Search
All
Economics
Politics

Despite Strong Spending in October, GDPNow Forecast Took a Dive, Why?

•

•

56 comments on Despite Strong Spending in October, GDPNow Forecast Took a Dive, Why?

•

GDPNow data from Atlanta Fed, chart by Mish

Chart Notes

  • The blue line is the base forecast. It is about all the public sees or hears about when the BEA releases its GDP report but it is not what matters most.
  • The red line is Real Final Sales (RFS). That is the bottom line estimate for the economy and what does matter most. 
  • The yellow line is RFS to domestic buyers, the rest is exports.
  • The green line is RFS to private domestic buyers. It excludes government and exports.

Real Final Sales is the true bottom line performance for the quarter. The difference between the baseline report and RFS is inventories which net to zero over time. 

Mainstream media follows the baseline number, not what matters most. 

GDPNow Current Estimate

Please consider the December 1 update to the GDPNow Forecast for 2022 Q4 GDP.

The GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the fourth quarter of 2022 is 2.8 percent on December 1, down from 4.3 percent on November 23. After recent releases from the US Census Bureau, the US Bureau of Economic Analysis, and the Institute for Supply Management, a decrease in the nowcast of fourth-quarter real personal consumption expenditures growth from 4.8 percent to 3.2 percent was slightly offset by an increase in the nowcast of fourth-quarter gross private domestic investment growth from 1.0 percent to 2.0 percent. In addition, the nowcast of the contribution of the change in real net exports to fourth-quarter real GDP growth decreased from 0.64 percentage points to 0.16 percentage points.

Spotlight on Current Numbers

  • Base Number: 2.8 Percent
  • RFS: 2.4 Percent
  • RFS Domestic: 2.1 Percent
  • RFS Private Domestic: 2.4 Percent

Real Income and Spending Surge in October 

Real Income and Spending data from the BEA, chart by Mish

I will do a closer look at income and spending but it is the month-over-month changes that drive the GDPNow forecast.

Real Personal Consumption expenditures jumped a whopping 0.5 percent in October. Real means inflation-adjusted. Nominal spending rose 0.8 percent with inflation eating 0.3 percentage point.

Yet, the GDPNow forecast took a dive on strong spending August and October but soared in September. 

August and September were for Q3 but here are the internal details for the GDPNow report on December 1 (lead chart). 

Major GDPNow Releases for 2022 Q4

GDPNow release data from Atlanta Fed, annotations by Mish

Major Contribution to GDP Changes

  • PCE: From 3.29 to 2.18
  • Equipment: From 0.46 to 0.74
  • Nonresidential Structures: From 0.02 to -0.13
  • Residential Structures: From -0.87 to -1.01

The GDPNow report followed the ISM release, advance economic indicators, and personal Income reports. 

Advance Trade Data 

Trade image from Census Department 

Please consider the Monthly Advance Trade Data from the Commerce department. 

Advance Trade Details

  • The international trade deficit was $99.0 billion in October, up $7.1 billion from $91.9 billion in September. 
  • Exports of goods for October were $173.7 billion, $4.7 billion less than September exports.
  • Imports of goods for October were $272.7 billion, $2.4 billion more than September imports.
  • Exports fell 2.6 percent and imports rose 0.9%.

A similar setup happened in August. But in September (yellow highlight in the real income and spending chart), imports fell and exports rose. 

Consumers spent more but on imports. 

However, it’s not the data that matters but what the model expected that matters. The GDPNow model did not anticipate this trade reversal.

Residential Investment

On November 23, the GDP Now Forecast for Residential Investment fell from -0.59 to -0.88 and has continued to dive for obvious reasons. It’s now -1.01.

Curiously, despite the alleged bounce in new home sales on November 23, the GDPNow model went the other way. 

The model expected more or the negative revisions mattered more. Regardless, I highly doubt there was much of a bounce. 

Cancellations are running about 25 percent and the Census Department does not factor cancellations into its data. The margin of error on the housing reports is enormous.

New Home Sales

  • Sales of new single‐family houses in October 2022 were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 632,000, according to estimates released jointly today by the U.S. Census Bureau and the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
  • This is 7.5 percent (±20.8 percent)* above the revised September rate of 588,000, but is 5.8 percent (±19.6 percent)* below the October 2021 estimate of 671,000.
  • In September I reported New Home Sales Jump an Astonishing 28 Percent in August to 685,000. But today we see the number is 661,000.
  • This month the Census Department revised September from 603,000 to 588,000.

Notice the margin of errors in these reports ±20 percent!

The Census Department does not have much faith in its estimates and neither do I. 

See links above for more details and discussion.

This post originated at MishTalk.Com.

Thanks for Tuning In!

Please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

If you have subscribed and do not get email alerts, please check your spam folder.

Mish

Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com

Thanks for Tuning In!

Mish

Mike Shedlock

Recommended Articles

Comments to this post are now closed.

56 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
worleyeoe
worleyeoe
3 years ago
I thought you or someone familiar with the Fed’s GDPNow, said that this measurement has a tendency to rise as we get into the last month of the quarter? If true, then it’s reasonable to think it will pop back up towards the end of the month.
0
0
JeffD
JeffD
3 years ago
Here’s how inflation works — a substantial number of people who had $1 million on March 20, 2020 now have $2 million, essentially instantly. They won’t spend that money with careful consideration, but like a lotto winner. Rather than pay asking price for a home, they will pay $200k over asking to get just the house they want, $800k lotto winnings leftover for continued inflationary spending.
0
0
JeffD
JeffD
3 years ago
Reply to  JeffD
Now consider a business owner, where a third of your customers are lotto flush with cash. They won’t blink or complain about huge price increases, they will just pay whatever without thinking about price. After all, who really cares, since it is just instant lotto wiings and there is plenty left to spend down? But there are enough of these customers to act as price setters for *everyone*, even if 2/3 of customers can’t afford what I have to offer. As a business owner, much higher margin with much fewer transactions is a win-win for me. And that is exactly what we have been seeing with automobiles, goceries, housing, you name it. But what about the 2/3 who can’t afford it? Well there are enough high margin customers to support the higher prices, that the people who can’t afford it are forced to find a way to pay the new price. Many will turn to debt and/or sacrificing some purchases to make others, at least until the lotto winners spend down their additional $800k in winnings. So what is insidious about inflation is the mix of sales (lotto winning customers vs everyone else) , not the toal amount of money in the economy. That extra money in the economy will be changing hands for *years*, and will not be depleted by the end of 2023 as Powell seems to expect.
0
0
vanderlyn
vanderlyn
3 years ago
Reply to  JeffD
a nice example. but when one looks in history of mankind with similar inflationary money printing episodes, there is no one size fits all. sometimes the newly “computer cursor delivered” inflation is different than previous actual printing in centuries or money clipping. but i’d suspect the answe is we don’t know. sometimes inflation of money takes and instant to work . sometimes it can take 2 or 3 decades. i would guess as this empire is unwinding and becoming more and more like argentina by each decade, the smart folks will hide their “money” in the form of gold and drugs and perhaps even art and some choice r/e. and in a few decades only a few percent of families will have all the wealth. we are more than half way to complete banana republik status. we could sip cognac with cigars in front of fireplaces and have nice chats about how far along. i’d guess 90%. look around. trump. biden. homelessness. suicides. dick picture selfie culture. i’m not even drunk. yet.
0
0
JeffD
JeffD
3 years ago
Reply to  vanderlyn
I agree with your comment completely. My follow on comment I attached to my original comment concerning this specific round of inflation got moderated away for reasons unknown. Maybe because it could make waves among advertisers. I’ll summarize by saying I think the mix in purchases is what makes the current bout of inflation particularly swift and bad.
0
0
JeffD
JeffD
3 years ago
Reply to  JeffD
PS While I believe supply chain disruptions had an effect, I beieve those effects are minor in comparison to the root cause I focused on, especially as it relates to services.
0
0
vanderlyn
vanderlyn
3 years ago
Reply to  JeffD
per shadow stats, trump and biden in 2 covid years “printed via computer cursor” about 50 plus years of printing previously. and we all know everyone got some. busboys to investment bankers. hell, first time in my life i ever collected unemployment payments after paying into the funds as a business owner for 40 years. the free shyt money was raining heavy. how long it will last is anyones guess. i think mish is washed up in his recession forecast. GDP is dumb number as it is 40% government spending. just dumb number to lock onto. WE ARE ARGENTINA. since 9.11.01 and jacked up during panic of 2008 and the plague years just put us squarely into latin amerikan banana land. we ain’t gonna end up like EU. that’s a pipe dream. we are much worse off. our ruling class has printed to oblivion and sends trillions around the globe to scumbags like raytheon and us navy. the best performing cities for r/e appreciation this 21st century has been Kabul and Baghdad. thanks to amerikan money laundering. global war on terror has put us into the poor house. i kind of like latin amerika. mexico city is my fav city in new world. 1 million rich. 19 million flavelas of desperately poor. the million rich downtown is like Madrid without the fanny pack amerikan tourists. amerikans have no clue. too arrogant and ignorant.
