DERIVATIVES ACTIVITIES

In the ordinary course of business, Citigroup enters into various types of derivative transactions. These derivative

transactions include:


•	Futures and forward contracts, which are commitments to buy or sell at a future date a financial instrument, commodity or currency at a contracted price and may be settled in cash or through delivery of an item readily convertible to cash.


•	Swap contracts, which are commitments to settle in cash at a future date or dates that may range from a few days to a number of years, based on differentials between specified indices or financial instruments, as applied to a notional principal amount.


•	Option contracts, which give the purchaser, for a premium, the right, but not the obligation, to buy or sell within a specified time a financial instrument, commodity or currency at a contracted price that may also be settled in cash, based on differentials between specified indices or prices.

Swaps, forwards and some option contracts are over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives that are bilaterally negotiated with counterparties and settled with those counterparties, except for swap contracts that are novated and "cleared" through central counterparties (CCPs). Futures contracts and other option contracts are standardized contracts that are traded on an exchange with a CCP as the counterparty from the inception of the transaction. Citigroup enters into derivative contracts relating to interest rate, foreign currency, commodity and other market/credit risks for the following reasons:

•

Trading Purposes: Citigroup trades derivatives as an active market maker. Citigroup offers its customers derivatives in connection with their risk management actions to transfer, modify or reduce their interest rate, foreign exchange and other market/credit risks or for their own trading purposes. Citigroup also manages its derivative risk positions through offsetting trade activities, controls focused on price verification and daily reporting of positions to senior managers.

•

Hedging: Citigroup uses derivatives in connection with its own risk management activities to hedge certain risks or reposition the risk profile of the Company. Hedging may be accomplished by applying hedge accounting in accordance with ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging, or by an economic hedge. For example, Citigroup issues fixed-rate long-term debt and then enters into a receive-fixed, pay-variable-rate interest rate swap with the same tenor and notional amount to synthetically convert the interest payments to a net variable-rate basis. This strategy is the most common form of an interest rate hedge, as it minimizes net interest cost in certain yield curve environments. Derivatives are also used to manage market risks inherent in specific groups of on-balance sheet assets and liabilities, including AFS securities, commodities and borrowings, as well as other interest-sensitive assets and liabilities. In addition, foreign-exchange contracts are used to hedge non-U.S.-dollar-denominated debt, foreign-currency-denominated AFS securities and net investment exposures.

Derivatives may expose Citigroup to market, credit or liquidity risks in excess of the amounts recorded on the Consolidated Balance Sheet. Market risk on a derivative product is the exposure created by potential fluctuations in interest rates, market prices, foreign exchange rates and other factors and is a function of the type of product, the volume of transactions, the tenor and terms of the agreement and the underlying volatility. Credit risk is the exposure to loss in the event of nonperformance by the other party to satisfy a derivative liability where the value of any collateral held by Citi is not adequate to cover such losses. The recognition in earnings of unrealized gains on derivative transactions is subject to management’s assessment of the probability of counterparty default. Liquidity risk is the potential exposure that arises when the size of a derivative position may affect the ability to monetize the position in a reasonable period of time and at a reasonable cost in periods of high volatility and financial stress.

Derivative transactions are customarily documented under industry standard master netting agreements that provide that following an event of default, the non-defaulting party may promptly terminate all transactions between the parties and determine the net amount due to be paid to, or by, the defaulting party. Events of default include (i) failure to make a payment on a derivatives transaction that remains uncured following applicable notice and grace periods, (ii) breach of agreement that remains uncured after applicable notice and grace periods, (iii) breach of a representation, (iv) cross default, either to third-party debt or to other derivative transactions entered into between the parties, or, in some cases, their affiliates, (v) the occurrence of a merger or consolidation which results in a party’s becoming a materially weaker credit, and (vi) the cessation or repudiation of any applicable guarantee or other credit support document. Obligations under master netting agreements are often secured by collateral posted under an industry standard credit support annex to the master netting agreement. An event of default may also occur under a credit support annex if a party fails to make a collateral delivery that remains uncured following applicable notice and grace periods.

The netting and collateral rights incorporated in the master netting agreements are considered to be legally enforceable if a supportive legal opinion has been obtained from counsel of recognized standing that provides the requisite level of certainty regarding enforceability and that the exercise of rights by the non-defaulting party to terminate and close-out transactions on a net basis under these agreements will not be stayed or avoided under applicable law upon an event of default including bankruptcy, insolvency or similar proceeding.

A legal opinion may not be sought for certain jurisdictions where local law is silent or unclear as to the enforceability of such rights or where adverse case law or conflicting regulation may cast doubt on the enforceability of such rights. In some jurisdictions and for some counterparty types, the insolvency law may not provide the requisite level of certainty. For example, this may be the case for certain sovereigns, municipalities, central banks and U.S. pension plans.

Exposure to credit risk on derivatives is affected by market volatility, which may impair the ability of counterparties to satisfy their obligations to the Company. Credit limits are established and closely monitored for customers engaged in derivatives transactions. Citi considers the level of legal certainty regarding enforceability of its offsetting rights under master netting agreements and credit support annexes to be an important factor in its risk management process. Specifically, Citi generally transacts much lower volumes of derivatives under master netting agreements where Citi does not have the requisite level of legal certainty regarding enforceability, because such derivatives consume greater amounts of single counterparty credit limits than those executed under enforceable master netting agreements.

Cash collateral and security collateral in the form of G10 government debt securities is often posted by a party to a master netting agreement to secure the net open exposure of the other party; the receiving party is free to commingle/rehypothecate such collateral in the ordinary course of its business. Nonstandard collateral such as corporate bonds, municipal bonds, U.S. agency securities and/or MBS may also be pledged as collateral for derivative transactions. Security collateral posted to open and maintain a master netting agreement with a counterparty, in the form of cash and/or securities, may from time to time be segregated in an account at a third-party custodian pursuant to a tri-party account control agreement.

