Federal Reserve Economic Data

The FRED® Blog

From inflation targeting to average inflation targeting

The Fed’s new long-run monetary framework

Since 1996, it has been understood among Fed policymakers that the (undeclared) target for inflation was around 2%. In January 2012, Chairman Ben Bernanke made this implicit inflation target explicit and official, thereby aligning the Fed’s inflation target with that of all the major central banks. In this framework, when inflation has approached or exceeded the traditional 2% target, even temporarily as it did in 2018, the FOMC has responded by raising the baseline federal funds rate to combat rising prices.

In August 2020 at the online Jackson Hole conference, Chair Jay Powell announced a revision to the Fed’s long-run monetary policy framework by re-framing this goal as an average inflation target (AIT) of 2% over the long-run. With this new framework, the FOMC is communicating that it will tolerate inflation above its target for a period of time to offset periods when inflation was below its target. In other words, the FOMC is targeting average inflation of 2% in the long run.

So, what does past inflation data say about the feasibility of the new AIT? The FRED graph above plots two lines of data points over the past 25 years:

  • the FOMC’s preferred inflation measure, the core personal consumption expenditures index (core PCE), in blue and
  • the 2% target in red.

Given the recent asymmetric history of inflation, the concept of a symmetric target would represent a substantial change: Since the Great Recession of 2008-2009, there have been only two brief periods when the preferred inflation rate has exceeded the 2% target.

The FRED graph above also demonstrates how the new AIT guidance on inflation represents a substantial shift in thinking. In the past, the Federal Reserve has rarely tolerated rates above 2% and has raised interest rates whenever approaching the target. This new policy suggests that, if inflation can return to a range above 2%, the Federal Reserve will have to tolerate higher inflation than it has for much of the past 20 years—and tolerate it for significantly longer periods. Yet, given the pandemic, it could be challenging at this time to sustain average inflation above 2%.

How this graph was created: Search for and select “Personal Consumption Expenditures Excluding Food and Energy (Chain-Type Index).” Select the time period January 1995 to the present month. Then select “Percent Change from a Year Ago” as the units. Next, use the “Add Line” tab to search for and select the same series. In the formula box type (a*2)/a, which results in a horizontal line of 2% for the target.

Suggested by Matthew Famiglietti and Carlos Garriga.

View on FRED, series used in this post: PCEPILFE

How to read Indeed job posting data

This blog post is obsolete. Indeed changed the methodology for its data in January 2021.

Tracking the availability of new jobs is no easy task. But FRED recently added online job postings data from Indeed. These data are presented in an interesting way, so some explanation is in order.

First, the data cover a 7-day moving average of job postings on Indeed.com as well as other online platforms. Indeed makes every effort to remove duplicate job postings from these counts, but doesn’t include job postings that are not found online. The proportion of online postings has been steadily increasing, and this brings us to our second point.

If you measure only some of the job postings—in this case, online only—and know that this proportion is increasing, it’s unrealistic to compare the data from previous years with the data from the current year without making any adjustments. An unadjusted measurement would likely systematically show an increase every year simply because the proportion of online postings is increasing.

So one needs to reset every year of statistics, and that’s what happens with this dataset: Every February 1 is set to a value of 100 for every year of data. This adjustment allows us to see how the postings are evolving.

For example, in the graph above, we see that on April 6, 2020, the 7-day moving average of new job postings was at –51.2%. This means that postings on April 6, 2020, as compared with February 1, 2020, were 51.2% lower than postings on April 6, 2019, as compared with February 1, 2019. But this figure of 51.2% doesn’t include any changes that may have happened between 2019 and 2020.

Despite our best efforts here, we know this may still be a bit confusing. So, a short explanation is that the data are useful for looking at patterns within the year, but not as useful for looking at patterns across years. Of course, 2020 has been pretty special, with all its dramatic changes, which show up in the graph. At present, we have less than a year of data, so we’ll need to wait a bit for all those interesting yearly patterns to show up. As with any FRED data series, you can check in at any time to see what’s new.

How this graph was created: Start from the release table, check the series you wish to display, and click “Add to Graph.”

Suggested by Christian Zimmermann.

View on FRED, series used in this post: IHLCHGNEWUS, IHLCHGUS

The impact of COVID-19 on U.S. states’ economic activity

State-level GDP data show the second quarter was much worse than the first

GDP comes in various forms—for the nation as a whole and also for individual U.S. states. The map above shows the change in real GDP in each U.S. state for the first quarter of 2020. This was at the start of the pandemic, and some states were hit hard.

The worst declines were in Louisiana (-11.91%), Delaware (-11.43%), Wyoming (-10.53%), Hawaii (-8.92%), Wisconsin (-8.76%), South Carolina (-8.24%), and Michigan (-7.94%). The hope at the time was that this slump would be temporary. We now have the data for the second quarter:

While the colors of the map are similar, the actual values in the second quarter are much worse. To put this in perspective, consider that the decline in the worst state in the first-quarter map (-11.91% in Louisiana) was nowhere near the decline in the best state in the second-quarter map (-21.91% in Delaware). The numbers are astounding, with Hawaii, Nevada, and Tennessee losing over 40% of their economic activity.

To see more details and find your home state, click the link below each map in this post to reach the interactive maps on GeoFRED.

How these maps were created: The original post referenced interactive maps from our now discontinued GeoFRED site. The revised post provides replacement maps from FRED’s new mapping tool. To create FRED maps, go to the data series page in question and look for the green “VIEW MAP” button at the top right of the graph. See this post for instructions to edit a FRED map. Only series with a green map button can be mapped.

Suggested by Christian Zimmermann.



Back to Top