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.


Thursday, May 30, 2019

1Q2019 Gross Domestic Product: Second Estimate

Click image for larger version
In its second estimate of 1Q2019 gross domestic product (GDP), the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) trimmed the growth rate of the U.S. economy to a seasonally adjusted and annualized rate (SAAR) of +3.06% (3.0% expected), down 0.12 percentage point (PP) from the “advance” estimate (“1Qv1”) but +0.89PP from 4Q2018.
All four groupings of GDP components -- personal consumption expenditures (PCE), private domestic investment (PDI), net exports (NetX), and government consumption expenditures (GCE) -- contributed to 1Q growth.
It is difficult to consider the details of this revision as anything more than statistical noise. Consumer spending on both goods and services was confirmed as decelerating from 4Q.
·         Goods: +0.08PP from 1Qv1; -0.76PP from 4Q
·         Services: 0.00 from 1Qv1; -0.16PP from 4Q
Growth rates for fixed investments and inventories were revised marginally lower.
·         Fixed investment: -0.09PP from 1Qv1; -0.36PP from 4Q
·         Inventories: -0.05PP from 1Qv1; +0.49PP from 4Q
Export and import growth rates had minor and largely offsetting revisions.
·         Exports: +0.13PP from 1Qv1; +0.36PP from 4Q
·         Imports: -0.19PP from 1Qv1; +0.69PP from 4Q
The BEA's real final sales of domestic product was revised modestly downward (-0.07PP, to +2.46%) but it is still up +0.40PP from 4Q.  
Click image for larger version
Consumer Metric Institute’s Rick Davis highlighted several “take-aways” from this revision: 
-- The BEA confirmed that consumer spending on goods [decelerated]. Meanwhile, the already relatively soft growth in services spending was left unchanged.
-- The annualized growth in commercial and private fixed investments was more than halved relative to 4Q.
-- Imports added +0.39% annualized growth to the headline, even though it actually reflects softening import spending in the midst of generally weaker global trade.
-- The BEA's headline number was more than doubled by an inflation rate that was materially at odds with the inflation recorded by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
-- Nevertheless, this revision left the headline number in the "Goldilocks" zone of economic growth.
“The question remains: Are these fair skies a sign of a well-oiled and unstoppable economy? Or is this merely the calm before the next storm?” Davis concluded.
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, May 28, 2019

April 2019 Residential Sales, Inventory and Prices

Click image for larger view 
Click image for larger view
Sales of new single-family houses in April 2019 were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate (SAAR) of 673,000 units (679,000 expected). This is 6.9% (±14.0%)* below the revised March rate of 723,000 (originally 692,000), but 7.0% (±12.4%)* above the April 2018 SAAR of 629,000 units; the not-seasonally adjusted year-over-year comparison (shown in the table above) was +8.2%. For longer-term perspectives, not-seasonally adjusted sales were 51.5% below the “housing bubble” peak but 26.2% above the long-term, pre-2000 average.
The median sales price of new houses sold in April 2019 was $342,200 (+$36,400 or 11.9% MoM); meanwhile, the average sales price jumped to $393,700 (+$21,400 or 5.7%). Starter homes (defined here as those priced below $200,000) comprised 12.1% of the total sold, down from the year-earlier 13.1%; prior to the Great Recession starter homes represented as much as 61% of total new-home sales. Homes priced below $150,000 made up 3.0% of those sold in April, down from 3.3% a year earlier.
* 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 April, single-unit completions fell by 39,000 units (-4.1%). Although sales (-50,000 units; 6.9%) fell more dramatically than completions, inventory for sale contracted in absolute terms (-3,000 units) while months-of-inventory (+0.3 month) expanded. 
Click image for larger view
Existing home sales retreated in April (-20,000 units), to a SAAR of 5.19 million units (5.36 million expected). Inventory of existing homes for sale expanded in both absolute (+160,000 units) and months-of-inventory terms (+0.4 month). The median price of previously owned homes sold in April jumped to $267,300 (+$7,600 or 2.9% MoM). Because the drop in new-home sales was proportionally larger than that of resales, the share of total sales comprised of new homes ticked down to 11.5%. 
Click image for larger view
Housing affordability retreated as the median price of existing homes for sale in March jumped by $9,100 (+3,6%; +3.8 YoY), to $261,100. Concurrently, Standard & Poor’s reported that the U.S. National Index in the S&P Case-Shiller CoreLogic Home Price indices rose at a not-seasonally adjusted monthly change of +0.6% (+3.7% YoY) -- the slowest rate of annual appreciation since September 2012.
“Home price gains continue to slow,” said David Blitzer, Managing Director and Chairman of the Index Committee at S&P Dow Jones Indices. “The patterns seen in the last year or more continue: year-over-year price gains in most cities are consistently shrinking. Double-digit annual gains have vanished. The largest annual gain was 8.2% in Las Vegas; one year ago, Seattle had a 13% gain. In this report, Seattle prices are up only 1.6%. The 20-City Composite dropped from 6.7% to 2.7% annual gains over the last year as well. The shift to smaller price increases is broad-based and not limited to one or two cities where large price increases collapsed. Other housing statistics tell a similar story. Existing single family home sales are flat. Since 2017, peak sales were in February 2018 at 5.1 million at annual rates; the weakest were 4.36 million in January 2019. The range was 650,000.
“Given the broader economic picture, housing should be doing better. Mortgage rates are at 4% for a 30-year fixed rate loan, unemployment is close to a 50-year low, low inflation and moderate increases in real incomes would be expected to support a strong housing market. Measures of household debt service do not reveal any problems and consumer sentiment surveys are upbeat. The difficulty facing housing may be too-high price increases. At the currently lower pace of home price increases, prices are rising almost twice as fast as inflation: in the last 12 months, the S&P Corelogic Case-Shiller National Index is up 3.7%, double the 1.9% inflation rate. Measured in real, inflation-adjusted terms, home prices today are rising at a 1.8% annual rate. This compares to a 1.2% real annual price increases in housing since 1975.” 
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.

Thursday, May 16, 2019

April 2019 Residential Permits, Starts and Completions

Click image for larger view 
Click image for larger view
After revisions to seasonally adjusted data back to January 2014, Census Bureau data showed builders started construction of privately-owned housing units in April at a seasonally adjusted annual rate (SAAR) of 1,235,000 units (1.200 million expected). This is 5.7% (±13.0%)* above the revised March estimate of 1,168,000 (originally 1.139 million units), but 2.5% (±10.4%)* below the April 2018 SAAR of 1,267,000 units; the not-seasonally adjusted YoY change (shown in the table above) was -2.9%.
Single-family housing starts in April were at a SAAR of 854,000; this is 6.2% (±13.7%)* above the revised March figure of 804,000 (-4.6% YoY). Multi-family starts: 381,000 units (+4.7% MoM; +1.5% YoY).
* 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 
Click image for larger view
Completions in April were at a SAAR of 1,312,000 units. This is 1.4% (±15.5%)* below the revised March estimate of 1,331,000 (originally 1.313 million units), but 5.5% (±11.9%)* above the April 2018 SAAR of 1,244,000 units; the NSA comparison: +6.4% YoY.
Single-family housing completions were at a SAAR of 918,000; this is 4.1% (±13.4%)* below the revised March rate of 957,000 (+17.4% YoY). Multi-family completions: 394,000 units (+5.3% MoM; -13.4% YoY). 
Click image for larger view 
Click image for larger view
Total permits were at a SAAR of 1,296,000 units (1.290 million expected). This is 0.6% (±2.6%)* above the revised March rate of 1,288,000 (originally 1.269 million units), but 5.0% (±1.4%) below the April 2018 SAAR of 1,364,000 units; the NSA comparison: -0.5% YoY.
Single-family permits were at a SAAR of 782,000; this is 4.2% (±1.2%) below the revised March figure of 816,000 (-4.8% YoY). Multi-family: 514,000 (+8.9% MoM; +7.8% YoY). 
Click image for larger view 
Click image for larger view
Builder confidence in the market for newly-built single-family homes rose three points to 66 in May, according to the latest National Association of Home Builders/Wells Fargo Housing Market Index (HMI). Builder sentiment is at its highest level since October 2018.
“Builders are busy catching up after a wet winter and many characterize sales as solid, driven by improved demand and ongoing low overall supply,” said NAHB Chairman Greg Ugalde. “However, affordability challenges persist and remain a big impediment to stronger sales.”
“Mortgage rates are hovering just above 4% following a challenging 4Q2018 when they peaked near 5%. This lower-interest rate environment, along with ongoing job growth and rising wages, is contributing to a gradual improvement in the marketplace,” said NAHB Chief Economist Robert Dietz. “At the same time, builders continue to deal with ongoing labor and lot shortages and rising material costs that are holding back supply and harming affordability.”
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, May 15, 2019

