Silicon Investor - Items affecting stock market picks

[russet] Ranked: Central Banks Buying and Selling Gold in 2026 April 21, 2026 By Nicco...

russet — 4/21/2026 4:38:20 PM

Ranked: Central Banks Buying and Selling Gold in 2026

April 21, 2026

By Niccolo Conte
Editing

Bruno Venditti

Design

Amy Kuo

more visuals like this on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

Central Banks Buying and Selling Gold in 2026See visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

Poland is the largest gold buyer in 2026 so far, adding over 20 tonnes.
Emerging markets are driving most purchases as geopolitical risk rises.
Russia and Turkey are among the biggest sellers, reflecting fiscal and currency pressures.

Central banks are taking diverging paths on gold in 2026.

While countries like Poland, Uzbekistan, and China are adding to their reserves, others, including Russia and Turkey, are selling to manage economic pressures. The split highlights gold’s dual role as both a geopolitical hedge and a source of liquidity.

This chart shows net changes in central bank gold reserves by country so far as of end of February, based on data from the World Gold Council.

Poland Leads Global Gold Buying in 2026

Poland is leading global gold accumulation in 2026, adding over 20 tonnes, more than any other central bank so far this year. This purchase is part of a broader multi-year plan to reach 700 tonnes, reflecting heightened security concerns on NATO’s eastern flank.

Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan follow closely behind, continuing a steady trend of gold accumulation among Central Asian economies.

CountryNet Change in 2026 (Tonnes of Gold)

???? Poland	20.23
???? Uzbekistan	16.48
???? Kazakhstan	6.51
???? Malaysia	4.98
???? Czechia	3.36
???? China	2.18
???? Cambodia	1.69
???? Indonesia	1.51
???? Serbia	0.99
???? Philippines	0.46
???? El Salvador	0.29
???? Singapore	0.20
???? Malta	0.12
???? Mongolia	0.08
???? Egypt	0.06
???? Qatar	0.02
???? Mexico	-0.02
???? Belarus	-0.05
???? Kyrgyzstan	-1.07
???? Bulgaria	-1.88
???? Turkey	-8.08
???? Russia	-15.55

Diversification Away From Dollar ReservesThe freezing of roughly $300 billion in Russian central bank assets in 2022 marked a turning point for global reserve management.

In response, countries like China and several Central Asian economies have accelerated gold purchases, treating bullion as a reserve asset that sits outside the reach of foreign governments. Unlike foreign currency reserves, gold is not subject to foreign jurisdiction, making it attractive in a fragmented geopolitical landscape. Smaller buyers, such as Cambodia and Serbia, are also gradually increasing their allocations.

Why Russia and Turkey Are Selling Gold

On the other side of the ledger, Russia and Turkey are the largest net sellers of gold in 2026.

Russia’s gold sales point to mounting fiscal strain, as wartime spending and sanctions pressure government finances.

Meanwhile, Turkey’s reduction is driven by domestic policy, including efforts to stabilize the lira and manage local gold demand.

[russet] Ranked: The Countries Buying (and Selling) the Most Gold Since 2020 February 11...

russet — 4/21/2026 4:35:35 PM

Ranked: The Countries Buying (and Selling) the Most Gold Since 2020

February 11, 2026

By Niccolo Conte
Editing

Bruno Venditti

Design

Miranda Smith

visuals like this on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

The Countries Buying (and Selling) the Most Gold Since 2020See visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

China, Poland, and Türkiye were the largest gold buyers among central banks between 2020 and 2025.
Gold prices surged more than 230% over the period, fueling one of the strongest official-sector buying waves in decades.
A smaller group of countries reduced holdings, highlighting divergent reserve strategies.

As gold prices surged more than 230% since 2020, central banks around the world launched one of the largest gold-buying waves in modern history.

For many countries, bullion became more than just a hedge—it became a strategic reserve asset amid rising geopolitical tensions, currency volatility, and growing efforts to diversify away from the U.S. dollar.

Yet not every nation followed the same playbook: some were accumulating gold aggressively, while others were trimming reserves.

This chart ranks the countries that made the biggest net additions and the largest reductions in gold reserves over the past five years. The data comes from the World Gold Council.

China and Eastern Europe Lead Gold Buying

Together, the top 15 buyers added nearly 2,000 net tonnes of gold to their reserves over the period, underscoring a broad shift in official sector strategy.

China recorded the largest increase in gold reserves over the period, adding more than 350 tonnes. This move aligns with Beijing’s long-running push to diversify reserves away from the U.S. dollar and reduce exposure to Western financial systems, reinforcing gold’s role as a politically neutral anchor within global reserves.

RankCountryNet change in tonnes (2020-2025)

1	???? China	357.1
2	???? Poland	314.6
3	???? Türkiye	251.8
4	???? India	245.3
5	???? Brazil	105.1
6	???? Azerbaijan	83.6
7	???? Japan	80.8
8	???? Thailand	80.6
9	???? Hungary	78.5
10	???? Singapore	77.3
11	???? Iraq	74.6
12	???? Qatar	73.0
13	???? Czech Rep.	62.8
14	???? Russia	55.4
15	???? United Arab Emirates	51.7

Poland followed China closely in the ranking, increasing its gold holdings by over 300 tonnes as part of a long-term push to bolster monetary security.

Türkiye and India also ranked among the top buyers. Both countries face persistent inflation pressures and currency volatility, making gold an attractive hedge within official reserves.

Emerging Markets Step Up Accumulation

Beyond the largest buyers, several emerging markets made notable additions. Brazil added more than 100 tonnes, while Azerbaijan’s increase came through its sovereign wealth fund, the State Oil Fund of the Republic of Azerbaijan.

Japan, Thailand, Hungary, and Singapore also expanded reserves, signaling broader global interest in gold as a stabilizing asset during periods of economic uncertainty.

Who Reduced Gold Holdings?While many central banks were building gold stockpiles, a smaller group reduced exposure, highlighting sharply different reserve priorities.

The Philippines recorded the largest reduction, cutting reserves by more than 65 tonnes. Kazakhstan and Sri Lanka also posted significant declines, often reflecting domestic liquidity pressures or active reserve rebalancing during periods of economic stress.

RankCountryNet change in tonnes (2020-2025)

1	???? Philippines	-65.2
2	???? Kazakhstan	-52.4
3	???? Sri Lanka	-19.1
4	???? Germany	-16.3
5	???? Mongolia	-15.9
6	???? Tajikistan	-11.9
7	???? Euro Area (average)	-10.8
8	???? Colombia	-9.2
9	???? Finland	-5.4
10	???? Curaçao & St. Maarten	-3.9
11	???? Solomon Islands	-0.6
12	???? Suriname	-0.4
13	???? Malta	-0.3
14	???? Ethiopia	-0.2
15	???? Switzerland	-0.1

Several European countries, including Germany and Finland, posted modest reductions. Switzerland’s change was minimal, underscoring its generally stable approach to gold management compared with more active buyers elsewhere.

Taken together, the data shows how gold has reasserted itself as a cornerstone of global reserves, even as countries take sharply different paths in preparing for an uncertain monetary future.

[russet] Mapped: Which Countries Hold the Most Gold Reserves? November 18, 2025 By Br...

russet — 4/21/2026 4:32:44 PM

Mapped: Which Countries Hold the Most Gold Reserves?

November 18, 2025

By Bruno Venditti
Design

Anna Diederichs

more visualizations like this on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

Mapped: Which Countries Hold the Most Gold Reserves?See visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

The U.S. and Europe hold over 60% of global gold reserves as of 2024.
China added 331 tonnes between 2019 and 2024, lifting its total to 2,280 tonnes.
India, Poland, and Turkey saw major increases from 2019 to 2024.
Poland’s holdings jumped from 2019 to 2024, reaching 448 tonnes.

Gold remains one of the world’s most enduring stores of value, and central banks continue to accumulate it at record levels. The buying also cause the metal to hit record high prices in 2025.

This map highlights which countries hold the most gold in their official reserves. The data for this visualization comes from BullionVault, which tracks global central bank gold holdings. Figures represent official gold reserves in tonnes as of 2024.

Collectively, the U.S. and Europe control more than 60% of all reported reserves.

Rank

Country

Gold reserves (tonnes)

1	???? United States	8,133.5
2	???? Germany	3,351.6
3	???? Italy	2,451.9
4	???? France	2,437.0
5	???? Russia	2,333.1
6	???? China	2,279.6
7	???? Switzerland	1,039.9
8	???? India	876.2
9	???? Japan	846.0
10	???? Netherlands	612.5
11	???? Turkey	595.4
12	???? Poland	448.2
13	???? Portugal	382.7
14	???? Uzbekistan	382.6
15	???? Saudi Arabia	323.1

‹1234567›

The United States Dominates Global Gold HoldingsThe United States remains the world’s largest holder of gold by a wide margin, with 8,133.5 tonnes, a figure virtually unchanged for decades. Most of this gold is stored at Fort Knox and the New York Federal Reserve.

At current prices, America’s reserves are worth over $1 trillion, serving as a strategic asset that underpins confidence in the U.S. dollar.

Europe’s Long-Standing Reserves Remain Strong

Europe’s major economies—Germany (3,352 tonnes), Italy (2,452 tonnes), and France (2,437 tonnes)—collectively hold nearly 8,200 tonnes, rivaling the U.S. total.

These large holdings date back to the postwar Bretton Woods era, when gold underpinned the international monetary system.

China’s gold reserves have surged from 1,948 tonnes in 2019 to 2,280 tonnes in 2024, as Beijing diversifies away from U.S. Treasury holdings and seeks to internationalize the yuan.

India, now the world’s fifth-largest economy, holds 876 tonnes.

Other emerging markets, including Turkey (595 tonnes) and Poland (448 tonnes), have sharply increased gold holdings to hedge against inflation, currency volatility, and geopolitical uncertainty.

Beyond the Top 10: Smaller Nations Build Resilience

Countries like Uzbekistan (383 tonnes) and Saudi Arabia (323 tonnes) also feature prominently, highlighting the growing appeal of gold among energy and resource-rich economies. In addition, developing nations such as Thailand, Singapore, and Kazakhstan are quietly increasing their reserves as a safeguard against global shocks.

[russet] Globe says Scotiabank warns on higher energy prices 2026-04-20 07:04 ET - In th...

russet — 4/20/2026 3:18:12 PM

Globe says Scotiabank warns on higher energy prices

2026-04-20 07:04 ET - In the News

See In the News (C-BNS) Bank of Nova Scotia

The Globe and Mail reports in its Saturday edition that a federal tax break on diesel fuel is welcome news, but officials caution it will not offset the price increases caused by the Iran war. The Globe's Jeffrey Jones writes that Ottawa has suspended gasoline excise taxes. Diesel prices, however, have risen significantly since the war began, impacting truckers, railways and farmers. Many truckers have added extra fuel charges. Ottawa said last week it would suspend taxes of 10 cents a litre on gasoline, and four cents on diesel and aviation fuel from April 20 through Sept. 7. Canadian diesel prices have climbed as much as 43 per cent from before the Iran war, spiking to a recent national average high of $2.43 a litre from $1.70 in late February, according to Natural Resources Canada. It averaged $2.17 on Thursday. The Canadian Fuels Assoc. says the cut amounts to a fraction of the price, calling it a far cry from "where we were at the start of the conflict."

Canada consumes about 80 million litres of diesel fuel a day, compared with 118 million litres of gasoline.

Scotiabank Economics warns that higher energy prices impose rising costs for essential items borne disproportionately by lower-income households.

[russet] EnergyHalf the World’s Oil Comes From Just Five Countries March 25, 2026 By ...

russet — 4/17/2026 2:46:50 PM

EnergyHalf the World’s Oil Comes From Just Five Countries

March 25, 2026

By Niccolo Conte
Design

Sam Parker

ore visuals like this on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

Half the World’s Oil Comes From Just Five CountriesSee visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

The U.S. was the world’s largest crude oil producer in 2025 at 13.58 million barrels per day, ahead of Russia (9.87) and Saudi Arabia (9.51).
Middle Eastern countries produced 32.1% of global crude oil in 2025.

Just five countries produced half of the world’s oil in 2025, with the U.S., Russia, and Saudi Arabia alone accounting for nearly 40% of global supply.

That level of concentration means a small number of countries have an outsized influence on global oil supply.

This visualization shows global crude oil production including lease condensate by country in a single chart with countries organized and colored by region.

The data for this visualization comes from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, and is a Jan-Nov 2025 annualized average of crude oil and lease condensate production by country, the latest data available as of March 9, 2026.

U.S., Russia, and Saudi Arabia Lead Crude Oil Production

The U.S. was the world’s largest producer of crude oil and lease condensate in 2025, producing 13.58 million barrels per day (mb/d), comfortably ahead of Russia at 9.87 mb/d and Saudi Arabia at 9.51 mb/d. Combined together, those three countries were responsible for 39% of global crude oil production in 2025.

The data table below shows the world’s crude oil production in 2025 by country in million barrels per day (mb/d) and each country’s share of global production:

10152550100entries per page

Country

Crude Oil and Lease Condensate 2025 Production (million barrels per day)

Share of 2025 Global Production (%)

???? United States	13.58	16.08
???? Russia	9.87	11.69
???? Saudi Arabia	9.51	11.26
???? Canada	4.94	5.85
???? Iraq	4.39	5.20
???? China	4.34	5.14
???? Iran	4.19	4.96
???? United Arab Emirates	3.82	4.52
???? Brazil	3.75	4.43
???? Kuwait	2.58	3.05
???? Kazakhstan	2.07	2.45
???? Norway	1.85	2.19
???? Mexico	1.72	2.04
???? Nigeria	1.61	1.90
???? Libya	1.36	1.61

Showing 1 to 15 of 79 entries

‹123456›

After that top tier, production drops sharply. Canada ranked fourth at 4.94 million barrels per day, followed by Iraq (4.39) and China (4.34). In other words, the U.S. alone almost produced more crude than Canada, Iraq, and China combined.

Iran was the seventh-largest producer of crude oil in 2025, pumping 4.19 mb/d which equates to 5% of the world’s production last year.

The Middle East is the Largest Oil-Producing Region

While the U.S. was the single biggest producer, the Middle East remained the largest regional bloc in the ranking. Countries from the region produced 32% of the world’s crude oil in 2025, or nearly one-third of the global total.

Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, the United Arab Emirates, and Kuwait all landed in the top 10. That clustering helps explain why Middle Eastern supply continues to play an outsized role in global oil balances, even with the U.S. holding the top spot individually.

The war in Iran has led to significant disruption in crude oil production and trade in 2026, with many Middle Eastern countries’ production facilities shut down or destroyed.

Even if the war were to end soon, many facilities will require significant reinvestment and time to repair, along with high levels of uncertainty across the key energy trade route that is the Strait of Hormuz.

After the Top 10, Oil Production Falls Off Quickly

The concentration of output in a few countries and regions becomes even clearer lower down the ranking of oil producers. The top 10 countries accounted for 72.2% of global production, meaning all remaining producers combined contributed less than 28%.

That long tail includes countries such as Kazakhstan, Norway, Mexico, Nigeria, Libya, and Guyana, each of which adds meaningful barrels to the market without approaching the scale of the leading producers.

The result is a global crude market where a handful of countries still matter most for overall supply trends.

[russet] Ranked: The World’s Biggest Natural Gas Producers April 16, 2026 By Niccolo ...

russet — 4/17/2026 2:43:44 PM

Ranked: The World’s Biggest Natural Gas Producers

April 16, 2026

By Niccolo Conte
Design

Amy Kuo

more visuals like this on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

Ranked: The World’s Biggest Natural Gas ProducersSee visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

The U.S. produces 25% of global natural gas, far ahead of any other country.
Its output is nearly equal to Iran and China combined.
Global supply is concentrated among a small group of producers, shaping energy markets and LNG trade.

The U.S. has pulled far ahead as the world’s largest natural gas producer, accounting for a quarter of global supply in 2024.

This chart ranks the top gas-producing countries using the latest available data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, showing how output is concentrated among a handful of players that anchor global energy markets.

That dominance is becoming more important as disruptions in the Middle East tighten supply and shift trade flows toward large, stable producers like the United States.

The U.S. is the World’s Largest Natural Gas Producer

The U.S. isn’t just the top producer. It operates at a completely different scale.

In 2024, it produced 37,751 billion cubic feet of natural gas, more than 1.6x Russia and nearly equal to the combined output of Iran and China. No other country comes close. The gap between the U.S. and Russia alone is larger than the total output of most top-10 producers.

The data table below shows the ranking of natural gas production by country in 2024 in billion cubic feet:

10152550100entries per page

Search:

Rank

Country

Natural Gas Production in 2024 (billion cubic feet)

1	???? United States	37,751
2	???? Russia	22,672
3	???? Iran	9,853
4	???? China	9,111
5	???? Canada	7,028
6	???? Qatar	6,003
7	???? Australia	5,368
8	???? Norway	4,626
9	???? Saudi Arabia	4,344
10	???? Algeria	3,496
11	???? Malaysia	2,860
12	???? Turkmenistan	2,755
13	???? Indonesia	2,472
14	???? United Arab Emirates	2,084
15	???? Argentina	1,660

Showing 1 to 15 of 74 entries

‹12345›

After the top four, production drops off sharply, with no country exceeding 7,500 billion cubic feet. Canada and Qatar lead the second tier, followed by a mix of LNG exporters and regional suppliers. This steep decline underscores how concentrated global supply is at the very top.

Together, those countries form the core of the global gas supply system, spanning North America, Eurasia, the Middle East, and key LNG-exporting hubs.

America’s Shale Helped Redraw the Production Map

U.S. natural gas output has roughly tripled since 2005 as hydraulic fracturing unlocked shale formations that were previously uneconomical. This surge helps explain why the U.S. stands so far ahead of other producers and why it has become central to both pipeline and LNG flows.

Recent tensions in the Middle East have disrupted natural gas infrastructure and shipping routes, particularly around the Strait of Hormuz, a key chokepoint for global energy trade.

With flows constrained, global markets are leaning more heavily on large, stable producers. This dynamic further amplifies the role of the U.S., which leads both in natural gas output and LNG export capacity.

As supply risks persist, this concentration is becoming more consequential. Countries with large, stable production, especially the U.S., are playing a growing role in balancing global energy markets and meeting LNG demand.

[russet] Car & Truck Inflation in America: Cost of Vehicle Ownership Soared by 36% si...

russet — 4/15/2026 4:09:46 PM

Car & Truck Inflation in America: Cost of Vehicle Ownership Soared by 36% since 2020

by Wolf Richter • Apr 14, 2026 • 32 Comments
Prices of new & used vehicles, insurance, gasoline, maintenance & repairs, parts & accessories, and fees.

By Wolf Richter for WOLF STREET.

Americans spend a lot of money on the ownership costs of motor vehicles, and inflation has hit them over the head in recent years. These costs of vehicle ownership weigh nearly 15% in the Consumer Price Index. They include the purchase price of new and used vehicles, the price of motor fuel, auto insurance, maintenance and repairs, auto parts and equipment (parts, tires, accessories, oil, coolant, and fluids), and motor vehicle fees (state registration and license fees, parking fees, tolls, and other fees).

Each category of costs experienced its own inflation spike. They didn’t happen in lockstep. The first out the gate were new and used vehicle prices; they exploded between mid-2020 and mid-2022 and then hit a ceiling. Vehicle maintenance and repair services rose steadily through 2021 and then exploded, and they continue to surge. Auto insurance exploded from 2022 through 2024 but then hit a ceiling and stalled. Motor vehicle fees rose steadily but then suddenly spiked late last year. And motor fuel prices spiked from late 2020 through mid-2022, then plunged, and now there’s the brutal re-spike. We’ll look at each one of them.

The CPI for motor vehicle maintenance and repairs jumped by 1.25% in March from February and by 6.1% year-over-year, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Since January 2020, those prices exploded by 50%. These are services – parts and equipment are in a separate category, see further below – and these services are driven by the cost of labor (which surged) and profits (which also surged). The chart shows the index for the price level (not the percentage change), seasonally adjusted.

The CPI for motor vehicle insurance has been flat to down since the peak in mid-2025. In March it was essentially unchanged from February, and up only 0.8% from a year ago.

