Louise Curley

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
    background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
    background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
<br>

<span id="articletext">
<p></p>
<p><img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050510c.jpg" width="353"></p>
<p>March Industrial production data were released today for the developed nations-- Germany, Denmark, the United Kingdom; and for the developing nations--Slovakia, Turkey and Malaysia. Each country reported a decline in production from February, adding to the evidence of a slow down in world growth in the first quarter of 2005.</p>
<p>While Turkey showed the largest decline, it followed an unusually large-- 9%-- rise in February. Unexpected declines occurred in the United Kingdom where production was down by 1.14% and in Germany where production declined by 0.79%. In both cases the consensus had predicted a rise.</p>
<p>The year-to-year percentage changes in the data generally show a declining trend over the past year or so in all the reporting countries except Germany, where the data appear trend less. The first chart compares the year-to-year changes in production for Germany and the United Kingdom. Although Turkey and Malaysia show a declining trend in year-to-year changes, the percent changes have yet to record declines, indicating that production is still increasing on a year-to-year basis as shown in the second chart. <img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050510d.jpg" width="353"> The same cannot be said for Denmark where the average year-to-year decline for the first quarter was 3.88% and for Slovakia where there has been little change in the level of production.</p>
</span>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><b>INDUSTRIAL&nbsp; PRODUCTION</b></th>
<th scope="col"><b>Mar 05</b></th>
<th scope="col"><b>Feb 05</b></th>
<th scope="col"><b>Mar 04</b></th>
<th scope="col"><b>M/M%</b></th>
<th scope="col"><b>Y/Y%</b></th>
<th scope="col"><b>&nbsp;2004&nbsp;&nbsp;</b></th>
<th scope="col"><b>&nbsp;2003</b></th>
<th scope="col"><b>&nbsp;2002</b></th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Germany (2000=1000</td>
<td>100.9</td>
<td>101.7</td>
<td>99.3</td>
<td>-0.79</td>
<td>1.61</td>
<td>100.8</td>
<td>98.4</td>
<td>98.3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">U. K. (2001=100)</td>
<td>95.8</td>
<td>96.9</td>
<td>97.6</td>
<td>-1.14</td>
<td>-4.84</td>
<td>97.8</td>
<td>97.3</td>
<td>97.5</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Denmark (2000=100)</td>
<td>97</td>
<td>99</td>
<td>103</td>
<td>-2.02</td>
<td>-5.83</td>
<td>102</td>
<td>102</td>
<td>103</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Turkey (1997=100)</td>
<td>129.0</td>
<td>137.0</td>
<td>122.7</td>
<td>-5.84</td>
<td>5.13</td>
<td>123.4</td>
<td>112.4</td>
<td>103.4</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Slovakia (2000=100)</td>
<td>124.1</td>
<td>126.7</td>
<td>127.9</td>
<td>-2.05</td>
<td>-2.97</td>
<td>124.7</td>
<td>120.9</td>
<td>114.8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Malaysia (1993=100)</td>
<td>237.5</td>
<td>240.3</td>
<td>226.0</td>
<td>-1.17</td>
<td>5.09</td>
<td>229.6</td>
<td>206.3</td>
<td>188.8</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>


March Industrial production data were released today for the developed nations-- Germany, Denmark, the United Kingdom; and for the developing nations--Slovakia, Turkey and Malaysia. Each country reported a decline in production from [...]

March Industrial Production Data Show Declines in Developed and Emerging Nations

Our global data offering is unparalleled in terms of coverage, quality, and organization. We offer 290+ databases from 2500 government and private sources, a wealth of key survey and forecast data covering the world’s economies, and a robust offering of archive databases that drive machine learning for big data applications.

Optimized for precision analytics, our data is seamlessly integrated with Microsoft Office and all leading statistical packages through our DLX® software and platform independent HaverView™ website. We further offer direct database feeds, client server or cloud-based delivery, and RESTful API.


Privacy Policy

Disclaimer

Contact us

A premier time series data platform for the global strategy, research, and quant communities. 

New York

London

Singapore

Tokyo

Economy in Brief

Viewpoints

Contact Us

Our Data

Our Products

What We Do

Our Authors

About Us

Data News

Resources

Release Calendars

Training Center

Webinars

Newsletters

Download Software

For Clients

Live Updates

Tom Moeller

250121A12.jpg

250121B12.jpg

Recent strength in factory sector production generated life in pricing power. The Industrial Materials Price Index from the Foundation for International Business and Economic Research (FIBER) rose 1.0% (2.1% y/y) during the four weeks ended January 17, 2025, reversing a 1.0% decline in the prior four weeks. The level of the index was its highest since the second week of November.

