trismik/FinRAG huggingface dataset:
Net Debt to Adjusted EBITDA Ratio
(UNAUDITED)
($ in millions)
(1) 2017 Adjusted EBITDA shown pro forma, assuming the Level 3 acquisition and the colocation and data center sale took place on January 1, 2017.

2019
2018
2017(1)
Gross Debt
$35,039
36,352
38,053
Cash and cash equivalents
(1,690)
(488)
(551)
Net debt
$33,349
35,864
37,502
Adjusted EBITDA excluding integration and transformation costs and special items (1)
$9,070
9,040
8,686
Net Debt to Adjusted EBITDA Ratio
3.7
4.0
4.3


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the total gross debt over the three years?
Choices:
76106
109444
73917
71402
33338
Correct choice index: 1
2007 annual report 21 five-year stock performance graph the graph below illustrates the cumulative total shareholder return on snap-on common stock since 2002 , assuming that dividends were reinvested .
the graph compares snap-on 2019s performance to that of the standard & poor 2019s 500 stock index ( 201cs&p 500 201d ) and a peer group .
snap-on incorporated total shareholder return ( 1 ) 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 snap-on incorporated peer group s&p 500 fiscal year ended ( 2 ) snap-on incorporated peer group ( 3 ) s&p 500 .

Fiscal Year Ended (2)
Snap-on Incorporated
Peer Group (3)
S&P 500
December 31, 2002
$100.00
$100.00
$100.00
December 31, 2003
118.80
126.16
128.68
December 31, 2004
130.66
152.42
142.69
December 31, 2005
146.97
157.97
149.70
December 31, 2006
191.27
185.10
173.34
December 31, 2007
198.05
216.19
182.87

( 1 ) assumes $ 100 was invested on december 31 , 2002 and that dividends were reinvested quarterly .
( 2 ) the company's fiscal year ends on the saturday closest to december 31 of each year ; the fiscal year end is assumed to be december 31 for ease of calculation .
( 3 ) the peer group includes : the black & decker corporation , cooper industries , ltd. , danaher corporation , emerson electric co. , fortune brands , inc. , genuine parts company , newell rubbermaid inc. , pentair , inc. , spx corporation , the stanley works and w.w .
grainger , inc. .

Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. in 2004 what was the ratio of the snap-on incorporated to the peer group perfomance
Choices:
-0.85724
0.85724
19915.1972
1.16654
0.82712
Correct choice index: 1
ADJUSTED EBITDA
(1) Fiscal 2019 average foreign exchange rate used for translation was 1.3255 USD/CDN.
(2) Fiscal 2018 was restated to comply with IFRS 15 and to reflect a change in accounting policy as well as to reclassify results from Cogeco Peer 1 as discontinued operations. For further details, please consult the "Accounting policies" and "Discontinued operations" sections.
(3) Fiscal 2019 actuals are translated at the average foreign exchange rate of fiscal 2018 which was 1.2773 USD/CDN.
Fiscal 2019 adjusted EBITDA increased by 10.0% (8.5% in constant currency) as a result of: • an increase in the American broadband services segment mainly as a result of strong organic growth combined with the impact of the MetroCast and FiberLight acquisitions; and • an increase in the Canadian broadband services segment resulting mainly from a decline in operating expenses.
For further details on the Corporation’s adjusted EBITDA, please refer to the "Segmented operating and financial results" section.

Years ended August 31,
2019 (1)
2018 (2)
Change
Change in constant currency (3)
Foreign exchange impact (3)
(in thousands of dollars, except percentages)
$
$
%
%
$
Canadian broadband services
688,681
681,020
1.1
1.3
(1,102)
American broadband services
465,645
369,200
26.1
21.5
16,911
Inter-segment eliminations and other
(46,386)
(43,402)
6.9
6.8
(12)
1,107,940
1,006,818
10.0
8.5
15,797


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What was the increase / (decrease) in the Inter-segment eliminations and other from 2018 to 2019?
Choices:
-2984000
5968
-46374
-89788
-2984
Correct choice index: 4
schlumberger limited and subsidiaries shares of common stock issued in treasury shares outstanding ( stated in millions ) .

