The CPI components suggest that inflation’s glide path through the “final mile” will remain sticky. Services less energy services rose 0.4% in January and are up 2.9% year-over-year. Shelter increased 0.2% on the month and 3.0% over the past year. Medical care services rose 0.3% in January and are up 3.9% year-over-year. These service categories continue to keep core inflation above the Fed’s target.

Progress is real. The chart below shows core CPI has finally taken an incremental step to a lower inflationary regime. Yet the path lower remains gradual and sticky.

The Tariff Effect on Core Goods

The CPI for commodities less food and energy commodities increased 1.1% year-over-year and remains a key contributor to overall disinflation. This category could contribute to even lower inflation this year if the U.S. avoids enacting new tariffs.

In Liberty Street Economics, the New York Federal Reserve published a quick study that demonstrates a tariff incidence of roughly “94 percent” in the first eight months of 2025 and “86 percent” by November, meaning the vast majority of tariff costs showed up in import prices paid by U.S. consumers. The average tariff rate rose to about 13 percent, and tariffed goods experienced price increases of roughly 11 percent relative to comparable untariffed goods. Fed Chair Jerome Powell noted at the January press conference on monetary policy that inflation could be closer to target absent tariff effects. This study provides supporting data.

However, from a policy of economic warfare, tariffs have likely achieved a primary aim: a significant reduction in imports from China. The study pointed out that “in the first eleven months of 2025, China’s share of U.S. imports fell by another 5 percentage points, slipping below 10 percent”. Chinese imports accounted for nearly 25% of U.S. imports in 2017 and declined to around 15% in 2024 following the tariff increases implemented in 2018 and 2019.

The inflationary consequences of tariffs could be secondary to this strategic goal. Importers have shifted supply chains to blunt the otherwise inflationary impact of the higher tariffs. The general disinflationary environment during the first round of tariffs also likely helped embolden today’s heightened tariff regimes.

The strategic objective may be clear. The inflationary implications are less so.

Are Tariffs an Enduring Inflationary Force?

The New York Fed study does not argue that tariffs create a self-sustaining inflation spiral. It documents substantial pass-through into prices during 2025. If no new tariffs are enacted, year-over-year comparisons will eventually absorb this price shock. Base effects alone would allow the tariff impulse to fade.

However, continued or expanded tariffs would introduce new price-level increases. Repeated rounds would transform a one-time adjustment into recurring upward pressure on core goods. Ongoing uncertainty around tariff policy remains a significant wildcard. Persistent uncertainty could encourage firms to raise prices preemptively in anticipation of future cost increases.

Reluctant Disinflation

Disinflation is underway, but the path for the final mile to 2% remains sticky. This phase can best be described as reluctant disinflation, the mirror image of sticky inflation.

The bond market remains broadly unconcerned about renewed inflationary pressure. Bond prices rose following the CPI release. After gaining 1.3% ahead of the report amid rising equity volatility, the iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT) added another 0.5% after the data. With TLT trading well above its upper Bollinger Band – a signal of short-term extension – I took profits on a large TLT position.

In recent weeks, I have shifted toward buying dips and selling rallies in TLT rather than fading strength. As long as the bond market remains confident that inflation will continue moderating, my inflation hedge remains concentrated in commodities as the U.S. in particular positions itself to run the economy hot with lower interest rates, high investment, and fiscal stimulus.

Be careful out there!

The post Core Inflation Softens, but the Final Mile to 2% Remains Sticky appeared first on Inflation Watch.

Shmid warned that “while in theory, tariffs may have only temporary effects on inflation (although persistent effects on the level of prices) I would be hesitant to take too much solace from theory in this environment”. He tied recent tariff announcements to broader signs of economic stress, including “a decline in consumer sentiment and increases in near-term inflation expectations.” Schmid acknowledged that the current policy environment has become “considerably more complicated,” citing feedback from business contacts who see growing risks on both sides of the Fed’s dual mandate of maximum employment and stable prices.

Schmid’s skepticism around transitory inflation contrasts with recent remarks from Fed Chair Jerome Powell, who has leaned into a more reassuring message about the persistence of tariff-driven price pressures. In “Jerome Powell’s Fed Deftly Maneuvers Through a Stagflationary Minefield“, I admired Powell’s effectiveness in navigating a difficult policy landscape, but I also pointed out the problematic use of “transitory” to describe inflationary effects. Powell argued that “it can be the case that it’s appropriate sometimes to look through inflation if it’s going to go away quickly without action by us… and that can be the case in the case of tariff inflation.”

That assertion paralleled Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s line that tariffs are a “one-time price adjustment.” But as I wrote in “The Sleight of Hand Behind the ‘One-Time Adjustment’ and ‘Transitory’ Tariff Inflation Narrative“, for inflation to be transitory, expectations for price levels would need to revert after the initial tariff shock. Yet, “tariffs make price reversion unlikely by locking in a permanently higher cost base.” In that piece, I also pointed out how structural effects – such as wage responses, supply chain disruptions, and embedded cost pass-through behavior – make inflationary pressures from tariffs more persistent. Outcomes are also hard to anticipate as inflationary pressures cascade through the economy.

Schmid appears attuned to these systemic effects. He described “a marked increase in the upside risks around inflation along with elevated downside risks to the outlook for employment and growth,” and openly questioned the prudence of discounting these risks as fleeting. Unlike Powell, who focused on optionality and emphasized that longer-term inflation expectations remain anchored, Schmid directly acknowledged that business sentiment and price expectations are shifting in ways that could prove difficult to reverse.

Powell’s message was strategically designed to preserve policy flexibility and calm markets in the face of stagflationary fears, and in that moment, Powell succeeded. However, I remain concerned that Powell’s framing underestimates the lasting damage that tariff-related cost increases can impose on the economy. As I wrote in my critique, the idea of a “one-time adjustment” may be statistically correct but economically misleading. A new, higher price level, once established, may not simply fade away. The higher price level could reshape business behavior and household expectations for years to come.

Schmid seems to understand these risks. His closing words underscore the seriousness of the moment (emphasis mine): “With renewed price pressures likely, I am not willing to take any chances when it comes to maintaining the Fed’s credibility on inflation.” That statement signals a shift away from the complacency that defines the transitory inflation narrative on tariffs.

The Last Friendly Report on Inflation?

As the Fed slowly accepts increased inflationary risks in the future, the past provides fleeting reasons for optimism on inflation. While I have stuck by the persistent and sticky narrative on inflation, March’s CPI (Consumer Price Index) report signaled the potential start of the next leg down for core inflation…just in time for tariffs to pressure inflation upward again. From the report:

“The index for all items less food and energy rose 0.1 percent in March, following a 0.2-percent increase in February. Indexes that increased over the month include personal care, medical care, education, apparel, and new vehicles. The indexes for airline fares, motor vehicle insurance, used cars and trucks, and recreation were among the major indexes that decreased in March…

The all items less food and energy index rose 2.8 percent over the last 12 months, the smallest
12-month increase since March 2021.”

Notably, the shelter index was up 4.0% year-over-year.

The chart below suggests that, absent tariff inflationary pressures, core CPI would finally be on its last leg lower toward the Fed’s 2.0% target.

Ironically, this positive development in core CPI could give more confidence to policymakers in pressing forward with inflationary tariffs.

Bostic Concurs

In an interview on Marketplace, president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, Raphael Bostic, appeared to concur with Schmid’s concerns:

“I think the pressures that are out there are not the best for our mandates. All the models say that the introduction to tariffs is going to put upward pressure on prices, and I’ve seen more reports of recession fears in the media and from our business contacts than I’ve heard in a year and a half or two years. And so that’s also going to put pressure on our mandate, the employment mandate, in a way that is not positive.”

Bostic’s tiny source of solace is that “the current environment today might not be the current environment tomorrow.”

Currency Correction

Typically I conclude these inflation reviews by teasing out some implications and impacts in currency markets via the U.S. dollar. This time around, there are too many tariff-related cross-currents and too much economic chaos to directly connect dots. So, instead, I take this time to describe a “currency correction” I had to make on the Canadian dollar (USD/CAD) and the Mexican peso (USD/MXN).

A month ago I explained:

“I am short USD/MXN out of a belief that economic relations with Mexico are about as bad as they can get. I could of course get proven wrong in due time. On the other hand, I am long USD/CAD because I do not think the market fully appreciates how much weaker the Canadian economy will get as it tries to match the U.S. in this economic warfare.”

I was correct for almost two weeks, but in due time I have been proven wrong. I have now closed out both trades in order to reassess my next moves. Surprisingly, the Canadian dollar has proven quite strong against the Mexican peso. The exact opposite of my expectations. That chart below shows how CAD/MXN is breaking out from an approximate triangle or wedge type pattern.

Even more importantly, USD/CAD has broken below a key support level at the same time the U.S. dollar looks poised for a fresh, major breakout against the Mexican peso. In other words, in the last 2-3 weeks, I could not have been more wrong! (Note how the 25% tariff on Canada and Mexico defined a PEAK for USD/CAD, a classic contrarian move).

While USD/CAD broke support at its 200-day moving average (DMA) (the blue line), USD/MXN HELD 200DMA support. Thus, USD/MXN looks likelyly to head even higher while USD/CAD looks likely to head even lower.

This currency correction took me by surprise. The move likely reflects the effectiveness and the robustness of Canada’s current resistance to U.S. economic warfare. Mark Carney, the new Prime Minister of Canada, has been quite clear in laying out a framework of Canadian resistance. The Governor of the Bank of Canada, Tim Macklem, has been similarly forthright in laying out the implications for monetary policy and bracing Canadians for the economic warfare ahead. Apparently, both men have, so far, succeeded in bolstering Canada’s defenses (symbolically through the Canadian dollar). The implications for inflation both here and in Canada remain to be seen as trade slows down between the two North American neighbors and former allies.

Be careful out there!

Full disclosure: no positions

The post Inflation Concerns Rise at the Federal Reserve Amid Tariff Unease appeared first on Inflation Watch.

I faded the move in bonds as nothing about the December CPI print changed the fundamental narrative of sticky inflation and a cautious Fed or even the prospect of soaring U.S. budget deficits. I speculated on weekly SPY put options as a hedge. I fully acknowledge that the stock market has spent a year and a half or more adjusting to every hiccup and bout of angst over the inflation narrative.

The chart below demonstrates that the eye must strain hard to see a change in the profile of core CPI. We will have to wait until later this month to see whether the softer than expected core CPI also bends core PCE off its uptrend from its last trough.

Sources: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Personal Consumption Expenditures Excluding Food and Energy (Chain-Type Price Index) [PCEPILFE], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: All Items Less Food and Energy in U.S. City Average [CPILFESL], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; January 15, 2025.

The volatility index (VIX) well represented the stock market’s huge sigh of relief over inflation. The VIX plunged 13.9% and brought an end to the most recent uptrend.

Shelter Inflation Continues Trending Down

Shelter inflation, along with services inflation, has been a key culprit in stubbornly sticky inflation. The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) pointed out that “the year-over-year change in the shelter index remained below 5% for a fourth straight month and posted its lowest annual gain since January 2022, suggesting a continued moderation in housing inflation.” Shelter inflation has even been on a definitive downtrend since peaking in March, 2023. Unfortunately, the current trajectory may be too slow for comfort in terms of its impact on aggregate core CPI.

Shelter inflation dropped from 7.5% in December, 2022 to 6.2% in December, 2023 and now 4.6% last December. If this nearly linear pace continues, shelter inflation will be around 3.2% next December, right around where core CPI currently sits. Thus, other components will still need to do some heavy-lifting in coming months to meaningfully push core CPI, and presumably core PCE, closer to the Fed’s 2.0% target.

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: Shelter in U.S. City Average [CUSR0000SAH1], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; January 16, 2025

An Oil Breakout

Oil prices are not part of the core CPI, but its recent breakout has caught my attention. A continued, persistent rise in oil prices could bleed into higher inflation expectations for consumers. Such a dynamic may further motivate the Federal Reserve to sit on its hands with monetary policy. A 3.3% gain in the United States Oil Fund (USO) sent the ETF to a 2 1/2 year high.

A Spike In Short-Term Inflation Expectations?

Every month, the New York Federal Reserve publishes a survey of consumer expectations. This survey includes various measures of inflation expectations. The 1-year median expected inflation rate for consumers stayed around 3.0% for all of 2024, consistent with the narrative of sticky inflation. However, a potentially interesting blip happened in December where the median point prediction jumped from 3.0% to 3.8%. The median point predictions are typically higher than the median expected inflation rate, but they rarely diverge and almost never by such a wide margin. The accompanying press release does not refer to this surprising 1-month behavior, but I cannot help speculating on its significance. I will be watching to see whether this point projection manages to lead the median expected inflation rate higher or whether it snaps back to the typical relationship. Either way, such a jump is surely not positive for inflation in the near-term.

The Trade

I continue to maintain a strategy of fading rallies in TLT. Going into the CPI I owned a single February TLT $85 put option “just in case” CPI produced a fresh upside surprise in inflation. Now I can accumulate TLT put options at more attractive prices. TLT’s rally stopped just short of resistance at the 20-day moving average (DMA) (the dotted line below). A breakout from there will set up even more attractive prices on a test of converging resistance between the downtrending 50DMA (the red line) and the bottom of the former trading range (the thick black line).

Be careful out there!

Full disclosure: long TLT put options, long SPY put options

The post A Fresh Opportunity to Fade Bonds As A Marginal Change in Inflation Ignites A Near Oversold Market appeared first on Inflation Watch.

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: All Items in U.S. City Average [CPIAUCSL], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, July 11, 2024

The chart above shows that the CPI stayed within a tight range of change between 0% and 0.5% until June’s reading. That pleasurable drop into negative territory for the first time since May, 2020 was enough to cause major shifts in financial markets. Investors quickly rotated out of growth stocks like big cap tech and bought up interest rate sensitive stocks and the “cheap” stuff that has been left for dead.

The iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) soared 3.6% to a 28-month high, a long overdue and bullish breakout.

The iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF (ITB) surged 6.2%, quickly defied a recent downgrade from Citigroup that seemed poised to send ITB into an eventual bear market, and shook off the blues from a busted spring home selling season.

The iShares U.S. Real Estate ETF (IYR) gapped up 2.8% and almost finished recovering its losses for the year.

Even the regional banks came alive. The SPDR S&P Regional Banking ETF (KRE) jumped 4.2% and almost got back to flat for the year.

The end result of these strong gains and reversals was an abrupt improvement in market breadth. My favorite technical indicator, the percentage of stocks trading above their 50-day moving averages (DMAs), or what I call AT50 for short, climbed an astonishing 13 percentage points. A subtle downtrend came to an abrupt and definitive end.

This shift continues a string of notable divergences in market breadth. This divergence is a bullish contrast to the notable declines in the S&P 500 (SPY) and the NASDAQ (COMPQ) on the day, 0.9% and 2.0% respectively. Both major indices suddenly look toppy again.Once again, they printed what technical traders call bearish engulfing patterns, sometimes called major reversals. Only the surge in market breadth stops me from getting bearish (I remain neutral on the stock market per the last label in the S&P 500 chart below).

Now all the market needs is an actual rate cut from the Fed to give the celebration in market breadth some lasting power. As I noted when making the case to buy into the iShares MSCI BRazil ETF (EWZ), the market has recently sniffed out an imminent launch of a rate cutting cycle from the Federal Reserve. July 11th is the day the market practically forced the Fed’s hand. The odds of a rate cut for September jumped from 69.7% to 86.4%. The odds for staying right where they are dropped a lot closer to zero.

Source: CME FedWatch Tool

Now Back to the Inflation Story

While the celebrating over a negative handle on the headline CPI was market-moving, the headline CPI just continued an easily recognizable trajectory. Core CPI increased from the previous month and was up 3.3% year-over-year; both increases were lower than the previous month. The trend continues downward. Thus there was really no new news in the data. The trend is down, the trend is still the friend of the consumer.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: All Items Less Food and Energy in U.S. City Average [CPILFESL], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, July 11, 2024.

