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/070625b.jpg" width="353">
Consumer Price Indexes for four countries--China, India, Singapore and Vietnam--were released today and can be found in the Haver Data Base. EMERGEPR, together with similar data for other Asian nations. Data are available, through May, except for India.
Inflation, as measured by the year to year increase in the Consumer Price Index, has varied widely in the various countries of Asia. Inflation in the first five months of this year are shown for selected Asian countries in the table below, together with the annual rates for 2004, 2005 and 2006.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/070625a.jpg" width="353">
Deflationary tendencies that were evident in the Greater China Area appear to have lessened in Hong Kong and China, but still persist in Taiwan. These trends are shown in the first chart.
Among the high inflation countries, Vietnam, Indonesia and India, for example, inflation in Vietnam after decelerating somewhat last year has increased in the current months of this year. Inflation in India has trended upward since mid 2005. Inflation in Indonesia jumped in late 2005 as a result of natural disasters and fell precipitately in late 2006. Inflation there is now moderately below the levels reached in early 2005 and no clear trend is apparent, as can be seen in the second chart.<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/070625c.jpg" width="353">
The third chart shows the course of inflation in countries that have experienced moderating inflation in recent years. Thailand, like Indonesia experienced exceptionally high inflation in late 2005 and early 2006 followed by a sharp fall later in the year. Among these countries inflation in Singapore and, to a lesser extent, in South Korea is trending upward.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">INFLATION IN ASIA Y/Y % CHANGE IN CPI&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">May 07</th>
<th scope="col">Apr&nbsp; 07&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">Mar 07&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">Feb&nbsp; 07&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">Jan 07&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">2006</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">China</td>
<td>3.42</td>
<td>3.05</td>
<td>3.33</td>
<td>2.75</td>
<td>2.21</td>
<td>1.71</td>
<td>1.78</td>
<td>3.78</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Hong Kong</td>
<td>1.27</td>
<td>1.27</td>
<td>2.36</td>
<td>0.79</td>
<td>1.97</td>
<td>2.02</td>
<td>0.91</td>
<td>-0.38</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Taiwan</td>
<td>-0.03</td>
<td>0.67</td>
<td>0.84</td>
<td>1.74</td>
<td>0.35</td>
<td>0.60</td>
<td>2.31</td>
<td>1.61</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol"> Vietnam </td>
<td>7.22</td>
<td>7.07</td>
<td>6.70</td>
<td>6.48</td>
<td>6.43</td>
<td>7.39</td>
<td>8.28</td>
<td>7.76</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Indonesia</td>
<td>6.01</td>
<td>6.29</td>
<td>6.22</td>
<td>6.30</td>
<td>6.26</td>
<td>13.10</td>
<td>10.46</td>
<td>6.06</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">India</td>
<td>n.a.</td>
<td>6.67</td>
<td>6.72</td>
<td>7.56</td>
<td>6.72</td>
<td>6.18</td>
<td>4.24</td>
<td>3.77</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">South Korea</td>
<td>2.35</td>
<td>2.45</td>
<td>2.16</td>
<td>2.17</td>
<td>1.68</td>
<td>2.24</td>
<td>2.75</td>
<td>3.59</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Singapore</td>
<td>1.09</td>
<td>0.59</td>
<td>0.79</td>
<td>0.59</td>
<td>0.20</td>
<td>0.96</td>
<td>0.47</td>
<td>1.67</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Thailand</td>
<td>1.91</td>
<td>1.84</td>
<td>2.04</td>
<td>2.32</td>
<td>3.05</td>
<td>4.64</td>
<td>4.54</td>
<td>2.77</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Consumer Price Indexes for four countries--China, India, Singapore and Vietnam--were released today and can be found in the Haver Data Base. EMERGEPR, together with similar data for other Asian nations. Data are available, through [...]

Inflation Trends in Asia, ex Japan

Robert Brusca

<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/070625d.jpg" width="353">
Edge lower by 0.3%- two of four regions drop.
The monthly series of existing housing sales continues to show weakness but it also shows that weakness has been diminishing. Above we plot a three-month moving average of Yr/yr growth rates. It shows that all regions except the SOUTH have put their period of biggest declines behind them. The South, with ongoing problems in the Gulf region continues to show some of the nation&#146;s worst housing trends. Each region has experienced a rebound then another episode of weakness. The question is whether this new episode of weakness will remain muted or gather momentum. The raw monthly patterns look more like regions that are losing their weakness. The final stage of recovery for housing will be for the various regions to have some m/m increases and for growth rates to move sideways and eventually higher.
From roughly December 2005 Sept 2006 housing was in its worst period of this cycle across regions. Since then three of four regions are looking like they are trying to stabilize.
Prices have been recovering too but that is a seasonal trend. Median housing prices are down 2.1% Yr/Yr and average prices are lower by just 0.8%.
The smaller regions rebounded this month while the two larger regions continued to slow.
The progressive growth rates do not show a particular pattern except that over six months the pace of slowing was cut back or even became an increase but then turned to a larger decline in the recent three-months. Charts on the levels of variables give us better guidance on where trends are going and those actually look more stable than charts constructed from growth rates.
Moreover prices are not accelerating their drop. In the Midwest Yr/Yr median prices fell for 11 straight months and now have risen in two of the past three months. Overall median prices are still dropping and are lower in 10 straight months.
The large Southern region of the county, beset problems in the Gulf states has the largest y/y drop in existing home prices at 3.3% It has seen a 10-month string of monthly declines in Yr/Yr average and median prices. It is helping to drive the weakness in US overall prices. Even the West that remains weak has seen average prices rise Yr/Yr in half of the months dating back to June 2006. Median prices in the West are weaker having last risen Yr/Yr in Feb 2007.
The number of homes for sales actually rose last month pushing the number of months supply up to 8.9 months from 8.4 previously and from as low as 6.4 months one year ago. We do not place much stock in these figures for existing homes since by and large these are owner occupied homes and are not being sold by a business. The fact that prices are not plunging as supply increases suggests that there is a somewhat better balance in the market than what the homes-for-sale data suggest. Indeed, own-home sellers face far different market forces than builders selling empty new homes.
We are left with the feeling that regional events are getting in that way of these national comparisons. Hurricanes that battered the Gulf states and overbuilding in places like Florida and Las Vegas are having outsized impact on the data. Even so we can see that housing prices are by and large stabilizing and the while existing home sales are still declining, the pace of decline is being contained and is not accelerating. 

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
Existing Home Sales Summary
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="6">(Existing Home Sales: In Thousands&#39; -- Nat&#39;n&#39;l Ass&#39;n of Realtors)</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">Month</td>
<td>Total</td>
<td>North-East</td>
<td>Mid-West</td>
<td>South</td>
<td>West</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">May.07</td>
<td>5,990</td>
<td>1100</td>
<td>1410</td>
<td>2300</td>
<td>1180</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Apr.07</td>
<td>6,010</td>
<td>1040</td>
<td>1400</td>
<td>2380</td>
<td>1190</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Mar.07</td>
<td>6,150</td>
<td>1140</td>
<td>1390</td>
<td>2410</td>
<td>1210</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Feb.07</td>
<td>6,680</td>
<td>1220</td>
<td>1560</td>
<td>2570</td>
<td>1320</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Jan.07</td>
<td>6,440</td>
<td>1060</td>
<td>1520</td>
<td>2540</td>
<td>1320</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Dec.06</td>
<td>6,270</td>
<td>1070</td>
<td>1460</td>
<td>2490</td>
<td>1250</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Nov.06</td>
<td>6,250</td>
<td>1080</td>
<td>1420</td>
<td>2470</td>
<td>1280</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Oct.06</td>
<td>6,270</td>
<td>1030</td>
<td>1420</td>
<td>2520</td>
<td>1300</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Sep.06</td>
<td>6,230</td>
<td>1040</td>
<td>1420</td>
<td>2520</td>
<td>1260</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Aug.06</td>
<td>6,310</td>
<td>1060</td>
<td>1430</td>
<td>2520</td>
<td>1290</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Jul.06</td>
<td>6,320</td>
<td>1050</td>
<td>1430</td>
<td>2530</td>
<td>1320</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Jun.06</td>
<td>6,490</td>
<td>1090</td>
<td>1490</td>
<td>2550</td>
<td>1360</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">May.06</td>
<td>6,680</td>
<td>1140</td>
<td>1510</td>
<td>2610</td>
<td>1410</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="6">Percent Changes: Existing Home Sales</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">Mo/Mo%</td>
<td>Total</td>
<td>North-East</td>
<td>Mid-West</td>
<td>South</td>
<td>West</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">May.07</td>
<td>-0.3%</td>
<td>5.8%</td>
<td>0.7%</td>
<td>-3.4%</td>
<td>-0.8%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Apr.07</td>
<td>-2.3%</td>
<td>-8.8%</td>
<td>0.7%</td>
<td>-1.2%</td>
<td>-1.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Mar.07</td>
<td>-7.9%</td>
<td>-6.6%</td>
<td>-10.9%</td>
<td>-6.2%</td>
<td>-8.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Feb.07</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>15.1%</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">3-Mo:ar</td>
<td>-41.3%</td>
<td>-39.3%</td>
<td>-38.5%</td>
<td>-42.0%</td>
<td>-42.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">6-mo:ar</td>
<td>-8.3%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>-1.4%</td>
<td>-13.8%</td>
<td>-15.6%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">1-Year</td>
<td>-10.3%</td>
<td>-3.5%</td>
<td>-6.6%</td>
<td>-11.9%</td>
<td>-16.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Prices:</td>
<td colspan="5">Median Prices</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">One Mo:</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
<td>2.3%</td>
<td>-0.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">One Year:</td>
<td>-2.1%</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>-1.7%</td>
<td>-3.8%</td>
<td>-0.5%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Edge lower by 0.3%- two of four regions drop. The monthly series of existing housing sales continues to show weakness but it also shows that weakness has been diminishing. Above we plot a three-month moving average of Yr/yr growth [...]

Existing Home Sales

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/070625d.jpg" width="353">
The monthly series of existing housing sales continues to show weakness but it also shows that weakness has been diminishing. On the left we plot a three-month moving average of year/year growth rates. It shows that all regions except the SOUTH have put their period of biggest declines behind them. The South, with ongoing problems in the Gulf region, continues to show some of the nation&#146;s worst housing trends. Each region has experienced a rebound then another episode of weakness. The question is whether this new episode of weakness will remain muted or gather momentum. The raw monthly patterns look more like regions that are losing their weakness. The final stage of recovery for housing will be for the various regions to have some month/month increases and for growth rates to move sideways and eventually higher.
From roughly December 2005 through September 2006 housing was in its worst period of this cycle across regions. Since then three of four regions are looking like they are trying to stabilize.
Prices have been recovering too but that is a seasonal trend. Median housing prices are down 2.1% Yr/Yr and average prices are lower by just 0.8%.
The smaller regions rebounded this month while the two larger regions continued to slow.
The progressive growth rates do not show a particular pattern except that over six months the pace of slowing was cut back or even became an increase but then turned to a larger decline in the recent three months. Charts on the levels of variables give us better guidance on where trends are going and those actually look more stable than charts constructed from growth rates.
Moreover prices are not accelerating their drop. In the Midwest Yr/Yr median prices fell for 11 straight months and now have risen in two of the past three months. Overall median prices are still dropping and are lower in 10 straight months.
The large Southern region of the county, beset by problems in the Gulf states, has the largest Yr/Yr drop in existing home prices at 3.3% It has seen a 10-month string of monthly declines in Yr/Yr average and median prices. It is helping to drive the weakness in US overall prices. Even the West that remains weak has seen average prices rise Yr/Yr in half of the months dating back to June 2006. Median prices in the West are weaker having last risen Yr/Yr in February 2007.
The number of homes for sales actually rose last month pushing the number of months supply up to 8.9 months from 8.4 previously and from as low as 6.4 months one year ago. We do not place much stock in these figures for existing homes since by and large these are owner occupied homes and are not being sold by a business. The fact that prices are not plunging as supply increases suggests that there is a somewhat better balance in the market than what the homes-for-sale data suggest. Indeed, own-home sellers face far different market forces than builders selling empty new homes.
We are left with the feeling that regional events are getting in the way of these national comparisons. Hurricanes that battered the Gulf states and overbuilding in places like Florida and Las Vegas are having outsized impact on the data. Even so we can see that housing prices are, by and large, stabilizing and that, while existing home sales are still declining, the pace of decline is being contained and is not accelerating.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
Existing Home Sales Summary
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="6">(Existing Home Sales: In Thousands&#39; -- Nat&#39;n&#39;l Ass&#39;n of Realtors)</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">Month</td>
<td>Total</td>
<td>North-East</td>
<td>Mid-West</td>
<td>South</td>
<td>West</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">May.07</td>
<td>5,990</td>
<td>1100</td>
<td>1410</td>
<td>2300</td>
<td>1180</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Apr.07</td>
<td>6,010</td>
<td>1040</td>
<td>1400</td>
<td>2380</td>
<td>1190</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Mar.07</td>
<td>6,150</td>
<td>1140</td>
<td>1390</td>
<td>2410</td>
<td>1210</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Feb.07</td>
<td>6,680</td>
<td>1220</td>
<td>1560</td>
<td>2570</td>
<td>1320</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Jan.07</td>
<td>6,440</td>
<td>1060</td>
<td>1520</td>
<td>2540</td>
<td>1320</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Dec.06</td>
<td>6,270</td>
<td>1070</td>
<td>1460</td>
<td>2490</td>
<td>1250</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Nov.06</td>
<td>6,250</td>
<td>1080</td>
<td>1420</td>
<td>2470</td>
<td>1280</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Oct.06</td>
<td>6,270</td>
<td>1030</td>
<td>1420</td>
<td>2520</td>
<td>1300</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Sep.06</td>
<td>6,230</td>
<td>1040</td>
<td>1420</td>
<td>2520</td>
<td>1260</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Aug.06</td>
<td>6,310</td>
<td>1060</td>
<td>1430</td>
<td>2520</td>
<td>1290</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Jul.06</td>
<td>6,320</td>
<td>1050</td>
<td>1430</td>
<td>2530</td>
<td>1320</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Jun.06</td>
<td>6,490</td>
<td>1090</td>
<td>1490</td>
<td>2550</td>
<td>1360</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">May.06</td>
<td>6,680</td>
<td>1140</td>
<td>1510</td>
<td>2610</td>
<td>1410</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="6">Percent Changes: Existing Home Sales</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">Mo/Mo%</td>
<td>Total</td>
<td>North-East</td>
<td>Mid-West</td>
<td>South</td>
<td>West</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">May.07</td>
<td>-0.3%</td>
<td>5.8%</td>
<td>0.7%</td>
<td>-3.4%</td>
<td>-0.8%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Apr.07</td>
<td>-2.3%</td>
<td>-8.8%</td>
<td>0.7%</td>
<td>-1.2%</td>
<td>-1.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Mar.07</td>
<td>-7.9%</td>
<td>-6.6%</td>
<td>-10.9%</td>
<td>-6.2%</td>
<td>-8.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Feb.07</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>15.1%</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">3-Mo:ar</td>
<td>-41.3%</td>
<td>-39.3%</td>
<td>-38.5%</td>
<td>-42.0%</td>
<td>-42.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">6-mo:ar</td>
<td>-8.3%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>-1.4%</td>
<td>-13.8%</td>
<td>-15.6%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">1-Year</td>
<td>-10.3%</td>
<td>-3.5%</td>
<td>-6.6%</td>
<td>-11.9%</td>
<td>-16.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Prices:</td>
<td colspan="5">Median Prices</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">One Mo:</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
<td>2.3%</td>
<td>-0.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">One Year:</td>
<td>-2.1%</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>-1.7%</td>
<td>-3.8%</td>
<td>-0.5%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The monthly series of existing housing sales continues to show weakness but it also shows that weakness has been diminishing. On the left we plot a three-month moving average of year/year growth rates. It shows that all regions except [...]