But since January 2020, the index has spiked by 56%. Insurers, which got hit by spiking repair costs and exploding used-vehicle prices (replacement costs) in 2020-2022, raised their premiums to keep up with cost increases, plus some. But recently, those increases stalled.

So there is little inflation – the rate of change of prices – in auto insurance currently. But due to the inflation in prior years, auto insurance has become hugely expensive and continues to be hugely expensive.

The CPI for motor vehicle parts and equipment jumped by 0.7% in March from February. Year-over-year, and from three years ago (March 2023), it was up by 3.9%.

But since January 2020, the index has soared by 27%, most of it in 2021 and 2022.

The CPI for motor vehicle fees rose by 0.42% in March and by 3.6% year-over-year, including the freak spike in January.

Since 2020, the cost of fees has risen by 14%, relatively tame, compared to the other costs here.

The CPI for used vehicles had exploded by 54% from mid-2020 through early 2022, and then plunged through mid-2024 when it bottomed out.

Not seasonally adjusted, it ticked up in March but was down 3.2% year-over-year (blue line). Seasonally adjusted, it dipped further in May and was down 3.2% year-over-year (red).

Since mid-2020, the used vehicle CPI is still up by 29%, despite the plunge since mid-2022. Used vehicles remain very expensive, and the industry has had a very hard time making price increases stick. So maybe this spring they get their chance when consumers come in with their big tax refunds.

In preparation for this hoped-for onslaught of down-payment-wielding customers, dealers have already started bidding up prices at wholesale auctions where they buy their inventory.

The CPI for new vehicles inched up 0.1% in March from April, and by 0.47% year-over-year, and is below where it had been at the peak in mid-2023.

After the 21% price surge from mid-2020 through mid-2023, new vehicle prices hit a ceiling, they’re too expensive, and demand is not strong at those prices, and any price increases keep getting replaced with discounts and incentives to make sales happen.

New vehicle sales remain well below their pre-pandemic levels and in 2025 were just a hair higher than they’d been 40 years ago, in 1986 ( my ugly charts by automaker, but there were some winners too):

The CPI for gasoline spiked by 21% seasonally adjusted and by 25% not seasonally adjusted in March from February.

The US is a big exporter of gasoline, and has a big trade surplus in petroleum products, including gasoline, and its supply is not dependent on the Strait of Hormuz. Gasoline prices at the pump spiked because energy speculation is global and instant, though the gasoline was already in underground tanks or had been refined and purchased well before the war in Iran began. And what consumers paid for was a huge spike in profit margins of the gasoline retailers and refiners (and the crack spread surged in the first half of March).

Year-over-year, the CPI for gasoline spiked by 18.9%.

The CPI for “private transportation,” which combines the above categories into one index, spiked by 4.6% in March from February, to a new record, surpassing for the first time June 2022, driven by the spike in gasoline prices in March.

Year-over-year, it was also up by 4.6% thanks to the spike in March. In February, it had still been down from a year ago, due to the year-over-year declines of used-vehicle and gasoline prices.

Since January 2020, it has spiked by 36%, that’s about the increase of the overall cost of ownership of a motor vehicle in the car and truck culture of America.

[russet] PPI Jumps by over 6% Month-to-Month Annualized for 3rd Month in a Row. Energ...

russet — 4/14/2026 10:04:59 PM

PPI Jumps by over 6% Month-to-Month Annualized for 3rd Month in a Row. Energy Price Spike just Latest Wrinkle

by Wolf Richter • Apr 14, 2026 • 6 Comments
The hit from energy in March was softened by food and services, which briefly backed off. In prior months, services were the driver.

By Wolf Richter for WOLF STREET.

The energy price spike hit inflation at the producer level in March: The overall Producer Price Index final demand (PPI) accelerated sharply to 4.0% compared to a year ago, the worst since February 2023 (red in the chart).

Month-to-month, the overall PPI jumped by 0.51% (+6.3% annualized), seasonally adjusted. But it had already jumped by 6.1% and 6.8% annualized in February and January before the energy price spike hit (blue in the chart), according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics today.

What’s surprising is that it didn’t jump more. Turns out, there were several factors that kept the March month-to-month increase from blowing out: While energy prices spiked in March from February, prices of food that manufacturers buy fell, and the PPI for services that producers buy, the biggie – 68% of overall PPI – was nearly unchanged month-to-month after three big increases in a row because its component “trade services” (accounts for 19% of overall PPI) fell in March from February, the second month of declines, after the two huge spikes in January and December.

Energy prices are always volatile with big jumps and plunges. The 8.5% spike in March (165% annualized) came on top of the jump in February.

This pushed the year-over-year increase to 11.2%, from a decline in the prior month.

The energy PPI is so volatile with such huge spikes and plunges that it’s helpful to look at the price level to gain some perspective (the year-over-year percentage changes just cause uninsured whiplash).

The chart shows the price level of the energy PPI. The big spike in March pushed the price level to the highest since the September 2023 spike.

From the peak in mid-2022 through 2025, energy prices plunged but remained far higher than before covid, driven by the soaring costs of electricity.

The PPI for food that producers buy held down the overall PPI: It fell on a month-to-month basis by 0.27%, after the gigantic spike in February of 2.39%, and the plunge in January.

On a year-over-year basis, the food PPI accelerated to 1.5%.

Food prices are also hugely volatile, so it helps to look at the price level. The PPI for food is up by 33% from mid-2020, prices are very high, but they’ve been bumping into a ceiling at these levels, it seems.

The services PPI barely ticked up 0.05% (+0.6% annualized) in March from February, seasonally adjusted, after the big increases in the prior three months.

It caused the six-month services PPI to back off to +4.6%, from 5.8% in February, which had been the worst increase since August 2022.

The services PPI weighs 68% of the overall PPI, and the nearly flat month-to-month reading in March kept the overall PPI from blowing out.

Within the services PPI:

Trade services (weigh 19% in overall PPI): -0.3% month-to-month not annualized, second month in a row of declines, after big spikes of +2.0% each in January and December.
Transportation & warehousing services (weigh 4.9% in overall PPI) spiked by 1.3% not annualized in March from January, the biggest spike since July.
Other services (weighs 38% in overall PPI): +0.1%, after the 0.6% jump in the prior month.

Year-over-year, the services PPI decelerated a hair to +3.7%, after four months in a row of acceleration.

The low point, the point of the coolest recent services PPI inflation, was in December 2023 at 1.8%. The inflation rate has more than doubled since then.

Despite the month-to-month squiggles, services prices have been marching relentlessly higher. Since mid-2020, the services PPI has risen by 28%. The chart shows the price level, and its steep trajectory. This is 68% of the overall PPI:

The PPI for finished core goods (goods without food and energy) rose 0.18% (+2.2% annualized), the slowest increase in a year.

Year-over-year, the PPI for finished core goods rose by 3.6%, a slight deceleration from the prior two months.

Core PPI Final Demand, which excludes energy and food components, rose by only 0.09% (1.1% annualized) in March from February, seasonally adjusted, held down by the services PPI.

This small month-to-month increase caused the six-month core PPI to back off a notch to +4.7%, the second worst since August 2022, behind only the +5.5% in February.

Year-over-year, core PPI decelerated a hair to 3.75%.

[russet] Who Owns America’s $39T Debt April 13, 2026 By Boyan Girginov DesignJoyce...

russet — 4/14/2026 9:59:08 PM

Who Owns America’s $39T Debt

April 13, 2026

By Boyan Girginov
Design

Joyce Ma

more visuals like this on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

Who Owns America’s $39T DebtSee visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

The Federal Reserve holds $4.4T in Treasuries—more than the top three foreign holders combined.
Domestic investors hold $17.7T, nearly double foreign ownership at $9.3T.
About $7.6T of U.S. debt is owed within government accounts.

Who really finances America’s $39T debt, and how much is held at home versus abroad?

This chart shows where U.S. debt ultimately sits, from domestic investors and foreign governments to the Federal Reserve and internal trust funds.

Data is sourced from Treasury’s daily Debt to the Penny, the U.S. Joint Economic Committee, TIC data, and the Federal Reserve, as of March 19, 2026.

Breaking Down Who Holds U.S. Debt

To finance its growing deficits, the U.S. relies on a wide range of buyers, including domestic institutions, foreign governments, and its own central bank.

The table below shows how U.S. debt is distributed across its largest holders:

Value of U.S. Debt (in Trillions)Share of U.S. DebtTotal U.S. Debt39.0100%


Mutual and Pension Funds	6.6	17%
Banking institutions, Dealers	2.4	6%
Individual Investors	3.0	8%
Other Domestic Holders	5.7	15%
Japan	1.2	3%
United Kingdom	0.9	2%
China	0.7	2%
Other Nations	6.5	17%
Federal Reserve	4.4	11%
Social Security Trust Fund	2.6	7%
Other Government Trust Funds	5.1	13%

Of the $39 trillion in gross debt, $31.4 trillion (81%) is held by domestic and foreign investors.

The remaining $7.6 trillion (19%) is intragovernmental debt, reflecting internal government transactions. This total is roughly twice the combined fortune of the world’s top 20 billionaires.

Debt held by the public represents what the U.S. owes to outside investors and directly influences interest rates, borrowing costs, and financial markets. By contrast, intragovernmental debt is money the government owes to itself, primarily through programs like Social Security.

Mutual funds and pension funds are the largest public holders, at $6.6 trillion, reflecting strong demand for safe, liquid assets. The Federal Reserve holds $4.4 trillion on its balance sheet, more than the top three foreign creditors—Japan, the U.K., and China—combined.

Among individuals, Warren Buffett, through his company Berkshire Hathaway, is the largest non-government holder of U.S. Treasury bills, with holdings valued at $339 billion as of Q4 2025.

What Does High U.S. Debt Mean for the Average American?

The U.S. is among the top 10 most indebted countries globally in debt-to-GDP terms, and its debt is growing by about $1 trillion every three months. This trend can affect Americans’ standard of living.

As debt rises, a larger share of the federal budget goes toward interest payments, crowding out spending on priorities like infrastructure, defense, and social programs.

Excessive debt can dampen wage growth and job creation while contributing to higher interest rates, making mortgages, loans, and credit card debt more expensive.

As the national debt continues to rise, its composition and ownership remain critical for understanding risks to financial markets and the broader economy.

[russet] Mapped: Europe’s Biggest Budget Deficits April 5, 2026 By Gabriel Cohen Desi...

russet — 4/14/2026 9:52:56 PM

Mapped: Europe’s Biggest Budget Deficits

April 5, 2026

By Gabriel Cohen
Design

Sabrina Lam

ee more visuals like this on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

Mapped: Europe’s Biggest Budget DeficitsSee visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

Romania has Europe’s largest deficit at 7.3% of GDP, followed by Poland and Belgium.
Several major economies, including France and the UK, have deficits exceeding 5% of GDP.
Many EU countries remain above the bloc’s 3% deficit limit.

Europe’s fiscal rules are under pressure. The most recent data for late 2025 show that many countries are running deficits well above the European Union’s 3% limit, with some of the region’s largest economies among the worst offenders.

This map shows government budget balances as a share of GDP across Europe, based on the latest data from Eurostat and national statistical agencies.

While deficits surged during the pandemic, they remain elevated due to weak growth, energy shocks, and rising defense spending, particularly in countries closer to the war in Ukraine.

Who’s Running the Largest Deficits?The EU sets a 3% of GDP limit on fiscal deficits, but many countries are now exceeding it by a wide margin.

From France (5.4%) to Poland (5.8%) and Romania (7.3%), several major economies are running deficits nearly double the threshold, raising questions about enforcement and fiscal discipline across the bloc.

The following data table lists European countries alongside their 2025 budget balances as a percentage of GDP.

10182550100entries per page

Search:

Country

Gov't Budget Deficit or Surplus (% of GDP)

???? Romania	-7.3%
???? Poland	-5.8%
???? Belgium	-5.7%
???? France	-5.4%
???? UK	-5.4%
???? Austria	-4.8%
???? Hungary	-4.4%
???? Slovakia	-3.8%
???? Bulgaria	-3.6%
???? Italy	-3.4%
???? Finland	-3.3%
???? EU	-3.2%
???? Latvia	-3.0%
???? Croatia	-2.9%
???? Germany	-2.8%
???? Spain	-2.2%
???? Czechia	-1.9%
???? Lithuania	-1.8%

Showing 1 to 18 of 32 entries

‹12›

All figures for Q3 2025 except for Norway and Switzerland, which are 2025 estimates. Norwegian figures include oil revenues. Latest data available as of March 2026.

Why does this matter? Higher deficits typically mean more borrowing, which can push up interest costs and limit governments’ ability to respond to future crises. For heavily indebted countries, this creates a growing fiscal squeeze as debt servicing takes up a larger share of budgets.

Different variables can shape a government’s budget and cause it to run either a surplus or a deficit. For many EU countries, the COVID-19 pandemic forced higher spending at a time of economic contraction, a trend that continued during the energy crisis following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

The latter has also forced higher government spending for more than just energy subsidies. European governments, especially in the east, have boosted defense spending to ward off Russian aggression.

Poland stands out with a budget deficit of 5.8%, driven largely by a surge in defense spending since 2022. As one of NATO’s frontline states, the country has rapidly expanded its military budget, illustrating how geopolitical tensions are directly reshaping fiscal balances across Europe.

Deficits in the EU’s Big Three

France, Germany, and Italy—the EU’s three largest economies—are all running deficits, but to very different degrees. France (5.4%) and Italy (3.4%) are above the EU’s limit, while Germany (2.8%) remains just below it.

Germany, which has long prided itself on fiscal prudence and low national debt, has had a rough few years, with the COVID-19 shock followed by an energy crisis and a multiyear recession.

The country recently bypassed its famous “debt brake,” which limits structural deficits, in order to boost investment in defense following the onset of the Russo-Ukrainian War. Meanwhile, the government of Chancellor Friedrich Merz is under pressure to further increase investment in key strategic sectors despite limited growth.

France and Italy are also struggling to reduce their deficits, which are among the highest in Europe, although they are hamstrung by their own domestic concerns. France’s political instability and divided legislature have caused consistent setbacks to budget revisions, while Italy has attempted for years to bring down its high public debt, which at over 135% of GDP is the second-highest in the eurozone after Greece.

Mixed Results Across Non-EU Economies

Among the major non-EU economies, the budgetary situation is slightly better, albeit with one major exception: the United Kingdom is projected to have run a 5.4% deficit, contributing to its high public debt of roughly 100% of GDP.

Switzerland, meanwhile, eked out a meager 0.5% surplus, aided by above-expected profit taxes in Geneva. Norway, for its part, secured a 12.5% budget surplus, facilitated by its generous oil reserves at a time of soaring energy prices.

Norway’s 12.5% surplus stands in stark contrast to the rest of Europe. Fueled by oil revenues, it highlights how access to natural resources can dramatically reshape a country’s fiscal position. Without this energy income, however, Norway would be running a sizable deficit, underscoring how unusual its position is.

[russet] The difference in Iran is 90% or more (80 million people) want the muslim invade...

russet — 4/14/2026 8:58:02 PM

The difference in Iran is 90% or more (80 million people) want the muslim invader regime ousted. They are waiting for U.S. and Israel to destroy the regime. The majority want a referendum on what system of government is next. They are organizing right now to be the boots on the ground to effect regime change. A western friendly regime is the likely outcome with no nucs, no funding of muslim terrorists, religious tolerance and a want to be part of the free industrialized world.

The U.S. and Israel are welcomed by the majority of Iranians that want the bombing to continue to kill the current regime.

Two Wars. One You Can See. One You Can't

A $36 Trillion Problem with a Military Solution

Jay Martin

Apr 14

Two Wars

Every empire fights two wars at once. One is the war you can see - the missiles, the carrier groups, the maps on cable news with arrows pointing at places most people couldn’t find on a globe six months ago.

The other is the war you can’t see. The one fought in bond auctions, currency markets, and the quiet panic of finance ministers who stop sleeping.

America is fighting both right now. And the one nobody is watching is the one that matters more.

Stay with me.

The War Everyone Sees

Five weeks into the U.S.-Israeli campaign against Iran, here is what we know. The Strait of Hormuz - the twenty-one-mile-wide corridor through which roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil supply flows on any given day - is effectively closed. Tanker traffic has collapsed from a normal range of 60-70 transits per day to near zero.

Iran’s parliament speaker has said publicly that the Strait “will not return to its pre-war status.” The International Energy Agency has called this the greatest global energy security threat in history.

The consequences are spreading like cracks in a windshield. Qatar’s Ras Laffan complex - the largest liquefied natural gas plant on Earth, responsible for supplying fuel to dozens of countries - has suffered extensive missile damage, knocking out 17% of Qatar’s LNG export capacity for up to five years.

Taiwan, which relies on LNG for40% of its electricity, has an eleven-day emergency stockpile.

Australia has lowered its diesel quality standards and watched hundreds of petrol stations run dry.

Slovenia became the first EU state to introduce fuel rationing.

South Korea is enforcing a five-day vehicle rotation system.

Michael Haigh, the Global Head of Commodities Research at Société Générale - one of the largest banks in Europe - said last week that the final vessels carrying jet fuel to the UK were arriving, and that “there is no more after that.”

Let that sink in. No more jet fuel for the United Kingdom.

Dow Chemical - one of the world’s largest chemical companies, whose products end up in everything from food packaging to medical supplies - doubled its polyethylene price overnight.

Why does that matter?

Polyethylene is in your grocery bags, water bottles, food packaging, medical equipment, and much more. If you bought it at a store, there’s a good chance it touched polyethylene before it reached your hands.

Polyethylene is made from petroleum-based feedstocks, and when Hormuz closed, about50% of the global polyethylene supply was affected.

They say that when the price of energy goes up, the price of everything goes up. You could say the same thing about polyethylene.

This is how a war in the Middle East shows up at your grocery store. Energy doesn’t stay in the energy sector. It flows through everything you buy, everything you eat, everything you build.

American and Israeli interceptor stockpiles are running dangerously low - the Royal United Services Institute estimates America is roughly a month from exhausting key missile defence systems, and it could take five years to rebuild what was expended in the first sixteen days.

Thirteen American military bases in the region are now deemed “all but uninhabitable,” not because they are destroyed, but because they are undefendable against the onslaught of 20-30 missiles and drones per day - a steady, grinding pace that has confounded every analyst who expected Iran to run out weeks ago.

Despite what you might have read about the ambiguous and disputed cease-fire, none of the above has changed.

The Iranians have, by most honest assessments, locked the U.S. out of the Middle East. Not because they have a better military. Because they don’t need one. Cheap missiles, cheap drones, and Russian satellite targeting have shown - for the first time in modern naval history - that a relatively inexpensive arsenal can deny the world’s most powerful navy access to a critical waterway.

For four hundred years, since the days of the Dutch Empire, control of the seas has been the foundation of global power. The idea that a navy could be neutralized by a country with a fraction of America’s military budget was, until five weeks ago, considered impossible by most defence analysts. That assumption is now dead.

So yes, everyone is watching Iran. Every headline, every missile strike, every Trump post about “productive conversations” that Tehran immediately denies.

But that is only half of this story.

The War Nobody Sees

To understand the second war - the one that may matter more - I need to explain something that most people never think about. It’s not complicated, but it is important.

When the U.S. government spends more money than it collects in taxes - which it does, every single year, to the tune of trillions of dollars - it borrows the difference. It does this by selling IOUs called Treasury bonds. A “10-year Treasury” is just a promise from the U.S. government to pay you back in ten years, with interest. These bonds are considered the safest investment in the world because, in theory, the U.S. government will always pay its debts.

Here’s why this matters right now.

Countries around the world - Japan, the UK, China, South Korea, dozens of others - hold roughly $9.4 trillion worth of these American IOUs. They bought them because Treasuries are safe, liquid, and denominated in dollars. For decades, this system has worked beautifully. The U.S. borrows cheaply. Foreign governments park their savings in a safe asset. Everyone wins.

Until everyone needs cash at the same time.

Let me ask you a question. If you were running Japan’s central bank, and your country was suddenly staring down an energy crisis that threatened to shut down factories, power plants, and shipping routes - and you needed dollars immediately to buy oil on the open market - what would you sell first?