Leading the rise, Crude Oil & Benzene group prices strengthened 4.0% (-2.3% y/y) in the latest four weeks. The cost of West Texas Intermediate crude oil jumped 11.2% in four weeks to $78.33 per barrel and stood 7.4% higher y/y. It was increased from a $68.58 low in the first week of December. The cost of the petro-chemical benzene, used for making plastics & synthetic fibers, eased 0.4% (-22.8% y/y) in the last four weeks. Excluding crude oil, the industrial commodity price index edged 0.4% higher (1.7% y/y) in the latest four-week period.

Also moving higher, prices in the Miscellaneous group improved 1.9% during the last four weeks and rose 5.1% y/y. Plywood prices strengthened 8.5% over the last four-week period (7.6% y/y) while the cost of natural rubber improved 1.4% in four weeks, but jumped 32.6% y/y.

To the downside, prices in the Metals group slipped 0.6% (+5.0% y/y) over the most recent four weeks. Zinc prices fell 6.4% (+14.0 y/y) in four weeks and steel scrap prices were off 1.2% (-17.9% y/y). The cost of lead fell 1.9% in four weeks (-6.2% y/y). Offsetting these declines, aluminum prices increased 2.5% during the last four weeks (19.7% y/y). Tin costs rose 1.7% (19.3 y/y) while copper scrap prices improved 1.5% (9.5% y/y) over four weeks.

Textile prices eased 0.2% (-1.9% y/y) over the last four-week period. Cotton prices fell 1.3% (-18.8% y/y) and the cost of burlap held steady (+14.2% y/y) during the last four weeks.

The Foundation for International Business and Economic Research (FIBER) develops economic measurement techniques as applied to business cycles and inflation in the U.S. and other market economies. The commodity price data can be found in Haver's **DAILY**, **WEEKLY**, **USECON** and **CMDTY** databases.

250121C12.jpg

250121D12.jpg

- Crude oil prices increase sharply.
- Lumber & rubber costs rise.
- Metals prices are mixed.

FIBER: Industrial Commodity Prices Strengthen in Latest Four Weeks

Tian Yong Woon

This week we focus on South Korea, where ongoing political uncertainty continues to weigh on the economy. The Korean won remains under pressure, and equities are struggling to mount a meaningful recovery (Chart 1). The political instability has also dampened both consumer and business sentiment (Chart 2), posing a risk to economic activity if the situation persists or worsens. Focusing on the manufacturing sector, recent PMI readings indicate that the economy has struggled to maintain expansion, suggesting that factors beyond political instability, including external pressures, have been contributing to the challenges (Chart 3). Despite these headwinds, the Bank of Korea (BoK) opted to hold interest rates steady last week, pausing its easing cycle for now, despite the aforementioned economic constraints (Chart 4). A closer look reveals both domestic and external factors likely influenced the BoK’s decision. Domestically, the interim political flux has certainly played a role. Externally, considerations include more muted market expectations of Fed rate cuts this year (Chart 5) and potential trade-related actions from the newly re-elected Trump administration (Chart 6).

**Impacts of recent political developments**
Political uncertainty continues to weigh heavily on South Korean financial markets, with the won remaining on the back foot after being the worst-performing Asian currency last year. The South Korean won has weakened significantly in recent months, particularly against the US dollar (Chart 1), depreciating by around 11% since early October. While the broader impact of a strengthening dollar has contributed to this decline, the won has been especially impacted by domestic political turmoil, notably following President Yoon's short-lived declaration of martial law last December. Although the currency saw some temporary relief after Yoon's impeachment and arrest, it has yet to mount a substantial recovery, reflecting ongoing instability in South Korea’s political landscape. Meanwhile, equities are still struggling to recover from last year's losses.  For context, Yoon declared martial law in early December of last year, accusing the main opposition party of engaging in "anti-state activities" and collaborating with "North Korean communists." This drastic decision followed months of Yoon's deep unpopularity, which some political commentators believe contributed to the opposition party's landslide victory in the parliamentary elections earlier that year. However, Yoon quickly rescinded the declaration just hours after it was made, following its overwhelming rejection by lawmakers and widespread public protests.