Existing Home Sales Edge Lower by 0.3% - Two of Four Regions Drop

<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/070625d.jpg" width="353">
The monthly series of existing housing sales continues to show weakness but it also shows that weakness has been diminishing. On the left we plot a three-month moving average of year/year growth rates. It shows that all regions except the SOUTH have put their period of biggest declines behind them. The South, with ongoing problems in the Gulf region, continues to show some of the nation&#146;s worst housing trends. Each region has experienced a rebound then another episode of weakness. The question is whether this new episode of weakness will remain muted or gather momentum. The raw monthly patterns look more like regions that are losing their weakness. The final stage of recovery for housing will be for the various regions to have some month/month increases and for growth rates to move sideways and eventually higher.
From roughly December 2005 through September 2006 housing was in its worst period of this cycle across regions. Since then three of four regions are looking like they are trying to stabilize.
Prices have been recovering too but that is a seasonal trend. Median housing prices are down 2.1% Yr/Yr and average prices are lower by just 0.8%.
The smaller regions rebounded this month while the two larger regions continued to slow.
The progressive growth rates do not show a particular pattern except that over six months the pace of slowing was cut back or even became an increase but then turned to a larger decline in the recent three months. Charts on the levels of variables give us better guidance on where trends are going and those actually look more stable than charts constructed from growth rates.
Moreover prices are not accelerating their drop. In the Midwest Yr/Yr median prices fell for 11 straight months and now have risen in two of the past three months. Overall median prices are still dropping and are lower in 10 straight months.
The large Southern region of the county, beset by problems in the Gulf states, has the largest Yr/Yr drop in existing home prices at 3.3% It has seen a 10-month string of monthly declines in Yr/Yr average and median prices. It is helping to drive the weakness in US overall prices. Even the West that remains weak has seen average prices rise Yr/Yr in half of the months dating back to June 2006. Median prices in the West are weaker having last risen Yr/Yr in February 2007.
The number of homes for sales actually rose last month pushing the number of months supply up to 8.9 months from 8.4 previously and from as low as 6.4 months one year ago. We do not place much stock in these figures for existing homes since by and large these are owner occupied homes and are not being sold by a business. The fact that prices are not plunging as supply increases suggests that there is a somewhat better balance in the market than what the homes-for-sale data suggest. Indeed, own-home sellers face far different market forces than builders selling empty new homes.
We are left with the feeling that regional events are getting in the way of these national comparisons. Hurricanes that battered the Gulf states and overbuilding in places like Florida and Las Vegas are having outsized impact on the data. Even so we can see that housing prices are, by and large, stabilizing and that, while existing home sales are still declining, the pace of decline is being contained and is not accelerating.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
Existing Home Sales Summary
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="6">(Existing Home Sales: In Thousands&#39; -- Nat&#39;n&#39;l Ass&#39;n of Realtors)</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">Month</td>
<td>Total</td>
<td>North-East</td>
<td>Mid-West</td>
<td>South</td>
<td>West</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">May.07</td>
<td>5,990</td>
<td>1100</td>
<td>1410</td>
<td>2300</td>
<td>1180</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Apr.07</td>
<td>6,010</td>
<td>1040</td>
<td>1400</td>
<td>2380</td>
<td>1190</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Mar.07</td>
<td>6,150</td>
<td>1140</td>
<td>1390</td>
<td>2410</td>
<td>1210</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Feb.07</td>
<td>6,680</td>
<td>1220</td>
<td>1560</td>
<td>2570</td>
<td>1320</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Jan.07</td>
<td>6,440</td>
<td>1060</td>
<td>1520</td>
<td>2540</td>
<td>1320</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Dec.06</td>
<td>6,270</td>
<td>1070</td>
<td>1460</td>
<td>2490</td>
<td>1250</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Nov.06</td>
<td>6,250</td>
<td>1080</td>
<td>1420</td>
<td>2470</td>
<td>1280</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Oct.06</td>
<td>6,270</td>
<td>1030</td>
<td>1420</td>
<td>2520</td>
<td>1300</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Sep.06</td>
<td>6,230</td>
<td>1040</td>
<td>1420</td>
<td>2520</td>
<td>1260</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Aug.06</td>
<td>6,310</td>
<td>1060</td>
<td>1430</td>
<td>2520</td>
<td>1290</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Jul.06</td>
<td>6,320</td>
<td>1050</td>
<td>1430</td>
<td>2530</td>
<td>1320</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Jun.06</td>
<td>6,490</td>
<td>1090</td>
<td>1490</td>
<td>2550</td>
<td>1360</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">May.06</td>
<td>6,680</td>
<td>1140</td>
<td>1510</td>
<td>2610</td>
<td>1410</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="6">Percent Changes: Existing Home Sales</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">Mo/Mo%</td>
<td>Total</td>
<td>North-East</td>
<td>Mid-West</td>
<td>South</td>
<td>West</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">May.07</td>
<td>-0.3%</td>
<td>5.8%</td>
<td>0.7%</td>
<td>-3.4%</td>
<td>-0.8%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Apr.07</td>
<td>-2.3%</td>
<td>-8.8%</td>
<td>0.7%</td>
<td>-1.2%</td>
<td>-1.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Mar.07</td>
<td>-7.9%</td>
<td>-6.6%</td>
<td>-10.9%</td>
<td>-6.2%</td>
<td>-8.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Feb.07</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>15.1%</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">3-Mo:ar</td>
<td>-41.3%</td>
<td>-39.3%</td>
<td>-38.5%</td>
<td>-42.0%</td>
<td>-42.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">6-mo:ar</td>
<td>-8.3%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>-1.4%</td>
<td>-13.8%</td>
<td>-15.6%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">1-Year</td>
<td>-10.3%</td>
<td>-3.5%</td>
<td>-6.6%</td>
<td>-11.9%</td>
<td>-16.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Prices:</td>
<td colspan="5">Median Prices</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">One Mo:</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
<td>2.3%</td>
<td>-0.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">One Year:</td>
<td>-2.1%</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>-1.7%</td>
<td>-3.8%</td>
<td>-0.5%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
 Inflation Trends in Asia, ex Japan   
by <a href="/comment/Curley.html">Louise Curley</a> June 25, 2007


