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/050301c.jpg" width="353">
The total value of construction put in place rose another 0.7% in January. Revised figures indicate consistent gains throughout 2004. Consensus expectations had been for a 0.4% rise for January.
Private residential building activity rose 0.7% after an upwardly revised 1.2% rise in December. New single family building added 0.9% (11.8% y/y) to the 1.0% December gain.
Nonresidential building jumped 1.2% but the prior month&#39;s gain was lessened. The gain was led by large m/m increases in shopping centers (+40.5% y/y) and malls (+4.8% y/y).
Public construction rose 0.8%. Spending on residential projects rose 2.6% (17.3% y/y) and highways &amp; streets, nearly one third of the value of public construction spending, rose 4.4% (15.7% y/y).
These more detailed categories represent the Census Bureau&#146;s reclassification of construction activity into end-use groups. Finer detail is available for many of the categories; for instance, commercial construction is shown for Automotive sales and parking facilities, drugstores, building supply stores, and both commercial warehouses and mini-storage facilities. Note that start dates vary for some seasonally adjusted line items in 2000 and 2002 and that constant-dollar data are no longer computed.

<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/@E9/@E907/@E90701/@E90701.HTM">Construction Put-in-place</a></th>
<th scope="col">Jan</th>
<th scope="col">Dec</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total</td>
<td>0.7%</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>10.6%</td>
<td>8.9%</td>
<td>5.1%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Private</td>
<td>0.6%</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>11.3%</td>
<td>10.7%</td>
<td>6.0%</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Residential</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
<td>11.8%</td>
<td>13.8%</td>
<td>13.1%</td>
<td>8.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Nonresidential</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>10.1%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>-7.1%</td>
<td>-12.8%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Public</td>
<td>0.8%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
<td>8.5%</td>
<td>3.4%</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
<td>7.0%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The total value of construction put in place rose another 0.7% in January. Revised figures indicate consistent gains throughout 2004. Consensus expectations had been for a 0.4% rise for January. Private residential building activity [...]

U.S. Construction Spending Up

<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/050301b.jpg" width="353">
The Composite Index of activity in the manufacturing sector reported by the Institute of Supply Management slipped again in February to 55.3. The index has fallen during six of the last seven months. Consensus expectation had been for an increase to 57.0.
During the last twenty years there has been a 69% correlation between the level of the Composite Index and the three month growth in factory sector industrial production.
The new orders component slipped modestly following the sharp January decline to 55.8. The separate index of export orders rose 0.5 points, but the prior month&#39;s gain was reversed. The production index reversed all of the prior month&#39;s 1.1 point gain and the inventories index cratered 4.2 points to 48.6, the lowest level since last May.
The employment index slipped 0.7 points to 57.4 after the 4.8 point rise in January. During the last twenty years there has been a 69% correlation between the level of the ISM Employment Index and the three month growth in factory sector employment.
The prices paid index fell for the fourth straight month, off 3.5 points to 65.6 and down twenty two points from the high last April.
Is there evidence of the new economy in the U.S. GDP data? from the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago can be found <a href="http://www.chicagofed.org/publications/economicperspectives/ep_1qtr2005_part2_kouparitsas.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/@EF/@EF02/@EF02.HTM">ISM Manufacturing Survey</a></th>
<th scope="col">Feb</th>
<th scope="col">Jan</th>
<th scope="col">Feb &#39;04</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Composite Index</td>
<td>55.3</td>
<td>56.4</td>
<td>62.8</td>
<td>60.5</td>
<td>53.3</td>
<td>52.4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; New Orders Index</td>
<td>56.5</td>
<td>62.6</td>
<td>69.2</td>
<td>&nbsp;63.5</td>
<td>57.9</td>
<td>56.5</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Prices Paid Index (NSA)</td>
<td>69.0</td>
<td>72.0</td>
<td>75.5</td>
<td>79.8</td>
<td>59.6</td>
<td>57.6</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The Composite Index of activity in the manufacturing sector reported by the Institute of Supply Management slipped again in February to 55.3. The index has fallen during six of the last seven months. Consensus expectation had been for [...]

ISM Factory Index Slipped Again

<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/050301b.jpg" width="353">
The Composite Index of activity in the manufacturing sector reported by the Institute of Supply Management slipped again in February to 55.3. The index has fallen during six of the last seven months. Consensus expectation had been for an increase to 57.0.
During the last twenty years there has been a 69% correlation between the level of the Composite Index and the three month growth in factory sector industrial production.
The new orders component slipped modestly following the sharp January decline to 55.8. The separate index of export orders rose 0.5 points, but the prior month&#39;s gain was reversed. The production index reversed all of the prior month&#39;s 1.1 point gain and the inventories index cratered 4.2 points to 48.6, the lowest level since last May.
The employment index slipped 0.7 points to 57.4 after the 4.8 point rise in January. During the last twenty years there has been a 69% correlation between the level of the ISM Employment Index and the three month growth in factory sector employment.
The prices paid index fell for the fourth straight month, off 3.5 points to 65.6 and down twenty two points from the high last April.
Is there evidence of the new economy in the U.S. GDP data? from the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago can be found <a href="http://www.chicagofed.org/publications/economicperspectives/ep_1qtr2005_part2_kouparitsas.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/@EF/@EF02/@EF02.HTM">ISM Manufacturing Survey</a></th>
<th scope="col">Feb</th>
<th scope="col">Jan</th>
<th scope="col">Feb &#39;04</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Composite Index</td>
<td>55.3</td>
<td>56.4</td>
<td>62.8</td>
<td>60.5</td>
<td>53.3</td>
<td>52.4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; New Orders Index</td>
<td>56.5</td>
<td>62.6</td>
<td>69.2</td>
<td>&nbsp;63.5</td>
<td>57.9</td>
<td>56.5</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Prices Paid Index (NSA)</td>
<td>69.0</td>
<td>72.0</td>
<td>75.5</td>
<td>79.8</td>
<td>59.6</td>
<td>57.6</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
U.S. Construction Spending Up  
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> March 1, 2005


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050301c.jpg" width="353">
The total value of construction put in place rose another 0.7% in January. Revised figures indicate consistent gains throughout 2004. Consensus expectations had been for a 0.4% rise for January.
Private residential building activity rose 0.7% after an upwardly revised 1.2% rise in December. New single family building added 0.9% (11.8% y/y) to the 1.0% December gain.
Nonresidential building jumped 1.2% but the prior month&#39;s gain was lessened. The gain was led by large m/m increases in shopping centers (+40.5% y/y) and malls (+4.8% y/y).
Public construction rose 0.8%. Spending on residential projects rose 2.6% (17.3% y/y) and highways &amp; streets, nearly one third of the value of public construction spending, rose 4.4% (15.7% y/y).
These more detailed categories represent the Census Bureau&#146;s reclassification of construction activity into end-use groups. Finer detail is available for many of the categories; for instance, commercial construction is shown for Automotive sales and parking facilities, drugstores, building supply stores, and both commercial warehouses and mini-storage facilities. Note that start dates vary for some seasonally adjusted line items in 2000 and 2002 and that constant-dollar data are no longer computed.

<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/@E9/@E907/@E90701/@E90701.HTM">Construction Put-in-place</a></th>
<th scope="col">Jan</th>
<th scope="col">Dec</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total</td>
<td>0.7%</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>10.6%</td>
<td>8.9%</td>
<td>5.1%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Private</td>
<td>0.6%</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>11.3%</td>
<td>10.7%</td>
<td>6.0%</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Residential</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
<td>11.8%</td>
<td>13.8%</td>
<td>13.1%</td>
<td>8.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Nonresidential</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>10.1%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>-7.1%</td>
<td>-12.8%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Public</td>
<td>0.8%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
<td>8.5%</td>
<td>3.4%</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
<td>7.0%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Chain Store Sales Jumped Last Week 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> March 1, 2005


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050301a.jpg" width="353">
Chain store sales jumped 1.5% last week according to the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC)-UBS survey.
The strong end to February pulled the month&#39;s average 1.0% ahead of January and last week&#39;s sales were 3.8% above four weeks earlier.
During the last ten years there has been a 59% correlation between y/y change in chain store sales and the change in non-auto retail sales less gasoline, as published by the US Census Department.
The leading indicator of chain store sales from ICSC, down 0.6% (-0.2% y/y), fell for the second consecutive week. The indicator&#39;s February average nevertheless remained above January.
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.

<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">02/26/05</th>
<th scope="col">02/19/05</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Total Weekly Chain Store Sales</td>
<td>452.5</td>
<td>445.6</td>
<td>3.3%</td>
<td>4.6%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Louise Curley

