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/041129a.jpg" width="353">
Sales of new single-family homes edged 0.2% higher in October to 1.226M following a 7.0% September gain that was double the initial indication. Consensus estimates had been for a decline in sales to 1.200M. 
Sales were mixed m/m around the country. In the Northeast sales rose sharply for the third straight month but were down 3.4% y/y. In the West sales also rose sharply for the third consecutive month and were nearly a third higher than last October. To the downside were sales in the South by 9.1% (-4.9% Y/Y) and sales in the Midwest were off 3.6% (+8.4% y/y).
The median price of a new single family home jumped 9.1% m/m to $221,800 (14.3% y/y), near the record high.

<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">Oct</th>
<th scope="col">Sept</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">New Single-Family</td>
<td>1,226</td>
<td>1,224</td>
<td>7.4%</td>
<td>1,089</td>
<td>976</td>
<td>907</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
U.S. Durable Goods Orders Fell 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> November 24, 2004


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041129c.jpg" width="353">
Durable goods orders fell 0.4% in October led lower by declines in orders for motor vehicles and capital goods. A 0.5% gain in orders had been the Consensus expectation.
Nondefense capital goods orders dropped 3.3% as orders for computers &amp; electronic products were dragged 5.7% (+3.7% y/y) lower by a 10.3% (+7.0% y/y) decline in orders for computers. Electrical equipment &amp; appliance orders also were down by 3.5% (+2.2% y/y), the second consecutive monthly decline.
Transportation equipment orders rose 0.3% but the gain was wholly due to a 35.2% (-17.2% y/y) spurt in defense aircraft. Motor vehicle &amp; parts orders fell 2.8% (-3.2% y/y) and nondefense aircraft orders fell 0.4% (-1.6% y/y) following huge declines during the prior two months. Durable goods orders less transportation fell 0.7% (+9.6% y/y).
Orders for machinery were again quite strong logging a 3.7% m/m gain (+24.7% y/y). fabricated metals orders also rose by 3.1% (+13.1% Y/Y).<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041129b.jpg" width="353">
Unfilled orders rose 0.6% (8.6% y/y) but the ratio of backlogs to shipments fell.
Inventories of durable goods 0.5% (6.5% y/y). The inventory to shipment ratio was about stable at 1.39, up from the low of 1.35 in March but well down from the highs near 1.7 in 2001.

<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/@ED0101.HTM">NAICS Classification</a></th>
<th scope="col">Oct</th>
<th scope="col">Sept</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Durable Goods Orders</td>
<td>-0.4%</td>
<td>0.9%</td>
<td>5.7%</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
<td>-1.7%</td>
<td>-10.5%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Nondefense Capital Goods</td>
<td>-3.3%</td>
<td>3.0%</td>
<td>5.1%</td>
<td>5.6%</td>
<td>-7.2%</td>
<td>-15.5%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Excluding Aircraft</td>
<td>-3.6%</td>
<td>5.2%</td>
<td>6.2%</td>
<td>6.6%</td>
<td>-7.1%</td>
<td>-12.9%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Initial Unemployment Insurance Claims Fell Unexpectedly 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> November 24, 2004


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041129d.jpg" width="353">
Last week, initial claims for unemployment insurance fell 12,000 to 323,000 from a little revised 335,000 the prior week. The Consensus expectation had been for 335,000 claims.
The four week moving average of initial claims fell to 332,000 (-9.7% y/y), the lowest level since November 2000.
During the last ten years there has been a (negative) 82% correlation between the level of initial claims and the y/y change in payroll employment.
Continuing claims for unemployment insurance fell 29,000 following a downwardly revised 24,000 drop the prior week.
The insured rate of unemployment remained at 2.2% for the seventh week.

<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/WEEKLY/@W5/@W507/@W507.HTM">Unemployment Insurance (000s)</a></th>
<th scope="col">11/20/04</th>
<th scope="col">11/13/04</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Initial Claims</td>
<td>323</td>
<td>335</td>
<td>-10.8%</td>
<td>402</td>
<td>404</td>
<td>406</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Continuing Claims</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>2,755</td>
<td>-18.1%</td>
<td>3,531</td>
<td>3,570</td>
<td>3,018</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Mortgage Applications Plunged 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> November 24, 2004


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041129e.jpg" width="353">
Mortgage applications plunged 5.7% last week for the second sharp w/w decline this month, but the average level of activity so far in November still was up 3.1% from October according to the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA).
Purchase applications again fell sharply by 3.5%. Though the November average was up versus October, the latest weekly level was the lowest in the last four. During the last ten years there has been a 60% correlation between the y/y change in purchase applications and the change in new plus existing home sales.
Applications to refinance skid 8.3% w/w leaving the November average up 2.4% versus October.
The effective interest rate on a conventional 30-year mortgage fell to 5.92%. It averaged 5.92% in October. The effective rate on a 15-year mortgage also fell to 5.39%.
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 accounts for more than 40% of all applications processed each week by mortgage lenders. 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">11/19/04</th>
<th scope="col">11/12/04</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total Market Index</td>
<td>715.0</td>
<td>758.3</td>
<td>-7.8%</td>
<td>1,067.9</td>
<td>799.7</td>
<td>625.6</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Purchase</td>
<td>463.3</td>
<td>480.3</td>
<td>0.7%</td>
<td>395.1</td>
<td>354.7</td>
<td>304.9</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Refinancing</td>
<td>2,179.3</td>
<td>2,375.4</td>
<td>-16.6%</td>
<td>4,981.8</td>
<td>3,388.0</td>
<td>2,491.0</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Help-Wanted Advertising Up Slightly 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> November 24, 2004