Information pertaining to Citigroup’s derivative activities, based on notional amounts, is presented in the table below. Derivative notional amounts are reference amounts from which contractual payments are derived and do not represent a complete and accurate measure of Citi’s exposure to derivative transactions. Rather, Citi’s derivative exposure arises primarily from market fluctuations (i.e., market risk), counterparty failure (i.e., credit risk) and/or periods of high volatility or financial stress (i.e., liquidity risk), as well as any market valuation adjustments that may be required on the

transactions. Moreover, notional amounts do not reflect the netting of offsetting trades. For example, if Citi enters into a receive-fixed interest rate swap with $100 million notional, and offsets this risk with an identical but opposite pay-fixed position with a different counterparty, $200 million in derivative notionals is reported, although these offsetting positions may result in de minimis overall market risk. Aggregate derivative notional amounts can fluctuate from period to period in the normal course of business based on Citi’s market share, levels of client activity and other factors.

Derivative Notionals



	Hedging instruments under ASC 815⁽¹⁾⁽²⁾				Other derivative instruments
					Trading derivatives				Management hedges⁽³⁾
In millions of dollars	December 31, 2016		December 31, 2015		December 31, 2016		December 31, 2015		December 31, 2016		December 31, 2015
Interest rate contracts
Swaps	$	151,331	$	166,576	$	19,145,250	$	22,208,794	$	47,324	$	28,969
Futures and forwards	97		—		6,864,276		6,868,340		30,834		38,421
Written options	—		—		2,921,070		3,033,617		4,759		2,606
Purchased options	—		—		2,768,528		2,887,605		7,320		4,575
Total interest rate contract notionals	$	151,428	$	166,576	$	31,699,124	$	34,998,356	$	90,237	$	74,571
Foreign exchange contracts
Swaps	$	19,042	$	23,007	$	5,492,145	$	4,765,687	$	22,676	$	23,960
Futures, forwards and spot	56,964		72,124		3,251,132		2,563,649		3,419		3,034
Written options	—		448		1,194,325		1,125,664		—		—
Purchased options	—		819		1,215,961		1,131,816		—		—
Total foreign exchange contract notionals	$	76,006	$	96,398	$	11,153,563	$	9,586,816	$	26,095	$	26,994
Equity contracts
Swaps	$	—	$	—	$	192,366	$	180,963	$	—	$	—
Futures and forwards	—		—		37,557		33,735		—		—
Written options	—		—		304,579		298,876		—		—
Purchased options	—		—		266,070		265,062		—		—
Total equity contract notionals	$	—	$	—	$	800,572	$	778,636	$	—	$	—
Commodity and other contracts
Swaps	$	—	$	—	$	70,774	$	70,561	$	—	$	—
Futures and forwards	182		789		142,530		106,474		—		—
Written options	—		—		74,627		72,648		—		—
Purchased options	—		—		69,629		66,051		—		—
Total commodity and other contract notionals	$	182	$	789	$	357,560	$	315,734	$	—	$	—
Credit derivatives⁽⁴⁾
Protection sold	$	—	$	—	$	859,420	$	950,922	$	—	$	—
Protection purchased	—		—		883,003		981,586		19,470		23,628
Total credit derivatives	$	—	$	—	$	1,742,423	$	1,932,508	$	19,470	$	23,628
Total derivative notionals	$	227,616	$	263,763	$	45,753,242	$	47,612,050	$	135,802	$	125,193


(1)	The notional amounts presented in this table do not include hedge accounting relationships under ASC 815 where Citigroup is hedging the foreign currency risk of a net investment in a foreign operation by issuing a foreign-currency-denominated debt instrument. The notional amount of such debt was $1,825 million and $2,102 million at December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively.


(2)	Derivatives in hedge accounting relationships accounted for under ASC 815 are recorded in either Other assets/Other liabilities or Trading account assets/Trading account liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheet.


(3)	Management hedges represent derivative instruments used to mitigate certain economic risks, but for which hedge accounting is not applied. These derivatives are recorded in either Other assets/Other liabilities or Trading account assets/Trading account liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheet.

(4)

Credit derivatives are arrangements designed to allow one party (protection buyer) to transfer the credit risk of a “reference asset” to another party (protection seller). These arrangements allow a protection seller to assume the credit risk associated with the reference asset without directly purchasing that asset. The Company enters into credit derivative positions for purposes such as risk management, yield enhancement, reduction of credit concentrations and diversification of overall risk.

The following tables present the gross and net fair values of the Company’s derivative transactions and the related offsetting amounts as of December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015. Gross positive fair values are offset against gross negative fair values by counterparty pursuant to enforceable master netting agreements. Under ASC 815-10-45, payables and receivables in respect of cash collateral received from or paid to a given counterparty pursuant to a credit support annex are included in the offsetting amount if a legal opinion supporting the enforceability of netting and collateral rights has been obtained. GAAP does not permit similar offsetting for security collateral. The tables also present amounts that are not permitted to be offset, such as security collateral or cash collateral posted at third-party custodians, but which would be eligible for offsetting to the extent an event of default occurred and a legal opinion supporting enforceability of the netting and collateral rights has been obtained.