April 2019 Industrial Production, Capacity Utilization and Capacity

Click image for larger version
Total industrial production (IP) fell 0.5% in April (0.0% expected), and the rates of change for six previous months were revised down on net. Output is now reported to have declined 1.9% at an annual rate in 1Q. Manufacturing production moved down 0.5% in April (+0.1% expected) after being unchanged in March. The index for mining advanced 1.6% in April, while the index for utilities fell 3.5%. At 109.2% of its 2012 average, total industrial production was 0.9% higher in April than it was a year earlier. 
Click image for larger version 
Click image for larger version
Industry Groups
Manufacturing output declined 0.5% in April after having decreased about 0.4% per month, on average, during the previous three months (NAICS manufacturing: -0.5% MoM; 0.0% YoY). In April, the production of durable goods fell almost 1%, but the index for nondurable goods only edged down. Among durables, losses of 2% or more were posted by machinery; electrical equipment, appliances, and components; and motor vehicles and parts (wood products: +0.2%). Among nondurables, the results were mixed—the largest gains were recorded by apparel and by paper products (+1.2%), and the largest declines were recorded by textile and product mills and by plastics and rubber products. The index for other manufacturing (publishing and logging) declined 0.3% and was well below its year-earlier level.
The output of utilities fell 3.5% in April, with declines in the indexes for both natural gas and electric utilities; demand for heating decreased last month because of temperatures that were warmer than normal. After having fallen for three consecutive months, mining output stepped up 1.6% in April and was 10.4% above its level of a year earlier. The increase in the mining index for April reflected gains in the oil and gas sector as well as a jump in coal mining that followed a few months of declines. 
Click image for larger version
Capacity utilization (CU) for the industrial sector decreased 0.6 percentage point (PP) in April to 77.9%, a rate that is 1.9PP below its long-run (1972–2018) average.
Manufacturing CU dropped 0.5PP in April to 75.7%, a rate that is 2.6PP below its long-run average (NAICS manufacturing: -0.6%, to 76.2%). The utilization rate for durable manufacturing declined, while the rates for nondurable manufacturing and for other manufacturing (publishing and logging) were little changed (wood products: -0.1%; paper products: +1.3%). Capacity utilization for mining increased to 91.4% and remained well above its long-run average of 87.1%. The utilization rate for utilities dropped to 76.2% and was more than 9PP below its long-run average. 
Click image for larger version
Capacity at the all-industries level nudged up 0.2% (+2.0 % YoY) to 140.1% of 2012 output. Manufacturing (NAICS basis) rose fractionally (+0.1% MoM; +1.2% YoY) to 138.9%. Wood products: +0.3% (+3.8% YoY) to 164.6%; paper products: 0.0% (-0.8 % YoY) to 109.8%.
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.

