A Better Gauge for Job Growth
Looking at employment data year over year, using a three-month moving average, offers a clearer picture of the U.S. job market.
Looking at employment data year over year, using a three-month moving average, offers a clearer picture of the U.S. job market.
Bob Johnson: This week, we look at three different charts and three different ways to look at monthly employment growth.
First, we're going to start with nonseasonally adjusted data. This is the data as it literally comes in. You can look at the monthly data and see there is huge volatility ranging from something close to 3 million jobs lost in a typical January to something as high as more than a million jobs added in April. The volatility is caused by various known seasonal factors. In January, it's retailers coming back from the holidays and shutting down a little bit from their holiday employment. You see another big spike in jobs in the other direction in April and May when we add almost a million jobs. That happens as the normal college graduation class comes out and as normal seasonal hiring for the summer begins. And then we have a fall-off in July--people going back to school as well as some of the things going on in the auto industry. Then, the other big spike you see there on the upside is in October, and that's largely related to the retailers beginning to hire on the other end of the cycle for the holiday season.
So, this presents an extremely volatile look that's confusing and hard to interpret. So, what's another way to look at the data? Well, the government tries to use seasonal-adjustment factors, which is shown in the second chart here. This takes the number of jobs and applies a seasonal factor. Here, you can see a much smoother pattern, and you can actually see a little bit more of what's going on. But even still, there is volatility here, too, where we've had anywhere from roughly 150,000 jobs in any one month to 250,000 jobs in another month. So, again, there is still some volatility. You'd expect these bars to be roughly the same height and slowly sloping upward if the seasonal-adjustment factors were perfect.
Instead, I suggest that maybe we look at the data a third way, and that is looking at the percentage growth on a year-over-year basis and averaging that over three months. This chart looks almost flat. There's very, very little variation in the data. We've been in the range of 2.1% to 2.3% almost all the time over the last four years. So, this method shows the incredible stability of employment, and I think it better reflects what's going on in the underlying economy than the other two graphs, which both have their own set of issues.
By the way, the graph right now suggests that employment is still healthy, which is great news for the economy because we've never had a recession while employment was still in a healthy growth mode.
Transparency is how we protect the integrity of our work and keep empowering investors to achieve their goals and dreams. And we have unwavering standards for how we keep that integrity intact, from our research and data to our policies on content and your personal data.
We’d like to share more about how we work and what drives our day-to-day business.
We sell different types of products and services to both investment professionals
and individual investors. These products and services are usually sold through
license agreements or subscriptions. Our investment management business generates
asset-based fees, which are calculated as a percentage of assets under management.
We also sell both admissions and sponsorship packages for our investment conferences
and advertising on our websites and newsletters.
How we use your information depends on the product and service that you use and your relationship with us. We may use it to:
To learn more about how we handle and protect your data, visit our privacy center.
Maintaining independence and editorial freedom is essential to our mission of empowering investor success. We provide a platform for our authors to report on investments fairly, accurately, and from the investor’s point of view. We also respect individual opinions––they represent the unvarnished thinking of our people and exacting analysis of our research processes. Our authors can publish views that we may or may not agree with, but they show their work, distinguish facts from opinions, and make sure their analysis is clear and in no way misleading or deceptive.
To further protect the integrity of our editorial content, we keep a strict separation between our sales teams and authors to remove any pressure or influence on our analyses and research.
Read our editorial policy to learn more about our process.