Derivative Mark-to-Market (MTM) Receivables/Payables



In millions of dollars at December 31, 2016	Derivatives classified in trading account assets / liabilities^(1)(2)(3)						Derivatives classified in Other assets / liabilities⁽²⁾⁽³⁾
Derivatives instruments designated as ASC 815 hedges	Assets			Liabilities			Assets			Liabilities
Over-the-counter	$	716		$	171		$	1,927		$	22
Cleared	3,530			2,154			47			82
Interest rate contracts	$	4,246		$	2,325		$	1,974		$	104
Over-the-counter	$	2,494		$	393		$	747		$	645
Foreign exchange contracts	$	2,494		$	393		$	747		$	645
Total derivative instruments designated as ASC 815 hedges	$	6,740		$	2,718		$	2,721		$	749
Derivatives instruments not designated as ASC 815 hedges
Over-the-counter	$	244,072		$	221,534		$	225		$	5
Cleared	120,920			130,855			240			349
Exchange traded	87			47			—			—
Interest rate contracts	$	365,079		$	352,436		$	465		$	354
Over-the-counter	$	182,659		$	186,867		$	—		$	60
Cleared	482			470			—			—
Exchange traded	27			31			—			—
Foreign exchange contracts	$	183,168		$	187,368		$	—		$	60
Over-the-counter	$	15,625		$	19,119		$	—		$	—
Cleared	1			21			—			—
Exchange traded	8,484			7,376			—			—
Equity contracts	$	24,110		$	26,516		$	—		$	—
Over-the-counter	$	13,046		$	14,234		$	—		$	—
Exchange traded	719			798			—			—
Commodity and other contracts	$	13,765		$	15,032		$	—		$	—
Over-the-counter	$	19,033		$	19,563		$	159		$	78
Cleared	5,582			5,874			47			310
Credit derivatives⁽⁴⁾	$	24,615		$	25,437		$	206		$	388
Total derivatives instruments not designated as ASC 815 hedges	$	610,737		$	606,789		$	671		$	802
Total derivatives	$	617,477		$	609,507		$	3,392		$	1,551
Cash collateral paid/received⁽⁵⁾⁽⁶⁾	$	11,188		$	15,731		$	8		$	1
Less: Netting agreements⁽⁷⁾	(519,000		)	(519,000		)	—			—
Less: Netting cash collateral received/paid⁽⁸⁾	(45,912		)	(49,811		)	(1,345		)	(53		)
Net receivables/payables included on the consolidated balance sheet⁽⁹⁾	$	63,753		$	56,427		$	2,055		$	1,499
Additional amounts subject to an enforceable master netting agreement, but not offset on the Consolidated Balance Sheet
Less: Cash collateral received/paid	$	(819	)	$	(19	)	$	—		$	—
Less: Non-cash collateral received/paid	(11,767		)	(5,883		)	(530		)	—
Total net receivables/payables⁽⁹⁾	$	51,167		$	50,525		$	1,525		$	1,499


(1)	The trading derivatives fair values are presented in Note 24 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.


(2)	Derivative mark-to-market receivables/payables related to management hedges are recorded in either Other assets/Other liabilities or Trading account assets/Trading account liabilities.

(3)

Over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives are derivatives executed and settled bilaterally with counterparties without the use of an organized exchange or central clearing house. Cleared derivatives include derivatives executed bilaterally with a counterparty in the OTC market, but then novated to a central clearing house, whereby the central clearing house becomes the counterparty to both of the original counterparties. Exchange traded derivatives include derivatives executed directly on an organized exchange that provides pre-trade price transparency.


(4)	The credit derivatives trading assets comprise $8,871 million related to protection purchased and $15,744 million related to protection sold as of December 31, 2016. The credit derivatives trading liabilities comprise $16,722 million related to protection purchased and $8,715 million related to protection sold as of December 31, 2016.


(5)	For the trading account assets/liabilities, reflects the net amount of the $60,999 million and $61,643 million of gross cash collateral paid and received, respectively. Of the gross cash collateral paid, $49,811 million was used to offset trading derivative liabilities and, of the gross cash collateral received, $45,912 million was used to offset trading derivative assets.

(6)

For cash collateral paid with respect to non-trading derivative assets, reflects the net amount of $61 million of gross cash collateral paid, of which $53 million is netted against non-trading derivative positions within Other liabilities. For cash collateral received with respect to non-trading derivative liabilities, reflects the net amount of $1,346 million of gross cash collateral received, of which $1,345 million is netted against OTC non-trading derivative positions within Other assets.


(7)	Represents the netting of derivative receivable and payable balances with the same counterparty under enforceable netting agreements. Approximately $383 billion, $128 billion and $8 billion of the netting against trading account asset/liability balances is attributable to each of the OTC, cleared and exchange-traded derivatives, respectively.


(8)	Represents the netting of cash collateral paid and received by counterparty under enforceable credit support agreements. Substantially all cash collateral received and paid is netted against OTC derivative assets and liabilities, respectively.


(9)	The net receivables/payables include approximately $7 billion of derivative asset and $9 billion of derivative liability fair values not subject to enforceable master netting agreements, respectively.



In millions of dollars at December 31, 2015	Derivatives classified in trading account assets / liabilities^(1)(2)(3)						Derivatives classified in Other assets / liabilities⁽²⁾⁽³⁾
Derivatives instruments designated as ASC 815 hedges	Assets			Liabilities			Assets			Liabilities
Over-the-counter	$	262		$	105		$	2,328		$	106
Cleared	4,607			1,471			5			—
Interest rate contracts	$	4,869		$	1,576		$	2,333		$	106
Over-the-counter	$	2,688		$	364		$	95		$	677
Foreign exchange contracts	$	2,688		$	364		$	95		$	677
Total derivative instruments designated as ASC 815 hedges	$	7,557		$	1,940		$	2,428		$	783
Derivatives instruments not designated as ASC 815 hedges
Over-the-counter	$	289,124		$	267,761		$	182		$	12
Cleared	120,848			126,532			244			216
Exchange traded	53			35			—			—
Interest rate contracts	$	410,025		$	394,328		$	426		$	228
Over-the-counter	$	126,474		$	133,361		$	—		$	66
Cleared	134			152			—			—
Exchange traded	21			36			—			—
Foreign exchange contracts	$	126,629		$	133,549		$	—		$	66
Over-the-counter	$	14,560		$	20,107		$	—		$	—
Cleared	28			3			—			—
Exchange traded	7,297			6,406			—			—
Equity contracts	$	21,885		$	26,516		$	—		$	—
Over-the-counter	$	16,794		$	18,641		$	—		$	—
Exchange traded	1,216			1,912			—			—
Commodity and other contracts	$	18,010		$	20,553		$	—		$	—
Over-the-counter	$	31,072		$	30,608		$	711		$	245
Cleared	3,803			3,560			131			318
Credit derivatives⁽⁴⁾	$	34,875		$	34,168		$	842		$	563
Total derivatives instruments not designated as ASC 815 hedges	$	611,424		$	609,114		$	1,268		$	857
Total derivatives	$	618,981		$	611,054		$	3,696		$	1,640
Cash collateral paid/received⁽⁵⁾⁽⁶⁾	$	4,911		$	13,628		$	8		$	37
Less: Netting agreements⁽⁷⁾	(524,481		)	(524,481		)	—			—
Less: Netting cash collateral received/paid⁽⁸⁾	(43,227		)	(42,609		)	(1,949		)	(53		)
Net receivables/payables included on the Consolidated Balance Sheet⁽⁹⁾	$	56,184		$	57,592		$	1,755		$	1,624
Additional amounts subject to an enforceable master netting agreement, but not offset on the Consolidated Balance Sheet
Less: Cash collateral received/paid	$	(779	)	$	(2	)	$	—		$	—
Less: Non-cash collateral received/paid	(9,855		)	(5,131		)	(270		)	—
Total net receivables/payables⁽⁹⁾	$	45,550		$	52,459		$	1,485		$	1,624


(1)	The trading derivatives fair values are presented in Note 24 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.