250120T1.jpg

The dampened sentiment surrounding South Korea is reflected not only in financial markets but also in recent business and consumer sentiment surveys, which have plunged amid political turmoil. Specifically, consumer sentiment dropped by over 12 index points in December 2024, marking the first negative sentiment reading in more than six months (Chart 2). Business sentiment also declined, though to a lesser degree, dipping further into negative sentiment territory during the period. While not yet fully reflected in hard economic data, sentiment indicators like those discussed above can often influence actual economic behaviour. As such, South Korea’s ongoing political instability risks adversely affecting economic activity, especially if it persists.

250120T2.jpg

Turning to other survey results, South Korea's latest PMI readings also showed deterioration in December. Specifically, the manufacturing sector slipped back into contraction, driven by declines in both output and new orders (Chart 3). However, it is important to note that South Korea’s manufacturing sector, as indicated by the PMI, has struggled to stay in expansionary territory for several months, suggesting that factors beyond recent political instability have been at play. In particular, external factors have been weighing on the manufacturing sector, a theme we will explore further below.

250120T3.jpg

**The Bank of Korea**
The Bank of Korea (BoK) surprised investors last week by keeping its policy rates unchanged, effectively pausing its easing cycle for now (Chart 4). This decision, taken despite the sentiment-dampening developments outlined earlier, is justifiable for two key reasons. First, on the external front, the BoK sought to avoid exacerbating downward pressure on the won, which could have been triggered by a widening of yield differentials had it opted for further rate cuts. Second, its cautious, wait-and-see approach amid ongoing domestic political uncertainty, allows the central bank to make more informed decisions once the political landscape stabilizes. However, one could argue that withholding further monetary easing could leave struggling sectors without the support they need. Given the ongoing uncertainties, the BoK has also indicated that South Korea’s GDP growth is likely to fall below its November forecasts of 2.2% for 2024 and 1.9% for 2025.

250120T4.jpg

Delving deeper into the external considerations mentioned earlier, the BoK has had to contend with a strengthening US dollar as markets increasingly scaled back expectations of further US Fed easing this year. The reduction in Fed rate cut expectations has pushed US yields significantly higher since his electoral victory last year (Chart 5). This, in turn, has made US yield differentials with other economies, including South Korea, less favourable. As a result, investor demand for the US dollar has increased, leading to sell-offs of other currencies, including the won. It is likely that the BoK took these yield differential considerations into account when deciding to hold its policy rate last week.

250120T5.jpg

Considerations regarding Fed policy are likely not the only concerns South Korea faces from the US. The potential direct impact of trade-related actions by US President Trump’s administration is also a significant worry. This is especially true given Trump’s hawkish stance on trade and his goal of reducing the US trade deficit through tariff-related measures. In this context, South Korea has particular reason for concern, as it recorded the 8th largest trade deficit with the US in 2023. This is concerning because exports have been a key driver—often the main driver—of South Korea’s recent GDP growth. Notably, the US has increasingly accounted for a larger share of South Korea’s exports, reaching just over 18% in 2024. In response, South Korean authorities have already begun considering measures, such as purchasing more oil and gas from the US, to help reduce the trade surplus with the US. However, it remains to be seen whether these actions will be enough to significantly reduce the surplus and avoid potential US countermeasures.

250120T6.jpg

Asia

Economic Letter from Asia: On Korea

Winnie Tapasanun

250117R32.jpg

250117S32.jpg

Industrial production (IP) rose a larger-than-expected 0.9% m/m (0.5% y/y) in December following an upwardly revised 0.2% increase in November (-0.1% initially) and a downwardly revised 0.5% decline in October (-0.4% previously), data from the Federal Reserve Board showed. A 0.3% m/m December increase had been expected in the Action Economics Forecast Survey. The December IP index at 103.2 was the highest since June 2024; it was 4.2% above a low of 99.0 in September 2021 and 8.1% above a low of 95.5 in February 2021. The Fed estimated that increases in aircraft & parts output contributed 0.2 percentage point to December IP growth after the resolution of the Boeing strike. In Q4 2024, IP fell 0.2% q/q after falling 0.2% q/q in Q3 2024, dropping at a 0.6% annualized rate following a 0.8% Q3 annualized rate of decline. IP fell 0.3% in 2024 after rising 0.2% in 2023 and 3.4% in 2022.

