108.7 vs. 99.5 (Bloomberg consensus). Is positive economic news percolating into surveys? From the Confidence Board today:<\/p>\n
Figure 1:<\/strong> UMich Consumer Sentiment (blue, left scale), Consumer Sentiment adjusted per Cummings-Tedeschi (red, left scale), and Conference Board Consumer Confidence (black, right scale), Bloomberg consensus (light blue square, right scale). NBER defined peak-to-trough recession dates shaded gray. Source: University of Michigan via FRED, Conference Board, NBER.<\/em><\/p>\n Taking into account the adjusted UMich Consumer Sentiment index (per Cummings and Tedeschi (2024)<\/a> discussed here<\/a>) and the Conference Board Consumer Confidence index, consumer assessments of the economy are noticeably brighter than in previous readings.<\/p>\n The change in the Confidence index is pretty large (which is interesting when taken in addition to the positive revision to the September value).<\/p>\n Figure 2:<\/strong> Change in Conference Board Consumer Confidence demeaned and normalized by standard deviation 2016-2024M10 (blue). NBER defined peak-to-trough recession dates shaded gray. Source: Conference Board, NBER and author\u2019s calculations.<\/em><\/p>\n The normalized change is 1.4 standard deviations \u2013 over a period marked by substantial movements.<\/p>\n Finally, with these readings, the link to news sentiment is re-established to some degree.<\/p>\n Figure 3:<\/strong> UMich Consumer Sentiment adjusted per Cummings-Tedeschi (red), and Conference Board Consumer Confidence (black), and Shapiro-Sudhof-Wilson\/SF Fed News Sentiment index (thru 10\/27) (green), all demeaned and normalized by standard deviation. NBER defined peak-to-trough recession dates shaded gray. Source: University of Michigan via FRED, Cummings-Tedeschi<\/a>, Conference Board, SF Fed<\/a>, NBER and author\u2019s calculations.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/econbrowser.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/umcsent_conf_pix.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n