Tom Moeller

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html><head>
</head>
<body>
	 
 
 
 

<a href="/comment/200512a.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/200512a.png"></a>
 <a href="/comment/200512b.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/200512b.png"></a>

&bull;


&bull;


The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB)
indicated that its Small Business Optimism Index plummeted 7.8% (-5.3% y/y) to
96.4 during March...........



The NFIB figures can be found in Haver's SURVEYS database.

<a href="/comment/200512c.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/200512c.png"></a>
 <a href="/comment/200512d.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/200512d.png"></a>

<table class="centered" width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0">
	<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>

 <thead>
 <tr>
 <th class="firstcol" scope="col" >National Federation of
 Independent Business (SA, Net % of Firms)</th>
 <th scope="col" >Apr</th>
 <th scope="col" >Mar</th>
 <th scope="col" >Feb</th>
 <th scope="col" >Apr'19</th>
 <th scope="col" >2019</th>
 <th scope="col" >2018</th>
 <th scope="col" >2017</th>
 </tr>
 </thead>
 <tbody>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" >Small Business Optimism Index (1986=100)</td>
 <td>96.4</td>
 <td>104.5</td>
 <td>104.3</td>
 <td>101.8</td>
 <td>103.0</td>
 <td>106.7</td>
 <td>104.9</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" >Firms Expecting Economy to Improve</td>
 <td>5</td>
 <td>22</td>
 <td>14</td>
 <td>11</td>
 <td>13</td>
 <td>32</td>
 <td>39</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" >Firms Expecting Higher Real Sales</td>
 <td>-12</td>
 <td>19</td>
 <td>23</td>
 <td>19</td>
 <td>18</td>
 <td>26</td>
 <td>23</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" >Firms Reporting Now Is a Good Time to
 Expand the Business</td>
 <td>13</td>
 <td>26</td>
 <td>28</td>
 <td>23</td>
 <td>25</td>
 <td>30</td>
 <td>23</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" >Firms Planning to Increase Employment</td>
 <td>9</td>
 <td>21</td>
 <td>19</td>
 <td>18</td>
 <td>19</td>
 <td>21</td>
 <td>18</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" >Firms With Few or No Qualified
 Applicants for Job Openings (%)</td>
 <td>47</td>
 <td>52</td>
 <td>49</td>
 <td>54</td>
 <td>52</td>
 <td>51</td>
 <td>49</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" >Firms Expecting to Make Capital Outlays</td>
 <td>21</td>
 <td>26</td>
 <td>28</td>
 <td>27</td>
 <td>28</td>
 <td>29</td>
 <td>28</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" >Firms Reporting That Credit Was Harder
 to Get</td>
 <td>3</td>
 <td>1</td>
 <td>4</td>
 <td>6</td>
 <td>4</td>
 <td>4</td>
 <td>4</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" >Firms Raising Average Selling Prices</td>
 <td>6</td>
 <td>11</td>
 <td>15</td>
 <td>12</td>
 <td>13</td>
 <td>15</td>
 <td>7</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" >Firms Raising Worker Compensation</td>
 <td>31</td>
 <td>36</td>
 <td>36</td>
 <td>33</td>
 <td>31</td>
 <td>33</td>
 <td>27</td>
 </tr>
 </tbody>
 </table>
 
</body></html>

• • The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) indicated that its Small Business Optimism Index plummeted 7.8% (-5.3% y/y) to 96.4 during March........... The NFIB figures can be found in Haver's SURVEYS database. National [...]

U.S. Small Businesses Become Pessimistic

Robert Brusca

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html><head>
</head>

	 
 
 
 
 

<a href="/comment/200414e.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/200414e.png" align="left"></a>
I feature a chart of Finland's price index against Brent. It shows how the headline for Finland is very much on the same cycle as oil prices.

However, despite a heralded oil price deal, oil prices today are falling again and the oil market is in a state of substantial excess. It will take OPEC-plus some time to deal with the excesses oil in the market especially since the coronavirus reaction seems destined to keep growth on its heels for some time.

Finland shows some interesting price trend patterns. Inflation diffusion is very low in March, falling to a diffusion reading of 35%. Prices fell in March compared to February; the pace of price increases picked up in only three of nine sectors (plus the headline that is included the inflation diffusion calculation).

However, over three months, inflation diffusion is at 70% and rising sharply. But not all accelerations are created equal. Five categories plus the headline show prices falling on balance over three months. The acceleration reading comes from the fact that there were seven price declines on balance over six months and those declines were mostly deeper declines than the annual rates posted over three months. For example, transportation prices fell at a 10.4% annual rate over three months as of March, but that massive rate of decline is a deceleration compared to the 13.6% annual rate drop over six months.

The diffusion readings are useful and show the breadth of inflation and occasionally they will flag an odd result like that. But what we see is that inflation is modest across the recent months and also on a sequential basis from 12-months to six-months to three-months. The highest reading on sequential inflation is the 1.2% pace over six months. Monthly inflation is at +0.1% in each of the two prior months.

Lastly, we have inflation rankings for Finland that show the overall pace back to 2001 in the bottom 20% of its queue of monthly annualized rates of inflation- that is quite low. Food, clothing & footwear, communication, and other goods & services have above median readings on this timeline back to 2001. An above-median reading is one with a ranking above the 50% mark.


<img border="0" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/200414.png" width="660" height="300">


Inflation in the EMU echoes this good news with all early reporting members in the table showing inflation well below the ECB limit of 2%. In fact, only Germany and the Netherlands have inflation at or about the 2% pace.

Since the EMU was formed, only Ireland, Germany, France and Finland have kept their respective inflation rates consistently below that for the EMU as a whole. Finland is part of a special group of low-inflation EMU members.

However, the usual high inflation countries have really been keeping inflation in check. Spain, Portugal, Italy, and Greece on the month are the low inflation countries this month. Over five years, the lowest inflation countries are Greece, Ireland, Finland, and Italy. Over five years, the high inflation counties are Germany, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and France. These are unusual groupings from an historic perspective. On balance, inflation is also tame in the EMU and holding well below the ECB's mandate to keep it below 2%.


Inflation in EMU 
<img border="0" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/200414 2.png" width="660" height="270">


Inflation is low partly because of the oil glut and the oil glut stems substantially from the slow, induced pace that comes from trying to contain the coronavirus. The IMF has just cut its outlook for global growth to -3%. The finger on the pulse of trade measure known as the Baltic Dry goods Index remains low and flat. Markets today were trying to rally on China's export and import numbers that were not as bad as expected. But that is thin gruel for good news. At the same time, corporations' earnings reports are coming out and they are only the beginning of some bad news depending on the company and the industry and when a particular firm got caught up in the shutdown.

Between weak growth and the ongoing nature of weak growth, because fighting the virus requires that temperance be extended, a difficult picture of the oil market emerges as well as for all commodities. Countries are trying and planning to restart something more like normalcy, but how that is done, how fast it is done and how thoroughly it is done remains a contentious issue.

</html>

I feature a chart of Finland's price index against Brent. It shows how the headline for Finland is very much on the same cycle as oil prices. However, despite a heralded oil price deal, oil prices today are falling again and the oil [...]

Inflation Continues Tame in EMU; Finland's Prices Drop in March

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html><head>
</head>
<body>
	 
 
 
 

<a href="/comment/200414j.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/200414j.png"></a>
 <a href="/comment/200414k.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/200414k.png"></a>

&bull; Lower oil prices drag costs lower.


&bull; Prices for other goods weaken.


Import prices weakened 2.3% (-4.1% y/y) during March after falling 0.7%
in February, revised from -0.5%. A 3.0% decline had been expected in the Action
Economics Forecast Survey. These figures are not seasonally adjusted and do not
include import duties.

A 27.4% decline (-36.0% y/y) in petroleum &amp; petroleum
product prices accounted for virtually all of the total's drop. It followed an
8.8% fall during February. Nonpetroleum import prices eased 0.1% (-0.9%&nbsp;y/y)
after a 0.2% rise.

Lower prices for foods, feeds &amp; beverages weakened the
import price total with a 1.0% decline (+0.1% y/y). Prices of industrial
materials excluding petroleum eased 0.2% (-2.4% y/y). Capital goods prices rose
0.1% (-1.2% y/y) for a fourth straight month as computer, peripheral &amp;
semiconductor costs increased 0.6% (-5.4% y/y). Capital goods prices excluding
these technology products held steady (0.4% y/y). Auto, parts &amp; engine
prices improved 0.4% (0.5% y/y) as nonauto consumer goods prices declined 0.3%
(-0.6% y/y) following two months of stability.

Export prices declined 1.6% last month (-3.6% y/y) after
weakening 1.1% in February. A 1.9% fall had been expected.

The decline reflected a 1.4% drop (-2.2% y/y) in agricultural
product prices. Nonagricultural product prices also weakened by 1.5% (-3.7%
y/y). Prices for foods, feeds &amp; beverages dropped 1.5% (-1.8% y/y)
Industrial materials prices weakened 4.5% (-11.2% y/y) as petroleum product
costs fell 14.6% (-29.8% y/y). Capital goods prices improved 0.2% (0.8% y/y) as
computer, peripheral &amp; semiconductor prices gained 0.8% (-2.6% y/y).
Excluding these products, the cost of capital goods improved 0.1% (1.6% y/y).
Auto &amp; auto product export prices gained 0.1% (-0.3% y/y) for a second month
while nonauto consumer goods prices declined 0.6% (-0.2% y/y).

The import and export price series can be found in Haver's USECON
database. Detailed figures are available in the USINT database. The
expectations figure from the Action Economics Forecast Survey is in the AS1REPNA database.

<a href="/comment/200414l.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/200414l.png"></a>
 <a href="/comment/200414m.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/200414m.png"></a>

<table class="centered" width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0">
	<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>

 <thead>
 <tr>
 <th class="firstcol" scope="col" ><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USARC04/@E8/@E807/@E807.HTM">Import/Export
 Prices (NSA, %)</a></th>
 <th scope="col" >Mar</th>
 <th scope="col" >Feb</th>
 <th scope="col" >Jan</th>
 <th scope="col" >Mar Y/Y</th>
 <th scope="col" >2019</th>
 <th scope="col" >2018</th>
 <th scope="col" >2017</th>
 </tr>
 </thead>
 <tbody>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" >Imports - All Commodities</td>
 <td>-2.3</td>
 <td>-0.7</td>
 <td>0.2</td>
 <td>-4.1</td>
 <td>-1.3</td>
 <td>3.1</td>
 <td>2.9</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" >&nbsp;&nbsp;Petroleum &amp; Petroleum
 Products</td>
 <td>-27.4</td>
 <td>-8.8</td>
 <td>0.3</td>
 <td>-36.0</td>
 <td>-2.6</td>
 <td>22.0</td>
 <td>25.6</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" >&nbsp;&nbsp;Nonpetroleum</td>
 <td>-0.1</td>
 <td>0.2</td>
 <td>0.1</td>
 <td>-0.9</td>
 <td>-1.1</td>
 <td>1.3</td>
 <td>1.1</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" >Exports - All Commodities</td>
 <td>-1.6</td>
 <td>-1.1</td>
 <td>0.6</td>
 <td>-3.6</td>
 <td>-0.9</td>
 <td>3.4</td>
 <td>2.4</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" >&nbsp;&nbsp;Agricultural</td>
 <td>-1.4</td>
 <td>-2.7</td>
 <td>2.2</td>
 <td>-2.2</td>
 <td>-0.4</td>
 <td>0.6</td>
 <td>1.5</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" >&nbsp;&nbsp;Nonagricultural</td>
 <td>-1.5</td>
 <td>-1.1</td>
 <td>0.6</td>
 <td>-3.7</td>
 <td>-0.9</td>
 <td>3.7</td>
 <td>2.5</td>
 </tr>
 </tbody>
 </table>
 
</body></html>

• Lower oil prices drag costs lower. • Prices for other goods weaken. Import prices weakened 2.3% (-4.1% y/y) during March after falling 0.7% in February, revised from -0.5%. A 3.0% decline had been expected in the Action Economics [...]

U.S. Import and Export Prices Continue to Decline

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html><head>
</head>
<body>
	 
 
 
 

 <a href="/comment/200414f.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/200414f.png"></a>
	 <a href="/comment/200414g.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/200414g.png"></a>

&bull; Economic worries develop.


&bull; Pricing power weakens.


The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB)
indicated that its Small Business Optimism Index plummeted 7.8% (-5.3% y/y) to
96.4 during March, the lowest level since October 2016.

Almost all of the readings in the survey declined, some
sharply. The net percentage of firms expecting the economy to improve declined
to 5% from 22%. The net percentage of firms expecting higher real sales fell to
-12%, the lowest level since August 2011. The net percentage reporting that now
was a good time to expand the business also declined significantly.

On the labor front, the net percentage of firms planning to
increase employment fell m/m to a four-year low of 9%, down from 21% in February.
A lessened 47% of businesses found few or no qualified candidates to fill job
openings, versus 54% twelve months earlier.

A lessened net 31% of firms raised worker compensation, down
from the expansion high of 37% reached in September 2018. A greatly reduced 16%
of firms were planning to raise worker earnings, down from the 26% expansion
high reached in November.

Pricing power deteriorated as a net 6% of firms reported
raising prices, down from a 19% high in May 2018. A sharply lower net 12% of
firms planned to raise average selling prices, less than half the percentage
late in 2018.

Credit became slightly harder to get. A net three percent of
firms reported trouble obtaining financing versus one percent in February.
Sixteen percent of firms reported difficulty near the end of the recession in
2009. A net three percent of firms were not satisfied that their borrowing needs
were met in the last three months.

The small business survey inquires about additional issues
facing small business. A lessened 24% reported a problem with the quality of
labor and a greatly reduced 15% indicated that taxes were the largest problem.
Government requirements were worrisome to a steady 13% of respondents. That
remained below the September 2013 high of 24%. A lessened seven percent of firms
reported the cost of labor as the most significant problem, down from the record
11% in September of last year. Insurance cost/availability concerned a lower 10%
of respondents. Competition from large businesses was felt by a steady 10% of
businesses as the biggest problem. Poor sales were significant for nine percent
of businesses, the most in six months but down from 32% in 2009. Financial &amp;
interest rate problems worried just two percent of respondents. Inflation
concerned a slightly higher two percent of respondents as the biggest problem.

Roughly 24 million small businesses exist in the U.S. and
they create 80% of all new jobs. The index is based 1986=100. The typical NFIB
member employs 10 people and reports gross sales of about $500,000 a year.

The NFIB figures can be found in Haver's SURVEYS database.

<a href="/comment/200414h.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/200414h.png"></a>
 <a href="/comment/200414i.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/200414i.png"></a>

<table class="centered" width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0">
	<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>

 <thead>
 <tr>
 <th class="firstcol" scope="col" >National Federation of
 Independent Business (SA, Net % of Firms)</th>
 <th scope="col" >Mar</th>
 <th scope="col" >Feb</th>
 <th scope="col" >Jan</th>
 <th scope="col" >Mar'19</th>
 <th scope="col" >2019</th>
 <th scope="col" >2018</th>
 <th scope="col" >2017</th>
 </tr>
 </thead>
 <tbody>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" >Small Business Optimism Index (1986=100)</td>
 <td>96.4</td>
 <td>104.5</td>
 <td>104.3</td>
 <td>101.8</td>
 <td>103.0</td>
 <td>106.7</td>
 <td>104.9</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" >Firms Expecting Economy to Improve</td>
 <td>5</td>
 <td>22</td>
 <td>14</td>
 <td>11</td>
 <td>13</td>
 <td>32</td>
 <td>39</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" >Firms Expecting Higher Real Sales</td>
 <td>-12</td>
 <td>19</td>
 <td>23</td>
 <td>19</td>
 <td>18</td>
 <td>26</td>
 <td>23</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" >Firms Reporting Now Is a Good Time to
 Expand the Business</td>
 <td>13</td>
 <td>26</td>
 <td>28</td>
 <td>23</td>
 <td>25</td>
 <td>30</td>
 <td>23</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" >Firms Planning to Increase Employment</td>
 <td>9</td>
 <td>21</td>
 <td>19</td>
 <td>18</td>
 <td>19</td>
 <td>21</td>
 <td>18</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" >Firms With Few or No Qualified
 Applicants for Job Openings (%)</td>
 <td>47</td>
 <td>52</td>
 <td>49</td>
 <td>54</td>
 <td>52</td>
 <td>51</td>
 <td>49</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" >Firms Expecting to Make Capital Outlays</td>
 <td>21</td>
 <td>26</td>
 <td>28</td>
 <td>27</td>
 <td>28</td>
 <td>29</td>
 <td>28</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" >Firms Reporting That Credit Was Harder
 to Get</td>
 <td>3</td>
 <td>1</td>
 <td>4</td>
 <td>6</td>
 <td>4</td>
 <td>4</td>
 <td>4</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" >Firms Raising Average Selling Prices</td>
 <td>6</td>
 <td>11</td>
 <td>15</td>
 <td>12</td>
 <td>13</td>
 <td>15</td>
 <td>7</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" >Firms Raising Worker Compensation</td>
 <td>31</td>
 <td>36</td>
 <td>36</td>
 <td>33</td>
 <td>31</td>
 <td>33</td>
 <td>27</td>
 </tr>
 </tbody>
 </table>
 
</body></html>

• Economic worries develop. • Pricing power weakens. The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) indicated that its Small Business Optimism Index plummeted 7.8% (-5.3% y/y) to 96.4 during March, the lowest level since [...]

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html><head>
</head>
<body>
	 
 
 
 

 <a href="/comment/200414a.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/200414a.png"></a>
	 <a href="/comment/200414b.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/200414b.png"></a>

&bull; Crude oil prices improved last week, but a sideways trend persists.


&bull; A supply/demand imbalance for petroleum intensifies.


The price of West Texas Intermediate crude oil
increased to $24.40 per barrel last week from an average $21.72 one week earlier.
Despite the improvement, the price remained roughly two-thirds lower y/y.
Yesterday, the price was $22.41. The price of Brent crude oil rose to an
average of $32.25 last week. The price has fallen from a $67.38 high averaged in
the last week of December. Yesterday, the price was $31.82.

Retail gasoline prices declined to $1.85 per gallon (-34.5%
y/y) in the week ended April 13 from $1.92 per gallon in the previous week.
Prices remained below their May 2019 peak of $2.90 per gallon. Haver Analytics
adjusts the gasoline price series for regular seasonal variation. The seasonally
adjusted price fell to $1.79 per gallon from $1.89.

The average price of natural gas rose to $1.77/mmbtu
(-35.1% y/y) last week from $1.62, but remained below the peak of $2.81/mmbtu
early in November. Yesterday, the price was $1.86/mmbtu.

Reduced prices reflect supply outpacing demand. In the four
weeks ending April 3, gasoline inventories rose 12.3% y/y and inventories
of all petroleum products increased 3.8% y/y. Gasoline demand declined
19.3% y/y, while total petroleum product demand fell 10.7% y/y. Crude oil input
to refineries declined 5.9% y/y in the past four weeks.

These data are reported by the U.S. Department of Energy. The
price data can be found in Haver's WEEKLY and DAILY databases.
Greater detail on prices, as well as the demand, production and inventory data,
along with regional breakdowns, are in OILWKLY.

<a href="/comment/200414c.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/200414c.png"></a>
 <a href="/comment/200414d.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/200414d.png"></a>

<table class="centered" width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0">
	<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>

 <thead>
 <tr>
 <th class="firstcol" scope="col" >Weekly Energy Prices</th>
 <th>04/13/20</th>
 <th>04/06/20</th>
 <th>03/30/20</th>
 <th>Y/Y %</th>
 <th>2019</th>
 <th>2018</th>
 <th>2017</th>
 </tr>
 </thead>
 <tbody>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" >Retail Gasoline ($ per Gallon Regular,
 Monday Price, End of Period)</td>
 <td>1.85</td>
 <td>1.92</td>
 <td>2.00</td>
 <td>-34.5</td>
 <td>2.57</td>
 <td>2.27</td>
 <td>2.47</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" >Light Sweet Crude Oil, WTI ($ per bbl,
 Previous Week's Average)</td>
 <td>24.40</td>
 <td>21.72</td>
 <td>20.62</td>
 <td>-61.9</td>
 <td>56.91</td>
 <td>64.95</td>
 <td>50.87</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" >Natural Gas ($/mmbtu, LA, Previous
 Week's Average)</td>
 <td>1.77</td>
 <td>1.62</td>
 <td>1.73</td>
 <td>-35.1</td>
 <td>2.57</td>
 <td>3.18</td>
 <td>2.99</td>
 </tr>
 </tbody>
 </table>
 
 </body></html>

• Crude oil prices improved last week, but a sideways trend persists. • A supply/demand imbalance for petroleum intensifies. The price of West Texas Intermediate crude oil increased to $24.40 per barrel last week from an average [...]

U.S. Energy Prices Are Mixed

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html><head>
</head>
<body>
	 
 
 
 

&bull; Crude oil prices improved last week, but a sideways trend persists.


&bull; A supply/demand imbalance for petroleum intensifies.


The price of West Texas Intermediate crude oil
increased to $24.40 per barrel last week from an average $21.72 one week earlier.
Despite the improvement, the price remained roughly two-thirds lower y/y.
Yesterday, the price was&nbsp; $22.41. The price of Brent crude oil rose to an
average of $32.25 last week. The price has fallen from a $67.38 high averaged in
the last week of December. Yesterday, the price was $31.82.

Retail gasoline prices declined to $1.85 per gallon (-34.5%
y/y) in the week ended April 13 from $1.92 per gallon in the previous week.
Prices remained below their May 2019 peak of $2.90 per gallon. Haver Analytics
adjusts the gasoline price series for regular seasonal variation. The seasonally
adjusted price fell to $1.79 per gallon from $1.89.

The average price of natural gas rose to $1.77/mmbtu
(-35.1% y/y) last week from $1.62, but remained below the peak of $2.81/mmbtu
early in November. Yesterday, the price was $1.86/mmbtu.

Reduced prices reflect supply outpacing demand. In the four
weeks ending April 3, gasoline inventories rose 12.3% y/y and inventories
of all petroleum products increased 3.8% y/y. Gasoline demand declined
19.3% y/y, while total petroleum product demand fell 10.7% y/y. Crude oil input
to refineries declined 5.9% y/y in the past four weeks.

These data are reported by the U.S. Department of Energy. The
price data can be found in Haver's WEEKLY and DAILY databases.
Greater detail on prices, as well as the demand, production and inventory data,
along with regional breakdowns, are in OILWKLY.


 <thead>
 <tr>
 <th class="firstcol" scope="col" width="1046">Weekly Energy Prices</th>
 <th width="117">04/13/20</th>
 <th width="117">04/06/20</th>
 <th width="117">03/30/20</th>
 <th width="117">Y/Y %</th>
 <th width="117">2019</th>
 <th width="118">2018</th>
 <th width="118">2017</th>
 </tr>
 </thead>
 <tbody>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" width="1046">Retail Gasoline ($ per Gallon Regular,
 Monday Price, End of Period)</td>
 <td align="center" width="117">1.85</td>
 <td align="center" width="117">1.92</td>
 <td align="center" width="117">2.00</td>
 <td align="center" width="117">-34.5</td>
 <td align="center" width="117">2.57</td>
 <td align="center" width="118">2.27</td>
 <td align="center" width="118">2.47</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" width="1046">Light Sweet Crude Oil, WTI ($ per bbl,
 Previous Week's Average)</td>
 <td align="center" width="117">24.40</td>
 <td align="center" width="117">21.72</td>
 <td align="center" width="117">20.62</td>
 <td align="center" width="117">-61.9</td>
 <td align="center" width="117">56.91</td>
 <td align="center" width="118">64.95</td>
 <td align="center" width="118">50.87</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" width="1046">Natural Gas ($/mmbtu, LA, Previous
 Week's Average)</td>
 <td align="center" width="117">1.77</td>
 <td align="center" width="117">1.62</td>
 <td align="center" width="117">1.73</td>
 <td align="center" width="117">-35.1</td>
 <td align="center" width="117">2.57</td>
 <td align="center" width="118">3.18</td>
 <td align="center" width="118">2.99</td>
 </tr>
 </tbody>


&nbsp;
U.S. Small Business Optimism Improves Slightly 
by <a href="http://www.haver.com/comment/Moeller.html">Tom
Moeller</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;April 15, 2020
• 
• .