You would sell the most liquid dollar asset you own. You would sell U.S. Treasuries.

And that is exactly what is happening. Foreign central bank holdings of Treasuries at the New York Federal Reserve have dropped to their lowest level since 2012. The decline started the month the war began. Countries that are short of energy and panicking are dumping American government bonds to raise dollars to pay for fuel. Japan holds $1.2 trillion in Treasuries. The United Kingdom holds $895 billion.

These are not small positions.

Now here is the problem. When lots of people sell the same asset at the same time, the price drops. When the price of a Treasury bond drops, its interest rate - what Wall Street calls the “yield” (the incentive to lend the U.S. money) - goes up.

And because Treasury yields set the baseline for borrowing costs across the entire economy, everything gets more expensive. Mortgages. Car loans. Corporate debt. Government refinancing. All of it.

Let me take a minute to break this down - because although everybody talks about the Treasury market, many people don’t really understand it.

It’s actually quite simple. Let me explain.

Put me in the position of the U.S. government. I spend more than I make, so I need to borrow some cash.

Let’s say you loan me $1,000, and I agree to pay you 5% interest - $50 a year - for five years. You’re earning annual interest, and you’ll get your $1,000 back in five years.

Good deal.

But two years in, you get a cash call. You need your money back now. The problem is, I don’t owe you your $1,000 for another three years.

So you go looking for someone to buy the loan from you.

You find a third party and say: Jay owes me $1,000, he’s paying 5% a year, and the full amount is due in three years. If you buy this loan from me, the payments are yours.

But the third party can smell your desperation. He says: “I’ll take it - but I’m only paying you $800. You’re not getting full value, but you’re getting cash today, which is what you need.” So you take the deal.

Now think about what just happened. That third party just paid $800 for a note that will pay him $1,000 in three years, plus the $50 annual interest along the way. His effective return - his yield - just went up, because he paid less for the same interest payments.

Now imagine this happening at scale. Not one lender, but entire countries - Japan, the UK, South Korea - all desperate for cash to buy oil, all selling U.S. Treasury bonds at the same time, all willing to take less than full value. And we are not talking thousands, we are talking trillions.

Here is why that matters. The United States is still spending more than it earns, so it still needs to issue new debt. But if investors can buy existing Treasuries cheaply on the open market, why would they lend fresh money to the U.S. government at effectively lower rates?

They wouldn’t. Nobody would.

So the government has to offer higher interest rates on new debt to attract new buyers, which raises borrowing costs for Washington at exactly the moment it can least afford it. And because Treasury yields anchor the entire credit system - mortgages, car loans, corporate debt - everything gets more expensive, all at once.

This is the predicament. The U.S. needs to offer higher interest rates to incentivize other countries to lend it money, but paradoxically, higher interest rates will break its own economy.

OK. Back to our story.

Over the last twelve years, U.S. federal debt has risen by a staggering $22 trillion. Over that same period, foreign buyers of that debt have been flat to declining. The gap has been filled increasingly by the Federal Reserve itself - America’s central bank, essentially printing money to buy its own government’s IOUs.

That works when the world is calm and inflation is low. It does not work when oil is spiking, supply chains are fracturing, and the countries holding $9.4 trillion of your debt are selling it to keep their lights on.

This brings us to Scott Bessent - Trump’s Treasury Secretary, the man responsible for making sure the U.S. government can continue to borrow the money it needs to function. Every time the interest rate on the 10-year Treasury has crept toward 4.4% in the last six weeks, Trump has dialled back military action to calm the market. He pauses strikes. He extends deadlines. He tweets about “productive conversations.” This is not a coincidence. 4.4% appears to be the line - the yield at which the cost of servicing America’s $36 trillion national debt starts spiralling out of control.

Three consecutive Treasury auctions in late March - events where the government tries to sell new bonds to investors - attracted weak demand. In plain terms, the government put bonds up for sale, and fewer people wanted to buy them, which means the government has to offer higher interest rates to attract buyers. The 2-year and 5-year auctions were the weakest in years. The bond market is sending a message: we don’t trust that this ends well.

What’s the point, Jay?

The point is this: the United States is not just fighting a war in the Strait of Hormuz. It is fighting a war in the bond market. And right now, both are running hot.

If Hormuz remains closed for a few more weeks, which appears highly likely, oil prices will remain at levels that guarantee a global recession, triggered by high energy, high polyethylene, high fertilizer, and high food prices.

A recession means government tax revenues collapse. When revenues collapse, but the debt stays the same, the cost of interest payments eats an ever-larger share of the budget. This forces the government to borrow even more, at higher rates, which drives the debt higher, which drives rates higher still.

Let’s personalize it again - you spend more than you earn, so you borrow. Then your income drops, so you borrow more. But lenders are nervous now, so you have to offer a higher interest rate to get the loan. That means your monthly payments increase, forcing you to borrow even more.

That is the exact same trap the U.S. government is in.

Economists call this a “debt spiral”. Now you understand why.

The Quagmire

The logical question - and I’d be asking it too - is this: if the bond market is the real threat, why not just leave Iran and focus on the financial crisis?

Because the two wars are the same war. You can’t fix one without fixing the other.

The bond market is under pressure because foreign central banks are selling Treasuries. They’re selling Treasuries because they need dollars. They need dollars because oil prices have spiked. Oil prices have spiked because the Strait of Hormuz is closed. And Hormuz is closed because the United States attacked Iran...

But since the train has already left the station, if you pull the thread in the other direction... it unravels just the same.

If the U.S. walks away from Iran, the Strait of Hormuz won’t stay closed. It reopens -but on Iran’s terms. This is not speculation. It is already happening. Iran is running a toll booth system in the Strait right now. Ships are paying passage in Chinese yuan and cryptocurrency. The IRGC is vetting vessels through its own clearance corridor.

Chinese ships have sailed through. A French-owned container ship transited last week - likely paying in yuan. As former British diplomat Alastair Crooke put it recently: Iran sees this conflict as “an opportunity to change the whole geopolitics of West Asia.”

So, if the U.S. withdraws, the oil flows again - but not in dollars. A big chunk of global energy trade shifts to yuan settlement, routed through China’s financial system. Deutsche Bank has already published a note calling the Iran war the potential catalyst for what they termed “the making of the Petroyuan.”

The dollar’s reserve currency status - the reason the U.S. Treasury has been deemed thesafest investment in the world, allowing the United States to borrow $36 trillion and keep functioning - takes a hit it may not recover from. And so the bond market breaks anyway. Just for a different reason.

That is the quagmire. Not two doors, one good and one bad. Two doors, both of them terrible. Stay, and the bond market bleeds from high oil prices and foreign selling. Leave, and the bond market bleeds from the death of the petrodollar and a collapse in global confidence.

The only scenario where the Treasury market stabilizes is the one where the U.S. regains control of the Strait, and oil flows again - in dollars, through American-secured waters, on American terms.

And that is why this war is not going to end quietly.

Two wars. One you can see - the missiles, the drones, the carrier groups in the Gulf. One you can’t - the bond auctions, the yield curve, the slow-motion panic in central bank vaults from Tokyo to London.

They are the same war. And right now, it looks like America is losing both of them.

But before we assume that outcome is inevitable,it is worth stress-testing the opposite scenario...

...because, what if I am wrong?

The Flip

Here’s where I want you to flip the script entirely. Because most of the analysis you’re reading right now - on social media, in financial newsletters, on cable news - is focused on the risk of failure. What if the U.S. loses? What if Hormuz becomes a permanent Iranian toll booth? What if the dollar loses its reserve status?

Those are real risks. I’ve laid them out. But now consider the other side.

What if the U.S. “wins”?

Not a negotiated compromise. Not a face-saving withdrawal. A decisive, total victory that establishes American operational control over the Strait of Hormuz and neutralizes Iran as a military threat for a generation.

The power dynamic of the last fifty years wouldn’t just stabilize. It would intensify.

Consider the energy map in that scenario.

U.S. shale production remains a domestic powerhouse. Venezuela - which holds the world’s largest proven oil reserves and produces heavy crude similar to Canada’s - is increasingly under American influence following recent interventions. Add operational control of the Strait, and the U.S. now controls the passage of Saudi, Kuwaiti, Qatari, and Iraqi oil exports. Every barrel of Gulf crude flows at America’s pleasure.

The U.S. wouldn’t just be energy independent. It would be energy-dominant. A monopoly position over global energy supply that arguably exceeds anything the American empire has held at any point in its history - including the immediate post-World War II era, when the U.S. produced two-thirds of the world’s oil.

And with that monopoly comes leverage. Not theoretical leverage. A concrete veto over the industrial survival of any nation that depends on Gulf energy, which is most of them. Japan, which imports nearly all of its oil. South Korea, which imports 98%. India. Australia. The UK, which just ran out of jet fuel. The message to any country stepping out of line would be simple and devastating:we control the tap, and we can turn it off.

Show me a nation that thinks it can challenge the United States with that kind of energy leverage, and I’ll show you a nation that hasn’t thought it through.

The Terrifying Logic of Destruction

Now here’s where this gets uncomfortable. But I need you to have the full picture I just painted firmly in your mind before we go further, because without understanding the financial stakes, what follows will sound like hysteria.

It is not.

If you accept the above premise - that an American loss would be existential, but an American win would revitalize the Empire for the foreseeable future… then you must ask - how far will they be willing to take it?

Which brings us to the terrible option.

The one that nobody wants to say out loud, but one that is certainly being discussed in small circles in Washington.

If negotiations fail, and if withdrawal means financial collapse and strategic humiliation, the remaining path is overwhelming force. Not a targeted strike. Not a “precision campaign.” The utter destruction of Iran’s ability to threaten the Strait - its military infrastructure, its missile production, its command and control, and possibly much more.

Ninety-two million people live in Iran. Let that number sit with you for a moment.

I am not sayingthat it would “work” and accomplish the American Presidents’ goals. And I pray that it does not happen.

But it would not be without precedent. History is full of moments when great powers, cornered by economic pressures, chose devastating violence because the financial alternative was worse.

In 1899, the British Empire went to war against the Boer republics of South Africa - primarily to secure control of the world’s richest gold and diamond mines at a time whenBritain’s industrial dominance was fading, and its finances were stretched thin.When the Boers refused to surrender and turned to guerrilla warfare, Britain didn’t negotiate. It burned farms, poisoned wells, and forcedover 100,000 civilians - including women and children- into concentration camps where an estimated 28,000 died. The cost of the war - £230 million, the most expensive British military campaign since Napoleon - was itself a sign of how desperate the stakes were.Britain chose devastation because losing control of South African resources would have accelerated the empire’s financial decline.

In 1945, the United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The strategic calculation was, in part, financial. Operation Downfall - the planned land invasion of Japan - carried projected American casualty estimates ranging from268,000 to over one million, with total casualties on both sides potentially reaching five to ten million.The Pentagon had pre-ordered 370,000 Purple Heart medals.Beyond the human cost, the financial burden of a prolonged Pacific campaign - on top of the European reconstruction already underway - threatened to break a nation already running wartime deficits. The bombs ended the war in days. The calculus was brutal.

Unfortunately, there is no shortage of examples.

The French in Algeria from 1954 to 1962, where a bankrupt Fourth Republic turned to torture and collective punishment to hold a colony whose oil and tax revenues it could not afford to lose.

The Soviets in Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989, where a crumbling economy and collapsing ruble pushed Moscow to carpet-bomb villages and mine civilian footpaths in a war it could not win but could not walk away from.

Notice where all of these atrocities happened?

Never in New York, London, Paris, or Moscow. Always somewhere far enough from the capital that the voters back home can read the headlines over breakfast and go back to their day.

Distance is the empire’s favourite accomplice.It is a lot easier to sign off on brutality when it is inflicted on people your own citizens will never meet, in a country most of them could not find on a map.

The pattern repeats: when an empire’s financial survival is threatened, restraint is the first casualty - and geography is the alibi.

Building the Case

If this is the direction - and I am not saying it is inevitable, only that history points there with concerning force -then the next phase is persuasion. The international community, the American public, and European allies would need to be brought along. History, again, tells us how this works.

The GCC countries - Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, Oman - are already leaning in. Their infrastructure has been devastated by this war. Qatar’s LNG capacity has been damaged for years. Saudi Arabia’s Yanbu pipeline - its only bypass route for oil exports that avoids the Strait - is now under threat from the Houthis, who officially entered the war on March 28th after the U.S. and Israel struck Iranian atomic sites.

The reality is stark: these nations need the Strait open, and only the U.S. has the military capability to make that happen. Trump has publicly expressed interest in having Arab states help pay for the war. Whether they write checks or simply provide diplomatic and logistical support, the GCC alignment is forming.

Now the U.S. needs Americans and Europeans to agree. This is the harder part, and the pattern is well documented.

In August 1964, the Johnson administration told Congress and the American public that North Vietnamese torpedo boats had launched an unprovoked attack on the USS Maddox in the Gulf of Tonkin - not once, but twice.

The “second attack” on August 4th never happened.

Former Defence Secretary Robert McNamara admitted as much in 2003,forty years later, and a declassified NSA study in 2005 confirmed it: the incident was based on misread intelligence and, in some cases, outright fabrication. But it was enough. Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, and the United States escalated into a full-scale war that would last a decade and claim over 58,000 American lives.

In 2003, Secretary of State Colin Powell sat before the United Nations and presented what he called irrefutable evidence that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. Mobile biological weapons labs. Aluminum tubes for uranium enrichment. The evidence was wrong - later investigations confirmed that Iraq had no active WMD program. But it was enough. The U.S. invaded, toppled the government, and spent the next decade occupying a country at a cost of over $2 trillion.

I am not saying these events are identical to what may happen with Iran. I am saying the pattern exists: when a great power decides military action is necessary, the justification follows. It always does. And it would be naive to assume that the pattern won’t repeat.

The point is that everyone is watching the war. Not enough people are watching the men and women decidinghow the war is fought.

Yes, the missiles are flying in the Strait of Hormuz. Yes, American bases are getting pounded. Yes, Iran is proving that asymmetric warfare works. All of that is true, and all of it matters. And the human cost of this war is the only thing that should matter at the end of any of it.

But if you want to understand what happens next in the hot war, you have to understand the “survive at all costs” mindset of Empires. You have to understand history.

Because history is full of leaders who made choices in a fiscal crisis that they would have called unthinkable a year earlier. Cold financial calculus — not ideology, not neoconservative ambition — has a way of pushing decision-makers past lines they swore they would never cross.

That is why the Treasury market matters. Not because a bond yield is more important than a human life. It isn’t. Not even close. It matters because if you want to know how desperate the people in charge are about to become — and what they are about to do with that desperation — the bond market will tell you before the Pentagon will.

The end of the war in West Asia won’t just decide the fate of the Middle East. It will decide whether the American financial system survives the decade intact and whether the dollar remains the world’s reserve currency.

One war. Fought in two places. One you can see. One you can’t.

And if I am right (I hope I am wrong), what happens in the place you can’t see will determine how the place you can see finally ends.

Honest question — let me know in the comments: what am I missing?

That’s it for today,

Jay Martin

[russet] Mapped: Only One Country Can Feed Itself Fully April 12, 2026 By Niccolo Con...

russet — 4/13/2026 5:00:08 PM

Mapped: Only One Country Can Feed Itself Fully

April 12, 2026

By Niccolo Conte
Editing

Bruno Venditti

Design

Anna Diederichs

ee more visuals like this on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

Mapped: Only One Country Can Feed Itself FullySee visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

Only one country—Guyana—can produce all seven essential food groups domestically.
Most countries, including the U.S. and China, fall short in at least one category.
Wealth doesn’t guarantee food independence, with many rich nations relying on imports.

Food security isn’t just about producing enough calories—it’s about covering the full range of nutrients needed for a balanced diet.

This map shows how many of seven essential food groups each country can supply domestically, based on data from a Nature Food study. The result reveals a striking gap: just one country can meet all its food needs on its own.

The analysis covers key categories including starchy staples, fruits, vegetables, dairy, meat, fish, and legumes—offering a more complete picture of national food independence. Even major agricultural producers like the United States and China still depend on imports for at least one of these groups.

Only One Country Covers All Food Groups

Guyana is the only country that can produce enough of all seven essential food groups to meet domestic demand. It not only covers every category, but exceeds needs in starchy staples and fruit—making it a clear global outlier in food independence.

China and Vietnam come close, each covering six out of seven groups. However, both fall short in dairy production, reflecting structural constraints in key sectors. Even top performers still rely on imports for at least one essential category.

10152550100entries per page

Search:

Country

Self-Sufficient Food Groups (of 7)

???? Macao

0

???? Guyana	7
???? China	6
???? Vietnam	6
???? Paraguay	5
???? New Zealand	5
???? Uruguay	5
???? Vanuatu	5
???? Argentina	5
???? Brazil	5
???? Lithuania	5
???? Estonia	5
???? Australia	5
???? Latvia	5
???? Spain	5
???? Serbia	5

Showing 1 to 15 of 185 entries

‹12345…13›

Wealth Doesn’t Guarantee Food IndependenceHigh-income countries often rank lower than expected. For example, Canada and the United States each cover only four out of seven food groups. Despite strong production in meat, dairy, and grains, both countries depend heavily on imports for fruits and vegetables.

This pattern reflects geography and climate. Northern countries face shorter growing seasons, limiting domestic output of fresh produce. As a result, even advanced agricultural systems cannot fully produce a balanced diet domestically.

Structural Constraints Shape Regional Gaps

The Middle East and North Africa consistently rank among the least self-sufficient regions. Limited water resources play a major role. The region holds roughly 6% of the global population but less than 2% of renewable water supply, restricting agricultural expansion.

Fish production is another major constraint globally. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Asia accounts for 91% of aquaculture output. This concentration leaves many countries dependent on seafood imports, even when they can produce meat or crops domestically.

[russet] Ranked: The Countries Building the Most Nuclear Power April 9, 2026 By Tasmi...

russet — 4/10/2026 5:55:37 PM

Ranked: The Countries Building the Most Nuclear Power

April 9, 2026

By Tasmin Lockwood

visualizations like this on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

Ranked: The Countries Building the Most Nuclear PowerSee visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

China is on track to more than double U.S. nuclear capacity, reaching nearly 186 GW.
The U.S. leads today but ranks second when planned projects are included.
Emerging players like India and Uganda are rapidly scaling nuclear capacity from near zero.

China is set to become the world’s dominant nuclear power producer.

Based on existing and planned projects, its total capacity could reach nearly 186 gigawatts, far surpassing the U.S., which currently leads globally. This shift reflects a broader push to secure reliable, low-carbon energy as electricity demand rises.

This chart ranks countries by current and prospective nuclear capacity, using data from Global Energy Monitor.

How Nuclear Energy Is Set to Scale by Country

The U.S. currently leads nuclear energy production with a capacity of 102,475 megawatts, exceeding France by more than 35,000 MW.

China ranks third today at 60,898 MW, but that is set to change as new plants come online.

Dive into the data, which includes sites of any capacity as of September 2025, below:

102550100entries per page

Search:

Country

Operating Nuclear Power (GW)

Prospective Nuclear Power (GW)

Total Future Nuclear Power (GW)

???? China	60.9	124.9	185.8
???? United States	102.5	15.4	117.9
???? France	65.7	9.9	75.6
???? Russia	28.6	32.2	60.7
???? India	8.2	31.5	39.7
???? South Korea	27.1	5.6	32.7
???? Ukraine	13.8	8.4	22.3
???? Japan	13.3	6.6	19.8
???? Uganda	0.0	18.0	18.0
???? Canada	14.6	2.5	17.2

Showing 1 to 10 of 20 entries

‹12›

This shift has major geopolitical implications. Countries that expand nuclear capacity can reduce reliance on imported fossil fuels while strengthening energy security and grid stability.

If all planned projects are completed, China will lead with 185,812 MW, followed by the U.S. at 117,910 MW and France at 75,590 MW.

France remains a historic leader in nuclear energy, with around 69% of its electricity generated from the technology.

The UK was home to the world’s first commercial nuclear power plant, which came online in 1956, but later scaled back its use of nuclear. The government is now aiming for a “golden age of nuclear,” though current commitments totaling 15,394 MW would rank the country just 12th globally.