(2)	Derivative mark-to-market receivables/payables related to management hedges are recorded in either Other assets/Other liabilities or Trading account assets/Trading account liabilities.

(3)

Over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives include derivatives executed and settled bilaterally with counterparties without the use of an organized exchange or central clearing house. Cleared derivatives include derivatives executed bilaterally with a counterparty in the OTC market, but then novated to a central clearing house, whereby the central clearing house becomes the counterparty to both of the original counterparties. Exchange traded derivatives include derivatives executed directly on an organized exchange that provides pre-trade price transparency.


(4)	The credit derivatives trading assets comprise $17,957 million related to protection purchased and $16,918 million related to protection sold as of December 31, 2015. The credit derivatives trading liabilities comprise $16,968 million related to protection purchased and $17,200 million related to protection sold as of December 31, 2015.


(5)	For the trading account assets/liabilities, reflects the net amount of the $47,520 million and $56,855 million of gross cash collateral paid and received, respectively. Of the gross cash collateral paid, $42,609 million was used to offset derivative liabilities and, of the gross cash collateral received, $43,227 million was used to offset derivative assets.

(6)

For cash collateral paid with respect to non-trading derivative assets, reflects the net amount of $61 million of the gross cash collateral paid, of which $53 million is netted against non-trading derivative positions within Other liabilities. For cash collateral received with respect to non-trading derivative liabilities, reflects the net amount of $1,986 million of gross cash collateral received of which $1,949 million is netted against non-trading derivative positions within Other assets.


(7)	Represents the netting of derivative receivable and payable balances with the same counterparty under enforceable netting agreements. Approximately $391 billion, $126 billion and $7 billion of the netting against trading account asset/liability balances is attributable to each of the OTC, cleared and exchange-traded derivatives, respectively.


(8)	Represents the netting of cash collateral paid and received by counterparty under enforceable credit support agreements. Substantially all cash collateral received and paid is netted against OTC derivative assets and liabilities, respectively.


(9)	The net receivables/payables include approximately $10 billion of derivative asset and $10 billion of liability fair values not subject to enforceable master netting agreements.

For the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, the amounts recognized in Principal transactions in the Consolidated Statement of Income related to derivatives not designated in a qualifying hedging relationship, as well as the underlying non-derivative instruments, are presented in Note 6 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Citigroup presents this disclosure by business classification, showing derivative gains and losses related to its trading activities together with gains and losses related to non-derivative instruments within the same trading portfolios, as this represents the way these portfolios are risk managed.

The amounts recognized in Other revenue in the Consolidated Statement of Income related to derivatives not designated in a qualifying hedging relationship are shown below. The table below does not include any offsetting gains/losses on the economically hedged items to the extent such amounts are also recorded in Other revenue.



	Gains (losses) included in Other revenue
In millions of dollars	2016			2015			2014
Interest rate contracts	$	(81	)	$	117		$	(227	)
Foreign exchange	12			(39		)	14
Credit derivatives	(1,009		)	476			(150		)
Total Citigroup	$	(1,078	)	$	554		$	(363	)

Accounting for Derivative Hedging

Citigroup accounts for its hedging activities in accordance with ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging. As a general rule, hedge accounting is permitted where the Company is exposed to a particular risk, such as interest rate or foreign exchange risk, that causes changes in the fair value of an asset or liability or variability in the expected future cash flows of an existing asset, liability or a forecasted transaction that may affect earnings.

Derivative contracts hedging the risks associated with changes in fair value are referred to as fair value hedges, while contracts hedging the variability of expected future cash flows are cash flow hedges. Hedges that utilize derivatives or debt instruments to manage the foreign exchange risk associated with equity investments in non-U.S.-dollar-functional-currency foreign subsidiaries (net investment in a foreign operation) are net investment hedges.

To qualify as an accounting hedge under the hedge accounting rules (versus an economic hedge where hedge accounting is not applied), a hedging relationship must be highly effective in offsetting the risk designated as being hedged. The hedge relationship must be formally documented at inception, detailing the particular risk management objective and strategy for the hedge. This includes the item and risk(s) being hedged, the hedging instrument being used and how effectiveness will be assessed. The effectiveness of these hedging relationships is evaluated at hedge inception and on an ongoing basis both on a retrospective and prospective basis, typically using quantitative measures of correlation, with hedge ineffectiveness measured and recorded in current earnings. Hedge effectiveness assessment methodologies are performed in a similar manner for similar hedges, and are used consistently throughout the hedging relationships. The assessment of effectiveness may exclude changes in the value of the hedged item that are unrelated to the risks being hedged and the changes in fair value of the derivative associated with time value. These excluded items are recognized in current earnings for the hedging derivative, while changes in the value of a hedged item that are not related to the hedged risk are not recorded.

Discontinued Hedge Accounting

A hedging instrument must be highly effective in accomplishing the hedge objective of offsetting either changes in the fair value or cash flows of the hedged item for the risk being hedged. Management may voluntarily de-designate an accounting hedge at any time, but if a hedge relationship is not highly effective, it no longer qualifies for hedge accounting and must be de-designated. Subsequent changes in the fair value of the derivative are recognized in Other revenue or Principal transactions, similar to trading derivatives, with no offset recorded related to the hedged item.

