Tom Moeller

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061206a.jpg" width="353">
The ADP Nat&#39;l Employment Report, reported by the payroll processor, indicated a 158,000 rise in private nonfarm payrolls last month. A 97,500 increase had been expected and the November figure from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics will be published this Friday.
Last month, ADP&#39;s measure of private nonfarm payrolls for October indicated a 128,000 rise in jobs that was followed by a 58,000 rise in private nonfarm payrolls, when published by BLS.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061206b.jpg" width="353">
ADP compiled the estimate from its database of individual companies&#39; payroll information. Macroeconomic Advisers, LLC, the St. Louis economic consulting firm, developed the methodology for transforming the raw data into an economic indicator.
According to ADP and Macro Advisers, the correlation between the monthly percentage change in the ADP estimate and that in the BLS data is 0.90.
The ADP National Employment Report data is maintained in Haver&#39;s USECON database; historical data go back to December 2000. The figures in this report cover only private sector jobs and exclude employment in the public sector, which rose an average 11,083 during the last twelve months.
The full ADP National Employment Report can be found <a href="http://www.adpemploymentreport.com/PDF/NER_November_Release_FINAL.pdf">here</a>, and the ADP methodology is explained <a href="http://www.adpemploymentreport.com/PDF/ADPNERMethodology.pdf">here</a>.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@EB/@EB25/@EB25.HTM">LAXEPA@USECON</a></th>
<th scope="col">November</th>
<th scope="col">October</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Nonfarm Private Payroll Employment (Chg.)</td>
<td>158,000</td>
<td>128,000</td>
<td>1.7%</td>
<td>1.7%</td>
<td>1.3%</td>
<td>-0.4%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The ADP Nat'l Employment Report, reported by the payroll processor, indicated a 158,000 rise in private nonfarm payrolls last month. A 97,500 increase had been expected and the November figure from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics [...]

ADP Report: Private Sector Jobs Rose 158,000 in November

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061206a.jpg" width="353">
The ADP Nat&#39;l Employment Report, reported by the payroll processor, indicated a 158,000 rise in private nonfarm payrolls last month. A 97,500 increase had been expected and the November figure from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics will be published this Friday.
Last month, ADP&#39;s measure of private nonfarm payrolls for October indicated a 128,000 rise in jobs that was followed by a 58,000 rise in private nonfarm payrolls, when published by BLS.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061206b.jpg" width="353">
ADP compiled the estimate from its database of individual companies&#39; payroll information. Macroeconomic Advisers, LLC, the St. Louis economic consulting firm, developed the methodology for transforming the raw data into an economic indicator.
According to ADP and Macro Advisers, the correlation between the monthly percentage change in the ADP estimate and that in the BLS data is 0.90.
The ADP National Employment Report data is maintained in Haver&#39;s USECON database; historical data go back to December 2000. The figures in this report cover only private sector jobs and exclude employment in the public sector, which rose an average 11,083 during the last twelve months.
The full ADP National Employment Report can be found <a href="http://www.adpemploymentreport.com/PDF/NER_November_Release_FINAL.pdf">here</a>, and the ADP methodology is explained <a href="http://www.adpemploymentreport.com/PDF/ADPNERMethodology.pdf">here</a>.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@EB/@EB25/@EB25.HTM">LAXEPA@USECON</a></th>
<th scope="col">November</th>
<th scope="col">October</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Nonfarm Private Payroll Employment (Chg.)</td>
<td>158,000</td>
<td>128,000</td>
<td>1.7%</td>
<td>1.7%</td>
<td>1.3%</td>
<td>-0.4%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Slower U.S. Factory Inventory Accumulation: Oil & Computers 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> December 6, 2006


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061206c.jpg" width="353">
Factory inventories rose an even slower 0.4% during October, half the 0.8% average gain during the prior six months. It was the slowest increase since a 0.5% decline in inventories during February and the y/y rise ticked lower to 7.1%.
The slowdown has been mostly due to lower oil prices which in October were mostly responsible for a 4.9% (+5.6% y/y) decline in petroleum refineries&#39; inventories. Less petroleum, factory inventories grew 0.7% (7.1% y/y) in October, equal to the average of the prior six months.
Inventories of computers &amp; electronic products recovered 0.6% (8.7% y/y) after a 0.1% slip during September, though the latest figure reflected a 17.2% (-11.2% y/y) drop in computers. Primary metals inventories surged 1.6% (19.0% y/y) in October, though that was the slowest increase in four months. Inventories of electrical equipment rose 0.5% (10.9% y/y) after the 0.9% September drop yet the 3-month change fell to 5.2% (AR), half the rate of growth during the first nine months of 2006. Furniture inventories rose 1.1% and the 3-month change rose to 10.2% while machinery inventories increased 0.3% after a 1.6% September spike.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061206d.jpg" width="353">
Total factory orders fell a hard 4.7% reflecting the 8.2% drop in durable goods orders which was little revised from the advance report. That reflected a 44.6% (+23.0% y/y) plunge in aircraft orders. Factory orders less transportation fell 0.8% (+1.4% y/y). Much of the recently slower growth in this measure reflects petroleum where orders (which equal shipments) fell 3.7% (-15.1% y/y) in October. Still, non-transportation orders less oil fell 0.6% (+3.3% y/y) in October for the third consecutive monthly decline.
Factory shipments rose 0.1%. Factory shipments less transportation &amp; petroleum eked out a 0.4% (3.7% y/y) increase after a 2.6% September decline.
Unfilled orders rose another 1.2% due to a 2.4% (53.9% y/y) jump in civilian aircraft. Less the transportation sector altogether backlogs rose 1.0% (13.3% y/y).<a href="http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/review/05/07/Gali.pdf"> </a>

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@ED/@ED01/@ED0101/@ED01016/@ED01016.HTM">Factory Survey</a> (NAICS)</th>
<th scope="col">October</th>
<th scope="col">September</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Inventories</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>0.6%</td>
<td>7.1%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>6.9%</td>
<td>-7.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">New Orders</td>
<td>-4.7%</td>
<td>1.7%</td>
<td>0.6%</td>
<td>8.5%</td>
<td>7.5%</td>
<td>0.9%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Shipments</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
<td>-4.2%</td>
<td>1.0%</td>
<td>7.1%</td>
<td>6.8%</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Unfilled Orders</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>4.1%</td>
<td>21.9%</td>
<td>16.3%</td>
<td>4.5%</td>
<td>-1.0%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Life in Housing - Mortgage Applications Recover 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> December 6, 2006


