After numerous days worth of delay, NBS released Q3 GDP, 3.9% y/y and q/q (not annualized), vs. 3.4% and 3.5% Bloomberg consensus (thereby ending the thriller). This is the picture, utilizing an index.
Figure 1: Index of Chinese real GDP, based on cumulated seasonally adjusted q/q development rates (black), and Bloomberg agreement based upon q/q development rate (sky blue square), in logs 2019Q= 0. Source: China NBS, Bloomberg, and authors computations.
Now, as noted in previous post, the seasonally adjusted q/q numbers reported by NBS is a little difficult to reproduce. In Figure 2, I reveal (normalized to 2019Q1= 0) log index, and real GDP as reported (not seasonally adjusted), seasonally adjusted either utilizing (multiplicative) moving average or Census X-13 (carried out in EViews).
Figure 2: Index of Chinese genuine GDP, based on cumulated seasonally adjusted q/q growth rates (black), and Bloomberg consensus based on q/q development rate (sky blue square), genuine GDP seasonally changed by author utilizing multiplicative moving average (tan), and using X-13 with log change (blue), and level indicated by IMF WEO (red square), all in logs 2019Q= 0. Source: China NBS, Bloomberg, IMF WEO (October 2022), and authors computations.
Since indicated levels of GDP for 2021Q4 were the exact same no matter index of cumulated development rates (black) or X-13 adjusted GDP (blue), its evident that a lot faster growth has to happen in Q4 utilizing my adjusted series in order to strike the IMF forecast for 2022Q4
.