<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/050228f.jpg" width="353">
Although they are declining, pessimists among consumers and businessmen in the 25 country European Union continue to outweigh the optimists. The excess of pessimists among consumers held steady in February at 10% while the excess of pessimists among industrial businessmen rose 1 percentage point to 5%.
The picture for &quot;The 25&quot; is slightly better than that of the 12 countries comprising the Euro Zone, suggesting that the non Euro Zone countries--largely Eastern European countries, plus the U.K, Sweden and Denmark--are less pessimistic than those in the Euro Zone. The first chart shows consumer confidence in the Euro 12 and the Euro 25.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050228e.jpg" width="353">
The data are not aggregated for the non Euro Zone countries, but the fact that pessimism among &quot;The 25&quot; is less than than of &quot;The 12&quot; suggests that pessimism among the non Euro countries is considerably less. Data released today by France and Slovakia show that consumer confidence in Slovakia, for example, has become decidedly less pessimistic beginning in early 2004--perhaps coinciding with the enlargement of the EU-- and is now less pessimistic than France. In the U.K., another non Euro Zone country, the balance of pessimists over optimists has over recent years been much smaller that the balance for the Euro Zone. Currently the pessimists and optimists in the U. K. are evenly balanced.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">Feb 05</th>
<th scope="col">Jan&nbsp;05</th>
<th scope="col">Feb 04</th>
<th scope="col">M/M Dif</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y Dif</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp;2004&nbsp;&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp;2003</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp; 2002&nbsp; &nbsp;</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Euro 12</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Consumer Confidence</td>
<td>-13</td>
<td>-13</td>
<td>-15</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>-14</td>
<td>-18</td>
<td>-11</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Industrial Confidence</td>
<td>-7</td>
<td>-5</td>
<td>-7</td>
<td>-2</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>-5</td>
<td>-10</td>
<td>-11</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Euro 25</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Consumer Confidence</td>
<td>-10</td>
<td>-10</td>
<td>-12</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>-12</td>
<td>-16</td>
<td>-9</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Industrial Confidence</td>
<td>-5</td>
<td>-4</td>
<td>-6</td>
<td>-1</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>-4</td>
<td>-11</td>
<td>-12</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">France: HH Confidence</td>
<td>-23</td>
<td>-25</td>
<td>-23</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>-22</td>
<td>-27</td>
<td>-16</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Slovakia: Consumer Confidence</td>
<td>-15.3</td>
<td>-14.2</td>
<td>-35.9</td>
<td>-1.1</td>
<td>20.6</td>
<td>-23.9</td>
<td>-34.8</td>
<td>-30.2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">U.K.: Consumer Confidence</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>-5</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>-3</td>
<td>-6</td>
<td>-4</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Although they are declining, pessimists among consumers and businessmen in the 25 country European Union continue to outweigh the optimists. The excess of pessimists among consumers held steady in February at 10% while the excess of [...]

Confidence in the Euro Zone and the Broader EU-25

<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/050228c.jpg" width="353">
The Chicago Purchasing Managers Business Barometer rose for the second month and increased to 62.7 in February, beating Consensus expectations for a decline to 60.2.
During the last ten years there has been a 67% correlation between the level of the Chicago Business Barometer and the three month change in factory sector industrial output. That correlation has risen to 82% during the last five years.
The employment index surged 4.9 points to 57.7, the highest level since November. During the last ten years there has been a 78% correlation between the level of the employment index and the three month change in factory sector employment. The new orders index rose to the highest level since October.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050228d.jpg" width="353">
The index of prices paid fell sharply to the lowest level in nearly a year. During the last ten years there has been an 86% correlation between the Chicago price index and the three month change in the &quot;core&quot; intermediate goods PPI.

<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/@EF05/@EF05.HTM">Chicago Purchasing Managers Index, SA</a></th>
<th scope="col">Feb</th>
<th scope="col">Jan</th>
<th scope="col">Feb&nbsp;&#39;04</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Business Barometer</td>
<td>62.7</td>
<td>62.4</td>
<td>64.7</td>
<td>62.9</td>
<td>54.6</td>
<td>52.8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; New Orders</td>
<td>68.5</td>
<td>65.8</td>
<td>66.4</td>
<td>67.0</td>
<td>58.0</td>
<td>56.2</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Prices Paid</td>
<td>70.1</td>
<td>76.5</td>
<td>67.7</td>
<td>80.1</td>
<td>55.8</td>
<td>56.9</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The Chicago Purchasing Managers Business Barometer rose for the second month and increased to 62.7 in February, beating Consensus expectations for a decline to 60.2. During the last ten years there has been a 67% correlation between [...]

Chicago Purchasing Agents' Index Up Again

<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/050228b.jpg" width="353">
Sales of new single-family homes fell a sharp 9.2% in January to 1.106M but the previously reported slight gain in December was revised to a 5.6% increase. Consensus estimates had been for sales of 1.125M.
The decline in sales last month was led by a 40.3% drop in the Midwest (-33.2% y/y). In the Northeast sales fell 17.1% (-33.7% y/y) and in the South sales also fell by 3.3% (+1.3% y/y). In the West sales rose 5.6% in January (+16.6% y/y).
The median price of a new single family home fell to $199,400 (-4.8% y/y).
The figures from the Census Department reflect homes sold as opposed to the figures on existing home sales from the National Association of Realtors which reflect closings of sales in earlier months. 

<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/@E9/@E904/@E90401/@E90401.HTM">Homes Sales (000s, AR)</a></th>
<th scope="col">Jan</th>
<th scope="col">Dec</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">New Single-Family</td>
<td>1,106</td>
<td>1,218</td>
<td>-4.2%</td>
<td>1,196</td>
<td>1,089</td>
<td>976</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Sales of new single-family homes fell a sharp 9.2% in January to 1.106M but the previously reported slight gain in December was revised to a 5.6% increase. Consensus estimates had been for sales of 1.125M. The decline in sales last [...]

