Click image
for larger version
In
its second (“preliminary”) estimate of 4Q2015 gross domestic product (GDP), the
Bureau
of Economic Analysis (BEA) adjusted the rate at which the U.S. economy grew
-- from a +0.69% seasonally adjusted and annualized rate (SAAR) posted in
January, to +1.00%. That +0.31 percentage point revision was a surprise, as expectations
were for a 0.3 percentage point decrease. Despite the upward
revision, 4Q’s GDP growth rate was still only half that of 3Q. Moreover, 4Q2015’s
year-over-year growth rate was +1.9%, slower than 3Q’s +2.1%.
Groupings
of GDP components show that personal consumption expenditures (PCE) contributed
to 4Q growth whereas private domestic investment (PDI) and net exports (NetX)
detracted from it. Government consumption expenditures (GCE) was essentially
neutral.
As
MarketWatch.com
put it, the upward GDP revision was the “worst kind,” as all of the net
improvement could be attributed to one line item: inventories (+0.31% -- equal
to change in the headline aggregate); changes in the other line items netted
out to zero. Inventories grew in 3Q by $85.5 billion. Instead of the 4Q inventory increase of $68.6 billion reported in
January, the BEA revised the increase by nearly one-third to $90.6 billion. So,
rather than a 3Q-4Q rate of change of -$16.9 billion ($68.6 - $85.5 = -$16.9),
inventories instead expanded by $5.1 billion ($90.6 - $85.5 = $5.1).
The
contribution of consumer spending was revised downward (goods: -0.11%, to less
than half of 3Q’s contribution; services: +0.03% from January’s report). Fixed
investment growth inched down (-0.01%) to +0.02%. Government spending edged
into mild contraction, removing -0.01% from the headline. Exports were even weaker
than initially thought, however, clipping 0.34% from the revised headline
growth rate.
In
fact, other than inventories, the only “good news” (given the way the BEA
computes GDP growth) was that lower spending on imports contributed +0.09% to
the headline growth number. Although most of this lower spending came from
falling commodity prices, some also came from weaker demand.
Click image
for larger version
Despite
this report being mostly statistical noise, some overarching patterns are
apparent:
*
The reported headline growth came largely from inventories and imports, both of
which can be strongly influenced by rapidly changing commodity prices. Changes
in the physical levels of trade and inventories are much smaller than the
dollar-value changes would suggest.
*
Consumer demand for goods was revised downward, as was fixed investment -- by
states, local governments and commercial investors. Any lingering growth in the
consumer, commercial and governmental demand for real/physical goods is
softening.
*
Exports fell even further into contraction.
*
Any residual growth in consumer spending for services is not discretionary --
it is primarily a consequence of inexorably rising health care costs; in fact,
over 22% of the YoY increase in GDP is attributable to spending on health care.
“Even
at face value, a 1% growth rate is fundamentally anemic,” concluded the
analysts at Consumer
Metrics. “And looking deeper into the numbers, most of that 1% comes from
the economic fog created by highly volatile commodity prices. So, despite an
upward blip in the headline number, we see no particular reason to be cheering
this report.”
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.