What is Macro Pulse?

Macro Pulse highlights recent activity and events expected to affect the U.S. economy over the next 24 months. While the review is of the entire U.S. economy its particular focus is on developments affecting the Forest Products industry. Everyone with a stake in any level of the sector can benefit from
Macro Pulse's timely yet in-depth coverage.


Friday, January 29, 2016

4Q2015 Gross Domestic Product: First (Advance) Estimate

Click image for larger version
In its first (“advance”) estimate of 4Q2015 gross domestic product (GDP), the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) reported the U.S. economy was growing at a +0.69% seasonally adjusted and annualized rate (SAAR), well below the +0.9% expected and down 1.30 percentage points compared to 3Q.
Groupings of GDP components show that personal consumption expenditures (PCE) and government consumption expenditures (GCE) contributed to 4Q growth whereas private domestic investment (PDI) and net exports (NetX) detracted from it. Overall, key line items in this report exhibited material deterioration relative to 3Q. Growth in 4Q consumer spending was less than half that reported in 3Q (although virtually all of the erosion was in spending for goods); growth in fixed investments nearly disappeared, as did growth in governmental spending. Moreover, exports tumbled into outright contraction.
The ongoing slowdown in inventory accumulation exerted less of a drag on GDP growth in 4Q. In 2Q, the value of inventories jumped by +$113.5 billion SAAR; 3Q: +$85.5 billion; 4Q: +$68.6 billion. I.e., the accumulation of inventories slowed GDP growth by -$16.9 billion SAAR in 4Q instead of -$28.0 billion in 3Q. Another “positive” observation (at least given the way GDP growth is computed) was that imports also were less of a drag on the rest of the economy -- although that was the result of both lower oil prices and generally weakening demand (the latter evidenced by real final sales of domestic product falling to less than half of the 3Q estimate). Recall that since imports subtract from GDP, a reduction in imports boosts GDP growth.
For this report the BEA assumed an annualized deflator of 0.82%. During October-December 2015 the inflation rate recorded by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) in its CPI-U index was 0.47%. Were the BEA's nominal data deflated using 4Q CPI-U inflation rate, the headline GDP growth number would have been a somewhat more optimistic +1.04%. 
Click image for larger version
This report should be a “wake-up call” for anyone who thinks the U.S. economy is steaming forward in relative isolation from the rest of the globe:
* The headline growth rate dropped by nearly two-thirds, thanks primarily to much weaker growth in consumer demand for goods and commercial fixed investments.
* Exports fell into significant contraction.
* The sustained growth in consumer spending for services is not discretionary -- it is primarily a consequence of rising Obamacare healthcare costs. In fact nearly one-fourth of the 4Q2014-to-4Q2015 increase in total GDP is attributable to healthcare expenditures.
* The quarter-to-quarter increase in the household savings rate (to 5.4%) goes a long ways towards explaining the ongoing weak retail sales. Household funds not being spent at the gasoline pump or on healthcare premiums are simply being saved. This implies households’ view of the future is not particularly positive.
* Finally, the numbers above show materially weaker economic growth within the United States, after several prior lackluster quarters (2Q2015 being something of an exception, although growth during even that quarter could hardly be described as “stellar” in historical context). There is a downward trend in the numbers that, absent a miracle, points to economic contraction in the near future.
The foregoing comments represent the general economic views and analysis of Delphi Advisors, and are provided solely for the purpose of information, instruction and discourse. They do not constitute a solicitation or recommendation regarding any investment.

