Valid and up to date CPSM exam questions and answers with dumps

killexams.com works with a huge number of up-and-comers to finish the CPSM test and get their affirmation. We have a huge number of effective tributes. Our CPSM practice test is solid, modest, exceptional, and legitimate to defeat the issues of CPSM test. Our CPSM test Exam Questions are most recently refreshed on ordinary premise and free pdf are reconsidered intermittently as indicated by the actual test.

Exam Code: CPSM Practice test 2022 by Killexams.com team
CPSM Certified Professional in Supply Management (CPSM)(Foundation)

CPSM is globally recognized as the gold standard of excellence for supply management professionals, in both the manufacturing and non-manufacturing sectors. Built on an in-depth analysis of supply management functions across industries, the program addresses the realities of supply management, as well as workplace complexities including globalization, use of technology, and expanded competencies that procurement and supply chain professionals employ to drive value in their organizations.

By earning a CPSM designation, you attain a greater understanding of end-to-end supply management and are better positioned to positively impact your organization.

CPSM emphasizes the major competencies of supply management including:

- Sourcing
- Category Management
- Negotiation
- Legal and Contractual
- supplier Relationship Management
- Cost and Price Management
- Financial Analysis
- Supply Chain Strategy
- Sales and Operations Planning
- Quality Management
- Logistics and Material Management
- Project Management
- Leadership and Business Acumen
- Systems Capability and Technology
- Risk and Compliance
- Corporate Social Responsibility

CPSM candidates have demonstrated knowledge of the cross-functional skills that enable them to contribute value and lead their organization in today's global economy. CPSM emphasizes major segments of the supply management profession, all critical to their employer's success. They demonstrate a dedication to their profession and to continuous professional development. Senior supply management executives often find value in using CPSM certification as a development tool for their entire organization, to ensure that everyone shares a common understanding of the skills required by the profession.

Built on an in-depth analysis of supply management functions across industries, the CPSM program addresses the realities of supply management, as well as workplace complexities as globalization, use of technology, and expanded competencies that supply management professionals employ to drive value in their organizations.

Certified Professional in Supply Management (CPSM)(Foundation)
ISM test Questions
Killexams : ISM test Questions - BingNews http://www.bing.com:80/news/search?q=ISM+Exam+Questions&cc=us&format=RSS Search results Killexams : ISM test Questions - BingNews http://www.bing.com:80/news/search?q=ISM+Exam+Questions&cc=us&format=RSS https://killexams.com/exam_list/ISM Killexams : Is Helping Others Charity, or Duty, or Both?

Humanitarianism is probably the most important "ism" in the world today, given the collapse of communism, the discrediting of neoliberalism, and the general distrust of large-scale political ideologies. Its activists often claim to escape or transcend partisan politics. We think of humanitarian aid, for example, first of all as a form of philanthropy -- a response to an earthquake in Haiti or a tsunami in Asia, which is obviously a good thing, an effort to relieve human suffering and save lives, an act of international benevolence. But there is a puzzle here, for helping people in desperate need is something that we ought to do; it would be wrong not to do it -- in which case it is more like justice than benevolence. Words such as "charity" and "philanthropy" describe a voluntary act, a matter of kindness rather than duty. But international humanitarianism seems more like duty than kindness, or maybe it is a combination: two in one, a gift that we have to give.

Individuals send contributions to charitable organizations when there is a humanitarian crisis, and then these organizations rush trained aid workers into the zone of danger and desperate need. But governments also send help, spending tax money that is coercively collected rather than freely given. Are individual citizens free not to give? Are governments free not to act? Does it matter whether the money is a gift or a tax?

The dilemma is even clearer in the case of humanitarian intervention. Governments may use force to stop a massacre -- as France, the United Kingdom, and the United States are claiming to do in Libya and as someone should have done in Rwanda. We can think of this as a gift to the people being rescued, and what is given is substantial, since it may include the lives of some of the interveners. But is the state that intervenes acting charitably? Isn't stopping a massacre morally necessary? And think of the diplomatic preparations for the intervention, the strategic arguments about how to do it, the necessary calculations of proportionality, the marshaling of military resources, the actual use of force, the problems of reconstruction afterward -- none of that feels like a philanthropic enterprise. This is more like political work, governed by the rules of justice and prudence, not kindness. And yet, we call it "humanitarian" because we want to believe that what underlies and motivates the intervention, at the deepest level, is human sympathy, freely flowing fellow feeling. It is two in one again: a spontaneous act and a necessary one.

But what if the combination doesn't work -- what if the fellow feeling doesn't flow freely?

OBLIGATORY CHARITY

I have been puzzling over these kinds of questions in the course of helping edit a volume in the series The Jewish Political Tradition, one dealing with, among other things, charity and taxation -- giving and taking. It should be easy to distinguish the two, shouldn't it? Individuals give, freely and spontaneously; the state takes, with threats and penalties. Yet it turns out that the distinction is not so easy to make. The difficulty is signaled by the Hebrew word tzedakah, which is commonly translated as "charity" but which comes from the same root as the word for "justice." This suggests that charity is not only good but also right. The same message is conveyed by the Hebrew word mitzvah, which in the Bible means "commandment" but has come colloquially to mean "a good deed" or "an act of human kindness" -- although still something that you have to do.

One can see how these versions of the two-in-one argument might develop among a stateless people. With little or no coercive power, the Jewish communities in the Diaspora had to rely heavily on the charitable contributions of their members. The contributions were indeed necessary, for without them there would be no way, for example, to ransom Jewish captives (a major concern of the Diaspora communities throughout the Middle Ages), help the poor and the sick, provide for orphans, or fund synagogues and schools.

And so the medieval philosopher Maimonides argued, following Talmudic precedents, that insofar as Jewish communities in the Diaspora had coercive power, they could legitimately force their members to provide tzedakah. The kahal, the autonomous or semiautonomous Diaspora community, could compel people to provide what they were supposed to provide freely, and it still counted as a charitable gift. It was distinct (although often hard to distinguish) from the taxes imposed, usually by the gentile overlord, which were levied on individuals by the Jewish rulers of the kahal, the tovei ha-ir (the good men of the city).

In the Jewish tradition, this view of tzedakah as an expression of justice was sometimes described in theological language. The idea is that God has heard and responded to the cries of the poor and, in principle at least, has given them what they need. You may possess some part of what they need, but you possess it only as an agent of God, and if you do not pass it on to the poor, if you do not contribute, say, to the communal charity fund, you are robbing the poor of what in fact already belongs to them. The negative act of not contributing is a positive theft. And since theft is unjust, you are acting not only uncharitably but also unjustly by not giving -- which is why coerced tzedakah is legitimate. I called this a theological argument, but it is possible even for nonbelievers to accept that, in some sense, it is true and right. Or nonbelievers can translate the argument into secular language: some part of everyone's wealth belongs to the political community, which makes economic activity and peaceful accumulation possible -- and it can and should be used to promote the well-being of all the members of the community.

Fundraising in the contemporary Diaspora still partakes of this two-in-one character. I celebrated my bar mitzvah in 1948 in Johnstown, Pennsylvania. That year, my parents brought me with them, as a new member of the community, to the annual banquet of the United Jewish Appeal (UJA), the main fundraising event on the Johnstown Jewish calendar. The year 1948 was a critical one, and every Jew in town was there; no one really had a choice about whether or not to come. There was a speaker from New York who talked with great emotion about the founding of Israel, the war that was then going on, and the desperate needs of the refugees waiting in Europe. Pledge cards were distributed, filled out at the table, and then put in an envelope and passed to the head of the table. There sat the owner of one of the biggest stores in town -- let's call him Sam Shapiro. Sam knew everybody else's business: who was doing well and who was not, who was paying college tuition for their children, who had a sick mother, who had recently made a loan to a bankrupt brother, who had money to spare. He opened each envelope, looked at the pledge, and if he thought that it was not enough, he tore the card in half and passed it back down the table. That is how the Jews of Johnstown raised money, without a Jewish state, without -- or supposedly without -- coercive power. Was that charity, or was it the functional equivalent of taxation? Was it giving, or was it taking? Tzedakah signals something of both.

What moral or philosophical principle was Sam enforcing? He probably could not have answered that question, but the answer seems obvious: "from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." That line is from Karl Marx's Critique of the Gotha Program. Sam was not a Marxist, not by a long shot, but he adjusted the demands he made on each of us to his knowledge of our ability to pay. And we all believed that the UJA would distribute the money to those most in need. "From each, to each" is another example of two in one, for it describes equally well charitable giving and justified taking. This is the principle that Marx believed would apply after the withering away of the state -- that is, in a condition of statelessness.

The idea of obligatory charitable giving is not peculiar to the Jews; there are many non-Jewish charities whose staffs would happily collect money the way the Johnstown UJA did, if they could, and would believe themselves to be acting justly. The two-in-one argument comes in Christian and Muslim versions; tithing, for example, is also understood as an act of justice and charity together. But the centuries of statelessness provide the Jewish version a special force. Recall the powerful line in the book of Isaiah denouncing those who "grind the faces of the poor." I think of UJA fundraising as grinding the faces of the rich, and although that may or may not be nice, it certainly seems right.

But what should be done with the money collected? What does it mean to address the needs of the poor? This, too, is a question not only of charity but also of justice. Maimonides has a famous discussion of the eight levels of tzedakah, but only two need concern us here. The highest form of charitable giving, he wrote, is to set up a poor man in business or in work of some sort, to make him independent. This is the height of tzedakah because it recognizes and respects the dignity of the person who is being helped -- which is also, obviously, a requirement of justice. When charity perpetuates dependency and subordination, it is unjust. Maimonides also insists that tzedakah in its highest form should be anonymous, for if the poor do not know the names of their benefactors, they cannot defer to them. The encounter of helplessness, on one side, and condescending benevolence, on the other, is humiliating for the needy, and so it should be avoided. Here, charitable giving among a stateless people takes on the most important feature of a decent welfare state, where the people receiving benefits are not obligated to any particular benefactor. They are helped as citizens by their fellow citizens, acting collectively.

Tzedakah in actual Jewish communities has often not taken the forms that Maimonides recommended. In many cases, it has been the product of noblesse oblige (which is not the same thing as moral obligation), and there have certainly been many poor people humiliated by gifts for which they had to beg. But the ideal, the collective sense of what tzedakah should be, was shaped by the belief that charity had to be governed by the demands of justice. And this two-in-one conception arises from the experience of statelessness.

IDEAL GIVING

Jewish statelessness can help us understand what charity more generally is or should be. It can also provide us with the crucial categories for thinking about humanitarianism in international society. When you do not have a state, charity and justice come two in one. Individuals decide which good deeds, out of many possible ones, they will undertake, which needs they will recognize and how much of their time, energy, and money they will give. But decisions of this sort cannot be made appropriately without understanding what justice requires.

There will be disagreement about what justice requires, of course, and in the absence of a state, there will not be any established procedures for resolving the disagreement -- hence, no democratic debates and no democratically chosen policies. And in that situation, the richest and most powerful members of the community will have inordinate influence. Any community that relies heavily on the charitable contributions of its members will be oligarchic in character. It will be ruled by people such as Sam Shapiro, who will sometimes be righteous and kind, as Sam was, and sometimes not.

This is the most important leftist criticism of charity -- that it concedes the power of the powerful and forces the poor into the position of beggars. Jewish beggars were known to be unusually demanding, insisting on their entitlements, as if they were expounding the deep meaning of the word tzedakah. But they were beggars still. Even when there is a state, but not a fully just state, one that fails to provide generously for education and welfare, the rich and powerful will play a dominant role -- as they do, these days, in the United States. Think of the significant role played by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, for example, in shaping the current debate about educational policy, and perhaps determining its outcome, in the United States' inadequately funded public school system.

But if there were a strong and effective welfare state relying on a just system of taxation and taking care of basic needs, then charitable giving would achieve a kind of independence. Now, the giver would be free to follow the impulse of his or her heart, helping other people or improving the common life in any number of ways: volunteering to work in a daycare center, hospital, or nursing home; visiting the sick; supporting charitable projects of a church or synagogue or mosque; giving money to organizations defending civil liberties or human rights; teaching in a local prison or school; contributing to cultural societies, museums, symphonies, and theatrical groups; helping underfunded political magazines.

These choices will have an impact on the quality of life in the larger society, and the accumulation of benevolent acts will shape its overall goodness. But since in our hypothetical good state, the most important decisions about social policy will be made democratically, no individual's choices will have a determining effect. There will be limits on the influence of the rich and powerful. Only in this context would charity mean what we have always taken it to mean: freely chosen acts of kindness, acts that reflect a generosity of spirit, free from the imperatives of justice, free from the urgency of other people's desperate need.

THE POLITICS OF HUMANITARIANISM

In international society, however, there is no global state. Here, the condition of the Jews for 2,000 years is everyone's condition, although it is felt most acutely by those for whom statelessness is doubled, at both the global and the national level -- people without a state, or living in failed states, or in states torn by civil wars. There is no higher authority to which such people can appeal for help. The United Nations sometimes claims to be such an authority, but its repeated failure to rescue those in need of rescuing gives the lie to that claim. The UN Security Council rarely acts effectively in crises, not only because of the veto power of its leading members but also because its members do not have a strong sense of responsibility for global security, for the survival of minority peoples, for public health and environmental safety, or for general well-being. They pursue their own national interests while the world burns.

This is the context in which we have to think about humanitarianism, which cannot in the circumstances of statelessness be a freely chosen gift, which has to respond to urgency and need. It is like tzedakah: if it does not connect with justice, it will not be what it should be. Religious men and women can reasonably think that God has already determined what we owe to the global poor, and the sick, and the hungry, and that our task is just to figure it out. And secular men and women can acknowledge that whether or not God exists, this is not a bad way of thinking about these things.

But even when driven by religious motives, humanitarianism is a political project. And because it is, it carries risks with it that are not usually associated with charitable work. Indeed, latest literature on humanitarian aid suggests that the work can go very badly when its organizers are not politically informed, committed to justice, and ready to make prudential calculations. You can, for example, deliver aid in ways that bring in new predators to feed on the provisions and resources intended for the poor, or you can insist on the military or police forces necessary to keep the predators out. You can act through governments that are often corrupt, or you can send your own people into the zones of need and danger and work directly with local individuals and groups. These are choices that primarily involve calculations of effectiveness.