New Home Sales Fell

<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/050228a.jpg" width="353">
Personal income dropped last month 2.3% following the 3.7% jump in December which was driven by Microsoft&#39;s dividend payment. Consensus expectations had been for a 2.6% decline. Excluding the dividend effect personal income increased 0.5% last month after a 0.6% rise in December. Figures from July through December were revised
Wage &amp; salary income rose 0.6% (5.8% y/y) in January after an upwardly revised 0.5% December gain. Factory sector wages inched 0.1% higher but rose 4.8% y/y. Earlier figures were revised up sharply
Personal disposable income fell 2.6% (5.8% y/y) after the 4.1% surge in December. Adjusted for price inflation disposable income fell 2.8% m/m but rose 3.5% y/y.
Personal consumption fell slightly after the 0.8% surge in December and spending was lightly short of Consensus expectations for a 0.1% rise. Durable goods spending fell 4.3% and reversed a like gain in December due to lower motor vehicle sales. Spending on nondurables rose 0.8% despite the decline in gasoline prices last month and services spending rose 0.4% (5.3% y/y).
The PCE chain price index rose 0.2% in January. The 0.3% rise in the price index less food &amp; energy was the steepest since December 2002.

<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/@E7/@E711/@E71102/@E71102.HTM">Disposition of Personal Income</a></th>
<th scope="col">Jan</th>
<th scope="col">Dec</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Personal Income</td>
<td>-2.3%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>6.0%</td>
<td>5.6%</td>
<td>3.2%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Personal Consumption</td>
<td>-0.0%</td>
<td>0.8%</td>
<td>5.7%</td>
<td>6.0%</td>
<td>5.2%</td>
<td>4.6%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Savings Rate</td>
<td>1.0%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
<td>1.1%</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">PCE Chain Price Index</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>-0.0%</td>
<td>2.2%</td>
<td>2.2%</td>
<td>1.9%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Less food &amp; energy</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
<td>1.3%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Personal income dropped last month 2.3% following the 3.7% jump in December which was driven by Microsoft's dividend payment. Consensus expectations had been for a 2.6% decline. Excluding the dividend effect personal income increased [...]

U.S. Personal Income Down

<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/050228a.jpg" width="353">
Personal income dropped last month 2.3% following the 3.7% jump in December which was driven by Microsoft&#39;s dividend payment. Consensus expectations had been for a 2.6% decline. Excluding the dividend effect personal income increased 0.5% last month after a 0.6% rise in December. Figures from July through December were revised
Wage &amp; salary income rose 0.6% (5.8% y/y) in January after an upwardly revised 0.5% December gain. Factory sector wages inched 0.1% higher but rose 4.8% y/y. Earlier figures were revised up sharply
Personal disposable income fell 2.6% (5.8% y/y) after the 4.1% surge in December. Adjusted for price inflation disposable income fell 2.8% m/m but rose 3.5% y/y.
Personal consumption fell slightly after the 0.8% surge in December and spending was lightly short of Consensus expectations for a 0.1% rise. Durable goods spending fell 4.3% and reversed a like gain in December due to lower motor vehicle sales. Spending on nondurables rose 0.8% despite the decline in gasoline prices last month and services spending rose 0.4% (5.3% y/y).
The PCE chain price index rose 0.2% in January. The 0.3% rise in the price index less food &amp; energy was the steepest since December 2002.

<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/@E7/@E711/@E71102/@E71102.HTM">Disposition of Personal Income</a></th>
<th scope="col">Jan</th>
<th scope="col">Dec</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Personal Income</td>
<td>-2.3%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>6.0%</td>
<td>5.6%</td>
<td>3.2%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Personal Consumption</td>
<td>-0.0%</td>
<td>0.8%</td>
<td>5.7%</td>
<td>6.0%</td>
<td>5.2%</td>
<td>4.6%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Savings Rate</td>
<td>1.0%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
<td>1.1%</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">PCE Chain Price Index</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>-0.0%</td>
<td>2.2%</td>
<td>2.2%</td>
<td>1.9%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Less food &amp; energy</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
<td>1.3%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
New Home Sales Fell 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> February 28, 2005


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050228b.jpg" width="353">
Sales of new single-family homes fell a sharp 9.2% in January to 1.106M but the previously reported slight gain in December was revised to a 5.6% increase. Consensus estimates had been for sales of 1.125M.
The decline in sales last month was led by a 40.3% drop in the Midwest (-33.2% y/y). In the Northeast sales fell 17.1% (-33.7% y/y) and in the South sales also fell by 3.3% (+1.3% y/y). In the West sales rose 5.6% in January (+16.6% y/y).
The median price of a new single family home fell to $199,400 (-4.8% y/y).
The figures from the Census Department reflect homes sold as opposed to the figures on existing home sales from the National Association of Realtors which reflect closings of sales in earlier months. 