Wednesday, January 27, 2016

December 2015 Residential Sales, Inventory and Prices

Click image for larger view 
Click image for larger view
Sales of new single-family houses in December were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate (SAAR) of 544,000 units (besting the 500,000 units expected), an increase of 53,000 units or 10.8% (±17.1%)* above the revised November rate of 491,000 units. December’s sales activity was also 9.9% (±25.0%)* above the December 2014 SAAR of 495,000 units; the not-seasonally adjusted year-over-year comparison (shown in the table above) was +8.6%. For all of 2015, sales were 13.7% higher than 2014.
For a longer perspective, December sales were roughly 61% below the “bubble” peak and about 27% below the long-term, pre-2000 average. Because sales increased while single-family starts declined, the three-month average ratio of starts to sales fell to 1.50 -- above the average (1.41) since January 1995. It is interesting to note that, despite the December rebound, sales trended lower since February 2015 while starts have trended upward.
Meanwhile, the median price of new homes sold fell by $8,100 (-2.7%), to $288,900 in December. The average price of homes sold tumbled by $17,800 (-4.8%), to $346,400. Even with the outsized decrease in the average price, the proportion of “starter” homes (those priced below $200,000) was the lowest (18.4%) of any December on record (going back to 2002); prior to the Great Recession starter homes comprised as much as a 61% share of total sales.
* 90% confidence interval includes zero. The Census Bureau does not have sufficient statistical evidence to conclude that the actual change is different from zero. 
Click image for larger view
As mentioned in our post about housing permits, starts and completions in December, single-unit completions jumped by 56,000 units (+8.7%). Because the absolute increase in sales was similar in size, new-home inventory expanded in absolute terms (+6,000 units) but shrank in months-of-inventory (-0.4 month) terms. 
Click image for larger view
Existing home sales rebounded in December (+700,000 units or 14.7%) to 5.46 million units (SAAR); that result was considerably above expectations of 5.20 million. Inventory of existing homes contracted in both absolute (-250,000 units) and months-of-inventory (-1.2 months) terms -- to near their lowest levels since before the housing crash. Because the increase of existing home sales outpaced that of new sales, the share of total sales comprised of new homes dropped to 9.1%. The median price of previously owned homes sold in December continued higher (+$4,100 or 1.9%), to $224,100. 
Click image for larger view
Housing affordability improved marginally in November despite the median price of existing homes for sale rising by $1,000 (+0.4%) to $221,600. Concurrently, Standard & Poor’s reported that the U.S. National Index in the S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price indices posted a not-seasonally adjusted monthly change of +0.1% (+5.3% compared to a year earlier).
“Home prices extended their gains, supported by continued low mortgage rates, tight supplies and an improving labor market,” said David Blitzer, Managing Director and Chairman of the Index Committee at S&P Dow Jones Indices. “Sales of existing homes were up 6.5% in 2015 vs. 2014, and the number of homes on the market averaged about a 4.8 months’ supply during the year; both numbers suggest a seller’s market. The consumer portion of the economy is doing well; like housing, automobile sales were quite strong last year. Other parts of the economy are not faring as well. Businesses in the oil and energy sectors are suffering from the 75% drop in oil prices in the last 18 months. Moreover, the strong U.S. dollar is slowing exports. Housing is not large enough to offset all of these weak spots.
“Home prices continue to recover from the collapse that began before the recession of 2007-2009 and continued until 2012. Three cities – Dallas, Denver and Portland OR – have reached new all-time highs; San Francisco is even with its earlier peak and Charlotte NC is less than 1% below its previous peak. The S&P/Case-Shiller National Home Price Index is about 4.8% below the peak it set in July 2006, and 29.2% above the bottom it touched in January 2012. By comparison, the S&P 500 as of Friday, January 22nd is up 46% from January 2012 -- better than the S&P/Case-Shiller National Home Price series and about the same as Los Angeles.” 
Click image for larger view
The foregoing comments represent the general economic views and analysis of Delphi Advisors, and are provided solely for the purpose of information, instruction and discourse. They do not constitute a solicitation or recommendation regarding any investment.

