Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.

What is the correct answer for percent change when the start amount is zero dollars $0?
There is no numerical convention in finance that I have ever seen.  If you look at statements or reports that measure growth when the starting value is negative or zero, you typically see "n/a" or "-" or "*" as the result.  Any numerical result would be meaningless.  Suppose you used 100% and another company had a legitimate 150% gain - where would the 100% change rank? What do my manager and investors expect to see? As a financial analyst - I would not want to see 100%.  I would instead rather see something that indicates that the % change is meaningless.   As an example, here's the WSJ documentation on change in Net Income: Net Income percent change is the change from the same period from a year ago. Percent change is not provided if either the latest period or the year-ago period contains a net loss.  Thinking about it in another context: Yesterday you and your friend had no apples. Today you have 1 and your friend has 20.  What percentage increase did you both have? Did you both have a 100% increase? How can you indicate that your friend had a larger "increase"? In that case (and in finance), the context needs to turn from a percentage increase to an absolute increase.  A percentage increase is that scenario is meaningless.