But there are also choices of a different kind. You can help desperately needy people in ways that disempower them and turn them into permanent clients, or you can help them in ways that promote their independence and enable them to help themselves. You can attempt to maintain your political neutrality, or you can take sides in civil wars and ethnic or party conflicts. You can act nonviolently, or you can decide to use or support the use of force. You can aim at relief, or you can aim at repair, sustaining the status quo or trying to transform it. No doubt, different cases require different choices, but in all the cases, these are going to be political choices, and they are likely to be made badly if they are governed chiefly by philanthropic considerations. There is not much room here for post-partisanship. Instead, it is necessary to think about the two-in-one character of humanitarian aid and to ask what justice requires. Similarly, when we judge the value of particular humanitarian projects, we cannot consider only the goodness, the warm-heartedness, the self-sacrifice of the aid workers; we must also ask whether they are acting justly and respectfully toward the people they are trying to help.

Who should make the critical decisions? Who are the agents of international humanitarianism, of charity and justice together? Just as rich and powerful individuals have disproportionate influence in determining the character and direction of domestic philanthropy, we have to worry that the richest and most powerful states and organizations will have a disproportionate influence in determining how aid is delivered and to whom. The big aid organizations are not accountable to the people they claim to help. Won't they often act in their own institutional interests? Don't states always defend their national interests even when they are engaged in humanitarian work?

ASSIGNING RESPONSIBILITY

This seems especially worrisome in the case of humanitarian intervention, which involves the use of force in someone else's country. And indeed, there is a lot of suspicion, especially on the left (but not only there), of any use of force for humanitarian purposes. There are people who claim that all military interventions will inevitably be the work of rich and powerful states acting imperially and will all end in domination. This claim is right -- sometimes, which means that it is not inevitably right. Suspicion in these cases invites suspicion in turn, for the original suspicion sometimes follows from a refusal to recognize the extent of the crisis that calls for intervention.

Opposition to all interventions is a mistake, although opposition to some is sure to be morally necessary. Libya may provide a useful example, since the decision to intervene, at the moment it was made, probably did not meet the proportionality test, which is a requirement of justice. And at this moment, as I am writing, the intervention seems to have prolonged, rather than stopped, the killing, which is neither charitable nor just. I doubt that the United States and NATO intend to dominate Libya (for the sake of its oil, say, which was readily available before the intervention). Their motives were and are humanitarian, but not sufficiently shaped by considerations of prudence and justice.

Still, military interventions will sometimes deserve our support, without regard to who the interveners are, so long as they meet the two-in-one criteria. Although we do not want powerful states to dominate international society, we do want access to their resources, precisely to their wealth and power -- in the same way that we want access to the resources of wealthy individuals in domestic society, which is why it is right to grind the face of the rich. Charity and justice together require that rich and powerful states contribute disproportionately to the common good or, better, that they contribute in proportion to their disproportionate wealth -- "from each, to each." It is more often the case that powerful states don't do enough, or don't do anything at all, in response to desperate need than that they respond in imperialist ways. Humanitarian crises are more often ignored than seized on as an excuse for domination. There cannot be many countries eager to dominate Haiti or Rwanda. So we need to look for ways of pressing rich and powerful states to do what they ought to do.

In fact, there are actually many states in international society that are capable of acting as humanitarian agents. In contrast to ordinary individuals in domestic society, ordinary states, even those far from being great powers, can act effectively in crises because of their ability to collect taxes and recruit aid workers and soldiers. So it is possible to imagine a division of humanitarian labor. Consider the role of the Vietnamese in shutting down the killing fields of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, or the Indian role in ending state terrorism in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh), or the role of the Tanzanians in overthrowing the murderous regime of Idi Amin in Uganda. Military intervention in these countries did not require the wealth and power of the United States; it was entirely within the reach of states with much smaller budgets and armies. The case is the same with regard to nonmilitary humanitarian aid, for which many states and many organizations have had a hand in shaping the international efforts -- and for which disproportionate influence probably comes more from dedication than from wealth, as the achievements of the Scandinavian states and their aid workers around the world suggest.

Again, this dedication is not merely philanthropic. It arises also from a commitment to justice; like tzedakah, it is two in one. And a commitment to justice is not voluntary; it is a commitment that we are all bound to make, as individuals and as citizens, and that all states are bound to make. We are not in a position where we can let generosity and warm-heartedness determine what states do in international society. In the absence of a global welfare state, there are many things that individual states have to do. But here is the agency question again: Which states have to do what?

RELIEF AND REPAIR

International humanitarianism is an imperfect duty. In any crisis situation, different states are capable of acting, but no single state is the designated actor. There is no established procedure that will tell us the proper name of the agent. Aid organizations often respond to a crisis in very large numbers, but without anyone assigned to take charge. The work should be coordinated, for the sake of its effectiveness -- and justice requires effectiveness -- but there is no named coordinator. We might look for UN designations of responsibility, both when military intervention is called for and when massive aid is called for. But we are likely to look in vain for timely or consistent assignments. In these circumstances, decisions about intervention and aid will often have to be made unilaterally -- as by Vietnam, India, and Tanzania in the cases mentioned above. The governing principle is, Whoever can, should.

That is not a principle that can be legally enforced, but there is a political process of enforcement -- not very effective, to be sure, but worth considering. It works through public criticism, shaming, moral appeal, and sometimes popular mobilization. The NATO intervention in Kosovo probably had a lot to do with shame over not preventing the Srebrenica massacre; U.S. President Bill Clinton's apology to the people of Rwanda for the United States' failure to prevent the 1994 massacre there was a response of sorts to fierce criticism of the U.S. posture at the UN that year. The unsuccessful campaign for intervention in Darfur involved tens of thousands of activists and sympathizers in a number of countries. This, too, is political work, and what drives it is not only humanitarian benevolence but also a strong sense of what justice requires.

The same combination, two in one, should determine the character and purpose of aid and intervention. It is, of course, immediately necessary to feed the hungry, to stop the killing. Relief comes before repair, but repair, despite the risks it brings with it, should always be the long-term goal -- so that crises do not become recurrent and routine. As with tzedakah according to Maimonides, aid workers and soldiers should do what they can, the best that they can, to promote the independence of individuals and states. In international society, this means building states that can defend the lives of their citizens and helping them help themselves. What must be avoided is enduring economic or political dependency -- the creation of pauper populations or of satellite states and puppet governments. Although we are often told that the state system must be transcended, sovereignty is in fact humanitarianism's morally necessary end: a decent state, capable of providing security, welfare, economic management, and education for all its citizens. Then, the aid workers and the intervening armies can go home. If they have created the conditions for self-determination, we know that they have acted both charitably and justly.

So state building can be a form of humanitarian work, even though we don't know anywhere near enough about how to do it. Regime change, however, is something different. When the Red Army tried to bring communism to Poland in 1919 and when the U.S. Army tried to bring democracy to Iraq in 2003 (and to Libya in 2011?), these were ideological, not humanitarian, projects. They aimed at repair but not at relief, whereas humanitarianism aims at repair only after, and in order to sustain, relief. It is the critical need for relief that generates the two-in-one response that we call humanitarian.

Relief and repair can take a long time, and there will be hard choices to make along the way, without any international procedure for making them. There is also no legal way to conscript people or states to do the necessary work or to regulate the work they do. That is, again, what global statelessness means. And so we must search for more informal ways of pressing people into humanitarian service and evaluating and criticizing what they do (and don't do). Since there are few effective laws in international society, we need principles of charity and justice that will shape our own contributions and also our judgments of what other people contribute.

Humanitarianism has to be an ongoing argument: What ought to be done right now? The answer to that question will change depending on the existing needs, the political circumstances, the resources that benevolence can provide, and the requirements of justice. But once we have figured out an answer, we can think of humanitarianism as the two-in-one enterprise that I have been describing. As individual men and women, as members of or contributors to nongovernmental organizations, as citizens of powerful states, it invites us to choose to do what we are absolutely bound to do.

Wed, 03 Aug 2022 05:56:00 -0500 en text/html https://www.foreignaffairs.com/world/on-humanitarianism
Killexams : JEE Advanced 2021 Question Papers Released, obtain Link Here
JEE Advanced 2021 Question Papers Released,  obtain Link Here
JEE Advanced 2021 question paper released (representational)

Image credit: Shutterstock

New Delhi:

Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Kharagpur has released question papers of the Joint Entrance Examination (JEE) Advanced 2021, which was conducted on Sunday, October 3. Students can go to the obtain section of the official website, jeeadv.ac.in, to access both JEE Main 2021 paper 1 and paper 2. The entrance test was conducted in two shifts and in both shifts, students had to answer questions from Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics.

Latest: Click Here to obtain Free JEE Advanced E-Books and trial Papers.
Don't Miss: JEE Advanced 2022 Preparation Tips to qualify the test with a good score. Check Here
B.Tech at UPESRanked #61 in NIRF, Grade A by NAAC, 50 LPA Highest CTC, 100% Placement. Apply Now 

JEE Advanced 2021 subject-wise question papers can be downloaded in PDF format. Candidates’ response sheets will be released yesterday and using the question paper and response sheets, students can find how they performed in the entrance exam.

Direct link

The provisional answer key of JEE Advanced 2021 will be available on October 10. The provisional key can be used to calculate probable scores. If candidates find an error in the answer key, they can report it between October 10 and 11.

JEE Advanced 2021 result and final answer key will be available on October 11.

  1. Go to jeeadv.ac.in

  2. Click on the ‘downloads’ icon

  3. Click on the link to obtain question paper

  4. Download question paper and take printout

JEE Advanced is conducted for admission to undergraduate programmes at IITs, IISc and IISERs, among others. The top 2.5 lakh candidates to qualify JEE Main 2021 are eligible to appear in the entrance exam.

Sun, 03 Oct 2021 20:47:00 -0500 en text/html https://www.ndtv.com/education/jee-advanced-2021-question-papers-released-download-link-here Killexams : Put That Amateur Radio License To Use On 915 MHz

Amateur radio enthusiasts in the US will be interested in Faraday, an open-source digital radio that runs on 915 MHz, which amateur radio enthusiasts may know better as the 33 cm band.

You can transmit on 915 MHz without a license (in the US), taking advantage of the Industrial, Scientific, and Medical (ISM) exemption. This means that there’s commodity hardware available for sending and receiving, which is a plus. But you can’t do so with any real power unless you have an amateur radio license. And that’s what makes Faraday interesting — it makes it very easy to transmit and receive digital data, with decent power and range, if you’re licensed. The band is currently under-utilized, so go nuts!

The hardware design and documentation is online, and so is the firmware. The founders of the project would like you to build out a big network of these devices, possibly meshing them together. Our only regret is that the 33 cm band is only really open for use in the US, both with a license and without. Of course, there’s very little the Faraday team can do about that.

We’re no strangers to digital-mode amateur radio around here. But if you’re an amateur who hasn’t played around with digital modes yet, this might be a good way to get your feet wet.

Thanks to [Daniel] for the tip!

Tue, 02 Aug 2022 12:00:00 -0500 Elliot Williams en-US text/html https://hackaday.com/2016/10/31/put-that-amateur-radio-license-to-use-on-915-mhz/
Killexams : Best Dog Food to Buy at Costco, According to Experts No result found, try new keyword!Making Sense of Dog Food Labels. Picking the right dog food can be a bewildering experience. Chicken, salmon, turkey, or beef? Brown rice or grain-free? Kirkland, Purina, or Blue ... Sun, 31 Jul 2022 10:00:00 -0500 en-us text/html https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/shopping/the-best-dog-food-to-buy-at-costco-according-to-experts/ar-AA10ajsY Killexams : Manufacturing PMI® at 52.8%; July 2022 Manufacturing ISM® Report On Business®

New Orders and Employment Contracting; Production and Backlogs Growing; supplier Deliveries Slowing at a Slower Rate; Raw Materials Inventories Growing; Customers' Inventories Too Low; Prices Increasing at a Slower Rate; Exports and Imports Growing; Record-Long Lead Times for Production Materials and MRO Supplies

TEMPE, Ariz., Aug. 1, 2022 /PRNewswire/ -- Economic activity in the manufacturing sector grew in July, with the overall economy achieving a 26th consecutive month of growth, say the nation's supply executives in the latest Manufacturing ISM® Report On Business®.

The report was issued today by Timothy R. Fiore, CPSM, C.P.M., Chair of the Institute for Supply Management® (ISM®) Manufacturing Business Survey Committee:

"The July Manufacturing PMI® registered 52.8 percent, down 0.2 percentage point from the reading of 53 percent in June. This figure indicates expansion in the overall economy for the 26th month in a row after a contraction in April and May 2020. This is the lowest Manufacturing PMI® figure since June 2020, when it registered 52.4 percent. The New Orders Index registered 48 percent, 1.2 percentage points lower than the 49.2 percent recorded in June. The Production Index reading of 53.5 percent is a 1.4-percentage point decrease compared to June's figure of 54.9 percent. The Prices Index registered 60 percent, down 18.5 percentage points compared to the June figure of 78.5 percent; this is the index's lowest reading since August 2020 (59.5 percent). The Backlog of Orders Index registered 51.3 percent, 1.9 percentage points below the June reading of 53.2 percent. The Employment Index contracted for a third straight month at 49.9 percent, 2.6 percentage points higher than the 47.3 percent recorded in June. The supplier Deliveries Index reading of 55.2 percent is 2.1 percentage points lower than the June figure of 57.3 percent. The Inventories Index registered 57.3 percent, 1.3 percentage points higher than the June reading of 56 percent. The New Export Orders Index reading of 52.6 percent is up 1.9 percentage points compared to June's figure of 50.7 percent. The Imports Index grew again in July, up 3.7 percentage points to 54.4 percent from 50.7 percent in June."

Fiore continues, "The U.S. manufacturing sector continues expanding — though slightly less so in July — as new order rates continue to contract, supplier deliveries Excellerate and prices soften to acceptable levels. According to Business Survey Committee respondents' comments, companies continue to hire at strong rates, with few indications of layoffs, hiring freezes or headcount reduction through attrition. Panelists reported higher rates of quits, reversing June's positive trend. Prices expansion eased dramatically in July, but instability in global energy markets continues. Sentiment remained optimistic regarding demand, with six positive growth comments for every cautious comment. Panelists are now expressing concern about a softening in the economy, as new order rates contracted for the second month amid developing anxiety about excess inventory in the supply chain. Demand dropped, with the (1) New Orders Index contracting again, (2) Customers' Inventories Index remaining at a low level but approaching 40 percent and (3) Backlog of Orders Index decreasing but still in growth territory. Consumption (measured by the Production and Employment indexes) was mixed during the period, with a combined positive 1.2-percentage point impact on the Manufacturing PMI® calculation. The Employment Index contracted for the third month in a row after expanding for eight straight months (September 2021 through April), but panelists again indicated month-over-month improvement in hiring ability in July. Challenges with turnover (quits and retirements) and resulting backfilling continue to plague efforts to adequately staff organizations. Inputs — expressed as supplier deliveries, inventories and imports — continued to constrain production expansion, but to a significantly lesser extent compared to June. The supplier Deliveries Index indicated deliveries slowed at a slower rate in July, which was supported by an increase in the Inventories Index. The Imports Index continued to expand in July after one month of contraction preceded by six straight months of growth. The Prices Index increased for the 26th consecutive month, at a much slower rate compared to June.

