AWM’s lines of business consist of the following: AWM’s client segments consist of the following: Asset Management has two high-level measures of its overall fund performance. 75 JPMorgan Chase & Co./2018 Form 10-K Selected metrics As of or for the year ended December 31, (in millions, except ranking data and ratios) 2018 2017 2016 % of JPM mutual fund assets rated as 4- or 5-star (a) 58% 60% 63% % of JPM mutual fund assets ranked in 1$^{st}$ or 2$^{nd}$  quartile: (b) 1 year 68 64 54 3 years 73 75 72 5 years 85 83 79 Selected balance sheet data (period-end) Total assets $ 170,024 $ 151,909 $ 138,384 Loans 147,632 130,640 118,039 Core loans 147,632 130,640 118,039 Deposits 138,546 146,407 161,577 Equity 9,000 9,000 9,000 Selected balance sheet data (average) Total assets $ 160,269 $ 144,206 $ 132,875 Loans 138,622 123,464 112,876 Core loans 138,622 123,464 112,876 Deposits 137,272 148,982 153,334 Equity 9,000 9,000 9,000 Credit data and quality statistics Net charge-offs $ 10 $ 14 $ 16 Nonaccrual loans 263 375 390 Allowance for credit losses: Allowance for loan losses 326 290 274 Allowance for lending-related commitments 16 10 4 Total allowance for credit losses 342 300 278 Net charge-off rate 0.01% 0.01% 0.01% Allowance for loan losses to period-end loans 0.22 0.22 0.23 Allowance for loan losses to nonaccrual loans 124 77 70 Nonaccrual loans to period- end loans 0.18 0.29 0.33 (a) Represents the “overall star rating” derived from Morningstar for the U.S., the U.K., Luxembourg, Hong Kong and Taiwan domiciled funds; and Nomura “star rating” for Japan domiciled funds. Includes only Asset Management retail open- ended mutual funds that have a rating. Excludes money market funds, Undiscovered Managers Fund, and Brazil domiciled funds. (b) Quartile ranking sourced from: Lipper for the U.S. and Taiwan domiciled funds; Morningstar for the U.K., Luxembourg and Hong Kong domiciled funds; Nomura for Japan domiciled funds and Fund Doctor for South Korea domiciled funds. Includes only Asset Management retail open-ended mutual funds that are ranked by the aforementioned sources. Excludes money market funds, Undiscovered Managers Fund, and Brazil domiciled funds. Asset Management  provides comprehensive global investment services, including asset management, pension analytics, asset-liability management and active risk-budgeting strategies. Wealth Management  offers investment advice and wealth management, including investment management, capital markets and risk management, tax and estate planning, banking, lending and specialty-wealth advisory services. Private Banking  clients include high- and ultra-high-net-worth individuals, families, money managers, business owners and small corporations worldwide. Institutional  clients include both corporate and public institutions, endowments, foundations, nonprofit organizations and governments worldwide. Retail  clients include financial intermediaries and individual investors. •  Percentage of mutual fund assets under management in funds rated 4- or 5-star:  Mutual fund rating services rank funds based on their risk-adjusted performance over various periods. A 5-star rating is the best rating and represents the top 10% of industry-wide ranked funds. A 4-star rating represents the next 22.5% of industry-wide ranked funds. A 3-star rating represents the next 35% of industry-wide ranked funds. A 2-star rating represents the next 22.5% of industry-wide ranked funds. A 1-star rating is the worst rating and represents the bottom 10% of industry-wide ranked funds. The “overall Morningstar rating” is derived from a weighted average of the performance associated with a fund’s three-, five- and ten-year (if applicable) Morningstar Rating metrics. For U.S. domiciled funds, separate star ratings are given at the individual share class level. The Nomura “star rating” is based on three-year risk-adjusted performance only. Funds with fewer than three years of history are not rated and hence excluded from this analysis. All ratings, the assigned peer categories and the asset values used to derive this analysis are sourced from these fund rating providers mentioned in footnote (a). The data providers re-denominate the asset values into U.S. dollars. This % of AUM is based on star ratings at the share class level for U.S. domiciled funds, and at a “primary share class” level to represent the star rating of all other funds except for Japan where Nomura provides ratings at the fund level. The “primary share class”, as defined by Morningstar, denotes the share class recommended as being the best proxy for the portfolio and in most cases will be the most retail version (based upon annual management charge, minimum investment, currency and other factors). The performance data could have been different if all funds/accounts would have been included. Past performance is not indicative of future results. •  Percentage of mutual fund assets under management in funds ranked in the 1st or 2nd quartile (one, three and five years) : All quartile rankings, the assigned peer categories and the asset values used to derive this analysis are sourced from the fund ranking providers mentioned in footnote (c). Quartile rankings are done on the net-of-fee absolute return of each fund. The data providers re-denominate the asset values into U.S. dollars. This % of AUM is based on fund performance and associated peer rankings at the share class level for U.S. domiciled funds, at a “primary share class” level to represent the quartile ranking of the U.K., Luxembourg and Hong Kong funds and at the fund level for all other funds. The “primary share class”, as defined by Morningstar, denotes the share class recommended as being the best proxy for the portfolio and in most cases will be the most retail version (based upon annual management charge, minimum investment, currency and other factors). Where peer group rankings given for a fund are in more than one “primary share class” territory both rankings are included to reflect local market competitiveness (applies to “Offshore Territories” and “HK SFC Authorized” funds only). The performance data could have been different if all funds/accounts would have been included. Past performance is not indicative of future results.