by Calculated Risk on 10/03/2018 04:58:00 PM

Note: CR has been hiking, and is scheduled to return to posting on Thursday, Oct 4th.

Thursday:
• At 8:30 AM ET, The initial weekly unemployment claims report will be released.

by Calculated Risk on 10/03/2018 10:03:00 AM

CR October 2018 Update: In 2013, I wrote a post "Predicting the Next Recession". I repeated the post in January 2015 (and in the summer of 2015, in January 2016, in August 2016, in April 2017, and in April 2018) because of all the recession calls. In late 2015, the recession callers were out in force - arguing the problems in China, combined with the impact on oil producers of lower oil prices (and defaults by energy companies) - would lead to a global recession and drag the US into recession.  I didn't think so - and I was correct.

I've added a few updates in italics by year.  Most of the text is from January 2013.

A few thoughts on the "next recession" ... Forecasters generally have a terrible record at predicting recessions. There are many reasons for this poor performance. In 1987, economist Victor Zarnowitz wrote in "The Record and Improvability of Economic Forecasting" that there was too much reliance on trends, and he also noted that predictive failure was also due to forecasters' incentives. Zarnowitz wrote: "predicting a general downturn is always unpopular and predicting it prematurely—ahead of others—may prove quite costly to the forecaster and his customers".

Incentives motivate Wall Street economic forecasters to always be optimistic about the future (just like stock analysts). Of course, for the media and bloggers, there is an incentive to always be bearish, because bad news drives traffic (hence the prevalence of yellow journalism).

In addition to paying attention to incentives, we also have to be careful not to rely "heavily on the persistence of trends". One of the reasons I focus on residential investment (especially housing starts and new home sales) is residential investment is very cyclical and is frequently the best leading indicator for the economy. UCLA's Ed Leamer went so far as to argue that: "Housing IS the Business Cycle". Usually residential investment leads the economy both into and out of recessions. The most recent recovery was an exception, but it was fairly easy to predict a sluggish recovery without a contribution from housing.

Since I started this blog in January 2005, I've been pretty lucky on calling the business cycle.  I argued no recession in 2005 and 2006, then at the beginning of 2007 I predicted a recession would start that year (made it by one month with the Great Recession starting in December 2007).  And in 2009, I argued the economy had bottomed and we'd see sluggish growth.

Finally, over the last 18 months, a number of forecasters (mostly online) have argued a recession was imminent.  I responded that I wasn't even on "recession watch", primarily because I thought residential investment was bottoming.

[CR 2015 Update: this was written two years ago - I'm not sure if those calling for a recession then have acknowledged their incorrect forecasts and / or changed theirs views (like ECRI and various bloggers). Clearly they were wrong.]

[CR April 2017 Update: Now it has been over four years!  And yes, ECRI has admitted their recession calls were incorrect.  Not sure about the rest of the recession callers.]

[CR October 2018 Update: Now it has been five and a half years!]

Now one of my blogging goals is to see if I can get lucky again and call the next recession correctly.  Right now I'm pretty optimistic (see: The Future's so Bright ...) and I expect a pickup in growth over the next few years (2013 will be sluggish with all the austerity).

The next recession will probably be caused by one of the following (from least likely to most likely):

3) An exogenous event such as a pandemic, significant military conflict, disruption of energy supplies for any reason, a major natural disaster (meteor strike, super volcano, etc), and a number of other low probability reasons. All of these events are possible, but they are unpredictable, and the probabilities are low that they will happen in the next few years or even decades.

[CR 2016 Update: The recent recession calls are mostly based on exogenous events: the problems in China and in commodity based economies (especially oil based).  There will be some spillover to the US such as fewer exports (and an impact on oil producing regions in the US), but unless there is a related financial crisis, I think the spillover will be insufficient to cause a recession in the US.]

2) Significant policy error. This might involve premature or too rapid fiscal or monetary tightening (like the US in 1937 or eurozone in 2012).  Two examples: not reaching a fiscal agreement and going off the "fiscal cliff" probably would have led to a recession, and Congress refusing to "pay the bills" would have been a policy error that would have taken the economy into recession.  Both are off the table now, but there remains some risk of future policy errors. 