Wednesday, January 20, 2016

December 2015 Residential Permits, Starts and Completions

Click image for larger view 
Click image for larger view
Builders started 1.149 million residential units (SAAR) in December (1.200 million expected). That is 2.5% (±8.6%)* below the revised November estimate of 1.179 million units (originally 1.173 million). The MoM decrease was most obvious in the single-family component. Single-family starts were at a rate of 768,000, or 3.3% (±8.5%)* below the revised November figure of 794,000. Multi-family starts were estimated to be 381,000 units (-4,000 or 1.0%).
* 90% confidence interval (CI) is not statistically different from zero. The Census Bureau does not publish CIs for the entire multi-unit category. 
Click image for larger view
December’s SAAR was 6.4% (±12.2%)* above the year-earlier SAAR of 1,080 million. The not-seasonally adjusted (NSA) YoY comparison (shown in the table above) is +5.6%. Single-family starts were +5.0%; multi-family: +6.7%.
An estimated 1.111 housing units were started in 2015, or 10.8% (±2.9%) above the 2014 figure of 1.003 million starts. Year-to-date (YTD) comparisons ranged between 10.4 and 11.4%. 
Click image for larger view 
Click image for larger view
Completions rose by 54,000 units in December, to a SAAR of 1.013 million. That is 5.6% (±10.5%)* above the revised November estimate of 959,000 and 7.9% (±11.6%)* above the year-earlier SAAR of 939,000 units. The NSA estimate was +4.8% YoY.
All of the MoM increase occurred in the single-family component. Single-family completions rose by 56,000 units, to 696,000. That is 8.8% (±12.2%)* above the revised November rate of 640,000 and +5.6% YoY (NSA). Multi-family completions edged down by 0.6%, to 307,000 (but +2.8 YoY NSA).
An estimated 965,700 housing units were completed in 2015, or 9.3% (±3.8%) above the 2014 figure of 883,800. 
Click image for larger view 
Click image for larger view
Total permits in December were at a SAAR of 1.232 million units (1.217 million expected). That is 3.9% (±2.2%) below the revised November rate of 1.282 million (originally 1.289 million), but 14.4% (±1.2%) above the year-earlier SAAR estimate of 1.077 million (+17.4% YoY NSA).
All of the MoM decline in permits was concentrated in the multi-family component, as single-family authorizations rose by 13,000 units, to a rate of 740,000 (1.8% ±2.2%* above the revised November figure of 727,000). Multi-family authorizations fell by 11.4% (to 492,000 units).
An estimated 1.173 million residential building permits were issued in 2015, 11.5% (±1.8%) above the year-earlier SAAR of 1.052 million units.
Builder confidence in the market for newly-built single-family homes held steady at 60 in January from a downwardly revised December reading of 60 on the National Association of Home Builders/Wells Fargo Housing Market Index. Any number over 50 indicates that more builders view conditions as “good” than “poor.”
“After eight months hovering in the low 60s, builder sentiment is reflecting that many markets continue to show a gradual improvement, which should bode well for future home sales in the year ahead,” said NAHB Chairman Tom Woods.  “January’s HMI reading is right in line with our forecast of modest growth for housing,” added NAHB Chief Economist David Crowe. “The economic outlook remains promising, as consumers regain confidence and home values increase, which will help the housing market move forward.” 
Click image for larger view
The foregoing comments represent the general economic views and analysis of Delphi Advisors, and are provided solely for the purpose of information, instruction and discourse. They do not constitute a solicitation or recommendation regarding any investment.

December 2015 Consumer and Producer Price Indices (incl. Forest Products)

Click image for larger version
The seasonally adjusted consumer price index for all urban consumers (CPI-U) declined 0.1% in December; consensus expectations were for no change. The indexes for energy (-2.4%) and food (-0.2%) both declined for the second month in a row, leading to the decline in the seasonally adjusted all items index.
The index for all items less food and energy rose 0.1% in December, its smallest increase since August. The index for shelter continued to rise (rent and owner’s equivalent rent: +0.2%), and the indexes for medical care, household furnishings and operations, motor vehicle insurance, education, used cars and trucks, and tobacco also increased in December. However, a number of indexes declined, including those for apparel, airline fares, personal care, new vehicles, and communication.
The all items index rose 0.7% over the last 12 months, compared to the 0.5% 12 month increase for the period ending November. The food index rose 0.8% over the last 12 months, though the index for food at home declined. The energy index fell 12.6%, with all its major components decreasing. The index for all items less food and energy increased 2.1% over the last 12 months. Shelter costs (rent: +3.7%; owner’s equivalent rent: +3.1%) contributed to the YoY rise, along with medical costs (+2.9%).

The seasonally adjusted producer price index for final demand (PPI) decreased 0.2% in December (-0.1% expected). Final demand prices increased 0.3% in November and fell 0.4% in October. On an unadjusted basis, the final demand index fell 1.0% in 2015, after rising 0.9% in 2014.
December’s decrease in the final demand index can be traced to a 0.7% decline in prices for final demand goods, over half of which was attributable to gasoline prices. In contrast, the index for final demand services moved up 0.1% (especially prices for services related to securities brokerage and dealing). 
Click image for larger version
Month-over-month changes in nearly all of the not-seasonally adjusted price indexes we track were negative in December, and all fell on a year-over-year basis. 
Click image for larger version
The foregoing comments represent the general economic views and analysis of Delphi Advisors, and are provided solely for the purpose of information, instruction and discourse. They do not constitute a solicitation or recommendation regarding any investment.

