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/050428c.jpg" width="353">
The Conference Board&#39;s National March Index of Help-Wanted Advertising fell to 39 from 41 during the prior two months.
During the last ten years there has been a 67% correlation between the level of help-wanted advertising and the three month change in non-farm payrolls.
The proportion of labor markets with rising want-ad volume evaporated to 10% from 53% in February.
The Conference Board surveys help-wanted advertising volume in 51 major newspapers across the country every month.
The latest help wanted report from the Conference Board is available <a href="http://www.conference-board.org/economics/helpwanted.cfm">here</a>.
Help-Wanted Advertising and Job Vacancies from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco can be found <a href="http://www.frbsf.org/publications/economics/letter/2005/el2005-02.html"> here</a>.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/CBDB/@C3/@C3.HTM">Conference Board</a></th>
<th scope="col">March</th>
<th scope="col">Feb</th>
<th scope="col">March &#39;04</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">National Help Wanted Index</td>
<td>39</td>
<td>41</td>
<td>39</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The Conference Board's National March Index of Help-Wanted Advertising fell to 39 from 41 during the prior two months. During the last ten years there has been a 67% correlation between the level of help-wanted advertising and the [...]

Help-Wanted Advertising Slipped

<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/050428b.jpg" width="353">
US real GDP growth of 3.1% (AR) in 1Q05 was the slowest in two years and fell short of Consensus expectations for a 3.5% advance. Also a surprise was the 3.3% rise in the GDP Chain Price Index. This strongest gain in four years easily surpassed estimates for a 2.1% increase.
The drag on US output from a deepened foreign trade deficit increased to 1.5 percentage points due to an acceleration in real import growth to 14.7% (10.8% y/y). Growth in auto imports accelerated to 13.7% (5.5% y/y) and nonauto consumer goods imports held steady at 27.8% (15.4% y/y). Capital goods imports slipped to 4.9% (14.3% y/y) and growth in exports more than doubled to 7.0% (5.9% y/y).
The acceleration in the chain price index was due to inventories and a faster 2.2% (1.6% y/y) gain in consumer prices less food &amp; energy. In addition, after two quarters of deflation prices for business equipment &amp; software rose 0.6% (-0.5% y/y). Overall, the price index for domestic demand held about steady at 3.0% but the y/y gain of 2.8% is up from 1.7% a year ago.
Domestic demand growth suffered mostly from slower business investment growth which fell to 4.6% (11.1% y/y) from 14.5% in 4Q. Growth in business fixed investment in computers &amp; software picked up to an even headier 24.3% (15.7% y/y) but spending levels elsewhere fell. Consumer spending growth slipped to 3.5% (3.6% y/y). Less computers real GDP grew 2.5% (3.3% y/y) versus 4.3% growth during 2004.
Faster inventory accumulation contributed the most to output growth in a year. The 1.2% add reflected a change in real private nonfarm inventories of $82.5B which was the fastest since early 2000 and nearly double the 4Q04 rate.
A Big League Economy Tunes Up in Spring Training from the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas is available <a href="http://www.dallasfed.org/eyi/usecon/archived/0503update.html"> here</a>.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@E7/@E701/@E701.HTM">Chained 2000$, % AR</a></th>
<th scope="col">1Q &#39;05 (Advance)</th>
<th scope="col">4Q &#39;04 (Final)</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">GDP</td>
<td>3.1%</td>
<td>3.8%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>3.0%</td>
<td>1.9%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Inventory Effect</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Final Sales</td>
<td>1.9%</td>
<td>3.4%</td>
<td>3.2%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>3.1%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Trade Effect</td>
<td>-1.5%</td>
<td>-1.4%</td>
<td>-0.8%</td>
<td>-0.4%</td>
<td>-0.3%</td>
<td>-0.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Domestic Final Demand</td>
<td>3.2%</td>
<td>4.5%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>3.4%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Chained GDP Price Index</td>
<td>3.3%</td>
<td>2.3%</td>
<td>2.5%</td>
<td>2.2%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
<td>1.7%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

US real GDP growth of 3.1% (AR) in 1Q05 was the slowest in two years and fell short of Consensus expectations for a 3.5% advance. Also a surprise was the 3.3% rise in the GDP Chain Price Index. This strongest gain in four years easily [...]

Foreign Trade Drag & Prices Up, US GDP Growth Down

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050428b.jpg" width="353">
US real GDP growth of 3.1% (AR) in 1Q05 was the slowest in two years and fell short of Consensus expectations for a 3.5% advance. Also a surprise was the 3.3% rise in the GDP Chain Price Index. This strongest gain in four years easily surpassed estimates for a 2.1% increase.
The drag on US output from a deepened foreign trade deficit increased to 1.5 percentage points due to an acceleration in real import growth to 14.7% (10.8% y/y). Growth in auto imports accelerated to 13.7% (5.5% y/y) and nonauto consumer goods imports held steady at 27.8% (15.4% y/y). Capital goods imports slipped to 4.9% (14.3% y/y) and growth in exports more than doubled to 7.0% (5.9% y/y).
The acceleration in the chain price index was due to inventories and a faster 2.2% (1.6% y/y) gain in consumer prices less food &amp; energy. In addition, after two quarters of deflation prices for business equipment &amp; software rose 0.6% (-0.5% y/y). Overall, the price index for domestic demand held about steady at 3.0% but the y/y gain of 2.8% is up from 1.7% a year ago.
Domestic demand growth suffered mostly from slower business investment growth which fell to 4.6% (11.1% y/y) from 14.5% in 4Q. Growth in business fixed investment in computers &amp; software picked up to an even headier 24.3% (15.7% y/y) but spending levels elsewhere fell. Consumer spending growth slipped to 3.5% (3.6% y/y). Less computers real GDP grew 2.5% (3.3% y/y) versus 4.3% growth during 2004.
Faster inventory accumulation contributed the most to output growth in a year. The 1.2% add reflected a change in real private nonfarm inventories of $82.5B which was the fastest since early 2000 and nearly double the 4Q04 rate.
A Big League Economy Tunes Up in Spring Training from the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas is available <a href="http://www.dallasfed.org/eyi/usecon/archived/0503update.html"> here</a>.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@E7/@E701/@E701.HTM">Chained 2000$, % AR</a></th>
<th scope="col">1Q &#39;05 (Advance)</th>
<th scope="col">4Q &#39;04 (Final)</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">GDP</td>
<td>3.1%</td>
<td>3.8%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>3.0%</td>
<td>1.9%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Inventory Effect</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Final Sales</td>
<td>1.9%</td>
<td>3.4%</td>
<td>3.2%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>3.1%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Trade Effect</td>
<td>-1.5%</td>
<td>-1.4%</td>
<td>-0.8%</td>
<td>-0.4%</td>
<td>-0.3%</td>
<td>-0.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Domestic Final Demand</td>
<td>3.2%</td>
<td>4.5%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>3.4%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Chained GDP Price Index</td>
<td>3.3%</td>
<td>2.3%</td>
<td>2.5%</td>
<td>2.2%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
<td>1.7%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Help-Wanted Advertising Slipped 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> April 28, 2005


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050428c.jpg" width="353">
The Conference Board&#39;s National March Index of Help-Wanted Advertising fell to 39 from 41 during the prior two months.
During the last ten years there has been a 67% correlation between the level of help-wanted advertising and the three month change in non-farm payrolls.
The proportion of labor markets with rising want-ad volume evaporated to 10% from 53% in February.
The Conference Board surveys help-wanted advertising volume in 51 major newspapers across the country every month.
The latest help wanted report from the Conference Board is available <a href="http://www.conference-board.org/economics/helpwanted.cfm">here</a>.
Help-Wanted Advertising and Job Vacancies from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco can be found <a href="http://www.frbsf.org/publications/economics/letter/2005/el2005-02.html"> here</a>.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/CBDB/@C3/@C3.HTM">Conference Board</a></th>
<th scope="col">March</th>
<th scope="col">Feb</th>
<th scope="col">March &#39;04</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">National Help Wanted Index</td>
<td>39</td>
<td>41</td>
<td>39</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Initial Claims for Jobless Insurance Bounce Back 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> April 28, 2005


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050428a.jpg" width="353">
Initial unemployment insurance claims last week recovered 21,000 of the lessened 33,000 decline the prior period. The level of 320,000 equaled Consensus expectations.
During the last ten years there has been a (negative) 75% correlation between the level of initial claims for unemployment insurance and the monthly change in payroll employment. There has been a (negative) 65% correlation with the level of continuing claims.
The four week moving average of initial claims fell sharply to 323,000 (-7.2% y/y).
Continuing claims for unemployment insurance dropped a sharp 76,000 to the lowest level since March of 2001.
The insured unemployment rate slipped to 2.0%.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/WEEKLY/@W5/@W507/@W507.HTM">Unemployment Insurance (000s)</a></th>
<th scope="col">04/23/05</th>
<th scope="col">04/16/05</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">Initial Claims</td>
<td>320</td>
<td>299</td>
<td>-5.9%</td>
<td>343</td>
<td>402</td>
<td>404</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Continuing Claims</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>2,555</td>
<td>-15.1%</td>
<td>2,926</td>
<td>3,531</td>
<td>3,570</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Germany's Chain GDP Yield Slightly Higher Long-Term Growth through 2004 
by <a href="/comment/Stone.html">Carol Stone</a> April 28, 2005


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050428d.jpg" width="353">
Germany&#39;s Federal Statistical Office today introduced its new chain-weighted GDP data with benchmark revisions through Q4 2004. No new periods were published; that will occur for Q1 2005 on May 24.
The chain-linking is calculated on an annual basis, with each line item adjusted by the prices prevailing during the previous year. This is similar to the UK process, but different from the US, which uses the immediate prior quarter. Like the US, though, Germany moved to a reference year in 2000, meaning that price and quantity indexes equal 100 in that year. The fixed-weight base period, most recently 1995, is now obsolete. 2000 is not a &quot;base&quot; year, but the reference year for the index calculations.
With this revision, the German statistics office also introduced other methodological changes. Greater use is made of hedonic pricing, that is, price indices that account for quality changes in goods and services. Newly available service sector statistics are incorporated as well as data from the quadrennial compilation of cost structure information. Finally, &quot;FISIM&quot; data, financial intermediation services indirectly measured, are reorganized according to conventions of the EU statistics regulations.
Interestingly, these various technical changes had only a mild impact on total GDP, which now shows about 0.2% more growth annually than before. In the most recent years, the difference is smaller still, as seen in the table below. Growth in 2004 was virtually the same at 1.6%, according to both methods.
Certainly, some GDP components do show a larger difference. Equipment investment is one of these, as might be expected, with a growth differential averaging about 1.2 percentage points over the last 10 years. Thus, for example, equipment outlays were up 0.9% last year by the new data, but down by 0.2% according to the old calculation scheme. Over the last five or six years, private consumption growth has been nearly the same, but prior to 1998, the chain calculation far outperformed the old fixed-weight regime, so the amount of consumption is larger now than shown before.
As we have noted with other countries as they change this GDP compilation system, the new data don&#39;t alter our subjective sense of the economy&#39;s health, but they give us a much more solid assessment of it, particularly as spending and production priorities shift around. Sometimes relative pricing is the reason this happens, but other times, technology, demographics and politics are more significant and these forces can push both prices and quantities. So a flexible accounting system gives a better vision of the &quot;big picture&quot; of real growth and inflation, regardless of what year is chosen to be &quot;100&quot;.

<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/GERMANY/GERMANY.HTM">Germany</a></th>
<th scope="col">Q4 2004</th>
<th scope="col">Q3 2004</th>
<th scope="col">Q2 2004</th>
<th scope="col">Q1 2004</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">GDP - New (Bil.Ch.2000 Euros)</td>
<td>528.27</td>
<td>529.00</td>
<td>529.20</td>
<td>528.12</td>
<td>2123.14</td>
<td>2090.35</td>
<td>2090.30</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; % Change</td>
<td>-0.1</td>
<td>-0.0</td>
<td>0.2</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>1.6</td>
<td>0.0</td>
<td>0.2</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">GDP - Old (Bil.1995 Euros)</td>
<td>501.60</td>
<td>502.77</td>
<td>502.66</td>
<td>500.89</td>
<td>2007.92</td>
<td>1987.53</td>
<td>1990.27</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; % Change</td>
<td>-0.2</td>
<td>0.0</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>0.5</td>
<td>1.6</td>
<td>-0.1</td>
<td>0.1</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Equipment Investment - New &nbsp; % Change</td>
<td>-0.6</td>
<td>3.4</td>
<td>2.8</td>
<td>-3.7</td>
<td>0.9</td>
<td>-0.3</td>
<td>-7.4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Equipment Investment - Old &nbsp; % Change</td>
<td>-0.4</td>
<td>3.4</td>
<td>1.9</td>
<td>-3.9</td>
<td>-0.2</td>
<td>-1.5</td>
<td>-8.5</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

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/050427d.jpg" width="353">
The Swedish labor market gives some signs of firming up in the March/Q1 report issued today by Statistics Sweden. The unemployment rate stands at 5.5%, lower by 0.3 percentage point than March 2004. Total employment is still decreasing, but quarterly data indicate a stabilizing trend, with the Q1 average 4,145,700 virtually identical to Q1 2004. The quarterly data for employment by industry also reveal that non-manufacturing jobs have started to increase, however slightly.
At the same time, the &quot;improvement&quot; in the unemployment situation is partially related to reduced labor force participation. As shown in the table below, a participation rate which we calculate is off noticeably from last year to 76.2% from 77.4%, reflecting a sizable rise in the number of people not in the labor force. This movement reflects some month-to-month volatility, so it probably does not imply such a severe weakening of sentiment among labor market participants. In fact, consumer confidence has firmed considerably in recent months and averaged 11.5% in Q1, the highest quarterly average since Q4 2000. If people were so concerned about labor market prospects that they were pulling out of the labor force, confidence surveys would likely give some corroborating evidence of such distress.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050427e.jpg" width="353">
So labor market conditions are not particularly favorable in Sweden presently, but they do seem to be stabilizing after a protracted erosion from late 2001 to early last year.

<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/NORDIC/@NS/@NS.HTM">Sweden</a> (Not Seasonally Adjusted)</th>
<th scope="col">Mar 2005</th>
<th scope="col">Feb 2005</th>
<th scope="col">Year Ago</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">Unemployment Rate (%)</td>
<td>5.5</td>
<td>5.7</td>
<td>5.8</td>
<td>5.5</td>
<td>4.9</td>
<td>4.0</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Participation Rate (%)*</td>
<td>76.2</td>
<td>76.2</td>
<td>77.4</td>
<td>77.8</td>
<td>78.0</td>
<td>78.0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Employment (thous)</td>
<td>4,148</td>
<td>4,132</td>
<td>4,178</td>
<td>4,213</td>
<td>4,232</td>
<td>4,242</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Manufacturing (thous)</td>
<td>Q1 2005</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>Q1 2004</td>
<td>712</td>
<td>723</td>
<td>745</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">694</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>703</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Non-Manufacturing (thous)</td>
<td>3,451</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>3,443</td>
<td>3,502</td>
<td>3,510</td>
<td>3,497</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The Swedish labor market gives some signs of firming up in the March/Q1 report issued today by Statistics Sweden. The unemployment rate stands at 5.5%, lower by 0.3 percentage point than March 2004. Total employment is still [...]

Unemployment Slightly Lower in Sweden, as Employment Flat from a Year Ago

<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/050427c.jpg" width="353">
The Mortgage Bankers Association reported that mortgage applications increased 5.9% last week to the highest level in six weeks. Nevertheless, the average level so far in April remained below March.
Applications to refinance rose 9.8% yet the April average still is off 7.0% from March.
Purchase applications rose 3.3% and the average in April is 2.0% ahead of March which rose 6.1% from February. During the last ten years there has been a 50% correlation between the y/y change in purchase applications and the change in new plus existing single family home sales.
The effective interest rate on a conventional 30-year mortgage fell to 6.01% from 6.08%, the lowest level since early March. The effective rate on a 15-year mortgage also fell to 5.65%.
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">04/22/05</th>
<th scope="col">04/15/05</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>712.4</td>
<td>672.6</td>
<td>-4.8%</td>
<td>735.1</td>
<td>1,067.9</td>
<td>799.7</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Purchase</td>
<td>482.0</td>
<td>466.7</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>454.5</td>
<td>395.1</td>
<td>354.7</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Refinancing</td>
<td>2,052.5</td>
<td>1,870.0</td>
<td>-14.6%</td>
<td>2,366.8</td>
<td>4,981.8</td>
<td>3,388.0</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The Mortgage Bankers Association reported that mortgage applications increased 5.9% last week to the highest level in six weeks. Nevertheless, the average level so far in April remained below March. Applications to refinance rose 9.8% [...]