Issued
In Treasury
Shares Outstanding
Balance, January 1, 2008
1,334
(138)
1,196
Shares sold to optionees less shares exchanged
–
5
5
Shares issued under employee stock purchase plan
–
2
2
Stock repurchase program
–
(21)
(21)
Issued on conversions of debentures
–
12
12
Balance, December 31, 2008
1,334
(140)
1,194
Shares sold to optionees less shares exchanged
–
4
4
Vesting of restricted stock
–
1
1
Shares issued under employee stock purchase plan
–
4
4
Stock repurchase program
–
(8)
(8)
Balance, December 31, 2009
1,334
(139)
1,195
Acquisition of Smith International, Inc.
100
76
176
Shares sold to optionees less shares exchanged
–
6
6
Shares issued under employee stock purchase plan
–
3
3
Stock repurchase program
–
(27)
(27)
Issued on conversions of debentures
–
8
8
Balance, December 31, 2010
1,434
(73)
1,361

see the notes to consolidated financial statements part ii , item 8 .

Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. what was the average beginning and ending balance of shares in millions outstanding during 2010?
Choices:
1194.5
1278.0
511.2
83
127800
Correct choice index: 1
B. Business Overview
Our Fleet
Our fleet currently consists of 23 Suezmax crude oil tankers, of which the vast majority have been built in Korea. The majority of our vessels are employed in the spot market, together with one vessel currently on a longer term time charter agreement expiring in 2021 or later. The vessels are considered homogenous and interchangeable as they have approximately the same freight capacity and ability to transport the same type of cargo.

Vessel
Built in 
Deadweight Tons  
Delivered to NAT in
Nordic Freedom
2005
159,331
2005
Nordic Moon
2002
160,305
2006
Nordic Apollo
2003
159,998
2006
Nordic Cosmos
2003
159,999
2006
Nordic Grace
2002
149,921
2009
Nordic Mistral
2002
164,236
2009
Nordic Passat
2002
164,274
2010
Nordic Vega
2010
163,940
2010
Nordic Breeze
2011
158,597
2011
Nordic Zenith
2011
158,645
2011
Nordic Sprinter
2005
159,089
2014
Nordic Skier
2005
159,089
2014
Nordic Light
2010
158,475
2015
Nordic Cross
2010
158,475
2015
Nordic Luna
2004
150,037
2016
Nordic Castor
2004
150,249
2016
Nordic Sirius
2000
150,183
2016
Nordic Pollux
2003
150,103
2016
Nordic Star
2016
159,000
2016
Nordic Space
2017
159,000
2017
Nordic Aquarius
2018
157,000
2018
Nordic Cygnus
2018
157,000
2018
Nordic Tellus
2018
157,000
2018


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the total weight of Nordic Freedom and Nordic Moon?
Choices:
319394
319636000000
319636
318662
320610
Correct choice index: 2
We have included Adjusted EBITDA in this report because it is a key measure that our management uses to understand and evaluate our core operating performance and trends, to generate future operating plans, to make strategic decisions regarding the allocation of capital and to make investments in initiatives that are focused on cultivating new markets for our solutions. We also use certain non-GAAP financial measures, including Adjusted EBITDA, as performance measures under our executive bonus plan. Further, we believe the exclusion of certain expenses in calculating Adjusted EBITDA facilitates comparisons of our operating performance on a period-to-period basis and, in the case of exclusion of acquisition-related expense and certain historical legal expenses, excludes items that we do not consider to be indicative of our core operating performance. Accordingly, we believe that Adjusted EBITDA provides useful information to investors and others in understanding and evaluating our operating results in the same manner as our management and board of directors.
Our use of Adjusted EBITDA has limitations as an analytical tool, and you should not consider it in isolation or as a substitute for analysis of our financial results as reported under GAAP. Some of these limitations are: (a) although depreciation and amortization are non-cash charges, the assets being depreciated and amortized may have to be replaced in the future, and Adjusted EBITDA does not reflect cash capital expenditure requirements for such replacements or for new capital expenditure requirements; (b) Adjusted EBITDA does not reflect changes in, or cash requirements for, our working capital needs; (c) Adjusted EBITDA does  may represent a reduction in cash available to us; and (e) other companies, including companies in our industry, may calculate Adjusted EBITDA or similarly titled measures differently, which reduces its usefulness as a comparative measure.
Because of these and other limitations, you should consider Adjusted EBITDA alongside our other GAAP-based financial performance measures, our net income and our other GAAP financial results. The following table presents a reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to net income, the most directly comparable GAAP measure, for each of the periods indicated (in thousands).

Year Ended December 31,
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
Adjusted EBITDA:
Net income
$53,330
$21,524
$29,251
$10,154
$11,768
Adjustments:
Interest expense, interest income and other income, net
(8,483)
503
1,133
(323)
526
Provision for / (benefit from) income taxes
5,566
(9,825)
2,990
4,227
5,697
Amortization and depreciation expense
22,134
21,721
17,734
6,490
5,808
Stock-based compensation expense
20,603
13,429
7,413
4,001
4,124
Acquisition-related expense
2,403
—
5,895
11,098
100
Litigation expense
12,754
45,729
7,212
13,387
6,347
Total adjustments
54,977
71,557
42,377
38,880
22,602
Adjusted EBITDA
$108,307
$93,081
$71,628
$49,034
$34,370


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What was the percentage change in adjusted EBITDA between 2018 and 2019?
Choices:
100
-7785500
16.36
14.06
818.39
Correct choice index: 2
entergy mississippi , inc .
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 $ 23.4 million primarily due to a lower effective income tax rate .
2010 compared to 2009 net income increased $ 6.0 million primarily due to higher net revenue and higher other income , partially offset by higher taxes other than income taxes , higher depreciation and amortization expenses , and higher interest expense .
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
$555.3
Volume/weather
(4.5)
Transmission equalization
4.5
Other
(0.4)
2011 net revenue
$554.9

the volume/weather variance is primarily due to a decrease of 97 gwh in weather-adjusted usage in the residential and commercial sectors and a decrease in sales volume in the unbilled sales period .
the transmission equalization variance is primarily due to the addition in 2011 of transmission investments that are subject to equalization .
gross operating revenues and fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to an increase of $ 57.5 million in gross wholesale revenues due to an increase in sales to affiliated customers , partially offset by a decrease of $ 26.9 million in power management rider revenue .
fuel and purchased power expenses increased primarily due to an increase in deferred fuel expense as a result of higher fuel revenues due to higher fuel rates , partially offset by a decrease in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power. .

Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. what was the ratio of the increase in the net income in 2011 compared to 2010
Choices:
-5.2
0.3
3.9
-3.9
390
Correct choice index: 2
The following table includes additional fair value information on financial assets and liabilities as at December 31, 2019 and 2018:
(1) Cash equivalents primarily correspond to deposits at call with banks.
(2) The carrying amount of the senior unsecured convertible bonds as reported above corresponds to the liability component only. For the convertible bonds issued on July 3, 2017 and outstanding as at December 31, 2017, the carrying amount of the senior unsecured convertible bonds corresponds to the liability component only, since, at initial recognition, an amount of $242 million was recorded directly in shareholders’ equity as the value of the equity instrument embedded in the convertible instrument.

2019
2019
2019
2018
2018
Level
Carrying Amount
Estimated Fair Value
Carrying Amount
Estimated Fair Value
Cash equivalents (1)
1
1,691
1,691
2,138
2,138
Long-term debt
– Bank loans (including current portion)
2
718
718
594
594
– Senior unsecured convertible bonds (2)
1
1,354
2,103
1,316
1,501


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the increase/ (decrease) in Cash equivalents of Carrying Amount from 2018 to 2019?
Choices:
-2137
3615358
-447
447
-447000000
Correct choice index: 2
The tax effects of temporary differences that gave rise to significant portions of the deferred tax assets and deferred tax liabilities were as follows:
Of the $2.8 billion and $2.4 billion net deferred tax liability at December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively, $2.9 billion and $2.5 billion is reflected as a long-term liability and $118 million and $131 million is reflected as a net noncurrent deferred tax asset at December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively.