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/070625b.jpg" width="353">
Consumer Price Indexes for four countries--China, India, Singapore and Vietnam--were released today and can be found in the Haver Data Base. EMERGEPR, together with similar data for other Asian nations. Data are available, through May, except for India.
Inflation, as measured by the year to year increase in the Consumer Price Index, has varied widely in the various countries of Asia. Inflation in the first five months of this year are shown for selected Asian countries in the table below, together with the annual rates for 2004, 2005 and 2006.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/070625a.jpg" width="353">
Deflationary tendencies that were evident in the Greater China Area appear to have lessened in Hong Kong and China, but still persist in Taiwan. These trends are shown in the first chart.
Among the high inflation countries, Vietnam, Indonesia and India, for example, inflation in Vietnam after decelerating somewhat last year has increased in the current months of this year. Inflation in India has trended upward since mid 2005. Inflation in Indonesia jumped in late 2005 as a result of natural disasters and fell precipitately in late 2006. Inflation there is now moderately below the levels reached in early 2005 and no clear trend is apparent, as can be seen in the second chart.<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/070625c.jpg" width="353">
The third chart shows the course of inflation in countries that have experienced moderating inflation in recent years. Thailand, like Indonesia experienced exceptionally high inflation in late 2005 and early 2006 followed by a sharp fall later in the year. Among these countries inflation in Singapore and, to a lesser extent, in South Korea is trending upward.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">INFLATION IN ASIA Y/Y % CHANGE IN CPI&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">May 07</th>
<th scope="col">Apr&nbsp; 07&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">Mar 07&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">Feb&nbsp; 07&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">Jan 07&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">2006</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">China</td>
<td>3.42</td>
<td>3.05</td>
<td>3.33</td>
<td>2.75</td>
<td>2.21</td>
<td>1.71</td>
<td>1.78</td>
<td>3.78</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Hong Kong</td>
<td>1.27</td>
<td>1.27</td>
<td>2.36</td>
<td>0.79</td>
<td>1.97</td>
<td>2.02</td>
<td>0.91</td>
<td>-0.38</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Taiwan</td>
<td>-0.03</td>
<td>0.67</td>
<td>0.84</td>
<td>1.74</td>
<td>0.35</td>
<td>0.60</td>
<td>2.31</td>
<td>1.61</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol"> Vietnam </td>
<td>7.22</td>
<td>7.07</td>
<td>6.70</td>
<td>6.48</td>
<td>6.43</td>
<td>7.39</td>
<td>8.28</td>
<td>7.76</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Indonesia</td>
<td>6.01</td>
<td>6.29</td>
<td>6.22</td>
<td>6.30</td>
<td>6.26</td>
<td>13.10</td>
<td>10.46</td>
<td>6.06</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">India</td>
<td>n.a.</td>
<td>6.67</td>
<td>6.72</td>
<td>7.56</td>
<td>6.72</td>
<td>6.18</td>
<td>4.24</td>
<td>3.77</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">South Korea</td>
<td>2.35</td>
<td>2.45</td>
<td>2.16</td>
<td>2.17</td>
<td>1.68</td>
<td>2.24</td>
<td>2.75</td>
<td>3.59</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Singapore</td>
<td>1.09</td>
<td>0.59</td>
<td>0.79</td>
<td>0.59</td>
<td>0.20</td>
<td>0.96</td>
<td>0.47</td>
<td>1.67</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Thailand</td>
<td>1.91</td>
<td>1.84</td>
<td>2.04</td>
<td>2.32</td>
<td>3.05</td>
<td>4.64</td>
<td>4.54</td>
<td>2.77</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/070622e.jpg" width="353">
The South African economy is moving ahead vigorously, according to Q1 GDP data released yesterday by the South African Reserve Bank. Growth actually slowed to &quot;just&quot; 4.7% from Q4 at an annual rate, following 5.6%. Year-on-year growth was 5.4%. The trend has hovered around a 5% pace since 2004, a pick-up from about 3-1/2% in the previous four years. In the first graph, we show GDP and consumption since 1980, along with recession shading for South African business cycles. Recent GDP growth has been lower than in some periods, but much more consistent, so that highs are not soon offset by lows. The last recession ended in late 1998. <img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/070622f.jpg" width="353">
Investment has been the driving force over the last couple of years and expanded at nearly a 22% annual rate in Q1. Further detail (see second graph) shows substantial increases in nonresidential buildings and infrastructure, and additional detail on these expenditures by industry indicates that they are in transportation, communication and utilities. Some of these are coming off a low base, but expanding very rapidly, a sign of the vigor of development efforts in South Africa. Gross value added in the construction industry parallels this growth.<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/070622g.jpg" width="353">
Consumer spending is hardly weak, either, with gains across the last five quarter exceeding 7% and even 8%. These are concentrated in goods, with spending on services less rapid. If there&#39;s a problem in South Africa&#39;s spending mix, it&#39;s in net exports. Exports themselves are fairly strong; they declined a bit in Q1 from Q4, but are still up 16.2% on the year-ago period. Imports are even stronger, though, with four-quarter growth right at 20%. Obviously much of the consumer and investment spending is sourced from foreign goods and services. A quick look at trade data shows marked growth in imports of metals, machinery, textiles, chemicals and even food products. As the South African economy moves ahead, we&#39;d guess that this dependence on foreign goods would diminish. 

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">SOUTH AFRICA</th>
<th scope="col">Q1 2007*</th>
<th scope="col">Q4 2006*</th>
<th scope="col">Q3 2006*</th>
<th scope="col">Q1 2006 Yr/Yr</th>
<th scope="col">2006</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Real GDP</td>
<td>4.7</td>
<td>5.6</td>
<td>4.5</td>
<td>5.4</td>
<td>5.0</td>
<td>5.1</td>
<td>4.8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Private Consumption</td>
<td>7.4</td>
<td>7.8</td>
<td>7.6</td>
<td>7.6</td>
<td>7.3</td>
<td>6.6</td>
<td>6.7</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Fixed Investment</td>
<td>21.8</td>
<td>16.4</td>
<td>14.0</td>
<td>15.6</td>
<td>12.7</td>
<td>9.6</td>
<td>8.9</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Net Exports (Bil.Rand)</td>
<td>-100.3</td>
<td>-95.8</td>
<td>-75.1</td>
<td>-72.5</td>
<td>-81.8</td>
<td>-36.9</td>
<td>-26.6</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">GVA: Construction</td>
<td>21.3</td>
<td>16.5</td>
<td>16.1</td>
<td>16.6</td>
<td>13.7</td>
<td>11.9</td>
<td>11.1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Manufacturing</td>
<td>4.7</td>
<td>8.3</td>
<td>4.7</td>
<td>5.7</td>
<td>4.8</td>
<td>5.0</td>
<td>4.7</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The South African economy is moving ahead vigorously, according to Q1 GDP data released yesterday by the South African Reserve Bank. Growth actually slowed to "just" 4.7% from Q4 at an annual rate, following 5.6%. Year-on-year growth [...]