Lower Rates Lift Mortgage Applications

<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/050427a.jpg" width="353">
Orders received by U.S. manufacturers of durable goods dropped 2.8% last month following a revised 0.2% dip in February. It was the third consecutive monthly decline in new orders. Consensus expectations had been for a 0.3% rise.
Lower orders for transportation equipment, down 7.8% (-15.3% y/y), reflected steep declines in orders for both civilian (-22.7% m/m, -15.3% y/y) and defense (-35.0% m/m, -23.0% y/y) aircraft. The third consecutive decline motor vehicle &amp; parts orders (-11.0% y/y) also contributed. Less transportation durable orders fell 1.0% (+3.9% y/y).
Orders for non-defense capital goods fell 6.2%. Less aircraft, the 4.7% decline reflected a 3.4% (+0.6% y/y) drop in orders for electrical equipment and a 7.6% drop in orders for machinery (+0.5% y/y). Computer &amp; electronic product orders rose 2.2% (7.9% y/y).<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050427a.jpg" width="353">
Shipments of durables slipped 0.2% (+3.5% y/y) while durable inventories rose 0.4% (9.6% y/y). That rise caused the I/S ratio to increase to its highest level since late 2003.
Unfilled orders fell 0.5% (+6.6% y/y) and the ratio of backlogs to shipments gave back some of prior month&#39;s sharp increase.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@ED/@ED01/@ED0101/@ED0101.HTM">NAICS Classification</a></th>
<th scope="col">Mar</th>
<th scope="col">Feb</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">Durable Goods Orders</td>
<td>-2.8%</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>-1.7%</td>
<td>10.8%</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
<td>-1.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Nondefense Capital Goods</td>
<td>-6.2%</td>
<td>-0.7%</td>
<td>1.1%</td>
<td>13.7%</td>
<td>5.6%</td>
<td>-7.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Excluding Aircraft</td>
<td>-4.7%</td>
<td>-2.5%</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
<td>11.7%</td>
<td>6.6%</td>
<td>-7.1%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Orders received by U.S. manufacturers of durable goods dropped 2.8% last month following a revised 0.2% dip in February. It was the third consecutive monthly decline in new orders. Consensus expectations had been for a 0.3% rise. [...]

U.S. Durable Goods Orders Off Sharply

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050427a.jpg" width="353">
Orders received by U.S. manufacturers of durable goods dropped 2.8% last month following a revised 0.2% dip in February. It was the third consecutive monthly decline in new orders. Consensus expectations had been for a 0.3% rise.
Lower orders for transportation equipment, down 7.8% (-15.3% y/y), reflected steep declines in orders for both civilian (-22.7% m/m, -15.3% y/y) and defense (-35.0% m/m, -23.0% y/y) aircraft. The third consecutive decline motor vehicle &amp; parts orders (-11.0% y/y) also contributed. Less transportation durable orders fell 1.0% (+3.9% y/y).
Orders for non-defense capital goods fell 6.2%. Less aircraft, the 4.7% decline reflected a 3.4% (+0.6% y/y) drop in orders for electrical equipment and a 7.6% drop in orders for machinery (+0.5% y/y). Computer &amp; electronic product orders rose 2.2% (7.9% y/y).<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050427a.jpg" width="353">
Shipments of durables slipped 0.2% (+3.5% y/y) while durable inventories rose 0.4% (9.6% y/y). That rise caused the I/S ratio to increase to its highest level since late 2003.
Unfilled orders fell 0.5% (+6.6% y/y) and the ratio of backlogs to shipments gave back some of prior month&#39;s sharp increase.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@ED/@ED01/@ED0101/@ED0101.HTM">NAICS Classification</a></th>
<th scope="col">Mar</th>
<th scope="col">Feb</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">Durable Goods Orders</td>
<td>-2.8%</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>-1.7%</td>
<td>10.8%</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
<td>-1.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Nondefense Capital Goods</td>
<td>-6.2%</td>
<td>-0.7%</td>
<td>1.1%</td>
<td>13.7%</td>
<td>5.6%</td>
<td>-7.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Excluding Aircraft</td>
<td>-4.7%</td>
<td>-2.5%</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
<td>11.7%</td>
<td>6.6%</td>
<td>-7.1%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Lower Rates Lift Mortgage Applications 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> April 27, 2005


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050427c.jpg" width="353">
The Mortgage Bankers Association reported that mortgage applications increased 5.9% last week to the highest level in six weeks. Nevertheless, the average level so far in April remained below March.
Applications to refinance rose 9.8% yet the April average still is off 7.0% from March.
Purchase applications rose 3.3% and the average in April is 2.0% ahead of March which rose 6.1% from February. During the last ten years there has been a 50% correlation between the y/y change in purchase applications and the change in new plus existing single family home sales.
The effective interest rate on a conventional 30-year mortgage fell to 6.01% from 6.08%, the lowest level since early March. The effective rate on a 15-year mortgage also fell to 5.65%.
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">04/22/05</th>
<th scope="col">04/15/05</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>712.4</td>
<td>672.6</td>
<td>-4.8%</td>
<td>735.1</td>
<td>1,067.9</td>
<td>799.7</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Purchase</td>
<td>482.0</td>
<td>466.7</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>454.5</td>
<td>395.1</td>
<td>354.7</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Refinancing</td>
<td>2,052.5</td>
<td>1,870.0</td>
<td>-14.6%</td>
<td>2,366.8</td>
<td>4,981.8</td>
<td>3,388.0</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Unemployment Slightly Lower in Sweden, as Employment Flat from a Year Ago 
by <a href="/comment/Stone.html">Carol Stone</a> April 27, 2005


