Federal Reserve Economic Data

The FRED® Blog

Data on quits and layoffs

Workers leave employment largely for two reasons: forced layoffs and voluntary quits.

In the past, the FRED Blog has used JOLTS business survey data from the BLS to analyze these flows. In May, FRED added another set of related household survey data compiled by Kathrin Ellieroth and Amanda Michaud (E-M), which provides a complementary perspective.

Our FRED graph above shows employee layoffs (blue lines) and quits (orange lines) from both these sources. It displays data since January 2016 for readability, but the datasets go back farther than that.

  • JOLTS data are the dashed lines.
  • E-M data are the solid lines.

Here’s an important distinction: The JOLTS data include employer-to-employer transitions, when workers move from one job to another without being unemployed in between. The E-M data include quits and layoffs that result in non-employment. One key difference is that the E-M data allow for observing where people will go following a layoff or quit: unemployment or non-participation. This can help researchers explain labor supply decisions of individuals and their contribution to unemployment.

How this graph was created: Search FRED for and select “Monthly Transition Rate of All U.S. Workers From Employment to Non-Employment Due to a Layoff” (from the E-M dataset). In the “Edit Graph” panel, use the “Add Line” tab to search for and select the other three series: “Monthly Transition Rate of All U.S. Workers From Employment to Non-Employment Due to a Quit” (also from the E-M dataset) and “Layoffs and Discharges: Total Nonfarm” and “Quits: Total Nonfarm” (from the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey from the Bureau of Labor Statistics). Be sure to click “Add data series” each time. Finally, use the “Format” tab to change line colors and textures.

Suggested by Diego Mendez-Carbajo, Kathrin Ellieroth, and Amanda Michaud.

FOMC Summary of Economic Projections, June 2025

In a previous FRED blog post, we discussed the Summary of Economic Projections (SEP) released by the FOMC this past March. In this blog post, we will again use ALFRED, the vintage data version of FRED, to compare the latest projections released in June 2025 with several of the recent projections through 2027 for the following variables:

  • the unemployment rate
  • core PCEPI inflation
  • real GDP growth
  • the federal funds rate

It’s important to note that these projections represent neither a committee plan nor a decision on future policy.

The first ALFRED graph, above, shows the unemployment rate projections for the fourth quarters of 2025, 2026, and 2027. Most recent values are shown by the gold bar. The median FOMC participant projects that the unemployment rate will average 4.5% in Q4 2025 and drop to 4.4% by 2027. This is just above the projection provided in March and only slightly higher than the longer-run unemployment rate projection of 4.2%.

The second graph shows the core inflation rate projections for the same years. The median FOMC participant now projects 3.1% inflation over 2025 and just-over-trend inflation of 2.1% by 2027.

The third graph, above, shows the median projections for real GDP growth. Growth projections for 2025 have been revised downward since December 2024, from 2.1% to 1.4%. However, the projections for growth over 2027 remain unchanged from the projections released in March, at 1.8%.

Our final graph shows the median participant’s projections of the federal funds rate. The most recent projections are unchanged from their March 2025 values for 2025, but are slightly higher than the March projections for 2026 and 2027. It is worth noting, though, that focusing on the median federal funds rate projection does obscure some of the dispersion of the individual participant projections. For example, projections for the year-end policy rate range from 3.6% to 4.4% (almost a full percentage point spread).

How these graphs were created: Search ALFRED for “FOMC unemployment” and take the median projection. Click on “Edit Graph,” choose a bar graph, and add three bars with the same series again. Finally, select the proper vintage for each bar. For the other three graphs, proceed similarly with “FOMC Consumption,” “FOMC Growth,” and “FOMC Fed Funds Rate.”

Suggested by Joseph Martorana and Charles Gascon.

Imports and trade policy uncertainty

Uncertainty surrounding trade policy can significantly affect International trade flows. Our first FRED graph, above, displays an index of trade policy uncertainty and the percent change in imports. The spike in uncertainty starting in late 2024 coincides with the spike in imports, suggesting that US importers preemptively accelerated their purchases as a precaution against anticipated tariff hikes or other trade disruptions.

To dig a little deeper, we look to our second graph, which separates total US imports by their region of origin. US imports from most regions grew modestly, but imports from Europe (the red-orange dash-dot line) distinctly stand out: They expanded rapidly and significantly surpassed the growth of all other sources of US imports. What accounts for this European import surge?

Our third graph separates European imports to the US by individual country. Switzerland (the red dashed line) clearly emerges as the dominant contributor, significantly outpacing all other European nations. This surge in Swiss imports is predominantly driven by increased purchases of gold, shown by the solid red line. This targeted increase in gold imports likely reflects precautionary behavior by businesses and investors seeking a safe-haven asset amid heightened trade policy uncertainty. Of course, other factors such as portfolio diversification could also play a role.

The key takeaway here is that responses to trade policy uncertainty can vary significantly across sectors and trading partners. The recent increase in US imports amid rising trade policy uncertainty isn’t an across-the-board phenomenon, but seems largely driven by precautionary imports of gold from Switzerland.

How these graphs were created: First graph: Search FRED for and select “Imports of Goods: Balance of Payments Basis.” Click on “Edit Graph,” change the units to “Percent Change from Year Ago.” From the “Add Line” tab, search for “Economic Policy Uncertainty Index: Categorical Index: Trade policy,” click “Add data series,” and change the units to “Index”; in the “Format” tab, click “Customize” and change “Y-Axis position” to “Right.” Set the first date as 2024-04-01. Second graph: Search FRED for and select “U.S. Imports of Goods by Customs Basis” for China, World, Canada, Europe, and Asia. From “Edit Graph” panel, edit the line for Canada by using the “Customize data” field to search for and add “U.S. Imports of Goods by Customs Basis for Mexico.” Type the formula a+b and click “Apply.” Next, change the units to “Percent Change from Year Ago” and click on “Copy to all.” Set the first date as 2024-03-01. Third graph: Search FRED for and select “U.S. Imports of Goods by Customs Basis” for Germany, Europe, France, the United Kingdom, and Switzerland and then also “Imports of Goods: Nonmonetary gold.” Change the units to “Percent Change from Year Ago” and again click on “Copy to all” and use 2024-03-01.

Suggested by Fernando Leibovici.



Back to Top