South Africa Maintains 5% GDP Growth Trend, with 20% Gains in Fixed Investment

<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" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/070622h.jpg">
Germany&#39;s IFO index fell sharply in June from 108.6 to 107. It stood at 108.6 for two months in a row and peaked in this cycle back in December 2006 at 108.7. No wonder the IFO says that levels are still high and that the economy is still strong. But looked at another way, all this ebullience misses the point. The IFO survey has been weakening for some time. And here I refer to weakening in terms of its rate of growth. The IFO Climate headline hit a growth peak in June 2006, at just a tic higher than the pace it posted in November, a month before it hit its numeric peak for the index level. The index growth rate had been trapped in a narrow range around 16%. IFO growth had been strong and stayed in a narrow band from April to December of 2006. But, since then, the rate of growth has been dropping - sometimes sharply - as the chart above shows. 
Both current conditions and expectations have lopped digits off their growth rates over this period. Expectations fell first dropping from a growth rate of 12.4% in April 2006 to below zero by October of the same year. Since April expectations growth has been waffling around the unchanged line. Current conditions growth, however, has continued to erode at a more or less steady pace. From March to May that erosion took a pause but in June current conditions are sharply lower again and the decline in the rate of growth is &#145;back on&#146; track and has fallen to zero from over 14% in June of 2006. 
The drop in the overall climate reading spreads across main sectors as the IFO sector diffusion readings tell us. Readings are still &#39;high valued&#146; as the percentage of range figures tell us at the far right of the table. Diffusion readings of climate peaked in April 2007; confidence peaked in December 2006, expectations peaked in March 2006. Still the month to month drop in June was sharp for most sectors; the decline in services was moderate.
And although IFO Chief Economist Gernot Nerb says he is not worried about exports and says that the export readings in the IFO survey are strong the truth is that those conditions have eroded dramatically across industry groups.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
Summary of IFO Sector Diffusion readings
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">CLIMATE Sum</td>
<td>Current</td>
<td>Last Mo</td>
<td colspan="6">Since Jan 1991*</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;</td>
<td>Jun-07</td>
<td>May-07</td>
<td>average</td>
<td>Median</td>
<td>Max</td>
<td>Min</td>
<td>range</td>
<td>% range</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">All Sectors</td>
<td>13.2</td>
<td>16.3</td>
<td>-8.8</td>
<td>-9.5</td>
<td>16.6</td>
<td>-30.6</td>
<td>47.2</td>
<td>92.8%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; MFG</td>
<td>23.9</td>
<td>27.5</td>
<td>-1.1</td>
<td>0.3</td>
<td>27.5</td>
<td>-35.5</td>
<td>63.0</td>
<td>94.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Construction</td>
<td>-16.0</td>
<td>-14.6</td>
<td>-29.2</td>
<td>-32.2</td>
<td>0.3</td>
<td>-50.7</td>
<td>51.0</td>
<td>68.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Wholesale</td>
<td>14.3</td>
<td>18.3</td>
<td>-14.8</td>
<td>-16.5</td>
<td>23.3</td>
<td>-39.6</td>
<td>62.9</td>
<td>85.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Retail</td>
<td>-5.0</td>
<td>-3.2</td>
<td>-14.8</td>
<td>-14.8</td>
<td>25.3</td>
<td>-40.3</td>
<td>65.6</td>
<td>53.8%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Services</td>
<td>26.0</td>
<td>26.5</td>
<td>8.2</td>
<td>7.8</td>
<td>28.5</td>
<td>-15.7</td>
<td>44.2</td>
<td>94.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4">* May 2001 for Services</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Germany's IFO index fell sharply in June from 108.6 to 107. It stood at 108.6 for two months in a row and peaked in this cycle back in December 2006 at 108.7. No wonder the IFO says that levels are still high and that the economy is [...]

IFO Index Drops to 107 from 108.6

<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/070622d.jpg" width="353">
European orders fell by 0.4% in April, less than expected, as bulk orders rose and boosted the headline. And while bulk orders do &#145;count&#146; they can often blur the trend and mask changes. That is probably the effect right now as European industrial orders are headed for a fall while everyone is ignoring that FACT. That&#146;s right, not an opinion, but a FACT of history. The trend for orders GROWTH is already lower and orders GROWTH follows closely movements in the euro exchange rate and follows that inversely. The EURO &#150; broadly defined, weighted by trade and inflation adjusted - has been rising and still is. In terms of its level the EURO is VERY strong. Orders have showed some resiliency. But the chart on the left shows that there always are flares of countertrend movements that eventually prove to be not sustainable. AND orders, while on an upswing, are still contained within the confines of a descending channel much like a rally in a bear chart for bonds or stocks. 
For now order trends in the EU are still looking OK (see table). But MFG sales within the Euro area have slowed and slowed sharply for consumer goods and even have slowed for the nearly bullet-proof Capital Goods sector. Domestic orders have showed a sharper fall-off than foreign orders but foreign orders are still obeying the BIG PICTURE law that says with a strong euro they too must fall (it is this series that is plotted on the chart, but the overall series plots almost as well). For the moment two factors are supporting orders in EU. One is this short-term monthly bump up in bulk orders. This sort of thing comes and goes. We expect orders will bulk up from time to time but by smaller amounts moving forward. The other factor is the fact that a lot of the Euro area orders are to non-euro area or aspiring euro area countries that are close by, maintain a tight &#145;peg&#146; to the euro and where historic ties continue to confer advantages to EMU producers. The longer the Euro remains strong, the more likely that competition (apparently the new &#145;dirty word&#146; in the EU) will take hold in such places. Eurol exports to the US already have dropped very sharply. That is a function of slower US growth but also of the nose-bleed euro FX valuations. The strong euro is leaving plenty of &#145;fingerprints&#146; around. 
The table shows that on most measures orders growth over the past three months is still pretty strong. In April, however, there are three sizeable declines among the four largest economies in the EU. Of course one of the reasons that the three-month growth rates for these countries are still firm is that in one of the previous months each had a sizeable increase in orders. You cannot hang your hat on any monthly number as evidence of a trend change. Instead we appeal to the chart above. 
The chart plots the real broad (trade-weighted) euro VS foreign order performance in the euro area since March of 2000. The relationship is reasonably tight and quite clear: euro up orders down; euro down orders up. Any questions? The euro is up and orders are still in a downtrend although they &#145;flared&#146; to the top of their downward sloping channel this month. Betting that this relationship between orders and the euro will not repeat itself seems to be a grasp at a straw. 
Moreover, if we plot orders against the LEVEL of the real exchange rate you see another reason to be a pessimist on order/export strength. The LEVEL of the real FX rate is extremely high. If short term movements in the rate matter, the level surely must matter. Some of the euro&#146;s strength could have been seen in advance and hedged. But the longer the euro stays strong the more that profit margins are squeezed or eliminated and the less help that hedging can offer. We conclude that while it is volatile, the slowing trend in EMU orders is for real. Don&#146;t you?

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
E-zone and UK Industrial Orders &amp; Sales Trends
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="grey4">
<td class="firstcol">SAAR except m/m</td>
<td colspan="3">% m/m</td>
<td>Apr-07</td>
<td>Apr-07</td>
<td>Apr-07</td>
<td>Apr-06</td>
<td>Apr-05</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">Euro area Detail</td>
<td>Apr-07</td>
<td>Mar-07</td>
<td>Feb-07</td>
<td>3-Mo</td>
<td>6-mo</td>
<td>12-mo</td>
<td>12-mo</td>
<td>12-mo</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">MFG Orders</td>
<td>-0.4%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
<td>-0.6%</td>
<td>7.2%</td>
<td>8.8%</td>
<td>9.0%</td>
<td>9.5%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey2">
<td class="firstcol">MFG Sales</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>3.3%</td>
<td>6.6%</td>
<td>6.3%</td>
<td>7.5%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey2">
<td class="firstcol">Consumer</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
<td>3.5%</td>
<td>7.5%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey2">
<td class="firstcol">Capital</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>0.6%</td>
<td>0.7%</td>
<td>6.8%</td>
<td>8.2%</td>
<td>8.1%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>1.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey2">
<td class="firstcol">Intermediate</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>5.2%</td>
<td>5.7%</td>
<td>7.9%</td>
<td>7.1%</td>
<td>2.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey1">
<td class="firstcol">MFG Orders</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">Total Orders</td>
<td>-0.4%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
<td>-0.6%</td>
<td>7.2%</td>
<td>8.8%</td>
<td>9.0%</td>
<td>9.5%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">EA13 Domestic MFG orders</td>
<td>-0.7%</td>
<td>2.3%</td>
<td>-0.4%</td>
<td>5.2%</td>
<td>5.7%</td>
<td>7.9%</td>
<td>5.9%</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">EA13 Foreign MFG orders</td>
<td>-1.1%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>13.4%</td>
<td>13.9%</td>
<td>11.0%</td>
<td>14.6%</td>
<td>3.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">Countries:</td>
<td>Apr-07</td>
<td>Mar-07</td>
<td>Feb-07</td>
<td>3-Mo</td>
<td>6-mo</td>
<td>12-mo</td>
<td>12-mo</td>
<td>12-mo</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">Germany</td>
<td>-1.0%</td>
<td>1.0%</td>
<td>4.2%</td>
<td>17.5%</td>
<td>11.3%</td>
<td>9.7%</td>
<td>14.5%</td>
<td>1.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">France</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
<td>5.2%</td>
<td>-7.8%</td>
<td>-3.9%</td>
<td>12.0%</td>
<td>18.3%</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">Italy</td>
<td>-1.1%</td>
<td>4.8%</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>17.2%</td>
<td>4.2%</td>
<td>2.3%</td>
<td>15.7%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">UK</td>
<td>-5.6%</td>
<td>3.3%</td>
<td>9.9%</td>
<td>31.8%</td>
<td>11.0%</td>
<td>-0.6%</td>
<td>4.6%</td>
<td>3.3%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

European orders fell by 0.4% in April, less than expected, as bulk orders rose and boosted the headline. And while bulk orders do count they can often blur the trend and mask changes. That is probably the effect right now as [...]