Note: Usually the optimal path for reducing the deficit means avoiding a recession since a recession pushes up the deficit as revenues decline and automatic spending (unemployment insurance, etc) increases.  So usually one of the goals for fiscal policymakers is to avoid taking the economy into recession. Too much austerity too quickly is self defeating.

[CR 2017 Update: Austerity was a mistake (obvious at the time).  And it is possible that we will see serious policy mistakes from the new administration (a complete wildcard).  And it is possible the Fed could tighten too quickly. ]

[CR April 2018 Update: We are seeing policy mistakes from the Trump administration on taxes, immigrations, and trade. See: When the Story Change, Be Alert. I'm watching for the impact of these policy mistakes.]

1) Most of the post-WWII recessions were caused by the Fed tightening monetary policy to slow inflation. I think this is the most likely cause of the next recession. Usually, when inflation starts to become a concern, the Fed tries to engineer a "soft landing", and frequently the result is a recession. Since inflation is not an immediate concern, the Fed will probably stay accommodative for a few more years.

So right now I expect further growth for the next few years (all the austerity in 2013 concerns me, especially over the next couple of quarters as people adjust to higher payroll taxes, but I think we will avoid contraction). [CR 2015 Update: We avoided contraction in 2013!] I think the most likely cause of the next recession will be Fed tightening to combat inflation sometime in the future - and residential investment (housing starts, new home sales) will probably turn down well in advance of the recession. In other words, I expect the next recession to be a more normal economic downturn - and I don't expect a recession for a few years.

[CR October 2018 Update: This was written in 2013 - and my prediction for no "recession for a few years" was correct.  This still seems correct today, so no recession in the immediate future (not in the next 12 months). ]

by Calculated Risk on 10/02/2018 04:53:00 PM

CR Note: Gone hiking! I will return on Thursday, Oct 4th. See the links below for the official releases.

Wednesday:
• At 7:00 AM ET, The Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) will release the results for the mortgage purchase applications index.

• At 8:15 AM, The ADP Employment Report for September. This report is for private payrolls only (no government). The consensus is for 182,000 payroll jobs added in August, down from 219,000 added in July.

• Early: Reis Q3 2018 Office Survey of rents and vacancy rates.

• At 10:00 AM, the ISM non-Manufacturing Index for September. The consensus is for index to increase to 56.8 from 55.7 in July.

by Calculated Risk on 10/02/2018 10:01:00 AM

CR Note: Gone hiking! I will return on Thursday, Oct 4th.
In 2005 and 2006, I was researching previous housing bubble / busts to try to predict what would happen following the bursting of the housing bubble.

So, in April 2008, when many pundits were calling the housing bottom, I wrote: Housing Bust Duration

After another year (or two) of rapidly falling prices, it's very likely that real prices will continue to fall - but at a slower pace. During the last few years of the bust, real prices will be flat or decline slowly - and the conventional wisdom will be that homes are a poor investment.

The Los Angeles bust took 86 months in real terms from peak to trough (about 7 years) using the Case-Shiller index. If the Composite 20 bust takes a similar amount of time, the real price bottom will happen in early 2013 or so.

And then in February 2012 I wrote: The Housing Bottom is Here

There are several reasons I think that house prices are close to a bottom. First prices are close to normal looking at the price-to-rent ratio and real prices (especially if prices fall another 4% to 5% NSA between the November Case-Shiller report and the March report). Second the large decline in listed inventory means less downward pressure on house prices, and third, I think that several policy initiatives will lessen the pressure from distressed sales (the probable mortgage settlement, the HARP refinance program, and more).

And in March 2013, I wrote about the two bottoms - one for activity and the other for prices: Housing: The Two Bottoms

I pointed out there are usually two bottoms for housing: the first for new home sales, housing starts and residential investment, and the second bottom is for house prices.
...
[I]t appears activity bottomed in 2009 through 2011 (depending on the measure) and house prices bottomed in early 2012.

by Calculated Risk on 10/01/2018 04:52:00 PM

CR Note: Gone hiking! I will return on Thursday, Oct 4th.