Of the 17 countries with zero installed capacity today, Uganda is set to scale up the most to 18,000 MW, followed by Poland with 15,612 MW and Türkiye with 14,700 MW.

Betting on Nuclear Fusion and Fission

Today’s nuclear expansion is centered on fission, the technology that powers all existing reactors and accounts for about 10% of global electricity generation. While mature, it is evolving through smaller, modular designs that aim to reduce costs, improve safety, and speed up deployment.

This helps explain why much of the prospective capacity in the chart includes not only large-scale plants, but also a growing wave of smaller reactors backed by governments and private capital.

At the same time, nuclear fusion, the process that powers the sun, remains a long-term ambition. Despite rising investment and recent technical progress, it has yet to reach commercial scale.

For now, the global nuclear buildout is firmly rooted in fission, as countries prioritize reliable, low-carbon power that can be deployed within the next decade.

[russet] Mapped: The World’s Biggest Energy Sources by Country March 18, 2026 By Brun...

russet — 4/10/2026 5:52:37 PM

Mapped: The World’s Biggest Energy Sources by Country

March 18, 2026

By Bruno Venditti
Design

Christina Kostandi

ore visualizations like this on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

Mapped: The World’s Biggest Energy Sources by CountrySee visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

Oil is the most common dominant energy source globally, leading in 39 of the countries covered in the dataset.
Coal remains the primary energy source in several of Asia’s largest economies, including China, India, Indonesia, and Vietnam.
Biomass is still the biggest energy source across much of Africa, where fuels like firewood and charcoal remain widely used for cooking and heating.

Despite rapid growth in renewables, much of the world still relies on a small group of traditional energy sources. In many countries, oil, coal, or natural gas continues to supply the largest share of energy used across transportation, industry, and electricity generation.

This map shows the largest primary energy source in 112 countries using data from the International Energy Agency (IEA). Primary energy refers to energy in its raw form before it is converted into electricity or refined fuels.

The global picture highlights how different regions depend on different fuels. Oil dominates in many economies, coal still powers several of Asia’s largest countries, and traditional biomass remains central to energy use across parts of Africa.

Oil Leads in the Largest Number of CountriesOil is the most common primary energy source globally, with 39 of the countries in the dataset relying on it more than any other fuel. It dominates across much of Europe, the Middle East, and large parts of Asia-Pacific.

In many economies, petroleum products remain essential for transportation and heavy industry. Even countries that produce natural gas, coal, or hydropower domestically often still rely on oil for a significant share of their overall energy supply.

10152550100entries per page

Search:

Country

Largest source of energy

???? Albania	Oil
???? Algeria	Natural Gas
???? Angola	Biomass
???? Argentina	Natural Gas
???? Armenia	Natural Gas
???? Australia	Oil
???? Austria	Oil
???? Azerbaijan	Natural Gas
???? Bangladesh	Natural Gas
???? Belarus	Natural Gas
???? Belgium	Oil
???? Benin	Biomass
???? Bosnia and Herzegovina	Coal
???? Botswana	Coal
???? Brazil	Oil

Showing 1 to 15 of 112 entries

‹12345…8›

Major economies such as the United States, Japan, and Germany still rely primarily on oil despite growing investments in renewables and electrification.

Following oil, natural gas is the next most common primary energy source globally, with 29 countries relying on it the most.

Coal Remains Key in Major Asian Economies

Coal continues to dominate the energy mix in several of the world’s largest emerging economies. China, India, Indonesia, and Vietnam all rely on coal as their biggest primary energy source.

One reason is simple: availability. Many of these countries have large domestic coal reserves and long-established mining and power infrastructure built around the fuel.

At the same time, coal remains one of the largest contributors to global carbon emissions, making these economies central to the future trajectory of global energy transitions.

Biomass Leads in Many African Countries

Across much of Africa, biomass remains the largest primary energy source. This includes fuels such as firewood, charcoal, and agricultural waste.

In many rural areas, these fuels are still widely used for everyday needs like cooking and heating, particularly where access to electricity or modern fuels remains limited.

Outside of Africa, only three other countries in the dataset rely primarily on biomass for energy: Finland, Latvia, and Pakistan.

[russet] US Government Interest Payments, Tax Receipts, Average Interest Rate on the ...

russet — 4/10/2026 5:47:35 PM

US Government Interest Payments, Tax Receipts, Average Interest Rate on the Debt, and Debt-to-GDP Ratio in Q4 2025

by Wolf Richter • Apr 9, 2026 • 31 Comments
It’s ugly, but slightly less ugly.
By Wolf Richter for WOLF STREET.

What portion of tax receipts gets eaten up by interest payments on the monstrous Treasury debt? That’s the question. And we got data on it today for Q4.

Tax receipts by the federal government jumped by $67 billion (+7.4%) in Q4 from Q3 to a record $902 billion. For the whole year, tax receipts jumped by $456 billion (+14.6%) to $3.57 trillion (blue line in the chart below).

Interest payments by the federal government on its monstrous Treasury debt rose by $7 billion (+2.4%) in Q4 from Q3, to $307 billion (red in the chart below). Interest payments don’t occur in a vacuum, but in the context of funds coming in to pay for them: tax receipts.

This measure of tax receipts, released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis today as part of its revised National Accounts data, tracks the receipts that are available to pay for general budget expenditures, such as interest payments, defense spending, government salaries, etc. Excluded are receipts that are not available to pay for general budget expenditures and are not included in the general budget, primarily Social Security and disability contributions that go into Trust Funds, out of which benefits are paid directly to the beneficiaries, and those payments are also not included in the general budget.

A growing economy generates more taxable income and higher tax receipts – both from corporate and individual taxpayers. Growing asset prices generate capital-gains taxes. But those capital gains tax receipts can drop precipitously when asset prices drop, such as in 2022. In addition, in 2025 there were the revenues from the new tariffs.

Tariffs amounted to $90 billion in Q4. For the past 12 months through February, they amounted to $304 billion, per the most recent Monthly Treasury Statement.

But the Supreme Court struck down part of those new tariffs, and the government will be paying out refunds of some of those tariffs. At the same time, the government already announced replacement tariffs under different laws. So in 2026, net receipts from tariffs, including refunds, will likely be smaller. But that was the situation for Q4.

Interest payments as a percent of tax receipts: Interest payments in Q4 ate up 31.6% of the tax receipts available to pay for them.

Ugly, but slightly less ugly than in the prior quarters. The high in Q3 2024, at 37.5%, was the worst ratio since 1996, when the ratio was receding from the crisis times in the 1980s.

The average interest rate on the Treasury debt was 3.33% in March, according to data from the Treasury Department, having stabilized since Q3 2024 between 3.30% and 3.37%, after more than doubling since the Fed first hiked its policy rates in early 2022:

New interest rates enter the interest expense when old Treasury securities mature and are replaced with new Treasury securities at the new interest rate, and when additional Treasury securities are issued at the new interest rates to fund the deficits.

There are currently $6.8 trillion in Treasury bills outstanding (terms between 1 month and 12 months), and they constantly mature and get refinanced in huge auctions every week, and issuance is also slowly being increased.

As the Fed cut its policy rates, the interest rate that the government paid to sell new T-bills fell from over 5% in mid-2023 to about 3.6% currently, which pushed down on the interest expense.

But when longer-term debt is issued at auction, their interest rates are often higher than the rates of the securities that matured and that they replaced.

Recent 10-year note yields at auction were over double the yield at which the maturing notes had been issued 10 years ago. And the size of the 10-year note auctions has roughly doubled from 10 years ago. So the government paid over double the interest rate on over double the amount, which quadruples the dollar-interest expense on that issue from the issue it replaced.

The ugly Debt-to-GDP ratio rose to 122.5% in Q4 and is now back on trend.

The ratio for Q1 and Q2 had dropped because of the effects of the debt ceiling, which prevented the debt from ballooning but drained the government’s checking account. At the beginning of Q3, the debt ceiling was raised, and debt issuance spiked in Q3 and Q4 to refill the government’s checking account.

The pandemic was unique in that GDP collapsed in Q2 2020, while the debt exploded, and the ratio spiked in a breathtaking manner. As GDP bounced off, while the growth of the debt slowed somewhat to still very high growth rates, the ratio backed off through 2022.

But in 2023, it started rising again even as the economy was growing at a rapid rate. The problem has been the $2.2-plus trillion in new debt that was added every year for the past three years by the Drunken Sailors in Washington:

But there won’t be a default on this debt because the US issued this debt in its own currency and can always create more currency to service the debt (the Fed buys some of the debt). So default is not the issue.

The issue is inflation. In an already inflationary environment, creating money to service an out-of-control debt would cause inflation to spiral out of control, crush the economy, and lead to years of wealth destruction and lower standards of living. Everyone knows this – even the people in Washington.

So the go-to hope seems to be to trim the annual deficits a little, including through tariffs, to where economic growth (as per nominal GDP) and modest inflation (3%-5%) outrun the growth of the debt, which would gradually over the years whittle away at the problem and lower the burden of the debt. This scenario assumes that there won’t ever be another recession, good luck with that.

[russet] Ranked: The World’s Largest Air Forces in 2026 April 7, 2026 By Bruno Venditt...

russet — 4/9/2026 6:34:49 PM

Ranked: The World’s Largest Air Forces in 2026

April 7, 2026

By Bruno Venditti

e more visuals like this on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

Ranked: The World’s Largest Air Forces in 2026See visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

The U.S. operates over 13,000 aircraft, more than the next three countries combined.
China ranks third in total aircraft but has one of the largest fighter fleets globally.
Six of the top eight air forces are in Asia, highlighting the region’s growing military focus.

Air power remains one of the clearest signals of military reach, and a key measure of how militaries project power globally.

This chart ranks the world’s largest air forces in 2026 by total aircraft, revealing a massive gap between the United States and every other country. It also breaks out fighter and interceptor fleets, offering a closer look at frontline combat strength.

The data for this visualization comes from GlobalFirepower, as of March 2026.

The U.S. Stands in a Class of Its Own

The most striking takeaway is the scale gap at the top.

The United States leads with 13,032 aircraft, more than the next three countries combined, putting it in a class of its own.

Russia ranks second with 4,237 aircraft, while China is third with 3,529.

RankCountryTotal AircraftFighters / Interceptors

1	???? United States	13,032	1,791
2	???? Russia	4,237	861
3	???? China	3,529	1,443
4	???? India	2,183	476
5	???? South Korea	1,540	242
6	???? Japan	1,429	217
7	???? Pakistan	1,397	331
8	???? Türkiye	1,101	201
9	???? Egypt	1,088	242
10	???? France	974	223
11	???? Saudi Arabia	917	283
12	???? North Korea	837	341
13	???? Taiwan	720	258
14	???? Italy	714	88
15	???? United Kingdom	625	103
16	???? Algeria	620	111
17	???? Israel	597	239
18	???? United Arab Emirates	581	99
19	???? Germany	569	127
20	???? Greece	560	178

The United States has long prioritized air dominance, and the size of its fleet reflects that strategy.

In fact, its 1,791 fighters and interceptors alone exceed the total aircraft inventories of many countries on this list.

Fighters vs. All Other Aircraft
Most aircraft in an air force aren’t combat jets. Instead, they are support systems that enable operations.

These include transport planes for moving troops and equipment, helicopters for mobility and logistics, training aircraft for pilot development, and specialized planes for refueling, surveillance, and electronic warfare. Together, these fleets determine how far, how fast, and how effectively a military can project air power.

Asia Commands Much of the Top 10

Air power is increasingly centered in Asia and the Middle East.

China, India, South Korea, Japan, Pakistan, and Türkiye all place in the top eight, while Egypt and Saudi Arabia also rank in the top 11.

Top Countries by Fighter Strength

Looking only at fighters and interceptors reveals a different balance of power.

China’s 1,443 fighter aircraft bring it closer to the U.S. in frontline combat aviation than total fleet size alone would suggest.

In addition, North Korea stands out, ranking 12th in total aircraft but fielding 341 fighters and interceptors, more than several countries with larger overall fleets. Meanwhile, nations like France, Israel, Taiwan, and Saudi Arabia show how relatively smaller air forces can still maintain substantial combat capability through a high share of fighter aircraft.

In modern warfare, total fleet size shows scale—but fighter strength and support capabilities together determine how that power is actually used.

[russet] Ranked: The Biggest Arms Importers in 2025 April 7, 2026 By Niccolo Conte Ed...

russet — 4/9/2026 6:12:32 PM

Ranked: The Biggest Arms Importers in 2025

April 7, 2026

By Niccolo Conte
Editing

Bruno Venditti

See more visuals like this on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

Ranked: The Biggest Arms Importers in 2025See visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

Saudi Arabia is the world’s largest arms importer, accounting for 9.1% of global demand.
Europe now makes up nearly 40% of global arms imports amid rising security concerns.
India, Ukraine, and Poland rank among the top buyers, reflecting ongoing regional tensions.

Global demand for military equipment is rising as countries respond to conflict, uncertainty, and shifting alliances.

This chart ranks the world’s largest arms importers in 2025, based on data from the SIPRI Arms Transfers Database (March 2026). It shows which nations are driving the surge in defense spending and where demand is accelerating fastest.

Middle East and Asia Lead Demand

Saudi Arabia leads global arms imports by a wide margin, accounting for 9.1% of total demand, more than any other country. Its sustained spending highlights a broader trend. Nations are accelerating military upgrades in response to prolonged regional instability.

Rank

Country

% of Global Arms Imports

1	???? Saudi Arabia	9.1%
2	???? India	8.6%
3	???? Ukraine	6.8%
4	???? Poland	6.5%
5	???? Japan	5.1%
6	???? Germany	4.9%
7	???? Indonesia	3.8%
8	???? Qatar	3.1%
9	???? United Arab Emirates	2.6%
10	???? Philippines	2.5%
11	???? Australia	2.5%
12	???? Netherlands	2.5%
13	???? United States	2.2%
14	???? Pakistan	2.1%
15	???? Egypt	2.1%

‹1234›

India follows closely at 8.6%, maintaining its position as a top importer due to ongoing regional tensions and the need to upgrade military capabilities. Meanwhile, countries like Qatar and the United Arab Emirates remain major buyers, reinforcing the Middle East’s strong presence in global arms demand.

Europe’s Rapid Expansion
Europe now accounts for 39.9% of global arms imports, the largest regional share by far. This sharp increase reflects a rapid buildup in defense capabilities following the war in Ukraine and a broader shift toward rearmament across the continent.

Ukraine ranks third globally with a 6.8% share, reflecting urgent military needs due to the war with Russia.

Broad Global Participation

While the top importers dominate headlines, arms demand is spread across dozens of countries, underscoring how widespread military investment has become in today’s geopolitical climate.

Nations like Japan, Germany, and Indonesia each hold significant shares. Smaller importers also represent a meaningful portion of the market, with the “Other” category accounting for 4.3% of global imports.

[russet] Six-Month Core PCE Inflation (still before Iran War) Jumps by Most since Jun...

russet — 4/9/2026 5:31:24 PM

Six-Month Core PCE Inflation (still before Iran War) Jumps by Most since June 2024. The Fed Needs to Pay Attention

by Wolf Richter • Apr 9, 2026 • 12 Comments
“Market-Based Core PCE price index,” which excludes the imputed housing components, spiked by the most since February 2023.

By Wolf Richter for WOLF STREET.

The Fed-favored inflation measure, the PCE price index, which includes food and energy, jumped by 0.38% in February from January (+4.6% annualized), the biggest jump in a year, though the energy price spikes from the Iran war hadn’t started yet (blue line).

Year-over-year, the PCE price index rose by 2.8%, roughly the same increase as in the prior three months, and all of them were the biggest increases since the spring of 2024 (red line).

The Fed’s target for the year-over-year measure is 2.0%.

The core PCE price index jumped by 0.37% in February from January, or +4.5% annualized, the third month in a row in the 4%+ annualized range.

This pushed up the 6-month core PCE price index to +3.4% annualized, the worst since June 2024. The six-month index shows the recent trend, and that trend has been going in the wrong direction (red line):

The year-over-year core PCE price index (not shown in the chart) rose by 3.0%, a slight deceleration of the prior month (+3.1%). The Fed’s target for this measure is 2.0%.

The housing index, including the imputed housing components, continue to hold down the overall PCE price index, the core PCE price index, and the core services PCE price index.

In February, the housing PCE price index rose by only 0.20% (+2.45% annualized, blue in the chart below). Year-over-year, it rose by 3.1% (red).

A major component in the index is “imputed,” so not based on price data but on what homeowners think their homes would rent for.

The declining imputed components take the place of actual inflation that homeowners face with surging homeowner’s insurance, property taxes, HOA fees, and repairs and maintenance.

The imputed data is from the BLS, what in CPI is called “Owner’s equivalent of rent,” which was heavily doctored last fall ( explained in detail here), and is visible in the chart below in the outlier three months circled in yellow.

Those three months will continue to push down the year-over-year comparisons until they begin to fall out of the 12-month time frame in September.

But the “Market-based core PCE price index,” which excludes all imputed components, spiked by the most since February 2023, by 0.39% (+4.8% annualized).

Year-over-year, it rose by 2.9%, the worst since January 2024:

Durable goods prices spiked month to month by 1.0% (+13.4% annualized), but not because of motor vehicles, the biggest component, where prices where unchanged month-to-month and nearly unchanged year-over-year; and not because of furnishings and durable household equipment and appliances, which ticked up by 0.3% for the month; but because of huge massive month-to-month spikes related to gold, guns & ammo, and computer software (and I’ll explain how computer software ends up in durable goods):

“Jewelry”: +7.0% month to month (+125% annualized), +10.8% year-over-year, as part of the surge of gold prices through January that made it into jewelry retail prices with a lag;
“Sporting equipment, supplies, guns, and ammunition”: +1.7% month-to-month (+22% annualized), second big month-to-month spike in a row, which flipped the year-over-year decline through December to an increase of +3.7% year-over-year. This category does not include bicycles, etc., which are in a different category, “sports and recreational vehicles,” where prices dipped in February.
“Computer software and accessories”: +6.5% month-to-month (+113% annualized), third big month-to-month increase in a row; +8.0% year-over-year. Software is not tariffed. It’s under durable goods because it’s part of “information processing equipment,” which includes “personal computers & tablets,” which are tariffed, but were unchanged month-to-month (+0%) and barely up year-over-year (+0.9%).

Energy prices jumped in February, before the Iran war, by 0.81% from January (+10.2% annualized), but were still unchanged from a year ago.

The energy price spike in March will add to the inflation data for March.

Food prices rose by 0.27% in February from January (+3.3% annualized, blue line). Year-over-year, they rose by 2.3%. The trend has been accelerating since mid-2024.

Part of it has been driven by the four-year-long huge price increases of beef and veal (+14% over the latest 12 months) and coffee (+12% over the latest 12 months). Some other food prices, such as eggs, have fallen from their prior spikes but remain much higher than before.

Inflation isn’t going away, on the contrary. There is a lot of stimulus in the economy: Government deficit spending, tax cuts for companies and individuals, bigger tax refunds to consumers starting in March, massive corporate investments in anything related to AI, too-low interest rates, and still too narrow spreads. Inflation feeds on these conditions.

The housing index and especially the declining imputed measures that replace the soaring actual inflation homeowners face are covering up the extent of the inflationary pressures in the economy.

The Fed needs to pay attention to inflation, and it has been to some extent, and it keeps mentioning it as a risk to the upside, and it has put rate cuts on hold because of it.

And in case you missed it: New inflation pressures suddenly building up in the pipeline are concerning – Used Vehicle Wholesale Prices Jumped. That’s How it Started in 2020 when Broad Inflation Took Off

[russet] Mapped: How Much Rent Has Risen in 30 Major U.S. Cities Since 2020 March 20, 2...

russet — 4/7/2026 5:01:33 PM

Mapped: How Much Rent Has Risen in 30 Major U.S. Cities Since 2020

March 20, 2026

By Dorothy Neufeld
Design

Amy Realey

ee more visualizations like this on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

How Much Rent Has Risen in 30 Major U.S. Cities Since 2020See visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

Miami saw the largest rent increase among major U.S. cities, with average rents rising 53% since 2020 to reach $2,645 in January.
Fast-growing Sun Belt metros—including Tampa and Atlanta—saw some of the sharpest rent increases, fueled by migration from higher-cost regions.
San Francisco (+13%) and Austin (+14%) experienced much slower rent growth.