0
0
JeffD
JeffD
3 years ago
Reply to  vanderlyn
I lived in Argentina for six months. We are definitely not Argentina. Maybe not in my lifetime, but I’m old.
0
0
vanderlyn
vanderlyn
3 years ago
Reply to  JeffD
financially speaking. argentina was rich and humming along as well if not better than USA a century ago. and when great depression came along the rulling class stole everything not nailed down. took a century to get where they are. we are 20 years to doing the same. WMD and global war on terror and panic of 2008………same stuff. we are argentina. trump and biden and kamala etc………..perfect latin amerikan kleptocrats………….it’s painfully obvious. i don’t mind. i love latin amerika. for rich among us it’s a bargain for basics of life like food and shelter and other red light district goodies like sex drugs and rock and roll.
0
0
JeffD
JeffD
3 years ago
Reply to  JeffD
Follow on: The excess gains of one lotto winner’s crazed instant gratification spending can’t screw up the world for the rest of us. But the excess gains of 10 million lotto winners crazed instant gratification spending absolutely can, as they become price setters for all goods and services. And as they each spend down their $1,000,000, daily over the next five years, like it is monopoly money rather than real money ($10? $50? Same price in the eyes of these people), all of us will be paying for it. I know this is the thinking, because I have many wealthy friends who are doing exactly this right now — absolute and complete disregard for cost buying 100% in terms of whether they want something in that moment or not, because the pandemic cash made them nosebleed rich.
0
0
JeffD
JeffD
3 years ago
Reply to  JeffD
Amazing how the reasoned version of this argument got moderated out twice, but the hyperbole version made it through.
0
0
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  JeffD
Looking at household debt to income, Fed hikes rates to offset increased wages, in turn discouraging debt based consumption in exchange for cash. – the red line on this chart is critical –
Higher rates also encourage saving and investing.
Basically a reversal of the last 42 years of flat wage growth with increased dependency on debt for consumption.
On the fiscal side, maybe we get lucky and the GOP finally stops focusing on Multinational corporate tax cuts and realizes the need for small and medium sized businesses to enter the competitive arena….but those corporations pay a lot of campaign bucks.
We’ve created a lot of jobs in the past few decades via those tax cuts, would be nice if those were American jobs.
.
0
0
JeffD
JeffD
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
That’s all well and good, but it didn’t stop one of my friends from buying an extra house and extra car, “just because”, both of which now sit empty/unused. And it didn’t stop another of my friends from staying at a place they “found” for $450/night while on vacation whereas in 2019, they were searching for days to find places that didn’t cost more than $150/night. This enormous instantaneous injection of money into the markets/economy will have repurcussions until at least 2025 as the NY Fed president just said yesterday. It was an awful, awful decision.
0
0
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  JeffD
Regarding circulation of Keynesian fiscal stimulus, sure, however – increased credit service payments will quickly offset that extra money.
Take a peek at fred, note the red line (cost of servicing debt) –
.
0
0
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
3 years ago
Reply to  JeffD
Before lotto, there was a real economy with real income. That part of real income that is not taxed, is either consumed or saved. Consumption drives ‘current’ demand (and current production). Saving drives investment (whether equity or debt) and prepares for future production.
Taxes can be used efficiently and effectively to benefit the nation, or tax revenue can be pi$$ed away. We see it when governments live beyond their means, and force interest rates to irrational (low) levels to finance their faux debt. Taxes used inefficiently/ineffectively and artificially low interest rates destroy competition and unbalance the real economy.
The end result is a structurally flawed economic system. The problem: those who caused it, cannot fix it.
0
0
worleyeoe
worleyeoe
3 years ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
Oh! They could fix it. They could raise taxes which is what MMT proposes to control inflation. But, we all know that’s not going to happen, so your point still stands, a structurally flawed system with no solution.
Thanks, Cap!
0
0
8dots
8dots
3 years ago
China shut down to hurt US economy. Import already have shifted to Vietnam and other ASEAN nations. We produce more stuff here in USA.
Something is broken in China. In order to slow down this process China might offer us steep discounts and other political goodies. The Biden administration might buy it. China, as a pussycat is better than a tiger. China will switch from exporting shortages and inflation, back to deflation, at least for a while…
0
0
8dots
8dots
3 years ago
Our trade deficit was rising in Oct, while China was shutting down. In Oct DX was trading at high level between 110 and 114, WTIC was down.
0
0
Salmo Trutta
Salmo Trutta
3 years ago
Larry Summers: “re: “At a certain point, consumers run out of their savings and then you have a Wile E. Coyote kind of moment,”

That will happen in the 1st qtr. of 2023.

0
0
JeffD
JeffD
3 years ago
Reply to  Salmo Trutta
Larry doesn’t understand how inflation works then. About $10 trillion was “instantly” dumped into the economy, making a lot of people very wealthy in a short period of time. A substantial number of people who had $1 million on March 2020 now have $2 million. Since they got that money so quickly, they have the luxury of viewing it as “free”. So their decision making on how to spend that money is more akin to a lottery winner vs careful consideration. In other words, instead of paying a fair prices for a home, throw an extra $200k over asking at the home to get just the one you want, and still have $800k of lotto winnings to continue spending down. Let’s shift gears now. Say you are a services business, and a third of your customers have this ” lotto money” mindset post-pandemic. Then if you raise prices, they are not going to blink or complain about throwing extra money at you, and they just pay whatever. But a third of your customers being these high margin patsies is enough to make them price setters for your service even if 2/3 of your customers can’t afford the new price. Huge margin? Less work? What business owner wouldn’t take that deal, even if transactions fall? And that’s what we’ve seen in automobiles, groceries, and everything else. But until all these patsies spend down their additional $800K of lotto money, *everyone* will have to deal with the consequences of the price increases.
0
0
Robbyrob
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
3 years ago
Reply to  Robbyrob
Um, how much of GDP caused by government expenditures?
0
0
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  Robbyrob
The whole thing’s kinda funny.
Ask in passing “How about the economy?” and you quickly learn how most folks view the economy according to their own microverse.
Our current economy is far more beneficial to the working class but detrimental to the wealthy, mainly because of the labor shortage and the fact that the upper class owns far more stocks.
If you’re surrounded by executives, life is miserable and we’re headed to another ’08, if you’re surrounded by working Joe’s things have never been better.
I regularly talk with both and the diversity of opinions is comical, almost always predictable.
I also think market pundits are overanalyzing this, the Fed may well be doing this right, it’s possible, ya never know.
.
0
0
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
Some things are predictable, for example, some people are wrong more often than they are right!
Directly above your comment, I posed the issue of how much of GDP is government expenditures. Directly below your comment, vanderlyn gives specific details of that spending.
Your observations on executives and Joes (plural, so no apostrophe) are what I would expect for a ‘local’ view of economics. Stepping back for a broader view, likely we are looking at the early stages of a global recession, with implosion in some debt-driven derivative markets, currency failures etc.
As for the Fed ‘doing this right’, good luck. This is a lose-lose situation.
0
0
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
No debate, but I still think there’s at least some merit to what Joe’s think.
0
0
JeffD
JeffD
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
Powell, aka the ghost of Arthur Burns, believes inflation will be wrapped up by end of 2023. In his Brookings speech, he gave a clear list of checkboxes for what would constitute “mission accomplished” on fighting inflation. Over half those checkboxes have already been met or exceeded, with the remaining checkboxes likely to be ticked by end of 2023. The problem though, is that $9.7 trillion was added to the economy over the short span of about two years, and that money is still out there changing hands every single day. It will be the end of 2025 before that pig in the python stops causing inflation, checkboxes be damned.
0
0
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  JeffD
While I agree on your point about the Keynesian injections and the amount of time it can circulate, Economists and pundits tend to be binary, tunnel vision in their opinions.
Supply chains were wrecked after 2020 and still slow to recover, then oil, and now Ag/food (drought has effected 14% of ag this year), none of that is related to wage inflation, thought we do have a labor shortage to boot.
I do think there was at least some adage to the “transitory” theme, just not as short term as the Fed thought.
I’m not saying I’m right, but If I’m even a little right, then look out below.
.
0
0
JeffD
JeffD
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
It’s much worse than a supply chain problem. Mish moderated away my comment on the root cause.
0
0
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  JeffD
I don’t think it was Mish, happens to me alot, there’s some algorithm that does it, sometimes if you refresh page and retype it works.
Try again.
0
0
JeffD
JeffD
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
I tried twice. The first time, it got deleted instantly. The second time, it said my comment was in moderation, disappearing five minutes thereafter. Very plain economic language, nothing controversial. I can’t imagine what I could have said that caused it to be moderated away. I described inflation from the business side of the equation instead of the consumers perspective. Maybe discussing people in terms of being income producing widgets that maximize profit is taboo now?
0
0
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
3 years ago
Reply to  JeffD
“…believes inflation will be wrapped up by end of 2023…”
Powell’s beliefs are not reassuring.
0
0
vanderlyn
vanderlyn
3 years ago
Reply to  Robbyrob
i know the hundred US peso in my pocket is worth about 20 us pesos turn of the century. of course we are all gloomy. inflation is a huge part of the misery index. mish has missed this. he thinks we are in a recession and stuff is now and will be cheap. nope. the ruling class will print us all into a perpetual state of gloom. why the latinos let it loose on soccer pitch and saturday nights. buenos noches
0
0
JeffD
JeffD
3 years ago
Reply to  vanderlyn
Once the QT buffer is spent down (about $2 trillion), it is a mandatory return to QE. That is why they should make the pace of QT runoff count. The current pace is too low to have a meaningful impact on the inflationary mindset.
0
0
JeffD
JeffD
3 years ago
Reply to  Robbyrob
The article you linked reminded me of Mish’s comment on higher interest rates. Mish said the Fed’s intent of higher rates was to lower the price of homes, but what actually happened was that it lowered the number of transactions. Rate hikes aren’t always transmitted to the economy in the way central planners intend.
0
0
vanderlyn
vanderlyn
3 years ago
Government spending in the United States was last recorded at 43.6 percent of GDP in 2021 . source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis
0
0
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
3 years ago
Reply to  vanderlyn
I don’t know about anyone else, but I find this appalling.
0
0
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
3 years ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
To me it’s frightening.
0
0
vanderlyn
vanderlyn
3 years ago
government spending as percent of GDP is now over 40%. it’s a very poor gauge of how the real economy is humming along. all the chatter on recession or not is pablum for middle brow consumption. imho. https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp#:~:text=In%20the%20long%2Dterm%2C%20the,according%20to%20our%20econometric%20models.&text=We%20have%20a%20plan%20for,using%20an%20excel%20add%2Din.
0
0
vanderlyn
vanderlyn
3 years ago
GDP is a very flawed accounting for economy. billions to ukraine to be laundered by criminals is GDP. it’s a joke.
0
0
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  vanderlyn
Well that’s a fresh lie… watching Tucker last night or did you just make it up yourself?
0
0
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
3 years ago
Reply to  Zardoz
Believe what you want from the lying left. It was not long ago that the Hunter laptop was Russian disinformation.
0
0
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
This symbolizes a major failure for Pubs, the answer to all campaign questions is to point to a Dem conspiracy theory.
Very few people care about Hunter and his laptop.
I could engage in a policy debate with you, where I feel the Dems are stronger, and right when you feel you don’t have an answer, you’ll mention Hunter’s laptop….it’s the GOP “go-to” last resort.
Before that, it was the Durham investigation, Hilary’s Emails, Benghazi, etc, the irony being that Pubs used those topics yet they yielded nothing in the end.
Hunter is a known addict, has a sordid history, none of that’s a secret, and yet, a GOP led Congress will likely spend millions in tax dollars to yet again get nothing.
If Hunter’s laptop is on the campaign platform for 2024 instead of real policy idea’s that appeal to working class independents, it’s light’s out for the Pubs.
As Obama once said – “Please, proceed”.
.
0
0
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
I’m glad you brought up the Hunter laptop. I mentioned it because it has recently taken on added significance. IMHO, with the Twitter evidence it becomes a watershed moment. We will see if ‘people’ care, or stick their heads in the sand when the Liar in Chief is exposed as the fraud he is.
Then, again, I was wrong about Whitewater. It was far too complex for low-IQ voters to understand.
Where, exactly, are the Dems stronger?
1) manipulating the mass media
2) manipulating young minds in school and college
3) manipulating women
4) manipulating racism
5) manipulating …. a long list
0
0
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
Buh buh bubbbbut BENGHAZI!
0
0
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
“Then, again, I was wrong about Whitewater. It was far too complex for low-IQ voters to understand.”
– Again, “Please, proceed”
“manipulating …. a long list”
– Yep, the Dems are all about “manipulating” the popularity contest, and all those “low IQ” voters might fall for it.
All those low IQ voters seem to think Democracy is some kinda popularity contest, they don’t realize concepts like trickle-down, “job creating tax cuts” for the wealthy, corporate tax cuts for offshoring and the Laffer curve will benefit them some day, the last 40 years have been the result of some kinda as yet unnamed glitch and they’re too stupid to see it.
.
0
0
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
Far better not to tax the middle class and use trickle-up.
0
0
JeffD
JeffD
3 years ago

The PCE numbers from Nov/Dec 2021 were -0.1/-0.8. The PCE numbers from Nov/Dec this year will both be over 0.1%. That means the yoy PCE numbers will explode higher over the next two months.

0
0
Mish
Mish
3 years ago
Reply to  JeffD
That is year-over-year
No impact on GDP
Only Month-Over-Month matters
0
0
JeffD
JeffD
3 years ago
Reply to  Mish
“Real world” measurement vs political “reality” have two different reaction functions, and we both know which one has a larger multiplier on market movements. Cf. 4.5% upside move on the NASDAQ after Powell’s remarks.
0
0
shamrock
shamrock
3 years ago
So the reported new homes sales in October was 632,000 (annual rate) and you claim the margin of error is +-20.8% so what do you think the range of actual new home sales could be? Between 500,000 and 763,000?
0
0
Mish
Mish
3 years ago
Reply to  shamrock
I do not claim the margin of error is +- 20.8%.
The Census Department states that as its margin of error.
Based on their statements, the range of sales would indeed be 501,000 to 763,000
I do not know if that includes cancellations which are currently about 25%. Seemingly not, because they never factor in cancellations.
So all things considered perhaps the range of sales is 400,000 to 800,000
0
0
Mish
Mish
3 years ago
Reply to  Mish
That is their range.
My range, factoring in calculations, would be 400,000 to 615,000 with that upper end being unlikely.
0
0
shamrock
shamrock
3 years ago
Reply to  Mish
Wow, ok, that is such a shockingly bad margin of error I was having a hard time believing. Thanks for clarifying.
0
0
Mish
Mish
3 years ago
Reply to  shamrock
Here you go
“New Home Sales
Sales of new single‐family houses in October 2022 were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 632,000, according
to estimates released jointly today by the U.S. Census Bureau and the Department of Housing and Urban
Development. This is 7.5 percent (±20.8 percent)* above the revised September rate of 588,000, but is 5.8 percent
(±19.6 percent)* below the October 2021 estimate of 671,000.”
and their explanation
“Whenever a statement such as “2.5 percent
(±3.2%) above” appears in the text, this indicates the range (‐0.7 to +5.7 percent) in which the actual percent change
is likely to have occurred. All ranges given for percent changes are 90‐percent confidence intervals and account only
for sampling variability.”
0
0
Mish
Mish
3 years ago
Reply to  Mish
It appears they admit there new home sampling is outrageously bad.
I used to remove those confidence levels but about 2 months ago I started posting them so people could see how ridiculous they are.
0
0
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
3 years ago
Reply to  Mish
With a ’90‐percent confidence interval’ that large, why bother collecting data? Maybe the better question is why fund HUD?
0
0

Decorate Your Walls with Mish Fine Art Images

Click each image to view details or purchase in the store.

Stay Informed

Subscribe to MishTalk

You will receive all messages from this feed and they will be delivered by email.