Monday, May 13, 2019

March 2019 International Trade (Softwood Lumber)

Click image for larger view 
Click image for larger view
Softwood lumber exports edged up (3 MMBF or +3.1%) in March; meanwhile, imports jumped (261 MMBF or +26.1%). Exports were 60 MMBF (-35.3%) below year-earlier levels; imports were 19 MMBF (+1.5%) lower. As a result, the year-over-year (YoY) net export deficit was 26 MMBF (+3.0%) larger. Also, the average net export deficit for the 12 months ending March 2019 was 1.9% larger than the average of the same months a year earlier (the “YoY MA(12) % Chng” series shown in the graph above). 
Click image for larger view
North America (47.5%; of which Canada: 28.2%; Mexico: 19.4%) and Asia (28.6%; especially China: 9.2%; and Japan: 7.5%) were the primary destinations for U.S. softwood lumber exports; the Caribbean ranked third with a 16.1% share. Year-to-date (YTD) exports to China were -67.1% relative to the same months in 2018. Meanwhile, Canada was the source of most (92.9%) of softwood lumber imports into the United States. Imports from Canada were -2.7% lower YTD than the same months in 2018. Overall, YTD exports were down 25.0% compared to 2018; imports: -2.8%. 
Click image for larger view 
Click image for larger view
U.S. softwood lumber export activity through the West Coast customs region represented the largest proportion (36.6% of the U.S. total), followed by the Eastern (27.5%) and Gulf (23.3%) regions. Seattle (23.5% of the U.S. total) maintained the lead over Mobile (14.2%) as the single most-active district. At the same time, Great Lakes customs region handled 67.4% of softwood lumber imports -- most notably the Duluth, MN district (27.3%) -- coming into the United States. 
Click image for larger view 
Click image for larger view
Southern yellow pine comprised 24.0% of all softwood lumber exports, Douglas-fir (16.2%) and treated lumber (13.1%). Southern pine exports were down 47.8% YTD relative to 2018, while treated: -29.4%; Doug-fir: -10.1%.
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.

Friday, May 10, 2019

April 2019 Consumer and Producer Price Indices (incl. Forest Products)

Click image for larger version
The Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) increased 0.3% in April (+0.4% expected). The gasoline index continued to increase, rising 5.7% and accounting for over two-thirds of the seasonally adjusted all-items monthly increase. The index for energy rose 2.9%, although the index for natural gas declined and the index for electricity was unchanged. The food index fell in April, its first monthly decline since June 2017. 
The index for all items less food and energy increased 0.1% for the third consecutive month. The indexes for shelter, medical care, education, and new vehicles all rose in April. The indexes for used cars and trucks, apparel, and household furnishings and operations were among those that declined over the month.   
The all items index increased 2.0% for the 12 months ending April, the largest 12-month increase since the period ending November 2018. The index for all items less food and energy rose 2.1% over the last 12 months, and the food index rose 1.8%. The energy index increased 1.7% over the past year after posting 12-month declines the past 4 months.
The Producer Price Index for final demand (PPI-FD) rose 0.2% in April (+0.3% expected). Final demand prices advanced 0.6% in March and 0.1% in February. Leading the April rise in the index for final demand, prices for final demand goods climbed 0.3%. The index for final demand services edged up 0.1%, and prices for final demand construction advanced 1.6%. The index for final demand less foods, energy, and trade services moved up 0.4% in April, the largest increase since rising 0.5% in January 2018.
On an unadjusted basis, the final demand index increased 2.2% for the 12 months ended in April; prices for final demand less foods, energy, and trade services advanced 2.2%.
Final Demand
Final demand goods: The index for final demand goods moved up 0.3% in April, the third consecutive increase. The April advance can be traced to prices for final demand energy, which rose 1.8%. In contrast, the index for final demand foods fell 0.2%. Prices for final demand goods less foods and energy were unchanged.
Product detail: Most of the April rise in the index for final demand goods is attributable to prices for gasoline, which increased 5.9%. The indexes for meats; search, detection, navigation, guidance systems, and related equipment; electric power; pharmaceutical preparations; and processed young chickens also moved higher. Conversely, prices for fresh and dry vegetables decreased 11.6%. The indexes for thermoplastic resins and materials and for liquefied petroleum gas also declined.
Final demand services: Prices for final demand services inched up 0.1% in April following a 0.3% advance in March. Leading the increase in April, the index for final demand services less trade, transportation, and warehousing rose 0.3%. Prices for final demand transportation and warehousing services climbed 1.0%. In contrast, margins for final demand trade services fell 0.5%. (Trade indexes measure changes in margins received by wholesalers and retailers.)
Product detail: Most of the April advance in the index for final demand services can be traced to prices for portfolio management, which jumped 5.3%. The indexes for hospital outpatient care; transportation of passengers (partial); machinery, equipment, parts, and supplies wholesaling; and fuels and lubricants retailing also moved higher. Conversely, margins for food and alcohol retailing decreased 3.1%. The indexes for traveler accommodation services; health, beauty, and optical goods retailing; and long-distance motor carrying also declined. 
Click image for larger version
The not-seasonally adjusted price indexes we track were mixed on both MoM and YoY bases. 
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.

