trismik/FinRAG huggingface dataset:
GWL Corporate Free Cash Flow(1)
Following the reorganization of Choice Properties to GWL, management evaluates the cash generating capabilities of GWL Corporate(2) based on the various cash flow streams it receives from its operating subsidiaries. As a result, the GWL Corporate free cash flow(1) is based on the dividends received from Loblaw, distributions received from Choice Properties and net cash flow contributions received from Weston Foods less corporate expenses, interest and income taxes paid. Lease payments are excluded from the calculation of GWL Corporate free cash flow(1) to normalize for the impact of the implementation of IFRS 16.
(i) Included in Other and Intersegment, GWL Corporate includes all other company level activities that are not allocated to the reportable operating segments, such as net interest expense, corporate activities and administrative costs. Also included are preferred share dividends paid.

For the quarters and years ended December 31
Quarters ended
Yeas ended
($ millions)
2019
2018
2019
2018
Weston Foods adjusted EBITDA(1)
56
59
223
233
Weston Foods capital expenditures
(70)
(91)
(194)
(212)
Distributions from Choice Properties
82
43
325
43
Dividends from Loblaw
–
–
233
212
Weston Foods income taxes paid
–
(2)
(7)
(32)
Other
64
21
(41)
(23)
GWL Corporate cash flow from operating businesses (1)
132
30
539
221
GWL Corporate and financing costs (i)
(24)
(33)
(109)
(108)
Income taxes paid
(4)
(2)
(19)
(14)
GWL Corporate free cash flow (1)
104
(5)
411
99


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the increase / (decrease) in the Weston Foods adjusted EBITDA from 2018 to 2019?
Choices:
-3
-396
-3000
115
3
Correct choice index: 0
2018 annual report 23 five-year stock performance graph the graph below illustrates the cumulative total shareholder return on snap-on common stock since december 31 , 2013 , of a $ 100 investment , assuming that dividends were reinvested quarterly .
the graph compares snap-on 2019s performance to that of the standard & poor 2019s 500 industrials index ( 201cs&p 500 industrials 201d ) and standard & poor 2019s 500 stock index ( 201cs&p 500 201d ) .
fiscal year ended ( 1 ) snap-on incorporated s&p 500 industrials s&p 500 .

Fiscal Year Ended<sup>(1)</sup>
Snap-onIncorporated
S&P 500Industrials
S&P 500
December 31, 2013
$100.00
$100.00
$100.00
December 31, 2014
126.77
109.83
113.69
December 31, 2015
161.15
107.04
115.26
December 31, 2016
163.63
127.23
129.05
December 31, 2017
169.61
153.99
157.22
December 31, 2018
144.41
133.53
150.33

( 1 ) the company 2019s fiscal year ends on the saturday that is on or nearest to december 31 of each year ; for ease of calculation , the fiscal year end is assumed to be december 31. .

Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. what was the percent change in the snap-on performance from 2015 to 2016
Choices:
36.86
0
3686
113.63
-19.73
Correct choice index: 0
Expenditure on R&D
TCS Innovation Labs are located in India and other parts of the world. These R&D centers, as certified by Department of Scientific & Industrial Research (DSIR) function from Pune, Chennai, Bengaluru, Delhi- NCR, Hyderabad, Kolkata and Mumbai.
Expenditure incurred in the R&D centers and innovation centers during FY 2019 and FY 2018 are given below:

Expenditure on R&D and innovation
Unconsolidated
Consolidated
FY 2019
FY 2018
FY 2019
FY 2018
a. Capital
2
-
2
-
b. Recurring
303
295
306
298
c. Total R&D expenditure (a+b)
305
295
308
298
d. Innovation center expenditure
1,285
1,079
1,352
1,202
e. Total R&D and innovation expenditure (c+d)
1,590
1,374
1,660
1,500
f. R&D and innovation expenditure as a percentage of total turnover
1.3%
1.4%
1.1%
1.2%