November 2015 International Trade (Pulp, Paper & Paperboard)

Month-over-Month (MoM), Year-over-Year (YoY), and Year-to-Date (YTD):
On a month-to-month basis, November's net exports posted the third consecutive monthly decline, dropping 51.8 thousand tonnes (-3.2%): 1,608 to 1,557 thousand tonnes. November's net exports were the second lowest level of the year thus far, supplanting October for that title and pushing it third lowest for the year. While February was lower than September, October, and November net exports, both January and March, it was likely impacted by the West Coast port slowdown. Details for November, the prior six months, year-over-year, and year-to-date performance are presented in the table below.
Click image for larger view
Both exports and imports fell between November and October; exports decreased by 138.1 thousand tonnes (-5.7%) and imports decreased by 86.4 thousand tonnes (-10.5%). The reason net exports fell is because the decline in exports was greater than the decline in imports.
On a year-over-year basis November exports were down 76.2 thousand tonnes and imports up 25.1 thousand tonnes, resulting in a year-over-year decrease in net exports of 101.3 thousand tonnes (-6.1%).
On a year-to-date basis exports are up 596 thousand tonnes while imports are down 424 thousand tonnes, yielding an increase in net exports of 1,020 thousand metric tonnes (5.9%). Net exports are on track to achieve the third highest level since 2005.
The year-to-date decline in imports and increase in exports is counterintuitive with reported stronger 2015 US growth compared to global growth and a strengthening U.S. dollar. As noted in prior repots, this trend has been consistently evident from April 2015's YTD through October 2015's YTD results; in the seven months of reported data since April four of the seven have been the second highest month of net exports since 2005 and two have been the third highest month. However, this pattern was broken in October when October 2015's monthly result ranked as the seventh highest monthly total of eleven since 2005. November improved modestly, increasing to the sixth highest monthly total of eleven Novembers since 2005. The graph below shows monthly, including a YTD monthly average (first data point of each line in graph below), from 2010 to 2015. 
Click image for larger view
While the West Coast port slowdown may explain some of the early 2015 results, and 2Q results reflect some degree of "catch-up" from the port slowdown, the YTD results suggests other factors are responsible for the YTD performance.
In particular, the reduction in YTD imports might suggest US economic activity may not be as strong as is generally believed. With a strong U.S. dollar and active U.S. growth compared to global growth the expectation would be imports would increase to support U.S. domestic economic growth. Cheap oil should have made such an outcome even more likely. The most notable drop in imports is from Canada. The bulk of the YTD increase in exports was driven by exports to China, suggesting China's economic slowdown has not yet adversely impacted sectors consuming pulp. More country by country details are covered below.
Six-month Cumulative Activity and Trends:
Cumulative activity over the six months ending November 2015 shows net exports are 7.1% above the pace seen over the six months ending in November 2014. Cumulative six-month net exports are principally higher due to higher exports, up 451 thousand tonnes or 3.2 percent, compared to imports which are down 211 thousand tonnes, or 4.3 percent.
Six-month trend-lines were fit to the data to study recent trends beyond simple cumulative activity. All three trend lines remained negative for the six-month period ending in November.
Apart from trend lines, thus far in 2015 May was the export peak, June the import peak, and May the net export peak. November's exports were 12.8% below May's export peak, November's imports were 13.0% below June's import peak, and November's net exports were 17.5% below May's net export peak. 
Click image for larger view
In terms of notable shifts in country-level details:
Pulp exports (24,720 thousand tonnes YTD) are higher (2.6%) compared to last year's YTD levels. China remains the chief destination of U.S. pulp by a wide margin, representing 58% of YTD shipments; November 2014 YTD figures pegged exports to China at 56% of the U.S. total, indicating China's share of US pulp exports has grown in 2015 relative to 2014. China's exports have increased by 6.9% YTD compared to the same period in 2014. Mexico leapfrogged India as the second-ranked destination for U.S. pulp exports, representing 6.7% of YTD exports compared to India's 6.3% share. Pulp exports to both countries are down YTD: Mexico's receipt of U.S. pulp export have fallen by over 4% and India's are down by nearly 12%. In addition to Mexico and India swapping spots in 2015, among 2014's top 10 destinations Japan and Indonesia also swapped, Japan moving up from number 7 to number 6 by purchasing 5.1% more pulp YTD while Indonesia has purchased 7.6% less pulp YTD. 
Click image for larger view
Pulp imports (5,537 thousand tonnes YTD) decreased -4.2% compared to prior YTD levels. Canada and Brazil, the 1st and 2nd ranked pulp import sources, respectively, account for nearly 94% of the pulp imported. Despite their top ranking, Canada has logged a decline (-7.1%) in pulp imported while Brazil has increased (+2.9%) its imports compared to prior YTD levels. Chile, the number three ranked source of pulp imports into the U.S., has increased its imports YTD by nearly 2%. Norway has climbed from a 10th ranked place in 2014 to 8th in 2015 with an over 330% increase in pulp imports to the U.S., the Philippines from 12th ranked in 2014 to 7th ranked in 2015 with an increase over 260%, and Germany from 13th ranked to 10th ranked. On a YTD basis China (9th in 2014, 11th in 2015) and Finland (8th in 2014, 12th in 2015) have fallen out of the 10 ten importers of pulp into the US. As a region Asia shows the largest percentage increase in imports into the U.S. at 44.6% while Caribbean nations collectively posted the largest percentage decline at 87.0%. 
Click image for larger view
Paper and paperboard imports (2,944 thousand tonnes YTD) have dropped by nearly 6% year-to-date compared to prior YTD activity. Once again Canada leads the way, accounting for nearly 86% of the total import volume and 117.5% of the YTD decrease (215 of 183 thousand tonnes). Finland and China held onto their number 2 and 3 rankings despite posting 2.2% and 3.7% decreases YTD, respectively. One notable development on a percentage basis is Australia, which has vaulted from being the 7th ranked supplier during the first ten months of 2014 to the 4th ranked supplier during the first ten months of 2015, posting an increase of 161.6%. Mexico slipped from the 4th to 5th place ranking despite importing 14.8% more into the U.S. YTD. In other top 10 changes from 2014, Swedan has dropped from 5th in 2014 to 6th in 2015 with a 7.7% drop in paper and paperboard imports into the U.S and South Korea slipped from 6th to 8th with pulp and paperboard imports declining by over 50%. Meanwhile Taiwan vaulted to the 9th ranked spot from 12th ranked in 2014 with an increase of 171.9% in imports shipped to the U.S. 
Click image for larger view
Paper and paperboard exports (2,188 thousand tonnes) dropped by 1.2% on a YTD basis. Canada, the number 1 ranked destination for U.S. paper and paperboard exports, holds a slim lead over Mexico, the number 2 ranked destination, despite exports to Canada dropping by 0.4% YTD compared to 2014 while Mexico has grown by 18.9 percent 2014 to 2015 YTD. Among 2014's Top 10 destinations, the "loss leader" in 2015 is India (-34 thousand tonnes, -27.4% from prior YTD) followed by Costa Rica (-23 thousand, -31.5% from prior YTD), and Japan (-14 thousand tonnes, -9.4% from prior YTD). Bucking the general decline in paper and paperboard exports, as already noted, Mexico's receipts of U.S. paper and paperboard exports is up. South Korea (+12.0%) and China (+9.1%) are both receiving more U.S. exports of paper and paperboard as well. 
Click image for larger view
The foregoing comments represent the general economic views and analysis of Delphi Advisors, and are provided solely for the purpose of information, instruction and discourse. They do not constitute a solicitation or recommendation regarding any investment.