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050427d.jpg" width="353">
The Swedish labor market gives some signs of firming up in the March/Q1 report issued today by Statistics Sweden. The unemployment rate stands at 5.5%, lower by 0.3 percentage point than March 2004. Total employment is still decreasing, but quarterly data indicate a stabilizing trend, with the Q1 average 4,145,700 virtually identical to Q1 2004. The quarterly data for employment by industry also reveal that non-manufacturing jobs have started to increase, however slightly.
At the same time, the &quot;improvement&quot; in the unemployment situation is partially related to reduced labor force participation. As shown in the table below, a participation rate which we calculate is off noticeably from last year to 76.2% from 77.4%, reflecting a sizable rise in the number of people not in the labor force. This movement reflects some month-to-month volatility, so it probably does not imply such a severe weakening of sentiment among labor market participants. In fact, consumer confidence has firmed considerably in recent months and averaged 11.5% in Q1, the highest quarterly average since Q4 2000. If people were so concerned about labor market prospects that they were pulling out of the labor force, confidence surveys would likely give some corroborating evidence of such distress.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050427e.jpg" width="353">
So labor market conditions are not particularly favorable in Sweden presently, but they do seem to be stabilizing after a protracted erosion from late 2001 to early last year.

<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/NORDIC/@NS/@NS.HTM">Sweden</a> (Not Seasonally Adjusted)</th>
<th scope="col">Mar 2005</th>
<th scope="col">Feb 2005</th>
<th scope="col">Year Ago</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">Unemployment Rate (%)</td>
<td>5.5</td>
<td>5.7</td>
<td>5.8</td>
<td>5.5</td>
<td>4.9</td>
<td>4.0</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Participation Rate (%)*</td>
<td>76.2</td>
<td>76.2</td>
<td>77.4</td>
<td>77.8</td>
<td>78.0</td>
<td>78.0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Employment (thous)</td>
<td>4,148</td>
<td>4,132</td>
<td>4,178</td>
<td>4,213</td>
<td>4,232</td>
<td>4,242</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Manufacturing (thous)</td>
<td>Q1 2005</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>Q1 2004</td>
<td>712</td>
<td>723</td>
<td>745</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">694</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>703</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Non-Manufacturing (thous)</td>
<td>3,451</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>3,443</td>
<td>3,502</td>
<td>3,510</td>
<td>3,497</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/050426e.jpg" width="353">
The latest monthly data and results of the most recent quarterly survey of industrial trends were released today by the CBI (Confederation of British Industries). Britain&#39;s manufacturing sector has been depressed for some time, as evidence by the first chart showing the monthly percent balances of increases less decreases in new orders. Rarely have increases in orders outweighed decreases and then only by a very small margin.
There is little comfort in the monthly data for the sector. The percent balance of decreases over increases in new orders in April of 24% is the largest since November, 2003.
Nor is the survey encouraging. While the survey revealed that the respondents were slightly less pessimistic in the current quarter compared to the first quarter, they were generally more pessimistic concerning the current status and outlook for new orders, output, prices and unit costs. The percent balances for new orders and output over the past three months are shown in the second chart.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050426d.jpg" width="353">
Although the manufacturing share of gross value added has declined from 24% in 1985 to 16% in 2004, a slowdown in manufacturing activity should have a significant impact on growth of the total economy.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">% Balance*</th>
<th scope="col">Q2 05</th>
<th scope="col">Q1 05</th>
<th scope="col">Q2 04</th>
<th scope="col">Q/Q Dif</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y Dif</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp;2004&nbsp;&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp;2003</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp;2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Optimism re business conditions</td>
<td>-15</td>
<td>-22</td>
<td>12</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>-27</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>-17</td>
<td>-6</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">New orders past 3 months</td>
<td>-18</td>
<td>-4</td>
<td>18</td>
<td>-14</td>
<td>-36</td>
<td>9</td>
<td>-16</td>
<td>-14</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">New orders next 3 months</td>
<td>-17</td>
<td>-4</td>
<td>12</td>
<td>-13</td>
<td>-29</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>-21</td>
<td>-14</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Output past 3 months</td>
<td>-10</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>15</td>
<td>-12</td>
<td>-25</td>
<td>11</td>
<td>-12</td>
<td>-13</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Output next 3 months</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>12</td>
<td>-5</td>
<td>-7</td>
<td>13</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>5</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Unit costs past 3 months</td>
<td>32</td>
<td>23</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>9</td>
<td>26</td>
<td>9</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>-4</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Unit costs next 3 months</td>
<td>18</td>
<td>19</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>-1</td>
<td>13</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>-1</td>
<td>-7</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Prices past 3 months</td>
<td>12</td>
<td>11</td>
<td>-3</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>15</td>
<td>-4</td>
<td>-16</td>
<td>-26</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Prices past 3 months</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>19</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>-14</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>-10-13</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;</td>
<td>Apr 05</td>
<td>Mar 05</td>
<td>Apr 04</td>
<td>M/M Dif</td>
<td>Y/Y Dif</td>
<td>&nbsp;2004&nbsp;&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;2003</td>
<td>&nbsp;2002</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total orders</td>
<td>-24</td>
<td>-13</td>
<td>14</td>
<td>-11</td>
<td>-10</td>
<td>-9</td>
<td>-29</td>
<td>-27</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Stock of finished goods</td>
<td>18</td>
<td>13</td>
<td>17</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>11</td>
<td>17</td>
<td>16</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Vol. of output next 3 months</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>9</td>
<td>12</td>
<td>-4</td>
<td>-7</td>
<td>12</td>
<td>-3</td>
<td>5</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Ave prices of domestic orders next 3 months</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>9</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>-4</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>-12</td>
<td>-13</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The latest monthly data and results of the most recent quarterly survey of industrial trends were released today by the CBI (Confederation of British Industries). Britain's manufacturing sector has been depressed for some time, as [...]

