New Home Sales Data: Don't rely On It Either

Wednesday, November 30, 2005 | 03:01 PM

Here we go again:

Yesterday's New Home Sales data of plus 13% month over month was . . . how shall I politely phrase this . . . somewhat questionable.

It seemed like such an outlier, that I had to dig into the details, especially given all the other non-confirming data we have seen: The same time we learned about that huge New Home Sales, we learned elsewhere that Unsold house inventory is at its highest since April 1986. (Existing Home Sales number about 6 times the number of New Homes).

I'll have more on this tomorrow, but here's the key takeaway:

a) The data appears to be "statistically insignificant," according to the Census Bureau;
b) Strong historical numbers (like plus 13%) tend to be subject to revision, but mostly stay net postive, albeit somewhat moderated;
c) Over the past 10 years, double digit months have been followed by flat to negative data the very next month (Mean Reversion).

The actual data can be found here.

The first item is the margin of error: Its actually higher than the increase for October as well as the revision for September:

“Sales of new one-family houses in October of 2005 were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1,424,000 . . . This is 13% (+/- 17.7%)* above the revised September rate of 1,260,000 and 9.0% (+/-18.2%)* above the October estimate.

There's the key: anytime your margin of error is greater than the estimated increase in New Home sales, confidence levels inthat data are low to non-existent. (A Census Bureau Economist I spoke to agreed with this interpretation).

As significant as that is, let's ignore it for the moment:  Looking back over the past 15 years of data, we see that a mean regression has followed nearly all double digit monthly gains. The subsequent month's data was significantly lowered -- flat to negative in nearly every case:
>

New Homes Sales

Month, Year Double Digit Gain Subsequent Month Increase / Decrease
June 2003 10.7% July 2003  (-2.1%)
December 2000  11.7% January 2001  (-4.8%)
July 2000 11.9% August 2000 (-4.4%)
November 1998 11.4% December 1998 (-4.6%)
January 1998 10% February 1998 (-0.7%)
March 1995 10.2% April 1995 0.8%.
*February 1994; 10.82% March 1994 8.89%
April 1993  16.45% May 1993 (-10.70%)
September 1993; 12.56% October 1993 (-3.03%)
January 1992 21.15% February 1992 (-5.47%)

 

>
In nearly all of these months, the subsequent month's data was significantly lowered. The one exception was *February 1994, which was followed by a strong March and April -- but they came on top of January 1994, which has the honor of being the very worst month ever in the history of the Census Construction data: Down -23.77%.

One final factoid: According to the Census Bureau, it takes 6 months to establish a trend for new houses sold. They note this in the fine print:

"These statistics are estimated from sample surveys. They are subject to sampling variability as well as nonsampling error including bias and variance from response, nonreporting, and undercoverage...Changes in seasonally adjusted statistics often show irregular movement. It takes 6 months to establish a trend for new houses sold. Preliminary new home sales figures are subject to revision due to the survey methodology and definitions used. The survey is primarily based on a sample of houses selected from building permits...Explanations of confidence intervals and sampling variability can be found on our web site listed above.

Bottom line:

a) A high margin of statistical error means the October data is unreliable;
b) we should expect to see a revision downwards, but not by a whole lot;
c) The November data should be flat to negative.



Hey, I'm an optimistic guy. I was an X-Files fan -- I want to believe. <sigh> But sometimes, the dope is so bad that's its misleading to call it anything but. I only want to get an accurate read of this planet's economy in order to know how to position capital into various asset classes.

Damn!  Now I have to go look at GDP . . .

>
>

Note: Since this nonsensical data issue has become a recurring theme, I have added Data Analysis as a new subtopic . . .

>

Source:

New-Home Sales Surged in October; Cooling Still Seen
JOI PRECIPHS, JAMES R. HAGERTY and KEMBA DUNHAM
Wall Street Journal, November 30, 2005; Page A2
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113326988930109009.html

NEW RESIDENTIAL SALES IN OCTOBER 2005 (PDF)
Census Bureau, Manufacturing and Construction Division
NOVEMBER 29, 2005 AT 10:00 A.M. EST
http://www.census.gov/const/newressales_200510.pdf
http://www.census.gov/newhomesales

Comparing New Home Sales and Existing Home Sales http://www.census.gov/const/www/existingvsnewsales.html

Wednesday, November 30, 2005 | 03:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack (3)
de.li.cious add to de.li.cious | digg digg this! | technorati add to technorati | email email this post

bn-image

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c52a953ef00d8345af16c69e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference New Home Sales Data: Don't rely On It Either:

» A pretty good day for economic data from William J. Polley
Plenty of good headlines, but does the good news run deeper? From the NY Times: Sales of new homes surged to a record in October, the government reported today, bucking recent reports of a slowdown in the roaring housing market.... [Read More]

Tracked on Nov 30, 2005 6:14:06 PM

» Conflicting Housing Statistics: Which Way Are We Going? from Matrix
Heres a good summary article by columnist Andrew Cassel about the conflicting statistics that have been released this week called The Economy | Volatility telling us something? [Philadelphia Enquirer] It lays out all the arguments pro and con. ... [Read More]

Tracked on Dec 1, 2005 12:14:10 AM

» New Home Sales Up (but watch the data) from The Big Picture
Commerce Department reported that April new-home sales jumped an unexpected 16.2% -- the biggest monthly gain in 14 years. The year over year drop in sales change was a drop of 10.6%. By no coincidence, the median home price dropped a 11.1% from the pr... [Read More]

Tracked on May 24, 2007 10:35:53 AM

Comments


hey-

not directly related to this but related to retail boom and real estate boom at same time...

do you know of an analysis that looks at retail sales per square foot of physical retail space? By analysis, i mean comparison of year-over-year changes. This would pick up on increases in retail sales that are not all that efficient (ie, lots of new stores built over recent years, and sales $ per square foot is trending down even though overall sales $ are increasing)

I do not know if sales $ per square foot are increasing or decreasing.

Posted by: nate | Nov 30, 2005 3:26:48 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.



Recent Posts

December 2008
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      

Archives

Complete Archives List

Blogroll

Blogroll

Category Cloud

On the Nightstand

On the Nightstand

 Subscribe in a reader

Get The Big Picture!
Enter your email address:


Read our privacy policy

Essays & Effluvia

The Apprenticed Investor

Apprenticed Investor

About Me

About Me
email me

Favorite Posts

Tools and Feeds

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Add to Google Reader or Homepage

Subscribe to The Big Picture

Powered by FeedBurner

Add to Technorati Favorites

FeedBurner


My Wishlist

Worth Perusing

Worth Perusing

mp3s Spinning

MP3s Spinning

My Photo

Disclaimer

Disclaimer

Odds & Ends

Site by Moxie Design Studios™

FeedBurner