If last week was all about cooperative macro data in the US, this week’s sparse releases were a bit unruly.
Remember: “Cooperative” in this context means “soft, but not weak,” as JonesTrading’s Mike O’Rourke put it.
To be sure, nobody convinced of a soft landing or “immaculate disinflation” was going to abandon their view based on ISM services, another downside weekly claims print and ULC revisions, but for whatever it’s worth, all three of those updates argued for a more hawkish Fed.
The hot ISM report was variously blamed for equities’ mid-week malaise, and although Apple headlines dominated on Thursday, the lowest initial claims print since February was worth a mention.
At 216,000, claims came in below the lowest estimate from three-dozen economists. It was the fourth weekly decline in a row. The four-week moving average fell back below 230,000. Actual, unadjusted initial claims were 190,200.
Nothing about that screams “softer labor market,” let alone economic downshift or recession. The more demand there is for labor, the more competition for scarce workers, and that points to elevated wage growth and sticky services inflation. That was precisely the message from ISM services and claims this week.
Meanwhile, revised data from the BLS showed unit labor costs rose 2.2% in Q2, a meaningfully brisker pace than the initially reported 1.6% rate.
Productivity was revised lower to show a 3.5% increase versus the 3.7% preliminary print which, you’re reminded, counted as the largest jump in almost three years.
“While the ULC revision was second-quarter data, it nonetheless spoke to ongoing pressure for wage gains,” BMO’s Ian Lyngen remarked.
All of this might seem trivial in the grand scheme of things, and in some sense it is, which is why I didn’t give it top billing. But if you’re tracking the week-to-week ebb and flow of the soft landing / immaculate disinflation narrative, the balance of this week’s figures was unfavorable — even as the releases themselves didn’t carry enough weight relative to last week’s marquee reports to move the needle.



regardless of data at the margins or middle, opaque it all remains. data outside economists’ estimates reinforces that opaqueness imho. (all economist jokes aside)
Seeing more anecdotal real-time hints of weaker labor conditions – companies doing just merit & COLA pay increases this year, or reducing hours, or not paying up as much for new hires in some sectors. It seems that the “official” wage data should lag at turning points.
Example (survey): https://www.wtwco.com/en-us/news/2023/06/us-employers-anticipate-2024-pay-raises-to-remain-high-as-labor-market-challenges-remain-wtw-survey