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the percentage change for consolidated Innovation center expenditure between FY 2018 and FY 2019?
Choices:
801.33
48.7
8.01
14.31
12.48
Correct choice index: 4
ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
The selected financial data should be read in conjunction with our “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” and our audited consolidated financial statements and the related notes to those consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report.
Year-over-year comparisons are significantly affected by our acquisitions, dispositions and construction of towers. Our transaction with Verizon Communications Inc. (“Verizon” and the transaction, the “Verizon Transaction”) and the acquisition of a controlling ownership interest in Viom Networks Limited (“Viom” and the acquisition, the “Viom Acquisition”), which closed in March 2015 and April 2016, respectively, significantly impact the comparability of reported results between periods. Our principal 2019 acquisitions are described in note 7 to our consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report.
(2) As of December 31, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016 and 2015, amounts include $76.8 million, $96.2 million, $152.8 million, $149.3 million, and $142.2 million, respectively, of restricted funds pledged as collateral to secure obligations and cash, the use of which is otherwise limited by contractual provisions.
(3) Total assets as of December 31, 2019 includes the Right-of-use asset recognized in connection with our adoption of the new lease accounting standard described in note 1 to our consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report

As of December 31,
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
(In millions)
Balance Sheet Data:
Cash and cash equivalents (including restricted cash) (2)
$1,578.0
$1,304.9
$954.9
$936.5
$462.9
Property and equipment, net
12,084.4
11,247.1
11,101.0
10,517.3
9,866.4
Total assets (3)
42,801.6
33,010.4
33,214.3
30,879.2
26,904.3
Long-term obligations, including current portion
24,055.4
21,159.9
20,205.1
18,533.5
17,119.0
Redeemable noncontrolling interests
1,096.5
1,004.8
1,126.2
1,091.3
—
Total American Tower Corporation equity
5,055.4
5,336.1
6,241.5
6,763.9
6,651.7


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What was the change in Long-term obligations, including current portion between 2018 and 2019?
Choices:
0
-2895.5
0.1
2895.5
-9158.9
Correct choice index: 3
NOTE 14 – OTHER LIABILITIES
The carrying amount is a reasonable approximation of fair value due to the short-term nature of the receivables. Please refer to note 21 for further information on fair value hierarchies.

USDm
2019
2018
Partners and commercial managements
0.5
1.2
Accrued operating expenses
14.1
9.1
Accrued interest
4.0
4.6
Wages and social expenses
14.3
16.1
Derivative financial instruments
12.3
3.4
Payables to joint ventures
0.1
0.1
Other
2.0
2.0
Balance as of 31 December
47.3
36.5


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What was the change in the Balance as of 31 December from 2018 to 2019?
Choices:
0
14.8
-34.5
10.8
10800000
Correct choice index: 3
Plan Summaries
As of January 3, 2020, the Company had stock-based compensation awards outstanding under the following plans: the 2017 Omnibus Incentive Plan, 2006 Equity Incentive Plan, as amended, and the 2006 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, as amended ("ESPP"). Leidos issues new shares upon the issuance of the vesting of stock units or exercising of stock options under these plans.
In fiscal 2017, stockholders approved the 2017 Omnibus Incentive Plan which provides the Company and its affiliates' employees, directors and consultants the opportunity to receive various types of stock-based compensation awards, such as stock options, restricted stock units and performance-based awards, as well as cash awards.
The Company grants service-based awards that generally vest or become exercisable 25% a year over four years or cliff vest in three years. As of January 3, 2020, 4.4 million shares of Leidos' stock were reserved for future issuance under the 2017 Omnibus Incentive Plan and the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan.
The Company offers eligible employees the opportunity to defer restricted stock units into an equity-based deferred equity compensation plan, the Key Executive Stock Deferral Plan ("KESDP"). Prior to 2013, the Company offered an additional opportunity for deferrals into the Management Stock Compensation Plan ("MSCP"). Benefits from these plans are payable in shares of Leidos' stock that are held in a trust for the purpose of funding shares to the plans' participants.
Restricted stock units deferred under the KESDP are counted against the total shares available for future issuance under the 2017 Omnibus Incentive Plan. All awards under the MSCP are fully vested and the plan does not provide for a maximum number of shares available for future issuance.
The Company's ESPP allows eligible employees to purchase shares of Leidos' stock at a discount of up to 15% of the fair market value on the date of purchase. During the first half of fiscal 2018 and 2017, the discount was 5% of the fair market value on the date of purchase, thereby resulting in the ESPP being non-compensatory. Effective the second half of fiscal 2018, the Company increased the discount to 10% of the fair market value on the date of purchase, resulting in the ESPP being compensatory.
During fiscal 2019, 2018 and 2017, $25 million, $11 million and $10 million, respectively, was received from ESPP plan participants for the issuance of Leidos' stock. A total of 4.2 million shares remain available for future issuance under the ESPP.
Stock-based compensation and related tax benefits recognized under all plans were as follows:

Year Ended
January 3, 2020
December 28, 2018
December 29, 2017
(in millions)
Total stock-based compensation expense
$52
$44
$43
Tax benefits recognized from stock-based compensation
13
11
17


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What was the change in the Tax benefits recognized from stock-based compensation from 2017 to 2018?
Choices:
-33
28
-6
-7
-17
Correct choice index: 2
supplemental financial information common stock performance the following graph compares the performance of an investment in the firm 2019s common stock from december 26 , 2008 ( the last trading day before the firm 2019s 2009 fiscal year ) through december 31 , 2013 , with the s&p 500 index and the s&p 500 financials index .
the graph assumes $ 100 was invested on december 26 , 2008 in each of the firm 2019s common stock , the s&p 500 index and the s&p 500 financials index , and the dividends were reinvested on the date of payment without payment of any commissions .
the performance shown in the graph represents past performance and should not be considered an indication of future performance .
the goldman sachs group , inc .
s&p 500 index s&p 500 financials index dec-09 dec-10 dec-11 dec-12 dec-13dec-08 the table below shows the cumulative total returns in dollars of the firm 2019s common stock , the s&p 500 index and the s&p 500 financials index for goldman sachs 2019 last five fiscal year ends , assuming $ 100 was invested on december 26 , 2008 in each of the firm 2019s common stock , the s&p 500 index and the s&p 500 financials index , and the dividends were reinvested on the date of payment without payment of any commissions .
the performance shown in the table represents past performance and should not be considered an indication of future performance. .

12/26/08
12/31/09
12/31/10
12/31/11
12/31/12
12/31/13
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
$100.00
$224.98
$226.19
$123.05
$176.42
$248.36
S&P 500 Index
100.00
130.93
150.65
153.83
178.42
236.20
S&P 500 Financials Index
100.00
124.38
139.47
115.67
148.92
201.92

218 goldman sachs 2013 annual report .

Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. what is the five year total return on the s&p 500 index?
Choices:
126.2
-36.2
24.4
136.2
-136.2
Correct choice index: 3
The performance rights sub-plan has also been used to compensate new hires for foregone equity, and ensure that key employees are retained to protect and deliver on the Group’s strategic direction. It has been offered to:
Executives of newly acquired businesses in order to retain intellectual property during transition periods; or
Attract new executives, generally from overseas; or
Middle management or executives deemed to be top talent who had either no or relatively small grants scheduled to vest over the ensuing two years.
Sign-on and retention rights generally do not have performance measures attached to them due to the objective of retaining key talent and vest subject to the executive remaining employed by the Group, generally for two or more years.
The performance rights sub-plan has also been used to compensate employees of the Group. Participants are required to meet a service condition and other performance measures to gain access to the performance rights.
The following table summarises movements in outstanding rights:

2019
2018
NO. OF RIGHTS
NO. OF RIGHTS
Outstanding at start of period
10,692,594
6,737,076
Granted during the period
4,465,617
5,691,731
Vested during the period
(182,601)
(586,663)
Lapsed during the period
(1,497,852)
(1,149,550)
Outstanding at end of period
13,477,758
10,692,594