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041129f.jpg" width="353">
The National Index of Help-Wanted Advertising published by the Conference Board rose slightly to 37 in October but has been moving sideways since 2Q 2003.
The proportion of labor markets with rising want-ad volume, however, more than recovered the prior month&#39;s plunge and jumped to 71%, the highest level since May.
During the last ten years there has been an 88% correlation between the level of help-wanted advertising and the year-to-year change in non-farm payrolls.
The Conference Board surveys help-wanted advertising volume in 51 major newspapers across the country every month. 

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/CBDB/@C3/@C3.HTM">Conference Board</a></th>
<th scope="col">Oct</th>
<th scope="col">Sept</th>
<th scope="col">Oct &#39;03</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">National Help Wanted Index</td>
<td>37</td>
<td>36</td>
<td>36</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
U.S. Consumer Sentiment Faded Late Month 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> November 24, 2004


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041129j.jpg" width="353">
Though the November reading of Consumer Sentiment from the University of Michigan rose to 92.8, that was lower than the mid-month reading of 95.5 and indicated that Sentiment faded as the month progressed. Consensus expectations for a reading of 96.0 were disappointed.
During the last ten years there has been a 75% correlation between the level of consumer sentiment and the y/y change in real PCE.
The consumer expectations index rose 1.7% m/m (-3.3% y/y) and the current economic conditions index rose 0.7% (2.1% y/y), both off from the mid-month pace
Consumer sentiment amongst families earning more than $50,000 per year rose m/m but was down 2.0% y/y. Sentiment amongst families earning less than $50,000 per year fell m/m and fell 1.3% y/y.
The University of Michigan survey is not seasonally adjusted.The mid-month survey is based on telephone interviews with 250 households nationwide on personal finances and business and buying conditions. The survey is expanded to a total of 500 interviews at month end.
&quot;Consumer Sentiment and the Media&quot; from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco can be found <a href="http://www.frbsf.org/publications/economics/letter/2004/el2004-29.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/@EF14/@EF1402/@EF1402.HTM">University of Michigan</a></th>
<th scope="col">Nov</th>
<th scope="col">Oct</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Consumer Sentiment</td>
<td>92.8</td>
<td>91.7</td>
<td>-1.0%</td>
<td>87.6</td>
<td>89.6</td>
<td>89.2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp; Current Conditions</td>
<td>104.7</td>
<td>104.0</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
<td>97.2</td>
<td>97.5</td>
<td>100.1</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp; Consumer Expectations</td>
<td>85.2</td>
<td>83.8</td>
<td>-3.3%</td>
<td>81.4</td>
<td>84.6</td>
<td>82.3</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Sales of new single-family homes edged 0.2% higher in October to 1.226M following a 7.0% September gain that was double the initial indication. Consensus estimates had been for a decline in sales to 1.200M. Sales were mixed m/m around [...]

New Home Sales Higher Still

Carol Stone, CBE

<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/041124a.jpg" width="353">
In the five weeks since we have written about the US energy market, prices have eased somewhat. Gasoline, at $2.03/gallon retail in mid-October, has fallen back below $2.00 the past two weeks. Crude oil peaked at $55.23/barrel on October 25, measured by West Texas Intermediate, the US benchmark, and dipped &quot;as low as&quot; $46.12 on November 16. Yesterday, November 23, it had retraced part of the drop, trading at $48.75.
Back in the spring, we wrote about some energy market fundamentals that have contributed to these extraordinary price levels. Over the past 30 years, most energy price spikes have been supply-driven. Oil-producing countries have controlled production in order to push prices higher in the contemporary demand environment. This episode seems different, we noted back in May, in that it looks to be more demand-oriented.
We illustrate this in the current situation with two graphs. In the first, the trend in demand for energy products over the last 15 years is seen to be positively correlated with the trend in crude oil prices. At 59%, the correlation is not numerically exacting, but it shows that demand and prices are moving fairly well in parallel, not in opposite directions that classical supply/demand economics would suggest.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041124b.jpg" width="353">
The second graph gives a strong reason for the push in demand and in prices. It highlights the link between light truck sales and gasoline prices. Since the mid-1990s, sales of light trucks, mostly SUVs, have grown both absolutely and in relation to conventional car sales. The resulting ratio of truck to auto sales is seen to have a 75% correlation with retail gasoline prices. This truck/car ratio actually has a 99% correlation with gasoline demand. Thus, the American &quot;love affair&quot; with the large vehicle, which was constrained by the initial energy crisis in the mid-1970s, has returned with the next generation of drivers. Energy prices, moving in more open markets in recent years, have responded to the consequent sharp rise in gasoline consumption. We see in the graph that very recently, the share of truck sales has decreased. If this move becomes a trend, some pressure on the general energy market could be relieved.