European Orders Fall by 0.4% in April

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>

 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/070622a.jpg" width="353">
The composite index of leading economic indicators rose an expected 0.3% last month and fully recouped a 0.3% decline during April. The May gain was only the second monthly increase this year, according to the Conference Board and left the leaders up just 0.3% y/y. 
During the last ten years there has been a 59% correlation between the y/y change in the leading indicators and the lagged change in real GDP.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/070622c.jpg" width="353">
The breadth of one month gain amongst the 10 components of the leading index remained at a low 55% after a 30% rise amongst the leaders&#146; components&#146; during April.
Lower initial claims for unemployment insurance, higher building permits and higher stock prices accounted for most of the gain in the leading index last month. Capital goods orders and the money supply fell.
The method of calculating the contribution to the leading index from the spread between 10 year Treasury securities and the Fed funds rate has been revised. A negative contribution will now occur only when the spread inverts rather than when declining as in the past. More details can be found <a href="http://www.conference-board.org/pdf_free/economics/bci/lei0705.pdf">here</a>. <img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/070622b.jpg" width="353">
The leading index is based on eight previously reported economic data series. Two series, orders for consumer goods and orders for capital goods, are estimated.
The coincident indicators increased 0.2% after a 0.1% rise during May. Over the last ten years there has been a 91% correlation between the y/y change in the coincident indicators and real GDP growth.
The lagging index rose the same 0.2% as during May. As a result the ratio of coincident to lagging indicators (a measure of economic excess) fell during May following a slight decline the prior month. 
Visit the Conference Board&#39;s <a href="http://www.conference-board.org">site</a> for coverage of leading indicator series from around the world.

<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/BCI/BCI.HTM">Business Cycle Indicators</a></th>
<th scope="col">May</th>
<th scope="col">April</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2006</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Leading</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>-0.3%</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>2.5%</td>
<td>7.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Coincident</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
<td>2.5%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Lagging</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>3.2%</td>
<td>3.0%</td>
<td>3.5%</td>
<td>0.6%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>


</html>

The composite index of leading economic indicators rose an expected 0.3% last month and fully recouped a 0.3% decline during April. The May gain was only the second monthly increase this year, according to the Conference Board and [...]

U.S. Leading Economic Indicators Up for Second Time This Year

US and China big leaders in adoption of AI models

Robust US demand for advanced technology products

China's export growth rotating away from the US

More pronounced upward revisions in countries more exposed to AI investment

Stable job openings and hiring rates point to cautious hiring

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

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

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

Tighter US immigration enforcement adversely impacting labor force

Economic policy uncertainty, while still elevated, is declining

Gradual disinflation and easier monetary policies across advanced economies

Largest October layoffs since 2003, led by technology

Subdued global shipping costs not yet pointing to supply chain problems

PMIs show still-elevated but slowing US inflation

AI boosting US investment in data centers

US productivity growth has been significantly faster than in other major economies

Consumers' short-term US inflation expectations still elevated while longer-term expectations of financial markets are steady

US financial markets have gotten used to elevated policy uncertainty

FOMC now expects more rate cuts going forward than in June

China gaining ASEAN exports while US exports slump

Job openings less than the number unemployed in July for first time since 2021

Reaccelerating goods price inflation along with sticky services inflation clouds the outlook

Falling oil prices aren't pulling down inflation expectations, pointing to a boost from increased tariffs

Equity market exuberance outpacing macroeconomic data

Apart from Japan, Blue Chip forecasters expect further sizable monetary easing

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

Andrew Cates

**The Global Monetary Policy Consensus**
The latest Blue Chip Financial Forecasts survey points to a notably more balanced global monetary policy outlook over the coming year. In contrast to the pronounced easing bias that dominated much of the past two years, expectations are now more symmetric, with a similar number of central banks projected to raise rates as to ease policy. Japan is seen delivering further tightening, while Canada is expected to initiate an interest rate hike in coming months. In Australia’s case, this tightening guidance was reinforced this week, with the Reserve Bank lifting its policy rate by 25 basis points. Elsewhere, and in contrast, the euro area, UK and US are expected to move in the opposite direction.

260205Z1.jpg

**US manufacturing activity**
The second chart underscores the recent improvement in US economic momentum, highlighted by an unexpected surge in the January ISM manufacturing PMI. After spending much of the past year hovering below the 50 threshold consistent with stagnation, the index jumped sharply back into expansionary territory, signalling a renewed pickup in industrial activity. This rebound has coincided with a broader run of stronger-than-anticipated US economic data, as reflected in the upswing in the Citigroup Economic Surprise Index. Together, these developments point to a US economy that continues to display notable resilience, complicating expectations of monetary easing in the near term.

260205Z2.jpg

**US Bank Lending Standards and Financial Stress** 
The next chart turns to US financial conditions, highlighting the latest readings from the Senior Loan Officer Opinion Survey. The net proportion of banks tightening lending standards on corporate loans and mortgages is now more modest by historical standards, and well below the extremes seen during past episodes of financial stress. Some easing in credit headwinds has occurred alongside relatively subdued readings on the OFR Financial Stress Index, which continues to hover below its long-run average. Together, these indicators suggest that the US financial system has continued to avoid the kind of acute stress typically associated with sharp slowdowns in credit availability—helping to underpin the recent resilience in economic activity.

260205Z3.jpg

**Semiconductor Sales**
The fourth chart highlights the renewed surge in global semiconductor sales, with momentum strengthening sharply over recent months across the Americas, China and the broader Asia-Pacific region. After the cyclical downturn in 2022–23, sales have rebounded to fresh highs, reflecting a powerful revival in demand for advanced chips and related technologies. This upswing has taken place amid intense investor preoccupation with artificial intelligence, with expectations that AI adoption will drive a sustained wave of capital spending on data centres, cloud infrastructure and high-performance computing. In contrast, semiconductor sales in Europe remain comparatively subdued, reflecting the region’s smaller footprint in high-end chip manufacturing, weaker industrial demand, and the ongoing impact of slower economic growth. While semiconductors are inherently cyclical, markets have increasingly interpreted the current rebound elsewhere as structural rather than purely cyclical—underpinned by the belief that AI represents a transformative and durable source of demand growth.

260205Z4.jpg

**Large-Scale AI Models**
The next chart illustrates the rapid proliferation of large-scale AI models globally, with newly updated data for 2025 pointing to a further sharp acceleration in development activity. The United States continues to lead by a wide margin, while China has also seen a steep rise in model deployment in recent years, underscoring the intensifying technological competition between the two economies. Growth in the UK and other regions has been more modest by comparison, highlighting the increasingly concentrated nature of AI innovation. Taken together with the surge in semiconductor sales, these trends help explain the market’s strong preoccupation with AI as a potential driver of future productivity and investment cycles—although the geographic concentration of activity also raises questions about the uneven distribution of any resulting economic gains.