By **industry groups**, manufacturing production gained 0.6% (0.03% y/y) in December following an upwardly revised 0.4% increase in November (+0.2% initially) and two consecutive m/m declines. Durable goods production rose 0.4% (-1.2% y/y) in December following a 0.9% rebound in November. This reflected m/m output rises of 6.3% (-5.6% y/y) in aerospace & miscellaneous transportation equipment, 1.7% (-1.9% y/y) in primary metals, 0.9% (-0.4% y/y) in fabricated metal products, and 0.5% (3.0% y/y) in electrical equipment, appliances & components. Notably, aircraft & parts production climbed 11.4% (-9.2% y/y), the largest m/m gain since May 2020, following a 0.7% November rebound. In contrast, the following durable goods categories fell m/m in December, including output drops of 2.0% (-3.7% y/y) in furniture & related products, 1.0% (-4.9% y/y) in miscellaneous durables goods, 0.7% (+3.8% y/y) in computer & electronic products, 0.6% (-5.7% y/y) in motor vehicles & parts, 0.6% (-1.3% y/y) in nonmetallic mineral products, 0.2% (+0.7% y/y) in machinery, and 0.2% (+2.7% y/y) in wood products.

Nondurable goods production rose 0.7% (1.4% y/y) in December after edging up 0.1% in November and October. The December rise reflected m/m output increases of all nondurable goods categories, including 1.6% (1.2% y/y) in petroleum & coal products, 1.5% (5.5% y/y) in printing & related support activities, 1.2% (-7.2% y/y) in apparel & leather goods, 0.8% (5.4% y/y) in chemicals, 0.6% (-1.0% y/y) in food, beverages & tobacco, 0.3% (1.3% y/y) in paper, 0.2% (-4.2% y/y) in plastics & rubber products, and 0.1% (2.3% y/y) in textiles & product mills.

Mining activity rose 1.8% (0.3% y/y) in December following an upwardly revised 0.5% decline in November (-0.9% initially). Utilities output rose 2.1% (4.3% y/y) following an upwardly revised 0.7% November drop (-1.3% initially). They increased for the second time in three months.

By **market groups**, business equipment output rose 1.4% (-4.3% y/y) in December following a 1.4% rise in November and two successive m/m decreases. Materials production advanced 1.2% (1.4% y/y) after virtually unchanged. Construction supplies production increased 0.9% (0.9% y/y) after holding steady. Consumer goods output rose 0.5% (0.3% y/y) in December after a 0.5% rebound, reflecting a 0.4% decline (-5.3% y/y) in durable consumer goods and a 0.7% gain (1.9% y/y) in nondurable consumer goods.

In **special classifications**, factory output of selected high-tech industries rose 1.1% (7.9% y/y) in December after holding steady in November (+0.3% initially) and four straight m/m rises. Manufacturing production excluding selected high-tech industries grew 0.6% (-0.2% y/y) following a 0.4% November rebound and two consecutive m/m declines. Manufacturing production excluding selected high-tech and motor vehicles & parts rose 0.7% (0.3% y/y) after a 0.2% November increase and three straight m/m decreases.

Capacity utilization rose to 77.6% in December, the highest since August, after holding at 77.0% in November (76.8% initially). The Action Economics Forecast Survey forecasted 77.0%. The December reading was 2.1 percentage points below its long-run (1972–2023) average. Manufacturing capacity utilization rose to 76.6% in December, the highest since September, from 76.2% in November (76.0% initially); the December rate was 1.7 percentage points below its long-run average.

Industrial production and capacity data are in Haver’s **USECON** database. Additional detail on production and capacity utilization can be found in the **IP** database. The expectations figures come from the **AS1REPNA** database.

250117T32.jpg

250117U32.jpg

- Dec. IP +0.9% m/m (+0.5% y/y), up for the second straight month; IP Index at a 6-month high.
- Mfg. IP +0.6% m/m, w/ durable goods up 0.4% and nondurable goods up 0.7%.
- Mining activity +1.8% and utilities output +2.1%, up for the second month in three.
- Key categories in market groups all gain.
- Capacity utilization increases to a 4-month-high 77.6%.