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the average number of rights 'outstanding at end of period' for 2018 and 2019?
Choices:
24170352
12085176
1
-16
24170350
Correct choice index: 1
Item 16C. Principal Accountant Fees and Services
Our principal accountant for 2019 and 2018 was KPMG LLP, Chartered Professional Accountants. The following table shows the fees Teekay and our subsidiaries paid or accrued for audit and other services provided by KPMG LLP for 2019 and 2018.
(1) Audit fees represent fees for professional services provided in connection with the audits of our consolidated financial statements and effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, reviews of our quarterly consolidated financial statements and audit services provided in connection with other statutory or regulatory filings for Teekay or our subsidiaries including professional services in connection with the review of our regulatory filings for public offerings of our subsidiaries.
Audit fees for 2019 and 2018 include approximately $928,300 and $859,000, respectively, of fees paid to KPMG LLP by Teekay LNG that were approved by the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors of the general partner of Teekay LNG. Audit fees for 2019 and 2018 include approximately $588,200 and $517,000, respectively, of fees paid to KPMG LLP by our subsidiary Teekay Tankers that were approved by the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors of Teekay Tankers.
(2) Audit-related fees consisted primarily of accounting consultations, employee benefit plan audits, services related to business acquisitions, divestitures and other attestation services. (3) For 2019 and 2018, tax fees principally included corporate tax compliance fees.
The Audit Committee has the authority to pre-approve audit-related and non-audit services not prohibited by law to be performed by our independent auditors and associated fees. Engagements for proposed services either may be separately pre-approved by the Audit Committee or entered into pursuant to detailed pre-approval policies and procedures established by the Audit Committee, as long as the Audit Committee is informed on a timely basis of any engagement entered into on that basis.
The Audit Committee separately pre-approved all engagements and fees paid to our principal accountants in 2019 and 2018.

Fees (in thousands of U.S. dollars)
2019
2018
Audit Fees (1)
2,723
2,529
Audit-Related Fees (2)
33
59
Tax Fees (3)
23
32
Total
2,779
2,620


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the increase/ (decrease) in Tax Fees from 2019 to 2018?
Choices:
-9
9
2714
55
1
Correct choice index: 0
loan commitments ( unfunded loans and unused lines of credit ) , asset purchase agreements , standby letters of credit and letters of credit are issued to accommodate the financing needs of state street 2019s clients and to provide credit enhancements to special purpose entities .
loan commitments are agreements by state street to lend monies at a future date .
asset purchase agreements are commitments to purchase receivables or securities , subject to conditions established in the agreements , and at december 31 , 2001 , include $ 8.0 billion outstanding to special purpose entities .
standby letters of credit and letters of credit commit state street to make payments on behalf of clients and special purpose entities when certain specified events occur .
standby letters of credit outstanding to special purpose entities were $ 608 million at december 31 , 2001 .
these loan , asset purchase and letter of credit commitments are subject to the same credit policies and reviews as loans .
the amount and nature of collateral are obtained based upon management 2019s assessment of the credit risk .
approximately 89% ( 89 % ) of the loan commitments and asset purchase agreements expire within one year from the date of issue .
sincemany of the commitments are expected to expire or renewwithout being drawn , the total commitment amounts do not necessarily represent future cash requirements .
the following is a summary of the contractual amount of credit-related , off-balance sheet financial instruments at december 31: .

(Dollars in millions)
2001
2000
Indemnified securities on loan
$113,047
$101,438
Loan commitments
12,962
11,367
Asset purchase agreements
10,366
7,112
Standby letters of credit
3,918
4,028
Letters of credit
164
218

state street corporation 53 .

Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. what is the percentage change in the balance of letters of credit from 2000 to 2001?
Choices:
0.50917
-0.26866
101437.75229
-0.24771
-0.60674
Correct choice index: 3
apple inc .
| 2016 form 10-k | 20 company stock performance the following graph shows a comparison of cumulative total shareholder return , calculated on a dividend reinvested basis , for the company , the s&p 500 index , the s&p information technology index and the dow jones u.s .
technology supersector index for the five years ended september 24 , 2016 .
the graph assumes $ 100 was invested in each of the company 2019s common stock , the s&p 500 index , the s&p information technology index and the dow jones u.s .
technology supersector index as of the market close on september 23 , 2011 .
note that historic stock price performance is not necessarily indicative of future stock price performance .
* $ 100 invested on 9/23/11 in stock or index , including reinvestment of dividends .
data points are the last day of each fiscal year for the company 2019s common stock and september 30th for indexes .
copyright a9 2016 s&p , a division of mcgraw hill financial .
all rights reserved .
copyright a9 2016 dow jones & co .
all rights reserved .
september september september september september september .