260205Z5.jpg

**An AI Bubble?** 
The final chart draws on the latest Blue Chip Financial Forecasts special questions, highlighting market participants’ perceptions of the economic gains likely to be delivered by artificial intelligence. While a sizeable share of respondents still believe that financial markets may be overestimating AI’s potential benefits, an increasing proportion now judge current expectations to be broadly accurate, with only a small minority viewing the gains as underestimated. Notably, this represents a softening in scepticism compared with the survey results from last month, when concerns about excessive market optimism were more pronounced. The shift suggests a growing acceptance that AI-related investment and innovation could translate into meaningful economic impacts—though uncertainty remains high around the scale, timing and distribution of these gains.

260205Z6.jpg

Financial markets have experienced renewed gyrations in recent weeks, as shifting geopolitical risks, questions around Federal Reserve independence, renewed talk of US dollar “debasement,” and ongoing enthusiasm surrounding artificial intelligence have combined to drive volatility across asset classes. These cross-currents have also contributed to a degree of rotation away from high-flying technology stocks, as investors reassess valuations and the timing of anticipated AI-driven gains. Against this backdrop, the charts in this week’s COTW highlight several important themes. Policy rate expectations now appear more balanced globally, marking a clear shift away from the one-sided easing bias of the past two years (chart 1), even as resilient US data—underscored by the unexpected jump in the January ISM index and a run of positive economic surprises—continues to complicate the outlook for monetary easing (chart 2). At the same time, US financial conditions remain relatively benign, with limited evidence of widespread credit stress or aggressive tightening in lending standards (chart 3). Meanwhile, the sharp rebound in semiconductor sales and the accelerating rollout of large-scale AI models underscore why investors remain so focused on the AI narrative, even as Europe lags behind due to weaker industrial momentum and a smaller footprint in advanced chip production (charts 4 and 5). Finally, while some scepticism about AI’s ultimate economic impact persists, the latest survey results suggest a moderation in concerns that markets are materially overestimating its gains (chart 6). Taken together, these developments paint a picture of a US economy that remains more resilient than many had anticipated, set against a financial landscape increasingly shaped by powerful—if sometimes competing—narratives around geopolitics, policy, and technological transformation.

Charts of the Week: Balanced Policy, Resilient Data and AI Narratives

260206E.jpg

With the December report, Germany’s production and some of the early European industrial production data reveal a good deal of chaos in terms of the embedded trends. On the month, German industrial production fell by 1.9%, with consumer goods output up by 0.5%, capital goods output falling by 5.3%, and intermediate goods output falling by 1.2%. Among the early reporters in the monetary union—France, Spain, and Portugal—only Spain showed an increase in manufacturing IP in December; however, Spanish industrial production is notoriously volatile.

**Broader IP trends in Germany and elsewhere in Europe**
As for other early industrial production reporters, both Sweden and Norway showed strong-to-solid gains in December and each of them showed two-months of gains in a row. Beyond that, sequential growth rates from 12-months to six-months to three-months show accelerating growth in German consumer goods output against decelerating growth for intermediate goods. Real manufacturing output and real sales show mixed results- no clear trends; however, real manufacturing orders in Germany are off the map strong. 

**German manufacturing/industrial Surveys**
German industrial surveys from the IFO for manufacturing shows persistent weakening as well as for IFO manufacturing expectations, and in the EU Commission industrial index in the last three months. More broadly, Germany shows some modest but ongoing step up all of these based on average levels from 12-months to six-months to three-months for IFO expectations and the EU Commission industrial readings with mixed results for other survey readings.

**IP trends in Europe**
For the early reporting EMU members France, Spain, and Portugal, who report industrial production trends, each show mixed monthly trends against ongoing decelerations for manufacturing output over the broader sequential periods (12-month, to 6-month, to 3-month). However, for other Europe, Sweden and Norway, manufacturing trends are steadily accelerating on this broader timeline.

**A feeling of ‘Deja- What?’**
These combinations of opposed trends mixed with a lack of trends leave us with this sense of confusion about what's going on in manufacturing. For Germany, the extreme strength in orders is reassuring since orders should be forward-looking rather than backward-looking or even contemporaneous. But orders can also be a fickle series and so we'll have to watch it to see if the trends for German orders hold up.

**Current quarter-What’s been happening now**
In addition, current quarter growth for Germany actually looks quite good with industrial production up 3.7% at an annual rate in the current quarter, led by output increases in manufacturing against a decline in the intermediate goods output. Real orders in the quarter are surging at a 44% growth rate, while real sales in manufacturing only had a 0.1% uptick at an annual rate. The industrial indicators for Germany in the quarter show weakness or flatness with the only exception being IFO manufacturing expectations that advanced by a small amount. The three EMU members who report industrial production data show positive growth in the just-completed quarter except for Portugal where industrial production is falling at a 2.9% rate in the fourth quarter. Sweden and Norway, European countries but not monetary union members, show a strong 22% annual rate gain in Sweden against the 3% annual rate decline in Norway.

260206.jpg

**Rankings**
**How growth rates stack up…**
Moving away from short-term trends, the rankings of growth rates of these various metrics using 12-month growth rates on data back to 2006, show below-median growth rates for German industrial production and all three of its major sectors. All of them have rankings below the 50% mark where the median resides. Germany’s manufacturing output growth rate is below its median as is the growth of real sales; and once again real manufacturing orders break out and show a stunning 90th percentile standing, extremely strong compared to other growth rates on this period.

**Indicator rankings are poor**
However, the survey based industrial indicators for Germany, ranked based on their index levels, are all extremely weak and much weaker than German sector or other German metrics. The strongest indicator reading is the 29th percentile standing for IFO manufacturing expectations while the current ZEW index, IFO manufacturing index, and the EU Commission industrial readings, all reside below their 15th percentile. The survey rankings suggest that industrial sentiment is in much worse shape than activity and growth.

**IP elsewhere in Europe**
However, the growth ranking of manufacturing industrial production for the reporting EMU members and other European members are all quite solid, with percentile standings ranging from the 66th up to the 93rd percentile.

**Summing up**
From these data, Germany emerges as the weak economy compared with historic norms based on industrial production growth and indicator readings. However, there's a glimpse of positivity from the growth of real orders, and at the same time, some concern about ongoing sentiment for manufacturing in Germany as distinct from actual performance.

Germany

German IP Reveals Chaotic Trends

Winnie Tapasanun

260205X15.jpg

260205Y15.jpg

**Total job openings** fell 5.6% m/m (-12.9% y/y) to 6.542 million in December after a downwardly revised 7.0% decline to 6.928 million in November (previously -4.1% m/m; 7.146 million), according to the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey. December marked the third consecutive m/m fall and the lowest level since September 2020. The job openings rate declined to 3.9% in December, the lowest since April 2020, from 4.2% in November, remaining below a record-high 7.4% in March 2022. This rate is calculated as the ratio of job openings to total nonfarm employment plus openings. Significantly, the drop in job openings also lowered the **ratio of job openings to unemployed individuals** to 0.872 in December—the lowest since March 2021—from 0.890 in November, down from 1.085 in December 2024 and a pre-pandemic 1.211 in February 2020. A reading of 0.872 implies there were about 0.87 open jobs per unemployed person—indicating fewer openings than unemployed workers. December was the fifth time in six months that this ratio remained below 1.0.

**Private sector job openings** fell 6.8% (-12.5% y/y) to 5.804 million in December after a 6.6% fall to 6.227 million in November, registering the third successive m/m decline and the lowest level since September 2020. The private sector job openings rate fell to 4.1% in December, the lowest since April 2020, from 4.4% in November. The December m/m decline in private sector openings reflected drops of 27.7% (-36.9% y/y) in financial activities, 20.2% (-25.5% y/y) in professional & business services, 14.4% (-5.1% y/y) in trade, transportation & utilities, and 5.2% (-12.4% y/y) in private educational & health services. To the upside, private sector openings in the following categories rose m/m in December: other services (21.1%; 11.0% y/y), mining & lodging (17.6%; 0.0% y/y), information (13.5%; -4.7% y/y), manufacturing (8.5%; 0.5% y/y), leisure & hospitality (7.5%; -17.2% y/y), and construction (2.8%; 42.4% y/y). Meanwhile, government job openings rose 5.3% (-15.6% y/y) in December, the first m/m rise in three months, after a 10.6% drop in November.