Wednesday, May 8, 2019

April 2019 Monthly Average Crude Oil Price

Click image for larger view
The monthly average U.S.-dollar price of West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil posted a fourth month of gains when rising by $5.71 (+9.8%), to $63.86 per barrel in April. The increase occurred within the context of a marginally stronger U.S. dollar, the lagged impacts of a 258,000 barrel-per-day (BPD) drop in the amount of oil supplied/demanded during February (to 20.2 million BPD), and an expansion in accumulated oil stocks (monthly average: 461 million barrels). 
Click image for larger view
From the 6 May 2019 issue of Peak Oil Review:
Recently there have been numerous reports that the mostly unprofitable U.S. shale oil industry is having trouble raising money to expand operations and does not expect to be increasing production as fast as in the past.  The recent U.S. drill rig count shows that number of rigs drilling for oil and gas has fallen by 9 percent since the November peak.  Some believe that the increasing presence of the integrated and well-financed major oil companies, such as Exxon and Chevron in the U.S. shale oil industry will be enough to offset declining production from the smaller shale oil drillers.  However, other major oil companies such as Shell and BP have said that they do not share the enthusiasm for U.S. shale oil.  Some are saying that the reason major oil companies are becoming more deeply involved in the Permian stems from a compulsion to keep growing their oil output and that shale oil is the fastest way to increase production these days no matter the cost and long-term prospects.
U.S. commercial crude oil inventories have been rising in recent weeks.  However, they have been increasing less than usual for this time of the year mainly due to lower demand from U.S. refineries which have been undergoing extended spring maintenance to be ready for the winter gasoline blends and the new low-sulfur requirements for marine fuels which come in force on January 1st.  Last week, a contamination problem in Moscow's 1 million BPD pipeline into Europe forced a 10 percent cut in Russian oil production.  Some are saying it could take weeks or months to rectify this situation.
Given that developments in Iran and Venezuela seem likely to lower the world's oil supply by 1 million BPD and the civil war in Libya and the insurgency in Nigeria could conceivably shut in another 500,000 to 1 million BPD, it seems probable that oil prices will be higher later this year. 
The OPEC+ Production Cut: OPEC's oil supply hit a four-year low in April due to declines in sanctions-hit Iran and Venezuela and output restraint by Saudi Arabia.  A month ago, with international oil prices moving steadily upward towards $80, it seemed possible that the Saudis and the other Gulf Arabs would agree to increase production in 2H2019.  In April, Moscow signaled OPEC and its allies could raise oil output after June because of improving market conditions and falling stockpiles.  Now with prices sliding back to circa $70 a barrel and Russia facing a multi-billion-dollar loss due to its oil contamination problem, the situation has become cloudier.
Last week Saudi Energy Minister al-Falih told the RIA news agency that the global deal on oil production could be extended to the end of 2019.  The minister did not specify whether, or by how much, output levels could change after June.  His comments came after President Trump said he had called OPEC and told the group to lower oil prices, without specifying to whom he spoke or whether he was referring to previous discussions with OPEC officials.
The parties to the OPEC+ 1.2 million BPD oil cut meet on June 25-26 to decide on whether to extend the agreement.  Oman's Energy Minister al-Rumhy said last Wednesday OPEC, Russia, and other producers would be looking to extend their oil output cut agreement when they meet.  U.S. Energy Secretary Perry met last Thursday in London with Saudi energy minister al-Falih and IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol, the same day the U.S. sanctions waivers expired for eight importers of Iranian oil.   "Secretary Perry remains actively engaged with his counterparts from the world's major oil supplying nations and remains confident in the ability of these nations to offset any potential disruptions in global energy markets," the DOE said in a statement after the meeting.
U.S. Shale Oil Production: After a pause, the EIA resumed estimating that U.S. shale oil production continues to climb, this time by 100,000 BPD in the week ending on 26 April.  We shall have to wait until the end of June before actual figures rather than estimates are available.  Oil production in the lower 48 was up by 1.6 million BPD in the three months from December to February compared with a year earlier.  However, growth is down from more than 1.8 million BPD in August-September and is slowing significantly for the first time since 2016. The EIA continues to forecast that U.S. crude production will rise by around 1.4 million BPD this year and 0.7 million BPD in 2020. 
Click image for larger view
Selected highlights from the 3 May 2019 issue of OilPrice.com’s Oil & Energy Insider include:
The oil price rally ended this week, with rising U.S. inventories and production scaring away the bulls. Crude stocks soared by 10 million barrels and U.S. production rose to 12.3 million BPD in the last week of April. "Even with deep losses in supply from Iran and Venezuela, as well as a few other countries around the world, OPEC+ will still need to hold back production to balance the market," SEB analyst Bjarne Schieldrop said in a note
Iran warns OPEC is about to collapse. Iran's oil minister said that OPEC may fall apart. "Iran is a member of OPEC for its interests and any threat from member states won't go unanswered," Bijan Namdar Zanganeh said, referring to Saudi Arabia's apparent coordination with the U.S. on Iran sanctions. "I told [OPEC Secretary-General Mohammad] Barkindo that OPEC is in danger by the unilateralism of some members and the organization faces the risk of collapse." Last year, Qatar quit OPEC, but it would be a much more significant development of Iran were to exit.
OPEC production hits four-year low. OPEC production fell to a four-year low in April, according to Reuters. Declines in Venezuela and Iran were largely to blame. The cartel's collective output stood at 30.23 million BPD, down 90,000 BPD from March and the lowest since 2015. "The Iran sanctions come on top of already fragile supplies and raise concerns about tightening markets," Norbert Ruecker of Swiss bank Julius Baer said.
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, May 7, 2019