Rents across major U.S. cities have surged 36% since 2020, reflecting the ripple effects of pandemic migration, tight housing supply, and rising demand in Sun Belt metros.

Using data from Zillow, this visualization compares rent inflation across 30 major U.S. cities between 2020 and January 2026, revealing where prices have climbed the fastest, and where growth has been more subdued.

Some cities have seen rent increases of more than 50%, while others have experienced significantly slower growth despite already high housing costs.

Miami Saw the Biggest Rent Increase Since 2020

Since 2020, Miami has seen the fastest rent growth in the U.S., with prices soaring 53%.

10152550100entries per page

Search:

Rank

City

Change in Rental Cost
2020-2026

Average Monthly Rent
Jan 2026

1	Miami, FL	53%	$2,645
2	Tampa, FL	50%	$1,986
3	Riverside, CA	48%	$2,464
4	St. Louis, MO	44%	$1,409
5	Cincinnati, OH	43%	$1,522
6	Detroit, MI	42%	$1,455
7	San Diego, CA	41%	$2,871
8	Atlanta, GA	38%	$1,812
9	Chicago, IL	37%	$2,091
10	Orlando, FL	37%	$1,917
11	Phoenix, AZ	36%	$1,718
12	Las Vegas, NV	36%	$1,716
13	Charlotte, NC	36%	$1,704
14	Philadelphia, PA	34%	$1,849
15	Sacramento, CA	34%	$2,197

Showing 1 to 15 of 30 entries

‹12›

Back in 2020, rent in Miami cost $1,725, based on typical mid-market rents adjusted for the local housing mix.

By January 2026, it climbed to $2,645, now higher than rents in Seattle and Washington, DC. This coincided with a pandemic-era migration wave that added roughly 250,000 residents to the region.

Tampa ranks second, with 50% rent inflation. While monthly rent remains more affordable than Miami, at $1,986, prices have shot up by $664. Even more strikingly, the Tampa Bay region grew by 497,000 residents, likely owing to its relative affordability.

Rent Inflation Varies Across California Cities

While Riverside and San Diego saw among the fastest-growing rents nationwide, San Francisco price growth was muted.

Riverside rents boomed 48% as residents moved away from costlier California metros. Over the period, rents jumped $795, reaching $2,464 per month, marking the third-highest increase across cities analyzed.

By contrast, San Francisco saw the slowest rent growth, rising just 13% since 2020. Amid growing affordability concerns, roughly 116,000 residents left the city, helping ease pressure on rental prices.

Notably, Austin followed a similar pattern of slower rent growth, with prices rising 14% over the period. Unlike San Francisco, however, the key factor was record apartment construction that significantly increased supply and moderated rent increases.

[russet] Ranked: Top 10 Countries With the Most U.S. Troops in 2025 April 7, 2026 By ...

russet — 4/7/2026 4:59:30 PM

Ranked: Top 10 Countries With the Most U.S. Troops in 2025

April 7, 2026

By Julia Wendling
Graphics & Design

The following content is sponsored by Inigo

Ranked: Top 10 Countries With the Most U.S. Troops in 2025
Key Takeaways

Japan and Germany host the largest amounts of U.S. troops presence with 61.7k and 49.3k personnel respectively.
The top 10 host countries account for roughly 200k U.S. military and civilian personnel.
U.S. deployments remain concentrated in regions tied to Russia and China security priorities.

The global footprint of U.S. troops remains extensive. The data shows a small group of strategic host countries concentrate most deployments.

This visualization, created in partnership with Inigo, provides visual context to where U.S. forces are stationed and how that footprint reflects shifting geopolitical priorities. These placements highlight enduring alliances and evolving security concerns.

Where Are U.S. Troops Deployed?Japan hosts the largest U.S. presence with 61.7k personnel. Germany follows with 49.3k. South Korea ranks third at 26.7k.

CountryTotal Military & Civilian Personnel (2025)

???? Japan	61,684
???? Germany	49,338
???? South Korea	26,722
???? Italy	15,365
???? United Kingdom	11,592
???? Spain	4,331
???? Bahrain	3,813
???? Belgium	1,832
???? Turkey	1,728
???? Cuba	771

Italy and the United Kingdom host 15.4k and 11.6k personnel respectively. These locations form the backbone of U.S. military positioning in Europe.

This distribution is not new. U.S. troop levels across these top host countries have hovered around 200k for the past decade. The consistency reflects long standing defense agreements and established infrastructure.

Strategic Priorities Shape Deployment

Beyond the top hosts, smaller but strategic deployments remain important. Spain has 4.3k personnel. Bahrain has 3.8k. Turkey hosts 1.8k. Cuba rounds out the top 10 with 0.8k.

These placements support key operational hubs and regional missions. Many are tied to naval access, logistics, and rapid response capabilities.

Overall, deployments align closely with major security priorities. Forces are concentrated in regions linked to Russia and China. This reflects a continued focus on deterrence and alliance support in critical theaters.

A Persistent Global Footprint

The U.S. military presence abroad remains highly concentrated and strategically aligned. Japan and Germany anchor this network, while other host countries support regional operations.

The data shows stability in overall troop levels. It also highlights how geography continues to shape military strategy. As global tensions evolve, this footprint is likely to remain a key tool of U.S. power projection.

[russet] Ranked: The World’s 50 Most Powerful Militaries January 15, 2026 By Bruno Ve...

russet — 4/3/2026 6:08:28 PM

Ranked: The World’s 50 Most Powerful Militaries

January 15, 2026

By Bruno Venditti
Design

Amy Kuo

e more visuals like this on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

Ranked: The World’s 50 Most Powerful MilitariesSee visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

The U.S., Russia, and China rank as the world’s most powerful militaries, reflecting their scale, resources, and global reach.

The recent U.S. operation against Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro demonstrated that military power is not only about troop numbers or superior combat technology.

With the successful extraction of Maduro and his wife from a military compound in just 2.5 hours, the extremely effective operation showed how far training, intelligence, and logistics go towards driving military power.

This infographic ranks the world’s most powerful militaries in 2025. The data for this visualization comes from the Global Firepower Index, which assesses 145 countries.

The World’s Top Military Powers

The index evaluates more than 60 factors, including active military manpower, land, air and naval assets, logistics, natural resources, and geographic considerations. Importantly, a lower Military Power Index score indicates greater overall strength.

Rank

Country

Military Power Index

Active Military Manpower

1	???? United States	0.07	1,328,000
2	???? Russia	0.08	1,320,000
3	???? China	0.08	2,035,000
4	???? India	0.12	1,455,550
5	???? South Korea	0.17	600,000
6	???? United Kingdom	0.18	184,860
7	???? Japan	0.18	247,150
8	???? France	0.19	200,000
9	???? Turkiye	0.19	355,200
10	???? Italy	0.22	165,500
11	???? Brazil	0.24	360,000
12	???? Pakistan	0.25	654,000
13	???? Indonesia	0.26	400,000
14	???? Germany	0.26	181,600

‹1234›

The United States ranks first, with the lowest Military Power Index score and more than 1.3 million active-duty personnel. Its position reflects unmatched global reach, advanced technology, and extensive logistical capabilities.

Russia and China follow closely behind. China stands out for having the largest active military manpower among the top three, with just over 2 million personnel, while Russia combines large troop numbers with extensive land and strategic capabilities.

Manpower Isn’t Everything

While troop numbers matter, they do not tell the full story. Countries like Japan, the United Kingdom, and France rank among the top 10 despite having far smaller active forces than some lower-ranked nations.

Japan ranks highly due to its advanced naval and air forces, including one of the world’s most capable destroyer fleets, modern fighter jets, and strong missile defense systems.

Despite a smaller army, the UK maintains strong air and naval assets and benefits from deep integration with NATO operations. Meanwhile, France ranks among the top militaries thanks to its nuclear arsenal, blue-water navy, and proven ability to conduct overseas operations independently.

[russet] Ranked: The World’s Largest Armies in 2026 April 3, 2026 By Bruno Venditti D...

russet — 4/3/2026 6:04:11 PM

Ranked: The World’s Largest Armies in 2026

April 3, 2026

By Bruno Venditti
Design

Christina Kostandi

See more visuals like this on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

Ranked: The World’s Largest Armies in 2026See visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

Bangladesh ranks #1 globally with over 7 million personnel, driven almost entirely by reserves and paramilitary forces.
China has the largest active-duty military, with roughly 2 million troops.
Countries like South Korea and Taiwan rely heavily on reserves due to regional security pressures.

Military power is often associated with advanced weapons and technology, but sheer manpower still shapes global rankings.

This chart reveals the world’s largest armies in 2026 by total personnel—including active troops, reserves, and paramilitary forces. The results are unexpected: countries with relatively small active forces, like Bangladesh and Vietnam, rank at the top due to massive reserve systems.

Data comes from GlobalFirepower (March 2026). Definitions of reserve and paramilitary forces vary by country.

Reserve Forces Drive the RankingsBangladesh ranks first globally with 7 million total personnel, despite having just over 200,000 active troops. Its position is driven almost entirely by a vast paramilitary network.

Rank

Nation

Active

Reserve + Paramilitary

Total

1	???? Bangladesh	204,000	6,800,000	7,004,000
2	???? Vietnam	450,000	5,300,000	5,750,000
3	???? Ukraine	900,000	4,100,000	5,000,000
4	???? India	1,400,000	3,500,000	4,900,000
5	???? South Korea	450,000	3,200,000	3,650,000
6	???? Russia	1,300,000	2,300,000	3,600,000
7	???? China	2,000,000	1,100,000	3,100,000
8	???? United States	1,300,000	800,000	2,100,000
9	???? North Korea	1,300,000	660,000	1,960,000
10	???? Taiwan	230,000	1,700,000	1,930,000
11	???? Brazil	376,000	1,500,000	1,876,000
12	???? Pakistan	660,000	1,100,000	1,760,000
13	???? Philippines	160,000	1,500,000	1,660,000
14	???? Colombia	429,000	1,100,000	1,529,000
15	???? Egypt	439,000	779,000	1,218,000
16	???? Iran	610,000	570,000	1,180,000
17	???? Indonesia	405,000	651,000	1,056,000
18	???? Germany	184,000	860,000	1,044,000
19	???? Türkiye	481,000	530,000	1,011,000
20	???? Israel	170,000	500,000	670,000

Vietnam follows a similar model to Bangladesh, combining a moderate active force with one of the largest reserve systems in the world. Ukraine also stands out, reflecting rapid mobilization and expansion following the ongoing conflict with Russia.

China Leads in Active Military Strength

When focusing only on active-duty personnel, the rankings shift significantly. China leads with roughly 2 million troops, followed by India, Russia, and the United States—all with over 1 million active personnel.

This highlights a key distinction: total personnel reflects mobilization capacity, while active forces indicate immediate military readiness.

North Korea also ranks high in active personnel, reflecting its long-standing emphasis on military preparedness.

Different Strategies Across Regions

Military structure varies widely by region. South Korea and Taiwan maintain large reserve forces due to geopolitical tensions, particularly with neighboring rivals.

Meanwhile, countries like Brazil and Germany maintain relatively balanced forces, with moderate active troops and sizable reserves. Israel stands out for its highly mobilized reserve system, which can be activated quickly in times of crisis.

[russet] The Massive Unsustainable Trade Deficit in Goods Has Improved Sharply. Tarif...

russet — 4/3/2026 12:32:54 AM

The Massive Unsustainable Trade Deficit in Goods Has Improved Sharply. Tariffs Are Doing their Job

by Wolf Richter • Apr 2, 2026 • 44 Comments
The 6-month average trade deficit in goods fell to $80 billion, the least-bad since 2020.

By Wolf Richter for WOLF STREET.

The Census Bureau released the trade figures for February today, and they were another step in the right direction. The trade deficit in goods at $57 billion in February, was down by 52% from the trade deficit in February last year ($120 billion) and down by 58% from the tariff-frontrunning peak in March last year ($136 billion) just before the vast majority of tariffs kicked in. But monthly trade figures are very volatile. The 6-month average irons out those monthly ups and downs and shows the trend.

The 6-month average trade deficit in goods fell (improved) to $80 billion in February, the least-bad since September 2020, and down by 37% from the 6-month-average peak in March 2025. The tariffs are doing their job!

Since a trade deficit is a negative in the GDP calculation, it is shown here as negative figures, representing US cash flowing out of the US to other countries.

The tariffs are supposed to accomplish two goals: 1. Reduce the massive and unsustainable trade deficit in goods driven by the tsunami of imports; 2. Raise taxes from companies that continue to import anyway.

Here we’re looking at the first of those two goals: an improvement in the unsustainable trade deficit in goods. Tariffs are applied to goods, not to services. The future of the tariffs still hasn’t been etched into stone. But the effects so far are becoming clearer: a substantial reduction in imports of goods, and a big improvement in the massive and unsustainable trade deficit in goods.

Shifting supply chains and production to factories in the US is a slow process, especially when it involves building new factories or expanding existing factories. These projects take years from being first decided to actually starting mass-production. What has shown up over the first 10 months of the tariffs so far is the low-hanging fruit.

Imports of goods fell to $255 billion, the least-bad since December 2023.

The six-month average of imports improved to $270 billion, down by 11% from the peak of the six-month average in March 2025 ($302 billion), and a level first breached on the way up in mid-2022.

Imports are a negative in the GDP calculation and are expressed here in negative figures.

Exports of goods have been ticking higher, but they’re not nearly high enough to balance out the flood of imports. In dollar terms, the US is a big exporter of pharmaceutical products; energy products and petrochemicals; civilian aircraft, aircraft engines, and parts; machinery and industrial equipment; vehicles and parts; periodically nonmonetary gold; and many other products.

In February, exports rose to $196 billion, the second highest since October. The six-month average rose to a record $190 billion.

Exports are a positive factor in the GDP calculation and are expressed in positive figures here:

The combination of even slowly rising exports and rapidly falling imports produced the sharp improvement in the trade deficit in goods (first chart above).

And in case you missed it: Status of US Dollar as Global Reserve Currency: USD Share Drops to 31-Year Low as Central Banks Diversify into Other Currencies & Gold

[russet] Ranked: America’s Most Dangerous Cities, According to Citizens October 11,...

russet — 3/28/2026 4:33:29 PM

Ranked: America’s Most Dangerous Cities, According to Citizens

October 11, 2025

By Marcus Lu
Design

Amy Kuo

isualization first on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

Mapped: America’s Most Dangerous Cities, According to CitizensThis was originally posted on our Voronoi app. Download the app for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

Numbeo’s Crime Index is based on user surveys, scaled 0–100, and reflects people’s perception of crime & safety rather than official statistics.
Based on the index’s mid-2025 update, Memphis, TN is the most dangerous city in America.

Where do American’s feel the least safe?

To answer this question, we visualized the results of Numbeo’s Crime Index, which reveals how people perceive safety in their own city as of mid-2025. Unlike FBI or police statistics, this index reflects public sentiment through crowdsourced surveys.

Data & Discussion

Numbeo’s Crime Index uses a scale from 0 (very safe) to 100 (very dangerous), based on residents’ self-reported experiences and perceptions. The survey covers various aspects of crime, including:

General perception of crime levels
Perceived safety during day and night
Concerns about specific crimes (mugging, robbery, car theft, physical attacks, etc.)
Severity of property crime (burglary, theft, vandalism)
Severity of violent crime (assault, homicide, sexual offenses)

Overall, this index provides an alternative lens on urban safety that is shaped more by everyday life than by crime reports. Here’s how to interpret the results:

Very Low Crime: 20 and below
Low Crime: 20.01-40
Moderate Crime: 40.01-60
High Crime: 60.01-80
Very High Crime: above 80

Search:

Rank

City

State

Crime Index

--

National Index Score

--

49.2

1	Memphis	TN	78.0
2	Detroit	MI	73.1
3	Baltimore	MD	72.7
4	Albuquerque	NM	71.7
5	Saint Louis	MO	69.7
6	Oakland	CA	68.7
7	New Orleans	LA	66.9
8	Milwaukee	WI	66.7
9	Chicago	IL	66.1
10	Philadelphia	PA	65.8
11	Atlanta	GA	64.6
12	Houston	TX	63.2
13	San Francisco	CA	60.9
14	Indianapolis	IN	60.2
15	Washington, DC	DC	60.2
16	Kansas City	MO	58.1
17	Portland	OR	57.1
18	Jacksonville	FL	56.6
19	Las Vegas	NV	55.9
20	Minneapolis	MN	55.6

‹12›

Memphis Leads the Rankings

At the top of the list, Memphis, Tennessee registers the highest crime index score at 78, marking it as the city Americans perceive as the most unsafe in 2025.

Residents often cite issues with violent crime and property theft, contributing to its elevated perception of risk.

While Memphis has historically suffered from high crime rates, recent data shows safety is improving. In 2024, total crime in Memphis dropped by roughly 13.3%, with homicide down about 30% and motor vehicle theft down nearly 39%.

Rust Belt and Legacy Crime Centers

Detroit (73.1) and Baltimore (72.7) continue to rank among the top three most dangerous cities in the index.

Since 2008, both cities have struggled with the loss of key industries and jobs, eroding their economic base (and tax revenues). This fuels an increase in poverty rates, reduces the city’s capacity to respond, and destabilizes communities.

[russet] Ranked: The World’s Most Surveilled Cities March 28, 2026 By Dorothy Neufeld ...

russet — 3/28/2026 4:30:33 PM

Ranked: The World’s Most Surveilled Cities

March 28, 2026

By Dorothy Neufeld
Design

Miranda Smith

ee more visualizations like this on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

Ranked: The World’s Most Surveilled CitiesSee visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

Indian cities dominate the rankings, with Hyderabad (79 cameras per 1,000 people) leading globally.
Eight of the top 10 cities are Asian. The other two most surveilled cities are in Russia.
China has 700 million cameras (494 per 1,000 people), though per-city data is unavailable.

Surveillance is becoming a defining feature of modern cities, but the level of monitoring varies significantly from one urban center to the next.

In Los Angeles, the number of cameras exceeds 46,000. Hyderabad, India has around 900,000. This visualization ranks major global cities by the number of CCTV cameras per 1,000 people using data from Comparitech, showing where surveillance is most concentrated.

As governments and municipalities expand surveillance for security and smart city initiatives, these rankings offer a snapshot of where camera density—and public surveillance—is highest today.

Cities With the Most Cameras Per Capita

At the top of the list, Hyderabad, India leads globally with 79 cameras per 1,000 people, followed by Indore (72) and Bangalore (41). Collectively, they hold over 1.7 million cameras.

It’s worth noting that data for specific cities in China is unavailable owing to government secrecy. However, it’s estimated to have 494 cameras per capita, or nearly one camera for every two people.

The table below shows the number of CCTV cameras per capita, highlighting the scale of public surveillance around the world.

[russet] Ranked: The 50 Countries With the Most Agricultural Land March 14, 2026 By Ga...

russet — 3/21/2026 5:41:01 PM

Ranked: The 50 Countries With the Most Agricultural Land

March 14, 2026

By Gabriel Cohen
Design

Anna Diederichs

re visuals like this on the Voronoi app.

The 50 Countries With the Most Agricultural LandSee visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

China has the most agricultural land in the world, with roughly 2.0 million square miles.
The U.S., Australia, Brazil, and Russia round out the top five.
Asia and Africa account for a large share of the top 50 countries by agricultural land area.

Agricultural land spans more than 18 million square miles worldwide, forming the foundation of global food production.

This graphic ranks the top 50 countries by agricultural land area, using the most recent FAO data compiled by the World Bank. China leads the world by a wide margin, followed by the United States and Australia.

The ranking highlights where the world’s largest agricultural footprints are located, spanning major producers across Asia, Africa, and the Americas.

Why China Has the World’s Most Agricultural Land

At 2 million square miles, China has more agricultural land than any other country worldwide. Roughly a fifth of the national population works in agriculture, and China today is the world’s largest producer and consumer of agricultural goods.

