First, some clarifications:
I know that light is considered as energy
No, light is a group of photons and those have energy
So it is certainly taken into account in universes models and calculations.
The energy of radiation is minimal, reaching about $0.01\%$ (yes, what you said is correct, kingW3) of the energy of the Universe, and that's because of two phenomena causing it to:
Is it positive or negative?
- If it were negative, we would be testing some kind of light propulsion engine or using it for building an Alcubierre warp drive. You don't see that happening. Also, light would be a tachyon (which are bad: if you ever see a theory produces a tachyon, throw the theory out of the window, as it's equivalent to saying it doesn't work)
- If it were positive it would have mass, we wouldn't have discovered a lot of things, such as Special Relativity because of it traveling at subluminal speeds, and possibly
it would hurt we could "feel it" (because of touch) it depending on the exact value of its mass.
it should decrease expansion somehow
It does, but $0.01\%$ of the energy of the Universe clearly is negligible, and as I said, that number decreases over time.
The mass of light is equal to...?
Light is massless, meaning that its rest mass ($m_0$) is zero. But that doesn't mean it can't interact gravitationally: the reason objects have gravity is that they have mass (and momentum, if not you would have what I think is about $92\%$ less mass), and in this case, mass is equivalent to energy in the sense that it curves Spacetime similarly.
Other way to phrase that last sentence is as StephenG put it:
[...] Energy (i.e. non-mass energy) can contribute to the distortion of space-time, but that's not the same as it having mass.
Summary of what I said, answering other questions:
How much of the total mass of the universe does light and electromagnetic waves accounts for?
And how much does it [energy of radiation] contributes to its [the Universe's] expansion?