Home

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Lying with statistics

  • Mar. 24th, 2008 at 10:07 AM
side-beard-flip
The WSJ swallows the National Association of Realtors press release by reporting: Existing-home sales climbed 2.9%, the first increase in seven months, during February as buyers took advantage of sharply falling prices. The median dropped 8.2% to $195,900, but inventories also declined..

The problem is that sales numbers were not seasonally adjusted. January is the low point of the year for home sales, thus it is no surprise that month-on-month prices had been dropping and have now risen again. Year-on-year sales are still way down:



High inventories should result in falling prices and increased sales, which is how the surplus inventory goes away and the market re-establishes an equilibrium after all the bubble-fueled overinvestment in housing. But we are far from being out of the woods yet. (Calculated Risk has more graphs and analysis).

Comments

[info]perich wrote:
Mar. 24th, 2008 05:32 pm (UTC)
See, I read this AP article:

"After falling for six straight months, sales of existing homes posted an unexpected increase in February. But the median home price tumbled by the largest amount on record."

... and my first thought was, "Why is there a 'but' there? What should I expect a good to do after prices fall - sell less?"
[info]nemene wrote:
Mar. 24th, 2008 05:50 pm (UTC)
Its got to do with elasticiti and responce times. Basically Price and # of sales are both products of demand. If Demand shifts up you expect both to go up, if shifts down you expect both to go down. When prices fall and number of sales increase then you do not necessarily have a shift in demand, but rather the market adjusting to find the new optimum.
[info]perich wrote:
Mar. 24th, 2008 05:51 pm (UTC)
rather the market adjusting to find the new optimum.

Right. I think this is what I meant.
[info]patrissimo wrote:
Mar. 24th, 2008 11:40 pm (UTC)
Well, year-on-year, prices and sales are both down. But yeah, the "but" you quoted is nonsense. We should expect volume to go up when prices go down. Unless things are really fucked. Which they are :).
[info]nemene wrote:
Mar. 24th, 2008 05:52 pm (UTC)
Lies, Damn Lies and what was the last one.

but looking at the chart it looks like '08 is narrowing the Y/Y gap. Feburary is not as much lower as January was.
[info]prock wrote:
Mar. 24th, 2008 06:19 pm (UTC)
it looks like '08 is narrowing the Y/Y gap

It's very difficult to take single samples and draw such strong conclusions, so while it may look that way, variance suggests that it could in fact swing either way. If you looks at the broader trends, it looks likely that less homes will be sold in 2008 than in 2007.
[info]oliana0 wrote:
Mar. 24th, 2008 05:53 pm (UTC)
Thanks for the link. Interesting stuff. I blame TLC and H&G. They make turning a house over for a large profit look glamorous and "hip." You know, in the same way that violent computer games makes kids violent.

It's kind of weird to consider "months of supply" of homes for sale. Also, looking at the data, from a pure data analysis perspective, it looks like Mid 2005 would have been a the first red flag for bad things to come. I'd be interested in seeing statistics on this going back over various market fluctuations (like decades of data).
[info]coliningus wrote:
Mar. 24th, 2008 05:55 pm (UTC)
It is even worse than that, since this February had 3.6% more days than usual.

Sales in February 2008 (5.03 million SAAR) were the weakest February since 1998 (4.77 million SAAR).

Except if you look at SAAR/day to correct for the leap day, 2008 was worse than 1998 too!
[info]nemene wrote:
Mar. 24th, 2008 08:14 pm (UTC)
That is a difficult one to say for certain, because not all days of the week are created equal. You end up needing to compare counts for each day of the week and weighing them according to typical activity levels for the day of the week. If this is closing data I would expect weekends to be lower then weekdays, if this is offers then I would expect Saturday to be the high day of the week. Once you take that all into account I am not sure that leap day would have a significant impact. (ALSO afterall we do tend to treat each of the months as equal, and feb with leap day is still shorter then any other month.)

I am curious what a graph of rolling 28 day blocks would look like, would it smoth out some of the monthly variation or not?
[info]brec wrote:
Mar. 24th, 2008 07:23 pm (UTC)
Why do you say the numbers weren't seasonally adjusted? The press release says:
Existing-home sales – including single-family, townhomes, condominiums and co-ops – rose 2.9 percent to a seasonally adjusted annual rate (1) of 5.03 million units in February from a pace of 4.89 million in January... [emphasis added]
The footnote explains the meaning of annual rate and seaonally adjusted.
[info]patrissimo wrote:
Mar. 24th, 2008 11:43 pm (UTC)
You're right, thanks.
[info]patrissimo wrote:
Mar. 24th, 2008 11:44 pm (UTC)
They don't mention taking into account the leap day, though, and 3.6% extra days is big on the scale of the change they are talking about (+2.9%).
[info]hgfalling wrote:
Mar. 25th, 2008 04:15 am (UTC)
This data beat analysts' expectations fairly significantly (I believe the consensus was that it would be negative. So in that sense, it's a light bit of positive news in the ocean of muck that is the housing market.
[info]patrissimo wrote:
Mar. 25th, 2008 11:06 pm (UTC)
that makes sense.
[info]beth_leonard wrote:
Mar. 25th, 2008 07:52 am (UTC)
So when should I buy an investment property Mr. Market-perfect-timing-guy?
--Beth
[info]patrissimo wrote:
Mar. 25th, 2008 11:06 pm (UTC)
Not for at least a couple years! Case-Shiller (quality-adjusted home price index) futures predict an 18% decline over the next year alone in the US for residential home prices. It would be a terrible idea to buy an investment property now.
[info]bittercrackbaby wrote:
Mar. 26th, 2008 05:58 am (UTC)
I would expect it to be 2010/11 where we could see traction. There are still going to be pockets like in various parts of the South Bay where the market will stay tight.

Latest Month

July 2009
S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031 

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow