by Calculated Risk on 10/23/2014 06:00:00 PM

From the FDIC: FDIC Releases Economic Scenarios for 2015 Stress Testing

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) today released the economic scenarios that will be used by certain financial institutions with total consolidated assets of more than $10 billion for stress tests required under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010.

The baseline, adverse, and severely adverse scenarios include key variables that reflect economic activity, including unemployment, exchange rates, prices, income, interest rates, and other salient aspects of the economy and financial markets.

The baseline scenario represents expectations of private sector economic forecasters. The adverse and severely adverse scenarios are not forecasts, rather, they are hypothetical scenarios designed to assess the strength and resilience of financial institutions and their ability to continue to meet the credit needs of households and businesses under stressed economic conditions.

Here is an excel spreadsheet with the scenarios.

Note: I'm not even on "recession watch", and I think the baseline is the most likely scenario for the next couple of years.  However I think these regular stress tests are very helpful for regulators.

The first table is a summary of the baseline scenario (basically in line with most economic forecasts for GDP and unemployment).

Stress Test Baseline Scenario
	GDP1	Unemployment2	DOW3	House Prices3
2014	2.2%	5.9%	6.5%	4.1%
2015	2.9%	5.4%	5.1%	2.5%
2016	2.9%	5.3%	5.3%	3.0%
2017	2.7%	5.3%	5.3%	3.0%

¹ GDP is the average quarterly real change in real GDP.
² Unemployment is for Q4 of each year.
³ The change in the DOW and House Prices is from Q4 of the preceding year to Q4.

The second table is the adverse scenario. This is moderate recession, but a slow recovery. Under the adverse scenario, unemployment peaks at 8% in 2017. The DOW declines about 28% from peak to trough, and house prices fall 13%.

Stress Test Adverse Scenario
	GDP1	Unemployment2	DOW3	House Prices3
2014	1.3%	6.4%	0.0%	2.6%
2015	-0.3%	7.6%	-16.3%	-7.7%
2016	1.4%	8.0%	-7.8%	-5.6%
2017	2.0%	8.0%	0.1%	0.9%

The third table is the severely adverse scenario. This is a severe recession, but a fairly quick recovery. Under the severely adverse scenario, unemployment peaks at 10.1% in 2016. The DOW declines about 58% and house prices fall 25%.

Stress Test Severely Adverse Scenario
	GDP1	Unemployment2	DOW3	House Prices3
2014	0.4%	6.9%	-11.7%	1.9%
2015	-3.7%	9.9%	-49.8%	-14.9%
2016	2.1%	9.9%	33.9%	-11.0%
2017	3.9%	9.1%	43.1%	2.0%

by Calculated Risk on 10/23/2014 01:54:00 PM

A few comments on QE:

• The FOMC is expected to announce the end of QE3 on Wednesday October 29th, following the FOMC meeting next week.

• Most research shows that the primary impact of QE on interest rates is from the size of the Fed balance sheet ("stock") as opposed to the impact on supply and demand ("flow"). This means that interest rates will not spike when QE ends (something I've noted at the conclusion of previous QE purchases).

• The positive impact of QE on the economy was probably modest and was the result of lower interest rates. QE probably lowered interest rates 50 bps (maybe more or less).  However monetary policy has been the only game in town since fiscal policy has had a negative impact on the economy over the last 4 years (my view is the pivot to austerity was a mistake, and the actions of Congress for the last 3+ years have been negative for the economy).

• The possible negative impacts of QE (such as inflation, weak dollar) never materialized.  Inflation remains below the Fed's target, and the U.S. dollar has strengthened recently.   As I noted yesterday, without the recent increases in shelter (rent and OER), inflation would be close to 1% year-over-year.  Without QE, inflation might be dangerously low!

• At the end of the previous rounds of QE, the economy was still struggling from the effects of the housing bust and financial crisis. Households were still deleveraging in the aggregate. Now the economy is in much better shape, and the effects of the crisis are diminishing. Therefore I do not expect another round of QE during this recovery (although I think the first rate hike might be later than most people expect).

• On inflation: Some people are warning that inflation will pick up as the economy gains traction (because of the size of the Fed's balance sheet). That is possible, but I don't expect a rapid increase in inflation. Many of the factors that led to sharply rising inflation in the '70s are not currently present (like wages and contracts tied to CPI and different demographics).

• My view is QE was not a panacea, but overall QE was a success.  I was a frequent critic of the Fed prior to the financial crisis - I think the Fed was almost anti-regulation during the housing bubble, and initially the Fed was behind the curve when the crisis was looming - however once Bernanke became aware of the severity of the crisis, the Fed was aggressive and effective. Perhaps they were a little slow in implementing QE3 - and with low inflation an argument could be made now to extend QE - but overall I think QE was a success.

by Calculated Risk on 10/23/2014 12:13:00 PM

From the Philly Fed:

The Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia has released the coincident indexes for the 50 states for September 2014. In the past month, the indexes increased in 43 states, decreased in four, and remained stable in three, for a one-month diffusion index of 78. Over the past three months, the indexes increased in 44 states, decreased in five, and remained stable in one, for a three-month diffusion index of 78

Note: These are coincident indexes constructed from state employment data. An explanation from the Philly Fed:

The coincident indexes combine four state-level indicators to summarize current economic conditions in a single statistic. The four state-level variables in each coincident index are nonfarm payroll employment, average hours worked in manufacturing, the unemployment rate, and wage and salary disbursements deflated by the consumer price index (U.S. city average). The trend for each state’s index is set to the trend of its gross domestic product (GDP), so long-term growth in the state’s index matches long-term growth in its GDP.

Click on graph for larger image.

This is a graph is of the number of states with one month increasing activity according to the Philly Fed. This graph includes states with minor increases (the Philly Fed lists as unchanged).

In September, 45 states had increasing activity (including minor increases). This measure declined sharply during the winter, but is close to normal for a recovery.


Here is a map of the three month change in the Philly Fed state coincident indicators. This map was all red during the worst of the recession, and is mostly green again.

by Calculated Risk on 10/23/2014 09:10:00 AM

This house price index is only for houses with Fannie or Freddie mortgages.

From the FHFA: FHFA House Price Index Up 0.5 Percent in August

U.S. house prices rose in August, up 0.5 percent on a seasonally adjusted basis from the previous month, according to the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) monthly House Price Index (HPI). The previously reported 0.1 percent increase in July was revised to reflect a 0.2 percent increase.

The FHFA HPI is calculated using home sales price information from mortgages sold to or guaranteed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. From August 2013 to August 2014, house prices were up 4.8 percent. The U.S. index is 5.8 percent below its April 2007 peak and is roughly the same as the August 2005 index level. This is the ninth consecutive monthly house price increase.

For the nine census divisions, seasonally adjusted monthly price changes from July 2014 to August 2014 ranged from -0.6 percent in the New England and South Atlantic divisions to +1.2 percent in the Mountain division. The 12-month changes were all positive ranging from +1.9 percent in the Middle Atlantic division to +7.8 percent in the Pacific division.
emphasis added

by Calculated Risk on 10/23/2014 08:35:00 AM

The DOL reports:

In the week ending October 18, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 283,000, an increase of 17,000 from the previous week's revised level. The previous week's level was revised up by 2,000 from 264,000 to 266,000. The 4-week moving average was 281,000, a decrease of 3,000 from the previous week's revised average. This is the lowest level for this average since May 6, 2000 when it was 279,250. The previous week's average was revised up by 500 from 283,500 to 284,000.

There were no special factors impacting this week's initial claims.

The previous week was revised up to 266,000.

The following graph shows the 4-week moving average of weekly claims since January 1971.

Click on graph for larger image.


The dashed line on the graph is the current 4-week average. The four-week average of weekly unemployment claims decreased to 281,000.

This was slightly below the consensus forecast of 285,000 and suggests few layoffs.