As of December 31,
2019
2018
(Dollars in millions)
Deferred tax assets
Post-retirement and pension benefit costs
$1,169
1,111
Net operating loss carryforwards
3,167
3,445
Other employee benefits
134
162
Other
577
553
Gross deferred tax assets
5,047
5,271
Less valuation allowance
(1,319)
(1,331)
Net deferred tax assets
3,728
3,940
Deferred tax liabilities
Property, plant and equipment, primarily due to depreciation differences
(3,489)
(3,011)
Goodwill and other intangible assets
(3,019)
(3,303)
Other
—
(23)
Gross deferred tax liabilities
(6,508)
(6,337)
Net deferred tax liability
$(2,780)
(2,397)


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the total amount reflected as a long-term liability in 2018 and 2019?
Choices:
-2774.6
5.8
5.4
0.4
579.9
Correct choice index: 2
Trade and Other Receivables
Unbilled revenues represent amounts not yet billed to merchants related to subscription fees for Plus merchants, transaction fees and shipping charges, as at the Consolidated Balance Sheet date.
Expressed in US $000's except share and per share amounts

December 31, 2019
December 31, 2018
January 1, 2018
$
$
$
Indirect taxes receivable
36,821
3,774
832
Unbilled revenues
31,629
12,653
7,616
Trade receivables
9,660
11,191
7,073
Accrued interest
5,754
5,109
2,015
Other receivables
6,665
8,620
4,403
90,529
41,347
21,939


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the average indirect taxes receivable for 2018 and 2019 ?
Choices:
20297.5
20612
-20297.5
36821
1
Correct choice index: 0
Gross Profit
Year Ended December 31, 2019 Compared with the Year Ended December 31, 2018
Gross profit and margin decreased during the year ended December 31, 2019 compared to prior year primarily due to an increase in hosting migration costs, higher amortization of software development, recognition of previously deferred costs and the sale of OneContent business on April 2, 2018, which carried a higher gross margin compared with our other businesses. These were partially offset with an increase in organic sales for Veradigm and our acute solutions in 2019.
Year Ended December 31, 2018 Compared with the Year Ended December 31, 2017
Gross profit increased during the year ended December 31, 2018 compared with the year ended December 31, 2017 primarily due to acquisitions. From a revenue mix perspective, gross profit associated with our recurring revenue streams, which include the delivery of recurring subscription-based software sales, support and maintenance, and recurring client services improved as we continued to expand our customer base for these services, particularly those related to outsourcing and revenue cycle management. Gross profit associated with our non-recurring software delivery, support and maintenance revenue stream decreased primarily due to fewer perpetual software license sales of our acute and population health management solutions. Gross profit associated with our non-recurring client services revenue stream, which includes non-recurring project-based client services, decreased primarily driven by higher internal personnel costs, including those related to incremental resources from recent acquisitions. Gross margin decreased primarily due to lower sales of higher margin perpetual software licenses and higher amortization of software development and acquisition-related assets driven by additional amortization expense associated with intangible assets acquired as part of recent acquisitions.

Year Ended December 31,
(In thousands)
2019
2018
2017
2019 % Change from 2018
2018 % Change from 2017
Total cost of revenue
$ 1,058,097
$ 1,025,419
$ 864,909
3.2%
18.6%
Gross profit
$ 713,580
$ 724,543
$ 632,799
(1.5%)
14.5%
Gross margin %
40.3%
41.4%
42.3%


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the average gross profit between 2017-2019?
Choices:
0.69
690307.33
448793.06
1
0
Correct choice index: 1
The director compensation policies summarized above resulted in the following total compensation for our non-management directors in fiscal year 2019:
Director Compensation Table
(1) Oleg Khaykin, President and Chief Executive Officer, is not included in this table as he was an employee of the Company and as such received no compensation for his services as a director. His compensation is disclosed in the Summary Compensation Table.
(2) The amounts shown in this column represent the grant date fair values of RSUs issued pursuant to the Company’s 2003 Equity Incentive Plan, computed in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification Topic 718 (“FASB ASC Topic 718”), excluding the effect of estimated forfeitures. There can be no assurance that these grant date fair values will ever be realized by the non-employee directors. For information regarding the number of unvested RSUs held by each non-employee director as of the end of fiscal year 2019, see the column “Unvested Restricted Stock Units Outstanding” in the table below

DIRECTOR COMPENSATION
Name (1)
Fees Earned or Paid in Cash ($)
Stock Awards ($) (2)
Total ($)
Keith Barnes
102,500
178,317
280,817
Richard E. Belluzzo
160,000
178,317
338,317
Laura Black
67,500
178,317
245,817
Tor Braham
67,500
178,317
245,817
Timothy Campos
77,500
178,317
255,817
Donald Colvin
97,500
178,317
275,817
Masood A. Jabbar
90,000
178,317
268,317


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the difference between  Richard E. Belluzzo's total compensation as compared to Laura Black?
Choices:
-92500
92500
160000
82500
270817
Correct choice index: 1
Geographic Revenue
In addition to the revenue presentation by reportable segment, we also measure revenue performance on a geographic basis.
Total revenue of $77,147 million in 2019 decreased 3.1 percent year to year as reported (1 percent adjusted for currency), but increased 0.2 percent excluding divested businesses and adjusted for currency.
Americas revenue decreased 1.9 percent as reported (1 percent adjusted for currency), but grew 1 percent excluding divested businesses and adjusted for currency. Within North America, the U.S. decreased 2.4 percent and Canada increased 4.0 percent as reported (6 percent adjusted for currency). Latin America declined as reported but grew adjusted for currency. Within Latin America, Brazil declined 4.8 percent as reported, but was flat adjusted for currency.
EMEA revenue decreased 4.1 percent as reported, but was essentially flat adjusted for currency and increased 1 percent excluding divested businesses and adjusted for currency. As reported, the U.K., France and Italy decreased 2.9 percent, 4.1 percent and 1.3 percent, respectively, but grew 1 percent, 1 percent and 4 percent, respectively, adjusted for currency. Germany decreased 7.9 percent as reported and 3 percent adjusted for currency. The Middle East and Africa region decreased 3.5 percent as reported and 2 percent adjusted for currency.
Asia Pacific revenue decreased 4.0 percent as reported (3 percent adjusted for currency) and 2 percent excluding divested businesses and adjusted for currency. Japan increased 2.3 percent as reported and 1 percent adjusted for currency.
Australia decreased 17.3 percent as reported and 11 percent adjusted for currency. China decreased 13.4 percent as reported and 11 percent adjusted for currency and India decreased 8.1 percent as reported and 5 percent adjusted for currency.

($ in millions)
For the year ended December 31:
2019
2018
Yr.-to-Yr. Percent Change
Yr.-to-Yr. Percent Change Adjusted for Currency
Yr.-to-Yr. Percent Change Excluding Divested Businesses And Adjusted for Currency
Total revenue
$77,147
$79,591
(3.1)%
(1.0)%
0.2%
Americas
$36,274
$36,994
(1.9)%
(1.1)%
0.8%
Europe/Middle East/Africa
24,443
25,491
(4.1)
0.4
1.3
Asia Pacific
16,430
17,106
(4.0)
(3.0)
(2.5)


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What was the increase / (decrease) in the Asia Pacific revenue from 2018 to 2019?
Choices:
-17110
-1
676
0
-676
Correct choice index: 4
Provision for Income Taxes
The effective income tax rate is calculated by dividing the provision for income taxes by income before income taxes. The effective income tax rate for 2019 was 13.0% compared to 18.3% for 2018.
The decrease in the effective income tax rate and the provision for income taxes was primarily due to the recognition of approximately $2.2 billion of a non-recurring tax benefit in connection with the disposition of preferred stock, representing a minority interest in a foreign affiliate in 2019 compared to the non-recurring deferred tax benefit of approximately $2.1 billion as a result of an internal reorganization of legal entities within the historical Wireless business, which was offset by a goodwill charge that is not deductible for tax purposes in 2018.
A reconciliation of the statutory federal income tax rate to the effective income tax rate for each period is included in Note 12 to the consolidated financial statements.

(dollars in millions) Increase/ (Decrease)
Years Ended December 31,
2019
2018
2019 vs. 2018
Provision for income taxes
$2,945
$ 3,584
$ (639)
(17.8)%
Effective income tax rate
13.0%
18.3%


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the change in Provision for income taxes from 2018 to 2019?
Choices:
639
0
-651
-639
2945
Correct choice index: 3