Can anyone explain how payrolls are revised? News today showed that Sept Non-Farm payrolls were revised to a 139k loss from a 219k loss. There are two things that are on my mind: A) How is there such a large discrepancy (they were off by ~36%) B) Kind of weird that they’re revising numbers from 3 months ago. Can someone shed some light on this?
i think the revisions are based on a larger sample of surveyed businesses. The concurrent number is an estimate based on a survey of a couple thousand establishments, i forget exactly how many.
Only 11k jobs lost in November! I know it’s only a second derivative improvement, but that is friggin awesome if it’s true. We may actually get to 0 or even positive in Dec or January. Just hope that this isn’t some kind of methodology change, or a blip on the screen.
^the upward revisions to previous months is a good sign IMO, along with the fact that temp hiring was stronger. Job growth would solve so many problems, i just hope it’s self sustained by the time stimulus winds down. i read an article about firms who hired to do smaller infrastructure projects are already facing layoffs because the projects are winding down and there’s nothing in the pipeline…
jbaldyga Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > i think the revisions are based on a larger sample > of surveyed businesses. The concurrent number is > an estimate based on a survey of a couple thousand > establishments, i forget exactly how many. Gotcha, but I think a 80k difference in jobs is a BIG number even with a larger sample. That means a company approximately the 1.5 times the size of Goldman just appeared from nowhere. (i think GS has about 60k employees)
lot’s of companies out there. I don’t think this magnitude of revisions is that uncommon especially in a dynamic market. Also, the BLS has to model business births/deaths and they notoriously miss turns. But I don’t think that would come to light until their annual rebenchmark in Feb; not sure if they adjust the output from that model on a month to month basis.
Largest increase in employment came in part-time positions. We’ll see how the market looks in January and February after the holiday season.
if you take into account that it is a sa adjusted figure you actually have more people in work. the sa due to christmas hiring is i think around 300,000…first time since ages i am strategic short outright
Why would you short on the back of positive labour market newsflow?
I do think the jump in payrolls is real; however the income from jobs lost may not be replaced by the income from jobs gained. That will still be a drag on the consumer sector, but it suggests that we may not be facing as big a disaster on main street as we may have feared.
bchadwick Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > but it suggests that > we may not be facing as big a disaster on main > street as we may have feared. Wall Street has been predicting that since March 9th.
Underemployment is still above 17%…