For fair value hedges, any changes in the fair value of the hedged item remain as part of the basis of the asset or liability and are ultimately realized as an element of the yield on the item. For cash flow hedges, changes in fair value of the end-user derivative remain in Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) (AOCI) and are included in the earnings of future periods when the forecasted hedged cash flows impact earnings. However, if it becomes probable that some or all of the hedged forecasted transactions will not occur, any amounts that remain in AOCI related to these transactions must be immediately reflected in Other revenue.

The foregoing criteria are applied on a decentralized basis, consistent with the level at which market risk is managed, but are subject to various limits and controls. The underlying asset, liability or forecasted transaction may be an individual item or a portfolio of similar items.

Fair Value Hedges

Hedging of Benchmark Interest Rate Risk

Citigroup’s fair value hedges are primarily hedges of fixed-rate long-term debt or assets, such as available-for-sale securities.

Citigroup hedges exposure to changes in the fair value of outstanding fixed-rate issued debt. These hedges are designated as fair value hedges of the benchmark interest rate risk associated with the currency of the hedged liability. The fixed cash flows of the hedged items are typically converted to benchmark variable-rate cash flows by entering into receive-fixed, pay-variable interest rate swaps. By designating an interest rate swap contract as a hedging instrument and electing to apply ASC 815 fair value hedge accounting, the carrying value of the debt is adjusted to reflect the impact of changes in the benchmark interest rate, with such changes in value recorded in Other revenue. The related interest rate swap is recorded on the balance sheet at fair value, with changes in fair value also reflected in Other revenue. These amounts are expected to, and generally do, offset. Any net amount, representing hedge ineffectiveness, is automatically reflected in current earnings. These fair value hedge relationships use either regression or dollar-offset ratio analysis to assess whether the hedging relationships are highly effective at inception and on an ongoing basis.

Citigroup also hedges its exposure to changes in the fair value of fixed-rate assets due to changes in benchmark interest rates, including available-for-sale debt securities and loans. The hedging instruments are typically receive-variable, pay-fixed interest rate swaps. These fair value hedging relationships use either regression or dollar-offset ratio analysis to assess whether the hedging relationships are highly effective at inception and on an ongoing basis.

Hedging of Foreign Exchange Risk

Citigroup hedges the change in fair value attributable to foreign exchange rate movements in available-for-sale securities that are denominated in currencies other than the functional currency of the entity holding the securities, which may be within or outside the U.S. The hedging instrument is generally a forward foreign exchange contract. In this hedge, the portion of the change in the fair value of the hedged available-for-sale security attributable to foreign exchange risk (i.e., spot rates) is reported in earnings, and not AOCI—which offsets the change in the fair value of the forward contract that is also reflected in earnings. Citigroup considers the premium associated with forward contracts (i.e., the differential between spot and contractual forward rates) as the cost of hedging; this amount is excluded from the assessment of hedge effectiveness and reflected directly in earnings over the life of the hedge. The dollar-offset method is used to assess hedge effectiveness. Since that assessment is based on changes in fair value attributable to changes in spot rates on both the available-for-sale securities and the forward contracts for the portion of the relationship hedged, the amount of hedge ineffectiveness is not significant.

Hedging of Commodity Price Risk

Citigroup hedges the change in fair value attributable to spot price movements in physical commodities inventory. The hedging instrument is a futures contract to sell the underlying commodity. In this hedge, the change in the value of the hedged inventory is reflected in earnings, which offsets the change in the fair value of the futures contract that is also reflected in earnings. Although the change in the fair value of the hedging instrument recorded in earnings includes changes in forward rates, Citigroup excludes the differential between the spot and the contractual forward rates under the futures contract from the assessment of hedge effectiveness. Since the assessment is based on changes in fair value attributable to change in spot prices on both the physical commodity and the futures contract, the amount of hedge ineffectiveness is not significant.

The following table summarizes the gains (losses) on the Company’s fair value hedges:



	Gains (losses) on fair value hedges⁽¹⁾
	Year ended December 31,
In millions of dollars	2016			2015			2014
Gain (loss) on the derivatives in designated and qualifying fair value hedges
Interest rate contracts	$	(753	)	$	(847	)	$	1,546
Foreign exchange contracts	(1,415		)	1,315			1,367
Commodity contracts	182			41			(221		)
Total gain (loss) on the derivatives in designated and qualifying fair value hedges	$	(1,986	)	$	509		$	2,692
Gain (loss) on the hedged item in designated and qualifying fair value hedges
Interest rate hedges	$	668		$	792		$	(1,496	)
Foreign exchange hedges	1,573			(1,258		)	(1,422		)
Commodity hedges	(210		)	(35		)	250
Total gain (loss) on the hedged item in designated and qualifying fair value hedges	$	2,031		$	(501	)	$	(2,668	)
Hedge ineffectiveness recognized in earnings on designated and qualifying fair value hedges
Interest rate hedges	$	(84	)	$	(47	)	$	53
Foreign exchange hedges	4			(23		)	(16		)
Total hedge ineffectiveness recognized in earnings on designated and qualifying fair value hedges	$	(80	)	$	(70	)	$	37
Net gain (loss) excluded from assessment of the effectiveness of fair value hedges
Interest rate contracts	$	(1	)	$	(8	)	$	(3	)
Foreign exchange contracts⁽²⁾	154			80			(39		)
Commodity hedges⁽²⁾	(28		)	6			29
Total net gain (loss) excluded from assessment of the effectiveness of fair value hedges	$	125		$	78		$	(13	)


(1)	Amounts are included in Other revenue on the Consolidated Statement of Income. The accrued interest income on fair value hedges is recorded in Net interest revenue and is excluded from this table.


(2)	Amounts relate to the premium associated with forward contracts (differential between spot and contractual forward rates). These amounts are excluded from the assessment of hedge effectiveness and are reflected directly in earnings.

