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/040816a.jpg" width="353">
The Empire State Index of General Business Conditions in New York&#39;s manufacturing industries dropped 23 points in August to 12.6, its lowest reading in 15 months. The July figure was revised down slightly from 36.54 to 35.75.
All of the activity components of the survey showed significant reductions, particularly new orders and shipments. Unfilled orders registered -4.61, their first negative reading since September 2003. However, the employment measure managed a modest pick-up to 16.98 from 13.06 in July. 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 from 56.41 in July to 49.59. This is still relatively high, but maintains the general range of the last several months, indicating that prices of the materials used by these companies have stopped accelerating.
The August index of expectations for business conditions six months ahead decreased by about 5 points. Expectations for capital expenditures fell for a fourth consecutive month.
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>.

<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">August</th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">8/03</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">General Business Conditions (diffusion index)</td>
<td>12.57</td>
<td>35.75</td>
<td>13.02</td>
<td>16.30</td>
<td>7.02</td>
<td>-13.57</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The Empire State Index of General Business Conditions in New York's manufacturing industries dropped 23 points in August to 12.6, its lowest reading in 15 months. The July figure was revised down slightly from 36.54 to 35.75. All of [...]

Empire State Index Slows 23 Points for August

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>

 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/040816a.jpg" width="353">
The Empire State Index of General Business Conditions in New York&#39;s manufacturing industries dropped 23 points in August to 12.6, its lowest reading in 15 months. The July figure was revised down slightly from 36.54 to 35.75.
All of the activity components of the survey showed significant reductions, particularly new orders and shipments. Unfilled orders registered -4.61, their first negative reading since September 2003. However, the employment measure managed a modest pick-up to 16.98 from 13.06 in July. 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 from 56.41 in July to 49.59. This is still relatively high, but maintains the general range of the last several months, indicating that prices of the materials used by these companies have stopped accelerating.
The August index of expectations for business conditions six months ahead decreased by about 5 points. Expectations for capital expenditures fell for a fourth consecutive month.
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>. 

<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">August</th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">8/03</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">General Business Conditions (diffusion index)</td>
<td>36.54</td>
<td>35.75</td>
<td>13.02</td>
<td>16.30</td>
<td>7.02</td>
<td>-13.57</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Net Foreign Purchases of Securities in US Markets Gain in June as Sales Fall 
by <a href="/comment/Stone.html">Carol Stone</a> August 16, 2004


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/040816c.jpg" width="353">
In June, net foreign purchases of securities traded in US markets totaled $71.8 billion, more than May&#39;s $65.9 billion. The latter figure, though, was revised upward from an original $56.4 billion. So there has been considerably more foreign activity in US securities markets of late. The US Treasury publishes the array of monthly data on foreign investors&#39; purchases and sales of &quot;long-term&quot; US securities (having maturity greater than one year). Known as the &quot;TIC&quot; data for &quot;Treasury International Capital&quot;, these data are contained in Haver&#39;s USINT database in the section &quot;US International Investment Tables&quot;, shown by security type and country.
The performance of the net figure can give a somewhat misleading impression of outright demand for US securities, however. As indicated in the first graph, foreign investors actually bought fewer bonds and stocks in June. The gain in net purchases occurred because these investors also curtailed their sales. <img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/040816b.jpg" width="353"> 
By security type, net purchases increased for Treasuries and bonds of US corporations. Purchases of federal agency securities fell, and foreign investors were net sellers of foreign bonds and foreign stocks in US markets. They moved from net sales of US corporate stocks to modest net purchases, ending a three-month-long net liquidation. It is seen in the second graph that this last development corresponds to the evolution of the US stock market. Net foreign purchases of stocks have a 60% correlation with the S&amp;P 500 Index over the last 20 years. Here too, though, the &quot;net purchases&quot; occurred because sales fell by more than purchases, meaning this is not a genuinely positive commitment to the US markets. 

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">

</table>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">Net Foreign Purchases of Securities in US Markets (Billions US$)</th>
<th scope="col">June 2004</th>
<th scope="col">May 2004</th>
<th scope="col">Apr 2004</th>
<th scope="col">June 2003</th>
Monthly Average
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">2003</td>
<td>2002</td>
<td>2001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Total</td>
<td>71.8</td>
<td>65.2</td>
<td>75.4</td>
<td>92.9</td>
<td>59.2</td>
<td>47.9</td>
<td>41.8</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Treasuries</td>
<td>40.6</td>
<td>29.2</td>
<td>35.7</td>
<td>46.9</td>
<td>23.2</td>
<td>10.0</td>
<td>1.5</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Federal Agencies (mostly &quot;GSEs&quot;)</td>
<td>15.9</td>
<td>20.6</td>
<td>31.8</td>
<td>31.1</td>
<td>13.4</td>
<td>16.3</td>
<td>13.7</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">US Corporate Bonds</td>
<td>27.1</td>
<td>20.3</td>
<td>16.5</td>
<td>23.0</td>
<td>22.5</td>
<td>15.2</td>
<td>18.5</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">US Corporate Stocks</td>
<td>1.9</td>
<td>-7.7</td>
<td>-1.9</td>
<td>10.4</td>
<td>2.9</td>
<td>4.2</td>
<td>9.7</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Foreign Bonds</td>
<td>-6.2</td>
<td>8.6</td>
<td>4.7</td>
<td>10.5</td>
<td>2.2</td>
<td>2.4</td>
<td>2.5</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Foreign Stocks</td>
<td>-7.5</td>
<td>-5.8</td>
<td>-11.3</td>
<td>-5.2</td>
<td>-5.9</td>
<td>-0.1</td>
<td>-4.2</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Housing Market Index Bounces Back 
by <a href="/comment/Stone.html">Carol Stone</a> August 16, 2004


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/040816d.jpg" width="353">
The Composite Housing Market Index reported by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) rebounded in this month&#39;s survey to 71, 4 points higher than in July. The index was even with last August&#39;s level.
The index of single family home sales expected in the next six months also rose 4 points. The current sales index gained 2 points.
After falling to a three-month low in July, the gauge of traffic of prospective buyers surged to 57, its highest in more than five years. 
The fortunes of the housing market are widely viewed as related inversely to interest rates. This has generally been the case, with a negative correlation of 73% over the last 15 years between the Housing Market Index and the 10-year Treasury constant maturity yield. However, this relationship has broken down over more recent spans. Over the last 10 years, the correlation is only 38%, and it even swings to positive in the last five years. This behavior suggests that causation could be shifting the other way: that is, perhaps developments in housing demand are impacting interest rates so that as it strengthens, rates rise.
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><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">August</th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">June</th>
<th scope="col">August &#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">Composite Housing Market Index</td>
<td>71</td>
<td>67</td>
<td>68</td>
<td>71</td>
<td>64</td>
<td>61</td>
<td>56</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>


</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/040813d.jpg" width="353">
Retail sales in China strengthened in July, gaining 18.2% over their year-earlier amount. Sales totaled 429 billion yuan or $50.9 billion. It was the strongest performance since before the 1997 Asian currency crisis.
This sales expansion is obviously far outpacing the restrained Chinese population growth, which was just 0.6% in 2003. The sales gains mean that per capita sales are also rising steeply, and must surely be achieving double-digit advances again this year, extending those of the last several years, illustrated in the table below.
Further, as seen in the accompanying graph, these sales are also outstripping rising Chinese retail prices. Beginning last October, deflation of these prices turned to inflation, which has continued to accelerate. But the gain in sales is larger, yielding hefty increases in the volume of sales as well, so Chinese people seem to be enjoying vigorously expanding consumption.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">Jul 2004</th>
<th scope="col">Jun 2004</th>
<th scope="col">May 2004</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">Retail Sales (Bil.Yuan)</td>
<td>421</td>
<td>425</td>
<td>417</td>
<td colspan="3">Monthly Average</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">389</td>
<td>341</td>
<td>313</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Yr/Yr % Change</td>
<td>18.2</td>
<td>13.9</td>
<td>17.8</td>
<td>10.7</td>
<td>12.1</td>
<td>10.0</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Population (Millions)</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td colspan="3">Yearly Total</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">1292</td>
<td>1285</td>
<td>1276</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Retail Sales per Capita -- Yuan</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>3,612</td>
<td>3,282</td>
<td>2,946</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Yr/Yr % Change</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>10.1</td>
<td>11.4</td>
<td>9.3</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Retail sales in China strengthened in July, gaining 18.2% over their year-earlier amount. Sales totaled 429 billion yuan or $50.9 billion. It was the strongest performance since before the 1997 Asian currency crisis. This sales [...]

Big Gain in Chinese Retail Sales

<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/040813e.jpg" width="353">
As partially described here yesterday, Europe continued a steady growth pace in Q2, according to the &quot;flash estimate&quot; compiled by Eurostat, the Euro-Zone statistical agency. The original group, the EU-12saw 0.5% GDP growth in the quarter, and the expanded EU-25, 0.6%.
These &quot;flash&quot; estimates are preliminary. They are based on early summary measures produced in some of the countries, and model extrapolations for the remaining members. Actual data included in today&#39;s EU-12 figure come from Belgium, Germany, Greece, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Finland. Some incomplete Spanish data are also used. No details on the components are available, as we described yesterday for Germany and France.
The EU-25 adds actual data for Sweden and the UK, both of which had 0.9% GDP gains in Q2. This was sufficient to make the EU-25 total 0.6%, a notch higher than the EU-12 number. Obviously, many other countries are yet to be added to this compilation. <img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/040813f.jpg" width="353">
Elsewhere, Japan&#39;s GDP for Q2 was disappointingly weak. It grew just 0.4% in the quarter, much slower than the 1.4% projected by analysts and also weaker than Q1&#39;s 1.6%. The Cabinet Office published component information; it shows that consumer spending slowed to a 0.6% increase from 1.1% and that business investment was virtually flat after 1.1% in Q1 and 6.6% in Q4 2003.
These figures for Japan appeared distressful for analysts cited in press reports today. Even so, the year-on-year gain in business plant and equipment was 8.1%, nearly twice as much as the 20-year average of 4.1%. And, as is clear in the graph, the investment component is very volatile, making it hard to predict and reducing the import of any single quarter&#39;s result. Overall GDP, with a 4.4% year-on-year move, was also markedly stronger than its 20-year average of 2.6%. [Detailed components for the total Euro-Zone GDP accounts will be reported by Eurostat on September 7.]

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">Percent Changes</th>
Qtr/Qtr
<th scope="col">Year/ Year</th>
4th Qtr/4th Qtr
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">2nd Qtr 2004</td>
<td>1st Qtr 2004</td>
<td>4th Qtr 2003</td>
<td>2003</td>
<td>2002</td>
<td>2001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Euro-Zone 12</td>
<td>0.5</td>
<td>0.6</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>2.0</td>
<td>0.7</td>
<td>1.1</td>
<td>-0.1</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Euro-Zone 25</td>
<td>0.6</td>
<td>0.6</td>
<td>0.5</td>
<td>2.2</td>
<td>1.1</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Japan</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>1.6</td>
<td>1.8</td>
<td>4.4</td>
<td>3.1</td>
<td>1.7</td>
<td>-2.1</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

As partially described here yesterday, Europe continued a steady growth pace in Q2, according to the "flash estimate" compiled by Eurostat, the Euro-Zone statistical agency. The original group, the EU-12saw 0.5% GDP growth in the [...]

Steady Growth in European GDP; Japanese Figure Disappoints

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/040813a.jpg" width="353">
The University of Michigan&#146;s consumer sentiment index for mid-August fell unexpectedly to 94.0 from 96.7 in July. Consensus expectations had been for a rise to 98.0.
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 expectations sub-index fell to 84.7, the lowest level since May. The index of current economic conditions rose to 108.4, its level since January.
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.

<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"> Mid-Aug</th>
<th scope="col"> July</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>94.0</td>
<td>96.7</td>
<td>5.3%</td>
<td>87.6</td>
<td>89.6</td>
<td>89.2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp; Current Conditions</td>
<td>108.4</td>
<td>105.2</td>
<td>8.7%</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>84.7</td>
<td>91.2</td>
<td>2.7%</td>
<td>81.4</td>
<td>84.6</td>
<td>82.3</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The University of Michigans consumer sentiment index for mid-August fell unexpectedly to 94.0 from 96.7 in July. Consensus expectations had been for a rise to 98.0. During the last ten years there has been a 75% correlation between [...]

U.S. Consumer Sentiment Down on Reduced Expectations

<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/040813b.jpg" width="353">
The July PPI for finished goods rose a tame 0.1% versus Consensus expectations for a 0.3% rise.The &quot;core&quot; PPI also was well behaved, rising an expected 0.1%.
Finished energy prices bounced up 2.3% (11.3% y/y) after the 1.6% June decline. Offsetting that gain was a 1.6% (+4.9% y/y) decline in food prices.
Prices of finished consumer goods less food &amp; energy rose 0.1% (1.8% y/y) for the second month reflecting flat consumer durable prices and a 0.2% gain in core non-durable prices.
Finished capital goods prices rose 0.1% (1.6% y/y).
The fireworks in the PPI report was an 8.6% increase in core crude goods prices, a record gain which reflected a 32.2% (NSA) rise in iron &amp; steel scrap prices. Other metals prices also were quite strong.
Intermediate goods prices were strong as well with a 0.8% gain. Core intermediate prices rose the same 0.5% (6.4% y/y) as in June, last month reflecting higher paperboard and box prices.
&quot;Will Oil Prices Choke Growth?&quot; from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis can be found <a href="http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/aiet/20040701/cover.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/@E8/@E802/@E80201/@E80201.HTM"> Producer Price Index</a></th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">June</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">Finished Goods</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
<td>-0.3%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>3.2%</td>
<td>-1.3%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Core</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Intermediate Goods</td>
<td>0.8%</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>7.7%</td>
<td>4.7%</td>
<td>-1.5%</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Core</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>6.4%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
<td>-0.5%</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Crude Goods</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
<td>22.1%</td>
<td>25.1%</td>
<td>-10.6%</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Core</td>
<td>8.6%</td>
<td>-0.5%</td>
<td>28.8%</td>
<td>12.4%</td>
<td>3.8%</td>
<td>-10.0%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The July PPI for finished goods rose a tame 0.1% versus Consensus expectations for a 0.3% rise.The "core" PPI also was well behaved, rising an expected 0.1%. Finished energy prices bounced up 2.3% (11.3% y/y) after the 1.6% June [...]

Finished Producer Prices Tame, But Crude Prices Soar

<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/040813c.jpg" width="353">
The U.S. foreign trade deficit surged to another record high in June of $55.8B. Consensus expectations had been for a deficit of $46.7B.
Total imports jumped 3.3% as petroleum imports surged 17.8% (46.2% y/y). Imports of non-petroleum goods also rose a strong 1.8% (17.4% y/y) following an upwardly revised 1.0% rise in May.
Exports slumped 4.3% following the downwardly revised 2.7% jump to a record high. Month to month weakness was across the board and pronounced.
By country, the US trade deficit with China deepened m/m to $14.2.0B ($124.1B in 2003) as imports surged 12.7% (39.6% y/y). The US trade deficit with Japan also deepened to $6.3B ($66.0B in 2003) on an 11.6% 13.0% y/y) jump in imports.

<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/@EE/@EE03/@EE03.HTM"> Foreign Trade</a></th>
<th scope="col">June</th>
<th scope="col">May</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">Trade Deficit</td>
<td>$55.8B</td>
<td>$46.9B</td>
<td>$40.0B(6/03)</td>
<td>$496.5B</td>
<td>$421.7B</td>
<td>$362.7B</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Exports - Goods &amp; Services</td>
<td>-4.3%</td>
<td>2.7%</td>
<td>9.7%</td>
<td>4.6%</td>
<td>-3.1%</td>
<td>-6.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Imports - Goods &amp; Services</td>
<td>3.3%</td>
<td>1.0%</td>
<td>19.3%</td>
<td>8.5%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
<td>-5.5%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The U.S. foreign trade deficit surged to another record high in June of $55.8B. Consensus expectations had been for a deficit of $46.7B. Total imports jumped 3.3% as petroleum imports surged 17.8% (46.2% y/y). Imports of non-petroleum [...]

U.S. Trade Deficit A New Record

<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/040813c.jpg" width="353">
The U.S. foreign trade deficit surged to another record high in June of $55.8B. Consensus expectations had been for a deficit of $46.7B.
Total imports jumped 3.3% as petroleum imports surged 17.8% (46.2% y/y). Imports of non-petroleum goods also rose a strong 1.8% (17.4% y/y) following an upwardly revised 1.0% rise in May.
Exports slumped 4.3% following the downwardly revised 2.7% jump to a record high. Month to month weakness was across the board and pronounced.
By country, the US trade deficit with China deepened m/m to $14.2.0B ($124.1B in 2003) as imports surged 12.7% (39.6% y/y). The US trade deficit with Japan also deepened to $6.3B ($66.0B in 2003) on an 11.6% 13.0% y/y) jump in imports.

<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/@EE/@EE03/@EE03.HTM"> Foreign Trade</a></th>
<th scope="col">June</th>
<th scope="col">May</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">Trade Deficit</td>
<td>$55.8B</td>
<td>$46.9B</td>
<td>$40.0B(6/03)</td>
<td>$496.5B</td>
<td>$421.7B</td>
<td>$362.7B</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Exports - Goods &amp; Services</td>
<td>-4.3%</td>
<td>2.7%</td>
<td>9.7%</td>
<td>4.6%</td>
<td>-3.1%</td>
<td>-6.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Imports - Goods &amp; Services</td>
<td>3.3%</td>
<td>1.0%</td>
<td>19.3%</td>
<td>8.5%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
<td>-5.5%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Finished Producer Prices Tame, But Crude Prices Soar 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> August 13, 2004


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/040813b.jpg" width="353">
The July PPI for finished goods rose a tame 0.1% versus Consensus expectations for a 0.3% rise.The &quot;core&quot; PPI also was well behaved, rising an expected 0.1%.
Finished energy prices bounced up 2.3% (11.3% y/y) after the 1.6% June decline. Offsetting that gain was a 1.6% (+4.9% y/y) decline in food prices.
Prices of finished consumer goods less food &amp; energy rose 0.1% (1.8% y/y) for the second month reflecting flat consumer durable prices and a 0.2% gain in core non-durable prices.
Finished capital goods prices rose 0.1% (1.6% y/y).
The fireworks in the PPI report was an 8.6% increase in core crude goods prices, a record gain which reflected a 32.2% (NSA) rise in iron &amp; steel scrap prices. Other metals prices also were quite strong.
Intermediate goods prices were strong as well with a 0.8% gain. Core intermediate prices rose the same 0.5% (6.4% y/y) as in June, last month reflecting higher paperboard and box prices.
&quot;Will Oil Prices Choke Growth?&quot; from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis can be found <a href="http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/aiet/20040701/cover.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/@E8/@E802/@E80201/@E80201.HTM"> Producer Price Index</a></th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">June</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">Finished Goods</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
<td>-0.3%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>3.2%</td>
<td>-1.3%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Core</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Intermediate Goods</td>
<td>0.8%</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>7.7%</td>
<td>4.7%</td>
<td>-1.5%</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Core</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>6.4%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
<td>-0.5%</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Crude Goods</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
<td>22.1%</td>
<td>25.1%</td>
<td>-10.6%</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Core</td>
<td>8.6%</td>
<td>-0.5%</td>
<td>28.8%</td>
<td>12.4%</td>
<td>3.8%</td>
<td>-10.0%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
U.S. Consumer Sentiment Down on Reduced Expectations 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> August 13, 2004


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/040813a.jpg" width="353">
The University of Michigan&#146;s consumer sentiment index for mid-August fell unexpectedly to 94.0 from 96.7 in July. Consensus expectations had been for a rise to 98.0.
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 expectations sub-index fell to 84.7, the lowest level since May. The index of current economic conditions rose to 108.4, its level since January.
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.

<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"> Mid-Aug</th>
<th scope="col"> July</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>94.0</td>
<td>96.7</td>
<td>5.3%</td>
<td>87.6</td>
<td>89.6</td>
<td>89.2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp; Current Conditions</td>
<td>108.4</td>
<td>105.2</td>
<td>8.7%</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>84.7</td>
<td>91.2</td>
<td>2.7%</td>
<td>81.4</td>
<td>84.6</td>
<td>82.3</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

PMIs showing widespread revival of global economy

Crude oil price has returned to pre-conflict level but traffic through Hormuz still subpar

Surging orders for computers and electronics propelling durable goods orders

Next year's inflation forecasts are on the rise and above target

Disrupted global supply chains placing upward pressure on US goods prices

Construction of data centers has overtaken transportation construction in US

Elevated energy prices putting intense upward pressure on input prices around the globe

US is big leader in global surge in private AI investment

Larger-than-usual income tax refunds this year are supporting consumer spending

Sharply rising share of AI-related jobs

Inflationary impact of surge in oil prices larger in Europe than in the US

Futures market thinks the price of oil will recede significantly over the next six months

Recent pickup in US defense orders could help support overall growth ahead

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

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. 

New York

London

Singapore

Tokyo

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

Andrew Cates

**Growth Surprises Continue to Underpin Equity Resilience**
Global equity markets have proved remarkably resilient in recent weeks, shrugging off intermittent bouts of geopolitical and policy uncertainty to grind higher. Chart 1 below helps explain why: it tracks the relationship between global growth-versus-inflation surprises and world equity markets, and on that measure the recent run of global growth data has continued to surprise on the upside relative to inflation outturns — a combination that has historically been supportive for risk assets. Whether that resilience persists will depend on whether the growth-surprise advantage evident in the chart below can be sustained in the face of the inflationary pressures explored below.

260709Z1.jpg

**PMIs Confirm a Broadly Solid Global Expansion**
This week's final composite PMI readings for June reinforced the broader impression of resilient global growth. As chart 2 below shows, most major economies posted readings comfortably in expansionary territory, with India continuing to lead the pack and the US not far behind. Even the laggards in the sample are hovering close to the expansion threshold rather than falling decisively below it, suggesting stabilisation rather than outright contraction (and with the UK a notable exception).

260709Z2.jpg

**Inflation Surprises Are Creeping Back, and Bond Yields Are Taking Notice**
The US growth picture painted by Haver's surprise indices broadly echoes the message from the global PMI data. Chart 3 below shows the combined growth-and-inflation surprise index drifting higher this week, and closer inspection suggests growth is doing most of that work, with activity data continuing to outperform expectations. That is, on the face of it, good news. But it has not stopped bond markets from taking notice: short-dated Treasury yields have remained elevated in recent weeks, as stronger growth keeps alive the possibility that the Federal Reserve holds rates higher for longer or even lifts them in coming weeks.

260709Z3.jpg

**Supply Chains Are Tightening** 
Latest data show that global supply chain pressures tightened by less in June than they had the month before, likely reflecting the easing of Middle East tensions through much of the period. Chart 4 below shows that pressures troughed in the middle of last year and have been building gradually since, though June's slower pace of tightening suggests that easing had started to feed through. Still, today's flare-up threatens to undo that improvement, particularly if it affects shipping routes or energy flows through the region once again.

260709Z4.jpg

**Extreme Weather: An Old Supply-Side Risk Returns**
Geopolitics is not the only source of supply-side risk currently in play. Large parts of Europe have been gripped this week by another intense and prolonged heatwave, with temperatures in several major cities running well above seasonal norms. Extreme heat of this kind carries real economic costs: it depresses labour productivity, particularly in outdoor and manufacturing-adjacent sectors, strains electricity grids as air-conditioning demand spikes, and can disrupt agricultural output and river-based transport when water levels fall. Episodes like this have become more frequent in recent years, and while any single heatwave rarely shifts the macro picture on its own, the cumulative effect of more frequent and more severe weather events could start showing up in productivity and inflation data across the advanced economies. It is a reminder that the supply side of the global economy faces structural as well as cyclical challenges, and that climate-related disruption deserves a permanent place alongside geopolitics and demographics in any assessment of medium-term inflation risk.

260709Z5.jpg

**AI Investment: The Other Side of the Supply Equation**
Set against these supply-side headwinds is a genuinely positive structural development: the extraordinary scale of private investment now flowing into artificial intelligence. Chart 6 below shows just how sharply that investment has grown in recent years, reaching a fresh high last year. If even a fraction of that investment translates into genuine productivity gains, it could provide a meaningful long-run offset to the energy, climate and geopolitical constraints highlighted elsewhere in this week's charts. The scale of the bet now being placed on AI is large enough that it is beginning to show up in aggregate investment and capital expenditure data across the advanced economies, and it is likely to remain one of the defining structural themes shaping the global growth outlook over the remainder of this decade.

260709Z6.jpg

Global markets head into this week’s closing stages digesting a mixed set of signals. Last week's US non-farm payrolls report undershot expectations, adding to questions about the durability of the US labour market even as broader activity data have continued to hold up well. Compounding that picture, news broke today of renewed instability in the Middle East, reintroducing a geopolitical risk premium into markets just as investors had begun to look past it. Global equity markets have nonetheless remained resilient, continuing to track the broadly encouraging tone of incoming activity data (chart 1). That resilience was reinforced by a solid set of global PMIs across most major economies over the past few days (chart 2). Haver's surprise indices tell a similar story of positive growth momentum in the US, but with an important caveat: incoming inflation data have also been surprising to the upside, driven largely by higher oil prices (chart 3). These inflation risks could persist moreover, as global supply chain pressures have picked up in recent months and today's flare-up in the Middle East threatens to add further strain (chart 4). The world economy remains vulnerable to other supply-side shocks too, such as the extreme heat gripping much of Europe this week (chart 5). Still, on the other side of the ledger the enormous scale of investment now flowing into artificial intelligence could be a genuine source of supply-side potential (chart 6).

<iframe data-testid="embed-iframe" style="border-radius:12px" src="https://open.spotify.com/embed/episode/0dl4LKZaL1oTC5UPIaqrA9?utm_source=generator&si=7aa69345dbfd4ac4" width="100%" height="152" frameBorder="0" allowfullscreen="" allow="autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; fullscreen; picture-in-picture" loading="lazy"></iframe>

Charts of the Week: Growth Holds Firm

Robert Brusca

260710E.jpg

Manufacturing output in the countries of the European Monetary Union continues to underperform. The median change for the 11 countries reporting on the table is a 0.5% decline in May following a 0.3% increase in April. However, only 41.7% of the reporters are accelerating in May, compared to 25% in April, although in March over half of the reporters had showed some acceleration, with output at 61.5%.

In May, of these eleven early reporters, seven showed month-to-month declines in output. This compares to four showing declines in April and four showing declines in March.

**Sequential trends**
Over 12 months, output is declining in four of these eleven countries: Germany, Luxembourg, Ireland, and Portugal. Over six months, output declines in five of the eleven countries. Over three months, output declines in four of the eleven countries. Over these broader sequential periods, output is increasing in most cases; only one country, Ireland, shows consistent declines in output over three months, six months, and 12 months. However, among EMU countries, only Italy shows output expanding on all three timelines, although Sweden, an EU member country, also shows output increasing in all three periods.

Amid the output weakness in May, the quarter-to-date calculation for industrial production growth is also broadly weak. In May, seven of the eleven quarter-to-date changes in industrial production are negative. Positive results, increases in the quarter-to-date, are registered by Germany, Luxembourg, Greece, and Portugal.

The ranking of the year-over-year growth rates shows seven countries with output growth rate rankings below 50%, marking them as below their respective medians. The comparisons for output growth are taken back to 2006, a period of about 20 years.

Four EMU countries rank above their twenty-year medians: France, Italy, Luxembourg, and Greece.

The snapshot of industry in the monetary union is consistent, showing little momentum, little strength, and relatively low rankings for current growth rates; only a minority of reporters show an acceleration in growth in May compared to April. With the situation in the Strait of Hormuz deteriorating again, the outlook for industrial production has to remain guarded.

260710.jpg

Europe

Industrial Sector Remains Under Pressure in EMU

Winnie Tapasanun

260709F57.jpg

260709G57.jpg

Existing home sales unexpectedly fell 2.4% m/m (+2.8% y/y) to 4.09 million units (SAAR) in June, the first monthly decline since March, following an upwardly revised 3.7% increase to 4.19 million in May (previously +3.2%; 4.17 mil.), according to the National Association of Realtors (NAR). The Action Economics Forecast Survey had expected June sales of 4.20 million units. Sales remained 36.4% below a high of 6.43 million in January 2022 and 38.0% below a peak of 6.60 million in January 2021. The June decline coincided with a rise in the average 30-year fixed mortgage rate to 6.49% in June, the highest since August 2025, after increasing to 6.44% in May, according to Freddie Mac. The sales figures are based on closings of sales contracts signed over the past couple of months.

Existing single-family home sales fell 2.4% (+3.3% y/y) to 3.73 million units in June, the first m/m fall in three months, following a 4.1% gain to 3.82 million in May, remaining 34.6% below a high of 5.70 million in January 2022. Sales of condos and co-ops decreased 2.7% (-2.7% y/y) to 360,000 in June, the lowest level since May 2025, after being unchanged m/m for the third successive month at 370,000, remaining 50.7% below a high of 730,000 in January 2022.

Regionally, June existing home sales declined m/m in all regions except the Northeast. Sales in the South dropped 3.6% (+3.8% y/y) to 1.89 million in June, a three-month low, after a 3.2% rise in May, and sales in the Midwest slid 3.0% (+2.1% y/y) to 980,000 following a 7.4% May advance; both posted the first m/m decrease in three months. Sales in the West fell 1.3% (+2.8% y/y) to 740,000, the lowest level since January, after being flat m/m at 750,000 in May. In contrast, sales in the Northeast increased 2.1% (0.0% y/y) to 480,000 after a 4.4% May gain. Notably, the South remained the dominant region, accounting for 46.2% of total U.S. existing home sales.

The median price of all existing homes (NSA) rose 2.2% (1.8% y/y) to $440,600 in June, the fifth consecutive m/m rise, on top of an upwardly revised 3.3% increase to $431,200 in May ($429,300 previously). Prices were 22.1% above a low of $360,800 in January 2023. The median price of an existing single-family home climbed 2.3% (1.8% y/y) to $446,400 in June, the fifth straight m/m increase, after a 3.4% advance to $436,400 in May. The median price of condos and co-ops, up for the sixth time in seven months, grew 0.6% (1.6% y/y) to $380,000 following a 1.0% May gain to $377,800. Regionally, overall prices rose m/m and y/y in June in the Northeast (+5.6%; +3.9% y/y), Midwest (+2.1%; +2.7% y/y), South (+1.0%; +0.9% y/y), and West (+0.8%; +0.9% y/y). All these price series were at their record highs.

Inventories of homes for sale fell m/m in June for the first time since December. The number of existing homes for sale (NSA) declined 0.6% (+1.3% y/y) to 1.56 million units following an upwardly revised 4.7% May rise to 1.57 million (the highest level since November 2019). The supply of homes on the market at the current selling rate (NSA) increased to 4.6 months in June from 4.5 months in May and April, matching the highest level since August 2025. A record low in supply of 1.6 months was in January 2022.

The data on existing home sales, prices and affordability are compiled by the National Association of Realtors. The data on single-family home sales extend back to February 1968. Total sales and price data and regional sales can be found in Haver's **USECON** database. Regional price and affordability data and national inventory data are available in the **REALTOR** database. Mortgage interest rates can be found in the **WEEKLY** database. The expectations figure is from the Action Economics Forecast Survey, reported in the **AS1REPNA** database.

