Jobs Day

|
Includes: RINF
by: Tim Duy

The jobs report for January is upon us. I would like to say this one will receive special attention, but they all receive special attention. Consensus forecast is for nonfarm payrolls to gain 188k, with a range of 170k-215k, while unemployment holds constant at 5%. Calculated Risk looks at five indicators and concludes:

Unfortunately none of the indicators above is very good at predicting the initial BLS employment report. However, based on these indicators, it appears job gains will be below consensus.

One of the indicators CR considers is consumer sentiment - which, as CR says, is influenced by factors other than the labor market - so I will discount it in what follows. A regression of the monthly change in nonfarm payrolls on the remaining indicators - monthly change in ADP payrolls (ADP), the ISM employment index for manufacturing (NAPMEI), the ISM employment index for nonmanfucturing (NMFEI), and the monthly change in initial jobless claims (CLAIMS2) - yields:

This is a quick and dirty regression, to be sure, and I would caveat it by saying that it is more accurately described as a model of the revised nonfarm payrolls number than the initial release. Note, also, that the coefficient on the manufacturing employment index is not significant. As CR says:

Note: Recently the ADP has been a better predictor for BLS reported manufacturing employment than the ISM survey.

With these caveats in mind, the one-step ahead forecasts are:

The point forecast for January is 202.64k, a tad higher than consensus, but the 95% confidence interval is wide at (48k to 357k). Which is a reminder that trying to predict monthly payrolls is something of a fool's errand. I would not be surprised by any outcome within the 68% confidence interval, or 123k-280k. A significant miss relative to consensus should not be a surprise. It would still be within the range of recent outcomes.

The Fed will be watching for signs that the economy has slowed precipitously since the final quarter of 2015. They will also be watching the unemployment rate and underemployment indicators to assess remaining slack in the economy. Further declines in the unemployment rate will make them increasingly uneasy with holding steady even as financial markets suggest they should. Watch wages for confirmation that slack has or has not diminished. And finally, for those on recession watch, ignore the headlines, whether they be weak or strong, and look at temporary help payrolls and signs that long-term unemployment is back on the rise. Both tend to be leading indicators, especially the former.

In other news, New York Fed President William Dudley was reported to have cooled on rate hikes:

"One thing I think we can say with more confidence is that financial conditions are considerably tighter than they were at the time of the December meeting," said Dudley, a permanent voter on the Federal Open Market Committee, the Fed's monetary policy arm.

"So if those financial conditions were to remain in place by the time we get to the March meeting, we would have to take that into consideration in terms of that monetary policy decision," he said.

While The Wall Street Journal reports that Fed Governor Lael Brainard reiterated her warnings from last year:

Her concern is that stresses in emerging markets including China and slow growth in developed economies could spill over to the U.S. "This translates into weaker exports, business investment and manufacturing in the United States, slower progress on hitting the inflation target, and financial tightening through the exchange rate and rising risk spreads on financial assets," Ms. Brainard said Monday in response to questions from The Wall Street Journal.

"Recent developments reinforce the case for watchful waiting," she said.

Both are clearly more cautious than Kansas City Fed Esther George. And more influential as well. I enjoyed this:

"I don't think it served Janet Yellen well," former Dallas Fed President Richard Fisher said in an interview of Ms. Brainard's critique. "It's the only time I've known her when she didn't appear to be a team player," he said of Ms. Brainard, with whom he worked in the Clinton administration.

Seriously? Fisher has the gall to criticize Brainard as not a team player? Google "Fisher Dallas dissent" and see what you get. A sample:

Being a team player isn't always what the Fed needs. Fisher obviously thought so when he was on the FOMC. Yet, he insists Brainard be the team player he wasn't. Sad.

Separately, Goldman Sachs has erased their expectations of a rate hike in March, but left three more penciled in for the rest of the year. Clearly in the "no recession" camp. I think that March is unlikely, as is a chance to "catch up" in April. But I can make a story on the back of calm in financial markets and two strong employment reports that March comes back on the table. Not my baseline, though.

Bottom Line: The Fed is mostly coming around to delaying the next rate hike. We would need to see a lot of change over just a few weeks to get them back on their original track. More than seems likely. Rest of the year? If you are in the "no recession" camp like me, you anticipate the Fed will resume hiking later this year. If you are in the "recession" camp, it's all over.

About this article:

Expand
Want to share your opinion on this article? Add a comment.
Disagree with this article? .
To report a factual error in this article, click here