No GDP Downturn Forecasted: SPF

In contrast to the July WSJ survey, the just-released Survey of Professional Forecasters mean forecast shows no negative GDP growth.

Figure 1: GDP (bold black), August SPF (red), July WSJ survey (pink), CBO projection (teal), World Economic Outlook (orange square), all in bn. Ch.2012$ SAAR. Source: BEA, Philadelphia Fed, WSJ survey, July CBO Economic Outlook Update, IMF World Economic Outlook July Update, and author’s calculations.

The SPF forecast is substantially above the WSJ, partly because it incorporates the actual Q2 advance estimate. Respondents to the July WSJ survey, as well as the CBO and IMF staff, did not have the Q2 advance estimate at time of forecasting.

The August SPF indicates both faster growth, and higher level of output, than the February SPF, which was again above the August SPF (albeit with slower growth).

Figure 2: GDP (bold black), August SPF (red), February SPF (tan), August SPF (blue), GDPNow of 8/8 (sky blue square), all in bn. Ch.2012$ SAAR. NBER defined peak-to-trough recession dates shaded gray. Source: BEA, Philadelphia Fed, Atlanta Fed, NBER, and author’s calculations.

The y/y growth rate distribution has noticeably shifted up since the May survey.

Source: SPF (August, 2023).

Note that even as growth has proven resilient, the forecasted ten year yield has moved up (although still below CBO projection in 2024).

Figure 3: Ten year Treasury yield (bold black), August SPF (red), February SPF (tan), August SPF (blue), CBO (sky blue), all in %. NBER defined peak-to-trough recession dates shaded gray. Source: BEA, Philadelphia Fed, CBO Economic Outlook July Update, NBER, and author’s calculations.

12 thoughts on “No GDP Downturn Forecasted: SPF

  1. Ivan

    What no recession!!!

    So many people are going to be SOOOO disappointed. This is the Biden administrations fault.

    1. pgl

      No recession? Some people have been saying we’ve been in a recession for the last 1.5 years. Of course some people say the darndest things!

    1. pgl

      Get a clue – everyone here is bored with your whining. Do something productive and honest for a change.

    2. Macroduck

      ltr, you lying scum. How many times do I have to tell you this. Nobody is demeaning your civilization. We are calling you out for your dishonest behavior. To claim otherwise is to compound your dishonesty.

      You, ltr, you are the target of criticism, of disdain. When you drag the rest of China into it, you demean a 5,000 year old civilization by associating that civilization with your behavior.

    3. Ivan

      Oh the humanity!!!!!

      Someone says something critical and 1.4 billion people with their 5000 year old civilization are crumbling into dust. I guess that civilization is not that robust anymore?

    1. Macroduck

      Should be banned for length. And for diluting useful content with pure nonsense. ltr intentionally reduces the intellectual value of this blog through her bahavior.

  2. pgl

    Wait Trump said he would never picked David Weiss to be the special prosecutor in the politically motivated torturing of Hunter Biden? Excuse me but it was Trump that appointed Weiss back in 2017.

    1. Ivan

      I am sure Trump would prefer Rudy. However, he not only picked Weiss but also kept him for 3 years of fruitless investigation. Then in order to not look political Biden kept the guy for another 2 years in a completely unprecedented investigation of tax filing violations and a gun “crime” that a federal courts recently declared was not a crime. Now the guys GOP handlers have told him to gain Special Counsel status so he can keep the case going until after next years election. Not sure that was such a smart move making the inevitable comparison between Trumps crimes and Biden’s sons misdemeanors. I will fly well with the base but not with anybody with a functional brain.

  3. Macroduck

    Off topic, income distribution –

    I just ran into the cutest series of simulations of wealth distribution over time:

    https://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/59330#comments

    The idea is that, over a number of periods, wealth is redistributed according to some fixed rule. The result is that, with time, some will rise and others fall in terms of wealth, without any virtue needed. It’s just math. Change the rules and you change the eventual result, but the result is always a skewed distribution of wealth. And the winners did nothing to deserve to win.

    I’ve run into similar exercises involving firm concentration, with similar results: random processes are enough to generate industrial concentration similar to that seen in reality. There is no need to assume better management is behind better performance. Random processes account for success.

    Make of this what you will.

  4. Willie

    I’m sure not seeing any sign of a downturn around here. There aren’t as many cranes downtown as there were, but there are plenty scattered across the rest of Seattle. Smaller projects seem to be taking the place of block busters. So, construction doesn’t appear to be falling off, just changing. Traffic is a pain. I kinda miss pandemic level traffic. I am seeing a lot more life on the streets in Seattle as well. It’s not like it was, but it is getting far better. All signs of improving economic activity, not declining activity. And, the WSJ is a Murdoch rag. Of course they think we are headed into a recession. They are wishing it to be so. Too bad the editorial staff doesn’t listen to the actual journalists there so much.

Comments are closed.