The data table below features all of the world’s countries and their total square mileage of agricultural land:

10152550100entries per page

Search:

Rank

Country Name

Ag land (sq. mi)

1	???? China	2,009,326
2	???? United States	1,627,576
3	???? Australia	1,402,492
4	???? Brazil	914,131
5	???? Russian Federation	832,826
6	???? Kazakhstan	827,284
7	???? India	689,466
8	???? Saudi Arabia	670,418
9	???? Argentina	448,405
10	???? Sudan	435,002
11	???? Mongolia	414,933
12	???? Mexico	380,486
13	???? South Africa	371,975
14	???? Nigeria	267,948
15	???? Canada	219,596

Showing 1 to 15 of 209 entries

‹12345…14›

China even has more agricultural land than larger countries like Russia (833,000 sq. mi) and Canada (220,000) owing to those countries’ vast frozen and tundra geographies.

However, climate change is likely to change the landscape of global agriculture, as new northern regions become more hospitable for agriculture.

The Top Agricultural Players

The United States (1.6 million), Australia (1.4 million), and Brazil (914,000) round out the top five countries worldwide. Each of these countries specializes in different crops.

For example, the U.S. is the world’s largest producer of corn, while Brazil is the top grower of both soybeans and sugarcane.

Meanwhile, Australia has overcome its mostly arid geography to become a major wheat and cereals grower, rivaling major producers like India (689,000) and Ukraine (160,000).

Africa’s Growing Desert Problem

African countries make up nearly half of the top 50 countries worldwide by square mileage of agricultural land area. They’re led by larger countries like Sudan (435,000), South Africa (372,000), and Nigeria (268,000).

As with peers in Eurasia and the Americas, African agriculture is increasingly facing challenges from climate change.

In particular, the growing desertification problem is reducing countries’ agricultural land, especially in the Sahel region, as temperatures rise and soil becomes less fertile for growing crops. Over-farming and over-grazing are exacerbating regional soil erosion and deepening desertification.

[russet] Prices of New Single-Family Homes Drop Further, Inventory of Completed New H...

russet — 3/19/2026 8:34:00 PM

Prices of New Single-Family Homes Drop Further, Inventory of Completed New Homes for Sale Highest since 2009

by Wolf Richter • Mar 19, 2026 • 1 Comment
Hoping for lower mortgage rates that may not come.

By Wolf Richter for WOLF STREET.

Homebuilders have been aggressively trying to build and sell homes because that’s their business; they cannot wait out this market and pray for lower mortgage rates that may not come. They’re fighting for market share, and they’re trying to show growth to their investors – in a housing market that is otherwise frozen.

So the inventory of completed single-family homes for sale – the “spec homes” – has reached the highest level since 2009, prices continue to zigzag lower, incentives and mortgage-rate buydowns are used to move the inventory. And sales, well, they’re not exactly spectacular, but they’re fairly decent, compared to existing homes.

Contract prices fell, even with incentives not included.The median contract price dropped by 6.8% year-over-year to $400,500 in January (blue in the chart below), according to data from the Census Bureau today.

The three-month average, which irons out some of the month-to-month squiggles, dropped to $410,533 (red), down by 2.1% year-over-year and by 7.7% from the peak in late 2022, and roughly back where it had been in October 2021.

But this median-price metric does not include the heavy incentives, such as mortgage-rate buydowns that builders use to move their inventory. The Census Bureau tracks prices written into purchase contracts that buyers signed. These contract prices do not include the costs of mortgage-rate buydowns and some other incentives.

With the costs of the buydowns and incentives included, home prices fell far further – we know that from builders’ financial reports. For example, Lennar spent 14% of the home sales revenues on incentives, in addition to selling at lower contract prices, and this pushed its average selling price down by 24% from the peak, to levels first seen in 2017 (more in a moment).

These contract prices overstate effective sales prices and understate the effective price drops. And still, they’ve been zigzagging lower.

The price explosion in 2021 and 2022, when homebuyers were willing to pay whatever, had led to obscene profit margins at homebuilders. Those profit margins have been getting slashed since then, in Lennar’s case – which is gunning to be the #1 homebuilder in the US by volume – by nearly half.

Lennar’s gross margin on home sales got slashed to 15.2%, down from the obscene 26.9% in Q1 2022. Operating earnings from homebuilding plunged by 54% year-over-year, earnings before income taxes plunged by 57% year-over-year, net earnings plunged by 56% year-over-year, and its shares have plunged by 52% since the peak in September 2024.

Lennar cut the average price per home sold, including all incentives, by 24% from the peak in Q3 2022, to $374,000 (red in the chart), where it had first been in 2017. The mid-range guidance for Q2 dropped to $372,500 (blue).

In return, Lennar’s deliveries in Q1 have soared by 37% from Q1 2021, while sales of existing single-family homes have plunged by 32% over the same period, amid surging supply.

Overall sales of new homes have hung in there. In January, homebuilders sold 48,000 homes, down by 14% year-over-year, but just 2% below January 2019, roughly level with January 2018, and above January 2017.

Completed single-family homes for sale, at 126,000 in January, were up by 11% year-over-year, and the highest since June 2009. These essentially move-in ready “spec homes” are waiting for the spring selling season and lower mortgage rates that may not come. Builders have tied up a lot of capital in them, and they will be highly motivated to sell them.

Inventory by region.Inventory for sale at all stages of construction has been declining from the very high levels – from record levels in the South – as builders were focused on completing what they had started, and being somewhat prudent with starting new projects (a map of the four Census regions is below the article at the top of the comments).

In the South, inventories of new houses for sale at all stages of construction in January, at 288,000, were down 4.6% year-over-year, and down 7.7% from the record levels of 312,000 in June and July. But they remain very high, 55% higher than in January 2019.

In the West, inventories of new homes for sale have been declining for a year, but remain very high. In January, inventories, at 101,000 homes for sale, were down by 14% from January 2025, which had been the peak.

The West accounted for 21% of the total US inventory.

In the Midwest, inventories, at 52,000 homes, were up by 10.6% year-over-year and by 24% from January 2019:

In the Northeast, inventories, at 31,000 new homes, were up by 3.3% year-over-year and by 11% from January 2019.

The Northeast is a relatively small area with huge densely populated cities where multifamily construction (condos and apartments) plays a very big role.

E

[russet] Unitree robots, particularly the G1 humanoid and Go2 robotic dog, are advanced...

russet — 3/18/2026 9:21:00 PM

Unitree robots, particularly the G1 humanoid and Go2 robotic dog, are advanced, agile machines capable of autonomous navigation, complex acrobatic maneuvers (backflips, parkour), and dexterous manipulation of household objects. Featuring AI-driven movement, they can perform tasks like sorting items, wiping surfaces, running at high speeds, and synchronized group movements.
Key Capabilities of Unitree Robots:

Humanoid Dexterity & Tasks (G1/H1): The G1 humanoid can handle objects, pick up items, organize spaces, and interact with the environment using advanced dexterous hands.
Agility & Acrobatics: Unitree robots are known for high-speed locomotion, backflips, leaping, and quick recovery from falls or pushes.
Quadrupedal Mobility (Go1/Go2): The robotic dogs can navigate challenging, uneven terrain like sand, rocks, and soil.
AI and Intelligence: Equipped with 3D LiDAR and depth cameras, the robots have 360-degree environmental perception. They are increasingly integrating LLMs for conversational interaction.
Synchronized Swarm Movement: Multiple G1 robots can perform coordinated routines together.
Industrial/Rescue Applications: Specialized models like the B2 are equipped for industrial tasks, including firefighting with foam cannons.
YouTube +6

Key Models:

G1 Humanoid: A, lower-cost ($16,000+) consumer-grade, and research-focused humanoid aimed at home and office tasks.
H1 Humanoid: An earlier, larger full-size humanoid designed for running and complex movement.
Go2/Go2-W: Popular robot dogs for security, inspection, and hobbyist use.
Wikipedia +4

Unitree emphasizes rapid development, with robots designed to learn through AI reinforcement training for fast iteration.

[russet] Ranked: The Companies Shipping the Most Humanoid Robots March 17, 2026 By Ni...

russet — 3/18/2026 9:17:25 PM

Ranked: The Companies Shipping the Most Humanoid Robots

March 17, 2026

By Niccolo Conte
Editing

Dorothy Neufeld

Design

Sam Parker

more visualizations like this on the Voronoi app.

Ranked: The Companies Shipping the Most Humanoid RobotsSee visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

Chinese companies accounted for nearly 90% of global humanoid robot shipments in 2025.
Unitree and AgiBot shipped more than 10,000 robots combined, far ahead of every other manufacturer.
Tesla, Figure AI, and Agility Robotics each shipped about 150 units, showing how early the U.S. market still is.

Global humanoid robot shipments surpassed 14,500 in 2025. By 2030, they could reach mass adoption.

By far, China dominated global sales last year, covering 90% of total sales. While early deployments are largely for research and industrial purposes, their applications could soon break into wider retail uses and household tasks.

Based on data from multiple sources via Rest of World, this graphic ranks the companies shipping the world’s humanoid robots as the industry expands.

The Top Companies by Humanoid Robot Sales in 2025

The table below ranks humanoid robot shipments by company in 2025, highlighting which firms are leading the early commercialization of this emerging technology.

CompanyUnits Sold 2025Country

Unitree	5,500	???? China
AgiBot	5,168	???? China
UBTECH	1,000	???? China
Leju Robotics	500	???? China
Engine AI	400	???? China
Fourier Intelligence	300	???? China
Figure AI	150	???? U.S.
Agility Robotics	150	???? U.S.
Tesla	150	???? U.S.
Others	1,350	?? N/A

Unitree ranks first globally, with 5,500 units sold in 2025, up from around 1,500 a year earlier.

Moreover, Unitree’s models stand among the world’s most advanced and affordable. Its cheapest R1 model, for instance, costs just $5,900, while the company also sells robot dogs for $1,600.

Competitor AgiBot followed next seeing 5,168 units sold, with its lowest-cost model standing at $14,500. Overall, 21 new models were introduced in China in 2025, rising from three in 2022.

While Elon Musk projects humanoid robots will outnumber the human population by 2040, Tesla’s rollout has been markedly slower. In 2025, it shipped 150 of its Optimus models, with public sales forecasted to begin in 2027.

Similarly, other leading U.S. companies Figure AI and Agility Robotics each shipped about the same amount. Despite limited deliveries so far, Figure AI soared to a $39 billion valuation, jumping from $2.6 billion in 2024.

China’s Deep Supply Chains

China’s Yangtze River Delta contains the world’s most vertically integrated supply chain for humanoid robotics.

Not only are Unitree and AgiBot based in the region, it is home to several leading suppliers of robotics parts. DeepSeek and Alibiba—which launched an AI model designed for robotics—are also found in the cluster.

Additionally, the region’s role as a EV manufacturing hub serves as a key catalyst to production. Like autos, humanoids require thousands of precision components. In many cases, EV actuators and gears can be repurposed for humanoid robotics manufacturing.

Today, China controls about 26% of the global actuator market, compared with roughly 5% for the United States.

Along with this industrial base, humanoid robots depend heavily on critical minerals and rare earth elements, materials that China dominates, driving roughly 60% of global production. Together, these supply chain advantages give China a structural edge in scaling these emerging technologies.

[russet] Visualizing the Current Generation of Humanoid Robots January 31, 2025 By H...

russet — 3/18/2026 9:14:00 PM

Visualizing the Current Generation of Humanoid Robots

January 31, 2025

By Harrison Schell Featured Creator
Article/Editing:

Kayla Zhu

e this visualization first on the Voronoi app.

Comparing Humanoid Robots Across The WorldThis was originally posted on our Voronoi app. Download the app for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Humanoid robots have come a long way since the early prototypes that struggled with balance and basic movement.

Now, in 2025, autonomous robots built for real-world applications are closer than ever to commercial deployment.

This visualization, created by Harrison Schell from Made Visual, compares the new wave of humanoid robots in the last two years.

Data for individual robots come from company websites and LifeArchitect.ai.

Current Humanoid Robots In Development

Below, we show each robot’s lab, country of origin, height, weight, top speed, and power (if known).

LabRobotCountryHeight (cm)Weight (kg)Top Speed (km/h)Power (hours)

Figure	01	???? USA	167	60	4.3	5
Fourier	GR-1	???? Singapore	165	55	5
Tesla	Optimus Gen 2	???? USA	180	47	8
Boston Dynamics	HD Atlas	???? USA	150	47	9
Boston Dynamics	Atlas	???? USA	175	80	?	?
Sanctuary AI	Phoenix	???? Canada	170	70	5
Agility	Digit	???? USA	175	64	5.4	3
Unitree	H1	???? China	180	47	18

Several companies are launching their first or second-generation biped robots, looking to gain market share early in a space that is sure to grow alongside the intelligence of new LLM and AI technology.

In April 2024, Boston Dynamics retired its long-standing HD Atlas Humanoid robot in favor of the cervo-based Atlas, showing us the next generation of humanoid machines.

In a recent video shared by Boston Dynamics, the latest version of Atlas was shown being able to autonomously move engine covers between supplier containers and a mobile dolly, demonstrating the robot’s ability to perform tasks with minimal human intervention.

Tesla plans to begin limited production of its humanoid robot, Optimus, in 2025, initially deploying several thousand units for internal use within its factories.

Mass production is expected to ramp up by 2026, targeting 50,000-100,000 units, with ambitions to scale to 500,000 robots annually by 2029.

[russet] Charted: The Growth of Industrial Robots by Country April 18, 2025 By Doroth...

russet — 3/18/2026 9:07:56 PM

Charted: The Growth of Industrial Robots by Country

April 18, 2025

By Dorothy Neufeld

ee this visualization first on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

Charted: The Growth of Industrial Robots by CountryThis was originally posted on our Voronoi app. Download the app for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

Globally, there were nearly 4.3 million operational industrial robots in 2023, with China installing over 276,000 that year alone.
India saw the fastest annual growth of industrial robots, rising by 59% annually—the equivalent of 8,510 new robots in 2023.
In the UK, the automotive sector drove installations, increasing by 297% annually. Meanwhile, the metal and food sectors also experienced notable installation growth over the year.

As robots become more common across industries—from automotive plants to food processing facilities—manufacturing is steadily becoming more automated.

In 2023, over 540,000 new industrial robots were installed, pushing the global total past 4 million for the first time. Overall, Asia accounted for 70% of these new installations while Europe and the Americas made up 17% and 10% shares, respectively.

This graphic shows the rise in industrial robot installations by country, based on data from the International Federation of Robotics and 2025 AI Index Report.

India Sees the Fastest Annual Growth

While global industrial robot installations jumped by 10% in 2023, India outpaced this growth by nearly sixfold.

The automotive sector largely powered installations, which boomed by 139% over the year. Overall, the sector added 3,551 robots into factories, comprising a 42% share of installations.

102550100entries per page

Search:

Country

Annual Growth Rate of Industrial Robot Installations
in 2023 (%)

???? India	59
???? UK	51
???? Canada	37
???? Spain	31
???? Türkiye	15
???? Thailand	9
???? Germany	7
???? South Korea	-1
???? Mexico	-3
???? U.S.	-5

Showing 1 to 10 of 15 entries

‹12›

As we can see, the UK followed closely behind, with a 51% increase in industrial robot installations in 2023.

This brought the total number of new units to 3,083—though the figure still lagged behind countries like Canada, Spain, and Mexico. One notable adopter is Greencore, the UK’s largest sandwich manufacturer, which invests $25 million annually in industrial robots. These machines reportedly save the company 350 labor hours per week on sushi-making, as just one example.

In the U.S., new installations reached 37,587, marking a 5% annual decline. The automotive industry drove a third of this share, making it the largest market for robot deployment. For instance, General Motors uses collaborative robots that grasp tools on the assembly line.

Notably, more than 1 million robots are used in the auto industry worldwide.

Top 5 Countries by Number of New Industrial Robots

When it comes to the absolute number of installed industrial robots, China took the lead by far:

CountryNumber of Installed Industrial Robots in 2023

???? China	276,000
???? Japan	46,000
???? U.S.	38,000
???? South Korea	31,000
???? Germany	28,000

In total, there are 1.7 million machines working in China’s factories, with the highest concentration in the electronics and electrical sector.

While China dominates globally, South Korea has the highest share of industrial robots per capita. In 2023, there were 1,012 machines per 10,000 employees compared with 392 in China and 285 in America. Many leading South Korean companies, such as Samsung, Hyundai, and LG, deploy industrial robots supported by the country’s advanced robotics industry.

Canada is actively installing a diverse range of industrial robots, with adoption heavily driven by the automotive sector, followed by manufacturing, logistics, and agriculture. Key types of robots being installed include robotic arms for welding and assembly, autonomous mobile robots (AMRs) for logistics, and emerging humanoid robots.
Statistique Canada +3

Key industrial robots and systems being installed in Canada include:

Humanoid Robots: Toyota Canada is deploying Digit humanoid robots from Agility Robotics at its Woodstock, Ont., assembly plant.
Welding and Fabrication Robots: Novarc Technologies' Spool Welding Robot (SWR) is being used by companies like Seaspan Shipyards for pipe welding. Vention provides modular robots for welding, palletizing, and machine tending.
Autonomous Mobile Robots (AMRs): Used for material transfer within factories, such as the Omron LD90 installed at Dynamic Source Manufacturing.
Collaborative Robots (Cobots): Epson C-Series and GX Series robots, along with FANUC CRX series, are being used for applications requiring close human-robot interaction without safety fences.
Specialized Industrial Robots: KUKA provides heavy-duty robots for automotive production and foundry applications. Robotic systems are also being used for agriculture (e.g., laser weeding by Carbon Robotics).
FANUC America +8

Key Trends in Canada's Robotics Adoption:

Automotive Focus: A significant portion of industrial robot installations are in the automotive sector.
Modular Automation: Companies like Montreal-based Vention offer modular systems that allow manufacturers to quickly design and deploy robots for specific tasks.
Safety Standards: Companies are increasingly using robots with SafeSense™ technology, allowing for collaborative work.
Workforce Support: Despite lower robot density compared to the US, Canadian firms that install robots tend to increase productivity and grow their workforce, helping to mitigate labour shortages.

[russet] Hot Producer Price Inflation Adds to Fed’s Complex and Worsening Inflation P...

russet — 3/18/2026 9:04:22 PM

Hot Producer Price Inflation Adds to Fed’s Complex and Worsening Inflation Problem

by Wolf Richter • Mar 18, 2026 • 21 Comments
Worst 6-month PPI inflation since August 2022 (+5.3% annualized). After multiple rate cuts by the Fed, inflation heats up everywhere: services, food, energy, other goods.

By Wolf Richter for WOLF STREET.

The Producer Price Index final demand for services jumped by 0.54% (+6.7% annualized) in February from January, seasonally adjusted, after spiking by 0.82% (+10.3% annualized) in January, and by 0.59% (+7.3% annualized) in December, which pushed the six-month average to +5.8% annualized, the worst since August 2022, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics today.

The services PPI weighs 68% of the overall PPI. It drives the core PPI (which excludes food and energy components), and even the overall PPI (which includes food and energy). The overall PPI was further driven on a month-to-month basis by big spikes in food prices (+2.4% not annualized!) and energy prices (+2.3% not annualized!).

Within the services PPI:

Trade services PPI (weighs 19% in overall PPI): +0.4% month-to-month not annualized, after a big spike in the prior month.
Transportation & warehousing services PPI (weighs 4.9% in overall PPI): +0.3% month-to-month not annualized, after big spike in the prior month.
Other services (weighs 38% in overall PPI): +0.6%.

Year-over-year, the services PPI accelerated to 3.8%, the fourth month in a row of acceleration.

The low point, the point of the coolest recent services PPI inflation, was in December 2023 at 1.8%. The inflation rate has more than doubled since then.

PPI inflation has been broadly accelerating since 2023, with a lull in early 2025, and a steeper acceleration over the past six months.

Food inflation, after the massive spikes in 2021 and 2022, had calmed down a lot. But that ended mid-2025, when food prices started to accelerate their increases. Prices of energy products had plunged through 2025, but are now spiking.

And core goods prices started to accelerate in 2024 and continued to accelerate in 2025, in part fueled by tariffs that companies were paying for.

The chart below shows PPI inflation on a year-over-year basis for overall PPI (green double line), core PPI (purple line), services PPI (red line), and core goods PPI (yellow line).