Confederation of British Industries (CBI) Point to Slowdown in British Manufacturing Sector

USD/EUR exchange rate uncoupling from interest rate differential

Widespread downgrading of 2025 GDP outlook

Trade and fiscal policy uncertainty has exploded with the new administration

Much lower US electricity costs gives it a competitive advantage

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

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

US policy gyrations boosting policy uncertainty worldwide

Expected tariff hikes have boosted inflation expectations

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

US economy expected to outperform other major economies in 2025

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

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

Heavy US manufacturing states underperforming while Sun Belt states outperforming

Rising long-term yields a global phenomenon

US financial market concerns shifting from growth to inflation

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

Policy uncertainty has surged since the US national elections.

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

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

Headline US PCE inflation elevated by sticky services prices

US and global equity prices have recently diverged

US leading global upturn in economic surprises

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

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

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

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

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


Privacy Policy

Disclaimer

Contact us

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

New York

London

Singapore

Tokyo

Economy in Brief

Viewpoints

Contact Us

Our Data

Our Products

What We Do

Our Authors

About Us

Data News

Resources

Release Calendars

Training Center

Webinars

Newsletters

Download Software

For Clients

Live Updates

250430N1.jpg

250430O1.jpg

Real GDP eased 0.3% SAAR (+2.1% y/y) during the first quarter of 2025 after increasing 2.4% in Q4’24 and 3.1% in Q3’24. A 0.4% increase had been expected in the Action Economics Forecast Survey. It was the first decline since Q1 2022.

Foreign trade subtracted 4.83 percentage points from growth last quarter as imports surged 41.3% (13.4% y/y) ahead of tariffs, which began to come into effect in the first quarter. The rise followed a 1.9% decline in Q4’24. Exports rose 1.8% (3.0% y/y) after easing 0.2% in Q4. Inventories added 2.25 percentage points to growth after subtracting 0.84 percentage point from Q4 growth.

Real final sales to domestic purchasers grew 2.3% (2.9% y/y) in Q1 after rising 3.0% in Q4. Personal consumption expenditures rose 1.8% (3.1% y/y) following a 4.0% gain. Durable goods spending fell 3.4% (+5.3% y/y) after surging 12.4% in Q4. Motor vehicle purchases declined 11.1% (+5.5% y/y) after strengthening 19.7% in Q4. Spending on home furnishings & appliances gained 1.5% (6.1% y/y) following a 5.4% rise. Recreational goods & vehicle outlays rose 2.5% (7.0% y/y) last quarter after a 13.9% Q4 increase.

Nondurable goods outlays rose 2.7% (3.0% y/y) following 3.1% growth in Q4. Apparel spending increased 6.7% (2.5% y/y) following a 5.0% rise. Food & beverage buying gained 2.5% (2.3% y/y) after a 1.8% increase. Gasoline & fuel oil purchases increased 4.6% (3.4% y/y) after falling 2.0% in Q4.

Spending on services increased 2.4% last quarter (2.7% y/y) after a 3.0% gain. Outlays on housing & utilities increased 3.4% (1.8% y/y) after rising 1.1% in Q4. Health care expenditures rose 4.0% (4.8% y/y) following a 4.7% strengthening. Transportation outlays increased 5.3% (4.6% y/y) after a 3.7% rise while recreation spending rose 4.7% (2.8% y/y) following a 4.5% rise. Restaurant & hotel expenditures declined 2.1% (+0.5% y/y) following a 2.8% rise. Financial services expenditures rose 1.9% (2.0% y/y) after a 3.1% Q4 increase.

Business fixed investment increased 9.8% (3.6% y/y) following a 3.0% decline in Q4. Expenditures on structures rose 0.4% (-0.4% y/y) after a 2.9% increase. Expenditures on producers’ durable equipment jumped 22.5% (8.0% y/y) after falling 8.7%.  Outlays on information processing equipment soared 69.3% (18.9% y/y) following a 7.3% decline. Industrial equipment investment fell 1.4% (-0.3% y/y) after easing 0.9%. Intellectual property product spending rose 4.1% (1.8% y/y) following a 0.5% decline. 

Residential structures investment increased 1.3% (-0.1% y/y) in Q1 after a 5.5% Q4 rise.

250430P1.jpg

250430Q1.jpg

Government spending fell 1.5% (+2.4% y/y) after a 3.1% Q4 rise. Federal government expenditures declined 5.1% (+2.9% y/y) after rising 4.0% in Q4. National defense expenditures declined 8.0% (+4.0% y/y) after increasing 4.8% in Q4. State & local government spending rose 0.8% (2.1% y/y) following a 2.5% rise.