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061206e.jpg" width="353">
The total number of mortgage applications rose 8.1% last week and recovered all of the sharp declines during the prior two weeks, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association.
Purchase applications jumped 4.9%, the largest weekly increase in a month, spurred by lower interest rates &amp; price concessions. During November purchase applications rose 6.4% from the October level and in early December purchase applications are 5.1% above the November average.
During the last ten years there has been a 58% correlation between the y/y change in purchase applications and the change in new plus existing single family home sales.
Applications to refinance jumped 13.7% and recovered most of the prior two weeks&#39; sharp decline.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061206f.jpg" width="353">
The effective interest rate on a conventional 30-year mortgage dropped sixteen basis points to 6.16%. The peak for 30 year financing was 7.08% late in June. Rates for 15-year financing also fell sharply to 5.91%, the first time below 6% since January. Interest rates on 15 and 30 year mortgages are closely correlated (&gt;90%) with the rate on 10 year Treasury securities.
During the last ten years there has been a (negative) 79% correlation between the level of applications for purchase and the effective interest rate on a 30-year mortgage.
The Mortgage Bankers Association surveys between 20 to 35 of the top lenders in the U.S. housing industry to derive its refinance, purchase and market indexes. The weekly survey covers roughly 50% of all U.S. residential mortgage applications processed each week by mortgage banks, commercial banks and thrifts. Visit the Mortgage Bankers Association site <a href="http://www.mbaa.org">here</a>.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/SURVEYW/@S5/@S5.HTM">MBA Mortgage Applications (3/16/90=100)</a></th>
<th scope="col">12/01/06</th>
<th scope="col">11/24/06</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total Market Index</td>
<td>647.6</td>
<td>599.0</td>
<td>-1.4%</td>
<td>708.6</td>
<td>735.1</td>
<td>1,067.9</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Purchase</td>
<td>426.6</td>
<td>406.7</td>
<td>-13.8%</td>
<td>470.9</td>
<td>454.5</td>
<td>395.1</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Refinancing</td>
<td>1,989.7</td>
<td>1,749.6</td>
<td>24.6%</td>
<td>2,092.3</td>
<td>2,366.8</td>
<td>4,981.8</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
UK Industrial Production Takes Unexpected Fall in October 
by <a href="/comment/Stone.html">Carol Stone</a> December 6, 2006


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061206g.jpg" width="353">
UK industrial production declined unexpected in October, falling 0.8% compared to +0.1% forecast by a couple of consensus surveys of economists. The manufacturing sector was off 0.5%, in the face of an expected 0.2% increase. A number of factors accounted for the retreat.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061206h.jpg" width="353">
Total output was pushed down by a renewed decline in oil and gas extraction. The UK&#39;s oil production has been falling for several years, but had managed a bounce in September. This was more than reversed in October. Utility output continued a decline, which was quite large in October and attributed by some to unusually mild weather.
Manufacturing, the key cyclical sector, saw a 0.5% decrease in production. Press reports argued that the strength in the pound over the last several months was starting to hurt exports. This is possible, as seen in the accompanying chart. Machinery seems to be the main broad area showing weakness and that could relate to non-competitive pricing conditions in world markets.<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061206i.jpg" width="353"> The same is true for pharmaceuticals. However, in several of these instances, output had been up in prior months, so a downturn in one month is hard to blame on such fundamental factors, especially for items like machines that have fairly long lead-times. Note too that the relationship of British manufacturing to the currency value is quite loose. So until there&#39;s more evidence, it seems too soon to decide firmly on a cause for this sudden downdraft in industry. In fact, the ONS&#39;s preferred measure, the last three months average compared with the prior three months average, was still rising, by 0.3%. This is considerably less, though, than the 0.8% or 0.9% of the other recent periods

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/UK/@U3/@U3.HTM">UK</a></th>
<th scope="col">Oct 2006</th>
<th scope="col">Sept 2006</th>
<th scope="col">Aug 2006</th>
<th scope="col">Year Ago</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total, 2003 =100</td>
<td>98.2</td>
<td>99.0</td>
<td>98.9</td>
<td>97.6</td>
<td>99.0</td>
<td>100.8</td>
<td>100.0</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; % Change</td>
<td>-0.8</td>
<td>0.1</td>
<td>0.0</td>
<td>2.1</td>
<td>-1.8</td>
<td>0.8</td>
<td>-0.3</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Oil &amp; Gas</td>
<td>-2.6</td>
<td>2.1</td>
<td>-1.9</td>
<td>-11.3</td>
<td>-9.9</td>
<td>-8.4</td>
<td>-5.6</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Manufacturing, 2003=100</td>
<td>102.3</td>
<td>102.8</td>
<td>102.8</td>
<td>99.9</td>
<td>101.0</td>
<td>102.0</td>
<td>100.0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; % Change</td>
<td>-0.5</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0.3</td>
<td>4.8</td>
<td>-1.0</td>
<td>2.0</td>
<td>0.2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Electricity, Gas, &amp; Water</td>
<td>-3.1</td>
<td>-0.3</td>
<td>-0.6</td>
<td>-4.3</td>
<td>-0</td>
<td>1.1</td>
<td>1.6</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>

 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061205g.jpg" width="353">
 Pump prices for regular unleaded gasoline increased five cents last week to an average $2.30 per gallon after penny increases during both of the prior two weeks. The gains lifted the average price to its highest since the opening week of October.
The spot market (NY harbor) price for a gallon of regular gasoline slipped yesterday for the third straight day, but at $1.68 per gallon still reflected the hefty gains early last week.
Crude oil prices also fell yesterday but at $62.90 (5.0% y/y) the cost of a barrel of WTI was up from the $59.37 averaged in November and the $58.88 in October.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061205f.jpg" width="353">
Seasonably cold temperatures also lifted natural gas prices to $7.91/mmbtu, the highest level since early August. The Natural Gas Distribution System can be found <a href="http://www.energyquest.ca.gov/story/chapter09.html"> here</a>.
The latest Short-Term Energy Outlook from the U.S. Energy Information Administration is available <a href="http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/steo/pub/contents.html">here</a>.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/surveyw/@S2/@S2.HTM">Weekly Energy Prices</a></th>
<th scope="col">12/04/06</th>
<th scope="col">11/27/06</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">US Retail Gasoline Price, Regular</td>
<td>$2.30</td>
<td>$2.25</td>
<td>7.0%</td>
<td>$2.27</td>
<td>$1.85</td>
<td>$1.56</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>


</html>

Pump prices for regular unleaded gasoline increased five cents last week to an average $2.30 per gallon after penny increases during both of the prior two weeks. The gains lifted the average price to its highest since the opening week [...]