The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB)
indicated that its Small Business Optimism Index improved 0.2% (2.8% y/y) to
104.5 during February and added to its 1.6% January rise. The reading remained
4.0% below the high reached in August 2018.
The net percentage of firms expecting the economy to improve
rose to 22% from 14%, but most other readings in the survey weakened. The net
percentage of firms expecting higher real sales fell to 19% and reversed part of
its January rise. The net percentage reporting that now was a good time to
expand the business also declined modestly.&nbsp;
On the labor front, there was improvement. The net percentage
of firms planning to increase employment rose m/m to 21%, its highest level in
three months. Nevertheless, it remained below the expansion high of 26% in
August 2018. A higher 52% of businesses found few or no qualified candidates to
fill job openings. It was the most in three months but still down from 57% in
August of last year.
A steady net 36% of firms raised worker compensation, just
below the expansion high of 37% reached in September 2018. Working the other
way, a greatly reduced 19% of firms were planning to raise worker earnings last
month, down from the 26% expansion high reached three months earlier.
Current pricing power deteriorated as a net 11% of firms
reported raising prices and that mostly reversed three months of increase. A
sharply lower net 20% of firms planned to raise average selling prices,
increased from 15% in September.
Credit became easier to get. Only a net one percent of firms
reported trouble obtaining financing. Sixteen percent of firms reported
difficulty near the end of the recession in 2009. A lessened net two percent of
firms were not satisfied that their borrowing needs were met in the last three
months.
The small business survey inquires about additional issues
facing small business. A lessened 25% reported a problem with the quality of
labor and a greatly reduced 14% indicated that taxes were the largest problem.
Government requirements were worrisome to a steady 13% of respondents. That
remained below the September 2013 high of 24%. A steady eight percent of firms
reported the cost of labor as the most significant problem, down from the record
11% in September of last year. Insurance cost/availability concerned a greatly
increased 12% of respondents. Competition from large businesses was felt by a
slightly higher 10% of businesses as the biggest problem. Poor sales were
significant for just seven percent of businesses, down from 32% in 2009.
Financial &amp; interest rate problems worried just two percent of respondents.
Inflation concerned a steady one percent of respondents as the biggest problem.
Roughly 24 million small businesses exist in the U.S. and
they create 80% of all new jobs. The index is based 1986=100. The typical NFIB
member employs 10 people and reports gross sales of about $500,000 a year.
The NFIB figures can be found in Haver's SURVEYS
database.
<table width="1871" class="centered" border="0" cellSpacing="0">
 <thead>
 <tr>
 <th class="firstcol" scope="col" width="1147">National Federation of
 Independent Business (SA, Net % of Firms)</th>
 <th scope="col" width="102">Mar</th>
 <th scope="col" width="103">Feb</th>
 <th scope="col" width="103">Jan</th>
 <th scope="col" width="103">Mar'19</th>
 <th scope="col" width="103">2019</th>
 <th scope="col" width="103">2018</th>
 <th scope="col" width="103">2017</th>
 </tr>
 </thead>
 <tbody>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Small Business Optimism Index (1986=100)</td>
 <td align="center" width="102"></td>
 <td align="center" width="103">104.5</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">104.3</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">101.7</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">103.0</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">106.7</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">104.9</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Expecting Economy to Improve</td>
 <td align="center" width="102"></td>
 <td align="center" width="103">22</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">14</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">11</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">13</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">32</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">39</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Expecting Higher Real Sales</td>
 <td align="center" width="102"></td>
 <td align="center" width="103">19</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">23</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">16</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">18</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">26</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">23</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Reporting Now Is a Good Time to
 Expand the Business</td>
 <td align="center" width="102"></td>
 <td align="center" width="103">26</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">28</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">22</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">25</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">30</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">23</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Planning to Increase Employment</td>
 <td align="center" width="102"></td>
 <td align="center" width="103">21</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">19</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">16</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">19</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">21</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">18</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms With Few or No Qualified
 Applicants for Job Openings (%)</td>
 <td align="center" width="102"></td>
 <td align="center" width="103">52</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">49</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">49</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">52</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">51</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">49</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Expecting to Make Capital Outlays</td>
 <td align="center" width="102"></td>
 <td align="center" width="103">26</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">28</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">27</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">28</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">29</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">28</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Reporting That Credit Was Harder
 to Get</td>
 <td align="center" width="102"></td>
 <td align="center" width="103">1</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">4</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">6</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">4</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">4</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">4</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Raising Average Selling Prices</td>
 <td align="center" width="102"></td>
 <td align="center" width="103">11</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">15</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">13</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">13</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">15</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">7</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Raising Worker Compensation</td>
 <td align="center" width="102"></td>
 <td align="center" width="103">36</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">36</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">31x</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">31</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">33</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">27</td>
 </tr>
 </tbody>
</table>


</body>

</html>

<html>

<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="Microsoft FrontPage 4.0">
<meta name="ProgId" content="FrontPage.Editor.Document">
<title>FIBER</title>
</head>

<body>

 

• Economic worries develop.
• Pricing power weakens. 