<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/@E9/@E904/@E90401/@E90401.HTM">Homes Sales (000s, AR)</a></th>
<th scope="col">Jan</th>
<th scope="col">Dec</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">New Single-Family</td>
<td>1,106</td>
<td>1,218</td>
<td>-4.2%</td>
<td>1,196</td>
<td>1,089</td>
<td>976</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Chicago Purchasing Agents' Index Up Again 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> February 28, 2005


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050228c.jpg" width="353">
The Chicago Purchasing Managers Business Barometer rose for the second month and increased to 62.7 in February, beating Consensus expectations for a decline to 60.2.
During the last ten years there has been a 67% correlation between the level of the Chicago Business Barometer and the three month change in factory sector industrial output. That correlation has risen to 82% during the last five years.
The employment index surged 4.9 points to 57.7, the highest level since November. During the last ten years there has been a 78% correlation between the level of the employment index and the three month change in factory sector employment. The new orders index rose to the highest level since October.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050228d.jpg" width="353">
The index of prices paid fell sharply to the lowest level in nearly a year. During the last ten years there has been an 86% correlation between the Chicago price index and the three month change in the &quot;core&quot; intermediate goods PPI.

<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/@EF05/@EF05.HTM">Chicago Purchasing Managers Index, SA</a></th>
<th scope="col">Feb</th>
<th scope="col">Jan</th>
<th scope="col">Feb&nbsp;&#39;04</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Business Barometer</td>
<td>62.7</td>
<td>62.4</td>
<td>64.7</td>
<td>62.9</td>
<td>54.6</td>
<td>52.8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; New Orders</td>
<td>68.5</td>
<td>65.8</td>
<td>66.4</td>
<td>67.0</td>
<td>58.0</td>
<td>56.2</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Prices Paid</td>
<td>70.1</td>
<td>76.5</td>
<td>67.7</td>
<td>80.1</td>
<td>55.8</td>
<td>56.9</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Global freight costs are on the rise while supply chain pressures are contained

Accelerating positive economic surprises in the G10 are boosting the global economy

Considerably more monetary ease expected from US and UK as Japan tightens

Tighter US immigration enforcement adversely impacting labor force

Economic policy uncertainty, while still elevated, is declining

Gradual disinflation and easier monetary policies across advanced economies

Largest October layoffs since 2003, led by technology

Subdued global shipping costs not yet pointing to supply chain problems

PMIs show still-elevated but slowing US inflation

AI boosting US investment in data centers

US productivity growth has been significantly faster than in other major economies

Consumers' short-term US inflation expectations still elevated while longer-term expectations of financial markets are steady

US financial markets have gotten used to elevated policy uncertainty

FOMC now expects more rate cuts going forward than in June

China gaining ASEAN exports while US exports slump

Job openings less than the number unemployed in July for first time since 2021

Reaccelerating goods price inflation along with sticky services inflation clouds the outlook

Falling oil prices aren't pulling down inflation expectations, pointing to a boost from increased tariffs

Equity market exuberance outpacing macroeconomic data

Apart from Japan, Blue Chip forecasters expect further sizable monetary easing

US production rebounded in Q2, but demand continued to slow

US leader, Germany trailer for real GDP growth over past 3 years

Negative US inflation surprises leading G10 down

Deflation continues in China

Incoming data surprising on downside in US; positive surprises elsewhere

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

Service Health

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

London

Singapore

Tokyo

New York

Economy in Brief

Viewpoints

Contact Us

Our Data

Our Products

What We Do

Our Authors

About Us

Data News

Featured Data Additions

Resources

Release Calendars

Training Center

Webinars

Newsletters

Download Software

For Clients

Live Updates

Winnie Tapasanun

251230J46.jpg

251230K46.jpg

U.S. house prices rose 0.4% m/m in October following a 0.1% dip in September (0.0% initially) and a 0.4% rise in August (unrevised), according to the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) House Price Index. October marked the second m/m increase in three months after no change in July. The HPI reached a record high of 436.75 in October, up 13.4% from its August 2022 low of 384.98. The year-on-year rate of increase eased to 1.7% in October from 1.8% in September—the slowest pace since March 2012—down from 4.7% in October 2024 and well below a high of 18.6% in February 2022.

House prices increased m/m in October (vs. September) across seven of the nine census divisions. Gains were led by West South Central (+1.0% vs. -1.6%), followed by New England (+0.9% vs. -0.3%), East North Central (+0.6% vs. +0.7%), Mountain (+0.6% vs. -0.8%), West North Central (+0.6% vs. +0.6%), Middle Atlantic (+0.4% vs. +0.2%), and Pacific (+0.2% vs. +0.3%). In contrast, house prices fell m/m in two census divisions in October (vs. September): East South Central (-0.4% vs. +0.7%) and South Atlantic (-0.2% vs. -0.2%).

Year-on-year house prices continued to rise in October across most regions, except West South Central and South Atlantic. The y/y pace accelerated in October (vs. September) in four of the nine census divisions: West North Central (+3.8% vs. +3.2%), New England (+3.7% vs. +3.2%), Mountain (+0.3% vs. -0.8%), and Pacific (+0.2% vs. -0.6%). Meanwhile, house price growth decelerated y/y in October (vs. September) in East South Central (+1.5% vs. +2.7%), East North Central (+5.1% vs. +5.4%), and Middle Atlantic (+5.3% vs. +5.4%). To the downside, West South Central (-0.7% vs. -1.0%) and South Atlantic (-0.5% vs. +0.4%) were the only regions posting y/y declines in October (vs. September).