February 2019 International Trade (Softwood Lumber)

Click image for larger view 
Click image for larger view
Softwood lumber exports turned down (15 MMBF or -12.4%) in February; meanwhile, imports fell (48 MMBF or -4.6%). Exports were 42 MMBF (-8.5%) below year-earlier levels; imports were 16 MMBF (-1.6%) lower. As a result, the year-over-year (YoY) net export deficit was 26 MMBF (+3.0%) larger. Also, the average net export deficit for the 12 months ending February 2019 was 0.1% larger than the average of the same months a year earlier (the “YoY MA(12) % Chng” series shown in the graph above). 
Click image for larger view
North America (39.5%; of which Canada: 21.8%; Mexico: 17.7%) and Asia (36.7%; especially China: 13.9%; Japan: 8.0%) were the primary destinations for U.S. softwood lumber exports; the Caribbean ranked third with a 17.5% share. Year-to-date (YTD) exports to China were -63.3% relative to the same months in 2018. Meanwhile, Canada was the source of most (90.9%) of softwood lumber imports into the United States. Imports from Canada were -5.6% lower YTD than the same months in 2018. Overall, YTD exports were down 18.8% compared to 2018; imports: -5.3%. 
Click image for larger view 
Click image for larger view
U.S. softwood lumber export activity through the West Coast customs region represented the largest proportion (35.2% of the U.S. total), followed by the Eastern (33.5%) and Gulf (23.1%) regions. Seattle (22.4% of the U.S. total) maintained the lead over Mobile (14.4%) as the single most-active district. At the same time, Great Lakes customs region handled 65.4% of softwood lumber imports -- most notably the Duluth, MN district (23.5%) -- coming into the United States. 
Click image for larger view 
Click image for larger view
Southern yellow pine comprised 25.7% of all softwood lumber exports, Douglas-fir (15.3%) and treated lumber (13.5%). Southern pine exports were down 42.3% YTD relative to 2018, while treated: -27.7%; Doug-fir: -10.3%.
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.

