Don’t Miss a Post. Subscribe now.

GDPNow Model for the Third Quarter Surges Then Immediately Dives, What’s Happening?

GDPNow data from Atlanta Fed, chart by Mish

Catching Up

In my previous GDPNow Update on August 24, I commented “Even if you believe in a big economic boost from the July jobs report, housing erased those gains and more for the GDPNow Real Final Sales estimate.

On September 1, the GDPNow model may a big leap on ISM and construction spending, but I am not sure which one of those triggered the jump. 

I don’t believe the ISM numbers and construction is going to hell. So, rather than comment “I don’t believe this“, I waited for the next set of numbers, out today.  

Please consider the September 7 update to the GDPNow Forecast for Q3 GDP.

The GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the third quarter of 2022 is 1.4 percent on September 7, down from 2.6 percent on September 1. After recent releases from the US Census Bureau, the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, the US Bureau of Economic Analysis, and the Institute for Supply Management, the nowcasts of third-quarter real personal consumption expenditures growth, third-quarter real gross private domestic investment growth, and third-quarter real government spending growth decreased from 3.1 percent, -3.5 percent, and 1.7 percent, respectively, to 1.7 percent, -5.8 percent, and 1.3 percent, respectively, while the nowcast of the contribution of the change in real net exports to third-quarter real GDP growth increased from 0.82 percentage points to 1.09 percentage points.

What Happened On September 2?

The Jobs Report Much Is Weaker Than It Looks For Six Months

Either ISM or construction spending (or both) triggered the surge. But we do know what triggered the decline, the BLS jobs report. 

On September 2, I commented The Jobs Report Much Is Weaker Than It Looks For Six Months

In a follow up report I commented Increasingly Likely That Alleged Job Strength is a Mirage of Part Time Second Jobs

The economy added 1,888,000 jobs while full time employment declined by 383,000 and total employment (as measured by sum of full and part time) was down by 48,000.

The total discrepancy between the trends is 1,888,000 + 48,000 = 1,936,000

It appears the GDPNow model picked up on that, or the decline in work hours, or other weaknesses in the BLS report. 

It’s not just the headline number the model looks at, but something (or a number of thing) in the report were weaker than expected by the model.

Base Forecast vs Real Final Sales

The real final sales (RFS) number is the one to watch, not baseline GDP.

RFS ignores changes in inventories which net to zero over time. This is a good reason to ignore the talk of two quarters of declining GDP being a recession.

RFS in the second quarter was positive. I stick with my assessment of a recession starting in May, assuming the upcoming data matches my forecasts.

Retail sales plunged in May after a strong April, and that’s when housing started to crumble as well.

1.9 percent on real final sales is not recession territory, but I strongly believe that will not hold up. GDPNow forecasts tend to start out strong then fade as the quarter progresses.

There is still two months of data for Q3 coming up. Retail sales and housing rate to be weak. But will they be weaker than the model expects?

My guess is yes. 

ISM Says Service Sectors Strengthens, the S&P Says Sharpest Contraction Since 2020

The GDPNow model looks at ISM, not the similar S&P PMI. The divergence is stunning.

On September 6, I commented ISM Says Service Sectors Strengthens, the S&P Says Sharpest Contraction Since 2020

Whereas ISM says the economy expanded at a faster pace, the S&P PMI is reporting a sharp contraction.

The GDPNow model often swings wildly on ISM estimates, and many of the reports are more than a bit suspect. 

One criticism I have heard over the years is that ISM has severe survivor bias. That means weak companies go out of business or do not report results reliably. 

A second idea tossed around is the S&P PMI incorporates more small-to-midsize businesses. 

Whatever the explanation, I suggest to Pat Higgins to add the S&P PMI to the model to temper the wild swings and biases of the ISM.

 This post originated at MishTalk.Com

Please Subscribe!

Like these reports? I hope so, and if you do, 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

Comments to this post are now closed.

24 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
redcurran
redcurran
3 years ago
The 10-year note, not the 30-year bond, is used to determine the pricing of 30-year mortgages. Ask me to explain why if you want me to. It’s something I’m aware of. https://mishtalk.com/economics/gdpnow-model-for-the-third-quarter-surges-then-immediately-dives-whats-happening https://octordle.io
Jack
Jack
3 years ago
It is fairly obvious to anyone who has modeled before what the issue is.
This model includes co-linear input variables (e.g., number of jobs, employment levels, etc..) – which should be avoided. Model input variables should be chosen to be as independent as possible.
When steady state models include co-linear input variables, small variances in variable gains in the model will lead to large errors to the model output.
Often if model inputs move slowly these errors are corrected through a feedback loop (i.e., the actual result corrects the model).
Also the model was obviously built without a good set of data:
1. There is a limited set of data available to build the model (e.g., 400 data points = 100 years of data, 4 data points per year).
2. Most of the data points will have little change. You need good step changes in the input variables to build a good model.
3. There is probably a new variable that was never significant before (and not included in the model) also throwing things off (e.g., # retirements?).
If I had the Fed dataset, a copy of their model, and about an hour would be able to determine the issue.
TLDR/ The model is simply not that good – too much going on to show an accurate picture.
JackWebb
JackWebb
3 years ago
Reply to  Jack
Ah, the dreaded collinierarity. I never much liked doing multiple regressions. Always striked me as something you hire secretaries to do.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
3 years ago
Reply to  JackWebb
Yeah, I always hated the hidden errors that popped up doing regression analysis after entering new data.
Makes you feel stupid you didn’t catch ’em the first time around, but it’s better than not catching them.
Jack
Jack
3 years ago
Reply to  JackWebb
Would appear the Fed did have a secretary to build their model.
However am sure he/she was paid much higher than a secretary.
This model does question the competency of the Fed.
JRM
JRM
3 years ago
You know it was “HACKERS”!!!!
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
3 years ago
Reply to  JRM
Undoubtedly Putin’s fault.
Six000mileyear
Six000mileyear
3 years ago
The 30 year US bond broke June’s high, so I imagine mortgage rates will have a negative impact on housing this month. I would not be surprised to see rates climbing through election day.
JackWebb
JackWebb
3 years ago
Reply to  Six000mileyear
30-year mortgages are priced off of the 10-year note, not the 30-year bond. If you want me to explain why, just ask. This is something I know.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
3 years ago
Reply to  JackWebb
Is that the “around 7 years we move to another house and pay off the mortgage” thing?
KidHorn
KidHorn
3 years ago
Reply to  JackWebb
The rates are based off lots of things. While I agree the 10 year is likely the biggest competitor to MBS, it’s not the only thing.
8dots
8dots
3 years ago
What’s the difference between the HOOT of the day and Twitter @3AM.
8dots
8dots
3 years ago
Today USD had a trigger. A strong dollar is usually inverse with commodities, RE, stocks…Both Putin & Xi are causing fear & calamity.
Europe, Japan, S.Korea, India, Saudi Arabia, UAE… relly on US umbrella. The want of gold and dollars is rising. USD will lose it’s
prominence if and only if we lose a war with China. Meanwhile Putin is getting paid in deflated currencies. In 1980 gold reached $800. DXY 165 four years later. U want natgas and oil ==> pay in silver & gold.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
3 years ago
Reply to  8dots
Nuts. You could pay in uranium, or cobalt, or lithium, or various rare earths. Something tangible and useful.
MPO45
MPO45
3 years ago
Today was the first bear market rally and fully expect more to come. We may even rally all the way up to the next Fed hike and then plunge again. It’s going to be fun trading the next 500 days. My optimum trades of choice: covered calls, naked puts, single puts, single calls.
Also need to keep an eye on bonds, if rates get high enough, gotta throw them into the mix for a complete financial ménage à troi.
PapaDave
PapaDave
3 years ago
Reply to  MPO45
Liking the volatility and the day trading opportunities!
Also a great day to add to core positions in oil and gas stocks. Added more GXE, TVE, WCP, and TOU today.
MPO45
MPO45
3 years ago
Reply to  PapaDave
All look good, I really like TOU. Maybe will pick some up. I am treading lightly until the next Fed meeting. Only a couple of weeks away. Bank of Canada hiked rates so guessing inflation still an issue. Choo! choo! That’s the sound of the money train leaving the station….ALL ONBOARD!
JRM
JRM
3 years ago
Reply to  MPO45
Plunge protection team spending tax payer money…
PapaDave
PapaDave
3 years ago
Reply to  JRM
Are you a member of that team? Please let me know when they are about to do it and which stocks they are going to support in advance please. Thanks.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
3 years ago
Reply to  MPO45
Are you buying or selling these naked puts? What are you using to hedge (cash)?
MPO45
MPO45
3 years ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
I am selling naked puts (cash secured). My strategy, using apple as an example, is to wait for a plunge, sell OTM puts usually 30 days out, wait for expiry or assignment. If assigned, wait for a rally and then sell calls. If expired, sell calls into next month assuming another plunge hasn’t happened. If another plunge has happened sell more naked puts. Rinse and repeat until we stabilize while profiting all the way down and up. The key is to have cash reserves to keep buying/selling. I have $125k set aside for apple but can always allocate more.
Apple is a stock that I would like to own forever so buying it at a discount, selling calls for additional premium and collecting dividends is my profit ménage à troi.
XHB on the otherhand is a stock I don’t want to own at all so I bought (with cash) $55 puts strikes into January 2024. My target for XHB is $30. If it doesn’t go below $55 I will be lose cash.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
3 years ago
Reply to  MPO45
Many thanks. Hope you continue to do well.
Mish
Mish
3 years ago
Hoot of the Day
ARK appoints “Chief Futurist”
JackWebb
JackWebb
3 years ago
Reply to  Mish
Agree! A portfolio manager is supposed to be a chief futurist, fer chrissakes.

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.