The graph below shows a five-year comparison of the cumulative shareholder return on our Common Stock with the cumulative total return of the Standard & Poor’s (S&P) Mid Cap 400 Index and the Russell 1000 Index, both of which are published indices.
Comparison of Five-Year Cumulative Total Return From December 31, 2011 to December 31, 2016 Assumes $100 Invested with Reinvestment of Dividends
## Table 0 ##
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued) 108 Net Interest Revenue at Risk NIR-at-risk is designed to measure the potential impact of changes in global market interest rates on NIR in the short term.
The impact of changes in market rates on NIR is measured against a baseline NIR which encompasses management's expectations regarding the evolving balance sheet volumes and interest rates in the near-term.
The goal is to achieve an acceptable level of NIR under various interest-rate environments.
Assumptions regarding levels of client deposits and our ability to price these deposits under various rate environments have a significant impact on the results of the NIR simulations.
Similarly, the timing of cash flows from our investment portfolio, especially option-embedded financial instruments like mortgage-backed securities, and our ability to replace these cash flows in line with management's expectations, can affect the results of NIR simulations.
The following table presents the estimated exposure of NIR for the next twelve months, calculated as of the dates indicated, due to an immediate +/-100-basis-point shift to our internal forecast of global interest rates.
We manage NIR sensitivity not to decline more than 15% from the baseline NIR +/-100 basis point shocks.
Estimated incremental exposures presented below are dependent on management's assumptions, and do not reflect any additional actions management may undertake in order to mitigate some of the adverse effects of changes in interest rates on our financial performance.
## Table 1 ##
As of December 31, 2013, NIR sensitivity to an upward-100-basis-point shock in global market rates was higher compared to December 31, 2012, due to a higher level of forecast client deposits.
The benefit to NIR for an upward-100-basis-point ramp is less significant than a shock, since market rates are assumed to increase gradually.
A downward-100-basis-point shock in global market rates places pressure on NIR, as deposit rates reach their implicit floors due to the exceptionally low global interest-rate environment, and provide little funding relief on the liability side, while assets reset into the lower-rate environment.
NIR sensitivity to a downward-100-basis-point shock in market rates as of December 31, 2013 was similar to December 31, 2012, as higher levels of forecast noninterest-bearing deposits, which improve base NIR, provide no relief as rates fall.
Other important factors which affect the levels of NIR are the size and mix of assets carried in our consolidated statement of condition; interest-rate spreads; the slope and interest-rate level of U. S.  and non-U.
S.  dollar yield curves and the relationship between them; the pace of change in global market interest rates; and management actions taken in response to the preceding conditions.
Economic Value of Equity EVE sensitivity measures changes in the market value of equity to quantify potential losses to shareholders due to an immediate +/-200-basis-point rate shock compared to current interest-rate levels if the balance sheet were liquidated immediately.
Management compares the change in EVE sensitivity against State Street's aggregate tier 1 and tier 2 risk-based capital, to evaluate whether the magnitude of the exposure to interest rates is acceptable.
Generally, a change resulting from a +/-200-basis-point rate shock that is less than 20% of aggregate tier 1 and tier 2 capital is an exposure that management deems acceptable.
To the extent that we manage changes in EVE sensitivity within the 20% threshold, we would seek to take action to remain below the threshold if the magnitude of our exposure to interest rates approached that limit.
Similar to NIR-at-risk measures, the timing of cash flows affects EVE sensitivity, as changes in asset and liability values under different rate scenarios are dependent on when interest and principal payments are received.
In contrast to NIR simulations, however, EVE sensitivity does not incorporate assumptions regarding reinvestment of these cash flows.
In addition, our ability to price client deposits has a much smaller impact on EVE sensitivity, as EVE sensitivity does not consider the ongoing benefit of investing client deposits.
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued) 58 GEOGRAPHIC MIX OF ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT(1)
## Table 2 ##
(1) Geographic mix is based on client location or fund management location.
The increase in total assets under management from year-end 2012 to year-end 2013 resulted from stronger global equity market valuations, partly offset by net lost business of $5 billion.
The net lost business of approximately $5 billion was generally composed of $34 billion of net outflows from alternative investments, partly offset by net inflows of $13 billion into managed cash, net inflows of $6 billion into equities, net inflows of $4 billion into multi-asset-class solutions and net inflows of $3 billion each into fixed-income and securities lending funds.
The following table presents activity in assets under management for the years ended December 31: ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT
## Table 3 ##
(1) Amounts were associated with the U. S.  Treasury's winding down of its portfolio of agency-guaranteed mortgage-backed securities.