I earlier complained in “Fed’s Powell Avoids the Obvious: Inflation and Interest Rate Forecasts Make Little Sense” that Powell’s insistence that the Fed would cut once was inconsistent with a forecast indicating no progress on inflation. The core CPI continues to suggest that (overall) inflation’s days are dead for now.

Epilogue: TLT

The soft inflation numbers naturally drove bond yields down. The iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT) jumped 1.0% after fading from its highs of the day (TLT moves opposite the direction of yields). I used this opportunity to buy a fresh tranche of put options. I like fading TLT because the crushing levels of debt issuance periodically force yields higher and send TLT lower. Moreover, the economy is still able to generate enough inflation scares to send bond yields higher. Having said that, I have shifted the trade from a downtrend channel (shown in blue below) to a horizontal trading range (shown in black below). The first trade off this new presume range worked well as I took profits right at the top of the previous downtrend channel.

Of course a rate cut from the Fed could alter this trade all over again.

Be careful out there!

Full disclosure: long ITB, long SPY puts, long QQQ calendar call spread, long TLT put options, long EWZ

The post Now the Market Just Needs the Rate Cuts appeared first on Inflation Watch.

I break down the key components of Powell’s observations (using the transcript from the CNBC TV recoding of the live event) and then juxtapose them with the prospects for inflation going forward.

The S&P 500 (SPY) since the October lows overlayed with my past short-term trading calls. (Source: Tradingview.com)

Is Policy Really Restrictive?

Powell observed that “the labor market is about as tight as it was before the pandemic in 2019, and that’s good. Real wages are now positive, and unemployment has been below 4% for 27 consecutive months, something that hasn’t happened in half a century. So, the labor market is very strong, with signs of gradual cooling and rebalancing, so that the supply and demand for workers are coming back into balance, just as we would want.” The logic did not make sense at first. Powell provided the evidence of balance in the labor market later on in the discussion. He noted that “the ratio of vacancies to unemployed people, for example, has gone from more than 2 to 1 to now 1.3 to 1, and it was 1.2 before…You also see wages coming down, and you see quits coming down.” Most importantly, Powell used these observations as evidence that “policy is probably restrictive.”

Powell went on to add that restrictive policy is weighing on rate-sensitive spending. However, the conventional indicators of financial conditions still show they are just as loose as they were before the Fed started hiking, January 28, 2022 to be exact. In other words, either the market has done some serious advanced front-running of rate cuts or current policy is not nearly as restrictive as the Fed thinks. Even the stock market’s all-time highs suggest monetary conditions are not tight. From the Federal Reserve Board of Chicago’s National Financial Conditions Index (NFCI) (follow the black line for ANFCI):

Even the hand-wringing this year from the Federal Reserve about resilient inflation implies that policy may not be restrictive enough (whether that means rate hikes, or, more likely, extending the time horizon for current rates).

Resilient Inflation

Powell repeated a familiar refrain about inflation not falling as fast as expected given presumed restrictive policy. Thus, Powell had to show deference to the possibility that today’s high rates will need to stay in place longer than expected:

“The first quarter in the United States was notable for its lack of further progress on inflation. We had higher readings in the first quarter, higher than we expected. We did not expect this to be a smooth road, but these were higher than I think anybody expected. So, what that has told us is that we’ll need to be patient and let restrictive policy do its work.”

This comment tells me rate cuts are nowhere on the horizon. Moreover, Powell noted “we have the highest interest rates in some time. It may be that it takes longer than expected to do its work and bring inflation down.”

Most telling were Powell’s words when a question offered the opportunity to reassure the market that rate cuts were still on the way. Emphasis mine:

“So, as I just mentioned, I do think it’s really a question of keeping policy at the current rate for a longer time than had been thought. By many measures, the policy rate is restrictive. The question is, is it sufficiently restrictive? And I think that’s going to be a question that time will have to tell. Entertain the possibility? That could be a very small probability, but I have said that I don’t think it’s likely based on the data that we have that the next move we make would be a rate hike. I think it’s more likely that we’ll be at a place where we hold the policy rate where it is.”

Note what Powell did NOT say: it’s more likely that rates will be lower by the end of the year (or even next year).

So, nowhere in the discussion did Powell provide a line for the market expect rate cuts anytime soon. Thus, he has primed the market to get excited about any soft data that could provide the seeds of an excuse for the Fed to cut rates. Powell’s positioning is made even more potent by the stock market’s ability to trade at all-time highs despite all the hand-wringing about inflation this year.

Inflation Forecast

Powell expressed a lot of uncertainty about the path for inflation despite his confidence that “we will do that, that we will get inflation down to 2%.” I am not sure how rate cuts help bring down inflation (Turkey sure learned a central bank cannot cut rates to lower inflation), so I have to assume Powell has an image of “higher for longer” monetary policy rates.

Responding to a question on whether inflation could end up being more persistent than expected, Powell said: “I think we need more than a quarter’s worth of data to really make a judgment on that.” It’s like the perpetual data delay. It will be interesting to hear whether April’s inflation data finally gives the Fed more confidence that inflation is coming down sustainably. Time is running out for the Fed to start telegraphing the first rate cut, so the pressure is on the Fed to spin a story about April and May inflation that points to the 2% target.

When I look a the core CPI graph (year-over-year percentage change in the price index), it looks like inflation will soon resume a steep descent. To apply a modicum of extra rigor, I ran a simplistic forecast through ChatPGT’s Data Analyst. I let the model pick its forecasting method. This is a very simplistic forecast because it only uses the aggregate CPI time series. A more accurate forecast would consist of aggregating the forecasts of individual components of core CPI.

I provided the model core CPI (measured year-over-year) data back to 2016. I wanted the model to surmise that “equilibrium” consists of a tight range for inflation. I did not provide any more data because I figured the further away history gets from the pandemic era, the less likely the model has any value (another downside of using a single, aggregated time series for the forecast).

The chart below combines the actual core CPI data with the forecast. The “funnel” around the forecast shows the confidence interval within which inflation will fall in the future at 95% certainty. The wide swath of possibilities is consistent with Powell’s uncertainty about the path ahead. The flat average forecast is a typical behavior of time series forecasting where there are no definitive seasonal effects detected or modeled future episodic events. (For you ChatGPT and statistics wonks, I provide an Appendix below where ChatGPT explains the model and justifies its approach).

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: All Items Less Food and Energy in U.S. City Average [CPILFESL], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; May 15, 2024.

The Bond Market Rules

Putting aside vain attempts to forecast future inflation, the bond market is the ultimate arbiter of inflation expectations and/or how inflation may impact interest rates. The bond market in the form of the iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF is at a very critical (technical) juncture. The downtrend in TLT (uptrend in rates) was the ultimate guide in pushing the market into its April correction. The rebound in stocks for May perfectly correlates with the rebound in TLT (lower rates). The “soft” April CPI report sent TLT up 1.4% and right up against the top of the downtrend channel.

iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (Source: TradingView.com)

A confirmed breakout with a higher close should open the floodgates of bullishness for the stock market. A failure at resistance from the upper part of the channel could trigger a false breakout for the indices. Thus, given this year’s correlation with stocks, I reloaded on TLT puts as a hedge on my long trading positions.

Overall, the lesson in all these dynamics is that inflation combined with the interest rate response should continue to dominate the market’s underlying narrative. With rates on hold, even the Fed is just along for the ride for now.

Be careful out there!

Appendix (ChatGPT explains and justifies the CPI forecast)

{the following is verbatim including ChatGPT’s musings on data types and fixing its own processing problems}

The data consists of monthly core CPI year-over-year percentage changes starting from January 2016. To project the CPI for the next 24 months, I will use the ARIMA (AutoRegressive Integrated Moving Average) model, which is well-suited for time series forecasting.

Justification for ARIMA Model:

1. Handling Trends and Seasonality: ARIMA can model both trend and seasonality in the data, which is crucial for accurate CPI forecasting.
2. Flexibility: The model can be adjusted to different time series characteristics through its parameters.
3. Proven Effectiveness: ARIMA has been widely used and tested in economic and financial forecasting, making it a reliable choice.

Steps for the Analysis:

1. Data Preparation: Convert the date column to a datetime format and set it as the index.
2. Stationarity Check: Perform tests to check if the time series is stationary. If not, apply differencing.
3. Model Identification: Use autocorrelation (ACF) and partial autocorrelation (PACF) plots to identify the order of the ARIMA model.
4. Model Estimation: Fit the ARIMA model to the data.
5. Forecasting: Generate forecasts for the next 24 months.
6. Confidence Intervals: Calculate confidence intervals for the forecasts.
7. Visualization: Plot the actual data, the forecasted values, and the confidence intervals.

Let’s start with the data preparation and initial analysis. ​​

The Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) test results are as follows:

• ADF Statistic: -0.988
• p-value: 0.758
• Critical Values:
  • 1%: -3.508
  • 5%: -2.895
  • 10%: -2.585

Since the p-value is greater than 0.05, we fail to reject the null hypothesis that the time series is non-stationary. This indicates that the series needs to be differenced to make it stationary.

Let’s apply first-order differencing and recheck for stationarity. ​​

The ADF test results after first-order differencing are as follows:

• ADF Statistic: -2.447
• p-value: 0.129
• Critical Values:
  • 1%: -3.509
  • 5%: -2.896
  • 10%: -2.585

The p-value is still greater than 0.05, indicating the time series is not yet stationary. Let’s apply second-order differencing. ​​

The ADF test results after second-order differencing are as follows:

• ADF Statistic: -2.843
• p-value: 0.052
• Critical Values:
  • 1%: -3.509
  • 5%: -2.896
  • 10%: -2.585

The p-value is now close to 0.05, indicating the time series is approaching stationarity. Since it’s marginally above the threshold, we will proceed with ARIMA modeling with second-order differencing.

Model Identification

Next, we’ll use ACF and PACF plots to identify the appropriate orders (p, d, q) for the ARIMA model. ​​

The ACF and PACF plots provide insights into the appropriate orders for the ARIMA model:

• ACF (Autocorrelation Function): The ACF plot shows significant lags at various points, suggesting that an MA component (q) might be needed.
• PACF (Partial Autocorrelation Function): The PACF plot shows significant lags at the beginning, suggesting that an AR component (p) might be necessary.

Given the plots, an ARIMA model with orders (p, d, q) will be selected. Based on visual inspection, we can start with ARIMA(2, 2, 2) since both ACF and PACF show significance up to lag 2.

Model Estimation

Let’s fit the ARIMA(2, 2, 2) model to the data and generate forecasts for the next 24 months. ​​

It seems there’s an issue with the data types in the forecast confidence intervals, which might be causing the error. Let’s inspect the forecasted values and the confidence intervals to identify the problem. ​​

The forecasted values and confidence intervals appear to be valid. The issue might be due to incorrect data handling during the plotting process.

To resolve this, let’s explicitly convert the confidence intervals to a numeric type before plotting. ​​

It appears the error persists despite converting the confidence intervals to float. This might be due to a mismatch in the indices of the forecast intervals and the forecasted mean.

To resolve this, I’ll ensure the indices of the confidence intervals match those of the forecasted mean before plotting. ​​

The issue may be due to an incompatibility between the data types of the forecast index and the confidence intervals. To resolve this, I will ensure all data is in the correct numeric format and use the correct plotting function.

I’ll convert all relevant data to the same data type and then re-plot. ​​

The plot now correctly displays the actual data, the forecast, and the confidence intervals.

Summary of Analysis and Forecast:

• Data Preparation: The time series data was checked for stationarity and transformed using differencing to achieve stationarity.
• Model Selection: Based on the ACF and PACF plots, an ARIMA(2, 2, 2) model was chosen.
• Model Fitting and Forecasting: The ARIMA model was fit to the data, and forecasts for the next 24 months were generated.
• Visualization: The actual data, forecasted values, and confidence intervals were plotted to provide a comprehensive view of the projected CPI.

This approach provides a robust forecast by incorporating both autoregressive and moving average components, accounting for trends and seasonality in the core CPI data. The confidence intervals offer a range of possible future values, helping to understand the uncertainty associated with the predictions.

Full disclosure: long SPY calendar call spread, long TLT puts

The post Fed’s Powell Avoids Rate Cut Talk While April CPI Keeps Hope Alive appeared first on Inflation Watch.