Brent Donnelly is a senior risk-taker and FX market maker at HSBC New York and has been trading fore
I’m Trying To Understand Hedonic Adjustments
To learn more about Epsilon Theory and be notified when we release new content sign up here. You’ll receive an email every week and your information will never be shared with anyone else.
The Latest From Epsilon Theory
DISCLOSURES
This commentary is being provided to you as general information only and should not be taken as investment advice. The opinions expressed in these materials represent the personal views of the author(s). It is not investment research or a research recommendation, as it does not constitute substantive research or analysis. Any action that you take as a result of information contained in this document is ultimately your responsibility. Epsilon Theory will not accept liability for any loss or damage, including without limitation to any loss of profit, which may arise directly or indirectly from use of or reliance on such information. Consult your investment advisor before making any investment decisions. It must be noted, that no one can accurately predict the future of the market with certainty or guarantee future investment performance. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results. Statements in this communication are forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements and other views expressed herein are as of the date of this publication. Actual future results or occurrences may differ significantly from those anticipated in any forward-looking statements, and there is no guarantee that any predictions will come to pass. The views expressed herein are subject to change at any time, due to numerous market and other factors. Epsilon Theory disclaims any obligation to update publicly or revise any forward-looking statements or views expressed herein. This information is neither an offer to sell nor a solicitation of any offer to buy any securities. This commentary has been prepared without regard to the individual financial circumstances and objectives of persons who receive it. Epsilon Theory recommends that investors independently evaluate particular investments and strategies, and encourages investors to seek the advice of a financial advisor. The appropriateness of a particular investment or strategy will depend on an investor’s individual circumstances and objectives.
This commentary is being provided to you as general information only and should not be taken as investment advice. The opinions expressed in these materials represent the personal views of the author(s). It is not investment research or a research recommendation, as it does not constitute substantive research or analysis. Any action that you take as a result of information contained in this document is ultimately your responsibility. Epsilon Theory will not accept liability for any loss or damage, including without limitation to any loss of profit, which may arise directly or indirectly from use of or reliance on such information. Consult your investment advisor before making any investment decisions. It must be noted, that no one can accurately predict the future of the market with certainty or guarantee future investment performance. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results. Statements in this communication are forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements and other views expressed herein are as of the date of this publication. Actual future results or occurrences may differ significantly from those anticipated in any forward-looking statements, and there is no guarantee that any predictions will come to pass. The views expressed herein are subject to change at any time, due to numerous market and other factors. Epsilon Theory disclaims any obligation to update publicly or revise any forward-looking statements or views expressed herein. This information is neither an offer to sell nor a solicitation of any offer to buy any securities. This commentary has been prepared without regard to the individual financial circumstances and objectives of persons who receive it. Epsilon Theory recommends that investors independently evaluate particular investments and strategies, and encourages investors to seek the advice of a financial advisor. The appropriateness of a particular investment or strategy will depend on an investor’s individual circumstances and objectives.
Another hedonic adjustment is how much more pleasurable life is in 2020 than it was in 1990.
CPI is cost of living any time that making it such keeps the government from paying out more of our money to us. All other times it’s definitely not cost of living. Schrodinger’s CPI.
The truth is what we need it to be —-and this , to me, is the biggest example of all. The real inflation rate cannot be known - the Government’s solvency rests on it.
More and more missionary’s are speaking on the subject and it’s the thing that can bring the whole house of cards down.
Of course they and their renfields in the media will blame the markets and capitalism for the crash and use the whole crisis to consolidate their power. Our road to serfdom will then be complete.
First question: who benefits from CPI as measured? Second question: who benefits from CPI being under reported? Third question: which societal group has had their share of national income under structural pressure over the post Volker years?
Wouldn’t evenly applied hedonic quality adjustments increase the adjusted ‘cost’ of goods which get worse in quality? I’ve never heard that flow rate limiting shower nozzles which cost the same dollar value as good shower nozzles had a huge upward hedonic ‘cost’ adjustment.
Ditto for paper-thin jeans, un-flushable toilets, clothes dryers you have to run three times per load, bloatware-encrusted cheap computers, the thing in cars that beeps at you when it’s angry…
Rather than accept the entire premise and argue with the implementation, I’m going to reject the premise that hedonic quality adjustments are a valid way of measuring constant standard of living. Fortunately, there’s an even simpler reason why we can reject the entire concept. If you assume that overall happiness remains constant across this period of hedonic growth, there’s no reason why we should accept a downwards ‘cost’ adjustment.
Happiness associated with material goods is largely zero-sum. Humans look to those around them for cues about how valuable our possessions are. It doesn’t really matter to my day-to-day life that I live better than Louis XVI if my neighbor gets a new car and I’m still driving my college POS.
Furthermore, we still have to pay the prices out of our pocket. Additionally, as one gentleman memorably put it a few years ago, “we can’t eat iPads!”.
Accepting this simplifies things a lot. Ignore the hedonic adjustments, just do an apples to apples comparison. I’d suggest percent of median income; real income runs into problems if CPI is incorrect. Lets call this new measure subjective inflation and see what it tells us.
I always thought that would make a great thesis for some graduate student.
My God is this just beautifully written and 100% correct.
Thank you!
An under-appreciated issue here is how CPI must be rigged to damp feedback effects. When payments are indexed to inflation metrics (such as social security and union rates), and good/service costs are indexed to inflation expectations via consumer price increases and contractual rate adjustment schemes, you get a self-reinforcing feedback loop. Higher costs → higher income → higher costs. Accurate inflation-measuring combined with automatic contract indexing makes the system dynamically unstable from a control-theory standpoint. It is thus mechanically necessary for system stability that either the inflation adjustments don’t fully compensate for measured inflation, or the inflation metric systematically under-reports real inflation.
Everybody seems to have forgotten the CPI system was DESIGNED to under-report cost of living inflation.
Is that after adjustment for COVID?