260709H57.jpg

260709I57.jpg

- June sales -2.4% m/m to 4.09 mil., first drop in three mths.; +2.8% y/y, third straight y/y rise.
- Sales m/m down in the South (-3.6%), Midwest (-3.0%), and West (-1.3%); up in the Northeast (+2.1%).
- Sales y/y up in all regions except the Northeast w/ a flat reading.
- Median sales price +2.2% (+1.8% y/y) to $440,600, a record high.
- Unsold inventory -0.6% (+1.3% y/y) to 1.56 mil. units, first m/m decline since Dec.; 4.6 months' supply, highest since Aug. ’25.

U.S. Existing Home Sales Unexpectedly Fall in June from a Five-Month High

Kathleen Stephansen, CBE

260709A1.jpg

260709B1.jpg

Initial claims for unemployment insurance declined 2,000 to 215,000 in the week ending July 4, from 217,000 in the week ending June 27, revised from 215,000. The four-week average was 218,750 in the July 4 week, down from 222,500 in the week ending June 27. The Action Economics/Haver Analytics Survey looked for 218,000 claims to have been filed. 

The total number of unemployment insurance beneficiaries—also known as “continuing claims”—rose by 8,000 to 1.814 million in the week ending June 27, from 1.806 million in the week ending June 20, revised from 1.814 million. The four-week moving average rose to 1.808 million in the June 27 week from 1.801 million in the June 20 week. The insured unemployment rate was unchanged at 1.2% in the week of June 27. Except for a one-week dip to 1.1% in the week of April 25, the insured unemployment rate has been at 1.2% since the week of November 29, 2025.

The insured unemployment rate varied greatly across individual states and territories. In the week ending June 20, the highest unemployment rates were in Washington (2.03%), New Jersey (2.11%), Minnesota (2.15%), and Puerto Rico (2.45%). The lowest rates were in South Dakota (0.28%), Florida (0.35%), Alabama and North Carolina (both 0.41%), Louisiana (0.42%), and Arkansas (0.49%). Rates in other notable states include California (1.88%), Pennsylvania (1.63%), Illinois (1.58%), New York (1.52%), and Texas (1.12%). 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.

260709C1.jpg

260709D1.jpg

- New claims declined by 2,000 to 215,000 in the week ending July 4.
- Continuing claims rose by 8,000 to 1.814 million in the week ending June 27.
- The insured unemployment rate was unchanged at 1.2% in the week of June 27.

U.S. Initial Unemployment Claims Declined in the Week of July 4

260709E.jpg

The German trade surplus surged in May to €19.1 billion from €14.7 billion in April. Exports rose by 0.9% in May while imports fell by 2.5%, creating a jump in the surplus month-to-month. In April, exports increased by 0.8% while imports rose by 1.1%.

Details on exports and imports lag by one month. In April, exports for motor vehicles and consumer goods declined, while exports of capital goods and other exports rose. On the import side, there were increases in imports ranging from 2.8% to 4.3% month-to-month across capital goods, motor vehicles, and consumer goods, but for the catch-all category ‘other’ imports fell by 2.7% month-to-month.

Flows adjusted for inflation showed an increase in exports of 0.4% in May while real imports fell by 3.3%. In April, real exports were flat while real imports fell by 0.2%.

The sequential behavior of real exports and real imports show independent activity. Imports log a clear weakening, rising 0.1% over 12 months, falling at a 5% annual rate over six months, and then falling at a 10.3% annual rate over three months. On the export side, real exports rose by 2.6% over 12 months, accelerated to a 7.2% annual rate over six months, but over three months have pulled back and fallen at a 1.6% annual rate. However, export growth still exceeds import growth over each of these horizons: 12 months, six months, and three months.

Trade trends paint a darkening picture of the German economy, with imports weak in real terms and trending even weaker, while activity on the export side of the equation pops over 12 months and six months but takes a hit over three months.

260709.jpg

The situation in the Strait of Hormuz continues to muddy the waters for the future. Passage through the strait has been sharply stopped, stabilized, revived, and now is back to being destabilized. That makes the strait a major uncertainty zone; it's hard to tell how these effects are going to play out over the coming months for German trade results and everyone else's. The deterioration of conditions in the Strait of Hormuz is now unknowable because Iran has decided to start shooting at ships, further destabilizing the outlook.

Economy in Brief

Jump to:

Empire State Index Slows 23 Points for August

Empire State Index Slows 23 Points for August

Big Gain in Chinese Retail Sales

Steady Growth in European GDP; Japanese Figure Disappoints

U.S. Consumer Sentiment Down on Reduced Expectations

Finished Producer Prices Tame, But Crude Prices Soar

U.S. Trade Deficit A New Record

U.S. Trade Deficit A New Record