Monday, May 6, 2019

April 2019 Currency Exchange Rates

Click image for larger view
In April the monthly average value of the U.S. dollar (USD) appreciated versus Canada’s “loonie” (+0.1%), euro (+0.6%) and yen (+0.4%). On a trade-weighted index basis, the USD gained 0.1% against a basket of 26 currencies. 
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.

Friday, May 3, 2019

April 2019 Employment Report

Click image for larger view
The Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) establishment survey showed non-farm payroll employment rising by 263,000 jobs in April (+180,000 expected). Also, combined February and March employment gains were revised up by 16,000 (February: +23,000; March: -7,000). Meanwhile, the unemployment rate (based upon the BLS’s household survey) dropped to 3.6% -- primarily because the number of employed persons shrank far less (-103,000) than the overall civilian labor force (-490,000). 
Click image for larger view
Observations from the employment reports include:
* The disparity between the establishment (+263,000 jobs) and household survey results (-103,000 employed) makes us somewhat skeptical of the headline number. Also, had average (since 2009) March CES (business birth/death model) and seasonal adjustments been used, job gains might have amounted to +212,000.
* With those caveats in mind, Manufacturing gained 4,000 jobs in April. That result is reasonably consistent with the Institute for Supply Management’s (ISM) manufacturing employment sub-index, which expanded at a slower pace in April. Wood Products employment shrank by 1,400 jobs (ISM decreased); Paper and Paper Products: -1,600 (ISM increased); Construction: +33,000 (ISM increased). 
Click image for larger view
* The number of employment-age persons not in the labor force (NILF) jumped to 96.2 million (+646,000). This metric had been trending lower since August 2018 -- presumably, as more potential workers concluded their prospects were improving and (re)entered the workforce -- so the sharp increase in this statistic is somewhat disconcerting. Meanwhile, the employment-population ratio (EPR) was unchanged at 60.6%; roughly, then, for every five people being added to the population, three are employed. 
Click image for larger view
* With so many people leaving the labor force, the labor force participation rate dropped to 62.8% -- comparable to levels seen in the late-1970s. Average hourly earnings of all private employees increased by $0.06, to $27.77, resulting in a 3.2% year-over-year increase. For all production and nonsupervisory employees (pictured above), hourly wages rose by $0.07, to $23.31 (+3.4% YoY). Because the average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls shrank by 0.1 hour (to 34.4 hours), average weekly earnings decreased by $0.71, to $955.29 (+1.0% YoY). With the consumer price index running at an annual rate of 1.9% in March, workers’ purchasing power is -- by official metrics, at least -- reasonably stable. 
Click image for larger view
* Full-time jobs retreated by 191,000. Those employed part time for economic reasons (PTER) -- e.g., slack work or business conditions, or could find only part-time work -- rose by 155,000. Those working part time for non-economic reasons nudged up by 25,000 while multiple-job holders fell by 55,000. 
Click image for larger view
For a “sanity check” of the employment numbers, we consult employment withholding taxes published by the U.S. Treasury. Although “noisy” and highly seasonal, the data show the amount withheld in April shrank by $23.8 billion, to $213.8 billion (-10.0% MoM, but +9.3% YoY). To reduce some of the volatility and determine broader trends, we average the most recent three months of data and estimate a percentage change from the same months in the previous year. The average of the three months ending April was 5.8% above the year-earlier average -- well off the peak of +13.8% set back in September 2013. More than a full year has now passed with the lower withholding rates from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, and the lagged effects of the partial federal government shutdown should have effectively disappeared.
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.

