Composite PMIs Improve Except for the U.S.
The S&P composite PMIs in January improved across the board, with the exception of India and the United States. In the U.S., the PMI headline dropped back sharply on sharp weakness in the services sector in the month in the face of what had been resiliency and strength.
From roughly February to July of 2024, the persistence of declines by sector especially in manufacturing diminished. However, now things have shifted, and we are again in a period when there seems to be more deterioration. The prevalence of manufacturing AND service sector deterioration together has reappeared.
The Russian invasion was a real catalyst of change for the EU, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Japan, and the United States. Before Ukraine, the recovery from COVID was under way and both services and manufacturing sectors were running policies that left each sector with 50% or higher ranking in 60% to 100% of countries. After Russia’s aggressive action, both sectors were crushed across all these countries; the service sector rebounded first and from March 2024 to date services stood at a ranking above 50% or more in 60% to 100% of the countries. But in the post-invasion environment, the manufacturing sectors showed only about 20% of reporters above a 50% queue standing for manufacturing. Manufacturing continues to be hard hit and well short of normalcy.
Currently we are in another round of weakness looking at a broader group of early reporters that adds India and Australia into the mix. Still, six-month changes show weakness in at least two of three months or three of five months for manufacturing and service sectors. Together they are falling over the same six-months. The ‘best performance’ on this metric apart from the U.S. is Australia where manufacturing has improved on balance over six months for two months running but only after three months of deterioration on that basis.
U.S. performance is an outlier in several ways. The US service sector fell sharply in January, depressing services as well as the composite metric. But over six-months both US services and manufacturing have failed to worsen together for 16-months in a row.
The U.S. has been an anomaly in terms of international performance characteristics. U.S. manufacturing is weakening on balance over six months in six of the last seven months. But the service sector has risen on balance (over the previous six months) in 12 of the last 13 months.
The new sharp weakness in U.S. services (month-to-month) is an issue of it has any staying power.
The four-year queue standing of the manufacturing across eight countries and three sector readings (for each: two sectors plus a composite) shows only five of 24 of these rankings with standings above the 50% mark (above their respective medians) over the past four years. These readings are manufacturing in India (79.6%), services in Germany (63.3%) and services in the EMU (barely…. at 51.0%), and a 59.2 percentile standing for Japan’s service sector (the same for its composite).
There is still a general trend of composite PMI readings to ease over three months compared to 12-months and generally to be in an easing profile. The U.S. is the only country showing composite progress accelerating sequentially (warning here: the sequential data lag by a month and are only executed on hard data so the sharp January U.S. weakness is not represented in this calculation).
Only eight of 24 sectors show a net rise over the last three months. Ten of 24 sectors still show net weakness over 12 months. Three composite readings are lower on balance over 12 months (India Japan, and the U.K.). Economic conditions are touch and go and, as we saw in Davos, there is some concern about the state of the European economy at a time that the U.S. is threatening to impose tariffs that will weaken their economies.
Robert Brusca
AuthorMore in Author Profile »Robert A. Brusca is Chief Economist of Fact and Opinion Economics, a consulting firm he founded in Manhattan. He has been an economist on Wall Street for over 25 years. He has visited central banking and large institutional clients in over 30 countries in his career as an economist. Mr. Brusca was a Divisional Research Chief at the Federal Reserve Bank of NY (Chief of the International Financial markets Division), a Fed Watcher at Irving Trust and Chief Economist at Nikko Securities International. He is widely quoted and appears in various media. Mr. Brusca holds an MA and Ph.D. in economics from Michigan State University and a BA in Economics from the University of Michigan. His research pursues his strong interests in non aligned policy economics as well as international economics. FAO Economics’ research targets investors to assist them in making better investment decisions in stocks, bonds and in a variety of international assets. The company does not manage money and has no conflicts in giving economic advice.