From Zerohedge
Given the long lag between recessionary indicators and economic recession, it is unsurprising economists gave up anticipating a recession. However, while the recession has not happened yet, it does not mean that it still can’t. We should pay special attention to data historically correlated to economic growth.
If no recession is forthcoming, what can we conclude, given most term spread models were signaling a “sure bet”? Unlikely outcome (it’s a probabilistic world!), breakdown in historical correlations, omitted variable problem? In order to shed some light on this question, I examine probability estimates from (i) plain vanilla spread, (ii) debt-service-ratio and foreign term spread augmented, and (iii) term-premium adjusted spread specifications.
That’ s leading question in the NYT a little while back (just getting to this now that I’ve finished grading).
Di Martino Booth points to the McKelvey rule, which uses a 0.3 ppt threshold instead of the Sahm 0.5 ppt threshold. This indicator does seem to signal a recession as shown in the figure below.
Talking about a rethink of the output gap, and the concept of the trend-cycle decomposition in macro policy tomorrow. Here’s a picture of the output gap from CBO, from two statistical filters (Hodrick-Prescott and Fleischman-Roberts/Fed Board), and the Delong and Summers (BPEA 1988) model.
Industrial production continues to rise, while February monthly GDP erased January’s decline.
The WSJ April survey is out (responses April 5-9):
It doesn’t always work.
Plus 3rd release of 2023Q3 GDP.
…to 1% y/y [1]. Their Leading Economic Indicator edges up slightly [2]. Justin Ho discussed their brightening view on Friday’s Marketplace.