September2011
September2012
September2013
September2014
September2015
September2016
Apple Inc.
$100
$166
$123
$183
$212
$213
S&P 500 Index
$100
$130
$155
$186
$185
$213
S&P Information Technology Index
$100
$132
$142
$183
$187
$230
Dow Jones U.S. Technology Supersector Index
$100
$130
$137
$178
$177
$217

.

Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. what was the 1 year return of apple inc . from 2013 to 2014?
Choices:
487804.878
0
80.9756
0.4878
0.3279
Correct choice index: 3
NOTE 5. INVESTMENTS AND LOANS TO SUBSIDIARIES
Interest relates mainly to a subsidiary and is based on the Bank of America’s prime rate with a rise of two percent points. The repayment schedule of the loan is as follows: 24 annual installments of US$2 million, starting December 31, 2018, followed by a final installment of US$5.3 million on December 31, 2043.

December 31,
2018
2019
Loans due from subsidiaries - non-current portion
46,698
45,377
Loans due from subsidiaries - current portion
2,064
2,123
Total
48,762
47,500


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the percentage change in Loans due from subsidiaries - current portion from 2018 to 2019?
Choices:
0.69
202.86
59
2.86
3498.31
Correct choice index: 3
notes to consolidated financial statements 4 .
the sum of the quarters 2019 earnings per common share may not equal the annual amounts due to the averaging effect of the number of shares and share equivalents throughout the year .
5 .
during the fourth quarter of 2016 , net revenues included losses of approximately $ 60 million on sales and markdowns of legacy limited partnership investments in third-party-sponsored funds within the invest- ment management business segment .
the fourth quarter of 2016 also included a $ 70 million provision within the wealth management busi- ness segment related to certain brokerage service reporting activities .
employee share-based awards .

2017 Quarter
<i>$ in millions</i>
First
Second
Third
Fourth
Discrete tax benefit
$112
$16
$11
$16

24 .
subsequent events the firm has evaluated subsequent events for adjustment to or disclosure in the financial statements through the date of this report and has not identified any recordable or disclos- able events not otherwise reported in these financial state- ments or the notes thereto .
175 december 2017 form 10-k .

Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. what was the total discrete tax benefit from employee share-based awards in 2017 in millions?
Choices:
123
27.6
155.0
155000
160
Correct choice index: 2
Cost of Revenues and Gross Margin
Subscription cost of revenues and gross margin. Cost of subscriptions revenues increased by $50.9 million, or 46%, during fiscal year 2019 as compared to fiscal year 2018. Primary drivers of the increase were increases in third-party costs to support our solution offerings of $21.5 million, infrastructure support costs of $19.8 million including amortization expense from acquired intangible assets, and headcount and personnel and contractor related costs of $9.6 million including share-based compensation expense. These factors resulted in a decrease in gross margin.
The increase in headcount and other expense categories described herein was driven primarily by investments in our infrastructure and capacity to improve the availability of our subscription offerings, while also supporting the growth in new customers and increased usage of our subscriptions by our existing customer base. We expect subscription gross margin to be within a relatively similar range in the future.
Other cost of revenues and gross margin. Cost of other revenues increased by $23.0 million, or 48%, during fiscal year 2019 as compared to fiscal year 2018. This was primarily due to the increase in services personnel costs of $11.1 million including share-based compensation expense, cost of product sales of $10.6 million, and overhead costs of $1.3 million. Other revenues gross margin fluctuates based on timing of completion of professional services projects and discounting on phones.

Year ended December 31,
Year ended December 31,
(in thousands, except percentages)
2019
2018
$ Change
% Change
2018
2017
$ Change
% Change
Cost of revenues
Subscriptions
$160,320
$109,454
$50,866
46%
$109,454
$89,193
$20,261
23%
Other
70,723
47,675
23,048
48%
47,675
32,078
15,597
49%
Total cost of revenues
$231,043
$157,129
$73,914
47%
$157,129
$121,271
$35,858
30%
Percentage of revenues
Subscriptions
18%
16%
16%
18%
Other
8%
7%
7%
6%
Gross margins
Subscriptions
80%
82%
82%
81%
Other
17%
22%
22%
16%
Total gross margin %
74%
77%
77%
76%


Question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. What is the average total cost of revenue between 2017 to 2019?
Choices:
108691.67
7.2
169814.33
2830238.89
509443
Correct choice index: 2