<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/daily/@D3/@D306/@D306.HTM">Energy Prices</a></th>
<th scope="col">11/22/04</th>
<th scope="col">12/31/03</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">US Retail Gasoline, Regular ($/Gal.)</td>
<td>$1.948</td>
<td>$1.48</td>
<td>28.8%</td>
<td>$1.56</td>
<td>$1.35</td>
<td>$1.42</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Domestic Spot Market Price: West Texas Intermediate ($/Barrel)</td>
<td>$48.75</td>
<td>$32.55</td>
<td>64.3%</td>
<td>$32.78</td>
<td>$31.23</td>
<td>$19.38</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

In the five weeks since we have written about the US energy market, prices have eased somewhat. Gasoline, at $2.03/gallon retail in mid-October, has fallen back below $2.00 the past two weeks. Crude oil peaked at $55.23/barrel on [...]

SUV Demand Drives Up Energy Prices?

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/041123f.jpg" width="353">
Chile reported today that real GDP was up 6.84% over a year ago, compared with a 5.26% rise in the second quarter and a 4.65% rise in the first quarter. Earlier this month, Mexico and Peru reported third quarter growth near 5%. Brazil and Argentina both of which showed good second quarter growth, have yet to report third quarter figures. Brazil is recovering from last year&#39;s slump while Argentina has been coming out of the steep recession that occurred in 2001-2 . The contrast between steady growth path of Chile&#39;s economy and the erratic path of Argentina is shown in the attached chart.
Chile&#39;s growth in the third quarter was broad based, with all sectors showing good growth. Fixed capital spending was up 14% while other domestic spending was up almost 7%. Although exports of good and services were 15% above those of he third quarter of 2003, imports increased even more to 20%. Nevertheless, Chile maintained a positive balance of trade in goods and services of 203.1 billion Chilean Pesos.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">Year-to-Year % Change in Real GDP (Not seasonally adjusted)</th>
<th scope="col">Q3 O4</th>
<th scope="col">Q2 04&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp;Q1 04&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp; Q4 03&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">Q3 O3</th>
<th scope="col">Q2 03&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp;Q1 03&nbsp;</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Chile</td>
<td>6.84</td>
<td>5.26</td>
<td>4.65</td>
<td>3.27</td>
<td>3.12</td>
<td>3.02</td>
<td>3.65</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Argentina</td>
<td>n.a.</td>
<td>7.0</td>
<td>11.3</td>
<td>11.7</td>
<td>10.2</td>
<td>7.7</td>
<td>5.4</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Brazil</td>
<td>n.a.</td>
<td>5.71</td>
<td>2.67</td>
<td>-0.06</td>
<td>-1.48</td>
<td>-1.07</td>
<td>1.86</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Mexico</td>
<td>4.42</td>
<td>3.94</td>
<td>3.73</td>
<td>1.99</td>
<td>0.61</td>
<td>0.11</td>
<td>2.53</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Peru</td>
<td>4.78</td>
<td>3.59</td>
<td>4.944</td>
<td>2.94</td>
<td>3.04</td>
<td>3.56</td>
<td>5.67</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Chile reported today that real GDP was up 6.84% over a year ago, compared with a 5.26% rise in the second quarter and a 4.65% rise in the first quarter. Earlier this month, Mexico and Peru reported third quarter growth near 5%. Brazil [...]

Chile Reports Third Quarter Growth of Almost 7%

<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/041123a.jpg" width="353">
Last week, chain store sales recovered 0.8% following the prior week&#39;s 0.4% dip, according to the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC)-UBS.
Sales so far in November are 0.7% ahead of October.
Not so positive was the second consecutive 0.5% weekly decline in the leading indicator of chain store sales from ICSC. The monthly average is up just 0.2% from October which rose 0.4% from September.
During the last ten years there has been a 60% correlation between y/y change in chain store sales and the change in non-auto retail sales less gasoline.
The ICSC-UBS retail chain-store sales index is constructed using the same-store sales reported by 78 stores of seven retailers: Dayton Hudson, Federated, Kmart, May, J.C. Penney, Sears and Wal-Mart.
This 2001 report from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York examines <a href="http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/current_issues/ci7-11.pdf"> &quot;The Effect of Tax Changes on Consumer Spending&quot;</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">ICSC-UBS (SA, 1977=100)</a></th>
<th scope="col">11/20/04</th>
<th scope="col">11/13/04</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Total Weekly Chain Store Sales</td>
<td>439.6</td>
<td>436.1</td>
<td>3.9%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Last week, chain store sales recovered 0.8% following the prior week's 0.4% dip, according to the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC)-UBS. Sales so far in November are 0.7% ahead of October. Not so positive was the second [...]

Chain Store Sales Recover

<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/041123b.jpg" width="353">
The Chicago Fed National Activity Index (CFNAI) for October rose to 0.52 but the prior month&#39;s negative reading was deepened slightly. The three-month moving average of the CFNAI fell to the lowest level in nearly a year.
A zero value of the CFNAI indicates that the economy is expanding at its historical trend rate of growth.
During the last twenty years there has been a 74% correlation between the level of the CFNAI and q/q growth in real GDP.
The CFNAI is a weighted average of 85 indicators of economic activity. The indicators reflect activity in the following categories: production and income, the labor market, personal consumption and housing, manufacturing and trade sales, and inventories &amp; orders.

<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/@S5/@S503/@S503.HTM">Chicago Fed</a></th>
<th scope="col">Oct</th>
<th scope="col">Sept</th>
<th scope="col">Oct &#39;03</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">CFNAI</td>
<td>0.52</td>
<td>-0.04</td>
<td>0.19</td>
<td>-0.11</td>
<td>-0.40</td>
<td>-1.19</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The Chicago Fed National Activity Index (CFNAI) for October rose to 0.52 but the prior month's negative reading was deepened slightly. The three-month moving average of the CFNAI fell to the lowest level in nearly a year. A zero value [...]

Chicago Fed Nat'l Activity Index Improved 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>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041123c.jpg" width="353">
Sales of existing single family homes held the high ground with a 0.1% (+5.6% y/y) slip in October to 6.75M. September sales were revised up slightly and Consensus expectations had been for sales of 6.72M.
The figures reflect closings of home sales in earlier months.
Sales fell moderately in most areas of the country except in the South where they rose (+7.4% y/y) to a record high.
The median price of an existing home rose slightly to $187,000 (+8.8% y/y) following three months of decline.

<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/@E905/@E90501/@E90501.HTM">Existing Home Sales (000, AR)</a></th>
<th scope="col">Oct</th>
<th scope="col">Sept</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Existing Single-Family</td>
<td>&nbsp;6,750</td>
<td>&nbsp;6,760</td>
<td>5.6%</td>
<td>6,098</td>
<td>5,593</td>
<td>5,290</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Sales of existing single family homes held the high ground with a 0.1% (+5.6% y/y) slip in October to 6.75M. September sales were revised up slightly and Consensus expectations had been for sales of 6.72M. The figures reflect closings [...]

U.S. Existing Home Sales Remained High

<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/041123c.jpg" width="353">
Sales of existing single family homes held the high ground with a 0.1% (+5.6% y/y) slip in October to 6.75M. September sales were revised up slightly and Consensus expectations had been for sales of 6.72M.
The figures reflect closings of home sales in earlier months.
Sales fell moderately in most areas of the country except in the South where they rose (+7.4% y/y) to a record high.
The median price of an existing home rose slightly to $187,000 (+8.8% y/y) following three months of decline.

<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/@E905/@E90501/@E90501.HTM">Existing Home Sales (000, AR)</a></th>
<th scope="col">Oct</th>
<th scope="col">Sept</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Existing Single-Family</td>
<td>&nbsp;6,750</td>
<td>&nbsp;6,760</td>
<td>5.6%</td>
<td>6,098</td>
<td>5,593</td>
<td>5,290</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Chicago Fed Nat'l Activity Index Improved Sharply 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> November 23, 2004


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041123b.jpg" width="353">
The Chicago Fed National Activity Index (CFNAI) for October rose to 0.52 but the prior month&#39;s negative reading was deepened slightly. The three-month moving average of the CFNAI fell to the lowest level in nearly a year.
A zero value of the CFNAI indicates that the economy is expanding at its historical trend rate of growth.
During the last twenty years there has been a 74% correlation between the level of the CFNAI and q/q growth in real GDP.
The CFNAI is a weighted average of 85 indicators of economic activity. The indicators reflect activity in the following categories: production and income, the labor market, personal consumption and housing, manufacturing and trade sales, and inventories &amp; orders.

<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/@S5/@S503/@S503.HTM">Chicago Fed</a></th>
<th scope="col">Oct</th>
<th scope="col">Sept</th>
<th scope="col">Oct &#39;03</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">CFNAI</td>
<td>0.52</td>
<td>-0.04</td>
<td>0.19</td>
<td>-0.11</td>
<td>-0.40</td>
<td>-1.19</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Chain Store Sales Recover 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> November 23, 2004


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041123a.jpg" width="353">
Last week, chain store sales recovered 0.8% following the prior week&#39;s 0.4% dip, according to the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC)-UBS.
Sales so far in November are 0.7% ahead of October.
Not so positive was the second consecutive 0.5% weekly decline in the leading indicator of chain store sales from ICSC. The monthly average is up just 0.2% from October which rose 0.4% from September.
During the last ten years there has been a 60% correlation between y/y change in chain store sales and the change in non-auto retail sales less gasoline.
The ICSC-UBS retail chain-store sales index is constructed using the same-store sales reported by 78 stores of seven retailers: Dayton Hudson, Federated, Kmart, May, J.C. Penney, Sears and Wal-Mart.
This 2001 report from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York examines <a href="http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/current_issues/ci7-11.pdf"> &quot;The Effect of Tax Changes on Consumer Spending&quot;</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">ICSC-UBS (SA, 1977=100)</a></th>
<th scope="col">11/20/04</th>
<th scope="col">11/13/04</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Total Weekly Chain Store Sales</td>
<td>439.6</td>
<td>436.1</td>
<td>3.9%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
<td>2.1%</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>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041123d.jpg" width="353">
Taiwan&#39;s third quarter real gross domestic production, on a seasonally unadjusted basis. was 5.3% above the third quarter of 2003 In nominal terms it was 4.7% above a year ago, indicating that deflation is still a factor in the Taiwanese economy.The attached chart shows the year-to-year changes in Taiwan&#39;s real and nominal GDP.
Detailed data for the third quarter real GDP are not yet available, but the nominal data indicate that the improvement in capital spending that began late last year is continuing at a fast year-over-year rate of 20.1%. Exports are up almost 20% and imports, probably reflecting the strength in capital spending, are up 30.3%. Even private consumption expenditures are showing strength. Although, the year-to-year increases have been declining this year, they are well above the quarters of last year.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041123e.jpg" width="353">
While changes in the deflator are still negative, changes in consumer and wholesale prices have become positive. Big increases in agricultural products and petroleum products have led to sharp increases in wholesale prices that are beginning to affect consumer prices. In the table below we have aggregated the monthly wholesale and consumer data to quarterly for easy comparison with the GDP deflator. The second chart compares the year-to-year change in the GDP deflator and the Consumer Price Index. 

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">Year-to-Year % Change&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">Q3 04</th>
<th scope="col">Q2&nbsp; 04</th>
<th scope="col">Q1 04</th>
<th scope="col">Q4 03</th>
<th scope="col">Q3 04</th>
<th scope="col">Q2 04&nbsp;&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">Q1 03&nbsp;</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Real GDP</td>
<td>5.27</td>
<td>7.88</td>
<td>6.72</td>
<td>7.22</td>
<td>4.82</td>
<td>1.61</td>
<td>5.26</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Nominal GDP</td>
<td>3.73</td>
<td>4.90</td>
<td>4.69</td>
<td>2.83</td>
<td>1.54</td>
<td>-1.86</td>
<td>0.98</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Private Consumption</td>
<td>3.50</td>
<td>5.45</td>
<td>4.17</td>
<td>1.98</td>
<td>0.59</td>
<td>-2.58</td>
<td>0.27</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Gross Fixed Capital&nbsp;</td>
<td>20.12</td>
<td>23.52</td>
<td>16.14</td>
<td>6.75</td>
<td>-1.96</td>
<td>-6.99</td>
<td>-1.97</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Exports&nbsp;&nbsp;</td>
<td>19.47</td>
<td>25.25</td>
<td>17.16</td>
<td>14.64</td>
<td>9.37</td>
<td>3.41</td>
<td>10.82</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Imports</td>
<td>30.25</td>
<td>32.72</td>
<td>25.57</td>
<td>18.50</td>
<td>3.46</td>
<td>3.46</td>
<td>15.76</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">GDP Deflator&nbsp;</td>
<td>-0.97</td>
<td>-2.84</td>
<td>-1.83</td>
<td>-2.45</td>
<td>-2.20</td>
<td>-1.71</td>
<td>-2.16</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">CPI</td>
<td>2.89</td>
<td>1.20</td>
<td>0.51</td>
<td>-0.19</td>
<td>-0.59</td>
<td>-0.11</td>
<td>-0.21</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">WPI</td>
<td>10.47</td>
<td>6.46</td>
<td>2.47</td>
<td>0.92</td>
<td>1.76</td>
<td>2.22</td>
<td>5.07</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Taiwan's third quarter real gross domestic production, on a seasonally unadjusted basis. was 5.3% above the third quarter of 2003 In nominal terms it was 4.7% above a year ago, indicating that deflation is still a factor in the [...]

Taiwan Shows Good Growth in the Third Quarter: Consumer and Wholesale Price Increases Suggest Deflation May Soon [...]

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

FOMC expects more inflation and less growth than in March

With escalation of Israel/Iran conflict, geopolitical risk has recently surged while US trade policy uncertainty has ebbed

Renewed supply chain pressures point to a rebound in global inflation ahead

Apart from Japan, Blue Chip forecasters look for further significant monetary policy easing

Apart from the US, productivity is moribund

Financial market concerns ebb even though policy uncertainty continues to soar

US tariff revenues nearly doubled in April

Even with expected tariff-induced increases in inflation, BCFF forecasters look for a more aggressive round of monetary easing

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

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. 

London

Singapore

Tokyo

New York

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

250815N0.jpg

250815O0.jpg

The Housing Market Index, compiled by the National Association of Home Builders/Wells Fargo, eased 3.0% (-17.9% y/y) to 32 in August, reversing the 3.1% July rise to 33. It remained below the break-even point of 50, where it’s been since May of last year. The index remains below a July 2023 high of 56 and a November 2020 peak of 90.

The rate on a 30-year fixed rate mortgage averaged 6.61% in the first two weeks of August versus 6.72% during all of July. It fell to 6.58% last week and remained below the high of 7.79% in the last week of October 2023, according to Freddie Mac.

The single-family sales measure declined 2.8% (-20.5% y/y) this month to 35, after rising 2.9% in July. The prospective sales in six months measure held steady (-12.2% y/y) at 43, after rising 7.5% in July. The traffic of prospective buyers’ index rose 10.0% (-12.0% y/y) to 22 in August, after declining 4.8% in July.

Housing weakness centered in the Northeast this month with the index declining 18.8% (-15.2% y/y) to 39, after rising 9.1% in July. It was the lowest level since January 2023.  In the West, the index rose 4.0% (-29.7% y/y) to 26, its highest level in three months. The index for the Midwest held steady (+13.2% y/y) at 43, and matched the highest level in four months. The index in the South also held steady at 29 (-25.6% y/y), after falling in each month of this year.

The NAHB has compiled the Housing Market Index since 1985. It reflects survey questions which ask builders to rate sales and sales expectations as "good," "fair" or "poor" and traffic as "very high," "average" or "very low." The diffusion indexes with values over 50 indicating a predominance of "good"/"very high" readings. In constructing the composite index, the weights assigned to the individual index components are: 0.5920 for single-family detached sales, present time, 0.1358 for single-family detached sales, next six months, and 0.2722 for traffic of prospective buyers. The regional indexes run back to December 2004.

These data are included in Haver's **SURVEYS** database.

250815P0.jpg

250815Q0.jpg

- Overall reading matches lowest level since December 2022.
- Current sales slip, expectations steady, while traffic improves.
- Lower Northeast reading accounts for overall index decline.

U.S. Home Builders Index Edges Lower in August

250815V4.jpg

250815W4.jpg

Consumers remain in a spending mood. Total retail sales increased 0.5% (3.9% y/y) during July after rising 0.9% in June, revised from 0.6%, and falling 0.8% in May, revised from down 0.9%. The overall rise matched expectations in the Action Economics Forecast Survey. Sales excluding autos rose an expected 0.3% last month (3.7% y/y) following a 0.8% June gain, revised from 0.5%, and a 0.1% dip during May, revised from -0.2%.

Sales in the retail control group, which excludes autos, building materials, gasoline and food services, rose 0.5% (4.8% y/y) last month after increasing 0.8% in June, revised from 0.5%, and 0.3% in May, revised from 0.2%. These sales are used in the construction of personal consumption expenditures in the NIPA accounts. These sales rose 3.9% (AR) last quarter following a 3.7% Q1 rise.

Light vehicle sales increased 1.6% (4.7% y/y) in July after rising 1.4% in June, following a 3.8% decline in May. This compares to a 7.6% (6.0% y/y) rise in unit sales of motor vehicles last month which followed declines in each of the prior three months. Gasoline service station sales eased 0.7% (-2.9% y/y) during July after a 0.6% rise during June. Gasoline prices fell 1.2% (-9.8% y/y) last month after holding steady in June. Sales of building materials & garden equipment declined 1.0% (-2.6% y/y) after a 1.3% rise during June.

Elsewhere, sales were mixed last month. Furniture & home furnishings sales increased 1.4% (5.1% y/y) after rising 0.1% in June. Nonstore retail sales rose 0.8% (8.0% y/y) after increasing 0.9% in June. Sporting goods & hobby shop sales increased 0.8% (2.3% y/y) following a 0.7% decline. Apparel store sales increased 0.7% (5.0% y/y) during July following a 1.1% gain. General merchandise store sales rose 0.4% (2.3% y/y) after they moved 0.5% higher in June, and department store sales improved 0.9% (-0.8% y/y) after falling 0.6% in June.

Working lower, miscellaneous store sales fell 1.7% (+10.6% y/y) during July after strengthening 2.7% in June. Electronics & appliance store sales eased 0.6% (-2.3% y/y) last month after two consecutive months of moderate decline.

In the nondiscretionary sales sector, food & beverage store sales rose 0.5% (2.5% y/y) last month following a 0.8% rise in June. Health & personal care store sales also rose 0.4% (5.6% y/y) last month after strengthening 1.0% in June.

Restaurant & drinking establishment sales fell 0.4% (+5.6% y/y) in July after rising 0.6% in June.

Retail sales data can be found in Haver’s **USECON** database. The expectations figures are from the Action Economic Forecast Survey in **AS1REPNA**.

250815X4.jpg

250815Y4.jpg

- Strong vehicle sales pace the increase.
- Nonauto sales are mixed. 
- Sales in the retail control group (used to estimate PCE) increase.

U.S. Retail Sales Post Solid Increase in July; June Gain Revised Up

Winnie Tapasanun

250815R.jpg

250815S.jpg

Industrial production (IP) dipped 0.1% m/m in July after upwardly revised increases of 0.4% in June (+0.3% initially) and 0.1% in May (0.0% previously), data from the Federal Reserve Board showed. A 0.0% m/m for July had been expected in the Action Economics Forecast Survey. The year-on-year rate of increase accelerated to 1.4% in July from 0.7% in June; it was well above -0.2% y/y in July 2024. The July IP index was at 104.0, marginally down from 104.1 in June (the highest since September 2018) and 2.5% above a low of 101.5 in January 2024.

By **industry groups**, manufacturing production was virtually unchanged (+1.4% y/y) in July following rises of 0.3% in June (+0.1% initially) and 0.2% in May (+0.3% previously). Durable goods production grew 0.3% (2.7% y/y) in July, the second m/m gain in three months, following a 0.1% downtick in June. Within durables, the following categories rose m/m in July, including output increases of 1.7% (8.9% y/y) in aerospace & miscellaneous transportation equipment, 1.3% (-1.7% y/y) in miscellaneous durables goods, 1.0% (-2.0% y/y) in electrical equipment, appliances & components, 1.0% (-0.2% y/y) in furniture & related products, 0.7% (1.7% y/y) in wood products, 0.6% (-1.3% y/y) in nonmetallic mineral products, 0.2% (-0.3% y/y) in fabricated metal products, and 0.1% (5.6% y/y) in computer & electronic products. Notably, aircraft & parts production climbed 1.1% (11.4% y/y) in July, the ninth straight m/m rise, on top of a 2.3% gain in June. To the downside, the following durable goods categories fell for the third time in four months in July, including machinery (-0.3%; +0.9% y/y), motor vehicles & parts (-0.3%; +8.3% y/y), and primary metals (-0.3%; +4.0% y/y).

Nondurable goods production fell 0.4% (+0.6% y/y) in July, down for the third month in four, following a 0.7% rebound in June, reflecting m/m output falls of all nondurable goods categories. These included output declines of 2.1% (-4.7% y/y) in textiles & product mills, 1.7% (-5.5% y/y) in apparel & leather goods, 0.8% (-3.1% y/y) in plastics & rubber products, 0.5% (0.0% y/y) in paper, 0.5% (+0.7% y/y) in petroleum & coal products, 0.4% (+2.5% y/y) in chemicals, 0.2% (+0.3% y/y) in food, beverages & tobacco, and 0.1% (-1.3% y/y) in printing & related support activities.

Mining activity slid 0.4% (+1.9% y/y) in July, the third m/m slide in four months, after an unrevised 0.3% decrease in June. Utilities output declined 0.2% (+0.8% y/y), down for the second month in three, following a downwardly revised 1.8% June gain (+2.8% initially), with a 0.3% decrease (+1.6% y/y) in electric utilities output and a 0.5% rebound (-5.3% y/y) in natural gas utilities output.

By **market groups**, materials production fell 0.3% (+1.8% y/y) in July, the first m/m fall since March, after a 0.5% advance in June. Construction supplies production declined 0.2% (+2.0% y/y) following a 0.3% June increase. To the upside, business equipment output rose 0.5% (3.8% y/y) in July, the ninth consecutive m/m rise, after a 0.1% uptick in June. Consumer goods output edged up 0.1% (0.6% y/y) after a 0.3% June rebound, reflecting increases of 0.1% (2.5% y/y) in durable consumer goods and 0.1% (0.1% y/y) in nondurable consumer goods.

In **special classifications**, factory output of selected high-tech industries rose 1.4% (14.0% y/y) in July on top of an upwardly revised 0.9% gain in June (+0.5% initially), posting the fourth successive m/m rise and the seventh in eight months. Meanwhile, manufacturing production excluding selected high-tech industries dipped 0.1% (+1.1% y/y) in July, the first m/m easing since April, following a 0.3% increase in June; manufacturing production excluding selected high-tech and motor vehicles & parts slipped 0.1% (+0.6% y/y), the third m/m decline in four months, following a 0.5% June rebound.

Capacity utilization fell to 77.5% in July from a three-month-high 77.7% in June (77.6% previously). The Action Economics Forecast Survey forecasted 77.6%. The July reading was 2.1 percentage points below its long-run (1972–2024) average. Manufacturing capacity utilization dipped to 76.8% in July from an unrevised 76.9% in June; the July rate was 1.4 percentage points below its long-run average.

Industrial production and capacity data are in Haver’s **USECON** database. Additional detail on production and capacity utilization can be found in the **IP** database. The expectations figures come from the **AS1REPNA** database.

250815T.jpg

250815U.jpg

- July IP -0.1% (+1.4% y/y), led by a 0.4% decline in mining activity.
- Mfg. IP unchanged, w/ durables up 0.3% and nondurables down 0.4%.
- Utilities output -0.2%, the second m/m fall in three months.
- Key categories in market groups post mixed results.
- Capacity utilization down 0.2%pt. to 77.5%; mfg. capacity utilization down 0.1%pt. to 76.8%.

U.S. Industrial Production Eases in July

Sandy Batten

250815J1.jpg

250815K1.jpg

The Empire State Manufacturing Index of General Business Conditions unexpectedly advanced more than 6 points to 11.9 in August after having jumped nearly 22 points to 5.5 in July, according to the Empire State Manufacturing Survey released by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. This is the highest reading since November 2024 and indicates a pickup in the pace of economic activity in New York State. A reading of -1.0 for August had been expected by the Action Economics Forecast Survey. The percentage of respondents reporting an increase in general business conditions rose to 34.7% in August from 32.4% in July while the percentage reporting a decrease fell to 22.8% in August, the lowest reading since February, from 26.9% in July. The August survey was conducted between August 4 and August 11.

The headline index just reflects the answer to a single question concerning the state of economic activity and is not calculated from the components. Haver Analytics calculates a composite index from the five major components, which is comparable to the ISM manufacturing index. This calculated index slipped to 54.3 in August from 54.7 in July, still well above the critical 50 level that separates expansion from contraction but indicating that the components were not quite as strong as the headline index in August. The calculated index is the average of five diffusion indexes: new orders, shipments, employment, supplier deliveries and inventories with equal weights (20% each).

The August increase was led by a more than 13-point increase in the new orders index, to 15.4 from 2.0. Thirty-six percent of respondents reported an increase in orders, up slightly from 35% in July. However, only 20.4% reported a decline in orders, down markedly from 32.9% in July and a recent high of 40.2% in March. The shipments index was little changed in August but remained at a solid 12.2. Inventories reversed course sharply, falling to -6.4, the first negative reading since last August, from 15.6 in July. Employment also slowed with the index falling to 4.4 from 9.2 in July.

Indications of supply-chain disruptions continued to emerge. Delivery times lengthened markedly with the index jumping to 17.4 in August, its highest reading since May 2022, from an already elevated 8.3 in July. Twenty percent of respondents reported an increase in delivery times, up from nearly 15% in July, while only 2.8% reported a shortening versus 6.4% in July. Moreover, the supply availability index remained in negative territory at -5.5 versus -11.0 in July.

Inflation indexes softened a bit in August but remained elevated. The prices paid index edged down to 54.1 from 56.0 in July while the prices received index slid to 22.9 from 25.7 in July. Both remain significantly elevated relative to the beginning of the year.

Firm optimism about the future (the next six months) soured a bit in August. The index for future general business conditions fell eight points to 16.0, suggesting that businesses expect activity to increase in the months ahead, but firms were less optimistic than they were last month. New orders and shipments were expected to increase. Two-thirds of respondents expect input prices to pick up further over the next six months. Of some concern, capital spending plans were soft with the expectations index plunging to -0.9 in August from 9.2 in July.

The indexes in this report are diffusion indexes and measure the percentage of respondents indicating an increase minus the percentage indicating a decrease with zero separating expansion from contraction.

The New York Fed survey data are contained in Haver’s **SURVEYS** database. The expectations series is in Haver’s **AS1REPNA** database.

250815L1.jpg

250815M1.jpg

- The highest reading since November 2024.
- The August rise was led by stronger new orders and continued gains in shipments.
- More evidence of nascent supply-chain problems.
- Outlook six months ahead faded slightly.

FRBNY Empire State Manufacturing Index Unexpectedly Advances in August

250815J5.jpg

250815K5.jpg

Import prices unexpectedly increased 0.4% m/m (-0.2% y/y) in July after declines of 0.1% m/m in June and 0.4% m/m in May, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. An unchanged reading had been expected by the Action Economics Forecast Survey. Export prices edged up 0.1% m/m (2.2% y/y) in July following a 0.5% monthly gain in June. The Action Economic Forecast Survey had also looked for an unchanged reading.

For imports, prices for imported fuel advanced 2.7% m/m in July following an increase of 0.8% m/m in June and a decrease of 5.0% m/m in May. The July increase was the largest monthly advance since the index rose 3.0% m/m in January 2025. Higher prices for imported petroleum and natural gas drove the July increase, advancing 2.4% m/m and 4.7% m/m, respectively. Imported fuel prices fell 12.1% y/y in July 2025 with imported petroleum prices down 13.7% y/y while imported natural gas prices soared 62.2% y/y.

Apart from imported fuel, prices for nonfuel imports advanced 0.3% m/m percent in July, following a decrease of 0.3% m/m in June. Higher prices for nonfuel industrial supplies and materials (1.0% m/m), consumer goods (0.4% m/m), and capital goods (0.1% m/m) more than offset lower prices for automotive vehicles (-0.2% m/m) and foods, feeds, and beverages (-0.1% m/m). Nonfuel import prices increased 0.9% y/y in July and have not declined on an over-the-year basis since a 0.6% decrease in February 2024. Higher prices for nonfuel industrial supplies and materials; capital goods; and foods, feeds, and beverages contributed to the year-over-year advance.

Higher prices for nonagricultural exports drove the July increase in overall export prices. The price index for agricultural exports was unchanged in July following a 0.8% m/m increase in June. Higher prices for meat (1.1% m/m) and vegetables (3.4% m/m) lower prices for corn (-1.9% m/m) and animal feeds (-1.6% m/m). The price index for agricultural exports increased 3.4% y/y in July, the largest 12-month rise since a 5.3% y/y advance in January 2023. Nonagricultural export prices ticked up 0.1% m/m in July, after rising 0.5% m/m in June and falling 0.8% m/m in May. Higher prices for automotive vehicles (0.7% m/m), capital goods (0.2% m/m), and consumer goods (0.2% m/m) more than offset lower prices for nonagricultural industrial supplies and materials (-0.1% m/m). Prices for nonagricultural exports increased 2.0% y/y in July. Higher prices for nonagricultural industrial supplies and materials, capital goods, and automotive vehicles drove the year-over-year advance.

These import and export price series are not seasonally adjusted; they can be found in Haver’s **USECON** database. Detailed figures are available in the **USINT** database. The expectations figure from the Action Economics Forecast Survey is in the **AS1REPNA** database.

250815L5.jpg

250815M5.jpg

- Import prices rose 0.4% m/m in July against expectations of no change after declines in both May and June.
- Higher prices for imported petroleum and natural gas drove the July rebound. 
- Export prices ticked up 0.1% m/m, largely reflecting higher prices for nonagricultural exports.

Economy in Brief: 2004

Jump to:

New Home Sales Higher Still

SUV Demand Drives Up Energy Prices?

Chile Reports Third Quarter Growth of Almost 7%

Chain Store Sales Recover

Chicago Fed Nat'l Activity Index Improved Sharply

U.S. Existing Home Sales Remained High

U.S. Existing Home Sales Remained High

Taiwan Shows Good Growth in the Third Quarter: Consumer and Wholesale Price Increases Suggest Deflation May Soon [...]