Succinct Summations week ending March 29, 2013.

Positives:

1) U.S. markets shrug off Cyprus related news and hit all time highs.
2) Dow climbed to all-time highs — up 11.25% in Q1 (11th best Q1 in 114 years).
3) S&P 500 rose 10% in Q1 — all-time closing high on Thursday.
4) S&P Case-Shiller home price index rose 1% in January 8.1% YoY
5) University of Michigan consumer confidence surges to 78.6
6) Consumer Spending rose 0.7% in February — biggest gain in 5 months.
7) Personal Income up 1.1% in February (Est 0.8%).
8) Q4 GDP gained 0.4%
9) Total Durable Goods Orders rose 5.7%
10) Dallas Fed general business activity index 7.4 vs expectations of 3.2

Negatives:

1) Q4 GDP gained 0.4% v expectations of 0.5%.
2) Durable Goods Ex-Transports down 0.5% v expectations for a 0.7% rise.
3) Initial jobless claims jump to 357k
4) Pending home sales fall in February by 0.4% v expectations of a 0.3% decline; Sales up 5% Y/Y, missing expectations of 8.7%.
5) Cyprus mess continues, limits withdrawals to 300 euros a day.
6) Chicago PMI index of Midwest Mfr falls to 52.4 (expectations were 56.5).
7) German retail sales declined by 2.2% in February v a 2.5% gain in January.
8) European bank stock index fell 11 of the past 13 sessions.
9) German unemployment rose 13k in March v an expected drop of 2k.
10) Athens Stock Exchange fell over 6.5% from last Friday’s close.

Category: Markets

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

One Response to “Succinct Summations of Week’s Events (March 29, 2013)”

  1. faulkner says:

    Barry, I’ve been thinking about this re: Succinct Summations for awhile. I want to check if the messages implied in the “information architecture” you are using are intended, and to what extent.

    The numbering of the positives and negatives strongly suggests the top items are much more important than the ones further down. Are the #1 items some multiple times as important as the #10 items? Are the numbers on the negative list approximately equivalent to the corresponding numbers on the positive list? As the lists have an equal number of items, do they cancel each other out?

    Yes, I know the lists are approximations, and intended or nor, the form of their presentation is another example of how the organization of the input affects the process of decision-making, and hence the output.