U.S. Industrial Production Exceeds Expectations in December

250117F18.jpg

250117G18.jpg

Total housing starts jumped 15.8% m/m to a higher-than-expected 1.499 million units at a seasonally adjusted annual rate (SAAR) in December after declines of 3.7% to 1.294 million in November (-1.8% m/m, 1.289 million initially) and 0.8% to 1.344 million in October (-3.2% m/m, 1.312 million previously), data from the U.S. Census Bureau showed. The Action Economics Forecast Survey had expected 1.320 million starts for December. The December reading was the first m/m rise since August and the highest level since February 2024. The year-on-year rate was at -4.4% in December, the smallest y/y decline since September and less severe than -14.3% in November; it was +17.0% y/y in December 2023. Starts were 18.0% below a recent peak of 1.828 million in April 2022. During all of 2024, housing starts fell 4.0% after falling 8.4% in 2023 and 3.3% in 2022.

Single-family starts rose 3.3% (-2.6% y/y) to 1.050 million in December on top of a 7.7% rise to 1.016 million in November (1.011 million initially), registering the fourth m/m rise in five months and the highest level since February 2024. They reached a high of 1.222 million in November 2021 and a high of 1.286 in December 2020. Multi-family starts surged 61.5% (-8.4% y/y) to 449,000, the highest level since December 2023, reversing a 30.7% November decrease to 278,000. They reached a high of 624,000 units in November 2022 and a high of 627,000 units in April 2022.

Housing starts gained in all the major regions except in the West. Starts in the Northeast jumped 40.2% (22.7% y/y) to a three-month-high 157,000 in December, the third m/m increase in four months, after a 2.8% rebound in November. Starts in the Midwest recovered 20.0% (1.0% y/y) to 204,000, up for the second month in three, following a 32.5% November slump. Starts in the South advanced 17.7% (0.1% y/y) to 853,000, the highest level since February 2024, following a 10.2% November rise and two consecutive m/m declines. To the downside, starts in the West fell 0.7% (-26.2% y/y) to 285,000 on top of an 11.7% decrease, registering the third m/m fall in four months and the lowest level since July 2024. Notably, the South continued to post the largest level figure (853,000) for housing starts among the four regions. It showed a peak of 1.048 million in April 2022.

Building permits slid 0.7% (-3.1% y/y) to 1.483 million in December, the third m/m slide in four months, following a 5.2% rise to 1.493 million in November (compared to 1.493 million recently revised on December 23 and 1.505 million initially reported on December 18). They reached a high of 1.915 million in January 2022 and a high of 1.883 million in January 2021. Single-family permits rose 1.6% (-2.5% y/y) to 992,000, the third straight m/m rise and the highest level since February 2024, after a 0.5% increase to 976,000. They reached a high of 1.251 million in January 2022 and a high of 1.250 in January 2021. Multi-family permits fell 5.0% (-4.3% y/y) to 491,000, down for the third month in four, after having recovered 15.4% to 517,000. They reached a peak of 813,000 units in February 2023 and a high of 799,000 units in June 2022.

The housing starts and permits figures can be found in Haver's **USECON** database. The expectations figure is contained in the **AS1REPNA** database.

250117H18.jpg

250117I18.jpg

- Housing starts +15.8% (-4.4% y/y) to 1.499 mil. in Dec. vs. -3.7% (-14.3% y/y) to 1.294 mil. in Nov.
- Single-family starts highest since Feb. ’24; multi-family starts highest since Dec. ’23.
- Housing starts up m/m and y/y in the Northeast, Midwest and South but down in the West.
- Building permits fall for the third month in four, due to a drop in multi-family permits.

March Industrial Production Data Show Declines in Developed and Emerging Nations

Summary

Louise Curley

More Economy in Brief

FIBER: Industrial Commodity Prices Strengthen in Latest Four Weeks

Economic Letter from Asia: On Korea

U.S. Industrial Production Exceeds Expectations in December

U.S. Housing Starts Rebound in December; Highest Level Since February 2024

INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION	Mar 05	Feb 05	Mar 04	M/M%	Y/Y%	2004	2003	2002
Germany (2000=1000	100.9	101.7	99.3	-0.79	1.61	100.8	98.4	98.3
U. K. (2001=100)	95.8	96.9	97.6	-1.14	-4.84	97.8	97.3	97.5
Denmark (2000=100)	97	99	103	-2.02	-5.83	102	102	103
Turkey (1997=100)	129.0	137.0	122.7	-5.84	5.13	123.4	112.4	103.4
Slovakia (2000=100)	124.1	126.7	127.9	-2.05	-2.97	124.7	120.9	114.8
Malaysia (1993=100)	237.5	240.3	226.0	-1.17	5.09	229.6	206.3	188.8