• 11 hours Homeowners Experiment With Risky New Investment Trend
  • 14 hours U.S. Tech Stocks Look Increasingly Vulnerable
  • 17 hours De Beers To Expand World’s Most Profitable Diamond Mine
  • 19 hours Ford CEO Gets Raise After Massive Layoff Round
  • 1 day Germany’s Flirtation With Recession Could Cripple The Global Economy
  • 2 days Where To Look As Gold Miners Inch Higher
  • 2 days Google Faces Billions In Fines From European Regulators
  • 3 days The Energy Industry Has A Millennial Problem
  • 3 days Russian Banks Scramble For Sanction Loopholes
  • 4 days Gold ETFs Take A Hit After Four-Month Run
  • 4 days European Union Takes Aim At Ten New Tax Havens
  • 5 days Goldman Defends Trillion-Dollar Corporate Buyback Spree
  • 5 days $600 Billion At Risk As Boeing Fallout Continues
  • 5 days Venezuela Has Yet Another Crisis Developing
  • 5 days Wells Fargo Accused Of “Ongoing Lawlessness”
  • 6 days Hollywood Agency Returns $400M Investment To Saudi Wealth Fund
  • 6 days Why Twitter's CEO Is Backing A New Bitcoin Boom
  • 6 days U.S. Treasury To Employ “Extraordinary Measures” To Fend Off Default
  • 6 days Lobster, Golf Carts And Fidget Spinners: What’s In The Federal Budget?
  • 7 days Italy Launches New Welfare Experiment
Lending: The Good, Bad, And Ugly

Lending: The Good, Bad, And Ugly

Aristotle said, “The most hated…

The Chatroom Cartel Running Global Bond Markets

The Chatroom Cartel Running Global Bond Markets

Eight major banks have been…

  1. Home
  2. Markets
  3. Other

Investigating The GDP Deflator: Wildly Differing Results Depending on Your Choice

As noted in Real Q1 GDP 0.2% vs. Consensus 1.0%; Disaster in the Details I got the first quarter GDP forecast details correct.

However, a bit of self-assessment with differing GDP deflators shows my prediction of close to zero growth could easily have looked rather silly.

I asked Doug Short at Advisor Perspectives what the GDP would have looked like using various deflators:

  1. GDP (Implicit GDP Deflator)
  2. PCE (Personal Consumption Expenditures)
  3. CPI (Consumer Price Index)
  4. Shadowstats (Williams' Alternate CPI)

Charts are shown below.

Both Doug and I consider Shadowstats absurd, but we include it because many follow the number. For a recent critique of the measure please see Deconstructing and Debunking Shadowstats.


GDP Implicit Deflator (Official GDP)

GDP Implicit Deflator (Official GDP)


GDP with PCE as Deflator

GDP with PCE as Deflator


GDP with CPI as Deflator

GDP with CPI as Deflator


GDP with Shadowstats CPI as Deflator

GDP with Shadowstats CPI as Deflator


Results

  1. GDP (Implicit GDP Deflator): 0.2%
  2. PCE (Personal Consumption Expenditures): 2.2%
  3. CPI (Consumer Price Index): 3.3%
  4. Shadowstats (Williams' Alternate CPI): -1.2%

Depending on your price deflator, GDP was between -1.2% and +3.3%. If you toss out Shadowstats, then the range is 0.2% to 3.3%.

That's still a damn wide range. People accuse the BEA all the time of manipulating the deflator to make things look good, but if they easily could have done that this month for far better results.

Over time, GDP is highest with the PCE and GDP implicit deflators. At least the BEA is consistent.


Mean GDP

  1. GDP (Implicit GDP Deflator): 3.26%
  2. PCE (Personal Consumption Expenditures): 3.32%
  3. CPI (Consumer Price Index): 2.93%
  4. Shadowstats (Williams' Alternate CPI): 0.79%

Next quarter, because of rising energy prices, deflating GDP by the CPI will likely yield worse results than the GDP deflator. Some people will criticize the BEA because of it, while remaining silent about this quarter.

As it stands, rising energy prices and the strong dollar will place downward pressure on second quarter GDP no matter which deflator one uses.

 

Back to homepage

Leave a comment

Leave a comment