Tuesday, January 19, 2016

January 2016 Macro Pulse -- Slower than Molasses in….

The new year may have started with a lot of celebratory fireworks, but recent data releases suggest the U.S. economy is behaving more like a “dud.” Granted, most recent data releases are wrapping up 2015 (examples presented in link below) rather than reporting on 2016 activity, and so 2016’s opening salvo could still prove more energetic. With the weather east of the Continental Divide finally turning colder, however, the old saying “slower than molasses in January” may ultimately prove an apt description.
Click here to read the rest of the January 2016 Macro Pulse recap.

The Macro Pulse blog is a commentary about recent economic developments affecting the forest products industry. The monthly Macro Pulse newsletter typically summarizes the previous 30 days of commentary available on this website.

Monday, January 18, 2016

December 2015 Industrial Production, Capacity Utilization and Capacity

Click image for larger version
Total industrial production (IP) declined 0.4% in December (-0.2% expected), primarily as a result of cutbacks in utilities and mining. Also, the decrease for total IP in November was larger than previously reported (-0.9% instead of the original -0.6%), but upward revisions to earlier months left the level of the index in November only slightly below its initial estimate. For 4Q as a whole, IP fell at an annual rate of 3.4%. At 106.0% of its 2012 average, total IP in December was 1.8% below its year-earlier level.  
Industry Groups
Manufacturing output slipped 0.1% in December, but increased at an annual rate of 0.5% in 4Q. Factory output in December was 0.8% above its year-earlier level. The output of durable goods moved up slightly in December. Among the categories of durables, the indexes for motor vehicles and parts and for primary metals each dropped more than 1.5%, while the indexes for electrical equipment, appliances, and components and for computer and electronic products each increased more than 1.5%. Wood Products output rose by 0.7%.
The output of nondurables declined 0.2%, led by a drop of 1.2% for petroleum and coal products and by a reduction of 0.8% for paper. These declines were partially offset by increases for plastics and rubber products and for textile and product mills. The output of other manufacturing industries (publishing and logging) fell 0.5%. The index for mining declined 0.8% because of a large drop in coal mining, while the index for utilities decreased 2.0% thanks to continued warmer-than-usual temperatures that reduced demand for heating; both major categories recorded drops of more than 15% at an annual rate in 4Q. 
Click image for larger version 
Click image for larger version 
Click image for larger version
Capacity utilization (CU) for the industrial sector decreased 0.4 percentage point (-0.5%) in December to 76.5% (76.9% expected), a rate that is 3.6 percentage points below its long-run (1972–2014) average.
Manufacturing CU was little changed in December at 76.0%, a rate 2.5 percentage points below its long-run average. The operating rate for durable goods industries held steady at 75.8%, roughly 1 percentage point below its long-run average; Wood Products CU was at 71.8% (+0.5%). 
At 77.6%, the operating rate for nondurable goods industries was 2.8 percentage points below its long-run average; Paper CU was at 81.2% (-0.8%). Utilization for other manufacturing industries (publishing and logging) was down 0.3 percentage point to 60.0%. The utilization rate for mining fell 0.8 percentage point to 78.4%, and the rate for utilities dropped 1.6 percentage points to 73.2%, the lowest rate in the history of the series, which began in 1972. 
Click image for larger version
Capacity at the all-industries and manufacturing levels moved higher -- All-industries: +0.1% (+1.5% YoY) to 138.6% of 2012 output; Manufacturing: +0.1% (+1.4% YoY) to 139.3%. Wood Products extended the upward trend that has been ongoing since November 2013 when increasing by 0.2% (+2.5% YoY) to 160.7%. Paper was unchanged (-0.2% YoY) at 116.8%.
The foregoing comments represent the general economic views and analysis of Delphi Advisors, and are provided solely for the purpose of information, instruction and discourse. They do not constitute a solicitation or recommendation regarding any investment.