"Four of the six biggest manufacturing industries — Petroleum & Coal Products; Computer & Electronic Products; Transportation Equipment; and Machinery — registered moderate-to-strong growth in July.

"Manufacturing performed well for the 26th straight month. There are signs of new order rates softening — cited in 16 percent of general comments, compared to 17 percent in June — as panelists are increasingly concerned about excessive inventories and continuing record-high lead times. Employment activity remained strongly positive in spite of the uncertainty with new order rates," says Fiore.

Eleven manufacturing industries reported growth in July, in the following order: Apparel, Leather & Allied Products; Nonmetallic Mineral Products; Petroleum & Coal Products; Printing & Related Support Activities; Computer & Electronic Products; Transportation Equipment; Machinery; Textile Mills; Primary Metals; Plastics & Rubber Products; and Electrical Equipment, Appliances & Components. The seven industries reporting contraction in July compared to June, in the following order are: Wood Products; Furniture & Related Products; Paper Products; Miscellaneous Manufacturing; Fabricated Metal Products; Food, Beverage & Tobacco Products; and Chemical Products.

WHAT RESPONDENTS ARE SAYING

  • "Material extended lead times still affecting business, and the challenging labor market is a huge factor too. Backlog is healthy; we just cannot deliver to customers due to material issues." [Computer & Electronic Products]

  • "Inflation is slowing down business. Overstock of raw materials due to prior supply chain issues and slowing orders." [Chemical Products]

  • "Chip shortages remain; however, the COVID-19 lockdowns in China are presenting even worse supply issues." [Transportation Equipment]

  • "Growing inflation is pushing a stronger narrative around pending recession concerns. Many customers appear to be pulling back on orders in an effort to reduce inventories." [Food, Beverage & Tobacco Products]

  • "New order entry has slowed down slightly; however, logistical issues have yet to improve. Long lead times for materials and labor shortages are still a major problem." [Machinery]

  • "Our markets are still holding up; however, I believe a slowdown is coming. We are cautious about going out too far with orders. Also, I believe the general market is in the beginnings of a recession." [Fabricated Metal Products]

  • "All markets are extremely busy but face headwinds that will eventually take a toll. Lead times and costs make large projects very challenging to budget, plan and execute. Routine work is also very difficult." [Nonmetallic Mineral Products]

  • "Current order books are full, but there have been signs of a slowdown beginning in the fourth quarter." [Plastics & Rubber Products]

  • "Slight improvement projected for our business for the next quarter." [Primary Metals]

  • "Continuing delivery and staffing issues have eaten away the bottom line." [Textile Mills]

MANUFACTURING AT A GLANCE
July 2022

Index

Series
Index

Jul

Series
Index

Jun

Percentage

Point
Change

Direction

Rate of
Change

Trend*
(Months)

Manufacturing PMI®

52.8

53.0

-0.2

Growing

Slower

26

New Orders

48.0

49.2

-1.2

Contracting

Faster

2

Production

53.5

54.9

-1.4

Growing

Slower

26

Employment

49.9

47.3

+2.6

Contracting

Slower

3

Supplier Deliveries

55.2

57.3

-2.1

Slowing

Slower

77

Inventories

57.3

56.0

+1.3

Growing

Faster

12

Customers' Inventories

39.5

35.2

+4.3

Too Low

Slower

70

Prices

60.0

78.5

-18.5

Increasing

Slower

26

Backlog of Orders

51.3

53.2

-1.9

Growing

Slower

25

New Export Orders

52.6

50.7

+1.9

Growing

Faster

25

Imports

54.4

50.7

+3.7

Growing

Faster

2

OVERALL ECONOMY

Growing

Slower

26

Manufacturing Sector

Growing

Slower

26

Manufacturing ISM® Report On Business® data is seasonally adjusted for the New Orders, Production, Employment and Inventories indexes.
*Number of months moving in current direction.

COMMODITIES REPORTED UP/DOWN IN PRICE AND IN SHORT SUPPLY

Commodities Up in Price 
Adhesives and Paint (8); Aluminum* (26); Caustic Soda (5); Corrugate (6); Corrugated Packaging (21); Crude Oil (3); Diesel Fuel* (19); Electrical Components (20); Electricity (2); Electronic Components (20); Freight (21); Labor — Temporary (15); Logistics Services; Maintenance, Repair and Operating (MRO) Supplies; Natural Gas* (13); Petroleum Based Products (3); Plastic Resins* (7); Polyethylene; Rubber Based Products (12); Solvents; and Steel Products* (23).

Commodities Down in Price 
Aluminum* (3); Aluminum Products; Copper; Diesel Fuel*; Lumber (2); Natural Gas*; Plastic Resins* (2); Steel (3); Steel — Carbon; Steel — Hot Rolled (3); and Steel Products*.

Commodities in Short Supply 
Adhesives and Paints; Aluminum; Electrical Components (22); Electronic Components (20); Hydraulic Components (3); Labor — Temporary (15); Plastic Resins (3); Resin Based Products; Rubber Based Products (2); Semiconductors (20); and Steel Products (4).

Note: The number of consecutive months the commodity is listed is indicated after each item. 
*Indicates both up and down in price.

JULY 2022 MANUFACTURING INDEX SUMMARIES

Manufacturing PMI® 
The U.S. manufacturing sector grew in July, as the Manufacturing PMI® registered 52.8 percent, 0.2 percentage point lower than the June reading of 53 percent. "The Manufacturing PMI® continued to indicate sector expansion and U.S. economic growth in July. Three of the five subindexes that directly factor into the Manufacturing PMI® (Production, supplier Deliveries and Inventories) were in growth territory. Of the six biggest manufacturing industries, four — Petroleum & Coal Products; Computer & Electronic Products; Transportation Equipment; and Machinery — registered moderate-to-strong growth in July. The Production Index decreased 1.4 percentage points but remained in expansion territory. The supplier Deliveries Index slowed at a slower rate while the Inventories Index increased, indicating at least a slight easing of supply chain congestion. Eight of the 10 subindexes were positive for the period; a reading of 'too low' for the Customers' Inventories Index is considered a positive for future production," says Fiore. A reading above 50 percent indicates that the manufacturing economy is generally expanding; below 50 percent indicates that it is generally contracting.

A Manufacturing PMI® above 48.7 percent, over a period of time, generally indicates an expansion of the overall economy. Therefore, the July Manufacturing PMI® indicates the overall economy grew in July for the 26th consecutive month following contraction in April and May 2020. "The past relationship between the Manufacturing PMI® and the overall economy indicates that the Manufacturing PMI® for July (52.8 percent) corresponds to a 1.4-percent increase in real gross domestic product (GDP) on an annualized basis," says Fiore.

THE LAST 12 MONTHS

Month

Manufacturing
PMI®

Month

Manufacturing
PMI®

Jul 2022

52.8

Jan 2022

57.6

Jun 2022

53.0

Dec 2021

58.8

May 2022

56.1

Nov 2021

60.6

Apr 2022

55.4

Oct 2021

60.8

Mar 2022

57.1

Sep 2021

60.5

Feb 2022

58.6

Aug 2021

59.7

Average for 12 months – 57.6

High – 60.8

Low – 52.8

New Orders
ISM®'s New Orders Index dropped to 48 percent in July, a decrease of 1.2 percentage points compared to the 49.2 percent reported in June. This indicates that new order volumes contracted again after growing for 24 consecutive months. "Only one of the six largest manufacturing sectors — Computer & Electronic Products — increased new orders at a moderate level. Lead times remain at elevated levels, and fundamental raw material prices continue to persuade buyers to remain on the sidelines. Also contributing to order-placement pauses are concerns about future economic growth slowing and the impact to manufacturing inventories caused by additional order placements, which could impact working capital in the near-to-moderate term. Backlogs continued to sag due to the weakness in new orders," says Fiore. A New Orders Index above 52.9 percent, over time, is generally consistent with an increase in the Census Bureau's series on manufacturing orders (in constant 2000 dollars).

Of the 18 manufacturing industries, four reported growth in new orders in July: Nonmetallic Mineral Products; Printing & Related Support Activities; Primary Metals; and Computer & Electronic Products. Seven industries reported a decline in new orders in July, in the following order: Wood Products; Furniture & Related Products; Fabricated Metal Products; Miscellaneous Manufacturing; Plastics & Rubber Products; Chemical Products; and Machinery. Seven industries reported no change in new orders in July as compared to June.

New Orders

%Higher

%Same

%Lower

Net

Index

Jul 2022

17.2

63.0

19.8

-2.6

48.0

Jun 2022

17.8

65.1

17.1

+0.7

49.2

May 2022

28.2

58.5

13.3

+14.9

55.1

Apr 2022

25.1

64.0

10.9

+14.2

53.5

Production
The Production Index registered 53.5 percent in July, 1.4 percentage points lower than the June reading of 54.9 percent, indicating growth for the 26th consecutive month. "Of the top six industries, three —Petroleum & Coal Products; Computer & Electronic Products; and Transportation Equipment — expanded in July. Materials availability continues to show signs of recovery, but factories are still struggling to hit optimum output rates, primarily due to high levels of employee turnover," says Fiore. An index above 52.4 percent, over time, is generally consistent with an increase in the Federal Reserve Board's Industrial Production figures.

Five industries reported growth in production during the month of July: Apparel, Leather & Allied Products; Petroleum & Coal Products; Computer & Electronic Products; Transportation Equipment; and Plastics & Rubber Products. The six industries reporting a decrease in production in July — in the following order — are: Wood Products; Textile Mills; Miscellaneous Manufacturing; Fabricated Metal Products; Electrical Equipment, Appliances & Components; and Food, Beverage & Tobacco Products. Seven industries reported no change in production levels in July as compared to June.

Production

%Higher

%Same

%Lower

Net

Index

Jul 2022

24.9

58.5

16.6

+8.3

53.5

Jun 2022

27.4

60.9

11.7

+15.7

54.9

May 2022

23.9

59.2

16.9

+7.0

54.2

Apr 2022

27.5

61.0

11.5

+16.0

53.6

Employment
ISM®'s Employment Index registered 49.9 percent in July, 2.6 percentage points above the June reading of 47.3 percent. "The index contracted for the third straight month after an eight-month period of expansion. Of the six big manufacturing sectors, three (Transportation Equipment; Petroleum & Coal Products; and Machinery) expanded. Although an overwhelming majority of survey panelists again indicate their companies are hiring, they are still struggling to meet labor management plans. Improvement signs are mixed: A smaller share of comments (7 percent in July, down from 14 percent in June) noted greater hiring ease, and among respondents whose companies are hiring, 35 percent expressed difficulty in filling positions, down from 42 percent in June. Turnover rates remain elevated, with 39 percent of comments citing backfills and retirements, an increase from 29 percent in June. Employment levels, driven primarily by turnover, remain the top issue affecting production growth," says Fiore. An Employment Index above 50.5 percent, over time, is generally consistent with an increase in the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data on manufacturing employment.

Eight of 18 manufacturing industries reported employment growth in July, in the following order: Apparel, Leather & Allied Products; Nonmetallic Mineral Products; Printing & Related Support Activities; Transportation Equipment; Petroleum & Coal Products; Plastics & Rubber Products; Machinery; and Electrical Equipment, Appliances & Components. The six industries reporting a decrease in employment in July — in the following order — are: Textile Mills; Paper Products; Primary Metals; Miscellaneous Manufacturing; Food, Beverage & Tobacco Products; and Chemical Products.

Employment

%Higher

%Same

%Lower

Net

Index

Jul 2022

22.0

59.4

18.6

+3.4

49.9

Jun 2022

17.9

63.7

18.4

-0.5

47.3

May 2022

21.8

55.4

22.8

-1.0

49.6

Apr 2022

21.0

61.9

17.1

+3.9

50.9

Supplier Deliveries
The delivery performance of suppliers to manufacturing organizations was slower in July, as the supplier Deliveries Index registered 55.2 percent, 2.1 percentage points lower than the 57.3 percent reported in June. Of the top six manufacturing industries, five (Petroleum & Coal Products; Computer & Electronic Products; Transportation Equipment; Machinery; and Chemical Products) reported slower deliveries. "This indicates the best supplier deliveries performance since July 2020, when the index registered 55.9 percent as business began to resurface after the initial pandemic lockdowns. Deliveries slowed at a slower rate compared to the previous month — 21.4 percent of panelists reported slower deliveries in July, compared to 27.4 percent in June. Panelists' comments indicate that suppliers, despite their labor problems, performed better in July compared to previous months," says Fiore. A reading below 50 percent indicates faster deliveries, while a reading above 50 percent indicates slower deliveries.

Ten of 18 manufacturing industries reported slower supplier deliveries in July, in the following order: Textile Mills; Paper Products; Nonmetallic Mineral Products; Primary Metals; Miscellaneous Manufacturing; Petroleum & Coal Products; Computer & Electronic Products; Transportation Equipment; Machinery; and Chemical Products. Five industries reported faster supplier deliveries in July as compared to June: Wood Products; Electrical Equipment, Appliances & Components; Furniture & Related Products; Plastics & Rubber Products; and Fabricated Metal Products.

Supplier Deliveries

%Slower

%Same

%Faster

Net

Index

Jul 2022

21.4

67.6

11.0

+10.4

55.2

Jun 2022

27.4

59.8

12.8

+14.6

57.3

May 2022

37.1

57.2

5.7

+31.4

65.7

Apr 2022

38.7

57.0

4.3

+34.4

67.2

Inventories
The Inventories Index registered 57.3 percent in July, 1.3 percentage points higher than the 56 percent reported for June. "Manufacturing inventories expanded at a faster rate compared to June, registering their highest level since July 1984, when the index registered 57.8 percent. Of the six big manufacturing industries, five (Computer & Electronic Products; Petroleum & Coal Products; Machinery; Transportation Equipment; and Chemical Products) grew their inventories of manufacturing raw materials in July. Companies are showing the most concern about their inventory levels since the start of the pandemic in 2020, when a slowing of the manufacturing economy was anticipated," says Fiore. An Inventories Index greater than 44.4 percent, over time, is generally consistent with expansion in the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) figures on overall manufacturing inventories (in chained 2000 dollars).