The FHFA house price index is a weighted purchase-only index that measures average price changes in repeat sales of the same property. An associated quarterly index includes refinancing the same kind of properties. The indexes are based on transactions involving conforming conventional mortgages purchased or securitized by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. Only mortgage transactions on single-family properties are included.

The FHFA data are available in Haver’s **USECON** database.

The minutes to the December 9–10 **FOMC** meeting can be found [here](https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/fomcminutes20251210.pdf).

251230L46.jpg

251230M46.jpg

- FHFA HPI +0.4% m/m (+1.7% y/y) in Oct.; second m/m gain in three months.
- House prices up m/m in seven of nine census divisions but down in East South Central (-0.4%) and South Atlantic (-0.2%).
- House prices up y/y in seven of nine regions, led by Middle Atlantic (+5.3%), but down in West South Central (-0.7%) and South Atlantic (-0.5%).

U.S. FHFA House Prices Rebound in October Following September’s Easing

Robert Brusca

251230E.jpg

When inflation numbers come hot off the griddle, some part of them might stick to the pan. That's the case this month with Spain’s release of inflation in December. It provides us with the headline for the HICP measure, a headline to the domestic measure, and the domestic measure excluding energy. But it does not release the sector detail for the rest of the report.

However, based upon what's been released, it’s clear that inflation in Spain has picked up. The part of the core that we have in-hand, which is just the portion excluding energy, still appears to be fairly well behaved; however, its gain is still slightly excessive.

**HICP trend**
Spain’s HICP measure in December rose 0.4% after rising by 0.5% in both October and November; those are hot numbers. That translates into a 5.7% annual rate over three months which is hotter than its pace of 4.5% over six months which in turn is hotter than the 12-month increase of 3%. The HCP headline for Spain has clearly been accelerating, the year-over-year rise is too-hot, and the shorter-term metrics are hotter still. This is not good news, and this is not a welcome progression.

**Domestic inflation**
Looking at Spain’s domestic CPI conditions, we find that they are still on the hot side with December showing a headline gain of 0.3% but gains in October and November of 0.5% each, producing a three-month annual rate of 5.4%, which is hotter than its 4.2% over six months, which, in turn, is hotter than the year-over-year gain at 2.9%. And these patterns/results are very similar to the pattern and the readings for the HICP. The domestic inflation picture is too hot over 12 months and accelerating over the shorter periods.

**Domestic inflation ex-energy:** The CPI excluding energy is not as bloated as the HICP or the domestic headline, but it is still a reading on rough terrain. Over 12 months, inflation excluding energy rises at a 2.6% annual rate; that's above the 2% pace sought by the ECB for the community as a whole. Over six months, the reading ramps up to a 3.1% annual rate, again moving the wrong direction and a reading at 3.1% is simply too hot. Over three months, there's a slight deceleration compared to six months but still a rate that is too hot, at 2.9%, and stronger than the 12-month pace. Core inflation is better behaved than headline inflation and both the domestic and the HICP frameworks, but inflation is unruly overall and, for the most part, showing either acceleration or at least a 3-month pace stronger than its 12-month pace. None of this is what the ECB is looking for or trying to achieve.

**Beyond the missing details**
The details of the Spanish report are missing for December because the data are too preliminary for the authorities to post. However, if we look at the sequential pace of inflation over 12 months, six months, and three months on a lagged basis, it is looking at data that are up-to-date through November rather than through December what's the numbers that are generally excessive and they show too much acceleration moving from 12-months to 6-months to 3-months. Over 12 months compared to a year ago, five of nine categories show inflation accelerating. Over 6 months compared to 12 months, four categories are accelerating. Over 3 months compared to 6 months, six of the nine categories are accelerating. These acceleration tendencies are worrisome.

In addition, over 12 months, six of nine categories have a pace above 2%. Over 6 months, six of nine categories have annualized gains above 2%, and over 3 months, the lagged data show six of nine categories with gains above 2%. Only apparel shows inflation tempered on all horizons (at or below 2%). Food, housing, transport, education and other all show above 2% inflation on all horizons.

251230.jpg

**Summing up-challenging times ahead?**
Is Spain past its best inflation performance? Is the inflation worm going to begin to turn more broadly? These are trends we will need to watch. Inflation broadly has slowed or stopped its declines and largely done that in Europe as well as in the United States. Inflation is now hovering at a pace that is too strong- maybe tolerable or maybe not. Central banks need to decide and tell us what a 2% target means. Then, the question of what’s next hangs in the air. U.K. inflation remains excessive but has stepped down as the economy has begun to experience some significantly weaker economic data. Is that the future? Is it stagflation? Is it recovering from a slowdown and higher rates of interest and inflation? Or will there be continued inflation progress? Open the door on 2026…the envelope… please.

Spain

Spanish Inflation Flares at Year-End

251229A23.jpg

251229B23.jpg

General business activity in Texas declined further in December, according to the Texas Manufacturing Outlook Survey conducted by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. The overall measure, the general business activity index, fell to -10.9 in December, the lowest level since June, from -10.4 in November and -5.0 in October. The index, while above a low of -35.8 in April, was well below a high of +14.1 in January and +4.5 in December 2024. The index had been in negative territory from February through December 2025, except for a one-month positive reading of +0.9 in July. In December, 12.7% of respondents reported improved business activity, down from 18.9% in November, while 23.6% of respondents reported worsened business conditions, down from November's 29.3%. The company outlook index dropped to -11.9 in December, the fourth consecutive negative reading and the lowest since April, from -6.3 in November. Just 10.8% of respondents expected improved company outlook this month while 22.7% expected deterioration. Data were collected between December 15 and 23 from 74 Texas manufacturers.

The production index, a key measure of state manufacturing conditions, plunged to -3.2 in December after a 15.3-point jump to 20.5 in November, indicating production contracted for the first time since February. A lessened 17.2% of respondents reported higher production this month while an increased 20.4% reported a decline. The capacity utilization index plummeted to -4.5 in December, the lowest reading since February, following a four-year-high 19.4 in November; it was up from a low of -15.0 in January 2024 but well below a record-high 46.3 in March 2021.

The growth rate of orders index declined steeply to -16.0 in December from -1.3 in November, marking the weakest of four successive negative readings and the lowest level since June. The index was above a low of -22.0 in April and a low of -24.3 in November 2023 but significantly below a peak of 29.6 in April 2021. The new orders index fell to -6.4 this month after rising to 4.8 in November, indicating a decline in demand for the third time in four months and the lowest level since June. The index was above a low of -20.0 in April and a low of -21.8 in November 2022 but well below a high of 22.6 in February 2022 and a record-high 38.6 in April 2021. The shipments index plunged to -10.6 this month after jumping to 15.1 in November, marking its first negative reading since June and the lowest since July 2024. The unfilled orders index dropped to -13.5 in December from -6.6 in November, registering the 16th straight negative reading and the lowest since November 2024. The index was below a high of 1.4 in August 2024 but above a low of -26.3 in July 2024. Meanwhile, the delivery time index increased to 3.3 this month, the highest reading since March, from -8.4 in November.

Labor market indexes showed flat employment conditions and shorter workweeks in December. The employment index slipped to -1.1 this month from 1.2 in November, marking its first negative reading since September, with the near-zero level indicating little change in employment. The latest reading, while up from a low of -9.7 in January 2024, was far below a high of 17.9 in January 2023 and a record-high 31.8 in April 2021. A lessened 12.3% of respondents reported net hiring in December while 13.4% reported net layoffs. The hours worked index fell sharply to -7.5 this month, the lowest reading since June, after rising to 9.9 in November. Meanwhile, the wages & benefits index climbed to 21.8 in December, the highest level since October 2024 and near its series average of 21.0, up from 15.4 in November; nevertheless, having been trending downward since a peak of 55.0 in March 2022.

Inflationary pressures were little changed this month. The index for prices received for finished goods declined to 8.2 in December following a 3.1-point rise to 10.8 in November; it was up from a low of -7.0 in November 2023 but meaningfully below a high of 47.4 in March 2022 and a peak of 51.4 in October 2021. In December, 13.1% of respondents reported raising prices while only 4.9% reported lowering prices. The index of prices paid for raw materials rose to 36.0 this month, the highest reading since September, after a 1.9-point increase to 35.3 in November. The index was well above a low of 1.0 in June 2023 but significantly below 73.2 in March 2022 and a record-high 83.8 in November 2021.

Expectations on future manufacturing activity remained positive this month. The future general business activity index dipped to 10.8 in December after rising to 11.0 in November, registering the eighth straight positive reading. The future production index rose to a four-month-high 34.2 from November’s 33.7. Other indexes of future manufacturing activity also rose in December (vs. November), signaling increased activity six months ahead: company outlook (16.5 vs. 16.2), shipments (33.9 vs. 27.0), wages & benefits (42.5 vs. 39.1), and capital expenditures (17.7 vs. 12.9). Meanwhile, future indexes for capacity utilization (28.9 vs. 34.0), new orders (30.5 vs. 39.2), growth rate of new orders (24.9 vs. 27.8), and employment (20.9 vs. 22.3) declined in December (vs. November), but they remained in positive territory.

Each index is calculated by subtracting the percentage reporting a decrease in activity from the percentage reporting an increase. When all firms report rising activity, an index will register 100. An index will register -100 when all firms report a decrease. An index will be zero when the number of firms reporting an increase equals the number reporting a decrease. Data for the Texas Manufacturing Outlook, conducted by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, can be found in Haver's **SURVEYS** database.