Cash Flow Hedges

Hedging of Benchmark Interest Rate Risk

Citigroup hedges the variability of forecasted cash flows associated with floating-rate assets/liabilities and other forecasted transactions. Variable cash flows from those liabilities are synthetically converted to fixed-rate cash flows by entering into receive-variable, pay-fixed interest rate swaps and receive-variable, pay-fixed forward-starting interest rate swaps. Variable cash flows associated with certain assets are synthetically converted to fixed-rate cash flows by entering into receive-fixed, pay-variable interest rate swaps. These cash flow hedging relationships use either regression analysis or dollar-offset ratio analysis to assess whether the hedging relationships are highly effective at inception and on an ongoing basis. When the variable interest rates associated with hedged items do not qualify as benchmark interest rates, Citigroup designates the risk being hedged as the risk of overall variability in the hedged cash flows. Because efforts are made to match the terms of the derivatives to those of the hedged forecasted cash flows as closely as possible, the amount of hedge ineffectiveness is not significant.

For cash flow hedges in which derivatives hedge the variability of forecasted cash flows related to recognized assets, liabilities or forecasted transactions, the accounting treatment depends on the effectiveness of the hedge. To the extent these derivatives are effective in offsetting the variability of the forecasted hedged cash flows, the effective portion of the changes in the derivatives’ fair values will not be included in current earnings, but will be reported in AOCI. These changes in fair value will be included in the earnings of future periods when the hedged cash flows impact earnings. To the extent these derivatives are not fully effective, changes in their fair values are immediately included in Other revenue. Citigroup’s cash flow hedges primarily include hedges of floating-rate assets or liabilities which may include loans and securities purchased under agreements to resell, as well as forecasted transactions.

Hedging of Foreign Exchange Risk

Citigroup locks in the functional currency equivalent cash flows of long-term debt and short-term borrowings that are denominated in currencies other than the functional currency of the issuing entity. Depending on risk management objectives, these types of hedges are designated either as cash flow hedges of foreign exchange risk only or cash flow hedges of both foreign exchange risk and interest rate risk, and the hedging instruments are foreign exchange cross-currency swaps and forward contracts. These cash flow hedge relationships use dollar-offset ratio analysis to determine whether the hedging relationships are highly effective at inception and on an ongoing basis.

The amount of hedge ineffectiveness on the cash flow hedges recognized in earnings for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 is not significant. The pretax change in AOCI from cash flow hedges is presented below:



	Year ended December 31,
In millions of dollars	2016			2015			2014
Effective portion of cash flow hedges included in AOCI
Interest rate contracts	$	(219	)	$	357		$	299
Foreign exchange contracts	69			(220		)	(167		)
Credit derivatives	—			—			2
Total effective portion of cash flow hedges included in AOCI	$	(150	)	$	137		$	134
Effective portion of cash flow hedges reclassified from AOCI to earnings
Interest rate contracts	$	(140	)	$	(186	)	$	(260	)
Foreign exchange contracts	(93		)	(146		)	(149		)
Total effective portion of cash flow hedges reclassified from AOCI to earnings⁽¹⁾	$	(233	)	$	(332	)	$	(409	)


(1)	Included primarily in Other revenue and Net interest revenue on the Consolidated Income Statement.

For cash flow hedges, the changes in the fair value of the hedging derivative remain in AOCI on the Consolidated Balance Sheet and will be included in the earnings of future periods to offset the variability of the hedged cash flows when such cash flows affect earnings. The net gain associated with cash flow hedges expected to be reclassified from AOCI within 12 months of December 31, 2016 is approximately $0.1 billion. The maximum length of time over which forecasted cash flows are hedged is 10 years.

The after-tax impact of cash flow hedges on AOCI is shown in Note 19 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Net Investment Hedges

Consistent with ASC 830-20, Foreign Currency Matters—Foreign Currency Transactions, ASC 815 allows the hedging of the foreign currency risk of a net investment in a foreign operation. Citigroup uses foreign currency forwards, cross-currency swaps, options and foreign-currency-denominated debt instruments to manage the foreign exchange risk associated with Citigroup’s equity investments in several non-U.S.-dollar-functional-currency foreign subsidiaries. Citigroup records the change in the carrying amount of these investments in the Foreign currency translation adjustment account within AOCI. Simultaneously, the effective portion of the hedge of this exposure is also recorded in the Foreign currency translation adjustment account and any ineffective portion is immediately recorded in earnings.

For derivatives designated as net investment hedges, Citigroup follows the forward-rate method outlined in ASC 815-35-35. According to that method, all changes in fair value, including changes related to the forward-rate component of the foreign currency forward contracts and the time value of foreign currency options, are recorded in the Foreign currency translation adjustment account within AOCI.

For foreign-currency-denominated debt instruments that are designated as hedges of net investments, the translation gain or loss that is recorded in the Foreign currency translation adjustment account is based on the spot exchange rate between the functional currency of the respective subsidiary and the U.S. dollar, which is the functional currency of Citigroup. To the extent the notional amount of the hedging instrument exactly matches the hedged net investment and the underlying exchange rate of the derivative hedging instrument relates to the exchange rate between the functional currency of the net investment and Citigroup’s functional currency (or, in the case of a non-derivative debt instrument, such instrument is denominated in the functional currency of the net investment), no ineffectiveness is recorded in earnings.

The pretax gain (loss) recorded in the Foreign currency translation adjustment account within AOCI, related to the effective portion of the net investment hedges, is $(220) million, $2,475 million and $2,890 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.

Economic Hedges

Citigroup often uses economic hedges when hedge accounting would be too complex or operationally burdensome. End-user derivatives that are economic hedges are carried at fair value, with changes in value included in either Principal transactions or Other revenue.

For asset/liability management hedging, fixed-rate long-term debt is recorded at amortized cost under GAAP.

For other hedges that either do not meet the ASC 815 hedging criteria or for which management decides not to apply ASC 815 hedge accounting, the derivative is recorded at fair value on the balance sheet with the associated changes in fair value recorded in earnings, while the debt continues to be carried at amortized cost. Therefore, current earnings are affected by the interest rate shifts and other factors that cause a change in the swap’s value, but for which no offsetting change in value is recorded on the debt.

Citigroup may alternatively elect to account for the debt at fair value under the fair value option. Once the irrevocable election is made upon issuance of the debt, the full change in fair value of the debt is reported in earnings. The changes in fair value of the related interest rate swap are also reflected in earnings, which provides a natural offset to the debt’s fair value change. To the extent the two amounts differ because the full change in the fair value of the debt includes risks not offset by the interest rate swap, the difference is automatically captured in current earnings.

Additional economic hedges include hedges of the credit risk component of commercial loans and loan commitments. Citigroup periodically evaluates its hedging strategies in other areas and may designate either an accounting hedge or an economic hedge after considering the relative costs and benefits. Economic hedges are also employed when the hedged item itself is marked to market through current earnings, such as hedges of commitments to originate one- to four-family mortgage loans to be held for sale and MSRs.

Credit Derivatives

Citi is a market maker and trades a range of credit derivatives. Through these contracts, Citi either purchases or writes protection on either a single name or a portfolio of reference credits. Citi also uses credit derivatives to help mitigate credit risk in its corporate and consumer loan portfolios and other cash positions and to facilitate client transactions.

Citi monitors its counterparty credit risk in credit derivative contracts. As of December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, approximately 97% and 98%, respectively, of the gross receivables are from counterparties with which Citi maintains collateral agreements. A majority of Citi’s top 15 counterparties (by receivable balance owed to Citi) are banks, financial institutions or other dealers. Contracts with these counterparties do not include ratings-based termination events. However, counterparty ratings downgrades may have an incremental effect by lowering the threshold at which Citi may

call for additional collateral.

The range of credit derivatives entered into includes credit default swaps, total return swaps, credit options and credit-linked notes.

A credit default swap is a contract in which, for a fee, a protection seller agrees to reimburse a protection buyer for any losses that occur due to a predefined credit event on a reference entity. These credit events are defined by the terms of the derivative contract and the reference credit and are generally limited to the market standard of failure to pay on indebtedness and bankruptcy of the reference credit and, in a more limited range of transactions, debt restructuring. Credit derivative transactions that reference emerging market entities also typically include additional credit events to cover the acceleration of indebtedness and the risk of repudiation or a payment moratorium. In certain transactions, protection may be provided on a portfolio of reference entities or asset-backed securities. If there is no credit event, as defined by the specific derivative contract, then the protection seller makes no payments to the protection buyer and receives only the contractually specified fee. However, if a credit event occurs as defined in the specific derivative contract sold, the protection seller will be required to make a payment to the protection buyer. Under certain contracts, the seller of protection may not be required to make a payment until a specified amount of losses has occurred with respect to the portfolio and/or may only be required to pay for losses up to a specified amount.

A total return swap typically transfers the total economic performance of a reference asset, which includes all associated cash flows, as well as capital appreciation or depreciation. The protection buyer receives a floating rate of interest and any depreciation on the reference asset from the protection seller and, in return, the protection seller receives the cash flows associated with the reference asset plus any appreciation. Thus, according to the total return swap agreement, the protection seller will be obligated to make a payment any time the floating interest rate payment plus any depreciation of the reference asset exceeds the cash flows associated with the underlying asset. A total return swap may terminate upon a default of the reference asset or a credit event with respect to the reference entity subject to the provisions of the related total return swap agreement between the protection seller and the protection buyer.

A credit option is a credit derivative that allows investors to trade or hedge changes in the credit quality of a reference entity. For example, in a credit spread option, the option writer assumes the obligation to purchase or sell credit protection on the reference entity at a specified “strike” spread level. The option purchaser buys the right to sell credit default protection on the reference entity to, or purchase it from, the option writer at the strike spread level. The payments on credit spread options depend either on a particular credit spread or the price of the underlying credit-sensitive asset or other reference entity. The options usually terminate if a credit event occurs with respect to the underlying reference entity.

A credit-linked note is a form of credit derivative structured as a debt security with an embedded credit default swap. The purchaser of the note effectively provides credit protection to the issuer by agreeing to receive a return that could be negatively affected by credit events on the underlying reference credit. If the reference entity defaults, the note may be cash settled or physically settled by delivery of a debt security of the reference entity. Thus, the maximum amount of the note purchaser’s exposure is the amount paid for the credit-linked note.

The following tables summarize the key characteristics of Citi’s credit derivatives portfolio by counterparty and derivative form:



	Fair values				Notionals
In millions of dollars at December 31, 2016	Receivable⁽¹⁾		Payable⁽²⁾		Protection purchased		Protection sold
By industry/counterparty
Banks	$	11,895	$	10,930	$	407,992	$	414,720
Broker-dealers	3,536		3,952		115,013		119,810
Non-financial	82		99		4,014		2,061
Insurance and other financial institutions	9,308		10,844		375,454		322,829
Total by industry/counterparty	$	24,821	$	25,825	$	902,473	$	859,420
By instrument
Credit default swaps and options	$	24,502	$	24,631	$	883,719	$	852,900
Total return swaps and other	319		1,194		18,754		6,520
Total by instrument	$	24,821	$	25,825	$	902,473	$	859,420
By rating
Investment grade	$	9,605	$	9,995	$	675,138	$	648,247
Non-investment grade	15,216		15,830		227,335		211,173
Total by rating	$	24,821	$	25,825	$	902,473	$	859,420
By maturity
Within 1 year	$	4,113	$	4,841	$	293,059	$	287,262
From 1 to 5 years	17,735		17,986		551,155		523,371
After 5 years	2,973		2,998		58,259		48,787
Total by maturity	$	24,821	$	25,825	$	902,473	$	859,420


(1)	The fair value amount receivable is composed of $9,077 million under protection purchased and $15,744 million under protection sold.


(2)	The fair value amount payable is composed of $17,110 million under protection purchased and $8,715 million under protection sold.



	Fair values				Notionals
In millions of dollars at December 31, 2015	Receivable⁽¹⁾		Payable⁽²⁾		Protection purchased		Protection sold
By industry/counterparty
Banks	$	18,377	$	16,988	$	513,335	$	508,459
Broker-dealers	5,895		6,697		155,195		152,604
Non-financial	128		123		3,969		2,087
Insurance and other financial institutions	11,317		10,923		332,715		287,772
Total by industry/counterparty	$	35,717	$	34,731	$	1,005,214	$	950,922
By instrument
Credit default swaps and options	$	34,849	$	34,158	$	981,999	$	940,650
Total return swaps and other	868		573		23,215		10,272
Total by instrument	$	35,717	$	34,731	$	1,005,214	$	950,922
By rating
Investment grade	$	12,694	$	13,142	$	764,040	$	720,521
Non-investment grade	23,023		21,589		241,174		230,401
Total by rating	$	35,717	$	34,731	$	1,005,214	$	950,922
By maturity
Within 1 year	$	3,871	$	3,559	$	265,632	$	254,225
From 1 to 5 years	27,991		27,488		669,834		639,460
After 5 years	3,855		3,684		69,748		57,237
Total by maturity	$	35,717	$	34,731	$	1,005,214	$	950,922


(1)	The fair value amount receivable is composed of $18,799 million under protection purchased and $16,918 million under protection sold.