The services PPI (red) and the core PPI (purple) nearly overlap because core PPI is dominated by the services PPI, with core goods PPI (yellow) being a much smaller factor in core PPI.

And the Fed has been cutting its policy rates during this acceleration period, starting in September 2024.

Goods prices.

The PPIs final demand for both food and energy surged in February from January:

PPI for Food: +2.4%;
PPI for Energy: +2.3%.

The Core Goods PPI final demand (excludes food and energy) rose by 0.35% in February from January (+4.3% annualized), after a huge spike in the prior month.

The 6-month average rose by 4.8% annualized for the second month in a row. Both were the worst since September 2022.

Companies are trying to pass tariffs on to each other through the goods categories at various stages of the PPI. But consumer-facing companies have resisted price increases because consumers have resisted price increases, and consumer-facing companies had trouble passing on higher costs to consumers without losing sales.

Year-over-year, the core goods PPI jumped by 4.2%, same increase as in January, and both were the worst since March 2023.

Core PPI Final Demand, which includes all goods and services except food and energy, jumped by 0.49% in February from January (6.1% annualized) seasonally adjusted, after spiking by 0.81% (+10.2% annualized) in January, and by 0.53% (+6.6% annualized) in December.

The six-month average accelerated to +5.6% annualized, the worst since August 2022.

Year-over-year, core PPI accelerated to +3.9%, the worst since January 2025, and both were the worst since February 2023.

The overall PPI Final Demand, fueled by the spike in food and energy prices, and the surge in services prices, jumped by 0.68% month-to-month (+8.5% annualized).

The six-month average jumped to +5.3% annualized, the worst since August 2022.

Year-over-year, the overall PPI accelerated to +3.4%, as the past six months of month-to-month increases are starting to push the 12-month reading higher:

The Fed has a complex and growing inflation problem on its hands.

Services inflation, goods inflation, food inflation, and now also energy inflation have all been heating up.

Today’s PPI (producer-facing inflation) added another data point, to what the Fed-favored “PCE price index” (consumer-facing inflation), and the GDP’s “Price Index for Gross Domestic Purchases” (inflation in the overall domestic economy facing consumers, businesses, and governments) have already been saying: Inflation is broadly accelerating.

And if the Fed is talking about rate cuts in this environment, it is clearly stoned.

The Fed-favored core PCE price index, driven by core services, jumped by 0.36% (+4.5% annualized, blue line) in January, even more than in December (blue line).

Year-over-year (red line), it accelerated to 3.1%, the worst in nearly two years. It has been zigzagging higher and ever further away from the Fed’s 2% target since May 2025 (data was released last week; my detailed report is here).

The inflation measure for the domestic economy, the Price Index for Gross Domestic Purchases, which is part of the GDP data and reflects inflation adjustments in GDP except for imports, accelerated to 3.8% in Q4, the worst in three years: domestically bred inflation in the overall US economy:

[russet] What it Takes to Sell Homes in this Market: Lennar Cuts Average Selling Pric...

russet — 3/14/2026 11:17:13 PM

What it Takes to Sell Homes in this Market: Lennar Cuts Average Selling Price to 2017 Level

by Wolf Richter • Mar 13, 2026 • 55 Comments
Much lower margins, lower revenues per square foot, and lower construction costs. “We are adapting to market conditions as they are and not waiting for the market to bounce back”: CEO.

By Wolf Richter for WOLF STREET.

In its earnings report yesterday evening and in its conference call this morning, Lennar [LEN], one of the largest homebuilders in the US, laid out a laundry list of problems in the housing market that it dealt with in its own way: Revenues in Q1 plunged by 13% year-over-year. Operating earnings from homebuilding plunged by 54%, earnings before income taxes plunged by 57%, net earnings plunged by 56%, and its shares have plunged by 52% since the peak in September 2024.

The average price per home sold plunged by 8.3% year-over-year, and by 24%, or by $118,500, from the peak in Q3 2022, to $374,000 (red in the chart), where it had first been in 2017. The mid-range guidance for Q2 dropped to $372,500 (blue).

Lower prices are what it takes in this frozen overpriced market. Lennar’s deliveries have soared since 2021 and 2022: In Q1 2026, it delivered 16,863 homes, up by 37% from Q1 2021 (12,314), and up by 35% from Q1 2022 (12,538), in a market where sales of existing single-family homes have plunged by 32% from 2021, for the third year in a row, amid surging supply.

Part of it came out of profit margins: The average selling price was brought down by lower price points and by big incentives, including mortgage-rate buydowns. Incentives alone amounted to 14% of the average sales price.

Those incentives and lower prices slashed its gross margin on home sales to 15.2%, down from the obscene 26.9% in Q1 2022 when FOMO-besotted buyers were still willing to pay whatever during the final gasp of the golden days for homebuilders, and Lennar let them and cleaned them out, as did all homebuilders and sellers of existing homes.

Lennar targets the mass market. It doesn’t target the high end. It targets average families that want to buy a home. Its homes are mass-market products, designed and built to be more easily affordable – meaning lower priced. Lower-priced homes are exactly what this price-ravaged market needs.

What Lennar said:

“The decrease in average sales price [in Q1 year-over-year] was primarily due to continued weakness in the market and an increased use of sales incentives offered to homebuyers,” Lennar said.

“Gross margins decreased primarily due to lower revenue per square foot and higher land costs year over year, which were partially offset by a decrease in construction costs, reflecting the Company’s continued focus on cost-saving initiatives,” Lennar said.

“Our strategy has been to actively design around the affordability challenge rather than waiting it out,” Lennar said.

“We have focused on prioritizing volume to create durable scale advantages, delivering that volume at lower prices, and ultimately improving margins,” Lennar said.

“Additionally, our construction costs improved just over 2.5% in the first quarter and have decreased 12% over the last two years, even as labor remains constrained and materials face constant pricing pressure,” it said.

“We are, in fact, actually adapting to market conditions as they are and not waiting for the market to bounce back,” CEO Stuart Miller said during the conference call.

“Mortgage interest rates, which showed some early signs of easing towards the end of last year, have remained stubbornly over 6%, hovering around 6.2%-6.4% through most of our first quarter. With home prices plus interest rates at these levels, affordability remains the central challenge facing our buyers,” Miller said.

“The war in the Middle East is a wild card. It might end quickly and the world is a better and safer place, or it might trigger higher gas prices, higher inflation, and higher interest rates, and we’ll just have to wait and see,” he said.

“New leadership is taking a fresh look at efficiencies as well, together with new technologies. SG&A [selling, general, and administrative expenses] will continue to shrink, and the bottom line is that our overhead costs are coming down meaningfully throughout 2026,” he said.

In case you missed it: Supply of Existing Single-Family Homes Surges to Highest for February in 9 Years, Demand Stuck in the Deepfreeze.

[russet] Mapped: How Dependent Is Each Country on Chinese Imports? February 26, 2026 By...

russet — 3/14/2026 11:12:59 PM

Mapped: How Dependent Is Each Country on Chinese Imports?

February 26, 2026

By Tasmin Lockwood
Graphics/Design:

Amy Kuo

ee more visualizations like this on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

Mapped: How Dependent Is Each Country on Chinese Imports?See visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

128 countries source at least 10% of their goods imports from China.
Cambodia is the most dependent country, with 46.8% of its goods imports from China.
The U.S. relies on China for 13.8% of its goods imports, compared to 9–10% for Germany, France, and Italy.

China is the world’s largest exporter of goods, and for many countries, it plays a central role in their supply chains.

The map below shows how dependent each country is on Chinese imports, based on the latest data from UN Comtrade and the World Bank.

Countries With the Highest Percentage of Chinese ImportsCambodia has the highest dependency on Chinese goods imports at 46.8%. It imports a significant amount of raw materials for its textiles industry, according to The Observatory of Economic Complexity, which is then one of its largest exports.

Meanwhile, the U.S. ranks 97th overall, with 13.8% of its imports coming from China.

This data table below shows every country’s goods import dependency on China, with the latest data available for most countries as of 2024:

102550100entries per page

Rank

Country

Goods Import Dependency on China (%)

1	???? Cambodia	46.8
2	???? Kyrgyzstan	45.8
3	???? Hong Kong	40.9
4	???? Mongolia	40.5
5	???? Vietnam	34.0
6	???? Myanmar	33.5
7	???? Ethiopia	32.7
8	???? Paraguay	32.5
9	???? Indonesia	31.4
10	???? Tanzania	30.5

Showing 1 to 10 of 181 entries

Many of the most dependent countries either lack large domestic manufacturing bases or rely on Chinese inputs to power export industries, such as textiles and electronics assembly.

Goods from China make up over 40% of imports for Kyrgyzstan, Hong Kong, and Mongolia, earning them spots near the top of the list. Of these, only Hong Kong ranks among China’s largest trading partners by total dollar value, largely because many mainland exports are routed through it for re-export.

In contrast, the Cayman Islands is the only entry with less than 1% of its imports coming from China. Instead, the country is highly dependent on the Netherlands.

Trade Ties Often Extend Beyond Imports

China’s trade playbook often includes investment and infrastructure development in countries it partners with.

Through its ambitious One Belt, One Road initiative, which was established in 2013, Chinese state-owned banks have funded port and dock infrastructure projects in developing nations via loans. It gives China a stake in strategic trade locations and influence, especially if the host country can’t repay the loan.

Notably, Cambodia netted $3 billion of Chinese grants and loans from 2002 to 2023.

China is also heavily invested in Djibouti (17.7% import dependency on China) and its port, which is the lifeblood of the African country’s economy. China established its first military base in the country in 2017, joining a handful of Western nations including the U.S., which neighbors the Doraleh port.

Technology is China’s Largest Export

Inexpensive goods have historically been associated with the “Made in China” stamp, but technology is its largest export today after establishing itself as a strong manufacturing hub with cheaper labor. Integrated circuits, which are foundational components of most modern technologies, make up the lion’s share of exports and highlight China’s critical role in global supply chains; phones and cars follow.

The world is particularly dependent on China for processing critical minerals, which are used in everything from consumer electronics to defense systems. This reliance has pushed U.S. policymakers to strengthen domestic capacity and diversify supply chains using tariffs and industrial policy.

As countries look to diversify suppliers and reduce risk, the data shows how deeply embedded China remains in global trade. Any major shift away from Chinese imports would ripple across industries worldwide.

[russet] Core PCE Inflation Hits 3.1%, Worst in 2 Years, in Unique Twist Blows way pa...

russet — 3/13/2026 5:39:24 PM

Core PCE Inflation Hits 3.1%, Worst in 2 Years, in Unique Twist Blows way past CPI Inflation. Driven by Core Services

by Wolf Richter • Mar 13, 2026 • 1 Comment
Energy spike is still to come. The Fed needs to pay attention.

By Wolf Richter for WOLF STREET.

The Fed is going to talk a lot about inflation – as are households – given the spike in oil prices that started in March and that has already driven up prices of gasoline, and that is going to drive up overall inflation indices starting for March. But oil-price spikes tend to reverse, and to see longer-term underlying inflation trends, the Fed is also going to talk about “core” inflation measures that exclude the volatile energy components (such as gasoline) and food.

The Fed’s favored inflation measures are the all-items PCE price index, which includes food and energy, and the core PCE price index, which does not include them. The Fed uses them as yardstick for its 2% inflation target. But since May last year, PCE inflation has moved further away from the target, well before the energy price spike that is now coming at it.

The all-items PCE price index rose by 2.8% in January compared to a year ago, and the core PCE price index accelerated to 3.1%, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis today.

It was driven by the disturbing acceleration of underlying inflation, which is dominated by core services. Core services account for roughly 60% of the overall PCE price index.

The core services PCE price index accelerated sharply both, on a month-to-month basis (+0.38% or +4.7% annualized, blue line in the chart), and a 6-month basis (+3.6% annualized, red line). This acceleration in January came on top of the acceleration in December.

Year-over-year, the core services PCE price index accelerated to 3.4%. And it did so despite the deceleration of its housing components.

The core PCE price index, driven by core services, jumped by 0.36% (+4.5% annualized, blue line) in January, after the big jump in December.

Year-over-year (red line), it accelerated to 3.1%, the worst in nearly two years. It has been zigzagging higher and ever further away from the Fed’s 2% target since May 2025.

But wait… CPI has been cooling for months.Normally, the core PCE price index shows lower inflation readings than the core Consumer Price Index. But now they have gone in opposite directions: the core PCE price index has been accelerating for months and hit 3.1% in January, worst in nearly two years, while the core CPI has been decelerating for months to 2.5% in January.

That they shoot off in two different directions by that much is a unique twist. And there is a reason for that, and it has to do with a problem in CPI.

The chart shows the year-over-year change of the core PCE price index through January (red, data released today by the BEA) and of core CPI through February (blue, data released earlier this week by the BLS).

This is a very disturbing trend:

So what gives? CPI is getting pushed down by the housing components, especially Owners Equivalent of Rent (OER), that were doctored for the three months September, October, November, and that weigh 35% in the overall CPI (my detailed analysis for data geeks is here).

The PCE price index uses the same housing components, but they weigh only half as much in the index, only about 17%, and they also pushed down on the PCE Price index, but with half as much force as in CPI. The PCE price index also includes other components that the CPI does not include.

The all-items PCE price index was pushed down in January by its energy components that plunged month-to-month by 1.7% (-18.9% annualized). But that was for January. Energy costs, especially gasoline and utility natural gas piped to the home, already jumped in February. And in March, there will be the spike in gasoline prices that is now underway. So the month-to-month plunge of the PCE price index for energy in January was the final leg of the long decline since mid-2022.

But energy is a big component, and its huge plunge in January was enough to push down the overall year-over-year PCE inflation rate by a hair, to 2.8%, despite the surge of core PCE and core services PCE.

The chart below shows all three, on a year-over-year basis: the all-items PCE price index (red), the core PCE price index (blue), and the core services PCE price index (yellow):

The Fed’s target is 2% for PCE inflation. And PCE inflation has been going the wrong way and moving further away from the target since May 2025.

The energy price spike in March will come on top of it.The Fed needs to pay attention to inflation. As we can see in the core PCE price index at 3.1%, inflation is already percolating through the economy, aside from energy. The gasoline price spike will come on top of all this starting in March.

There is a lot of stimulus in the economy: Government deficit spending, tax cuts for companies and individuals, bigger tax refunds to consumers now during tax-refund season, massive corporate investments in anything related to AI, too-low interest rates, and too narrow spreads. Inflation feeds on these combined conditions.

In case you missed it:

Energy Inflation for Americans

Food Inflation in America

[russet] Charted: The Energy Mix of the World’s 10 Largest Economies March 13, 2026 By...

russet — 3/13/2026 4:27:18 PM

Charted: The Energy Mix of the World’s 10 Largest Economies

March 13, 2026

By Bruno Venditti
Graphics/Design:

Amy Kuo

re visuals like this on the Voronoi app.

The Energy Mix of the World’s 10 Largest EconomiesSee visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

Oil is the largest energy source in six of the world’s 10 biggest economies, including the U.S., Germany, Japan, the UK, and Italy.
Coal dominates energy supply in China and India, accounting for nearly 60% of their energy mixes.
France stands out for nuclear power, which provides over 46% of its energy mix, the highest share among the group.

This graphic compares the energy mix of the world’s 10 largest economies, showing how much of their total energy supply comes from oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear, hydro, and other renewables.

The data for this visualization comes from the Energy Institute’s 2025 Statistical Review of World Energy, representing the most recent full-year data (2024).

Oil Still Dominates Many Advanced Economies

Oil remains the largest energy source in six of the 10 biggest economies, including the United States, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, and Italy. In these countries, oil plays a major role in transportation and industrial sectors.

Italy has the highest reliance on oil among the group, with nearly 46% of its energy coming from petroleum. Germany and the UK also depend heavily on oil, though both have been expanding renewable energy capacity in recent years.

The table below shows the energy mix of each of the world’s 10 largest economies.

Country

Oil

Nat. Gas

Coal

Nuclear

Hydro

Renewables

???? U.S.	39.0%	35.4%	8.6%	9.8%	0.9%	6.3%
???? China	20.3%	9.8%	58.0%	3.1%	3.1%	5.7%
???? Germany	41.8%	27.9%	15.6%	0.0%	0.8%	13.9%
???? Japan	39.0%	19.9%	27.6%	5.7%	1.8%	6.1%
???? India	28.1%	6.5%	59.3%	1.5%	1.4%	3.1%
???? UK	41.7%	34.7%	2.6%	6.8%	0.3%	13.8%
???? France	31.0%	12.8%	2.0%	46.1%	2.9%	5.3%
???? Italy	45.9%	37.9%	1.8%	0.0%	3.6%	10.9%
???? Russia	24.1%	54.0%	11.8%	7.4%	2.4%	0.2%
???? Canada	36.6%	39.0%	2.4%	7.8%	10.4%	3.6%

Even in highly developed economies with strong climate targets, oil remains difficult to replace due to its central role in global transport systems.

Coal Remains Critical for China and India

Coal continues to dominate the energy mix in the world’s two most populous countries. In China, coal accounts for 58% of total energy supply, while India relies on coal for roughly 59%.

This reliance reflects both countries’ large industrial bases and the availability of domestic coal resources. Coal remains a relatively cheap and reliable energy source for powering manufacturing and electricity generation.

However, both China and India are also investing heavily in renewable energy and nuclear power as they attempt to balance economic growth with emissions reductions.

Different Paths to Low-Carbon Energy

Some economies rely more heavily on nuclear or hydropower rather than renewables alone. France stands out for its heavy dependence on nuclear power, which provides more than 46% of its total energy mix.

Canada, meanwhile, benefits from abundant hydropower resources, with hydro accounting for over 10% of its energy supply. The country also maintains a relatively balanced mix between oil and natural gas.

Russia shows the lowest share of renewables in the group at just 0.2%, reflecting its vast reserves of fossil fuels and heavy reliance on natural gas, which makes up more than half of its energy mix.

[russet] Food Inflation in America by Wolf Richter • Mar 11, 2026 • 2 Comments Not ...

russet — 3/11/2026 11:54:16 PM

Food Inflation in America

by Wolf Richter • Mar 11, 2026 • 2 Comments
Not good.

By Wolf Richter for WOLF STREET.

Food prices have been very high since the massive inflation outburst in 2021 and 2022. Then in 2023 and for much of 2024, price increases (inflation) calmed down, and prices rose more slowly off this very high level. But little by little, food inflation has been accelerating.

The chart shows the price level of the CPI for “Food at home” as index value. In a moment we’ll get to the rate of change of that price level expressed in percentages (inflation). What hurts is that these price increases now (inflation) come on top of these already very high prices (price level). The CPI for “food at home” covers food and beverages that people buy at stores, markets, or online and consume off premise. The price level in February was up by 31% from January 2020.

Note the dynamics: Price explosion in 2021 and 2022, followed by much slower price increases in 2023 through the first half of 2024, and then a steepening of the line, indicating that prices rose faster again off those already very high prices.

In February, the CPI for Food at home rose by 0.44% from January, seasonally adjusted (+5.4% annualized), after rising by 2.3% annualized in January and by 7.8% annualized in December (blue line in the chart below).

Compared to a year ago, food prices have risen by 2.45%, the biggest year-over-year increase since September (red line).

Prices in some major food categories jumped in February – or continued to spike, such as beef and coffee. Prices in other categories fell – or continued to plunge, such as eggs. Other prices increased or decreased much more modestly. And we’ll get to some of the major ones.

Beef & veal prices spiked month-to-month by 1.5% (+19% annualized) in February from January, and by 14.4% year-over-year.

Beef prices have been soaring since the beginning of 2021, as the US cattle herd has dropped to a multi-decade low for a laundry list of reasons, causing tight supply, and lots of profit opportunities for ranchers.

Despite the high prices, demand for beef has not yet collapsed. For prices to come down, one or both have to happen: supply has to surge or demand has to drop substantially. But neither has happened to the degree necessary to move prices back down.

Americans wail and gnash their teeth about high beef prices but keep buying it and keep paying those prices, though there are lots of delicious alternatives to beef, such as a great variety of fish, plus chicken and pork, plus vegetarian proteins.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics tracks tens of thousands of products and services by detailed items separately, which are then combined into categories and indices. So let’s look at ground beef and steak.

