Lies, Damned Lies, and Wage Growth

Posted by Brad McMillan, CFA, CAIA, MAI

Find me on:

This entry was posted on Nov 11, 2014 3:27:56 PM

and tagged In the News

Leave a comment

wage growthI mentioned yesterday that employment numbers are much stronger than most people are giving them credit for. The one exception is wage growth, which, as a statistic, has some weaknesses.

Today, I want to talk about those weaknesses and look at some numbers that paint a rosier picture.

What’s wrong with the “wage growth” stat?

Wage growth, as it’s discussed in the media, is a stat that dates back to 2007, represented by the red line below. The blue line represents a similar but older data series that includes a smaller set of workers.

wage_growth_1-1

The red line, wage growth as reported, seems to track the blue line reasonably well, but it has a couple of issues.

First, it shows less variation than the blue line, which raises a question as to whether it really captures the full change in wages, both up and down. Looking at 2011, for example, the blue line dropped (which you might expect, given the crisis in Europe at the time), but the red line stayed pretty constant. Similarly, through the whole crisis, the blue line seems to better reflect reality, in that wage growth kept dropping from 2009 through 2012. The red line suggests wage growth stayed fairly steady from 2010 to the present.

The other problem with the red line is that it only goes back seven years, so we really don’t know how it behaves over time. You can see the difference in the chart below.

wage_growth_2-1

Beyond the length of the data series, though, the more fundamental question is how responsive the underlying data is to changes. The newer measure, which appears to include more salaried workers, would be intuitively less responsive than the older one, which is based more on hourly positions, with greater turnover and more frequent wage changes. As a result, the newer data series appears to be smoother on both the downside and the upside, making it less useful as a signal of changes in the shorter term.

A better indicator of what’s happening with wages

The old wage growth stat (the blue line in the charts above) is actually a better signal, as it correlates strongly with unemployment around a 12-month lag, is more responsive to changes in the short term, and shows these behaviors over a 30-year time frame.

In short, the older data series:

  • Is fundamentally more responsive to changes (and therefore quicker to sense trends)
  • Has a much longer history, which makes it easier to interpret
  • Is broadly consistent with the newer series, which means that, despite the difference in current signals, they broadly support each other

What’s more, the time lag between the two series suggests that, as the unemployment rate continues to decline, the upward pressure on wage growth rates is also likely to increase. In other words, the newer data series isn’t indicating sustained slow wage growth; it’s just structurally slower to react.

Upcoming Appearances

Tune in to Bloomberg Radio's Bloomberg Businessweek on Friday, February 28, at 3:45 P.M. ET to hear Brad talk about the market. Stream the show live at https://www.bloombergradio.com/, listen through SiriusXM 119, or download Bloomberg's app, Bloomberg Radio+.

Tune into Yahoo Finance's The Final Round on Thursday, March 12, between 2:50 and 4:00 P.M. ET to hear Brad talk about the market. Exact interview time will be updated once confirmed. Watch at finance.yahoo.com

Subscribe via E-mail

New call-to-action
Crash-Test Investing
Commonwealth Independent Advisor

Hot Topics

Have a Question?

New Call-to-action

Conversations

Archives

see all

Subscribe

Disclosure

The information on this website is intended for informational/educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment advice, a solicitation, or a recommendation to buy or sell any security or investment product. Please contact your financial professional for more information specific to your situation.

Certain sections of this commentary contain forward-looking statements that are based on our reasonable expectations, estimates, projections, and assumptions. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve certain risks and uncertainties, which are difficult to predict. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Diversification does not assure a profit or protect against loss in declining markets.

The S&P 500 Index is a broad-based measurement of changes in stock market conditions based on the average performance of 500 widely held common stocks. All indices are unmanaged and investors cannot invest directly into an index.

The MSCI EAFE Index (Europe, Australasia, Far East) is a free float‐adjusted market capitalization index that is designed to measure the equity market performance of developed markets, excluding the U.S. and Canada. The MSCI EAFE Index consists of 21 developed market country indices.  

Third party links are provided to you as a courtesy. We make no representation as to the completeness or accuracy of information provided at these websites. Information on such sites, including third party links contained within, should not be construed as an endorsement or adoption by Commonwealth of any kind. You should consult with a financial advisor regarding your specific situation.

Member FINRASIPC

Please review our Terms of Use

Commonwealth Financial Network®