Gasoline Prices Highest in Two Months

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>

 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061205h.jpg" width="353">
Chain store sales collapsed as shoppers dropped after Thanksgiving week, according to the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC)-UBS. A 2.6% decline in sales last week lowered sales in the opening week of December 2.5% below the November average which had advanced 0.3% from October.
During the last ten years there has been a 45% correlation between the y/y change in chain store sales and the change in nonauto retail sales less gasoline.
The ICSC-UBS retail chain-store sales index is constructed using the same-store sales (stores open for one year) reported by 78 stores of seven retailers: Dayton Hudson, Federated, Kmart, May, J.C. Penney, Sears and Wal-Mart.
Despite last week&#39;s sales drop, the leading indicator of chain store sales from ICSC-UBS recovered the prior period&#39;s 0.3% decline (-0.1% y/y) and was up roughly 3% from the early year low.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/surveyw/@S2/@S2.HTM">ICSC-UBS (SA, 1977=100)</a></th>
<th scope="col">12/02/06</th>
<th scope="col">11/25/06</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Total Weekly Chain Store Sales</td>
<td>454.4</td>
<td>466.5</td>
<td>3.1%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
<td>4.7%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>


</html>

Chain store sales collapsed as shoppers dropped after Thanksgiving week, according to the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC)-UBS. A 2.6% decline in sales last week lowered sales in the opening week of December 2.5% below [...]

Weekly Chain Store Sales Collapsed

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061205i.jpg" width="353">
Announced job cuts reported by Challenger, Grey &amp; Christmas for November rose 7,596 to 76,773. The three month moving average of layoff announcements continued its earlier uptrend with a rise to 82,088, its highest level since this past March.
During the last ten years there has been an 83% (inverse) correlation between the three month moving average level of announced job cuts and the three month change payroll employment.
Layoffs were higher m/m in the automotive (20.4% y/y), chemical (81.5% y/y), consumer goods (-3.1% y/y), industrial goods (133.3% y/y) and services (9.4% y/y) industries.
Job cut announcements differ from layoffs. Many are achieved through attrition, early retirement or just never occur.
Challenger also reported that announced hiring plans increased sharply m/m (-34.3% y/y).

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/SURVEYS/@S3/@S301/@S301.HTM">Challenger, Gray &amp; Christmas</a></th>
<th scope="col">November</th>
<th scope="col">October</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Announced Job Cuts</td>
<td>76,773</td>
<td>69,177</td>
<td>-22.7%</td>
<td>1,072,054</td>
<td>1,039,935</td>
<td>1,236,426</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Announced job cuts reported by Challenger, Grey & Christmas for November rose 7,596 to 76,773. The three month moving average of layoff announcements continued its earlier uptrend with a rise to 82,088, its highest level since this [...]

Challenger Layoffs Up Slightly

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>

 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061205d.jpg" width="353">
The non-manufacturing sector Business Activity Index rose unexpectedly to 58.9 from 57.1 in October. The figure from the Institute for Supply Management (ISM) exceeded Consensus expectations for a decline to 56.0. Thus far in 4Q the index has averaged 58.0 versus an average of 54.9 last quarter.
Since the series&#39; inception in 1997 there has been a 50% correlation between the level of the Business Activity Index and the q/q change in real GDP for services plus construction.
The new orders sub-index improved to 57.1 from 56.5 in October and an average 55.0 during 3Q. The employment index also notched up to 51.6 from 51.0 in October but these figures were below the 3Q average of 53.2. Since the series&#39; inception in 1997 there has been a 60% correlation between the level of the ISM non-manufacturing employment index and the m/m change in payroll employment in the service producing plus the construction industries.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061205e.jpg" width="353">
Pricing power improved modestly after sharp declines during four of the prior five months. At 55.6 the November figure remained well off the 3Q average of 68.0. Since inception eight years ago, there has been a 70% correlation between the price index and the y/y change in the GDP services chain price index.
ISM surveys more than 370 purchasing managers in more than 62 industries including construction, law firms, hospitals, government and retailers. The non-manufacturing survey dates back to July 1997.
Business Activity Index for the non-manufacturing sector reflects a question separate from the subgroups mentioned above. In contrast, the NAPM manufacturing sector composite index is a weighted average five components.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@EF/@EF03/@EF03.HTM">ISM Nonmanufacturing Survey</a></th>
<th scope="col">November</th>
<th scope="col">October</th>
<th scope="col">Nov. &#39;05</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Business Activity Index</td>
<td>58.9</td>
<td>57.1</td>
<td>59.3</td>
<td>60.1</td>
<td>62.5</td>
<td>58.3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Prices Index</td>
<td>55.6</td>
<td>51.9</td>
<td>70.8</td>
<td>67.9</td>
<td>68.8</td>
<td>56.6</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>


</html>

The non-manufacturing sector Business Activity Index rose unexpectedly to 58.9 from 57.1 in October. The figure from the Institute for Supply Management (ISM) exceeded Consensus expectations for a decline to 56.0. Thus far in 4Q the [...]