The net lost business of $5 billion for 2013 presented in the table did not include $13 billion of new asset management business awarded to SSgA in 2013 but not installed prior to December 31, 2013.
This new business will be reflected in assets under management in future periods after installation, and will generate management fee revenue in subsequent periods.
Total assets under management as of December 31, 2013 included managed assets lost but not yet liquidated.
Lost business occurs from time to time and it is difficult to predict the timing of client behavior in transitioning these assets.
This timing can vary significantly.
Trading Services The following table summarizes the components of trading services revenue for the years ended December 31:
## Table 4 ##

<table><tr><td></td><td>BasePeriod</td><td>Indexed Returns</td></tr><tr><td>Company/Index</td><td>12/31/11</td><td>12/31/12</td><td>12/31/13</td><td>12/31/14</td><td>12/31/15</td><td>12/31/16</td></tr><tr><td>A. O. Smith Corporation</td><td>100.0</td><td>159.5</td><td>275.8</td><td>292.0</td><td>401.0</td><td>501.4</td></tr><tr><td>S&P Mid Cap 400 Index</td><td>100.0</td><td>117.9</td><td>157.4</td><td>172.8</td><td>169.0</td><td>204.1</td></tr><tr><td>Russell 1000 Index</td><td>100.0</td><td>116.4</td><td>155.0</td><td>175.4</td><td>177.0</td><td>198.4</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">Estimated Exposure toNet Interest Revenue</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td colspan="2">December 31,2013</td><td colspan="2">December 31,2012</td></tr><tr><td>Rate change:</td><td>Exposure</td><td>% of Base NIR</td><td>Exposure</td><td>% of Base NIR</td></tr><tr><td>+100 bps shock</td><td>$334</td><td>14.0%</td><td>$156</td><td>6.5%</td></tr><tr><td>–100 bps shock</td><td>-261</td><td>-10.9</td><td>-200</td><td>-8.3</td></tr><tr><td>+100 bps ramp</td><td>126</td><td>5.3</td><td>39</td><td>1.6</td></tr><tr><td>–100 bps ramp</td><td>-124</td><td>-5.2</td><td>-96</td><td>-4.0</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>As of December 31,</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td></tr><tr><td>(In billions)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>North America</td><td>$1,456</td><td>$1,288</td><td>$1,190</td><td>$1,332</td><td>$1,272</td></tr><tr><td>Europe/Middle East/Africa</td><td>560</td><td>480</td><td>428</td><td>452</td><td>479</td></tr><tr><td>Asia/Pacific</td><td>329</td><td>318</td><td>227</td><td>226</td><td>200</td></tr><tr><td>Total Assets Under Management</td><td>$2,345</td><td>$2,086</td><td>$1,845</td><td>$2,010</td><td>$1,951</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>Years Ended December 31,</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td></tr><tr><td>(In billions)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Balance at beginning of year</td><td>$2,086</td><td>$1,845</td><td>$2,010</td></tr><tr><td>Net new (lost) business</td><td>-5</td><td>112</td><td>-30</td></tr><tr><td>Sales of U.S. Treasury portfolio of asset-backed securities<sup>-1</sup></td><td>—</td><td>-31</td><td>-125</td></tr><tr><td>Assets added from Bank of Ireland Asset Management acquisition</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>23</td></tr><tr><td>Market appreciation (depreciation)</td><td>264</td><td>160</td><td>-33</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at end of year</td><td>$2,345</td><td>$2,086</td><td>$1,845</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>Years Ended December 31,</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td><td>% Change2013 vs. 2012</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Foreign exchange trading:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Direct sales and trading</td><td>$304</td><td>$263</td><td>$352</td><td>16%</td></tr><tr><td>Indirect foreign exchange trading</td><td>285</td><td>248</td><td>331</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>Total foreign exchange trading</td><td>589</td><td>511</td><td>683</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>Brokerage and other trading services:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Electronic foreign exchange trading</td><td>233</td><td>210</td><td>249</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td>Other trading, transition management and brokerage</td><td>239</td><td>289</td><td>288</td><td>-17</td></tr><tr><td>Total brokerage and other trading services</td><td>472</td><td>499</td><td>537</td><td>-5</td></tr><tr><td>Total trading services revenue</td><td>$1,061</td><td>$1,010</td><td>$1,220</td><td>5</td></tr></table>

Question: What was the total amount of Foreign exchange trading in 2013? (in million)
Answer: 589