are the two major forces, but we definitely have a confluence of factors that drive the secular trend. So correct me if I'm wrong here, but when we talk about indicators, what we're really talking about here is cyclical indicators. In that regard, we have what we broadly call leading indicators, which give us information about what's going to happen in the future. We have coincident indicators, which tells us what's happening right now. We have lagging indicators that are like the forensic evidence that we can look at after the fact, after the event has occurred to say, ah, there was for example, a recession between this date and this date. And is it also fair to say that lagging indicators are actually the most accurate indicators? Yes, I think that was a perfect description. And there's a part in an economic process for all the indicators, the leading, the coincident and the lagging. The lagging indicators tend to be lagging one in terms of where they move in the sequence, but they (12/57)
You are viewing a single comment's thread from: