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/050216d.jpg" width="353">
Mortgage applications dipped modestly last week following two weeks of gain according to the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) Survey. The 0.5% w/w decline followed gains of 4.2% and 7.3% during the prior two weeks.
The decline was due to a 4.8% drop in purchase applications. During the last ten years there has been a 59% correlation between the y/y change in purchase applications and the change in new plus existing home sales.
Applications to refinance rose another 4.1% following two weeks of gain but versus last year still are down 23.3%.
The effective interest rate on a conventional 30-year mortgage ticked higher to 5.75% but remained below the 5.89% averaged last month. The effective rate on a 15-year mortgage also rose to 5.41% last week.
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">02/11/05</th>
<th scope="col">02/04/05</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 class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total Market Index</td>
<td>732.3</td>
<td>735.9</td>
<td>-12.5%</td>
<td>735.1</td>
<td>1,067.9</td>
<td>799.7</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Purchase</td>
<td>423.3</td>
<td>444.6</td>
<td>2.3%</td>
<td>454.5</td>
<td>395.1</td>
<td>354.7</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Refinancing</td>
<td>2,530.1</td>
<td>2,430.7</td>
<td>-23.3%</td>
<td>2,366.8</td>
<td>4,981.8</td>
<td>3,388.0</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Mortgage applications dipped modestly last week following two weeks of gain according to the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) Survey. The 0.5% w/w decline followed gains of 4.2% and 7.3% during the prior two weeks. The decline was [...]

Mortgage Applications Dipped

<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/050216c.jpg" width="353">
The National Association of Home Builders&#39; (NAHB) Composite Housing Market Index fell again in February to 68 versus 70 in January.
Only the current sales of new single family homes component fell. The index components of prospective sales and the traffic of prospective buyers were stable.
During the last twenty years, annual changes in the composite index had an 83% correlation with the change in new home sales. There&#39;s been an 86% correlation with the change in single family housing starts.
The NAHB index is a diffusion index based on a survey of builders. Readings above 50 signal that more builders view conditions as good than poor.
Visit the National Association of Home Builders using this <a href="http://www.nahb.org">link</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/SURVEYS/@S4/@S4.HTM">Nat&#39;l Association of Home Builders</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>
<td class="firstcol">Composite Housing Market Index</td>
<td>68</td>
<td>70</td>
<td>66</td>
<td>68</td>
<td>64</td>
<td>61</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The National Association of Home Builders' (NAHB) Composite Housing Market Index fell again in February to 68 versus 70 in January. Only the current sales of new single family homes component fell. The index components of prospective [...]

NAHB Housing Market Index Fell 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/050216a.jpg" width="353">
Housing starts unexpectedly rose 4.7% in January to a record high of 2.159M following an upwardly revised 14.4% jump in December.Consensus expectations had been for a decline to 1.93M starts.
Single-family starts rose a moderate 2.7% m/m to a record high of 1.760M. The increase, however, was limited to a 20.0% gain in starts in the South. In other regions of the country single family starts fell.
Multi family starts jumped 14.1% m/m but the gain was just about back to the October level.
Building permits rose 1.7% in January, again mostly reflecting strength in single family permits in the South.
Today&#39;s testimony by Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan is available <a href="http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/hh/2005/february/testimony.htm"> here</a>.
Wicksell&#39;s Natural Rate from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis can be found <a href="http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/mt/20050301/cover.pdf"> here</a>.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">

</table>
<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/@E901/@E90101/@E90101.HTM">Housing Starts (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 class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total</td>
<td>2,159</td>
<td>2,063</td>
<td>11.6%</td>
<td>1,952</td>
<td>1,853</td>
<td>1,710</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Single-family</td>
<td>1,760</td>
<td>1,713</td>
<td>12.5%</td>
<td>1,605</td>
<td>1,505</td>
<td>1,363</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Multi-family</td>
<td>399</td>
<td>350</td>
<td>8.1%</td>
<td>348</td>
<td>348</td>
<td>347</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Building Permits</td>
<td>2,105</td>
<td>2,069</td>
<td>6.8%</td>
<td>2,035</td>
<td>1,889</td>
<td>1,749</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Housing starts unexpectedly rose 4.7% in January to a record high of 2.159M following an upwardly revised 14.4% jump in December.Consensus expectations had been for a decline to 1.93M starts. Single-family starts rose a moderate 2.7% [...]

Housing Starts At A New High in January

<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/050216a.jpg" width="353">
Housing starts unexpectedly rose 4.7% in January to a record high of 2.159M following an upwardly revised 14.4% jump in December.Consensus expectations had been for a decline to 1.93M starts.
Single-family starts rose a moderate 2.7% m/m to a record high of 1.760M. The increase, however, was limited to a 20.0% gain in starts in the South. In other regions of the country single family starts fell.
Multi family starts jumped 14.1% m/m but the gain was just about back to the October level.
Building permits rose 1.7% in January, again mostly reflecting strength in single family permits in the South.
Today&#39;s testimony by Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan is available <a href="http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/hh/2005/february/testimony.htm"> here</a>.
Wicksell&#39;s Natural Rate from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis can be found <a href="http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/mt/20050301/cover.pdf"> here</a>.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">

</table>
<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/@E901/@E90101/@E90101.HTM">Housing Starts (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 class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total</td>
<td>2,159</td>
<td>2,063</td>
<td>11.6%</td>
<td>1,952</td>
<td>1,853</td>
<td>1,710</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Single-family</td>
<td>1,760</td>
<td>1,713</td>
<td>12.5%</td>
<td>1,605</td>
<td>1,505</td>
<td>1,363</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Multi-family</td>
<td>399</td>
<td>350</td>
<td>8.1%</td>
<td>348</td>
<td>348</td>
<td>347</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Building Permits</td>
<td>2,105</td>
<td>2,069</td>
<td>6.8%</td>
<td>2,035</td>
<td>1,889</td>
<td>1,749</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
NAHB Housing Market Index Fell Again 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> February 16, 2005


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050216c.jpg" width="353">
The National Association of Home Builders&#39; (NAHB) Composite Housing Market Index fell again in February to 68 versus 70 in January.
Only the current sales of new single family homes component fell. The index components of prospective sales and the traffic of prospective buyers were stable.
During the last twenty years, annual changes in the composite index had an 83% correlation with the change in new home sales. There&#39;s been an 86% correlation with the change in single family housing starts.
The NAHB index is a diffusion index based on a survey of builders. Readings above 50 signal that more builders view conditions as good than poor.
Visit the National Association of Home Builders using this <a href="http://www.nahb.org">link</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/SURVEYS/@S4/@S4.HTM">Nat&#39;l Association of Home Builders</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>
<td class="firstcol">Composite Housing Market Index</td>
<td>68</td>
<td>70</td>
<td>66</td>
<td>68</td>
<td>64</td>
<td>61</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Mortgage Applications Dipped 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> February 16, 2005


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050216d.jpg" width="353">
Mortgage applications dipped modestly last week following two weeks of gain according to the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) Survey. The 0.5% w/w decline followed gains of 4.2% and 7.3% during the prior two weeks.
The decline was due to a 4.8% drop in purchase applications. During the last ten years there has been a 59% correlation between the y/y change in purchase applications and the change in new plus existing home sales.
Applications to refinance rose another 4.1% following two weeks of gain but versus last year still are down 23.3%.
The effective interest rate on a conventional 30-year mortgage ticked higher to 5.75% but remained below the 5.89% averaged last month. The effective rate on a 15-year mortgage also rose to 5.41% last week.
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">02/11/05</th>
<th scope="col">02/04/05</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 class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total Market Index</td>
<td>732.3</td>
<td>735.9</td>
<td>-12.5%</td>
<td>735.1</td>
<td>1,067.9</td>
<td>799.7</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Purchase</td>
<td>423.3</td>
<td>444.6</td>
<td>2.3%</td>
<td>454.5</td>
<td>395.1</td>
<td>354.7</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Refinancing</td>
<td>2,530.1</td>
<td>2,430.7</td>
<td>-23.3%</td>
<td>2,366.8</td>
<td>4,981.8</td>
<td>3,388.0</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Warm Weather Left Industrial Production Unchanged 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> February 16, 2005