ISM Nonmanufacturing Index Up Again, Unexpectedly

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061205a.jpg" width="353">
For 3Q &#39;06, nonfarm labor productivity growth of 0.2% was little revised from the preliminary report. The figure fell short of Consensus expectations for a larger revision to 0.4% growth. The weak increase kept y/y growth in productivity at 1.4%, the weakest since 1997.
Compensation per hour, however, was revised sharply with the 3Q estimate taken down one percentage point to 2.6% growth. Combined with a huge downward revision to 2Q growth to -1.2% from +6.6% (not a typo) it lowered the y/y change to 4.3% which is on a par with the growth during the last several years.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061205b.jpg" width="353">
The revisions to compensation lowered unit labor costs sharply as well to 2.3% growth last quarter. Growth during 2Q was lowered to -2.4% versus a previously estimated 5.4% gain. During the last thirty years there has been an 85% correlation between labor cost growth the growth in the GDP chain price deflator, although that correlation has fallen sharply in recent years.
Factory sector productivity growth last quarter was increased to 6.7% (4.5% y/y) from 5.9% but growth in factory sector compensation per hour was lowered just slightly to 2.4% (2.4% y/y) from 2.9%. The y/y gain in compensation is collapsed versus the previous estimate because of a sharp revision to 2Q growth to -5.8% (2.4% y/y) from +4.0% estimated last month. Unit labor costs as a result fell 4.1% during the third quarter (-2.0% y/y) after an 8.3% decline during the prior period.<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061205c.jpg" width="353">
Reported for the first time were 3Q estimates for the nonfinancial corporate sector. Productivity there rebounded 5.6% (3.8% y/y) after a 4.3% drop during 2Q that previously was reported as a 0.2% increase. Compensation grew 2.8% (4.3% y/y) after a 0.7% decline that was earlier estimated at +6.5%. As a result, unit labor costs fell 2.7% (+0.5% y/y) last quarter.
Unit profits for the nonfinancial corporate sector in this productivity report in fact grew 27.6% (19.0% y/y). These figures are in line with the sharp 8.2% (25.8% y/y) gain in nonfinancial corporate profits reported in last week&#39;s GDP report. Prices for the sector grew just 0.2% (1.8% y/y), the slowest quarterly increase in four years.
U.S. Economic Outlook is last Friday&#39;s speech by Chicago Fed president Michael H. Moskow and it can be found <a href="http://www.chicagofed.org/news_room/speeches/2006_12_01_carthage.cfm"> here</a>.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@EC/@EC02/@EC02.HTM">Non-farm Business Sector</a> (SAAR)</th>
<th scope="col">3Q &#39;06 (Revised)</th>
<th scope="col">3Q &#39;06</th>
<th scope="col">2Q&#39; 06</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Output per Hour</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
<td>2.3%</td>
<td>3.0%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Compensation per Hour</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>-1.2%</td>
<td>4.3%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Unit Labor Costs</td>
<td>2.3%</td>
<td>3.8%</td>
<td>-2.4%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
<td>0.7%</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

For 3Q '06, nonfarm labor productivity growth of 0.2% was little revised from the preliminary report. The figure fell short of Consensus expectations for a larger revision to 0.4% growth. The weak increase kept y/y growth in [...]

U.S. Productivity Little Revised, Compensation Lowered Sharply

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>

 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061205a.jpg" width="353">
For 3Q &#39;06, nonfarm labor productivity growth of 0.2% was little revised from the preliminary report. The figure fell short of Consensus expectations for a larger revision to 0.4% growth. The weak increase kept y/y growth in productivity at 1.4%, the weakest since 1997.
Compensation per hour, however, was revised sharply with the 3Q estimate taken down one percentage point to 2.6% growth. Combined with a huge downward revision to 2Q growth to -1.2% from +6.6% (not a typo) it lowered the y/y change to 4.3% which is on a par with the growth during the last several years.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061205a.jpg" width="353">
The revisions to compensation lowered unit labor costs sharply as well to 2.3% growth last quarter. Growth during 2Q was lowered to -2.4% versus a previously estimated 5.4% gain. During the last thirty years there has been an 85% correlation between labor cost growth the growth in the GDP chain price deflator, although that correlation has fallen sharply in recent years.
Factory sector productivity growth last quarter was increased to 6.7% (4.5% y/y) from 5.9% but growth in factory sector compensation per hour was lowered just slightly to 2.4% (2.4% y/y) from 2.9%. The y/y gain in compensation is collapsed versus the previous estimate because of a sharp revision to 2Q growth to -5.8% (2.4% y/y) from +4.0% estimated last month. Unit labor costs as a result fell 4.1% during the third quarter (-2.0% y/y) after an 8.3% decline during the prior period.<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061205a.jpg" width="353">
Reported for the first time were 3Q estimates for the nonfinancial corporate sector. Productivity there rebounded 5.6% (3.8% y/y) after a 4.3% drop during 2Q that previously was reported as a 0.2% increase. Compensation grew 2.8% (4.3% y/y) after a 0.7% decline that was earlier estimated at +6.5%. As a result, unit labor costs fell 2.7% (+0.5% y/y) last quarter.
Unit profits for the nonfinancial corporate sector in this productivity report in fact grew 27.6% (19.0% y/y). These figures are in line with the sharp 8.2% (25.8% y/y) gain in nonfinancial corporate profits reported in last week&#39;s GDP report. Prices for the sector grew just 0.2% (1.8% y/y), the slowest quarterly increase in four years.
U.S. Economic Outlook is last Friday&#39;s speech by Chicago Fed president Michael H. Moskow and it can be found <a href="http://www.chicagofed.org/news_room/speeches/2006_12_01_carthage.cfm"> here</a>.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@EC/@EC02/@EC02.HTM">Non-farm Business Sector</a> (SAAR)</th>
<th scope="col">3Q &#39;06 (Revised)</th>
<th scope="col">3Q &#39;06</th>
<th scope="col">2Q&#39; 06</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Output per Hour</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
<td>2.3%</td>
<td>3.0%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Compensation per Hour</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>-1.2%</td>
<td>4.3%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Unit Labor Costs</td>
<td>2.3%</td>
<td>3.8%</td>
<td>-2.4%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
<td>0.7%</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Challenger Layoffs Up Slightly 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> December 5, 2006


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061205i.jpg" width="353">
Announced job cuts reported by Challenger, Grey &amp; Christmas for November rose 7,596 to 76,773. The three month moving average of layoff announcements continued its earlier uptrend with a rise to 82,088, its highest level since this past March.
During the last ten years there has been an 83% (inverse) correlation between the three month moving average level of announced job cuts and the three month change payroll employment.
Layoffs were higher m/m in the automotive (20.4% y/y), chemical (81.5% y/y), consumer goods (-3.1% y/y), industrial goods (133.3% y/y) and services (9.4% y/y) industries.
Job cut announcements differ from layoffs. Many are achieved through attrition, early retirement or just never occur.
Challenger also reported that announced hiring plans increased sharply m/m (-34.3% y/y).