Saturday, January 9, 2016

December 2015 Employment Report

Click image for larger view
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) establishment survey, non-farm payroll employment rose by 292,000 jobs in December -- “crushing” even the upper end of the range of expectations of 230,000 (consensus average: 200,000). In addition, combined October and November employment gains were revised up by 50,000 (October: +9,000; November: +41,000). Meanwhile, the unemployment rate (based upon the BLS’s household survey) remained unchanged at 5.0% as the increase in the civilian labor force (+466,000) essentially offset the change in the number of people employed (+485,000). 
Click image for larger view
Observations from the employment reports include:
* The disparity in job gains between the establishment (+292,000) and household (+485,000) surveys was quite noticeable. However, the outsized increase in the household survey lends some support for the gain observed in the establishment survey.
* Employment gains were widespread across age cohorts, with only the 45- to 54-year-old cohort exhibiting a decline.
* Manufacturing added 8,000 jobs in December, and 30,000 during all of 2015. We find those results somewhat at odds with the behavior of the Institute for Supply Management’s manufacturing employment sub-index, which declined in nine of the past 12 months and has been either at the breakeven level or in outright contraction (including December) during four of those months. Wood Products added 1,500 jobs in December; Paper and Paper Products gained 500.
* Mining and logging shed 8,000 jobs, with 5,500 coming from support activities for mining and another 900 from oil and gas extraction. Construction added 45,000 jobs.
* Over 60% (165,300 jobs) of December’s private-sector job growth occurred in the sectors typically associated with the lowest-paid jobs -- Retail Trade: +4,300; Professional & Business Services: +73,000 (nearly half of which were temp-help positions); Education & Health Services: +59,000; and Leisure & Hospitality: +29,000. This is a persistent issue, as we have repeatedly highlighted: There are 1.415 million fewer manufacturing jobs today than at the start of the Great Recession in December 2007, but 1.602 million more Food Services & Drinking Places (i.e., wait staff and bartender) jobs. If 2015 trends continue, in three years there will be as many wait staff and bartender jobs as manufacturing jobs in the United States. 
Click image for larger view
* The employment-population ratio remained at 59.5%; roughly speaking, for every five people added to the population, fewer than three are employed. Meanwhile, the number of employment-age persons not in the labor force retreated by 277,000 to just over 94.1 million. 
Click image for larger view
* The labor force participation rate (LFPR) inched up to 62.6%, comparable to October 1977. Average hourly earnings of all private employees dipped by $0.01 (to $25.24), resulting in a 2.5% year-over-year increase. For all production and nonsupervisory employees (pictured above), however, hourly wages rose by $0.02, to $21.22 (+2.4% YoY). With the CPI running at an official rate of +0.5% YoY, wages are technically rising in real (inflation-adjusted) terms. The average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls was unchanged at 34.5 hours. 
Click image for larger view
* Finally, full-time jobs increased by 504,000 while part-time jobs rose by 27,000. Full-time jobs have been trending higher since December 2009, and are now 728,000 above the pre-recession high (although, for perspective, the non-institutional, working-age civilian population has risen by an estimated 18.8 million). Part-time jobs, by contrast, have been stuck in a channel between roughly 27 and 28 million.
The foregoing comments represent the general economic views and analysis of Delphi Advisors, and are provided solely for the purpose of information, instruction and discourse. They do not constitute a solicitation or recommendation regarding any investment.

Thursday, January 7, 2016

November 2015 International Trade (Softwood Lumber)

Click image for larger view 
Click image for larger view
Softwood lumber exports fell by 7 MMBF (5.6%) in November while imports increased by 33 MMBF (+2.6%). Exports were 6 MMBF (5.1%) above year-earlier levels; imports were 337 MMBF (33.8%) higher. The year-over-year (YoY) net export deficit was 331 MMBF (37.8%) larger. 
Click image for larger view
North America was the primary destination for U.S. softwood lumber exports in November (41.8%, of which Canada: 21.3%; Mexico: 20.5%). Asia (especially China: 18.9%) placed second with 38.8%. Year-to-date (YTD) exports to China were down 31.0% relative to the same months in 2014. Meanwhile, Canada was the source of nearly all (96.4%) softwood lumber imports into the United States. Overall, YTD exports were down 11.5% compared to 2014, while imports were up 9.9%. 
Click image for larger view 
Click image for larger view
U.S. softwood lumber export activity through West Coast customs districts bounced back in relation to the other districts during November (to 40.5% of the U.S. total, from 33.3% in October); Seattle reestablished its dominance as the most active export district (22.2% of the U.S. total), as Mobile, AL dropped by nearly half (to 10.8%, from 19.1%). At the same time, Great Lakes customs districts handled 70.5% of the softwood lumber imports (especially Duluth, MN with 28.9%) coming into the United States. 
Click image for larger view 
Click image for larger view
Southern yellow pine comprised 30.7% of all softwood lumber exports in November, followed by Douglas-fir with 20.2% (up from 14.9%). Southern pine exports were up 8.7% YTD relative to 2014, while Douglas-fir exports were down 26.6%.
The foregoing comments represent the general economic views and analysis of Delphi Advisors, and are provided solely for the purpose of information, instruction and discourse. They do not constitute a solicitation or recommendation regarding any investment.