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050216b.jpg" width="353">
Industrial production was unchanged last month versus Consensus expectations for a 0.3% increase. The shortfall was entirely due to a 3.1% decline in utility output as well as a 0.3% drop in mining output.
The factory sector again performed well and output rose 0.5% (5.3% y/y) following a downwardly revised 0.4% gain in December.
High tech sector output increased 1.5% (18.1% y/y) as output of communications equipment rose 3.0% (13.8% y/y). Semiconductor &amp; related equipment output rose 0.9% (26.5% y/y) and computer &amp; peripheral output also gained 0.9% (6.0% y/y).
Factory output excluding high tech rose 0.4% in December (4.4% y/y). A 1.2% decline in clothing output (-5.0% y/y) was offset by a 1.6% rise (9.5% y/y) in machinery output. Nondurables output also rose as did output of metals. Production of appliances, furniture &amp; carpeting fell 1.1% (-0.4% y/y) as furniture output fell 0.5% (+1.3% y/y).
Motor vehicle output fell 2.0% (+0.2% y/y) in January. Excluding motor vehicles, factory output rose 0.7% (5.7% y/y). Excluding both high tech and motor vehicles factory output rose 0.6% (4.8% y/y).
Total capacity utilization fell slightly to 79.0%. Capacity grew 1.2% y/y.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">

</table>
<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/@EA/@EA.HTM">Production &amp; Capacity</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">Industrial Production</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>0.7%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>4.1%</td>
<td>-0.0%</td>
<td>-0.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Capacity Utilization</td>
<td>79.0%</td>
<td>79.1%</td>
<td>76.9% (01/04)</td>
<td>78.0%</td>
<td>75.5%</td>
<td>75.3%</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/050215f.jpg" width="353">
Preliminary estimates of the growth of Gross Domestic Product in the Euro-Zone reveal a disappointing rise of 0.2% in the fourth quarter of 2004, about one-half of what the consensus was looking for. Not all of the twelve countries comprising the Euro Zone have reported. Among those that have, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands showed unexpected declines from the third to the fourth quarter of 0.23%, 0.31% and. 0.08%, respectively. Spain and France, on the contrary, reported increases of 0.8% and 0.7%, respectively.
For the year as a whole, growth in the Euro-Zone is estimated at about 1.6% compared with a growth of 4.4% for the U.S. Among the individual countries that have reported, Spain and France are estimated to have led the group with growth rates of 2.65% and 2.40%.The Netherlands, Italy and Germany are estimated to have risen 1.35%, 1.14% and 1.03%. The better performance of France over Germany over the past few years is shown in the first chart showing the quarterly changes in GDP in Germany and France.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050215e.jpg" width="353">
Part of the cause of the relatively slow growth of the Euro-Zone over the last few years can be attributed to the rise in the euro and the high price of oil.These trends are shown in the second chart.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">Gross Domestic Product % change&nbsp; Period to Period</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp;Q1 04&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp;Q2 04</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp; Q3 04&nbsp; &nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp;Q4 04</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp; 2004&nbsp; &nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp;2003 &nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp;2002</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp; 2001&nbsp; &nbsp;</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Germany</td>
<td>0.49</td>
<td>0.35</td>
<td>0.02</td>
<td>-0.23</td>
<td>1.03</td>
<td>-0.14</td>
<td>0.12</td>
<td>0.99</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">France</td>
<td>0.64</td>
<td>0.64</td>
<td>-0.02</td>
<td>0.70</td>
<td>2.40</td>
<td>0.56</td>
<td>1.10</td>
<td>2.10</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Italy</td>
<td>0.54</td>
<td>0.35</td>
<td>0.43</td>
<td>-0.31</td>
<td>1.14</td>
<td>0.36</td>
<td>0.37</td>
<td>1.67</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">The Netherlands</td>
<td>0.88</td>
<td>-0.14</td>
<td>0.34</td>
<td>-0.08</td>
<td>1.35</td>
<td>-0.88</td>
<td>0.57</td>
<td>1.43</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Spain</td>
<td>0.73</td>
<td>0.47</td>
<td>0.54</td>
<td>0.80</td>
<td>2.65</td>
<td>2.50</td>
<td>2.23</td>
<td>2.80</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Euro-Zone</td>
<td>0.64</td>
<td>0.47</td>
<td>0.27</td>
<td>0.20</td>
<td>1.55</td>
<td>0.52</td>
<td>0.86</td>
<td>1.60</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">United States</td>
<td>1.10</td>
<td>0.88</td>
<td>0.94</td>
<td>0.78</td>
<td>4.39</td>
<td>3.04</td>
<td>1.86</td>
<td>0.75</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Preliminary estimates of the growth of Gross Domestic Product in the Euro-Zone reveal a disappointing rise of 0.2% in the fourth quarter of 2004, about one-half of what the consensus was looking for. Not all of the twelve countries [...]

Preliminary Estimates of Euro-Zone's 2004 GDP Growth are below Consensus Estimates

<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/050215c.jpg" width="353">
The Empire State Index of General Business Conditions in New York&#39;s manufacturing industries added another point in February to the seven point decline in January and fell to 19.19. The index has fallen twenty points from its level one year ago.
The new orders component fell for the fourth month in the last five and also is down twenty points from its peak. The employment measure fell to its lowest since late 2003. Like the Philadelphia Fed Index of General Business Conditions, the Empire State Business Conditions Index reflects answers to an independent survey question; it is not a weighted combination of the components.
The prices paid index eased modestly.
Expectations for business conditions in six months again fell for the fifth consecutive month to the lowest level since March 2003.
The Empire State Manufacturing Survey is a monthly survey of manufacturers in New York State conducted by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Participants from across the state in a variety of industries respond to a questionnaire and report the change in a variety of indicators from the previous month. Respondents also state the likely direction of these same indicators six months ahead. April 2002 is the first report, although survey data date back to July 2001.
For more on the Empire State Manufacturing Survey, including methodologies and the latest report, click <a href="http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/regional_economy/empiresurvey_overview.html">here</a>.
 The Predictive Abilities of the New York Fed&#39;s Empire State Manufacturing Survey from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York is available <a href="http://www.newyorkfed.org/newsevents/news/research/2005/rp050203.html"> here</a>.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">

</table>
<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/@S511/@S511.HTM">Empire State 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>
<td class="firstcol">General Business Conditions (diffusion index)</td>
<td>19.19</td>
<td>20.08</td>
<td>39.57</td>
<td>28.76</td>
<td>16.17</td>
<td>7.19</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The Empire State Index of General Business Conditions in New York's manufacturing industries added another point in February to the seven point decline in January and fell to 19.19. The index has fallen twenty points from its level [...]

Empire State Index Eased 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/050215d.jpg" width="353">
Total business inventories rose another 0.2% after the 1.1% surge in November. The full year increase of 7.8% was the strongest since 1988.
Retail inventories rose 0.3% in December following a 1.1% increase the prior month. Accumulation of non-auto retail inventories jumped for the second month, up 1.0%, and the year&#39;s accumulation was the strongest in ten led by a 16.9% y/y gain in building materials. Inventories of furniture (6.8% y/y) and general merchandise (6.4% y/y) also rose strongly though apparel accumulation slowed to just 1.0%.
Wholesale inventories rose another 0.4% and the yearly gain of 11.2% was a record. During the last ten years there has been a 64% correlation between the y/y change in wholesale inventories and the change in imports of merchandise.
Overall business sales jumped 1.0% (+10.6% y/y) on the strength of yearend auto sales.
The ratio of inventories-to-sales fell slightly back to the record low of 1.30. Moreover, though the rate of inventory accumulation more than quadrupled last year, it lagged the double digit gain in sales.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@ED/@ED06/@ED0601/@ED0601.HTM">Business Inventories</a></th>
<th scope="col">Dec</th>
<th scope="col">Nov</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>0.2%</td>
<td>1.1%</td>
<td>7.8%</td>
<td>1.9%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Retail</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>1.1%</td>
<td>6.0%</td>
<td>5.0%</td>
<td>6.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Retail excl. Autos</td>
<td>1.0%</td>
<td>1.1%</td>
<td>6.4%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Wholesale</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>11.2%</td>
<td>2.2%</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Manufacturing</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>1.0%</td>
<td>7.3%</td>
<td>-1.3%</td>
<td>-1.8%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Total business inventories rose another 0.2% after the 1.1% surge in November. The full year increase of 7.8% was the strongest since 1988. Retail inventories rose 0.3% in December following a 1.1% increase the prior month. [...]

U.S. Inventory Accumulation Strong

<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/050216h.jpg" width="353">
Chain store sales inched up another 0.1% last week following the 2.2% spike the prior week according to the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC)-UBS survey.
The rise lifted sales in early February 0.7% ahead of the January average which rose 0.9% from December.
During the last ten years there has been a 58% 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 rose 0.3% in early February (+0.7% y/y).
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">02/12/05</th>
<th scope="col">02/05/05</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>446.2</td>
<td>445.8</td>
<td>1.7%</td>
<td>4.6%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Chain store sales inched up another 0.1% last week following the 2.2% spike the prior week according to the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC)-UBS survey. The rise lifted sales in early February 0.7% ahead of the January [...]

Chain Store Sales Up Further

Cost of transporting crude oil has soared to series high

Market-based inflation expectations have not yet reflected recent surge in oil prices

Global equity markets are fearing a major economic disruption from soaring oil prices

Is recent drop in sentiment signaling softer growth ahead?

With the Iran conflict, geopolitical risk has soared to alarming levels

Soaring AI-related investment in US underpinning strong contribution of business spending to overall growth

AI-related outperformance of IP in Advanced Asia ex Japan

Resilient US economy pushing up Blue Chip 2026 outlook

US and China big leaders in adoption of AI models

Robust US demand for advanced technology products

China's export growth rotating away from the US

More pronounced upward revisions in countries more exposed to AI investment

Stable job openings and hiring rates point to cautious hiring

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

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

Kathleen Stephansen, CBE

260402A5.jpg

260402B5.jpg

Initial claims for unemployment insurance declined by 9,000 to 202,000 in the week ending March 28, from 211,000 in the week ending March 21, revised from 210,000. The four-week average declined 3,000 to 207,750 in the week ending March 28, from 210,750 the March 21 week, revised from 210,500. The Forecast Survey looked for 212,000 claims to have been filed.

The total number of unemployment insurance beneficiaries—also known as “continuing claims”—rose by 25,000 to 1.841 million in the week ending March 21, from 1.816 million in the week ending March 14. The four-week moving average declined to 1.839 million in the latest week from 1.846 million in the March 14 week. This is the lowest level for this average since September 28, 2024 when it was 1.834 million. The insured unemployment rate remained at 1.2% in the week of March 21. It has remained at that level since the week of November 29, 2025.

The insured unemployment rate varied greatly across individual states and territories. In the week ending March 14, the highest unemployment rates were in Rhode Island (2.83%), New Jersey (2.73%), Massachusetts (2.66%), Washington (2.39%), Minnesota (2.31%), California (2.17%), and New York (2.01%). The lowest rates were in Florida (0.31%), Louisiana (0.32%), Arkansas (0.36%), Alabama (0.38%), and North Carolina (0.40%). Rates in other notable states include Illinois (1.99%), Connecticut (1.82%), Pennsylvania (1.72%), and Texas (1.07%). These state data are not seasonally adjusted.

Data on weekly unemployment claims are from the Department of Labor itself, not the Bureau of Labor Statistics. They begin in 1967 and are contained in Haver’s **WEEKLY** database and summarized monthly in **USECON**. Data for individual states are in **REGIONW** back to December 1986.

260402C5.jpg

260402D5.jpg

- New claims declined by 9,000 to 202,000.
- Continuing claims rose by 25,000 to 1.841 million.
- The insured unemployment rate remained at 1.2%.

U.S. Initial Unemployment Claims Edged Down in the Week of March 28

Robert Brusca

260402E.jpg

The S&P manufacturing PMIs for March showed improvements in 44.4% of the 18 reporters. The median reading for the month was at 50.9, indicating that expanding output was the median reading through the period. The median change showed a small step back of 0.1 diffusion points month-to-month.

Sequentially, looking at average yearly activity compared to a year ago, six months compared to 12 months, and three months compared to six months, we see progress in train. For three months compared to six months, the proportion of reporters showing improvement is 72.2%. For these reporters, over six months compared to 12 months, there is a 61.1% improvement proportion, while for 12 months compared to 12 months ago, there is only a 27.8% improvement.

The median reading over three months on average is 50.7, while the median reading over six months is 50.0 and the median reading over 12 months is 49.4. These readings show a very slow but steady improvement in manufacturing over this horizon.

In addition, we calculate the queue percentile standings for each reporter—that is, the level of the current diffusion index compared to all of the observations back to January 2022, expressing the final number as the percentile standing for the current month in that queue. On that basis, the median percentile standing for this group of reporters is 76.5%. It tells us that the median standing is in the top 25 percentile of all the readings since January 2022 to date. That's a reasonably good result. For the euro area, the queue percentile standing is at the 89.8 percentile, while for Germany it's at its 91.8 percentile. For the Monetary Union and for Germany, the current numbers are some of the best we've seen during this period. However, that doesn't mean that they're necessarily stellar readings.

**PMI diffusion vs. PMI rank standings**
German diffusion in manufacturing is 52.2 in March; for the EMU it is 51.6. Germany posts the fourth-highest PMI rank standing and the fifth highest raw standing in March. The highest standing among all reporters is 52.6 from South Korea. This is a period in which no country was posting very strong manufacturing results. In fact, the United States, with a manufacturing PMI rank standing of 79.6, has a diffusion reading in March just a tick below Germany’s whose queue standing at 91.8 seems miles ahead of the U.S.—but it isn’t. Remember that the queue standings are about relative positioning.

Looking at the details, we see that below-median rank readings were logged by Mexico, Russia, India, Brazil, Indonesia, and Turkey. The Asian markets and developing economies seem to have a harder time working up to the standards achieved by other countries.

We also have averages by certain groups of countries. For example, the U.S., the U.K., the Monetary Union, Canada, and Japan—an expanded G10 groping—had an average reading of 51.3 in March, and for that group of countries, the improvements have been steady from 12 months to six months to three months. For the BRIC countries in March, the average standing was 50.4, and for that group there has been a very slight ongoing erosion. For the Asian group, on average, the March reading is 51.2, and there has been a progression to stronger readings from 49.9 over 12 months to 50.5 over six months and to 50.8 over three months.

260402.jpg

On balance, manufacturing was quite uneven in March; however, there's a progression of improvement that is still in place. But with rising oil prices, war in Iran, and lots of knock-on effects to supply trains, it's likely that these readings are going to fall on harder times in the months ahead—unless the Iran war can be wrapped up in very, very, short order. According to the Baltic Dry index, there hasn't been much reduction in global shipping of dry goods. That index excludes oil and other wet goods shipments that clearly have been impeded. However, giving it more time, we may see that the dry index begins to show some difficulties.

Global Manufacturing PMIs Stall—Will It Get Worse?

Andrew Cates

**Global shipping costs**
The Baltic Dirty Tanker Index has surged to multi-year highs, reflecting a sharp tightening in global oil shipping markets. The primary driver is the escalation in Middle East tensions, particularly the effective disruption to flows through the Strait of Hormuz—a critical artery for roughly a fifth of global oil trade. Heightened security risks, including missile and drone attacks on vessels and port infrastructure, have forced rerouting, increased insurance premia and reduced effective tanker supply. At the same time, longer voyage distances—especially for Gulf exports diverted around the Cape—are tying up capacity and amplifying rate pressures. The result is a classic squeeze: constrained supply of available ships meeting elevated demand for transport, pushing freight costs sharply higher.

260401Z1.jpg

**Supply Chain Bottlenecks**
Flash PMI data point to a renewed build-up of supply chain pressures across the major economies. Supplier delivery times—where readings below 50 indicate slower deliveries—have deteriorated in both the US and UK, with the latter showing a particularly sharp decline. The euro area, while more stable, is also drifting in the same direction. This broad-based softening suggests that the disruptions visible in energy and shipping markets are now feeding into the real economy. Longer delivery times are typically an early indicator of tightening supply conditions, rising input costs and, ultimately, renewed pipeline inflation pressures. While not yet at the extremes seen during the pandemic, the direction of travel is clear: supply chains are becoming less efficient just as geopolitical risks intensify.

260401Z2.jpg

**Policy Uncertainty Versus Market Volatility**
A striking divergence is emerging between policy uncertainty and financial market volatility. The US Economic Policy Uncertainty Index has risen sharply, reflecting the intensifying geopolitical backdrop, trade disruptions and an increasingly complex policy environment. By contrast, the VIX—while off its lows—remains relatively contained by historical standards. This gap suggests that financial markets may be underpricing the scale and persistence of current risks. Either uncertainty begins to recede, or market volatility has further to rise. For now, the message is clear: policymakers are operating in a far more uncertain world than markets appear to be discounting.

260401Z3.jpg

**Oil Prices and Monetary Policy** 
The sharp rise in oil prices is once again feeding directly into short-term interest rate expectations, with a strong positive correlation evident between WTI and US 2-year Treasury yields. As energy prices surge, markets are reassessing the near-term inflation outlook and the likely policy response, pushing yields higher. This reflects a familiar dynamic: energy shocks tighten financial conditions not just directly, but via expectations of more restrictive monetary policy. That said, there are important caveats. Medium-term market-based inflation expectations remain relatively well contained, suggesting credibility in central banks’ ability to anchor inflation over time. Moreover, recent communication from Fed Chair Powell indicates that the Federal Reserve is in no immediate hurry to raise rates, pointing instead to a more cautious, data-dependent approach in the face of heightened uncertainty.

260401Z4.jpg

**Loose Labour Markets**
Wage growth across the US, UK and euro area continues to moderate, pointing to a gradual loosening in labour market conditions. The sharp post-pandemic surge in wage pressures—particularly pronounced in the US—has clearly faded, with all three regions now on a downward trajectory. This matters in the current context: while the oil shock is pushing headline inflation higher and complicating the near-term outlook, easing wage dynamics reduce the risk of persistent second-round effects. In turn, this lessens the urgency for central banks to respond aggressively with tighter policy. The result is a more nuanced policy backdrop—one where energy-driven inflation pressures are rising, but underlying domestic cost pressures are moving in the opposite direction.

260401Z5.jpg

**Headline Inflation in Advanced Economies**
Despite the recent energy shock, broader inflation dynamics across advanced economies remain relatively well behaved. The euro area HICP flash estimate rose from 1.9% in February to 2.5% in March, driven largely by higher energy prices. However, core inflation edged down to 2.3% from 2.4%, suggesting that pass-through into underlying price pressures remains limited for now. More generally, inflation across many advanced economies continues to hover close to central bank targets—a marked contrast to the peaks seen in 2022. While higher oil prices will almost certainly continue to lift headline inflation in the near term, and the risk is clearly tilted toward further upside, the broader picture for now remains one of relatively contained underlying pressures. This suggests the current shock is more likely to complicate the disinflation process—potentially slowing or interrupting it—rather than decisively reversing it, though the balance of risks has become less favourable.

260401Z6.jpg

Amid tentative signs of de-escalation from the US administration over the past 48 hours—including suggestions that the conflict with Iran could conclude relatively quickly—financial markets have begun to retrace some of last week’s sharp repricing of Middle East risk. Oil prices have come off their highs, while equities and bonds have rallied as risk premia ease. That said, the earlier phase of the week saw a decisive adjustment: oil surged, front-end yields moved higher, and uncertainty rose as investors grappled with the implications of disrupted energy flows. Even now, the overall adjustment has been uneven—volatility has picked up, but not to levels typically associated with sustained geopolitical stress—raising questions about how fully markets are internalising both the risks and the rapidly shifting outlook. Our charts this week capture these cross-currents. Tanker rates have spiked as shipping routes are disrupted and capacity tightens (chart 1), while PMI delivery times point to early signs of supply chain strain feeding into the real economy (chart 2). At the same time, the divergence between elevated policy uncertainty and relatively contained market volatility suggests there could have been a degree of complacency (chart 3). The rise in oil prices is already feeding into higher short-term yields, though this is being tempered by cooling labour markets, anchored inflation expectations and more cautious central bank signalling (charts 4 and 5). Meanwhile, euro area flash CPI has picked up, but core inflation remains relatively benign, suggesting underlying price pressures are still contained for now (chart 6).

Charts of the Week: Strait Stress

Sandy Batten

260401V4.jpg

260401W4.jpg

Total retail sales rebounded in February, rising a larger-than-expected 0.6% m/m (+3.7% y/y) following an upwardly revised 0.1% monthly decline in January (previously -0.2% m/m), according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau. The Action Economics Forecast Survey expected a 0.4% monthly increase. Excluding autos, other sales were up 0.5% m/m (+3.6% y/y), the first monthly increase in three months. The Action Economics Forecast Survey looked for a 0.3% m/m increase.

The control group of sales (those categories that the BEA uses to construct PCE in the national accounts) increased 0.5% m/m in February following a 0.2% increase in January. The January/February average for this variable is 2.1% annualized above the Q4 average. In Q4, the control group rose 2.8% saar from Q3. So, today’s figures point to a slight slowdown in PCE growth in the first quarter. Note, however, that the data released today predates the escalation of the conflict between the US/Israel and Iran which has led to a marked rise in gasoline/energy prices. The increase in energy prices to date, if maintained, could stress household finances and thereby significantly slow consumer spending ahead.

Sales of motor vehicles and parts jumped 1.2% m/m in February, their first monthly gain in three months and their largest monthly increase since last July. Furniture sales declined 1.0% m/m in February while sales of electronics and appliances rose 0.5% m/m. Sales of building materials increased 0.4% m/m, their fourth consecutive monthly gain. Sales at health and personal care stores jumped 2.3% m/m, their first monthly gain in five months. Sales at gasoline stations rose 0.9% m/m in February, their third monthly gain in the past four months, ahead of the sharp price increases that occurred in March. Clothing store sales jumped 2.0% m/m, their first monthly increase in three months. Department store sales gained 3.0% m/m, their first monthly increase in four months. Food sales slumped 1.0% m/m in February, their first monthly decline in three months. Sales of nonstore retailers increased 0.7% m/m in February on top of a 1.4% m/m jump in January. Eating out sales rose 0.4% m/m, their first monthly gain in three months.