251229C23.jpg

251229D23.jpg

- General Business Activity down in Dec. to -10.9, lowest level since June.
- Company Outlook (-11.9) negative for the fourth straight mth. and at an eight-month low; Production (-3.2) negative for the first time since Feb.
- New Orders Growth (-16.0) and New Orders (-6.4) at a six-month low.
- Employment (-1.1) negative for the first time since Sept.
- Prices Received down 2.6 pts. to 8.2; Prices Paid up 0.7 pts. to a three-month-high 36.0.
- Future General Business Activity down to 10.8, still positive for the eighth consecutive mth.

Texas General Business Activity Still Negative in December, But Expectations Remain Positive

251229F.jpg

251229G.jpg

The Pending Home Sales Index, a forward-looking measure of home sales based on contract signings, rose 3.3% m/m to 79.2 in November after increases of 2.4% in October (+1.9% initially) and 0.1% in September (unrevised), according to the National Association of Realtors (NAR). The November reading registered the fourth consecutive m/m gain after declining in July and June. The year-on-year growth rate accelerated to 2.6% in November, the highest since August, from 0.1% in October, though still below +6.0% y/y in November 2024. Despite recent gains, the PHSI had fallen 36.7% since its October 2021 high of 125.1.

The m/m rise in November pending home sales coincided with a decline in the average 30-year mortgage rate to 6.24% in November, the lowest since September 2024, down from 6.25% in October and 6.35% in September. These rates, while below a peak of 7.62% in October 2023, had remained higher than a low of 5.22% in August 2022 and more than double a record-low 2.68% in December 2020.

Pending home sales rose m/m in November across all four major regions. Sales in the West recovered 9.2% (2.4% y/y) in November, the first m/m increase since August, following a 1.4% decline in October. Sales in the South rose 2.4% (3.3% y/y), the fourth straight m/m rise, on top of a 2.7% October advance. Sales in the Northeast grew 1.8% (1.8% y/y), the third successive m/m increase, after a 2.3% October gain. Sales in the Midwest rose 1.3% (2.2% y/y), up for the third time in four months, after a 5.3% November rebound.

The pending home sales index measures sales at the time the contract for the purchase of an existing home is signed, similar to the Census Bureau's new home sales data. In contrast, the National Association of Realtors' existing home sales data are recorded when the sale is closed, which is usually a couple of months after the sales contract has been signed. In developing the pending home sales index, the NAR found that the level of monthly sales contract activity leads the level of closed existing home sales by about two months.

The series dates back to 2001 and are available in Haver's **PREALTOR** database. Weekly mortgage interest rates from the Mortgage Bankers Association can be found in the **WEEKLY** database.

- PHSI +3.3% (+2.6% y/y) in Nov., driven by lower mortgage rates.
- Home sales m/m up in all four major regions, w/ the highest rate in the West (+9.2%).
- Home sales y/y up across all regions, w/ the highest rate in the South (+3.3%).

U.S. Pending Home Sales Rise for the Fourth Straight Month in November

251229E.jpg

Swedish exports advanced month-to-month for the second month in a row while imports continued on a losing streak declining by 0.9% in November.

Exports have gradually been firming with exports falling by 6.1% over 12 months, rising at an annual rate of 4.8% over six months, and then rising at a 3.9% annual rate over three months. Exports are not on a steady acceleration path, but they have transitioned from a year-over-year growth rate that's negative to moderate positive short-term rates of growth.

Swedish imports, on the other hand, are weakening relatively sharply. Imports were down 4.4% over 12 months, down at a 1.2% annual rate over six months, and falling at a 17% annual rate over three months.

The global trade picture remains somewhat mixed. The Baltic Dry goods index, which is an indicator of global trade volume, has backed off of its highs but continues to post relatively steady volume indications. However, the S&P global manufacturing survey has been showing weakness; when manufacturing is weak, typically international trade is weak as well. Swedish trade may be picking up some of that weakness as well.

251229.jpg

On balance, Sweden's trade surplus has continued to recover and hold to a relatively high level over recent months as exports have maintained momentum better than imports.

Swedish domestic barometers of economic growth have remained relatively upbeat including orders and industrial production as well as employment growth and GDP. There is no reason there to expect weak imports based on the recent data we have seen. But then sometimes trade data show economic weakness first.   

At this time, the yearend weakness in Sweden’s imports is without a specific cause. Year-end flows can be surprising. Domestic demand, however, does not appear to be weak. But there is a good deal of weakness in Europe and the Ukraine-Russia war is still a nagging factor – a cloud that hangs over all of Europe with no certain end date or result in sight.

Economy in Brief: 2005

Jump to:

U.S. Construction Spending Up

ISM Factory Index Slipped Again

ISM Factory Index Slipped Again

Confidence in the Euro Zone and the Broader EU-25

Chicago Purchasing Agents' Index Up Again

New Home Sales Fell

U.S. Personal Income Down

U.S. Personal Income Down