The GDP price index rose 3.7% (2.6% y/y) after increasing 2.3% in Q4. It was the largest increase since Q4’22. A 2.4% increase had been expected. The PCE chain price index increased 3.6% (2.5% y/y) following a 2.4% rise. The PCE price index excluding food and energy rose 3.5% (2.8% y/y) after increasing 2.6% in Q4. The business fixed investment price index rose 0.4% (1.8% y/y) after 1.5% rise. The residential price index strengthened 3.9% (3.2% y/y) after a 1.9% rise while the government price index increased 4.7% (2.8% y/y) following a 2.1% rise.

The GDP data can be found in Haver’s **USECON** and **USNA** databases. **USNA** contains virtually all of the Bureau of Economic Analysis detail in the national accounts. The Action Economics consensus estimates can be found in **AS1REPNA**.

250430R1.jpg

250430S1.jpg

- Decline in GDP is first in three years.
- Foreign trade subtracts substantially ahead of tariffs.
- Domestic final demand growth weakens.
- Price index strengthens with higher core PCE prices.

U.S. GDP Unexpectedly Declines in Q1’25; Prices Strengthen

Michael J. Moran

250430A.jpg

250430B.jpg

High-side readings on the price indexes for personal consumption expenditures in January and February caused some concern about emerging price pressure, especially with some policies of the Trump administration possibly adding to the upward force. However, March brought notable relief, with the headline price index falling slightly (-0.04%). A marked decline in energy prices was helpful (-2.7%), but core prices also were subdued, increasing less than 0.1%.  Year-over-year changes were still above the Fed’s target of 2%, but only barely so for the headline measure (2.3%). The core index backed away from the reading of 3.0% in February, but the latest reading of 2.7% was in line with observations in the past year, and still uncomfortably above target.

Consumers roused from a winter slumber in March, with nominal outlays increasing 0.7%. With inflation restrained, real outlays also posted a gain of 0.7%. Spending on durable gods stood out, with real outlays advancing 3.2%. Real outlays for both nondurable goods and services rose 0.4%, a solid pace. Signs of life were certainly welcome after an average decline of 0.1% in January and February. The March rebound left growth of 1.8% (annual rate) in the first quarter.

The brisk increase in spending in March was supported by a solid gain in personal income (0.5% in both nominal and real terms). Growth in wage income was firm at 0.5%, while proprietors’ income was robust with a gain of 1.8% (not annualized!). The farm sector led the advance in proprietors’ income, but the nonfarm sector also was strong (0.6%).

The personal income and consumption figures are available in Haver’s **USECON** database with detail in the **USNA** database. The Action Economics forecasts are in **AS1REPNA**.

250430C.jpg

250430D.jpg

- Price pressure eases.
- Spending rebounds after two soft months.

Personal Income, Consumption, and Prices in March

250430F20.jpg

250430G20.jpg

The Pending Home Sales Index, a forward-looking home sales measure based on contract signings, from the National Association of Realtors rose 6.1% to 76.5 (-0.6% y/y) during March after rising a little-revised 2.1% in February. These changes followed a 4.6% January decline.

The rise in March sales occurred as the rate on a 30-year mortgage eased to an average 6.65% from 6.84% in February. This rate was well above a low of 2.68% averaged in December 2020.

Pending home sales were up in most regions of the country. Sales in the Midwest rose 4.9% (1.4% y/y) last month after rising 1.8% in February. Sales in the South increased 9.8% (-0.4% y/y) following a 5.8% February rise. Sales in the West improved 4.8% (-2.0% y/y) after falling 3.0% in February. Sales in the Northeast were off 0.5% (-3.0% y/y) in March after falling 0.9% in February.

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

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

- Sales rise to highest level in four months.
- Strength is evident throughout most of country.

U.S. Pending Home Sales Surge in March

Sandy Batten

250430F5.jpg

250430G5.jpg

The employment cost index (ECI) for civilian workers, arguably the most accurate measure of labor compensation in the United States, rose 0.9% q/q (3.6% y/y) in Q1, the same quarterly increase as in last year’s Q4, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The quarterly gains have fluctuated between 0.8% and 1.0% for the past six quarters. The Action Economics Forecast Survey had expected a 0.9% q/q increase and a 3.5% y/y gain.

Wages and salaries for civilian workers rose 0.8% q/q (3.5% y/y) in Q1, down from 1.0% q/q in Q4. This tied the Q3 2024 quarterly rise as the smallest increase since Q2 2021. It was also the smallest y/y increase since Q2 2021. Benefits increased by an outsized 1.2% q/q (3.9% y/y) in Q1 versus 0.8% q/q in Q4. This is the largest quarterly gain since Q2 2022. In general, employment cost gains remain above the pace observed prior to the pandemic but are slowing gradually.

Private industry workers’ compensation rose 0.8% q/q (3.4% y/y) in Q1, down from 0.9% q/q (3.6% y/y) in Q4. Wages and salaries for private industry workers increased 0.8% q/q (3.4% y/y) in Q1 versus 0.8% q/q (3.7% y/y) in Q4. The quarterly gain in Q1 tied that in Q3 2024 as the smallest increase since Q4 2020. Benefits for private industry workers jumped 1.2% q/q (3.6% y/y). the largest quarterly gain since Q2 2022. The acceleration in benefits in Q1 was primarily in service-producing industries.

