Hooray for the Dot Plot!

The Wall Street Journal reports today that Fed officials are increasingly nervous about the “dot plot” they release periodically. The dot plot shows how each member of the FOMC projects interest rates over the next few years, with one dot for each member. Here’s a Bloomberg version of the dot plot:

Back in 2014, as you can see, projections were all over the place. They ranged from a 2016 projection of 1.5 percent to a projection of 4.25 percent. Today, however, there’s quite a bit more agreement. The projections for 2019 range only from 2.4 percent to 3.1 percent. The “longer term” projections average around 3 percent, a full percentage point lower than the average FOMC projection back in 2014.

Which isn’t bad, really. A miss of one percentage point over the course of five years is hardly a terrible track record.

But that’s not what anyone cares about. Rather, it appears that the most recent dot plot, released in December, has “rattled” some investors. Why? Because it continues to suggest there could be further rate increases this year even though “top Fed leaders” have “signaled” that rates are on hold. “The dot plot to be released Wednesday would muddy this message if it showed several officials still expect to raise rates this year. Fed Chairman Jerome Powell appeared to pre-emptively play down the projections in a recent speech.”

Needless to say, this is not a problem with the dot plot, which is perfectly comprehensible. It’s a problem with the actual opinions of FOMC members, some of whom may not agree with their top leaders. In fact, it sounds like that’s the real problem here: not that the dot plot is too confusing, but that it’s too transparent. If there are several FOMC members who think interest rates should or will go up, the dot plot makes that crystal clear. There’s no way to hide it using fuzzy language the way they do in their press releases.

So hooray for the dot plot. It is raw data in its rawest form: easy to read and easy to interpret. Leave it alone.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend