The greatly-anticipated August 2013 U.S. Employment
Situation report hit the markets today, and managed to convey no
new information. The numbers which I view as the most important were exactly in-line (when rounded to 0.1%) with my highly sophisticated straight line projections.
The Treasury bond market recovered slightly in response,
pulling the yield back into a trading range which is centered somewhere just
below 3%. (I’ve seen technical analysts arguing that Armageddon will hit the
Treasury bond market if the 10-year Note yield breaches 3%; I tend to think
that the market could stay in a range even if the top end drifts a bit above 3%.)
I see it as likely that the Fed will commence a slow tapering this month. But there is not
enough information to say that the first rate hike will be before early 2015,
which I view as being consistent with market pricing (with a reasonable risk
premium).
I would characterise the Household Survey data for August as
lousy, with 115 thousand jobs lost on the month; the aggregate employment ratio
slipped back to trend at 58.6%. The rounded Unemployment Rate dropped by 0.1%
to 7.3% as a result of the Participation Rate dropping by 0.2% to 63.2%. The
Household Survey is a properly-designed random survey and is noisy
month-to-month, but the underlying trends appear stable. The crux of the matter is
whether the Participation Rate can keep dropping, as it explains why the Unemployment Rate is declining. However, the pool of workers who can
drop out of the labour force is declining in line with the Unemployment Rate.
I would note that the Gallup-ing Unemployment Rate indicator did not prove too helpful this month.
Within the Establishment Survey, the hourly wage data looked
good, but I will take a look at those numbers some other time. As for the
headline Nonfarm Payrolls number, I think it’s a fairly silly statistic. Market
participants like keying on that number, since it is much smoother than the
Household employment number. That smoothness is the result of algorithms that
can lead the number to miss turning points in the economy (however, later
revisions will fix that problem, so it is not apparent to those who used the revised
data in historical analysis). The market also seems to care about ridiculously
small differences in the data; the difference between the actual outturn
(169,000 jobs in August) versus an above consensus 219,000 is 50 thousand jobs,
or 0.037% of the total number of employees. In other words, the same outcome if
you followed normal rounding rules of 0.1% followed by other economic data. When
you consider the difficulties involved in seasonally adjusting the labour force
data in an environment of an evolving mix of industries, it is somewhat
difficult to take the market behaviour too seriously.
On other fronts, the highly non-smoothed Canadian labour market data smashed expectations. I expect to discuss the situation in my home country
next week.
(c) Brian Romanchuk 2013
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Posts are manually moderated, with a varying delay. Some disappear.
The comment section here is largely dead. My Substack or Twitter are better places to have a conversation.
Given that this is largely a backup way to reach me, I am going to reject posts that annoy me. Please post lengthy essays elsewhere.