Compensation in private goods-producing industries increased 1.0% q/q (3.2% y/y) in Q1, the largest quarterly gain in five quarters, versus a 0.7% q/q increase in Q4. Compensation in construction jumped 1.3% q/q, its largest quarterly increase since Q2 2022, up from a 0.6% q/q gain in Q4. Manufacturing compensation growth slowed to 0.7% q/q, its slowest quarterly advance since Q4 2020, from 0.8% q/q in Q4. Compensation in private service-producing industries increased 0.8% q/q (3.5% y/y), down slightly from a 0.9% q/q gain in Q4. Compensation in education and health services jumped 1.3% q/q, its largest quarterly gain since Q3 2023. In contrast, compensation in other services edged up 0.1% q/q in Q1, its smallest quarterly advance since before the pandemic.

The employment cost index measures the change in the cost of labor, free from the influence of employment shifts across occupations and industries. It is provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and is available in Haver’s **USECON** database. Consensus estimates from the Action Economics Forecast Survey are in Haver’s **AS1REPNA** database.

250430H5.jpg

250430I5.jpg

- Compensation grew 0.9 q/q in Q1, the same pace as in Q4.
- Wage growth slowed to 0.8% q/q while benefits surged 1.2% q/q, their largest quarterly increase since Q2 2022.

Employment Cost Growth Steady in Q1 2025

Kathleen Stephansen, CBE

250430J4.jpg

250430K4.jpg

The ADP National Employment Report indicated that nonfarm private sector payrolls rose 62,000 (1.4% y/y) during April after increasing 147,000 (1.4% y/y) during March, revised from 155,000. A 124,000 April rise in ADP employment had been expected in the Action Economics Forecast Survey.

Growth in median annual pay for "job stayers" eased to 4.5% y/y during April, from 4.6% y/y in March and from 4.7% y/y in the prior two months. Manufacturing sector pay grew 4.6% y/y during April, down from 4.8% y/y in March. Construction sector pay was unchanged at 4.7% y/y. Natural resource & mining sector pay grew 4.4% y/y. Financial sector pay rose 5.1% y/y, while education & health services pay rose 4.7% y/y. Leisure & hospitality pay also increased 4.7% y/y. Professional & business service sector pay increased 4.3% y/y as did trade, transportation & utilities pay. Information pay rose 4.1% y/y. Median annual pay for “job changers” rose 6.9% y/y after 6.7% y/y in March.

Small business hiring (less than 50 employees) rose 11,000 (0.6% y/y) after rising 18,000 (0.6% y/y) in March, revised down from 52,000. Employment at medium-sized firms (50-499,000 employees) rose 40,000 (1.1% y/y) after rising 43,000 (1.1% y/y). Large business hiring (500+ employees) rose 12,000 (3.4% y/y) in April, after rising 61,000 (3.6% y/y) in March, revised from 59,000.

Goods-producing employment rose 26,000 (1.3% y/y) in April, after rising 16,000 (1.3% y/y) during March, revised from 24,000. Manufacturing jobs rose 4,000 (-0.2% y/y) after rising 17,000 (-0.3% y/y) in March. The number of construction sector jobs rose 16,000 (3.4% y/y) in April, following a 2,000 (3.6% y/y) March increase, revised from 6,000. Natural resources & mining jobs rose 6,000 (2.8% y/y) in April after falling 3,000 (+1.9% y/y) in March.

The number of service-producing jobs rose 34,000 (1.4% y/y) during April, following a rise of 131,000 (1.4% y/y) in March. Professional & business services employment fell 2,000 (0.6% y/y) after rising 46,000 (0.7% y/y) in the prior month, revised from 57,000. Employment in the financial industry rose 20,000 (2.1% y/y) in April, after rising 38,000 (2.0% y/y) in March. Leisure and hospitality employment increased 27,000 (3.0% y/y), following a 23,000 (2.9% y/y) March increase, revised from 17,000. The number of education & health care jobs fell 23,000 (1.6% y/y) in April, following a 15,000 (1.8% y/y) rise in March, revised from 12,000. Information sector employment fell 8,000 (-0.1% y/y) after a rise of 3,000 (0.2% y/y) in March. The number of jobs in trade, transportation & utilities rose 21,000 (0.4% y/y) in April, after falling 4,000 (+0.4% y/y) in March, revised from a 6,000 fall. Employment in “other” services rose fell 1,000 (+3.2% y/y) following a 10,000 (3.4% y/y) rise in March, revised from 11,000.

By region, employment in the Northeast increased 10,000 (1.9% y/y) in April, following an increase of 95,000 (2.0% y/y) in March, revised from 89,000. Employment in the Midwest rose 42,000 (1.5% y/y) after a gain of 84,000 (1.4% y/y) in March, revised from 81,000. In the South, employment rose 3,000 (1.3% y/y) during April, after rising 10,000 (1.4% y/y) in March, revised from 27,000. In the West, employment rose 9,000 (0.6% y/y) after declining 43,000 (+0.6% y/y), revised from a 41,000 decline in March.

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.

250430L4.jpg

250430M4.jpg

- Employment increase is modest in both services & factory sectors.
- Wage growth for “job stayers” moderates.
- Small and medium-sized business employment slows.

Economy in Brief: April 2005

Jump to:

Help-Wanted Advertising Slipped

Foreign Trade Drag & Prices Up, US GDP Growth Down

Foreign Trade Drag & Prices Up, US GDP Growth Down

Unemployment Slightly Lower in Sweden, as Employment Flat from a Year Ago

Lower Rates Lift Mortgage Applications

U.S. Durable Goods Orders Off Sharply

U.S. Durable Goods Orders Off Sharply

Confederation of British Industries (CBI) Point to Slowdown in British Manufacturing Sector