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/SURVEYS/@S3/@S301/@S301.HTM">Challenger, Gray &amp; Christmas</a></th>
<th scope="col">November</th>
<th scope="col">October</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Announced Job Cuts</td>
<td>76,773</td>
<td>69,177</td>
<td>-22.7%</td>
<td>1,072,054</td>
<td>1,039,935</td>
<td>1,236,426</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Weekly Chain Store Sales Collapsed 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> December 5, 2006


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061205h.jpg" width="353">
Chain store sales collapsed as shoppers dropped after Thanksgiving week, according to the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC)-UBS. A 2.6% decline in sales last week lowered sales in the opening week of December 2.5% below the November average which had advanced 0.3% from October.
During the last ten years there has been a 45% correlation between the y/y change in chain store sales and the change in nonauto retail sales less gasoline.
The ICSC-UBS retail chain-store sales index is constructed using the same-store sales (stores open for one year) reported by 78 stores of seven retailers: Dayton Hudson, Federated, Kmart, May, J.C. Penney, Sears and Wal-Mart.
Despite last week&#39;s sales drop, the leading indicator of chain store sales from ICSC-UBS recovered the prior period&#39;s 0.3% decline (-0.1% y/y) and was up roughly 3% from the early year low.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/surveyw/@S2/@S2.HTM">ICSC-UBS (SA, 1977=100)</a></th>
<th scope="col">12/02/06</th>
<th scope="col">11/25/06</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Total Weekly Chain Store Sales</td>
<td>454.4</td>
<td>466.5</td>
<td>3.1%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
<td>4.7%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Gasoline Prices Highest in Two Months 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> December 5, 2006


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061205g.jpg" width="353">
 Pump prices for regular unleaded gasoline increased five cents last week to an average $2.30 per gallon after penny increases during both of the prior two weeks. The gains lifted the average price to its highest since the opening week of October.
The spot market (NY harbor) price for a gallon of regular gasoline slipped yesterday for the third straight day, but at $1.68 per gallon still reflected the hefty gains early last week.
Crude oil prices also fell yesterday but at $62.90 (5.0% y/y) the cost of a barrel of WTI was up from the $59.37 averaged in November and the $58.88 in October.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061205f.jpg" width="353">
Seasonably cold temperatures also lifted natural gas prices to $7.91/mmbtu, the highest level since early August. The Natural Gas Distribution System can be found <a href="http://www.energyquest.ca.gov/story/chapter09.html"> here</a>.
The latest Short-Term Energy Outlook from the U.S. Energy Information Administration is available <a href="http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/steo/pub/contents.html">here</a>.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/surveyw/@S2/@S2.HTM">Weekly Energy Prices</a></th>
<th scope="col">12/04/06</th>
<th scope="col">11/27/06</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">US Retail Gasoline Price, Regular</td>
<td>$2.30</td>
<td>$2.25</td>
<td>7.0%</td>
<td>$2.27</td>
<td>$1.85</td>
<td>$1.56</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
ISM Nonmanufacturing Index Up Again, Unexpectedly 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> December 5, 2006


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061205d.jpg" width="353">
The non-manufacturing sector Business Activity Index rose unexpectedly to 58.9 from 57.1 in October. The figure from the Institute for Supply Management (ISM) exceeded Consensus expectations for a decline to 56.0. Thus far in 4Q the index has averaged 58.0 versus an average of 54.9 last quarter.
Since the series&#39; inception in 1997 there has been a 50% correlation between the level of the Business Activity Index and the q/q change in real GDP for services plus construction.
The new orders sub-index improved to 57.1 from 56.5 in October and an average 55.0 during 3Q. The employment index also notched up to 51.6 from 51.0 in October but these figures were below the 3Q average of 53.2. Since the series&#39; inception in 1997 there has been a 60% correlation between the level of the ISM non-manufacturing employment index and the m/m change in payroll employment in the service producing plus the construction industries.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/061205e.jpg" width="353">
Pricing power improved modestly after sharp declines during four of the prior five months. At 55.6 the November figure remained well off the 3Q average of 68.0. Since inception eight years ago, there has been a 70% correlation between the price index and the y/y change in the GDP services chain price index.
ISM surveys more than 370 purchasing managers in more than 62 industries including construction, law firms, hospitals, government and retailers. The non-manufacturing survey dates back to July 1997.
Business Activity Index for the non-manufacturing sector reflects a question separate from the subgroups mentioned above. In contrast, the NAPM manufacturing sector composite index is a weighted average five components.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@EF/@EF03/@EF03.HTM">ISM Nonmanufacturing Survey</a></th>
<th scope="col">November</th>
<th scope="col">October</th>
<th scope="col">Nov. &#39;05</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Business Activity Index</td>
<td>58.9</td>
<td>57.1</td>
<td>59.3</td>
<td>60.1</td>
<td>62.5</td>
<td>58.3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Prices Index</td>
<td>55.6</td>
<td>51.9</td>
<td>70.8</td>
<td>67.9</td>
<td>68.8</td>
<td>56.6</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>


</html>

USD/EUR exchange rate uncoupling from interest rate differential

Widespread downgrading of 2025 GDP outlook

Trade and fiscal policy uncertainty has exploded with the new administration

Much lower US electricity costs gives it a competitive advantage

Wage growth slowing in the US and Euro area; elevated and sticky in the UK

Stagflation-lite: Blue Chip forecasts below-trend growth and elevated inflation

US policy gyrations boosting policy uncertainty worldwide

Expected tariff hikes have boosted inflation expectations

US and Japan ended 2024 on solid ground in contrast to Europe

US economy expected to outperform other major economies in 2025

Only modest evidence of AI-related surge in US productivity growth

Previous Trump tariffs fading. A boost from new tariffs ahead?

Heavy US manufacturing states underperforming while Sun Belt states outperforming

Rising long-term yields a global phenomenon

US financial market concerns shifting from growth to inflation

Economic activity is picking up in the US but remains lackluster abroad

Policy uncertainty has surged since the US national elections.

Recent turnaround in US economic surprises leading to increases in rate-cut expectations

The outlook has brightened in the US, while it has dimmed for other major economies

Headline US PCE inflation elevated by sticky services prices

US and global equity prices have recently diverged

US leading global upturn in economic surprises

Blue Chip forecasters look for further significant monetary easing apart from Japan

Recent rise in global supply chain pressures could augur a pickup in global inflation pressures

Underperforming German economy generating increased policy uncertainty relative to Europe and the US

Our global data offering is unparalleled in terms of coverage, quality, and organization. We offer 290+ databases from 2500 government and private sources, a wealth of key survey and forecast data covering the world’s economies, and a robust offering of archive databases that drive machine learning for big data applications.

Optimized for precision analytics, our data is seamlessly integrated with Microsoft Office and all leading statistical packages through our DLX® software and platform independent HaverView™ website. We further offer direct database feeds, client server or cloud-based delivery, and RESTful API.


Privacy Policy

Disclaimer

Contact us

A premier time series data platform for the global strategy, research, and quant communities. 

New York

London

Singapore

Tokyo

Economy in Brief

Viewpoints

Contact Us

Our Data

Our Products

What We Do

Our Authors

About Us

Data News

Resources

Release Calendars

Training Center

Webinars

Newsletters

Download Software

For Clients

Live Updates

250502A5.jpg

250502B5.jpg

Nonfarm payrolls increased 177,000 (1.2% y/y) during April after rising 185,000 in March, revised from 228,000, and 102,000 in February, revised from 117,000. Expectations had been for a 130,000 rise in the Action Economics Forecast Survey. The latest figure left the three-month average change at 155,000 in April, down from 232,000 in January.