Of 18 manufacturing industries, the 13 reporting higher inventories in July — in the following order — are: Apparel, Leather & Allied Products; Textile Mills; Computer & Electronic Products; Nonmetallic Mineral Products; Printing & Related Support Activities; Electrical Equipment, Appliances & Components; Wood Products; Petroleum & Coal Products; Machinery; Plastics & Rubber Products; Transportation Equipment; Fabricated Metal Products; and Chemical Products. The three industries reporting contracting inventories in July are: Paper Products; Primary Metals; and Food, Beverage & Tobacco Products.

Inventories

%Higher

%Same

%Lower

Net

Index

Jul 2022

25.5

61.8

12.7

+12.8

57.3

Jun 2022

25.4

59.8

14.8

+10.6

56.0

May 2022

24.3

62.5

13.2

+11.1

55.9

Apr 2022

21.4

61.4

17.2

+4.2

51.6

Customers' Inventories
ISM®'s Customers' Inventories Index registered 39.5 percent in July, 4.3 percentage points higher than the 35.2 percent reported for June, indicating that customers' inventory levels were considered too low. "Customers' inventories are too low for the 70th consecutive month, a positive for future production growth, but customer inventory requirements are easing compared to previous months," says Fiore.

Three industries (Wood Products; Food, Beverage & Tobacco Products; and Chemical Products) reported customers' inventories as too high in July. The 12 industries reporting customers' inventories as too low — listed in order — are: Nonmetallic Mineral Products; Transportation Equipment; Miscellaneous Manufacturing; Petroleum & Coal Products; Furniture & Related Products; Primary Metals; Plastics & Rubber Products; Computer & Electronic Products; Machinery; Paper Products; Fabricated Metal Products; and Electrical Equipment, Appliances & Components.

Customers'

Inventories

%
Reporting

%Too
High

%About
Right

%Too
Low

Net

Index

Jul 2022

78

12.4

54.2

33.4

-21.0

39.5

Jun 2022

75

11.1

48.1

40.8

-29.7

35.2

May 2022

75

12.8

39.7

47.5

-34.7

32.7

Apr 2022

76

10.5

53.2

36.3

-25.8

37.1

Prices 
The ISM® Prices Index registered 60 percent in July, 18.5 percentage points lower compared to the June reading of 78.5 percent, indicating raw materials prices increased for the 26th consecutive month, at a much slower rate. The Prices Index has been at or above 60 percent for 23 straight months. The month-over-month decline of 18.5 percentage points is the fourth biggest decline on record (since 1948) and the steepest since a 22.1-percentage point drop in June 2010. "The slowing in price increases is being driven by (1) volatility in the energy markets, (2) softening in the copper, steel, aluminum and corrugate markets and (3) a significant decrease in chemical demand. Notably, 21.5 percent of respondents reported paying lower prices in July, compared to 8.3 percent in June," says Fiore. A Prices Index above 52.6 percent, over time, is generally consistent with an increase in the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Producer Price Index for Intermediate Materials.

In July, 12 of 18 industries reported paying increased prices for raw materials, in the following order: Nonmetallic Mineral Products; Printing & Related Support Activities; Paper Products; Plastics & Rubber Products; Textile Mills; Computer & Electronic Products; Food, Beverage & Tobacco Products; Chemical Products; Miscellaneous Manufacturing; Machinery; Furniture & Related Products; and Transportation Equipment. The three industries reporting paying decreased prices for raw materials July are: Petroleum & Coal Products; Fabricated Metal Products; and Wood Products.

Prices

%Higher

%Same

%Lower

Net

Index

Jul 2022

41.5

37.0

21.5

+20.0

60.0

Jun 2022

65.2

26.5

8.3

+56.9

78.5

May 2022

70.2

24.2

5.6

+64.6

82.2

Apr 2022

73.5

22.1

4.4

+69.1

84.6

Backlog of Orders
ISM®'s Backlog of Orders Index registered 51.3 percent in July, a 1.9-percentage point decrease compared to the 53.2 percent reported in June, indicating order backlogs expanded for the 25th straight month. Of the six largest manufacturing sectors, three — Petroleum & Coal Products; Machinery; and Transportation Equipment — expanded their order backlogs. "Backlogs expanded in July at a slower rate, as new order levels remain low and panelists' customers prepare for a slowing in general manufacturing activity. A slowing in price increases is a positive for future new orders growth and backlogs expansion," says Fiore.

Five industries reported growth in order backlogs in July: Nonmetallic Mineral Products; Petroleum & Coal Products; Printing & Related Support Activities; Machinery; and Transportation Equipment. The seven industries reporting lower backlogs in July — in the following order — are: Furniture & Related Products; Wood Products; Fabricated Metal Products; Chemical Products; Primary Metals; Computer & Electronic Products; and Miscellaneous Manufacturing. Six industries reported no change in backlogs of orders in July as compared to June.

Backlog of

Orders

%Reporting

%Higher

%Same

%Lower

  Net

Index

Jul 2022

92

26.6

49.4

24.0

+2.6

51.3

Jun 2022

93

25.6

55.3

19.1

+6.5

53.2

May 2022

91

31.6

54.3

14.1

+17.5

58.7

Apr 2022

92

27.9

56.3

15.8

+12.1

56.0

New Export Orders
ISM®'s New Export Orders Index registered 52.6 percent in July, 1.9 percentage points above the June reading of 50.7 percent. "The New Export Orders Index grew for the 25th consecutive month, at a faster rate in July. Gains were achieved in the month as the European economy stabilizes and China recovers from its latest COVID-19 lockdowns. Of the six big industry sectors, four — Petroleum & Coal Products; Food, Beverage & Tobacco Products; Transportation Equipment; and Computer & Electronic Products — expanded," says Fiore.

The four industries reporting growth in new export orders in July are: Petroleum & Coal Products; Food, Beverage & Tobacco Products; Transportation Equipment; and Computer & Electronic Products. The six industries reporting a decrease in new export orders in July — in the following order — are: Wood Products; Paper Products; Plastics & Rubber Products; Electrical Equipment, Appliances & Components; Miscellaneous Manufacturing; and Chemical Products. Seven industries reported no change in exports in July as compared to June.

New Export
Orders

%
Reporting

%Higher

%Same

%Lower

  Net

Index

Jul 2022

73

16.6

72.1

11.3

+5.3

52.6

Jun 2022

72

12.3

76.8

10.9

+1.4

50.7

May 2022

73

14.6

76.6

8.8

+5.8

52.9

Apr 2022

73

10.7

84.1

5.2

+5.5

52.7

Imports
ISM®'s Imports Index registered 54.4 percent in July, an increase of 3.7 percentage points compared to June's figure of 50.7 percent. "Imports grew in July; activity improved as Asia ports started to clear their backlogs. The index reached its highest level since February (55.4 percent)," says Fiore.

The 10 industries reporting growth in imports in July — in the following order — are: Textile Mills; Printing & Related Support Activities; Petroleum & Coal Products; Primary Metals; Electrical Equipment, Appliances & Components; Transportation Equipment; Computer & Electronic Products; Fabricated Metal Products; Plastics & Rubber Products; and Machinery. Three industries reported lower volumes of imports in July: Paper Products; Miscellaneous Manufacturing; and Chemical Products.

Imports

%
Reporting

%Higher

%Same

%Lower

  Net

Index

Jul 2022

85

19.6

69.5

10.9

+8.7

54.4

Jun 2022

84

14.4

72.5

13.1

+1.3

50.7

May 2022

85

13.4

70.6

16.0

-2.6

48.7

Apr 2022

83

13.2

76.5

10.3

+2.9

51.4

The supplier Deliveries, Customers' Inventories, Prices, Backlog of Orders, New Export Orders, and Imports indexes do not meet the accepted criteria for seasonal adjustments.

Buying Policy
The average commitment lead time for Capital Expenditures in July was 183 days, a decrease of three days compared to June. Average lead time in July for Production Materials remained at its all-time high of 100 days. Average lead time for Maintenance, Repair and Operating (MRO) Supplies increased by seven days, to an all-time high of 51 days. (ISM® began tracking lead times data in 1987.)

Percent Reporting

Capital Expenditures

Hand-to-
Mouth

30 Days

60 Days

90 Days

6 Months

1 Year+

Average
Days

Jul 2022

14

3

10

13

29

31

183

Jun 2022

15

6

7

9

31

32

186

May 2022

17

5

8

10

30

30

178

Apr 2022

18

4

6

14

30

28

173

Percent Reporting

Production Materials

Hand-to-
Mouth

30 Days

60 Days

90 Days

6 Months

1 Year+

Average
Days

Jul 2022

8

21

21

28

13

9

100

Jun 2022

8

19

23

25

18

7

100

May 2022

9

21

21

26

15

8

99

Apr 2022

9

16

26

24

18

7

100

Percent Reporting

MRO Supplies

Hand-to-
Mouth

30 Days

60 Days

90 Days

6 Months

1 Year+

Average
Days

Jul 2022

22

36

21

15

5

1

51

Jun 2022

25

39

19

12

5

0

44

May 2022

27

35

19

12

6

1

48

Apr 2022

24

33

23

15

4

1

49

About This Report
DO NOT CONFUSE THIS NATIONAL REPORT with the various regional purchasing reports released across the country. The national report's information reflects the entire U.S., while the regional reports contain primarily regional data from their local vicinities. Also, the information in the regional reports is not used in calculating the results of the national report. The information compiled in this report is for the month of July 2022.

The data presented herein is obtained from a survey of manufacturing supply executives based on information they have collected within their respective organizations. ISM® makes no representation, other than that stated within this release, regarding the individual company data collection procedures. The data should be compared to all other economic data sources when used in decision-making.

Data and Method of Presentation
The Manufacturing ISM® Report On Business® is based on data compiled from purchasing and supply executives nationwide. The composition of the Manufacturing Business Survey Committee is stratified according to the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) and each of the following NAICS-based industry's contribution to gross domestic product (GDP): Food, Beverage & Tobacco Products; Textile Mills; Apparel, Leather & Allied Products; Wood Products; Paper Products; Printing & Related Support Activities; Petroleum & Coal Products; Chemical Products; Plastics & Rubber Products; Nonmetallic Mineral Products; Primary Metals; Fabricated Metal Products; Machinery; Computer & Electronic Products; Electrical Equipment, Appliances & Components; Transportation Equipment; Furniture & Related Products; and Miscellaneous Manufacturing (products such as medical equipment and supplies, jewelry, sporting goods, toys and office supplies). The data are weighted based on each industry's contribution to GDP. According to the BEA estimates for 2020 GDP (released December 22, 2021), the six largest manufacturing subsectors are: Computer & Electronic Products; Chemical Products; Transportation Equipment; Petroleum & Coal Products; Food, Beverage & Tobacco Products; and Machinery. Beginning in February 2018 with January 2018 data, computation of the indexes is accomplished utilizing unrounded numbers.

Survey responses reflect the change, if any, in the current month compared to the previous month. For each of the indicators measured (New Orders, Backlog of Orders, New Export Orders, Imports, Production, supplier Deliveries, Inventories, Customers' Inventories, Employment and Prices), this report shows the percentage reporting each response, the net difference between the number of responses in the positive economic direction (higher, better and slower for supplier Deliveries) and the negative economic direction (lower, worse and faster for supplier Deliveries), and the diffusion index. Responses are raw data and are never changed. The diffusion index includes the percent of positive responses plus one-half of those responding the same (considered positive).

The resulting single index number for those meeting the criteria for seasonal adjustments (Manufacturing PMI®, New Orders, Production, Employment and Inventories) is then seasonally adjusted to allow for the effects of repetitive intra-year variations resulting primarily from normal differences in weather conditions, various institutional arrangements, and differences attributable to non-moveable holidays. All seasonal adjustment factors are subject annually to relatively minor changes when conditions warrant them. The Manufacturing PMI® is a composite index based on the diffusion indexes of five of the indexes with equal weights: New Orders (seasonally adjusted), Production (seasonally adjusted), Employment (seasonally adjusted), supplier Deliveries, and Inventories (seasonally adjusted).

Diffusion indexes have the properties of leading indicators and are convenient summary measures showing the prevailing direction of change and the scope of change. A Manufacturing PMI® reading above 50 percent indicates that the manufacturing economy is generally expanding; below 50 percent indicates that it is generally declining. A Manufacturing PMI® above 48.7 percent, over a period of time, indicates that the overall economy, or gross domestic product (GDP), is generally expanding; below 48.7 percent, it is generally declining. The distance from 50 percent or 48.7 percent is indicative of the extent of the expansion or decline. With some of the indicators within this report, ISM® has indicated the departure point between expansion and decline of comparable government series, as determined by regression analysis. The Manufacturing ISM® Report On Business® survey is sent out to Manufacturing Business Survey Committee respondents the first part of each month. Respondents are asked to report on information for the current month for U.S. operations only. ISM® receives survey responses throughout most of any given month, with the majority of respondents generally waiting until late in the month to submit responses to provide the most accurate picture of current business activity. ISM® then compiles the report for release on the first business day of the following month.

The industries reporting growth, as indicated in the Manufacturing ISM® Report On Business® monthly report, are listed in the order of most growth to least growth. For the industries reporting contraction or decreases, those are listed in the order of the highest level of contraction/decrease to the least level of contraction/decrease.

Responses to Buying Policy reflect the percent reporting the current month's lead time, the approximate weighted number of days ahead for which commitments are made for Capital Expenditures; Production Materials; and Maintenance, Repair and Operating (MRO) Supplies, expressed as hand-to-mouth (five days), 30 days, 60 days, 90 days, six months (180 days), a year or more (360 days), and the weighted average number of days. These responses are raw data, never revised, and not seasonally adjusted.

ISM ROB Content
The Institute for Supply Management® ("ISM") Report On Business® (both Manufacturing and Non-Manufacturing) ("ISM ROB") contains information, text, files, images, video, sounds, musical works, works of authorship, applications, and any other materials or content (collectively, "Content") of ISM ("ISM ROB Content"). ISM ROB Content is protected by copyright, trademark, trade secret, and other laws, and as between you and ISM, ISM owns and retains all rights in the ISM ROB Content. ISM hereby grants you a limited, revocable, nonsublicensable license to access and display on your individual device the ISM ROB Content (excluding any software code) solely for your personal, non-commercial use. The ISM ROB Content shall also contain Content of users and other ISM licensors. Except as provided herein or as explicitly allowed in writing by ISM, you shall not copy, download, stream, capture, reproduce, duplicate, archive, upload, modify, translate, publish, broadcast, transmit, retransmit, distribute, perform, display, sell, or otherwise use any ISM ROB Content.