(2)	The fair value amount payable is composed of $17,531 million under protection purchased and $17,200 million under protection sold.

Fair values included in the above tables are prior to application of any netting agreements and cash collateral. For notional amounts, Citi generally has a mismatch between the total notional amounts of protection purchased and sold, and it may hold the reference assets directly, rather than entering into offsetting credit derivative contracts as and when desired. The open risk exposures from credit derivative contracts are largely matched after certain cash positions in reference assets are considered and after notional amounts are adjusted, either to a duration-based equivalent basis or to reflect the level of subordination in tranched structures. The ratings of the credit derivatives portfolio presented in the tables and used to evaluate payment/performance risk are based on the assigned internal or external ratings of the reference asset or entity. Where external ratings are used, investment-grade ratings are considered to be ‘Baa/BBB’ and above, while anything below is considered non-investment grade. Citi’s internal ratings are in line with the related external rating system.

Citigroup evaluates the payment/performance risk of the credit derivatives for which it stands as a protection seller based on the credit rating assigned to the underlying reference credit. Credit derivatives written on an underlying non-investment grade reference credit represent greater payment risk to the Company. The non-investment grade category in the table above also includes credit derivatives where the underlying reference entity has been downgraded subsequent to the inception of the derivative.

The maximum potential amount of future payments under credit derivative contracts presented in the table above is based on the notional value of the derivatives. The Company believes that the notional amount for credit protection sold is not representative of the actual loss exposure based on historical experience. This amount has not been reduced by the value of the reference assets and the related cash flows. In accordance with most credit derivative contracts, should a credit event occur, the Company usually is liable for the difference between the protection sold and the value of the reference assets. Furthermore, the notional amount for credit protection sold has not been reduced for any cash collateral paid to a given counterparty, as such payments would be calculated after netting all derivative exposures, including any credit derivatives with that counterparty in accordance with a related master netting agreement. Due to such netting processes, determining the amount of collateral that corresponds to credit derivative exposures alone is not possible. The Company actively monitors open credit-risk exposures and manages this exposure by using a variety of strategies, including purchased credit derivatives, cash collateral or direct holdings of the referenced assets. This risk mitigation activity is not captured in the table above.

Credit-Risk-Related Contingent Features in Derivatives

Certain derivative instruments contain provisions that require the Company to either post additional collateral or immediately settle any outstanding liability balances upon the occurrence of a specified event related to the credit risk of the Company. These events, which are defined by the existing derivative contracts, are primarily downgrades in the credit ratings of the Company and its affiliates. The fair value (excluding CVA) of all derivative instruments with credit-risk-related contingent features that were in a net liability position at both December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015 was $26 billion and $22 billion, respectively. The Company posted $26 billion and $19 billion as collateral for this exposure in the normal course of business as of December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively.

A downgrade could trigger additional collateral or cash settlement requirements for the Company and certain affiliates. In the event that Citigroup and Citibank were downgraded a single notch by all three major rating agencies as of December 31, 2016, the Company could be required to post an additional $1.5 billion as either collateral or settlement of the derivative transactions. Additionally, the Company could be required to segregate with third-party custodians collateral previously received from existing derivative counterparties in the amount of $0.1 billion upon the single notch downgrade, resulting in aggregate cash obligations and collateral requirements of approximately $1.6 billion.

Derivatives Accompanied by Financial Asset Transfers

The Company executes total return swaps which provide it with synthetic exposure to substantially all of the economic return of the securities or other financial assets referenced in the contract. In certain cases, the derivative transaction is accompanied by the Company’s transfer of the referenced financial asset to the derivative counterparty, most typically in response to the derivative counterparty’s desire to hedge, in whole or in part, its synthetic exposure under the derivative contract by holding the referenced asset in funded form. In certain jurisdictions these transactions qualify as sales, resulting in derecognition of the securities transferred (see Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of the related sale conditions for transfers of financial assets). For a significant portion of the transactions, the Company has also executed another total return swap where the Company passes on substantially all of the economic return of the referenced securities to a different third party seeking the exposure. In those cases, the Company is not exposed, on a net basis, to changes in the economic return of the referenced securities.

These transactions generally involve the transfer of the Company’s liquid government bonds, convertible bonds, or publicly traded corporate equity securities from the trading portfolio and are executed with third-party financial institutions. The accompanying derivatives are typically total return swaps. The derivatives are cash settled and subject to ongoing margin requirements.

When the conditions for sale accounting are met, the Company reports the transfer of the referenced financial asset as a sale and separately reports the accompanying derivative transaction. These transactions generally do not result in a gain or loss on the sale of the security, because the transferred security was held at fair value in the Company’s trading portfolio. For transfers of financial assets accounted for by the Company as a sale, where the Company has retained substantially all of the economic exposure to the transferred asset through a total return swap executed in contemplation of the initial sale with the same counterparty and still outstanding as of December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, both the asset carrying amounts derecognized and gross cash proceeds received as of the date of derecognition were $1.0 billion. At December 31, 2016, the fair value of these previously derecognized assets was $1.0 billion and the fair value of the total return swaps was $32 million recorded as gross derivative assets and $23 million recorded as gross derivative liabilities. At December 31, 2015, the fair value of these previously derecognized assets was $1 billion and the fair value of the total return swaps was $7 million recorded as gross derivative assets and $35 million recorded as gross derivative liabilities. The balances for the total return swaps are on a gross basis, before the application of counterparty and cash collateral netting, and are included primarily as equity derivatives in the tabular disclosures in this Note.