April 2019 ISM and Markit Surveys

Click image for larger version
The Institute for Supply Management’s (ISM) monthly sentiment survey showed that in April the expansion in U.S. manufacturing decelerated. The PMI registered 52.8%, down 2.5 percentage points (PP) from the March reading. (50% is the breakpoint between contraction and expansion.) ISM’s manufacturing survey represents under 10% of U.S. employment and about 20% of the overall economy. Inventories (+1.1PP) and order backlogs (+3.5PP) were the only sub-indexes exhibiting significant gains. 
Click image for larger version
The pace of growth in the non-manufacturing sector -- which accounts for 80% of the economy and 90% of employment -- also decelerated (-0.6PP) to 55.5%. Increases in export (+4.5PP) and import (+3.5PP) orders bucked the general trend of falling sub-index values. 
Click image for larger version
Of the industries we track, only Wood Products and Real Estate did not expand. “Spring selling season is here for residential construction,” observed one Construction respondent. “Sales are coming, but negotiations are now the norm. Traffic is higher than the last three months, mostly due to lower mortgage rates."

Relevant commodities:
  • Priced higher -- Construction subcontractors; fuel (diesel and gasoline); labor (general, construction and temporary); and oil.
  • Priced lower -- None.
  • Prices mixed -- Corrugate.
  • In short supply -- Construction subcontractors; and labor (general, construction and temporary).


IHS Markit’s April survey headlines were mixed relative to those of ISM.
Manufacturing -- Solid rise in new orders drives further improvement in operating conditions
Key findings:
  • New business growth picks up to three-month high...
  • ...leading to slightly stronger increase in output
  • Employment expands at softest rate since June 2017

Services -- Slowest business activity growth since March 2017
Key findings:
  • Rates of output and new business expansion ease further
  • Business expectations at lowest level since June 2016
  • Inflationary pressures soften


Commentary by Chris Williamson, Markit’s chief business economist:
Manufacturing -- "Although the PMI ticked higher in April, the survey remains consistent with manufacturing acting as a drag on the economy at the start of 2Q, albeit with the rate of contraction easing. Historical comparisons indicate that the survey’s output gauge needs to rise above 53.5 to signal growth of factory production. As such, the data add to signs that the economy looks set to slow after the stronger than expected start to the year.
"Employment growth also disappointed as hiring slipped to the lowest for nearly two years, albeit in part due to firms reporting difficulties finding staff amid the current tight labor market. “There was better news on the order book front, however, with inflows of new business rising and firms signaling an improved export performance. Unfortunately, on balance, manufacturers seem skeptical that the rise in demand will persist, with future expectations of output growth slumping lower in April.
“Both input cost and factory gate price inflation rates meanwhile eased further, down to the lowest for over one and a half years, hinting that consumer price inflation rates will have continued to cool in April.”

Services -- “The final PMI surveys for April indicate a marked slowing of the U.S. economy at the start of 2Q, suggesting the robust start to the year has lost some momentum. Businesses reported the weakest output and sales growth for two years, indicative of GDP growth slowing to 1.9% in April.
“While the first quarter saw factory weakness being offset by a robust service sector, both manufacturing and services have now shifted into a lower gear.
“An additional concern is that business optimism about the year ahead has slumped to its lowest since mid-2016, reflecting widespread reports from companies that weaker economic growth will likely further dampen business activity in coming months.
“Jobs growth has subsequently slipped to a two-year low as firms took a more cautious approach to hiring and expanding capacity in the face of the weaker sales growth and a gloomier outlook. Price pressures have fallen alongside the slower rate of economic growth signaled by the surveys, as firms struggled to raise prices amid intense competition."
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.