Except as explicitly and expressly permitted by ISM, you are strictly prohibited from creating works or materials (including but not limited to tables, charts, data streams, time-series variables, fonts, icons, link buttons, wallpaper, desktop themes, online postcards, montages, mashups and similar videos, greeting cards, and unlicensed merchandise) that derive from or are based on the ISM ROB Content. This prohibition applies regardless of whether the derivative works or materials are sold, bartered, or given away. You shall not either directly or through the use of any device, software, internet site, web-based service, or other means remove, alter, bypass, avoid, interfere with, or circumvent any copyright, trademark, or other proprietary notices marked on the Content or any digital rights management mechanism, device, or other content protection or access control measure associated with the Content including geo-filtering mechanisms. Without prior written authorization from ISM, you shall not build a business utilizing the Content, whether or not for profit.

You shall not create, recreate, distribute, incorporate in other work, or advertise an index of any portion of the Content unless you receive prior written authorization from ISM. Requests for permission to reproduce or distribute ISM ROB Content can be made by contacting in writing at: ISM Research, Institute for Supply Management, 309 West Elliot Road, Suite 113, Tempe, Arizona 85284-1556, or by emailing kcahill@ismworld.org. Subject: Content Request.

ISM shall not have any liability, duty, or obligation for or relating to the ISM ROB Content or other information contained herein, any errors, inaccuracies, omissions or delays in providing any ISM ROB Content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. In no event shall ISM be liable for any special, incidental, or consequential damages, arising out of the use of the ISM ROB. Report On Business®, PMI®, and NMI® are registered trademarks of Institute for Supply Management®. Institute for Supply Management® and ISM® are registered trademarks of Institute for Supply Management, Inc.

About Institute for Supply Management®
Institute for Supply Management® (ISM®) serves supply management professionals in more than 90 countries. Its 50,000 members around the world manage about US$1 trillion in corporate and government supply chain procurement annually. Founded in 1915 as the first supply management institute in the world, ISM is committed to advancing the practice of supply management to drive value and competitive advantage for its members, contributing to a prosperous and sustainable world. ISM leads the profession through the ISM® Report On Business®, its highly regarded certification programs and the ISM® Advance Digital Platform. This report has been issued by the association since 1931, except for a four-year interruption during World War II.

The full text version of the Manufacturing ISM® Report On Business® is posted on ISM®'s website at www.ismrob.org on the first business day* of every month after 10:00 a.m. ET.

The next Manufacturing ISM® Report On Business® featuring August 2022 data will be released at 10:00 a.m. ET on Thursday, September 1, 2022.

*Unless the New York Stock Exchange is closed.

Contact:    

Kristina Cahill

Report On Business® Analyst

ISM®, ROB/Research Manager

Tempe, Arizona

+1 480.455.5910

Email: kcahill@ismworld.org

Institute for Supply Management logo. (PRNewsFoto/Institute for Supply Management)

Cision

View original content to obtain multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/manufacturing-pmi-at-52-8-july-2022-manufacturing-ism-report-on-business-301596347.html

SOURCE Institute for Supply Management

Mon, 01 Aug 2022 02:00:00 -0500 en-US text/html https://finance.yahoo.com/news/manufacturing-pmi-52-8-july-140000823.html
Killexams : Webinar Replay: Staying One Step Ahead Of The Fed

Get Your Discount to EPB Macro Research Now!

The following text is a transcript for our readers who would like to follow along:

Daniel Snyder

All right. I don't want to waste any more time. We've given it a few minutes for everybody to join. Let's get this thing started. Hey, everyone. I'm Daniel Snyder from Seeking Alpha and I want to welcome you to today's, "Staying One Step Ahead of the Fed." And just 24 hours from now, the Fed is set to raise interest rates for the fifth time this year in their attempt to cool down red hot inflation, which continues to print new 40 year highs. Right? We've seen it time and time again. We saw it in May. We saw it in June. And just yesterday after the close. Retail giant Walmart cut their guidance due to inflation and inventory concerns.

Well, why is that? Well, food and gas are necessities in our economy and consumers will choose that over apparels and miscellaneous home goods any day of the week when they feel like they're in a crunch. We went from a world of "just in time" inventory to "just in case." And management teams, well, they couldn't keep up with the pace of change. So now, while some certain outlets are saying that a soft landing is still possible, companies have already started to rein in their spending. And I'm not just talking about the... excuse me. I just had a glitch. You guys still hear me, okay? Great. Awesome. I'm not just talking about companies like Alphabet, Apple, Microsoft. We're also talking about companies like Shopify who just came out this morning and said that they are ready to cut 10% of their workforce around the world. Days before they're supposed to announce their earnings. Right. How crazy is that? Everybody is preparing for an economic slowdown coming down the road. So here's the question. Can the Fed really cool down the economy while avoiding sending the economy into a recession? Or is it completely out of their hands at this point? And they're still trying to play catch up. They're trying to trying to get their credibility back. And we're all sitting around waiting to see how bumpy this recession is going to be. Is it going to be shallow? Is it going to be deep? Does the inverted yield curves actually mean anything? I don't know. All eyes are on Thursday's GDP number, though, right? With so much news coming across the wire seemingly every hour, it's a good idea to take a step back and take a look at the macro view.

So that's why we asked Eric Basmajian from EPB Macro Research to take the time and put together this presentation for you today. Eric is an economic cycle analyst. His proprietary frameworks are used by institutional and individual investors alike to help them make better decisions. So in today's webinar, Eric is going to break down what his models are saying is coming down the road in the next 6 to 18 months, and more importantly, how you can prepare for it with the names of two securities to put on your watch list today. Now, I've had the pleasure of interviewing Eric many times over the last year for our shows like: Stock Market Live, Weekend Bite, and other webinars. And I've got to tell you straight up, he has been right time and time again. He's even helped me protect my portfolio against the market drawdown we're seeing this year, because he just draws massive amounts of value and I expect today to be no different. So our team is going to go ahead and drop the link to his service in the chat box so you can check out everything they have to offer after the webinar. At the end of the presentation, Eric will take time to answer all of your questions, so feel free to type them into the chat box throughout the webinar and we're going to get to those at the end.

Now, before we really dive in and invite Eric here on the screen, I like to make sure everyone is looking at your screen so we can take a quick poll, because you know how we like to do it. We like to interact. So let me go ahead and throw this up on the screen.

And the question today is... Oh, looks like we had this on the other one. provide me one second guys. Well, I'm just going to ask it for you because I don't see it anymore. How long do you think a recession in the United States is going to last?

Why don't you go ahead and jump into the chat box with the answers - do you think is going to last less than three months? Do you think it'll be 3 to 6 months, 6 to 12 months, more than 12 months? Or, are we not going to have a recession at all? I see people coming in 2-4 year, 2 years, 2 years. 12, 6 to 12, one year, 3 to 6 months, one year, one year, 18 months. We're seeing it across the board here, guys. One hour. I'm not sure that's right, but nice try. 6 to 12 months. 12 months, less than a year. Nine months, two quarters, one year, 12, 18 months. 2 years, 1 year, 18 months. I mean, we are seeing a wide range of opinions coming through the chat right now. 12 months. I keep seeing 12 months. Keep seeing 2 years in here a lot as well. 12 months, 1 to 2 years. That could be a very, very bumpy time. 18 months, 12 to 18 months.

All right, guys. Well, that kind of gives you an idea, right? We're looking at a lot of people thinking that a recession coming down the pipe will result in a longer recession and not a shorter recession like everybody is starting to talk about. So without any further ado, I'm gonna go ahead, invite Eric into the conversation here and hand over the mic that he can run you through the economic cycle framework that he has to show you today. Eric, why don't you go and jump on here?

Eric Basmajian

Hey, Daniel, how are you?

Daniel Snyder

Hey, doing well. Shows all yours. People are waiting to hear from you. Take it away.

Eric Basmajian

Okay, I got. I got to say, before I get started, those are some good comments in the in the chat box. I was watching them as they were coming up. I saw one comment. I missed the name. They said, "Do you think the Fed is making a mistake between inflation and deflation?" And that's a really out of consensus comment, but I think that's a pretty astute observation. So I think as I go through some of my slides here, we may touch on that. I just thought that was pretty good comment. Something you don't hear because the talk is all about inflation. Inflation. We don't hear deflation anymore.

Daniel Snyder

Deflation versus disinflation. right? We got to figure that one out first.

Eric Basmajian

Exactly. Alrighty here. So I'm going to, I'm going to share my screen here. I got some slides prepared and you let me know if you could see my screen here, Daniel, and then I'll get going.

Daniel Snyder

Yep. You're all good to go.

Eric Basmajian

Alright. Thank you! So the title of this presentation is "Staying One Step Ahead of the Fed." And I'm going to do my best to respect everyone's time here, because I know that listening to slides can be a little boring. So I'm going to try and make this as concise and informative as possible so that we can get to the Q&A, which I really think is where a bulk of the discussion and back and forth happens. So this is called "Staying One Step Ahead of the Fed," and the next 20 minutes or so I'm going to explain my economic process and how that translates to an asset allocation or finding the best assets for the current economic regime.

I personally only use ETFs, but you can use this exact process to find which stocks to buy and when you should buy them. So just keep that in mind as you're listening. If you're more stock specific or individual stock focused, all of this information will still apply. But just know that my framework uses, uses, ETFs. I like to start my presentations with a little fun fact or a little trivia. So did you know that over the last 27 years or since 1996, the S&P 500 has only gone up 42% at the time? Now, I know everyone is used to hearing that the market goes up 70 to 75% of the time. So I could already see everyone kind of rolling their eyes at that. But I'll show my work on how I arrived at that statement. So since 1996, the S&P 500 has in fact compounded at 9.1% or it's gone up almost 900% in total return terms. But it is true that 58% of the time the S&P 500 was going sideways to down. So there was no return at all, 58% at the time. And as we go through the next few slides, you'll understand the significance of that data point. In this presentation, I'm going to cover what are cyclical economic trends and why they are so important. We'll also learn how to define a cyclical trend, and we'll also learn how and why assets perform so differently depending on the economic cycle regime. And lastly, I'll touch very briefly on how I go about spotting these critically important cyclical inflection points. So the majority of this presentation is going to be about cyclical economic trends. But before we talk about cyclical trends, we have to take a step back and build a foundation or start from the beginning.

At EPB Macro Research, we take a very comprehensive approach and we start all of our analysis by looking at what are called secular economic trends. Secular economic trends are 3 to 5, or even longer year trends that are basically completely controlled by debt and demographics or debt and population growth. So secular economic trends are what we call economic gravity. So it's a huge disservice to yourself when you start a forecast or any kind of analysis without understanding where this gravity in the economy is, is it pulling you down or is it pushing you up? Because you can defy gravity for a period of time but you always end up returning back to that gravitational force. So secular trends are the long term forces in the economy, and cyclical trends are the fluctuations in growth that occur around the secular trend. Now for asset allocation and asset selection, we only really care about the cyclical trend, the 6 to 8 month cycle, but the secular trend is extremely critical because if the secular trend is pulling you down or gravity is pulling you down, which is the case today, then each cyclical upturn will be weaker and weaker, and each cyclical downturn will be longer lasting and harder to break.

Now, this is clearly a sketch, but you can see that when the secular trend is down, that each cyclical upturn in this chart is getting weaker and weaker, where the economy starts spending less and less time in a cyclical upturn, and it spends more and more time in a cyclical downturn. So you don't have to take my word for it. This is the long term trend in U.S. real GDP growth. This is a 20 year annualized growth rate. So the last data point on this chart, 1.2% means that real GDP per capita has only increased at a 1.2% annualized pace over the last 20 years. Which is pretty bad. This is massively down from the two and a half percent growth rates that we used to sustain in the sixties, seventies and eighties. So the secular trend or gravity is pulling us down. We don't have too much time today to dig into why. This is something that I discussed at length in the premium EPB Macro Research subscription, but for now, all we have to know is that gravity is pulling us down. So the cyclical trend is where we want to focus and we have to know that the bias for the cyclical upturns is that they're going to fade quickly and that the cyclical downturns are going to last longer.

So what exactly is a cyclical upturn and what is a cyclical downturn? Very simply, when growth is trending higher, that's a cyclical upturn. And when growth is trending lower, that's a cyclical downturn. And just a couple of slides. We're going to see why basically everything rides on these cyclical trends in terms of asset class performance.

And here's that stat again. Since 1996, the economy has been in a cyclical upturn. Only 42% of the time. It's been in a cyclical downturn 58% of the time. Now, just to reiterate, this does not mean a cyclical downturn, does not mean negative growth. We're only talking about the direction of growth. So, for example, if growth moves from plus 4% to plus 1%, plus one is still positive growth, but the direction is moving lower. So that's a cyclical downturn. So instead of a sketch, let's look at a real life data point so we can see these trends in an actual reality. Many of you may be familiar with the ISM Manufacturing PMI. It's a very widely watched economic data point. If you're not familiar, that's okay. The ISM PMI is simply a survey of manufacturing purchase managers and when the reading is below 50, that generally means the economy is contracting. And when it's above 50, that means positive growth. It's a very popular data point because as you can see, it's very cyclical and it captures the cyclical trend very, very well. Again, a cyclical trend is defined by the direction of growth, not positive or negative growth. So as you can see on the right hand side of the chart, we're very clearly in a cyclical down turn today, and it probably feels that way because the market's been persistently lower and also the economy's starting to get a little bit softer. So the ISM PMI, while it's a very popular data point, it's not exactly how we define the cyclical trend. But I just wanted to show a popular data point that most people know to emphasize this concept of a cyclical trend.

So how exactly do we define a cyclical trend? I don't like to do anything subjectively, so why not take the information straight from the NBER, the agency that actually dates these business cycles? They use a combination of basically 6 indicators to measure these trends. And when they date cycles or date recessions, and those indicators are real personal income less transfer payments, nonfarm payrolls, which everyone knows, real personal consumption, retail sales, another employment measure, and industrial production. So what I do is I just take the data points that they just gave us and I smash them together into one index. This is proprietary to EPB Macro Research, I publish this frequently inside the service and it tracks the growth rate and you can see that it basically follows the same cyclical ups and downs as the manufacturing PMI as shown in the previous slide. The economy moves in cycles and it's not a business cycle that we're looking at here. It's a cyclical growth rate cycle. There's a big difference between a business cycle. We had one business cycle from 2010 through 2020. But as you can see in this chart, we had several cyclical trends that occurred within a longer business cycle. So these cyclical upturns are these fluctuations in growth. They last 6 to 18 months on average. Sometimes they can be as long as three years, but the average cyclical upturn is 13 months and the average cyclical downturn is 17 months. Why are the downturns longer than the upturns? That's that economic gravity that we were talking about in the beginning. The secular trend is pulling us down, so the downturns are lasting longer these days than the upturns. So we can pull this chart back until 1995 and we can see all the cyclical upturns and the cyclical downturn over the last three decades. This is my coincident index that I just showed, but pulled all the way back. The upturns are obviously in green and the downturns are in red, and we're about to see how this translates to asset performance. But since the data is so striking, you're probably not going to believe me. And you're going to think that I cherry picked these start dates and end dates. I did not pick the dates of these cycles. These shaded bars. A third party independent firm. The Economic Cycle Research Institute actually dates these growth rate cycles. You can go to their website and you can see these cycle dates. They date both business cycles, which is a recession or expansion and a growth rate cycle, which is what we're talking about here. And they do this for 22 countries. So you can pull the data from their website and you can test them yourself. So we're going to see now how the S&P 500 performs during a cyclical upturn and a cyclical downturn. The difference is really quite amazing. And this is the power of the economic cycle or the power of these cyclical trends.