November 2015 International Trade (General)

Click image for larger view
The goods and services deficit was $42.4 billion in November, down $2.2 billion from $44.6 billion in October, revised. November exports were $182.2 billion, $1.6 billion less than October exports. November imports were $224.6 billion, $3.8 billion less than October imports.
Year-to-date, the goods and services deficit increased $25.2 billion (5.5%), from the same period in 2014. Exports decreased $99.0 billion (4.6%). Imports decreased $73.7 billion (2.8%).
The November figures show surpluses, in billions of dollars, with South and Central America ($2.7), OPEC ($1.1), Saudi Arabia ($0.4), United Kingdom ($0.3), and Brazil ($0.1).  Deficits were recorded, in billions of dollars, with China ($30.2), European Union ($12.8), Japan ($5.6), Germany ($5.5), Mexico ($5.4), Italy ($2.4), South Korea ($2.3), India ($2.1), France ($2.1), and Canada ($0.9).
   * The deficit with Mexico decreased $0.9 billion to $5.4 billion. Exports decreased $0.9 billion to $18.8 billion and imports decreased $1.8 billion to $24.2 billion.
   * The surplus with members of OPEC increased $0.7 billion to $1.1 billion. Exports increased $1.3 billion to $6.5 billion and imports increased $0.6 billion to $5.4 billion. 
Click image for larger view
On a global scale, data compiled by the Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis showed that world trade volume contracted by 0.5% in October (+0.5% year-over-year) while prices rose by 0.3% (-12.6% YoY).
The foregoing comments represent the general economic views and analysis of Delphi Advisors, and are provided solely for the purpose of information, instruction and discourse. They do not constitute a solicitation or recommendation regarding any investment.

Wednesday, January 6, 2016

December 2015 Monthly Average Crude Oil Price

Click image for larger view
The monthly average U.S.-dollar price of West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil in December dropped to its lowest point since April 2004, retreating by $5.25 (-12.4%), to $37.19 per barrel. The price decrease coincided with a stronger U.S. dollar, the lagged impacts of a 125,000 barrel-per-day (BPD) uptick in the amount of oil supplied/demanded in October (to 19.4 million BPD), and a halt in the accumulation of oil stocks. The monthly average price spread between Brent crude (the predominant grade used in Europe) and WTI narrowed by $0.76 in December, to $1.07 per barrel. 
Click image for larger view 
Click image for larger view
Commentary from Oilprice.com editor Evan Kelly: “The outlook for oil markets in 2016 is just as murky as most of 2015 has been. WTI and Brent close out the year at relative parity in the mid-$30s per barrel. Oil storage levels are high both in the U.S. and around the world. Production is not declining from OPEC, and in the U.S., output is only slightly down at this point. Demand was high in 2015, but will drop off in 2016. The early signs of softening demand growth are already coming into view. Iran is expected to bring oil production back to the market, which could offset expected declines in the U.S. Goldman Sachs says oil may have to drop into the $20s in order for the necessary contraction to take place.
“On the other hand, the state of oil is not all negative. The optimistic view is that oil companies continue to find ways to reduce costs, even if further efficiency gains are becoming harder to achieve. But, taking a multi-year view on oil, it is important to remember that prices are unsustainably low. Output is going to need to be shut in, and prices will rebound. Depletion will overwhelm new sources of supply. Stronger companies could emerge better off on the rebound as the industry consolidates to a more sustainable size. Moreover, it is possible that the drastic cutbacks in investment today will only lead to a much larger price spike two or three years down the road.” 
Click image for larger view
Commentary from ASPO-USA’s Peak Oil Review editor Tom Whipple: “There has been no change in the conventional wisdom that oil prices will continue to fall further in the coming months.  The CEO of BP said over the weekend that the low point could be in the first quarter.  Goldman Sachs continues to say that it may take prices as low as $20 per barrel to force the production cuts necessary to rebalance the markets.  European oil inventories are already at capacity, and there are reports that ‘oil inventories in Asia are going to get closer to saturation in the first quarter.’
“Obviously there are too many forces at play in the global economy and oil markets this year to make any kind of responsible estimates of prices and production beyond the next few months. Optimists see recovery of the economy and oil prices later this year. Pessimists talk of a global recession. For the immediate future, the major exporters maintain they are going to keep up production and even the beleaguered US shale oil industry is maintaining production remarkably well.
“A lot depends on how much lower prices go in the coming year and how long they stay at extremely low levels. For now, the most optimistic predictions about when a recovery will occur are coming from those with a vested interest in higher oil prices, such as exporting nations or financial institutions that start from the premise that too much pessimism will scare off customers. One thing that seems reasonably clear is that the very low prices will result in declining oil production, at least in the US, Canada, and in the non-OPEC countries where oil production is not the hands of a government that can swallow the low prices.”
The foregoing comments represent the general economic views and analysis of Delphi Advisors, and are provided solely for the purpose of information, instruction and discourse. They do not constitute a solicitation or recommendation regarding any investment.