The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB)
indicated that its Small Business Optimism Index plummeted 7.8% (-5.3% y/y) to
96.4 during March, the lowest level since October 2016.
Almost all of the readings in the survey declined, some
sharply. The net percentage of firms expecting the economy to improve declined
to 5% from 22%. The net percentage of firms expecting higher real sales fell to
-12%, the lowest level since August 2011. The net percentage reporting that now
was a good time to expand the business also declined significantly.&nbsp;
On the labor front, the net percentage of firms planning to
increase employment fell m/m to a four-year low of 9%, down from 21% in February.
A lessened 47% of businesses found few or no qualified candidates to fill job
openings, versus 54% twelve months earlier.
A lessened net 31% of firms raised worker compensation, down
from the expansion high of 37% reached in September 2018. A greatly reduced 16%
of firms were planning to raise worker earnings, down from the 26% expansion
high reached in November.
Pricing power deteriorated as a net 6% of firms reported
raising prices, down from a 19% high in May 2018. A sharply lower net 12% of
firms planned to raise average selling prices, less than half the percentage
late in 2018.
Credit became slightly harder to get. A net three percent of
firms reported trouble obtaining financing versus one percent in February.
Sixteen percent of firms reported difficulty near the end of the recession in
2009. A net three percent of firms were not satisfied that their borrowing needs
were met in the last three months.
The small business survey inquires about additional issues
facing small business. A lessened 24% reported a problem with the quality of
labor and a greatly reduced 15% indicated that taxes were the largest problem.
Government requirements were worrisome to a steady 13% of respondents. That
remained below the September 2013 high of 24%. A lessened seven percent of firms
reported the cost of labor as the most significant problem, down from the record
11% in September of last year. Insurance cost/availability concerned a lower 10%
of respondents. Competition from large businesses was felt by a steady 10% of
businesses as the biggest problem. Poor sales were significant for nine percent
of businesses, the most in six months but down from 32% in 2009. Financial &amp;
interest rate problems worried just two percent of respondents. Inflation
concerned a slightly higher two percent of respondents as the biggest problem.
Roughly 24 million small businesses exist in the U.S. and
they create 80% of all new jobs. The index is based 1986=100. The typical NFIB
member employs 10 people and reports gross sales of about $500,000 a year.
The NFIB figures can be found in Haver's SURVEYS
database.
<table width="1871" class="centered" border="0" cellSpacing="0">
 <thead>
 <tr>
 <th class="firstcol" scope="col" width="1147">National Federation of
 Independent Business (SA, Net % of Firms)</th>
 <th scope="col" width="102">Mar</th>
 <th scope="col" width="103">Feb</th>
 <th scope="col" width="103">Jan</th>
 <th scope="col" width="103">Mar'19</th>
 <th scope="col" width="103">2019</th>
 <th scope="col" width="103">2018</th>
 <th scope="col" width="103">2017</th>
 </tr>
 </thead>
 <tbody>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Small Business Optimism Index (1986=100)</td>
 <td align="center" width="102">96.4</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">104.5</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">104.3</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">101.8</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">103.0</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">106.7</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">104.9</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Expecting Economy to Improve</td>
 <td align="center" width="102">5</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">22</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">14</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">11</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">13</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">32</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">39</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Expecting Higher Real Sales</td>
 <td align="center" width="102">-12</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">19</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">23</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">19</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">18</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">26</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">23</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Reporting Now Is a Good Time to
 Expand the Business</td>
 <td align="center" width="102">13</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">26</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">28</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">23</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">25</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">30</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">23</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Planning to Increase Employment</td>
 <td align="center" width="102">9</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">21</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">19</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">18</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">19</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">21</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">18</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms With Few or No Qualified
 Applicants for Job Openings (%)</td>
 <td align="center" width="102">47</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">52</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">49</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">54</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">52</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">51</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">49</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Expecting to Make Capital Outlays</td>
 <td align="center" width="102">21</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">26</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">28</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">27</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">28</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">29</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">28</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Reporting That Credit Was Harder
 to Get</td>
 <td align="center" width="102">3</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">1</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">4</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">6</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">4</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">4</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">4</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Raising Average Selling Prices</td>
 <td align="center" width="102">6</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">11</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">15</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">12</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">13</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">15</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">7</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Raising Worker Compensation</td>
 <td align="center" width="102">31</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">36</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">36</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">33</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">31</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">33</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">27</td>
 </tr>
 </tbody>
</table>


</body>

</html>

The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) indicated that its Small Business Optimism Index plummeted 7.8% (-5.3% y/y) to 96.4 during March, the lowest level since October 2016. Almost all of the readings in the survey [...]

<html>

<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="Microsoft FrontPage 4.0">
<meta name="ProgId" content="FrontPage.Editor.Document">
<title>FIBER</title>
</head>

<body>

 

• Economic worries develop.
• Pricing power weakens. 

The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB)
indicated that its Small Business Optimism Index plummeted 7.8% (-5.3% y/y) to
96.4 during March, the lowest level since October 2016.
Almost all of the readings in the survey declined, some
sharply. The net percentage of firms expecting the economy to improve declined
to 5% from 22%. The net percentage of firms expecting higher real sales fell to
-12%, the lowest level since August 2011. The net percentage reporting that now
was a good time to expand the business also declined significantly.&nbsp;
On the labor front, the net percentage of firms planning to
increase employment fell m/m to a four-year low of 9%, down from 21% in February.
A lessened 47% of businesses found few or no qualified candidates to fill job
openings, versus 54% twelve months earlier.
A lessened net 31% of firms raised worker compensation, down
from the expansion high of 37% reached in September 2018. A greatly reduced 16%
of firms were planning to raise worker earnings, down from the 26% expansion
high reached in November.
Pricing power deteriorated as a net 6% of firms reported
raising prices, down from a 19% high in May 2018. A sharply lower net 12% of
firms planned to raise average selling prices, less than half the percentage
late in 2018.
Credit became slightly harder to get. A net three percent of
firms reported trouble obtaining financing versus one percent in February.
Sixteen percent of firms reported difficulty near the end of the recession in
2009. A net three percent of firms were not satisfied that their borrowing needs
were met in the last three months.
The small business survey inquires about additional issues
facing small business. A lessened 24% reported a problem with the quality of
labor and a greatly reduced 15% indicated that taxes were the largest problem.
Government requirements were worrisome to a steady 13% of respondents. That
remained below the September 2013 high of 24%. A lessened seven percent of firms
reported the cost of labor as the most significant problem, down from the record
11% in September of last year. Insurance cost/availability concerned a lower 10%
of respondents. Competition from large businesses was felt by a steady 10% of
businesses as the biggest problem. Poor sales were significant for nine percent
of businesses, the most in six months but down from 32% in 2009. Financial &amp;
interest rate problems worried just two percent of respondents. Inflation
concerned a slightly higher two percent of respondents as the biggest problem.
Roughly 24 million small businesses exist in the U.S. and
they create 80% of all new jobs. The index is based 1986=100. The typical NFIB
member employs 10 people and reports gross sales of about $500,000 a year.
The NFIB figures can be found in Haver's SURVEYS
database.
<table width="1871" class="centered" border="0" cellSpacing="0">
 <thead>
 <tr>
 <th class="firstcol" scope="col" width="1147">National Federation of
 Independent Business (SA, Net % of Firms)</th>
 <th scope="col" width="102">Mar</th>
 <th scope="col" width="103">Feb</th>
 <th scope="col" width="103">Jan</th>
 <th scope="col" width="103">Mar'19</th>
 <th scope="col" width="103">2019</th>
 <th scope="col" width="103">2018</th>
 <th scope="col" width="103">2017</th>
 </tr>
 </thead>
 <tbody>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Small Business Optimism Index (1986=100)</td>
 <td align="center" width="102">96.4</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">104.5</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">104.3</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">101.8</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">103.0</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">106.7</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">104.9</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Expecting Economy to Improve</td>
 <td align="center" width="102">5</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">22</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">14</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">11</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">13</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">32</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">39</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Expecting Higher Real Sales</td>
 <td align="center" width="102">-12</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">19</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">23</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">19</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">18</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">26</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">23</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Reporting Now Is a Good Time to
 Expand the Business</td>
 <td align="center" width="102">13</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">26</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">28</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">23</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">25</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">30</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">23</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Planning to Increase Employment</td>
 <td align="center" width="102">9</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">21</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">19</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">18</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">19</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">21</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">18</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms With Few or No Qualified
 Applicants for Job Openings (%)</td>
 <td align="center" width="102">47</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">52</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">49</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">54</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">52</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">51</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">49</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Expecting to Make Capital Outlays</td>
 <td align="center" width="102">21</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">26</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">28</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">27</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">28</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">29</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">28</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Reporting That Credit Was Harder
 to Get</td>
 <td align="center" width="102">3</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">1</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">4</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">6</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">4</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">4</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">4</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Raising Average Selling Prices</td>
 <td align="center" width="102">6</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">11</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">15</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">12</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">13</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">15</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">7</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" width="1147">Firms Raising Worker Compensation</td>
 <td align="center" width="102">31</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">36</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">36</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">33</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">31</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">33</td>
 <td align="center" width="103">27</td>
 </tr>
 </tbody>
</table>

&nbsp;
U.S. Import and Export Prices Continue to Decline 
by <a href="http://www.haver.com/comment/Moeller.html">Tom
Moeller</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;April 14, 2020
• Lower oil prices drag costs lower.
• Prices for other goods weaken.