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

260401X4.jpg

260401Y4.jpg

- Total sales increased 0.6% m/m after a 0.1% m/m decline in January
- Excluding autos, sales increase 0.5% m/m in February after having been unchanged in January.
- Sales of the retail control group that is used to construct PCE rose 0.5% m/m in February.

U.S. Retail Sales Rebounded in February

Winnie Tapasanun

260401J35.jpg

260401K35.jpg

U.S. nonfarm private sector payrolls rose a larger-than-expected 62,000 (0.3% y/y) in March after increases of 66,000 in February (+63,000 initially) and 11,000 in January (unrevised), according to the ADP National Employment Report. The three-month average change was +46,000 in March, up from +38,000 in February and +41,000 in January. The Action Economics Forecast Survey expected a 40,000 increase in March.

Small business hiring (less than 50 employees) climbed a solid 85,000 (0.7% y/y) in March—the ninth straight m/m increase and the largest since August—after a 61,000 gain in February (+60,000 initially), with employment in very small firms (1-19 employees) surging 112,000, the strongest m/m rise since February 2024, and employment in small firms (20-49 employees) down 27,000. Employment at medium-sized firms (50-499 employees) fell 20,000 (-0.4% y/y) in March following a 6,000 decline in February (-7,000 initially) and two consecutive m/m increases. Large business hiring (500+ employees) slipped 4,000 (+1.0% y/y) after an 11,000 February rebound (+10,000 initially).

Service-producing jobs rose 32,000 (0.5% y/y) in March, the 10th straight m/m gain, on top of a 50,000 advance in February (+47,000 initially). March’s rise was led by education & health services (+58,000), followed by information (+16,000), leisure & hospitality (+7,000), financial activities (+4,000), other services (+4,000), and professional & business services (+1,000). To the downside, m/m employment fell in trade, transportation & utilities (-58,000).

Goods-producing employment advanced 30,000 (-0.4% y/y) in March, the biggest m/m increase since October 2022, after a 16,000 rise in February (unrevised). March’s gain was led by construction (+30,000) and natural resources & mining (+11,000), while manufacturing (-11,000) continued to decline.

By region, nonfarm private payroll employment rose m/m in March in the South (+101,000; +0.5% y/y) and West (+16,000; +0.4% y/y). In contrast, employment fell m/m in the Northeast (-29,000; +0.4% y/y) and Midwest (-26,000; -0.1% y/y).

Wage growth for job changers accelerated to a three-month-high 6.6% y/y in March from 6.3% y/y in February, remaining well below a high of 16.1% in April 2022. Wage growth for job stayers held steady at 4.5% y/y for the third consecutive month in March, holding in a narrow 4.4%-4.5% range since April 2025. Pay growth also remained steady in major industries, including financial activities (5.2% y/y), manufacturing (4.9% y/y), construction (4.7% y/y), leisure & hospitality (4.6% y/y), education & health services (4.3% y/y), and professional & business services (4.3% y/y).

The ADP National Employment Report and Pay Insights data can be found in Haver's **USECON** database. Historical figures date back to January 2010 for private employment. Pay data date back to October 2020. The expectation figure is available in Haver's **AS1REPNA** database.

260401L35.jpg

260401M35.jpg

- Private payrolls +62K in March, ninth straight m/m gain.
- Hiring increase driven by small businesses (+85K), strongest since August.
- Service-sector jobs up (+32K), led by education & health svs. (+58K) and information (+16K), partly offset by trade, transp. & utilities (-58K).
- Goods-producing jobs up (+30K), driven by construction (+30K).
- Wage growth accelerates y/y for job changers (6.6%, a three-month high) but steady for job stayers (4.5%).

Economy in Brief

Jump to:

Mortgage Applications Dipped

NAHB Housing Market Index Fell Again

Housing Starts At A New High in January

Housing Starts At A New High in January

Preliminary Estimates of Euro-Zone's 2004 GDP Growth are below Consensus Estimates

Empire State Index Eased Again

U.S. Inventory Accumulation Strong

Chain Store Sales Up Further