**Total hiring** rebounded 3.4% (-1.5% y/y) to 5.293 million in December, the first m/m increase since September, following a 4.6% decrease to 5.121 million in November. The hiring rate edged up to 3.3% in December from 3.2% in November, though it remained below pre-pandemic levels. **Private sector hiring** rose 3.1% (-0.4% y/y) to 4.978 million in December, the third m/m rise in four months, after a 4.0% decline to 4.826 million in November. The private sector hiring rate rose to 3.7% in December from 3.5% in November, the same as in October and September. The December m/m increase in private sector hiring was led by a 32.1% jump (42.3% y/y) in information, followed by gains of 24.0% (-4.6% y/y) in financial activities, 23.5% (0.0% y/y) in mining & lodging, 6.5% (-4.8% y/y) in private educational & health services, 4.2% (-4.9% y/y) in trade, transportation & utilities, 3.6% (6.1% y/y) in construction, 3.4% (7.9% y/y) in leisure & hospitality, and 1.8% (-4.3% y/y) in manufacturing. To the downside, private sector hiring in professional & business services (-5.2%; +0.5% y/y) and other services (-4.3%; -16.5% y/y) declined m/m in December. Meanwhile, government hiring rebounded 6.4% (-16.3% y/y) in December, the first m/m rise since September, following a 13.5% drop in November.

**Total separations** rose 2.1% (3.3% y/y) to 5.251 million in December after a 1.5% rise to 5.144 million in November, marking the third m/m increase in four months and the highest level since September. The total separations rate edged up to 3.3% after holding at 3.2% in November and October. Private sector separations rose 1.6% (4.2% y/y) to 4.932 million in December, the highest level since June, while government sector separations jumped 10.4% (-9.1% y/y) to 319,000 following two consecutive m/m declines. **Total quits** (voluntary separations initiated by the employee) increased 0.3% (3.5% y/y) to 3.204 million in December, the third m/m rise in four months and the highest level since June, after a 7.4% rebound in November. The quits rate (a measure of workers’ willingness or ability to leave jobs) held at 2.0% in December and November, slightly below 2.3% in February 2020. Private sector quits eased 0.2% (+4.5% y/y) following an 8.4% November rebound. **Layoffs and discharges** (involuntary separations initiated by the employer) increased 3.6% (5.6% y/y) to 1.762 million in December, up for the third time in four months, after an 8.1% drop in November. The layoffs & discharges rate remained at 1.1% in December and November, marginally below 1.3% in February 2020. Private sector layoffs grew 4.3% (7.8% y/y) following a 7.3% November decrease.

The Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (JOLTS) data are available in Haver’s **USECON** database.

260205C15.jpg

260205D15.jpg

- Job openings down 5.6% (-12.9% y/y) to 6.542 mil., third straight m/m decline.
- Hiring up 3.4% (-1.5% y/y) to 5.293 mil., first m/m increase since September.
- Separations rise to a three-month high; quits reach a six-month high; layoffs rebound.

U.S. JOLTS: Openings Drop to Lowest Level Since Sept. ’20; Hiring Rebounds in December

Sandy Batten

260205A2.jpg

260205B2.jpg

Initial claims for unemployment insurance jumped 22,000 to 231,000 in the week ended January 31 following an unrevised 209,000 in the prior week. The four-week average rose to 212,250 from 206,250. The Action Economics Forecast Survey looked for 213,000 claims to have been filed. Winter Storm Fern and the accompanying very cold temperatures could have provided a temporary boost. Historically speaking, claims remain at low levels.

The total number of unemployment insurance beneficiaries—also known as “continuing claims”—increased by 25,000 to 1.844 million in the week ending January 24, from a downwardly revised 1.819 million in the prior week (previously 1.827 million). The insured unemployment rate remained at 1.2% in the week of January 24, unchanged from the previous eight weeks.

The insured unemployment rate varied greatly across individual states and territories. In the week ending January 17, the highest unemployment rates were in Rhode Island (2.83%), New Jersey (2.77%), Massachusetts (2.67%), Washington (2.54%), and Minnesota (2.45%). The lowest rates were in Florida (0.30%), North Carolina (0.42%), Louisiana (0.43%), Alabama (0.46%), and Arkansas (0.47). Rates in other notable states include Illinois (2.15%), California, (2.08%), New York (2.02%), Pennsylvania (1.91%), and Texas (1.09%). These state data are not seasonally adjusted.

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

260205C2.jpg

260205D2.jpg

- New claims jumped 22,000 to 231,000, the highest level since December 6.
- Continuing claims rose to 1.844 million from 1.819 million.

U.S. Initial Unemployment Claims Surged in Latest Week

260205E.jpg

German real orders in December adjusted for inflation rose strongly again, gaining 7.8% month-to-month after rising 5.7% month-to-month in November. Foreign orders were up by 5.6% in December compared to 5.2% in November. Domestic orders surged by 10.7% in December after rising 6.4% in November and 10% in October.

**Real sales**
Real sales were mixed in December with overall sales falling 1.4% month-to-month mostly on weakness in capital goods sales.

**Broad categorical acceleration**
Many flows are accelerating this month. Sequential growth rates show acceleration. Total real orders accelerate from a year ago, to the current year, to six-months, and to three-months. Sales growth rates for consumer goods, consumer nondurables, and intermediate goods all show accelerations in gear. The exceptions are foreign orders that are not as strong over six months compared to their 12-month growth. And on the sales side, consumer durables sales and capital goods sales are weak.

**Quarter-to-quarter**
Quarterly annualized growth is complete for Q4 with this report. Foreign orders are the ‘weak flow’ expanding at a 13.6% annual rate – certainly not a weak growth rate. But domestic real orders are up at an astounding 101.9% annual rate. The net impact on the total real orders growth is to lift it to a pace of 44.1%. 

**Order ranking is very strong**
The table provides two rankings: one based on the level of variables and the other based on its year-on-year growth. The rankings this month for real orders overall, foreign, and domestic orders all reside in their top 80th to 90th percentiles- extremely strong based on level or growth. Sales do not follow suit. This gives us some reason to suspect that there is some lumpiness involved in the manufacturing data as distinct from strength. That will be something to watch. Overall mining and manufacturing sales growth is essentially at its historic median at a rank of 49.8. However, capital goods, intermediate goods and manufacturing sales all have rankings at or above their medians - as high as a 61-percentile standing for capital goods.

**Industrial confidence**
Industrial confidence for Germany, France, Italy and Spain (the EU’s big-four economies) show rankings based on these survey levels that are much lower at the 11th percentile for Germany, the 42nd and 36th percentiles, for France and Italy, respectively. Spain scores better with a 61.8 percentile standing on its industrial confidence measure. 

On balance, there is now an accelerating profile that is broad in sales trends and especially strong order trends. Perhaps Europe, under the pressure to stimulate its miliary capabilities, has a core of demand to help drive output ahead more consistently. This is something to watch in the coming months.

Economy in Brief: 2007

Jump to:

Inflation Trends in Asia, ex Japan

Existing Home Sales

Existing Home Sales Edge Lower by 0.3% - Two of Four Regions Drop

Existing Home Sales Edge Lower by 0.3% - Two of Four Regions Drop

South Africa Maintains 5% GDP Growth Trend, with 20% Gains in Fixed Investment

IFO Index Drops to 107 from 108.6

European Orders Fall by 0.4% in April

U.S. Leading Economic Indicators Up for Second Time This Year