Import prices weakened 2.3% during March after falling 0.7%
in February, revised from -0.5%. A 3.0% decline had been expected in the Action
Economics Forecast Survey. These figures are not seasonally adjusted and do not
include import duties.
A 27.4% decline (-36.0% y/y) in petroleum &amp; petroleum
product prices accounted for virtually all of the total's drop. It followed an
8.8% fall during February. Nonpetroleum import prices eased 0.1% (-0.9%&nbsp;y/y)
after a 0.2% rise.
Lower prices for foods, feeds &amp; beverages weakened the
import price total with a 1.0% decline (+0.1% y/y). Prices of industrial
materials excluding petroleum eased 0.2% (-2.4% y/y). Capital goods prices rose
0.1% (-1.2% y/y) for a fourth straight month as computer, peripheral &amp;
semiconductor costs increased 0.6% (-5.4% y/y). Capital goods prices excluding
these technology products held steady (0.4% y/y). Auto, parts &amp; engine
prices improved 0.4% (0.5% y/y) as nonauto consumer goods prices declined 0.3%
(-0.6% y/y) following two months of stability.
Export prices declined 1.6% last month (-3.6% y/y) after
weakening 1.1% in February. A 1.9% fall had been expected.
The decline reflected a 1.4% drop (-2.2% y/y) in agricultural
product prices. Nonagricultural product prices also weakened by 1.5% (-3.7%
y/y). Prices for foods, feeds &amp; beverages dropped 1.5% (-1.8% y/y)
Industrial materials prices weakened 4.5% (-11.2% y/y) as petroleum product
costs fell 14.6% (-29.8% y/y). Capital goods prices improved 0.2% (0.8% y/y) as
computer, peripheral &amp; semiconductor prices gained 0.8% (-2.6% y/y).
Excluding these products, the cost of capital goods improved 0.1% (1.6% y/y).
Auto &amp; auto product export prices gained 0.1% (-0.3% y/y) for a second month
while nonauto consumer goods prices declined 0.6% (-0.2% y/y).
The import and export price series can be found in Haver's USECON
database. Detailed figures are available in the USINT database. The
expectations figure from the Action Economics Forecast Survey is in the AS1REPNA
database.
<table width="1871" class="centered" border="0" cellSpacing="0">
 <thead>
 <tr>
 <th class="firstcol" scope="col" width="856"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USARC04/@E8/@E807/@E807.HTM">Import/Export
 Prices (NSA, %)</a></th>
 <th scope="col" width="144">Mar</th>
 <th scope="col" width="144">Feb</th>
 <th scope="col" width="144">Jan</th>
 <th scope="col" width="144">Mar Y/Y</th>
 <th scope="col" width="145">2019</th>
 <th scope="col" width="145">2018</th>
 <th scope="col" width="145">2017</th>
 </tr>
 </thead>
 <tbody>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" width="856">Imports - All Commodities</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">-2.3</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">-0.7</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">0.2</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">-4.1</td>
 <td align="center" width="145">-1.3</td>
 <td align="center" width="145">3.1</td>
 <td align="center" width="145">2.9</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" width="856">&nbsp;&nbsp;Petroleum &amp; Petroleum
 Products</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">-27.4</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">-8.8</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">0.3</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">-36.0</td>
 <td align="center" width="145">-2.6</td>
 <td align="center" width="145">22.0</td>
 <td align="center" width="145">25.6</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" width="856">&nbsp;&nbsp;Nonpetroleum</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">-0.1</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">&nbsp;0.2</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">0.1</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">-0.9</td>
 <td align="center" width="145">-1.1</td>
 <td align="center" width="145">1.3</td>
 <td align="center" width="145">1.1</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" width="856">Exports - All Commodities</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">-1.6</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">-1.1</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">0.6</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">-3.6</td>
 <td align="center" width="145">-0.9</td>
 <td align="center" width="145">3.4</td>
 <td align="center" width="145">2.4</td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
 <td class="firstcol" width="856">&nbsp;&nbsp;Agricultural</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">-1.4</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">-2.7</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">2.2</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">-2.2</td>
 <td align="center" width="145">-0.4</td>
 <td align="center" width="145">0.6</td>
 <td align="center" width="145">1.5</td>
 </tr>
 <tr class="odd">
 <td class="firstcol" width="856">&nbsp;&nbsp;Nonagricultural</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">-1.5</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">-1.1</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">0.6</td>
 <td align="center" width="144">-3.7</td>
 <td align="center" width="145">-0.9</td>
 <td align="center" width="145">3.7</td>
 <td align="center" width="145">2.5</td>
 </tr>
 </tbody>
</table>


</body>

</html>

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

Stable job openings and hiring rates point to cautious hiring

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

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

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

Tighter US immigration enforcement adversely impacting labor force

Economic policy uncertainty, while still elevated, is declining

Gradual disinflation and easier monetary policies across advanced economies

Largest October layoffs since 2003, led by technology

Subdued global shipping costs not yet pointing to supply chain problems

PMIs show still-elevated but slowing US inflation

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

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


Privacy Policy

Disclaimer

Contact us

Service Health

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

London

Singapore

Tokyo

New York

Economy in Brief

Viewpoints

Contact Us

Our Data

Our Products

What We Do

Our Authors

About Us

Data News

Featured Data Additions

Resources

Release Calendars

Training Center

Webinars

Newsletters

Download Software

For Clients

Live Updates

Michael J. Moran

260428N.jpg

260428O.jpg

The Conference Board’s index of Consumer Confidence inched higher in April from an upwardly revised reading in March. The combined changes left the measure 1.1% higher than the preliminary tally in March. Despite the improvement, the index remained in the low end of the range for the current expansion. The index in April totaled 92.8, down from an average of 96.1 in 2025 and an annual cyclical high of 105.4 in 2023.

The Improvement in April reflected a pickup in the expectations component, which rose 1.7%. The current conditions component inched 0.2% lower. Overall views on current conditions slipped despite more favorable assessments of the labor market. The so-called measure of the jobs gap (share of respondents indicating that jobs are plentiful less the share saying that jobs are hard to get) rose 1.4 percentage points higher to 7.5%. The pickup reflected a drop in the share indicating that jobs are hard to get (down 1.5 percentage points to 19.8%). The share indicating that jobs are plentiful eased 0.1 percentage point to 27.3%.

Although expectations improved in April, from a long-term perspective they could be viewed as the more important factor restraining the headline measure of confidence. As shown in the left chart below, the expectations component of confidence shows considerably less volatility than the current conditions component does. The contrasting patterns suggest that individuals realize that the economy will undergo possibly sharp cyclical swings, but they expect conditions at some point to return to an underlying norm.

The current conditions index in the current cycle has indeed dropped noticeably, but it is still above the long run average (123.8 in April versus the average of approximately 108 from 1990 to 2025). The expectations component, as usual, has eased less than the current conditions component, but its shift has pushed the measure to the low end of its long-run range (72.2 in April versus an average of approximately 88).

Interestingly, concern about the labor market seems to be a factor affecting expectations. While current views on the labor market are favorable (plentiful less hard to get jobs gap of 7.5%), Individual are concerned about the future. The survey asks respondents if they expect more jobs or fewer jobs six months hence. The share indicating fewer jobs has moved well into the upper end of the historical range. Such observations in the past were typically seen only during recession (chart, below right). An unfavorable view on interest rates also seems to be playing a role in depressing the expectations component. More than 60% of respondents to the current survey expect higher interest rates 12 months from now.

The results from the Conference Board survey of consumers differ markedly from those of the University of Michigan Survey Research Center. The Michigan results show consumer sentiment at a record low, while the Conference Board index is only slightly below its long-run average. The difference most likely reflects the nature of the questions in the surveys. The Conference Board focuses on business and employment conditions, while Michigan emphasizes personal finances. The focus on finances, along with questions on inflation, probably picks up concerns about affordability.

The Consumer Confidence data are available in Haver’s **CBDB** database. The total indexes, which are indexed to 1985=100, appear in **USECON**, and market expectations are in **AS1REPNA**.

260428P.jpg

260428Q.jpg

- Expectations improved slightly in April, but are still subdued relative to norms.
- Moderately favorable view of current conditions.

Consumer Confidence: Modest Change in April

Winnie Tapasanun

260428J35.jpg

260428K35.jpg

U.S. house prices were essentially unchanged m/m in February after rises of 0.2% in January (+0.1% initially) and 0.3% in December (unrevised), according to the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) House Price Index. February marked the first flat reading since September following four consecutive m/m increases. The HPI was at 441.43 in February, up 14.8% from its August 2022 low of 384.59. The year-on-year growth rate eased to 1.7% in February—the lowest since March 2012—from 1.8% in January (+4.1% in February 2025), down from a high of 6.9% in February 2024 and well below a peak of 18.5% in February 2022.

By region, February FHFA house prices showed a mixed performance. House prices fell m/m in February (vs. January) in four of the nine census divisions. Declines were led by Mountain (-1.1% vs. +0.4%), followed by Pacific (-0.5% vs. +0.6%), West North Central (-0.4% vs. +0.3%), and Middle Atlantic (-0.1% vs. +0.3%). To the upside, house prices rose m/m in four census divisions in February (vs. January): South Atlantic (+0.6% vs. -0.2%), East South Central (+0.2% vs. +1.2%), New England (+0.2% vs. +0.6%), and West South Central (+0.2% vs. -0.3%). Meanwhile, house prices in East North Central were virtually unchanged m/m for the second successive month in February following seven straight m/m gains.

Year-on-year house prices continued to rise in February in most regions, except Mountain, Pacific, and West South Central. The y/y growth rate accelerated in February (vs. January) in only two of the nine census divisions: East South Central (+4.0% vs. +3.2%) and South Atlantic (+0.9% vs. +0.4%). Meanwhile, house price growth decelerated y/y in February (vs. January) in four regions: New England (+3.1% vs. +3.9%), West North Central (+3.1% vs. +3.6%), East North Central (+3.8% vs. +4.5%), and Middle Atlantic (+4.2% vs. +4.5%). To the downside, Mountain (-0.7% vs. 0.0%), Pacific (-0.4% vs. -0.3%), and West South Central (-0.1% vs. -0.4%) posted y/y declines in February.

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

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

260428L35.jpg

260428M35.jpg

- February FHFA HPI 0.0% m/m; +1.7% y/y, lowest since Mar. ’12.
- House prices down m/m in four of nine census divisions, led by Mountain (-1.1%); up in four, driven by South Atlantic (+0.6%); flat in East North Central.
- House prices up y/y in six of nine regions, led by Middle Atlantic (+4.2%), but down in Mountain (-0.7%), Pacific (-0.4%), and West South Central (-0.1%).

U.S. FHFA House Prices Flat in February After Four Straight M/M Gains

Tian Yong Woon

In this week’s Letter, we cover the latest developments and implications of the Middle East conflict for Asia, while also making space for other important themes, including artificial intelligence (AI). The Middle East conflict remains in a no deal state coming out of the weekend, though some early Monday optimism emerged in Asian markets following Iran’s reported offer to reopen the Strait of Hormuz (chart 1). Nonetheless, as the Strait closure drags on, so too do the fiscal costs of domestic fossil fuel subsidies across Asia, which have been shown to move closely with crude oil prices (chart 2). While such measures offer direct relief by cushioning household energy costs, they remain difficult to sustain over the long haul.

Over the week, we also saw a further fraying in regional monetary policy trends, with the Philippines hiking its policy rate for the first time in about two years amid inflation concerns, while Indonesia stood pat on rates (chart 3). Investor attention is likely to remain fixed on monetary policy this week, with the Bank of Japan due to decide on policy. Expectations for an April hike have faded amid the persistent Middle East conflict, though yen weakness continues to present a source of concern (chart 4). The week also brings China’s latest PMI readings (chart 5), adding to the recent run of hard data accompanying the Q1 GDP release.

Beyond the Middle East conflict, the evolution of AI continues to demand close attention. Before geopolitical tensions took centre stage, AI was the dominant market narrative — and that enthusiasm has hardly faded. If anything, recent developments suggest the story is broadening: use cases are expanding, scalability is improving, and access is widening beyond large corporates to the mass market — increasingly spilling into the realm of physical AI. It may well be this persistent wave of optimism that is helping to underpin equity valuations, even as the geopolitical backdrop darkens (chart 6).

**The Middle East conflict**
About two months in, we remain stuck in the limbo of the US-Iran conflict, which has left the Strait of Hormuz largely closed and much of the world starved of the critical oil flows needed to power the global economy. The back and forth between the US and Iran has persisted in recent weeks, with both sides again failing to reach a peace deal over the weekend, though Monday’s news of Iran offering to reopen the Strait has revived some hope in markets. In truth, commodity and market valuations do not hinge so much on a peace deal itself, but rather on the resumption of oil flows through the Strait, something that could materialise even in the absence of a formal deal, though any agreement that includes and credibly delivers such a reopening would likely be warmly received by markets. Until then, market gyrations are likely to persist, with prices fluctuating in response to each new snippet of news. And until then, the world will continue both to be starved of, while gradually adapting to, the drip feed of oil flows emerging from the Strait.

260427T1.jpg

**The fiscal costs of the Middle East conflict**
As the Middle East conflict drags on, so too does the strain on fiscal resources across parts of Asia, as the costs of energy-related subsidy programmes continue to mount. While such programmes have an immediate, direct, and tangible impact in shielding households from surging energy costs, they are far from sustainable, particularly if oil prices remain well above targeted levels or stay elevated for an extended period. As chart 2 illustrates, the costs of these explicit subsidy programmes tend to rise closely with crude oil prices, as seen in India and Indonesia. Other measures adopted elsewhere, such as drawing down oil reserves, may be less fiscally costly, but are similarly difficult to sustain indefinitely. In both respects, the clock is ticking, and the world continues to hold its breath as the conflict drags on.

260427T2.jpg

**The latest central bank responses to the conflict**
Over the past week, Asia saw two central bank decisions. The Philippines’ (BSP) opted to deliver its first rate hike in about two years, while Indonesia’s (BI) chose to stand pat on policy rates and instead committed to stepped up FX intervention (chart 3). This latest round of decisions points to a further fraying of what had been a broad regional monetary policy consensus, namely that central banks would delay additional easing while maintaining a high bar for outright tightening. Domestic considerations, however, remain paramount. In the Philippines’ case, the central bank has moved to rein in inflation, which is already showing notable signs of price pass through stemming from disruptions linked to the Strait of Hormuz. That said, BSP is not the first in the region to buck the reluctance to tighten. Singapore’s central bank had already tightened policy in mid-April, albeit through its own distinct framework, given its use of the exchange rate rather than policy rates as the primary channel for monetary policy.

260427T3.jpg

**The week ahead**
Looking to the week ahead, a major central bank decision looms in Japan. Market expectations for the Bank of Japan to deliver a rate hike at its April meeting have ebbed amid the persistence of the Middle East conflict, to which Japan remains particularly vulnerable given its reliance on oil imports flowing through the Strait of Hormuz. At the same time, inflation in Japan has yet to become a major concern, with recent readings having picked up but not yet entering troubling territory. One potential source of concern, however, lies with the Japanese yen, which has remained on a weakening trend since early last year (chart 4). That depreciation has been one of the key arguments underpinning calls for further rate hikes.

260427T4.jpg

The week also brings China’s latest PMIs into focus. March saw a divergence between China’s official PMI readings, which improved, and the unofficial readings from RatingDog, which instead pulled back. Nonetheless, both official and unofficial gauges remained in expansionary territory (chart 5), with investors now watching closely to see whether that resilience can be sustained amid ongoing stresses from the Middle East, or whether offsetting drivers can continue to keep Chinese business sentiment and prospects buoyant.

260427T5.jpg

**Beyond the strait**
Moving beyond the Middle East conflict, a whole host of developments continue to unfold globally, many of which have in fact helped offset some of the pessimism wrought by the Strait’s chokehold. One such development is artificial intelligence (AI), which had dominated headlines before the outbreak of the conflict and continues to advance at breakneck pace. AI capabilities are still rapidly evolving, while practical applications, such as physical AI embodied in humanoid robots, are beginning to show broader and stronger use cases. Production of such robots is also becoming increasingly scalable and within reach not just for industrial complexes and healthcare, but for the mass market as well. It is perhaps growing optimism around these prospects that has helped keep equity valuations buoyant, even in the face of the festering conflict in the Middle East. Moreover, while concerns over AI-driven job displacement persist, new opportunities are emerging as well, particularly for AI adopters, with a growing share of job postings in Western economies increasingly referencing AI-related skills, as shown in chart 6.

260427T6.jpg

Asia

Economic Letter from Asia: Not Just About the Strait

260427E.jpg

**The Distributive Trades Survey**

The U.K. Distributive Trades Survey for April 2026 and the look-ahead expectation readings for May paint an extremely soured outlook for the U.K. economy.

**Retail ranking**: Surveys for retail sales compared to a year ago, orders compared to a year ago, and sales evaluated for the time of year all have rankings near zero, which is the worst result on this timeline. This zero distinction applies to retail sales compared to a year ago. The best ranking is 11.6%; that is for sales evaluated for the time of year. Orders compared to a year ago have a 4.2 percentile standing. The stock-to-sales ratio—which is a completely different concept—shows that the inventory-to-sales ratio has a 29.9 percentile standing.

**Retail diffusion**: The raw April diffusion readings (up minus down diffusion) show that sales compared to a year ago slipped to a reading of -68 in April from -52 in March. Orders fell to -46 in April from -26 in March. Sales evaluated for the time of year fell to -32 April from -23 in March. All three measures weakened, and all three weakened decisively, resulting in extremely weak rankings. All of the rankings are executed on data back to 2002.

**Expectations for retailing**: The expectations readings for May show slippage again across all three metrics: expected sales compared to a year ago, expected orders compared to a year ago, and expected sales for the time of year. Expected sales compared to a year ago fell to -60 in May from -49 in April. Orders compared to a year ago declined to -45 in May from -30 in April, and sales for the time of year slipped to -43 from -19. In May, these readings have rankings in a 0.4 percentile standing for sales compared to a year ago, a 1.8 percentile standing for sales evaluated relative to the time of year, and a 4.6 percentile standing for orders compared to a year ago. These two panels on current and expected retail sales volumes are just simply terrible: weak monthly, weak in ranking terms, and showing slipping momentum.

The distributor trade series also provides data on the wholesale sector. While the wholesale sector is not quite as beat up as the retail sector, it's still extremely weak. There is no cause for any kind of hope that things are getting better based on wholesaling trends.

**Wholesaling**: The wholesale survey for sales compared to a year ago edged lower to -32 in April from -31 in March. Orders compared to a year ago remained at a reading of -41 in April. Sales evaluated for the time of year improved to a reading of -20 in April from -39 in March—a significant step up, but still very weak. The percentile standings for these three categories show sales compared to a year ago at the 8.8 percentile, orders compared to a year ago at the 5.6 percentile, and sales evaluated for the time of year at the 14.8 percentile.

**Wholesale Expectations**: The look-ahead observations, which provide expectations for wholesaling in May, show a similar constellation of readings, with sales compared to a year ago falling to -37 in May from -27 in April and orders compared to a year ago falling to -42 from -38, while sales evaluated for the time of year improved to  16 from  37. That category for wholesale sales improved both in April in real time and in May for expectations; however, it continues to have a very weak percentile standing, at the 17.9 percentile in May, while sales for a year ago have a 6.7 percentile standing and orders for a year ago have a 6.0 percentile standing.

260427.jpg

While some of the global PMI data have improved, these survey data for the U.K. are particularly dour. The war in Ukraine drags on, and there's a new conflict in Iran that has shut the Strait of Hormuz, creating energy problems for much of Europe. More broadly, supply chains have been harmed. In addition, the U.K. is undergoing a bout of political instability, as its Prime Minister is under pressure and a good deal of political uncertainty is being worsened by deteriorating economic performance.

Both the U.K. and the European Monetary Union had been showing some progress on inflation until the Iran war hit. Now, as the oil prices are up so sharply, headline inflation is going to be worse everywhere and there will probably be a bit more attention directed to the core inflation rate. However, the U.K. has had inflation too hot for a while, and it has failed to settle down. At its last meeting, the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee warned that if the war was still ongoing at the next meeting, there would be a risk of a rate hike. So, it would seem that a rate hike is going to be in play unless the economy falls off a cliff first, which, based on the distributive trades data, is also something that could happen. The U.K. economy appears to be on very unsound footing, and what happens next is just about anybody's guess.

United Kingdom

U.K. Retail Sales: Worse Than During Covid

260424E.jpg

The onset of the war in Iran appears to have hit the German economy extremely hard as the Ifo survey shows very substantial and broad-based decline across its survey in April. The Ifo survey features readings for five sectors as well as an aggregate reading, and it surveys them for climate, current conditions, and expectations. The decline in the Ifo survey is present for all three concepts and across all five sectors, marking the weakening in April as a highly significant and extremely disturbing development. Only manufacturing in the current conditions survey escapes a month-to-month decline.

**The Ifo sequences**: The **climate** reading fell both overall and across each of the five sectors. **Current conditions** declined for the overall and for four of the five sectors, with manufacturing the sole exception. **Expectations** declined for the overall and for all sectors. Several of the sector declines were for a very substantial magnitude, especially when compared to historic changes in these indexes.

**Monthly changes in readings—severe broad deterioration**
The month-to-month change in the climate reading has weakened more month-to-month 19% of the time. That overall result, however, is boosted by manufacturing where the monthly change has been weaker 35% of the time (on data back to 2011). However, all other sectors have seen climate weaker m/m only 2.3% to 6.3% of the time! The current situation readings weakened, with the headline weakening more m/m 11% of the time. This was boosted by manufacturing, the only sector that improved on the month; its ranking on change was in its 85th percentile—quite good and truly stand-alone good news. The other current changes by sector ranged from construction being weaker 1.7% of the time, to retailing that has been weaker about 30% of the time in terms of m/m changes. Expectation changes were uniformly terrible, with the headline drop weaker only 6.3% of the time and sector change month-to-month weaker between 9% and 1.7% of the time. The monthly weakening was uniform and substantial. I document it with these calculations, but you can also see it on the chart above.

**Climate**: The bottom line is that the all-sector index for climate fell to -20.3 in April from -18 in March, placing it at a 10.5 percentile standing on data since 1993. The sector ranking is the highest for construction with a 42.2 percentile standing and the weakness for services at a 1.1 percentile standing—weaker than the table reading nearly 99% of the time. In terms of percentile standing levels or monthly changes, conditions are closing in on grim.

**Current conditions**: Current conditions saw the all-sector index slip to -5.3 in April from -2.4 in March. The headline ranking stands at a 9.8 percentile mark, making it—like the climate reading—weaker than its current reading only about 10% of the time. The strongest reading under current conditions is for construction which has a 60.6 percentile standing; it is the only ranking in the table above its historic median. Manufacturing, the only sector in the survey that improved month-to-month, has a 22.5 percentile standing, while services record the weakest percentile standing under current conditions, at an 8.4 percentile standing.

**Expectations:** The all-sector index for expectations fell to -25.3 in April from -19.9 in March, placing it at a 6.3 percentile standing. The percentile standings across sectors range from a high of 9.5% for manufacturing to a low of 1.5% for retailing. Up until earlier this year, the Ifo was showing signs of improvement; however, all of that has simply collapsed in the last month. Weakness is across economic concepts and sectors, as documented above. For reference, the table also gives a separate set of rankings on where the various indexes stand since the invasion of Ukraine, since that was another marked event that drove the index, that had been improving after Covid, down to lower levels.  Ranked even on this reduced scale looking at conditions only since the invasion of Ukraine, when conditions have generally been weaker, the current rankings across the Ifo survey remained extremely weak. This is a very disturbing survey for the German economy.

Economy in Brief

Jump to:

U.S. Small Businesses Become Pessimistic

Inflation Continues Tame in EMU; Finland's Prices Drop in March

U.S. Import and Export Prices Continue to Decline

U.S. Small Businesses Become Pessimistic

U.S. Energy Prices Are Mixed

U.S. Energy Prices Are Mixed

U.S. Small Businesses Become Pessimistic

U.S. Small Businesses Become Pessimistic