Average hourly earnings rose 0.2% during April after unrevised increases of 0.3% in March and 0.2% in February. Earnings growth of 3.8% y/y was below the 5.9% high in March 2022.

The unemployment rate, measured in the household survey, held m/m at an expected 4.2% in April, and compared to 4.1% in February and 4.0% in January. It reached a low of 3.4% in April 2023. The unemployment rate, including employees working part-time for economic reasons plus all marginally-attached workers, eased to 7.8% in April from 7.9% in March.

In the **establishment survey**, private-sector employment rose 167,000 (1.2% y/y) after a 170,000 March increase. Factory sector jobs edged 1,000 lower (-0.7% y/y) following a 3,000 gain. Construction sector employment increased 11,000 (1.7% y/y), after rising 7,000 in March.

Private service-producing sector employment increased 156,000 (1.4% y/y) in April after improving 161,000 in March. Increases varied greatly amongst service sector categories. Private education & health sector employment rose 70,000 (3.4% y/y) last month following a 74,000 March increase. Leisure & hospitality employment rose 24,000 (1.3% y/y) after a 38,000 gain. Trade, transportation & utilities rose 32,000 (0.9% y/y) in April following a 25,000 March increase. Professional & business services employment rose 17,000 (-0.1% y/y) following a 3,000 rise while temporary help employment rose 3,600 (-3.9% y/y) following a 2,700 decline. Financial activities employment improved 14,000 (1.2% y/y) after a 6,000 gain. The number of information sector jobs held steady (-0.4% y/y) last month after falling 2,000 in March.

Government sector payrolls rose 10,000 (1.3% y/y) last month after increasing 15,000 in March. The number of local government jobs increased 13,000 (1.4% y/y) following a 17,000 gain. State government employment rose 6,000 (1.8% y/y) following a 2,000 March increase but federal government payrolls fell 9,000 (-0.3% y/y), the third consecutive monthly decline.

Private-sector average hourly earnings rose 0.2% (3.8% y/y) in April after increasing 0.3% in March. Earnings in the goods-producing sector eased 0.1% (+4.0% y/y) following a 0.6% gain. Earnings in construction rose 0.3% (3.6% y/y), after a 0.2% rise but factory sector earnings declined 0.3% (+4.3% y/y) after surging 0.8% in March. In the private services-sector, earnings rose 0.2% (3.7% y/y) in April for the third straight month. Information sector pay increased 1.0% (5.2% y/y) last month after easing 0.1%, and financial activities earnings rose 0.5% (4.3% y/y) for the second straight month. Trade, transportation & utilities sector pay increased 0.4% (3.4% y/y) after 0.6%. Professional & business sector earnings increased 0.1% (4.4% y/y) after 0.2% in March. Leisure & hospitality earnings held steady (+3.8% y/y) following a 0.6% March increase.

250502C5.jpg

250502D5.jpg

The length of the average workweek held steady at 34.3 hours in April. The workweek in the goods-producing sector eased to 39.8 hours from 40.0 hours. The construction sector average workweek eased to 39.0 hours from 39.3 hours while the factory sector workweek moved lower to 40.0 hours from 40.2. The average workweek in the private service sector held at 33.2 hours. Professional & business service hours fell to 36.3 hours from 36.4 while trade, transportation & utilities hours improved to 34.3 from 34.0 hours. Private education hours rose slightly to 32.8, but leisure & hospitality held steady at 25.5 hours.

In the **household survey**, the unemployment rate held at 4.2% in April as employment rose 436,000 and the size of the labor force increased 518,000. The labor force participation rate edged up to 62.6% last month from 62.5% in March. It remained below the high of 63.3% early in 2020. The rate for teenagers declined to 36.9%. For workers aged 20-24, the rate held steady at 72.1%, up from 71.8% six months earlier. For workers aged 25-54 the rate rose to 83.6%, a five-month high. For individuals 55 and over, the rate improved to 38.4% in April.

The employment/population ratio for all workers in April rose to 60.0%. It remained below the peak reading of 61.1% in February, 2020 just prior to the pandemic.

The employment and earnings data are collected from surveys taken each month during the week containing the 12th day of the month. The labor market data are contained in Haver's **USECON** database. Detailed figures are in the **EMPL** and **LABOR** databases. The expectations figures are in the **AS1REPNA** database.

250502X5.jpg

250502F5.jpg

- Job growth spreads across most sectors.
- Earnings growth trend decelerates.
- Jobless rate holds steady.

U.S. Job Growth Is Firm in April but March Gain Is Lessened

Winnie Tapasanun

250502F32.jpg

250502G32.jpg

Total factory orders rose a slightly less-than-expected 4.3% m/m in March after rises of 0.5% in February and 1.8% in January, data from the U.S. Census Bureau showed. A 4.5% m/m March increase had been expected in the Action Economics Forecast Survey. The March reading was the third successive monthly rise and the largest since July 2024. The year-on-year rate accelerated to 6.0% in March, the highest since November 2022, from 2.3% in February. Notably, orders for nondefense aircraft & parts soared 139.0% in March following a 7.4% drop in February and a 92.9% surge in January. Factory orders excluding defense rose 4.8% (5.9% y/y), the largest of three straight m/m/ rises, after a 0.4% February increase. Factory orders excluding the transportation sector fell 0.2% (+1.1% y/y), the first m/m fall since August, after rising 0.3% in February, January and December.

Durable goods orders jumped 9.2% (11.9% y/y) in March, the third consecutive m/m gain and the biggest since July 2024, on top of a 0.8% increase in February (matching +9.2% m/m in the advance report on April 24). The March jump reflected m/m orders increases of 27.1% (the largest m/m surge since July 2024; 31.2% y/y) in transportation equipment, 1.1% (4.9% y/y) in primary metals, 0.5% (-0.4% y/y) in furniture & related products, 0.1% (2.5% y/y) in fabricated metal products, and 0.1% (0.9% y/y) in machinery. To the downside, durable goods orders for computers & electronic products (-1.3%; +2.7% y/y) and electrical equipment, appliances & components (-1.0%; +4.2% y/y) declined m/m in March.

Nondurable goods orders, which equal nondurable goods shipments, fell 0.3% (+0.4% y/y) in March, the first m/m fall since September, after a 0.1% uptick in February. The March fall reflected m/m drops of 2.4% (-9.3% y/y) in petroleum & coal products and 0.9% (-1.2% y/y) in apparel. To the upside, the following nondurable goods shipments rose m/m in March: leather & allied products (1.5%; 8.6% y/y), beverage & tobacco products (0.7%; 5.8% y/y), paper products (0.6%; 2.3% y/y), printing (0.3%; 3.8% y/y), textile mills (0.3%; 0.8% y/y), chemical products (0.2%; 5.4% y/y), plastics & rubber products (0.2%; 0.4% y/y), food products (0.1%; 1.8% y/y), and textile products (0.1%; 2.1% y/y).

Total shipments slipped 0.1% (+2.0% y/y) in March, the first m/m easing since October, after a 0.7% increase in February. Excluding transportation, shipments were virtually unchanged m/m (+1.1% y/y) in March following six straight m/m gains. Shipments of durable goods industries inched up 0.1% (3.8% y/y) in March, the smallest of four consecutive m/m increases, after a 1.3% advance in February. This reflected m/m durable goods shipments rises of 1.2% (5.6% y/y) in primary metals, 0.9% (0.1% y/y) in furniture & related products, 0.8% (-0.2% y/y) in nonmetallic mineral products, 0.4% (0.0% y/y) in machinery, 0.3% (1.8% y/y) in fabricated metal products, 0.2% (4.5% y/y) in computers & electronic products, 0.2% (-2.1% y/y) in wood products, and 0.1% (3.0% y/y) in electrical equipment, appliances & components. In contrast, durable goods shipments for transportation equipment (-0.5%; +7.3% y/y) and miscellaneous durable goods (-0.1%; +2.9% y/y) fell m/m in March following three successive m/m increases.

Unfilled orders rose 2.0% (2.3% y/y) in March, up for the eighth month in nine, after a 0.1% uptick in February. Excluding transportation, unfilled orders dipped 0.1% (+0.7% y/y) in March, the first m/m easing since May 2024, after holding steady in February. Backlogs of durable goods rose 2.0% (2.3% y/y) in March, reflecting m/m rises of 3.1% (3.1% y/y) in transportation equipment and 0.2% (2.4% y/y) in electrical equipment, appliances & components.

Inventories edged up 0.1% (0.9% y/y) in March, the fifth straight m/m increase, after rising at the same pace in the prior two months. Excluding transportation, inventories were up 0.1% (0.5% y/y) in March, the fifth consecutive m/m rise. Durable goods inventories ticked up 0.1% (1.0% y/y) in March after holding steady in February and January; nondurable goods inventories edged up 0.1% (0.8% y/y), the fifth successive m/m increase.

The factory sector data are available in Haver’s **USECON** database. The Action Economics Forecast Survey is in the **AS1REPNA** database.

250502H32.jpg

250502I32.jpg

- March manufacturers’ new orders +4.3% m/m; +6.0% y/y, highest since Nov. ’22.
- Durable goods orders (+9.2%) jump m/m, while nondurable goods orders (-0.3%) and shipments (-0.1%) decline m/m.
- Transportation equipt. orders +27.1% m/m, w/ a 139.0% m/m surge in nondefense aircraft & parts orders.
- Unfilled orders +2.0%, the eighth m/m rise in nine months.
- Inventories +0.1%, the fifth consecutive m/m increase.

U.S. Factory Orders Increase for the Third Straight Month in March

Robert Brusca

250502E.jpg

The global manufacturing data showed broad weakening in April as conditions weakened across more than half of the contributing early reporters in the S&P survey of manufacturing. Of the 18 early reporting countries, more than half of them showed deceleration over six months and 12 months. Over three months, only 8 of 18 showed deterioration and that's about as good as it got in this report. In the current month, month-to-month changes showed more than half of the survey contributors showing weaker results than the month before. In the S&P framework, manufacturing improved month-to-month for the U.S.; however, looking at sequential averages for the U.S., U.K., European monetary union, Canada, and Japan, we see a steady weakening and results over 12 months, over six months versus 12 months, and for three months versus 6 months. The highly developed countries are not doing particularly well.

Asian economies are also showing slight deterioration but doing a little better than the developed countries in general.

Only five of the 18 reporting countries have queue percentile standings in their data back to January 2021 that are above their medians. Readings at or above the 50% mark are at or above the median standing. Canada is showing the weakest manufacturing result on record over this span, in terms of its queue percentile standing which is at 0 in the current month.

I showed the graphic for the Baltic dry goods index in this report rather than statistics on the manufacturing PMI data because the Baltic data, which reflect shipping volume for dry goods - that is excluding things like oil - is weak but it's only in the neighborhood where it's been for some time. There has been a great deal of talk about how tariffs may have impacted trade flows, expected trade flows, shipping, shipping rates, and the like. However, according to the Baltic dry goods index, there isn't much evidence that this is occurring right now and affecting the current data. That may still lie ahead but for now it's not baked in the cake.

250502.jpg

Globally Manufacturing Weakens

Andrew Cates

**China-US shipping activity** 
The economic fallout from escalating US-China trade tensions is becoming increasingly visible in the data. A clear example is the chart below, which highlights a sharp drop in vessel arrivals at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, along with a notable decline in ships waiting offshore. These trends point to a tangible weakening in bilateral trade flows, as the effects of tit-for-tat tariffs imposed by both countries begin to bite. Given the outsized role the US and China play in global commerce, this slowdown is likely to reverberate through global supply chains, weighing on trade volumes, dampening demand, and curbing economic growth worldwide.

250501Z1.jpg

**GDP growth in Q1**
Data this week showed that the US economy contracted, albeit modestly, in Q1 even as the euro area recorded a modest expansion—an unusual divergence. The contraction in US GDP can be largely attributed to a sharp increase in imports, as firms rushed to front-load purchases ahead of anticipated tariff hikes. In addition, domestic demand was subdued, with weaker contributions from both consumer spending and government consumption. This decoupling between the US and euro area economies is particularly striking given the current global focus on the US dollar. While the euro area has shown unexpected signs of resilience, the US downturn raises important questions about its underlying momentum, especially as trade dynamics and policy uncertainty continue to cloud the outlook.

250501Z2.jpg

**The US dollar versus yield differentials**
Chart 3 below illustrates a sharp breakdown in the correlation between the US-Germany 10-year yield differential and the EUR/USD exchange rate. Historically, the dollar has moved closely with interest rate spreads, as yield-seeking capital flowed into US assets. But since early 2025—and more acutely following the April tariff actions—the dollar has weakened markedly even as the yield spread has narrowed only modestly. This decoupling underscores a critical shift: capital markets are reacting not just to monetary policy, but to rising trade and geopolitical uncertainty. In other words, the exchange rate is now being driven as much by risk sentiment as by interest rate arbitrage.

250501Z3.jpg

**The US economy’s structural outperformance and the dollar**
A second dynamic, captured in the next chart, reveals a tight correlation between the US real effective exchange rate and the potential GDP growth differential between the US and euro area over the past 50-60 years. This raises the question: has dollar strength (until recently) merely been a reflection of US growth leadership—or are capital inflows themselves helping to sustain this growth outperformance? In effect, the tail may be wagging the dog. Global investors have long allocated capital to the US, attracted by its macroeconomic resilience, technological leadership, and deep, liquid financial markets. The danger now is that the US trade war may disrupt this equilibrium. A sharp or sustained reduction in capital inflows could undermine growth, weaken the dollar, and trigger broader financial instability. Moreover, reversing this dynamic is not straightforward—barring a credible structural resurgence in European (or Asian) growth, the global investment landscape remains tilted toward the US.

250501Z4.jpg

**US competitiveness versus Europe, China and Japan** 
The next chart below examines relative unit labour costs across major economies since 2011. The US and China have seen a broadly similar trajectory, with steady increases in relative cost structures, while the euro area has remained flat and Japan has seen dramatic improvement. This suggests that, from a cost competitiveness standpoint, the US is not uniquely disadvantaged vis-à-vis China. However, as we discuss further below, this parallel erosion of cost competitiveness is occurring at much higher nominal wage levels in the US, which blunts its ability to regain export share through tariff-related shifts alone. The trade war strategy—absent a corresponding improvement in productivity or structural reforms—risks imposing costs without delivering material competitiveness gains.

250501Z5.jpg

**Average wages in selected developed and developing economies**
This point is reinforced by the final chart, which shows estimates for average monthly wages across countries in 2024. US labour remains much more expensive than in peer or emerging economies. So even if China’s costs rise in tandem with the US, the global supply chain has ample alternatives. 'China plus one' strategies are accelerating, and the US remains structurally misaligned with low-cost production hubs. Tariffs aimed at reshoring supply chains are unlikely to deliver sustained gains unless accompanied by deep supply-side reforms, and risk further disincentivizing foreign direct investment if global firms perceive US trade policy as erratic or punitive.

250501Z6.jpg

Financial markets found a measure of calm this week, buoyed by some subtle shifts in tone from US policymakers. A softening in the administration’s rhetoric around trade tariffs coupled with a less confrontational stance toward Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, helped ease tensions that had roiled markets earlier in the month. Equities rebounded modestly, and volatility indicators edged lower, reflecting cautious optimism that the worst of the policy shocks may be behind us. But beneath the surface, significant downside risks persist. New shipping data point to a pronounced slowdown in US-China trade flows (chart 1), suggesting the damage from recent tariff escalations is already rippling through global supply chains. Meanwhile, incoming data for the US revealed an unexpected contraction in the economy in Q1 and further signs of weakness in the labour market (chart 2). The US dollar, in the meantime, while long supported by superior growth and yield differentials, has begun to decouple from traditional drivers (charts 3 and 4) suggesting growing pressure on capital flows. At the same time, structural imbalances are drawing renewed scrutiny: unit labour cost comparisons show the US steadily losing competitiveness (chart 5), while nominal wage disparities remain stark versus China and other Asian economies, further complicating any effort to restore trade balance without broader reforms (chart 6). In short, while markets may be drawing temporary comfort from a pause in tariff brinkmanship, the deeper economic and financial vulnerabilities exposed this month remain unresolved—and increasingly central to the global macro narrative.

<iframe style="border-radius:12px" src="https://open.spotify.com/embed/episode/3PzXXKrkHcwtOLipohEdnB?utm_source=generator" width="100%" height="152" frameBorder="0" allowfullscreen="" allow="autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; fullscreen; picture-in-picture" loading="lazy"></iframe>

Charts of the Week: Tariff Truce, Tenuous Trust

250501F20.jpg

250501G20.jpg

U.S. light vehicle sales dropped 2.9% (+6.5% y/y) to 17.31 million units (SAAR) in April after surging 10.8% to 17.82 million units in March. The retreat in April vehicle sales accompanied a 1.7% y/y rise in real disposable income through March, which compared to 2.0% growth last year.

Sales declines were broad-based last month. Light truck sales fell 1.3% (+9.9% y/y) during April to 14.34 million units (SAAR), after rising 12.4% in March. Purchases of domestically-made light trucks declined 1.2% (+11.9% y/y) to 11.02 million units, after jumping 12.5% in March. Sales of imported light trucks fell 1.8% (+4.4% y/y) to 3.32 million units, following an 11.6% March surge.

Trucks’ record 82.8% share of the light vehicle market last month compared to 81.5% in March and 80.3% in April of last year. The share averaged 80.3% during all of 2024 versus 53.3% ten years earlier.

Auto sales also declined last month, down 9.5% (-7.5%) to 2.97 million units (SAAR) following a 3.5% March rise. The decline reversed all of the increase over the prior two months. Purchases of domestically-produced cars fell 9.8% (-4.3% y/y) last month to 2.22 million units, after rising 3.8% in March. Sales of imported autos declined 9.6% (-15.7% y/y) to 0.75 million units, following a 2.5% March increase.

Imports' 23.5% share of the U.S. light vehicle market was little changed from 23.6% in March and compared to a May 2023 low of 22.9% and a high of 26.3% in November of 2023. Imports' share of the passenger car market held steady at 25.3% last month and compared to 27.7% in April of last year. It reached a high of 38.7% in September 2021. Imports' share of the light truck market eased to 23.2% last month after falling to 23.3% in March.

U.S. vehicle sales figures can be found in Haver's **USECON** database. Additional detail by manufacturer is in the I**NDUSTRY** database.

250501H20.jpg

250501I20.jpg

- Light truck sales pull back, while auto sales tumble.
- Both domestic and imported sales decline.
- Imports' market share slips further.

Economy in Brief: December 2006

Jump to:

ADP Report: Private Sector Jobs Rose 158,000 in November

ADP Report: Private Sector Jobs Rose 158,000 in November

Gasoline Prices Highest in Two Months

Weekly Chain Store Sales Collapsed

Challenger Layoffs Up Slightly

ISM Nonmanufacturing Index Up Again, Unexpectedly

U.S. Productivity Little Revised, Compensation Lowered Sharply

U.S. Productivity Little Revised, Compensation Lowered Sharply