Tuesday:
• All day Light vehicle sales for September. The BEA estimated sales of 16.596 million SAAR in August 2018 (Seasonally Adjusted Annual Rate).

• Early, Reis Q3 2018 Mall Survey of rents and vacancy rates.

• AT 8:00 AM ET, Corelogic House Price index for August.

by Calculated Risk on 10/01/2018 10:02:00 AM

CR Note: Gone hiking! I will return on Thursday, Oct 4th.
In early 2009, many analysts were predicting the 2nd Great Depression. However I started seeing some positive signs ... and I was able to call the end of the recession in mid-2009.

From January 2009: Vehicle Sales

David Rosenberg at Merrill Lynch wrote a research piece last week: "Not Your Father’s Recession ...(But Maybe Your Grandfather’s)" (no link)

Needless to say, the piece wasn't too upbeat.

But I was intrigued by some of the comments on vehicle sales.
...
Currently this ratio is at 23.9 years, the highest ever. This is an unsustainable level (I doubt most vehicles will last 24 years!), and the ratio will probably decline over the next few years. This could happen with vehicles being removed from the fleet, but more likely because of a sales increase.
...
Sales won't increase right away (look at the depressed sales during the early '80s), but this does suggest that auto sales are closer to the bottom than the top, and that auto sales will increase significantly in the future - although sales in 2009 will probably be dismal.

And from February 2009: Looking for the Sun

2009 will be a grim economic year. The unemployment rate will rise all year, house prices will fall, commercial real estate (CRE) will get crushed ... but there might be a few rays of sunshine too.
...
Even though most of the economic news will be ugly in 2009, my guess is all three of these series will find a bottom (or at least the pace of decline will slow significantly). This means that the drag on employment in these industries, and the drag on GDP, will slow or stop.

These will be rays of sunshine in a very dark season. That doesn't mean a thaw, but it will be a beginning ...

CR Note: I do not have a crystal ball, but I was looking past the horrible day-to-day numbers and starting to see the end of the recession.

by Calculated Risk on 9/30/2018 04:48:00 PM

CR Note: Gone hiking! I will return on Thursday, Oct 4th. See the links below for the official releases.

Monday:
• At 10:00 AM: ISM Manufacturing Index for September. The PMI was at 61.3% in August, the employment index was at 58.5%, and the new orders index was at 65.1%.

• At 10:00 AM: Construction Spending for August.

by Calculated Risk on 9/29/2018 08:11:00 AM

The key report this week is the September employment report on Friday.

Other key indicators include the September ISM manufacturing and non-manufacturing indexes, September auto sales, and the August trade deficit.

----- Monday, Oct 1st -----
10:00 AM: ISM Manufacturing Index for September.

Here is a long term graph of the ISM manufacturing index.

The PMI was at 61.3% in August, the employment index was at 58.5%, and the new orders index was at 65.1%.

10:00 AM: Construction Spending for August.

----- Tuesday, Oct 2nd -----
All day: Light vehicle sales for September.

The BEA estimated sales of 16.596 million SAAR in August 2018 (Seasonally Adjusted Annual Rate).

This graph shows light vehicle sales since the BEA started keeping data in 1967. The dashed line is the current sales rate.

Early: Reis Q3 2018 Mall Survey of rents and vacancy rates.

8:00 AM: Corelogic House Price index for August.

----- Wednesday, Oct 3rd -----
7:00 AM ET: The Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) will release the results for the mortgage purchase applications index.

8:15 AM: The ADP Employment Report for September. This report is for private payrolls only (no government).

Early: Reis Q3 2018 Office Survey of rents and vacancy rates.

10:00 AM: the ISM non-Manufacturing Index for September.

----- Thursday, Oct 4th -----
8:30 AM: The initial weekly unemployment claims report will be released.

----- Friday, Oct 5th -----
8:30 AM: Employment Report for September.

There were 201,000 jobs added in August, and the unemployment rate was unchanged at 3.9%.

This graph shows the year-over-year change in total non-farm employment since 1968.

In August the year-over-year change was 2.33 million jobs.

A key will be the change in wages.

8:30 AM: Trade Balance report for August from the Census Bureau.

This graph shows the U.S. trade deficit, with and without petroleum, through the most recent report. The blue line is the total deficit, and the black line is the petroleum deficit, and the red line is the trade deficit ex-petroleum products.

The U.S. trade deficit was at $50.1 billion in July.

3:00 PM: Consumer Credit from the Federal Reserve.

by Calculated Risk on 9/28/2018 01:00:00 PM

CR Note: Gone hiking! I will return on Thursday, Oct 4th.
In December 2007, most analysts were still dramatically underestimating the probabe losses for lenders and financial institutions.

Here is an article from the WSJ quoting a crazy blogger: How High Will Subprime Losses Go?

The global race is on to find the best phrase to describe the housing and credit mess. The U.K.’s Telegraph quotes an economist who says it “could make 1929 look like a walk in the park” if central banks don’t solve the crisis in a matter of weeks.

The report cites the recent prediction from Barclays Capital that losses from the subprime-mortgage meltdown could hit $700 billion. That would top Merrill Lynch’s recent estimate of $500 billion. The Australian newspaper notes that a $700 billion “bloodbath” — potentially leading the U.S. economy into “the blackest year since the Great Depression” — would top the GDPs of all but 15 nations.

Back in the U.S., the Calculated Risk blog sidestepped the colorful language and went straight for the big number: “The losses for the lenders and investors might well be over $1 trillion.”

Many people thought I was crazy. But losses for lenders and financial institutions ended up over $1 Trillion.

And if you look at the post the WSJ referenced, the first paragraph starts: "Within the next couple of years, probably somewhere between 10 million and 20 million U.S. homeowners will owe more on their homes, than their homes are worth."

I was a grizzly bear!

by Calculated Risk on 9/28/2018 10:07:00 AM

CR Note: Gone hiking! I will return on Thursday, Oct 4th. Another post on Tanta!

Every finance and economics blogger owes Tanta a debt of gratitude. Before Tanta wrote the following essay, newspapers would "borrow" ideas and subjects from bloggers, and never mention the source. In March 2007 - with a powerful essay - she changed the way the main street media treated bloggers.

 In the week following publication of this piece, Tanta or myself were mentioned in just about every major newspaper in the US!

Sadly the media has trouble distinguishing between informed commentary and nonsense (like Zero Right) ... but at least bloggers now get mentioned.

From March 2007: Media Inquiries Policy

Calculated Risk is a hobby blog, created and maintained by a retired executive, with occasional assistance from a former bank officer and mortgage lending specialist who is currently on extended medical leave. Both of these people get endless questions, answers, hat tips, links, analysis, and overall inspiration from a very diverse group of commenters, regulars and occasional de-lurkers, all of whom are beloved except some of them.

CR regularly gets emails and comments from paid reporters who wish to know if CR or Tanta would like to be interviewed, or would simply like to answer one or several questions that the reporter has about economic or housing or mortgage issues. Because, so far, the answer has always been something on the order of “no,” we would like to explain to you why this is the case.
...
Dear reporters, we quote your stuff periodically, giving credit both to the reporter and the publication, under fair use terms. We have no objection to your returning the favor. If you have an editor who will not allow that, and you think that the problem can be solved by getting one of us to drop our online personas, give you our real names, and say the same thing to you over the phone, so that you can get your editor to accept it as something other than just blogging, which everybody knows is untrustworthy ranting by anonymous nuts, you are making a faulty assumption about the relationship among us, our birthdays, and yesterday. Neither CR nor Tanta wishes to play into a set of assumptions that render what we say on the blog as unworthy of coverage by the Big Media, but what we might say on the phone to Intrepid Reporter as good dirt and straight skinny.