So this is the S&P 500 since 1996. If you just bought and held it the entire time, it's got an annualized return of about 9.1% with volatility of 15%. These are the standard market returns that most people are used to. But what if we bought the S&P 500 and only held it during a cyclical upturn and we held a money market fund during a cyclical downturn. So when the economy was in a cyclical upturn, we own the S&P 500. When the economy was in a cyclical downturn, we sold and we held the money market fund. Well, the results are 11.3% annualized returns with 9% volatility. So you basically get all the returns with less volatility during the cyclical upturns.

Again, these are dates that have been independently established. So what about the downturns? Let's say we held a money market fund during the upturns and we wanted to punish ourselves and only own the S&P 500 during downturns. The opposite of what we're trying to do. Zero return. There has been zero return during economic downturns over the last 25 years, but 12% volatility. So economic downturns, the S&P 500 does not go anywhere. It grinds sideways, down on average and has a ton of volatility. And during cyclical upturns you get all of the gains of the market with less volatility. So now you could see that stat I had, that trivia I had in the beginning of this presentation, the economy has been in a cyclical upturn 42% of the time, but over 100% of the market gains came in that 42% of the time, 58% of the time the market has been going sideways, down, no gains, all volatility. Now, I probably know what you're saying and I agree this is very extreme because it implies that we perfectly nailed every cycle inflection point. And I am not suggesting that you can do that or I can do that, but that certainly is the goal of what we're trying to do. We're trying to capture all of the cyclical upturns and avoid all of the cyclical downturns. What I'm trying to show you is that these cyclical trends are basically the only thing that matters in terms of asset allocation or asset price performance. When you're in a cyclical upturn, you want to take risk, as much risk as you possibly can. You will be rewarded for that risk when growth is trending higher. But when you're in a cyclical downturn, you get all the bad parts of owning stocks with none of the upside. It's not just the S&P 500. We can take this beyond the S&P 500 and we can see how you can pick individual stocks with this type of a process. This chart shows the average excess performance of different sectors and style factors during cyclical downturns. I'm only showing cyclical downturns because we have limited time and that's our current regime, so that's probably what most people are interested in. Everything in green means that on average these sectors are style factors outperform the S&P 500 during downturns and the red bars show you which sectors and style factors normally underperform during these cyclical downturns.

Now, again, these are just averages over many, many cycles. So if you're a stock picker and you know that we're in a cyclical downturn, what sectors are you going to want to pick your stocks from? Probably health care, utilities, consumer staples. You don't want to be picking stocks from financials, industrials and materials on average. Those are going to be your market laggards.

So let's review what we've covered so far because that was a lot of information. The cyclical trend is the 6 to 8 months direction of economic growth. And a cyclical upturn is when growth is trending higher and a cyclical downturn is when growth is trending lower. When the economy is in a cyclical upturn, you want to take risk as much risk as you can. And when the economy is in a cyclical downturn, you want to stay as defensive as you possibly can. So before concluding and throwing out a couple of ETF ideas, I just want to cover how we go about spotting these inflection points or these pivots from downturn to upturn, because all the money is really made at the inflection points. Understanding where the trend is is not that difficult. We want to understand where the trend is going.

So in black here we have our cyclical trend. This is obviously a sketch and the data that define this cyclical trend is called coincident data because it coincides with the cycle peaks and troughs. It defines the cycle. To get an idea of where the cyclical trend is heading, to stay ahead of the Fed, to stay ahead of most market participants, we need to look at leading economic indicators. And this is really the basis of my entire service. The study of leading indicators. Defining the trend is relatively easy. We want to know where the trend is going now. The study of leading indicators can get quite nuanced and not have too much time to go into it in depth today. But we actually break these leading indicators into two buckets longer leading and shorter leading indicators, and this gives us great confidence in knowing the future trend. Because if the economy is in a cyclical upturn, let's say, and I alert subscribers that longer leading indicators have turned down, we don't do anything with this information. We just are on alert that longer leading indicators have turned out. But then a couple of months later, I tell subscribers that shorter leading indicators have also turned down. Now we start to make our switch in terms of asset allocation or go from taking a lot of risk to taking less risk, because now we know that coincident data or the trend is about to flip as well. And the problem is that most people, including the Fed, only look at coincident data like employment. Everyone is still talking about employment. Employment is still strong. You hear all the time, but this is why they always miss it. They're not looking forward. We can have sharp declines in leading indicators, but if you're looking at employment and saying it's still strong, you're going to miss what's coming in the next couple of quarters.

So inside EPB Macro Research, we watch this progression from longer leading to shorter leading data to coincident data. The data defines the trend and the coincident data doesn't tell you where you're going. It just tells you the current trend, which is why you need leading indicators. So let's look at the equation today. The cyclical trend is down. You saw that in the charts of the ISM PMI as well as the coincident index that I posted. We're in a clearly defined cyclical downturn in the economy. Now, I didn't have time to go through the actual leading indicators. I just wanted to show you the process, but I can tell you that the leading indicators are sharply lower right now. So that means that the current downturn in growth that we are currently experiencing will not end in the next couple of months. And you have to add on top of that, pretty extreme levels of monetary tightening from the Fed. And that cocktail gives you an extremely high likelihood of a recession in the next 12 months.

So how do we play that? Here's a couple ideas. The study of cycles tells us that long term Treasury bonds normally perform very well when the economy is in a cyclical downturn, because when you're in a cyclical downturn, the Fed is usually cutting interest rates. Now this time is a little bit different, and the Fed has been raising interest rates, even though the economy is in a clear downturn. So long term Treasury bond ETF, TLT, has been falling as a result of these rate hikes. But as the economy gets closer and closer to a recession, which it is with each passing day, those rate hikes will have no choice but to turn to rate cuts in 2023, and TLT will try and sniff that out. It already is. Do you look at the forward projections of the Fed funds futures market? The market is already pricing in almost 100 basis points of cuts in 2023. So I think that TLT will be a strong performer as we move closer to recession towards the back half of the year and into 2023. And it offers great values since it's been beaten down with these rate hikes as the economy goes into a recession. The historical data supports this as well. It's a great hedge to a portfolio that may be heavy in stocks. If we're going into a recession. TLT can be quite volatile. So if you want the same basic trade with less volatility, IEF is a 7 to 10 year Treasury bonds, another security that will likely benefit as the economy goes into a recession and the Fed is forced to start cutting interest rates later in 2023. So TLT and IEF are two bond positions that you may want to consider to your portfolio as the economy continues to grind lower. They have not performed well year to date because of the rate hikes. But as these hikes flip to cuts, I expect that they will change their relative performance. Utilities is a sector that you should keep on your radar screen if you're more focused on the equity market. Utilities are traditionally one of the most defensive sectors of the stock market, and they've been holding pretty true to that description. The broader S&P 500 is down 15 to 20% year to date, and XLU used flat actually up as of recording this. This is perfectly consistent with a cyclical downturn. So I also like XLU as a relative performer as long as the economy continues to go down. If the economy does fall into a recession is a strong chance that XLU will fall in value. But it will relatively outperform. The economy goes into a recession, the earlier securities, the bonds will probably go up.

So this last ETF that I'm gonna show is a little bit more outside the box. It's more of a fun ETF, but it's done really well this year. BTAL, it's a market neutral ETF. That means it has no directional exposure. And what the ETF does, is it is long, low beta stocks, and it is short high beta stocks in a market neutral way. High beta stocks generally perform terribly during cyclical upturns. So this is a perfectly good ETF for this cyclical regime, and its performance has been very consistent with history. So this is again, long, low beta, short high beta. And as the economy continues to cycle down, I would expect high beta to underperform. And this is again market neutral. So we've seen very, very, very strong performance in this ETF. I would continue to keep this one on your radar screen as well, as long as the economy continues to cycle down, which is the forecast over the next couple of months.

So remember this chart from one of the earlier slides. This shows the historical excess performance on average during cyclical upturns and downturns. And I just want to show how this is proving true again this cycle. If we take the top three equity sectors now, I'm just focused on the equity market here, the top three equity sectors that you want to be long of, or more overweight of during a cyclical downturn are health care, utilities and consumer staples. The bottom three sectors that you want to be, that you want to avoid or be underweight during a cyclical downturn are industrials, financials and emerging markets. So let's see how those have done year to date. Very consistent with history. The defensive sectors are outperforming the riskier sectors. So this is exactly how we can use these cyclical trends to pick sectors or even pick individual stocks within the sectors. Again, if you're a stock picker, you'll know which sectors that you want to focus on.

So if there's one major takeaway from the slides here and everything that I just said, it's that when the economy is in a cyclical downturn, you want to play defense for as long as it takes because it is not time to take risks. You'll be punished for taking risks. But when the economy flips to a cyclical upturn, which it will at some point you want to take as much risk as you can tolerate. That's the time to swing big. You are rewarded for taking risks during cyclical upturns.

So I'd love to take any questions that there are, but I'd just like to first suggest that if anyone found any of this information useful, they should consider the EPB Macro Research Newsletter, because I provide you weekly updates to the cyclical trend that I just discussed, so you'll always know what the current trend is. You also get access to my real time ETF buy list, which has basically all of the sectors that that generally perform well on average during these downturns. All of my picks are a little bit longer term. They're for the 6 to 12 month view. So you get access to that buy list. I throw about 1 to 2 picks a month onto that buy list. It's only $99 bucks for the first year for these weekly updates that you always know where the cyclical trend is. And then it's $199 every year thereafter, no price increases beyond that first year and second year jump because it's an introductory price. As a bonus, you also get a reference guide, an ETF Reference Guide, which has basically all the sectors and style factors and assets that perform well during each regime. So currencies, commodities, sectors, so that you always know which sectors to be looking at, what sectors to avoid. The full EPB Macro Research subscription is $999 per year, so the newsletter is a great place to get you a taste of what I do. It's got tons and tons of information on these cyclical trends and which sectors are best for the current regime. So you can take the newsletter subscription, and upgrade if you find it useful to the full service. The full service has long term asset allocation portfolios, a members chat room, tons of personal access to me for questions. We really chat all day long in that chat room, and I'm answering dozens and dozens of questions per day. The chatroom is really a great place, but I encourage everyone to check out the newsletter if you are interested in having a real time update on this cyclical trend, knowing where we are in the economy, and what the regime is going to be going forward. So with that, if there are any questions, I would be more than glad to try and answer them. And I really appreciate everyone for listening to these slides here.

Daniel Snyder

Eric, man, we really appreciate it that was such a great job. I know my eyes were on the screen the entire time. I keep seeing one question that I want to get to real quick before all the other ones that keep coming through, is people are wondering, they didn't really see it on your slides, but what do you think about energy? They didn't see the XLE, you know, is it under the commodities? Or where doees that fall within the cyclical trend?

Eric Basmajian

Yeah, good question, if you could, you still see my screen here?

Daniel Snyder

Yes, we can.

Eric Basmajian

Okay. Yes. So this slide here is a little bit abridged just because I couldn't fit everything onto one slide. So I had to cut it down a little bit. But yes, that is a really good question. And this is also a important point to make, is that on average, these are averages across many, many cycles. There's been ten cyclical upturns and ten cyclical downturns over the last 30 years. So on average, energy tends to be a laggard. You don't want to be in energy during a cyclical downturn because generally commodity prices come down when the economy is faltering. There's a little bit of an anomaly this cycle, obviously, because of some of the supply chain constraints. However, I believe that by the conclusion of this downturn, this time's not going to be any different than the other ones. The only commodity that's really still standing of the broad commodities is oil. We've seen copper take a big fall. We've seen most of the industrial commodities take a big fall right on schedule as they were supposed to. But oil tends to be a little bit more lagging because it's well, it is industrial focused. It actually is a huge service sector component with people driving and airlines. So oil tends to fall after the industrial commodities like copper. I track other things like zinc, rubber, rosin, those commodities are exclusively industrial commodities and they always fall first. So energy tends to move very late. Very, very late in the cycle because of oil. So, yes, energy has been a good performer so far. But by the conclusion of this downturn, I do not expect this cycle to be any different. I expect the cycle to drag oil down as the economy moves into a recession and therefore the energy sector would come down. But it's not on this chart. But yes, as a as a general rule, on average, you want to be long of energy related equities when the economy is moving higher, when the economy's accelerating, because that's generally when your commodities are rising in value.

Daniel Snyder

Thank you for clarifying. I think there were there was a handful of people that were wondering about that. And we actually have another group of people since we're on the slide, why want you guys to see the slide up that they're asking where does the technology sector play during a cyclical downturn trend? They didn't really see the sector illustrated in your side. Are you including that in growth?

Eric Basmajian

Yeah. So I excluded the technology sector because I wanted to add some nuance of the question came up. So I'm glad that it did. So, yes, growth generally means technology. So growth or technology generally tends to perform well in the cyclical downturns on average. But I want to make a huge distinction for technology, because the growth ETFs or the growth sector is really dominated by, let's say, like Apple, Microsoft, Google, these are the sectors that really dominate growth. And during a cyclical downturn, those sectors will perform well, they are interest rate sensitive. So it's the same concept as the long term treasury bonds. Normally they perform really, really well. But this has been a different cycle because the Fed has been hiking rates into a downturn. That's putting pressure on anything that's sensitive to interest rates. But again, at the conclusion of the downturn, the downturn won't end until we have a rate cutting cycle. So the long term bonds will gain their performance back as the Fed cuts because the cycle won't end until they cut. And then the growth and technology will also regain their outperformance as the Fed cuts. So technology is on the left side of the screen. It is a generally good performer during cyclical downturns. But again, I mentioned the big mega-cap technology. That's where you're going to want to stick. The ARK type stuff. That stuff doesn't always perform so well in a cyclical downturn as the economy goes into a recession. So you have to split the technology sector between big mega-cap conglomerate tech, that gets a check for the cyclical downturns, and then the ark type stuff, the speculative tech that doesn't get a check during the cyclical upturns. Now, I know that the technology sector writ large has not performed well, but again, it's because of the rate hikes. And as rate hikes flip to rate cuts, then the technology sector, specifically those mega-cap conglomerates will show their outperformance during this cycle.

Daniel Snyder

Eric Let's piggy back off that. But the tech that you're talking about with ARK and everything else not accurately representing, we had a question come through asking if the NASDAQ was still an accurate reflection of current technology and AI stocks, given digitalization lagging representation, and the GDP. They were just kind of curious. What were your thoughts on that, if you had any?

Eric Basmajian

Yeah, think so. I mean, the NASDAQ is basically dominated by those big companies, Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon, Facebook. And and I think it still does capture a pretty good representation. I mean, the question is a little bit outside of my wheelhouse. You know, I'm not an expert in the automation sort of AI type stuff. I'm generally focused on these bigger macro trends. But I think that the technology sector, the NASDAQ still does do a pretty good job. I mean, you could probably find individual indexes that try and do a better job of specifically capturing some of that automation. But for the general trend, I think that these big mega-cap conglomerates still do capture that trend because that's the benefit or the advantage that they have, especially in a lower interest rate environment, is that they have access to capital markets that they can just borrow and buy the growth or the automation that they need. And we said these companies are serial acquirers of smaller, more innovative companies. So I do think that ultimately a lot of this new age tech filters into these big companies in in one way or another, whether it's a subsidiary or a fully owned entity.

Daniel Snyder

That's great. I want to go ahead and tee you up with a two-parter. We had somebody on this chart specifically, I think a lot of people are looking at this. And somebody pointed out value has been beating growth lately, hasn't it? Question mark. But according to your chart, it should be down more than growth because they see value on the right side at -2.5% with growth obviously on the left side, 2.4%. And then the follow up for that is think, Jorge, I'm sorry if I'm pronouncing your name wrong, but he's asking what is included in value. So if you might provide me a little insight.

Eric Basmajian

Yeah, so good question. So again, by the conclusion of this downturn, I believe that value is going to underperform growth. We've only halfway through this downturn, so we can't judge the performance of this downturn yet because we haven't seen the end of it. And the only part of this downturn that we've seen is the rate hikes. And the rate hikes disproportionately impact assets that are sensitive to duration, which means technology, which means bonds, which means growth. So that's why we've seen the growth stocks underperform in this first half of the downturn. Normally in downturns, rate hikes never come. Rate hikes only come during upturns, which is why the performance is stacked this way. But this downturn will not end until we have a rate cutting cycle because the momentum of the economy is moving lower and the Fed is pushing us down the hill even faster with these rate hikes. So we will have to go through a rate cutting cycle in order for this downturn to flip to an upturn. And when we do go through that rate cutting cycle value will massively underperform growth. And I believe that the conclusion of the downturn will end up being representative of this chart. But yes, up until this point, growth has underperformed value that only because we're halfway through the downturn, we can't judge the performance until it's fully done. And it's because that the first half of the downturn has come with rate hikes, which is historically very inconsistent. The value sector or value style factor to take the second part of the question is generally composed of all of the sectors that you see on the right side of the screen, which are the materials, the industrials, the energy, the financials, your economically sensitive sectors and your growth is really your technology. So that's the split between the two of them. So, yes, I fully recognize that growth has underperformed value so far. But we are in the middle of a downturn. We're not at the end and we haven't seen the rate cutting part of this downturn, which is the reason growth outperforms value.

Daniel Snyder

Good insights. I want to follow up on that as well. I mean, I want to get to a couple more of these while we're on the slide. We saw a handful of questions come in, obviously, about the energy complex, which we touched on a second ago. And now we also have this question about gold. How do you think gold is going to perform during the downtrend? Does that fall under your commodities as well?

Eric Basmajian

Yet another good question. So I separate commodities into kind of three different commodities. We have gold, we have industrial commodities like copper, zinc, all of your really base metals. And then we have oil, right? So gold may decline in a cyclical downturn because if the economy goes into a recession and you get a whiff of deflation, gold may go down in value. However, gold will outperform your base metals, your copper, your zinc, your aluminum, and it will outperform oil most likely in a recession. So when the economy's trending down and is going into a recession, I like gold. Gold is a good exposure, even though it may decline in absolute terms, it outperforms in relative terms. So I think that we have to split the commodity bucket. Gold is sort of your very stable foundation. Then you have your really economically sensitive industrial commodities like copper, and then you have oil, which is service sector based. Gold should outperform the rest of the commodity complex even if it's falling in value. So for example, gold is down. I think the last time I checked 2 or 3% year to date, it's not positive, but it's outperforming something like copper, which has declined 30% in the last month or so. So that's very consistent. So gold good asset in relative terms, may decline in absolute terms, but it should hold up better than the rest of the commodity complex.

Daniel Snyder

Eric, let's, you know, this is devil's advocate. This also came through pretty much based off of what you just said about, you know, the cyclical nature of the economy. We're seeing all the commodity prices that are extremely volatile right now. Right? Like, take liquid natural gas with all the stuff going on in Europe or the supply chain issues that we've had. I think some people are wondering, you know, with the lack of supply and demand so high, the prices have to go up. So how are commodity prices coming down? Is that just based off of the downturn in the cycle? Are you expecting those to come down or what's your opinion on that?

Eric Basmajian

Yeah, I mean, we've seen the industrial commodities come down in price despite, you know, we hear a lot like, you know, when copper was rising and the economy is starting to turn down. All we heard was copper is not going to go down this time because EVs and EVs are going to cause us to have so much more demand for copper that than it was previously. So copper is not cyclical anymore. And of course, provide it a couple of weeks, couple of months and boom, copper goes down 30% just with the cycle. I'm not discounting the supply issues. There are certainly supply issues. But you think about something like wheat also. A supply issue was caused by the invasion of Ukraine. Wheat prices went went sky high. Everyone said, you know, we're only going up, up, up. And all of a sudden wheat prices are lower than they were before the invasion. So supply is a very important factor, but supply tends to be a slower moving variable than demand. Demand tends to be the swing factor for most of these commodities. So as growth continues to move lower and lower and lower and the economy goes into a recession, you can see the change in demand will be much more rapid than the change in supply. So I'm not saying supply doesn't matter, but when you when you're looking at what's going to move the price of the commodity on the margin, it's almost always going to be the demand because it can just change so rapidly. So for example, we have a supply demand curve with oil. You know, people will say, well, maybe we're 1 million, 2 million, 3 million barrels, let's say undersupplied, but you go into a recession, you can knock 4 million barrels off demand just like that. It's really difficult to change supply that rapidly. So demand tends to be the marginal swing factor in the price of these commodities. We heard it with the industrials. We heard that the industrials weren't going to go down this time because supply was constrained. And just like that, 30% in a month, copper is now trending down almost as low as it was in 2018-19 again. So I think that, yes, supply is a factor. But demand is really the swing factor here.

Daniel Snyder

Yeah. I mean, hence the interest rate hikes, right? Crush the demand since you can't control the supply. Now I want to move on from commodities in those sectors that we were talking about and touch on a couple of different investment classes as well. Like for instance, this question came through, what would you be thinking about real estate investment trusts or just real estate in general during these cyclical downturns like right now?

Eric Basmajian

Yeah, great, great, great question. And real estate is another one that's quite nuanced. You know, financials is less nuance. Right? When growth is trending higher, all financials tend to do well. When growth is trending lower, all financials tend to do poorly. The real estate sector, you got to look at a little bit more nuance. And I don't love the real estate sector because there's no great ETF that that breaks it down. It's, you know, it's all bucketed into one large REIT ETF for the most part, at least the big liquid ones. And you have to think about what are the different components of these REIT ETFs. You have something like residential apartments, you have storage, you have cell tower. Those tend to be more defensive in nature. So those sectors can perform better during a cyclical downturn. But then you have stuff like hotels, malls, mortgage REITs. Those obviously are much more tied to the economy. So those tend to be really cyclical and those tend to perform really poorly during cyclical downturns. So the REIT sector is interesting and require some nuance because you have some subsets of the REIT sector, mainly the cell tower, the storage and some of the apartments that are a lot less cyclical. Then you have some wildly cyclical parts like the malls, shopping centers, hotels, things like that, and mortgages that you got to be careful of. And that's why when you test the REIT ETF on a back test over these cycles, you know, when you do an upturn or downturn versus financials, you get a huge green bar during upturns and you get a huge bar during downturns. The REIT one tends to be a little bit more clustered in the middle without huge disparity because there's so much differences under the hood. So if I was going to play the REIT space during upturns and downturns when we're in a downturn, you want to stick with these subcategories of the REIT's that are most defensive. But when you're in an upturn, you want to stick with the subcategories that are that are most cyclical, most offensive.

Daniel Snyder

Yeah, that's awesome. Hey, can you do me a favor and actually go back to the slide that showed the S&P 500 and investing in that? Wait, there it is right there in the uptrend versus downtrend or just over time, I want to go ahead and run another poll for everybody that's with us still. I mean, all the real ones that are stuck around with us this long. I just want to ask you this question and kind of get a gauge from everybody who's still here. Do you take economic trends into consideration before investing into an ETF or a stock? So go ahead and look at your screen real quick for us. Go ahead and leave your response. Yes, of course. No, I never have. Or, you know, some of you may have learned something new today as Eric was presenting and now you're like, oh, I should now really look at the economic cycle. Because look, I mean, look at the difference in the returns between catching the uptrends. Obviously, you don't want to catch the downtrend. That doesn't look friendly at all. Let's provide another here second or two.

Eric Basmajian

Yeah, well, everyone's voting. I mean, you think about what's been happening recently Daniel, right? Like, so we've been in a downturn for the past year and what's been the result? I mean, it's been all chop, no return and a lot of stress, right? So we've been in a downturn. You just you want to be playing defense because this is just what happens when the economy is cycling down and growth is declining. By definition, you're moving closer and closer to a recession, right? And we're hearing companies talk about this now. This was all stuff that was totally, totally forecasted by the leading indicators over a year ago. And we're seeing companies reduce their guidance now. So I believe that this stuff is going to continue. And the the major, major, major gains in the market will come again when the economy rebounds and starts accelerating. And I think people really get hung up on the fact that, hey, growth is still positive. But you got to remember, it's all about direction. It's all rate of change. Are we accelerating or decelerating? That's really the critical point.

Daniel Snyder

That's so true. So I want to go ahead, move on. Thanks for every everyone for participating in that poll. Let's move on to what is your take on geopolitical events and how did those impacts the economic cycle?

Eric Basmajian

Obviously, good question. Can't ignore that one. But my process is very focused on economic data. So if I if I go over here to this slide, let me see here. If I have my leading indicator slide here. Everything for me is leading indicators, right? I have a coincident index which I showed earlier here. This coincident index defines the trend. We know that the trend is going down, the growth rate is decelerating. We don't know where this is heading, though. The coincident data doesn't tell us where we're headed. The leading indicators tell us where we're heading. Now, I'm not a geopolitical expert and I do not speculate on anything that I don't know. And I don't speculate on anything that I don't have concrete data for. So the way that I answer all of these questions, people always say, well, what about the Fed? Well, what about geopolitics? I think it's a huge, huge, huge problem when everyone starts to opine on what's going to happen with geopolitics, or what's going to happen with domestic politics, what's going to happen with the Fed, because these are just sort of subjective opinions. All of these things at some point will come through my indicators, actions that the Fed takes impact. Our monetary and credit aggregates. Monetary and credit aggregates are part of longer leading indicators. So instead of me speculating on what I think the Fed did, I just look at how it impacted the leading indicators. How did the geopolitics impact our current situation? Well, how is it going to impact the data? That's part of the longer or shorter waiting bucket. That's really how I answer all of these questions. I do not opine on what I think Russia's going to do. Are they going to pull out? Are they not going to pull out? Are they.. or what the Fed's going to do? You know, we just end up making huge errors when we put our biases into it and we say, you know, I think I know what the Fed is going to do, or not do. How does it impact the leading indicators? Leading indicators include all of these things that the Fed drives. Monetary aggregates, credit aggregates, interest rates. It all comes through the data. So if it comes to the data, that's how I interpret it. And all the Fed actions are very clearly pushing the leading indicators lower and lower and lower. That's how I interpret that the economy is going to continue moving to the downside. So it's much more of an objective process versus my subjective opinion. I know people may come to trust the opinion that I have and that gives me a license to opine on areas that I'm not an expert on. But , I don't think that I'm worthy of that. I don't think that it's fair to say, you know, I have a have a group of people that are following me. Therefore, I can speculate on all issues across the board. I just let it come to the leading indicators. And however it impacts those is what's going to determine my future outlook.

Daniel Snyder

Yeah you teed this up perfectly too. Since we're here on the longer leading/shorter leading on this slide specifically - we had a question come through I wonder if you might answer this for them, what would you hail as the top three factors or leading indicators to look for that would signal a flip from downtrend to uptrend?

Eric Basmajian

Well, they're asking me to provide away the secret sauce. Oh, I'm only kidding. Okay, I'll break it down this way. From a very high level, we have our coincident data, the black line, which is defined by income consumption, production and employment rate, industrial production, nonfarm payrolls, real retail sales, that kind of stuff. That's your coincident data. Your longer leading indicators tend to be your monetary aggregates, your credit aggregates. You're rate of change in interest rates, whether that's mortgage rates, corporate rates, treasury rates and the housing sector. All of your housing data. And remember what the housing sector you have to differentiate volume versus price. Price lags volume. So today we saw new home sales, the volume of transactions, I mean, imploded down 30-35% maybe even more at this point, maybe down 40% from peak. So longer leading is monetary aggregates, credit aggregates, rate of change in interest rates and the volume of transactions in the housing sector. Shorter leading indicators are things that those variables impact. So you think new orders of durable goods, you're thinking about sort of your industrial metals, manufacturing sentiment, you know, things like that. So that's sort of how to answer that. Those are the areas you want to be looking at without giving you the exact indicator, since those are exactly what I talk about every single week inside of my service. But that's sort of the framing of how you should think about the progression from longer leading to shorter leading to coincident. Why you said that? Well, let's talk about that a second, because a question came through as well is, you know, they're asking, does your service track these things? Of course they do. But how do you notify the people within your service of the changes of these indicators as they change over time? Yeah. So I mean, in the full service, we're talking about this stuff basically every single day in the chat room. I mean, every time a data point comes out, I'll notice a longer leading indicator. This is what the data point was. But I also basically cover this in one monthly report. I have a monthly cyclical update that comes out once per month in usually the second week of the month. And even though I provide interim updates in the chat room and some and some weekly stuff here and there, I have one big report that encompasses the entire thing I tell. I outline what the cyclical trend is. I go through the longer leading indicators. I go through the shorter leading indicators. I make the forecast of what that means, that we're going to be, where we're going to be headed going forward. And then I also say, given that outlook of where we're going, here are some ETF's to think about on the long side. Here are some ETF's to think about on the underweight short side. And that's sort of how I go about it. So I do update this stuff on a weekly basis with some very, very quick blurbs and some quick, you know, a couple of paragraphs every week. That's sort of what I provide on the newsletters, those short weekly updates. But the big meaty update where I take you through the whole process, start to finish every single month is in the full service, and it's just one monthly report and it's one cohesive piece, starting with the coincident cyclical trend. Here's where we're at right now, going into the longer leading - all of them,going to the shorter leading - all of them, and then letting us know where we're headed going forward.

Daniel Snyder

Yeah, Eric go ahead do me a favor, go to that last slide you had as well that covered your newsletter. Go ahead and put that up. I know we're getting to the end of time here. We want to be respectful of everybody's time today and we really appreciate. That's not the slide, is it? Go on to the last one. We want to be respectful of everybody's time. Obviously. everyone thank you for coming and tuning in. There were so many questions that we couldn't get to. So, Eric, I wanted to ask you, obviously, people that that into the service can talk to you and ask you questions and send you messages. But if they don't join your service, is there a way for them to get in contact with you?

Eric Basmajian

Yes. On Seeking Alpha, you could send me a message on my profile. Just go to my profile, my author profile and you can send something directly to my inbox. I'm more than happy to answer any questions that you have about the service or about economic cycles. I'm really open to talking about incoming messages. I like to inform everyone about what I think is going on and sort of teach the process a little bit because there can be a little bit of a learning curve. So you could hit me on the Seeking Alpha inbox any time or you can find me on Twitter. @EPBResearch on Twitter. My DM's are open there so you can send me a direct message there if you happen to be on Twitter. And then if you, if you want to take a free trial of the full service the chat room is really where I'm at most of the time. So that's those are the three places to find me.

Daniel Snyder

That's awesome. And just a reminder for everybody that's leaving in the chat, there's a ton of thank you's for you, Eric. I mean, there's people saying that they learned something new today. Great, great presentation. Just a reminder for everyone that this will be sent out to you for a replay afterwards as well. So you can rewatch this and go over any information that you might feel like you might have missed, or if you tuned in late or anything else like that, that will be sent to your email inbox as well. The link will of course be there for you as well if you didn't capture it in the chat box today. Eric, I can't. I mean, we appreciate you so much. Like I said at the very beginning, you've helped me protect my portfolio and I can't thank you enough. So thanks for helping everybody else out. And any last words? No, thank you. Thank you, Daniel. Thank you. Seeking Alpha. Appreciate everyone who took the time to come in and listen to this. And please do send me a message. Really happy to answer any questions that you guys have. So thank you. All right, everyone, that ends it for today. Watch out for the Fed tomorrow and we'll see you next time.

Tue, 26 Jul 2022 22:58:00 -0500 en text/html https://seekingalpha.com/article/4525657-webinar-replay-staying-one-step-ahead-of-the-fed
Killexams : ISM Manufacturing Below Expectations

This website is using a security service to protect itself from online attacks. The action you just performed triggered the security solution. There are several actions that could trigger this block including submitting a certain word or phrase, a SQL command or malformed data.

Sun, 31 Jul 2022 12:01:00 -0500 en-US text/html https://www.investing.com/analysis/boring-market-ism-manufacturing-below-expectations-200145567
Killexams : US stocks rally after ISM data shows improvement to economy; House Speaker Pelosi visit to Taiwan passes OK

4:15pm: St. Louis Fed president says US not in a recession

The Dow Jones Industrial Average closed Wednesday up 416 points, 1.3%, at 32,813, the Nasdaq Composite added 319 points, 2.6%, to 12,668, and the S&P 500 improved 64 points, 1.6%, to 4,155.

Markets reversed a two-day slide to start the week. Traders shook off some of the concerns involving Nancy Pelosi's visit to Taiwan, which China had urged her not to make, after she landed Tuesday night.

Additionally, comments from St. Louis Federal Reserve President James Bullard were encouraging. 

The regional president told CNBC in an interview that he doesn’t believe the US is in a recession and that interest rate increases should be expected to continue.

“As the chair said, we’re not in recession right now,” he said. “With all the job growth in the first half of the year, it’s hard to say that there was a recession.”

12.05pm: Focus shifts to stronger economic data

The major US indices were up around midday, as investors reviewed stronger data from the Institute for Supply Management (ISM) Services’ report.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average was up 1% at 32,371 points, the S&P 500 rose 1.3% at 4,142 and the Nasdaq Composite was up 2.1% at 12,612.

Michael Hewson, chief market analyst at CMC Markets UK, noted that attention had shifted back to the possibility the US Federal Reserve could pivot on its interest rate policy but was countered by better news from the ISM non-manufacturing purchasing managers index.

“We’ve continued to see pushback on that line of thinking from a succession of Fed speakers, with the latest, St. Louis Fed president James Bullard, who pushed the idea of a Fed funds rate of 3.75% to 4% by the end of this year, and that current Fed policy was far from being restrictive. He also expressed optimism that the US would see positive GDP growth in the second half, and that he wants to see convincing evidence of inflation easing,” Hewson said.

“If Bullard truly believes that we’ll see an H2 rebound, he won’t have been encouraged by today’s July services PMI (purchasing managers’ index) which was confirmed at 47.3. On the other hand, the latest ISM Services report saw an improvement from 55.3 to 56.7, while prices paid fell from 80.1 to 72.3. June factory orders also rose by a better-than-expected 2%.

“This divergence on the ISM relative to PMI rather muddies the waters as to how the US economy is performing, however, one thing that isn’t in doubt is that prices paid are falling. They fell sharply in manufacturing, and have fallen in services, although that hasn’t been enough to take the edge off today’s uptick in yields,” Hewson added.

At midday, the major movers included Starbucks, higher after above-forecast 3Q results on demand for cold drinks. Moderna shares were up over 15% after it also beat analyst expectations. On the other hand, shares of Solaredge Technologies were down over 18%, and Tinder operator Match Group shares were down 17%, both on disappointing 2Q earnings results.

10am: Proactive North America headlines:

DGTL Holdings wins four new Platform-as-a-Service contracts from top consumer packaged goods brands

Trading slump hits Robinhood’s revenues as retail investors tap out

Airbnb (NASDAQ:ABNB)'s 'most profitable Q2 ever' fails to impress edgy investors

PharmaDrug closes sale of German cannabis assets to Khiron Life Sciences

American Battery Technology Company (OTCQB:ABML) appoints industry veteran Lane Belanger as its staff analytical chemist

Todos Medical says poised to branch into MonkeyPox testing as Provista Diagnostics begins validation plan

Doubleview Gold receives final TSX approval for its non-brokered private placement of total gross proceeds of $3,068,241.20

PlantX brings Little West cold-pressed juices to Canada

ImagineAR says Jet Media Network launches Brazilian soccer legend Ronaldinho mobile app with integrated holograms

VolitionRx (NYSE-A:VNRX) awarded $1.5 million in non-dilutive funding

Braxia Scientific enters US telemedicine industry with acquisition of mental health platform KetaMD

Gevo and Alaska Airlines enter into five-year sustainable aviation fuel sales agreement

FansUnite Entertainment says Betting Hero unit expands presence in Pennsylvania through agreement with luxury sports bar Bankroll

Fabled Copper updates on 2022 field exploration programs at Muskwa Copper Project

Snowline Gold 'very encouraged' by scale of mineralized system at Rogue project in the Yukon

Algernon Pharmaceuticals says it has been invited to present IPF and chronic cough study data at American Cough Conference next year

Nextech AR Solutions launches AR Wayfinding and navigation into event space through ARway

AMPD Ventures says subsidiary Departure Lounge’s Metastage secures certification from Microsoft Mixed Reality Capture Studios

Metal Energy unveils 'better than expected' first phase drill results from Manibridge project, Manitoba

American Manganese receives funding from Canada's National Research Council for study on removal of fluoride from battery waste

Cloud DX (TSX-V:CDX, OTCQB:CDXFF) signs contract with Michigan primary care clinic as it continues to scale across US

Golden Minerals reports assay results from first 10 holes of second phase diamond drill program at its Sarita Este property in Argentina

Tribe Property Technologies completes acquisition of a portfolio of strata property management assets from Martello Property Services

MedX Health appoints medical technology veteran Tarek El Hoss as vice president for market development and sales

9.35am: Rollercoaster ride continues

US stocks opened higher on Wednesday with concerns around US-China relations over Nancy Pelosi’s Taiwan visit waning as earnings seasons continues.

Just after the open, the Dow Jones Industrial Average had added 168 points at 32,564 points, while the S&P 500 was up 23 points at 4,114 points and the Nasdaq Composite was up 116 points at 12,465 points.

Shares of drugstore chain CVS Health Corporation and coffee giant Starbucks Corporation were up about 5% and 1% respectively at the open after both companies posted quarterly earnings that beat analyst expectations.

OANDA senior market analyst Craig Erlam said this week had already been shaping up to be a rollercoaster ride and Pelosi’s trip had added just another layer of event risk for the markets.

“There will be hope following the initial response from Beijing that any escalation won't be too severe, although relations between the world's largest economies are clearly hugely strained and deteriorating,” he said.

6.30am: A little bit of calm

US stocks were expected to open slightly higher on Wednesday with China’s muted reaction so far to US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's visit to Taiwan calming overall sentiment.

Investors are also looking to key US PMI services sector data for direction amid prevailing fears that the world’s biggest economy will slide into a recession.

Futures for the Dow Jones Industrial Average were trading 0.4% higher pre-market, while those for the broader S&P 500 index gained 0.4%, and contracts for the tech-laden Nasdaq-100 rose 0.5%.

“Interestingly, the US and European futures are trading higher as investors are feeling relieved that the response from China over Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan was rather a muted one,” said Naeem Aslam, chief market analyst at avatrade.com. “Traders feared for a lot worse situation but in reality, what we had was just a military drill and some supply chain disruption.”

Still, the relief may be misplaced, he warned, noting that investors in Taiwan appear more pessimistic and that there may yet be a stronger response from China.

“In all of this, the country which is going to gain or lose the most is Taiwan, and if we look at the local stock market, there is a lack of optimism there, and this means that international markets aren’t pricing in the risk correctly yet,” Aslam said.

Direction for the day’s trading may well come from the ISM services sector PMI data for July, especially given fears over a weakening economy. Consensus estimates point to slower growth and stocks could come in for a rough ride if the data, due at 10.00am ET, comes in weaker than predicted.

Oil markets too are in focus ahead of OPEC’s meeting and as investors balance the prospect of supply constraints with the possibility of a steep drop in demand as global economic growth falters.

“There are jitters flowing through the oil market today, ahead of an OPEC+ meeting which is expected to bear little fruit when it comes to changing current output mandates. This feeds into anxieties about constrained supply which consumers and wholesalers are very well-versed in at this point,” said Sophie Lund-Yates, lead equity analyst at Hargreaves Lansdown.

“The interesting flipside is that anxieties about a petering of demand seem to be winning in the battle of sentiment. Very actual questions about the health of the global economy mean demand for oil and gas could be in for a contraction that’s so sharp, the supply concerns are void,” she noted.

Against this backdrop, WTI oil futures were 1.1% down at $93.40 a barrel while Brent crude futures were 1.2% lower at $99.32.

Contact the author at jon.hopkins@proactiveinvestors.com

Wed, 03 Aug 2022 04:18:00 -0500 en text/html https://www.proactiveinvestors.com/companies/news/989096/us-stocks-higher-midday-as-ism-data-shows-improvement-to-economy-989096.html
Killexams : Dow Futures Up 120 Pts; ISM Services PMI Data Due

This website is using a security service to protect itself from online attacks. The action you just performed triggered the security solution. There are several actions that could trigger this block including submitting a certain word or phrase, a SQL command or malformed data.

Tue, 02 Aug 2022 18:55:00 -0500 en-US text/html https://www.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/dow-futures-up-120-pts-ism-services-pmi-data-due-2861763
Killexams : S&P 500, FTSE 100 Week Ahead: NFP, ISM And Boe Rate Decision

(MENAFN- DailyFX) S&P 500, FTSE 100 Analysis and News

  • S&P 500 | Registering Best Month Since November 2020
  • FTSE 100 |25 or 50bps for the Bank of England


S&P 500 | Registering Best Month Since November 2020

The S&P 500 is on course to post its largest monthly rise since November 2020, up over 8%. A reminder that within our Q3 equity guide we did highlight that in the top 10 worst H1 performances, Q3 did tend to mark a bounceback on average of over 7%. The best month of which had been for July.

Source: Refinitiv, DailyFX

The move has come despite the fact that inflation has not peaked in headline CPI and soft activity survey data has flagged a worrying growth outlook. That being said, Fed Chair Powell's presser had been interpreted by the market as dovish, after the Fed Chair removed forward guidance and signalled that the Fed would be data dependent. Consequently, with data softening, markets have priced out aggressive rate hikes in favour of a 50bps rise for the September meeting. However, upcoming data in the weeks ahead will ultimately dictate the size of the next rate increase and thus market sensitivity to economic data will increase. As such, traders will be closely watching the upcoming PMI data as well as the latest NFP report.

Markets Price Out Aggressive Rate Hikes

Source: CME

On the technical front, a break above the 100DMA opens the door toward resistance at 4180-4200. Meanwhile, support is situated at 4015 and 3930.

S&P 500 Chart: Daily Time Frame

Source: Refinitiv

FTSE 100 | 25 or 50bps for the Bank of England

The Bank of England will release their latest monetary policy report, the question heading into the decision is whether they will hike 25bps or 50bps. While money markets are pretty convinced that the move will be 50bps with an 86% probability, economists polled are much more 50/50 on the matter. Consequently, we could be shaping up for yet another hawkish disappointment from the BoE, which would boost the FTSE 100 in such an event. The base case scenario, sticking with a 25bps rate rise.

That said, with the FTSE 100 eclipsing the 100 and 200DMAs, there is little in the way until 7500. However, it is worthwhile noting that we are nearing overbought territory and thus gains from here on in, may begin to slow.

Source: Refinitiv

Whether you are a new or experienced trader, we have several resources available to help you; indicators for tracking trader sentiment , quarterly trading forecasts , analytical and educational webinars held daily, trading guides to help you Excellerate trading performance, and one specifically for those who are new to forex .

MENAFN31072022000076011015ID1104621098


Legal Disclaimer:
MENAFN provides the information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.

Sun, 31 Jul 2022 00:16:00 -0500 Date text/html https://menafn.com/1104621100/SP-500-FTSE-100-Week-Ahead-NFP-ISM-And-Boe-Rate-Decision
CPSM exam dump and training guide direct download
Training Exams List