure of exposure calculated at a 97.5% ( 97.5 % ) confidence level .
dre exposure is a measure that expresses the risk of derivative exposure on a basis intended to be equivalent to the risk of loan exposures .
the measurement is done by equating the unexpected loss in a derivative counterparty exposure ( which takes into consideration both the loss volatility and the credit rating of the counterparty ) with the unexpected loss in a loan exposure ( which takes into consideration only the credit rating of the counterparty ) .
dre is a less extreme measure of potential credit loss than peak and is the primary measure used by the firm for credit approval of derivative transactions .
finally , avg is a measure of the expected fair value of the firm 2019s derivative receivables at future time periods , including the benefit of collateral .
avg exposure over the total life of the derivative contract is used as the primary metric for pricing purposes and is used to calculate credit capital and the cva , as further described below .
the three year avg exposure was $ 37.5 billion and $ 35.4 billion at december 31 , 2014 and 2013 , respectively , compared with derivative receivables , net of all collateral , of $ 59.4 billion and $ 51.3 billion at december 31 , 2014 and 2013 , respectively .
the fair value of the firm 2019s derivative receivables incorporates an adjustment , the cva , to reflect the credit quality of counterparties .
the cva is based on the firm 2019s avg to a counterparty and the counterparty 2019s credit spread in the credit derivatives market .
the primary components of changes in cva are credit spreads , new deal activity or unwinds , and changes in the underlying market environment .
the firm believes that active risk management is essential to controlling the dynamic credit risk in the derivatives portfolio .
in addition , the firm 2019s risk management process takes into consideration the potential impact of wrong-way risk , which is broadly defined as the potential for increased correlation between the firm 2019s exposure to a counterparty ( avg ) and the counterparty 2019s credit quality .
many factors may influence the nature and magnitude of these correlations over time .
to the extent that these correlations are identified , the firm may adjust the cva associated with that counterparty 2019s avg .
the firm risk manages exposure to changes in cva by entering into credit derivative transactions , as well as interest rate , foreign exchange , equity and commodity derivative transactions .
the accompanying graph shows exposure profiles to the firm 2019s current derivatives portfolio over the next 10 years as calculated by the dre and avg metrics .
the two measures generally show that exposure will decline after the first year , if no new trades are added to the portfolio .
the following table summarizes the ratings profile by derivative counterparty of the firm 2019s derivative receivables , including credit derivatives , net of other liquid securities collateral , for the dates indicated .
the ratings scale is based on the firm 2019s internal ratings , which generally correspond to the ratings as defined by s&p and moody 2019s .
ratings profile of derivative receivables rating equivalent 2014 2013 ( a ) december 31 , ( in millions , except ratios ) exposure net of all collateral % (  % ) of exposure net of all collateral exposure net of all collateral % (  % ) of exposure net of all collateral .

Rating equivalent
2014
2013<sup>(a)</sup>
December 31,(in millions, except ratios)
Exposure net of all collateral
% of exposure net of all collateral
Exposure net of all collateral
% of exposure net of all collateral
AAA/Aaa to AA-/Aa3
$19,202
32%
$12,953
25%
A+/A1 to A-/A3
13,940
24
12,930
25
BBB+/Baa1 to BBB-/Baa3
19,008
32
15,220
30
BB+/Ba1 to B-/B3
6,384
11
6,806
13
CCC+/Caa1 and below
837
1
3,415
7
Total
$59,371
100%
$51,324
100%

( a ) the prior period amounts have been revised to conform with the current period presentation. .

Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. what percent of the ratings profile of derivative receivables were junk rated in 2013?
Choices:
697
0
6391
37
20.0
Correct choice index: 4