No guarantee for future predictions

In the world of data intelligence providers it´s evident macroeconomic data is not as appreciated or needed as industrial / sector related analyzes. It should be!

Could it be that both providers and users cannot do without a mutual stalled feeding process while competitive advantages can only be measurable when one provider outperforms the other? What do YOU get what is not delivered to your competitor?

Tailor made analyzes differ too much to qualify them similar to raw data because a consultancy service or support is more than sending a report with numbers.

For macroeconomic data there is a different qualification. Users of country data should more appreciate quality and efficiency but still the opposite is poignant.

Here an overview of the potential single sources for global (!) macroeconomic data and among them those providers most named the past six years (own experience);

- Global Insight
- The Economist (EIU)
- Oxford Economics
- Business Monitor
- Datamonitor
- Euromonitor
- Bloomberg, Reuters, Gartner etc

There are more but this is about giving an example of well known providers that have one opinion - their own - while they all offer (similar) industrial data too. A kind of one-stop-shop but then with one opinion while overlapping is common.

Now other alternatives for latest economic forecasts & outlooks are:

- Consensus Economics (our only global direct competitor but not in quality-synergy)
- Banks (amazing how strong people judge their own contacts and get "last" updates)
- Multilateral organizations and central banks (when you like 2-4 updates a year)
- Consultants (valuable but elsewhere, remain single opinion for economic outlooks)

This is not a "competitive study" or "total product comparison" but to point at who is outperforming who or indirectly calling for the leading position of macro data.

Years ago some of these above mentioned providers proudly presented how they beat a consensus (average) by using very little and not constant data but market rumors tell this can again be expected. It is time asking "how they do it"!

Unfortunately the past five years were hardly or better not successful in case of forecasting economic indicators globally. Would they proudly present failures too?

Before 2006 for example mostly the US was used and then those indicators that hardly moved such as GDP growth (though not split in consumption and investment) or unemployment rates. Sometimes even CPI ratings but as this again has many components it was not done regularly.

Hence, the US has always been a better analytic study place with weekly and monthly polls and surveys but although still existing it cannot be used at global levels.

With upcoming B(R)IC success and economic distress in the US and other G7 economies results of "out-performers" or "track records" were no longer seen.

Due to the crisis of the past years it is unlikely there are out-performers or those that constantly beat the average in these fast changing global economies.

Conclusion:

Outperforming is hardly possible in forecasting. Using some "soft" years of lesser volatile ones combined with stability is no guarantee for future predictions. Like with investments this should be stated officially and never be used as a feature.

Fortunately for the mentioned providers or other firms dealing with forecasting many in the corporate industry do not care, even not after experiencing the last downturn.

Unfortunately this will not benefit those who care because "no interest in macro" is not because of an immunity in their corporate results, strategies or planning.

"No interest in macro" (improvements) is too often related to the decision maker who uses personal and not business reasons like not willing to discuss or a narrow mind.

The coming years traditional data providers will face hard times when not being able to distinguish (further & better) their services and performances.

Corporate time is much more valuable than "time to read nice economic background stories" or "collecting at internet outdated information".

Risks always demonstrate how difficult they can be measured or tested. Afterward it is easier concluding and making decisions. Industrial leaders should know better.

Finally "purchasing a brand name", "knowing someone at board levels" or "protecting budget to save my job" will no longer be valid due to the ongoing macro complexity.

Getting away with excuses will no longer benefit the organization in downturns, in recoveries and periods of stability or growth. Can your firm afford otherwise?

Macro is no longer a secondary intelligence since no one can constantly outperform others while forecasts are constantly adjusted do to fast country changes.

When a track record or past performance no longer is a guarantee for future predictions what is left is a decision to take that data offering most synergies!!