Ground beef: The average price of ground beef, 100% beef, excluding round, chuck, and sirloin, and excluding preformed patties, finally took a breather in February and barely budged, rising by just 0.2%, after spiking month after month almost uninterrupted for a whole year.

At $6.74 per pound, the average price is up by nearly 20% from a year ago and by 73% from January 2020.

Steak… Other beef products spiked in February. For example, the average price of uncooked steak spiked by 3.6% in February from January (+52% annualized), to $12.74 per pound, after dropping in the prior month. Steak is up by 17% year-over-year and by 66% from January 2020.

Chicken breast, boneless: The average price of boneless chicken breast fell by 0.6% in February from January, to $4.14 per pound. Year-over-year, it was up by 1.2%.

During the inflation shock from 2020 through September 2022, the price had exploded by 58%, then declined. But it is still up by 34% from January 2020.

Eggs: The price spike imploded, but prices are still high. The avian flu came in two waves, the first in 2022 and the second in 2024, each triggering shortages of eggs and huge price spikes. The average price of “Grade A Large Eggs” soared by 368% from $1.33 per dozen in mid-2020 to $6.23 at the peak of the second wave in March 2025, according to CPI data by the BLS.

Then, the price spike began to implode. In February, the average price of Grade A Large Eggs fell another 3.0% from January, to $2.50 per dozen, the lowest since December 2023, having now plunged by 60% from the March peak.

But it’s still 71% higher than in mid-2020.

The CPI for dairy and related products fell by 0.6% in February from January and was unchanged year-over-year. Dairy prices are high (price level), but the annual rate of change (inflation) of dairy prices is now low.

Compared to January 2020, the index is 21% higher.

The CPI for Fresh fruit and vegetables spiked by 1.4% month-to-month (+17.8% annualized). This big move pushed the year-over-year price increase to 2.6%, after having been close to unchanged year-over-year for several months:

“Other foods” because we can’t post a chart of every type of food. The CPI for “Other foods” combines the sub-indices of many food items and categories that the BLS tracks separately. They include the categories for sugar, sweets, fats and oils, salad dressing, peanut butter, soups, frozen and prepared meals, snacks, spices, olives, pickles, baby food and formula, etc. So a substantial part of the middle of the grocery store.

These “Other foods” were a culprit in the acceleration of food inflation in February. The CPI for “other foods” jumped by 0.8% in February from January (+10% annualized), after a drop in January and a big spike in December.

Over those three months combined, the CPI other foods jumped by 2.1% (6.4% annualized). Year-over-year, it rose by 3.4%, the biggest year-over-year increase since November 2023.

Since January 2020, the index for other foods soared by 34%.

Coffee, oh dearie… The average retail price of Ground Roast 100% Coffee spiked by 1.0% in February and by 30.5% year-over-year, to $9.46 per pound, according to BLS data today.

Since January 2020, the price of this type of coffee has exploded by 127%.

Coffee rocketed higher in two waves, roughly following with a lag the two waves in the coffee futures market: The first wave started in mid-2021, the second wave in September 2024.

But there is hope for coffee drinkers. Green coffee beans are a global commodity product, and prices can fluctuate wildly and instantly, driven by fears of droughts, bad harvests, market forces, tariffs, or whatever.

Futures prices for green beans of Arabica coffee have plunged to $2.86 per pound, from over $4.00 a pound in December.

But note, the cost of green coffee beans as a commodity is only a part of the retail price of ground roast coffee.

The current green-bean price of $2.86 per pound compares to the average retail price of $9.46 per pound for ground roast coffee.

The difference between the two prices goes to the roaster, the retailer, the transportation companies, to wages and salaries and share buybacks, and rent, and everything in between, plus profits for everyone between the green beans and the coffee in your cup. So if coffee futures drop by $1.00, as it just did, it may not reach your cup, or reach it only partially and slowly (chart below via Trading Economics):

And in case you missed it: CPI Inflation Rose on Food & Energy Prices, even before Gasoline Price Spike. YoY still Pushed Down by Bad-Joke OER

[russet] Mapped: Where China Gets Its Oil March 6, 2026 By Tasmin Lockwood Article/Edi...

russet — 3/11/2026 4:47:13 PM

Mapped: Where China Gets Its Oil

March 6, 2026

By Tasmin Lockwood
Article/Editing:

Niccolo Conte

Graphics/Design:

Amy Kuo

more visualizations like this on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

Mapped: Where China Gets Its OilSee visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

Over half of China’s imports of crude oil came from the Middle East in 2024.
The effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz thus poses a risk to China’s energy security.
Sanctioned countries — Russia, Iran, and Venezuela — accounted for 33% of China’s crude import mix that year.

China is the world’s largest crude oil importer, bringing in roughly 11 million barrels per day to fuel its economy. But that dependence creates a vulnerability: a large share of its supply comes from the Middle East.

The Strait of Hormuz, a critical trade route between Oman and Iran, has been disrupted as shipping companies reroute or stockpile cargo following U.S.-Israel strikes on Iran on Feb. 28, 2026.

The world’s largest oil tankers pass through the strait due to its depth and width, carrying 20.7 million barrels of oil every day in 2024. A large portion of that was headed for Asia, and China specifically.

The map, which is based on data from the U.S. EIA, shows where China imported its crude and condensate from in 2024.

China’s Oil Imports by Country

Dive into the data, which tracks import-source dependence rather than total Chinese primary energy dependence, below:

CountryShare of China's Crude Oil and Condensate Imports in 2024

???? Russia	20%
???? Saudi Arabia	14%
???? Iran	11%
???? Iraq	10%
???? Oman	7%
???? United Arab Emirates	6%
???? Brazil	6%
???? Angola	5%
???? United States	2%
???? Venezuela	2%
?? Other	17%

Russia was China’s largest supplier in 2024, accounting for about 20% of crude and condensate imports. Saudi Arabia followed at 14%, while Iran supplied 11%.

Other Middle Eastern producers—including Iraq, Oman, and the United Arab Emirates—also contribute significant shares.

Taken together, the Middle East made up 54% of crude and condensate imports, highlighting a concentration that leaves China exposed to sudden changes in energy flows through the region.

Brazil and Angola are key diversifiers, representing 6% and 5% of China’s imports.

China’s Supply Chain is Linked to Sanctions

Energy security was already on the Chinese agenda, leading it to bolster domestic production of renewables and even coal.

Russia, Iran, and Venezuela accounted for 33% of China’s crude import mix in 2024, highlighting how countries facing global sanctions have banded together.

Russia has strengthened its relationship with Asia since Europe began weaning itself off Russian gas in support of Ukraine. It moves a lot of its energy by pipe, meaning it avoids maritime corridors that can quickly become chokepoints and thus offer China an import source that is less exposed to geopolitical vulnerabilities.

[russet] Bombing of Iran could continue for at least 90 days thanks to reserves. Members...

russet — 3/11/2026 4:43:14 PM

Bombing of Iran could continue for at least 90 days thanks to reserves.

Members of the International Energy Agency, including European importers, Japan, and South Korea, must hold reserves equal to at least 90 days of net imports

Charted: Where the World’s Oil Comes From by Region

March 10, 2026

By Dorothy Neufeld
Graphics/Design:

Sabrina Lam

more visualizations like this on the Voronoi app.

Charted: Where the World’s Oil Comes From, by RegionSee visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

North America is the world’s largest oil-producing region in 2025, generating over 31 million barrels per day, equal to nearly 30% of global supply.
The Middle East produces over 29% of the world’s oil, led by Saudi Arabia and Iran.
Europe, excluding Russia, produces less than 4% of total oil production, the smallest share by region.

The world produced roughly 106 million barrels of oil per day in 2025, according to estimates from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).

Just two regions dominate global supply. North America and the Middle East together produce nearly 60% of the world’s oil, underscoring their outsized influence on energy markets.

This graphic breaks down global oil production by region in 2025, based on EIA data.

North America Leads Global Oil ProductionThe table below breaks down global oil production by region, including crude oil and other liquid fuels.

RegionCrude Oil and Other Liquid Fuels
(Million Barrels Per Day 2025)Global ShareGlobal Total106.3100.0%

North America	31.8	29.9%
Middle East	31.0	29.1%
Eurasia (Russia, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan)	13.6	12.8%
Asia-Pacific	9.4	8.9%
Central & South America	8.9	8.4%
Africa	7.6	7.2%
Europe	4.0	3.7%

North America is the world’s largest oil-producing region, accounting for 29.9% of global output in 2025, averaging 31.8 million barrels per day.

Much of this supply is driven by the U.S., where oil production reached record highs in 2025. Output has more than doubled over the past two decades, largely due to the expansion of shale drilling. Canada also hit record levels, producing 5.0 million barrels per day in December 2025.

The Middle East’s Massive Oil Output

The Middle East is the second-largest oil-producing region, generating 31 million barrels per day in 2025.

Saudi Arabia remains the region’s largest producer at 9.6 million barrels per day. However, the country saw its active oil rig count fall to a 20-year low in 2025, as energy investment increasingly shifts toward natural gas production. By 2030, natural gas production is set to expand 60%.

Iran produced 3.1 million barrels per day in 2025, still below its peak of 4.0 million in 2007.

Even so, the Middle East remains a dominant force in global oil markets. In 2025, it produced more crude oil than Africa, Europe, Central and South America, and Asia-Pacific combined.

Global Oil Trade and Strategic Stockpiles

The Strait of Hormuz remains one of the world’s most important oil chokepoints, handling roughly 20% of global petroleum trade.

While only 7% of U.S. crude exports pass through the corridor, Asian economies depend heavily on these shipments, accounting for nearly 90% of flows through the strait. To protect against supply disruptions, many countries maintain strategic petroleum reserves.

Members of the International Energy Agency, including European importers, Japan, and South Korea, must hold reserves equal to at least 90 days of net imports. Meanwhile, China has built some of the world’s largest stockpiles.

In short, the global oil market depends on a small number of regions—and a few critical trade routes—while strategic stockpiles help guard against supply shocks.

[russet] The Entire Global Economy in 2026 in One Chart (GDP, PPP) March 5, 2026 By Ga...

russet — 3/10/2026 8:19:47 PM

The Entire Global Economy in 2026 in One Chart (GDP, PPP)

March 5, 2026

By Gabriel Cohen
Article/Editing:

Niccolo Conte

Graphics/Design:

Sabrina Lam

See more visuals like this on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

The Entire Global Economy in 2026 in One Chart (GDP, PPP)See visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

Purchasing power parity (PPP) adjusts a country’s economic output to account for differences in cost of living.
The global economy sits at over $219 trillion by this metric, of which nearly half is found in Asia.
At over $43.5 trillion, China has the world’s largest economy by GDP (PPP).

The global economy is worth roughly $219 trillion in 2026 when measured by purchasing power parity (PPP), which adjusts economic output for differences in cost of living.

This visualization shows the size of every country’s economy using PPP-adjusted GDP, making it easier to compare how national economies stack up around the world.

These projections for 2026 come from the International Monetary Fund.

How PPP Changes the Global Economic Rankings

When comparing economies using PPP, the global ranking looks very different from nominal GDP.

While the United States is the world’s largest economy by nominal GDP, when adjusting for PPP China has actually been the world’s dominant economy since 2014.

Today the Chinese economy is valued at $43.5 trillion, well ahead of the $31.8 trillion seen in the United States.

10152550100entries per page

Search:

Rank

Country

GDP (PPP, billions of international dollars)

1	???? China	43,491.5
2	???? United States	31,821.3
3	???? India	19,143.4
4	???? Russia	7,340.8
5	???? Japan	6,923.3
6	???? Germany	6,323.5
7	???? Indonesia	5,358.3
8	???? Brazil	5,161.1
9	???? France	4,657.2
10	???? United Kingdom	4,592.1
11	???? Turkey	3,976.1
12	???? Italy	3,815.9
13	???? Mexico	3,552.7
14	???? South Korea	3,486.5
15	???? Spain	2,935.7

Showing 1 to 15 of 190 entries

‹12345…13›

China is far from alone in representing Asia among the world’s largest economies, however. Asian countries today contribute 49% of the global economy, solidifying the continent’s place as the new center of international trade and production.

India is the third-largest PPP-adjusted economy worldwide, at $19.1 trillion, while Japan ($6.9 trillion), Indonesia ($5.4 trillion), and South Korea ($3.5 trillion) all see multi-trillion-dollar boosts compared to their nominal GDP owing to cheaper costs of living.

At 4.7 billion people, Asia is the most populous continent worldwide, and many of its smaller developing economies, such as Vietnam and Thailand (both $1.9 trillion), are expected to continue to grow rapidly in the coming years, indicating the continent’s continued dominance going forward.

The European GapIf there’s one region where the difference between nominal and PPP-adjusted GDP is felt, it’s Europe. By nominal standards, Germany is the largest economy on this continent, followed by the United Kingdom, France, Italy, and Russia.

However, when adjusting for relative purchasing power Russia sees a massive boost, as a cheaper overall country, and soars to become Europe’s top economy at $7.3 trillion. By this metric, in fact, Russia is fourth worldwide behind only China, the U.S., and India.

France also surpasses the United Kingdom in this regard, but by and large the Eurozone economies fall behind Asian peers like Indonesia or Japan, which are able to acquire or produce goods at a more competitive rate.

The Boon of Emerging Markets

Outside of Eurasia, the story for emerging markets is much of the same. Brazil ($5.2 trillion) and Mexico ($3.6 trillion) each leapfrog Canada ($2.8 trillion) to become the second- and third-largest economies of the Americas, respectively.

Meanwhile, in Africa, home to a mere six percent of global GDP share, the three emerging-market economies of Egypt, Nigeria, and South Africa are responsible for roughly $6 trillion in total PPP-adjusted economic output.

[russet] Yes, Canada is actively building nuclear reactors, specifically small modular re...

russet — 3/7/2026 8:10:18 PM

Yes, Canada is actively building nuclear reactors, specifically small modular reactors (SMRs), with significant investments and projects underway in Ontario.

Current Project

Broader Context

Nuclear Energy in Canada: Currently, nuclear power accounts for about 15% of Canada's electricity generation, primarily from 17 operational reactors, mostly located in Ontario. The country has a long history of nuclear technology development and is a leader in the design and export of CANDU reactors.
Future Plans: In addition to the SMRs, there are discussions about expanding nuclear energy capacity in other regions of Canada, including proposals for conventional nuclear generating stations in Alberta.
Overall, Canada's commitment to building new nuclear reactors, particularly SMRs, reflects its focus on sustainable energy solutions and technological innovation in the nuclear sector.

Ranked: Countries Building the Most Nuclear Reactors

March 2, 2026

By Bruno Venditti
Graphics/Design:

Sam Parker

Use This Visualization

Ranked: Countries Building the Most Nuclear ReactorsSee visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

China accounts for 37 of the world’s reactors under construction—more than all other listed countries combined.
India and Russia rank a distant second, with six reactors each currently being built.
As of September 2025, the United States, France, and Canada have no reactors under construction.

China is in the middle of the largest nuclear construction push in the world.

Dozens of reactors are rising across the country, representing nearly 43 gigawatts of new generating capacity. That buildout alone exceeds what every other nation currently has under construction combined.

This chart breaks down which countries are expanding nuclear power in 2025, and below we also cover how much power they are adding to their grids.

The data comes from the World Nuclear Association.

China’s Massive Nuclear Expansion

China currently has 37 reactors under construction, representing roughly 42.9 gigawatts (GW) of new capacity.

That is more than six times the capacity being built in either India or Russia, the next closest countries.

As electricity demand rises and older plants retire, nuclear expansion will play a decisive role in shaping long-term energy security and grid stability.

CountryReactors Under ConstructionMegawatts

???? China	37	42.9K
???? India	6	5.2K
???? Russia	6	4.2K
???? Egypt	4	4.8K
???? Türkiye	4	4.8K
???? South Korea	3	4.2K
???? Bangladesh	2	2.4K
???? Japan	2	2.8K
???? Ukraine	2	1.9K
???? United Kingdom	2	3.4K
???? Argentina	1	0.03K
???? Brazil	1	1.4K
???? Hungary	1	1.2K
???? Iran	1	1.1K
???? Pakistan	1	1.1K
???? Slovakia	1	0.5K
???? Canada	0	0K
???? France	0	0K
???? USA	0	0K

Most reactors are initially licensed to operate for about 40 years, though many receive extensions to 60 years or even 80 years with upgrades and maintenance. As older plants reach the end of their lifespans, new reactors are needed to replace retiring capacity, support grid stability, and help countries meet long-term decarbonization goals.

India and Russia in Second Place

India and Russia are tied for second place with six reactors each under construction. India’s projects total 5.2 GW of capacity, slightly above Russia’s 4.2 GW.

After that, activity drops off quickly. Egypt and Türkiye each have four reactors underway, while most other countries are building one or two.

Notably, several established nuclear powers are absent from the list. As of September 2025, the United States, France, and Canada have no reactors under construction.

[russet] Ranked: Nuclear Power Capacity by Country (2025) October 23, 2025 By Bruno Ve...

russet — 3/7/2026 7:57:58 PM

Ranked: Nuclear Power Capacity by Country (2025)

October 23, 2025

By Bruno Venditti
Graphics/Design:

Sam Parker

this visualization first on the Voronoi app.

Use This Visualization

Ranked: Nuclear Power Capacity by Country (2025)This was originally posted on our Voronoi app. Download the app for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

Five countries account for 71% of the world’s nuclear generation capacity.
The United States leads with 97 gigawatt (GW) across 94 reactors; France and China both run 57 reactors, but France’s capacity is higher at 63 GW.

Nuclear power supplies a steady source of low-carbon electricity across many grids. Yet the bulk of capacity is concentrated in a handful of countries. This chart breaks down where global nuclear capacity sits today. The data for this visualization comes from the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Power Reactor Information System ( PRIS).

The Big Five Dominate Global Capacity

Five countries account for 71% of global nuclear capacity.

The United States tops the list with 97 GW across 94 reactors. France ranks second at 63 GW, a result of its historic policy to standardize and scale nuclear after the 1970s oil shocks. China follows at 55 GW. Russia (27 GW) and South Korea (26 GW) round out the top five.

CountryNet Capacity (GW)Number of Reactors

???? United States	97	94
???? France	63	57
???? China	55	57
???? Russia	27	36
???? South Korea	26	26
???? Ukraine	13	15
???? Canada	13	17
???? Japan	13	14
???? India	8	21
???? Spain	7	7
???? Sweden	7	6
???? United Kingdom	6	9
???? United Arab Emirates	5	4
???? Finland	4	5
???? Czech Republic	4	6
???? Belgium	4	4
???? Pakistan	3	6
???? Switzerland	3	4
?? Rest of World	18	28

Reactor Count vs. Reactor Scale

France and China both operate 57 reactors, yet France’s capacity is higher at 63 GW versus China’s 55 GW. The gap points to average reactor size, capacity uprates, and fleet composition. France’s standardized designs and efficiency upgrades push more net output per unit. China’s fleet includes a mix of older and newer designs, with several units commissioned in the past decade.

However, as China ramps larger Gen III+ reactors, this capacity differential could narrow quickly. Currently, nearly half of the world’s nuclear power under construction is located in China.

Emerging Players

Emerging players are also reshaping the nuclear map: the United Arab Emirates has reached 5 GW with just four reactors, while Finland and the U.K. maintain smaller but strategic fleets. Similarly, India has steadily expanded its nuclear capacity over recent decades, operating 21 reactors with a combined net capacity of 9 GW.

[russet] Where Americans Spend their Trillions on Goods and How that Changed since 20...

russet — 3/7/2026 7:48:31 PM

Where Americans Spend their Trillions on Goods and How that Changed since 2015

by Wolf Richter • Mar 6, 2026 • 14 Comments
Big structural changes in spending patterns created winners and losers.

By Wolf Richter for WOLF STREET.

Americans spent $8.7 trillion over the past 12 months at brick-and-mortar stores and at online retailers to purchase all kinds of goods, from shoes and groceries to RVs and cannabis – up by 3.6% from the same period a year earlier, according to the retail sales data from the Census Bureau today. But how are consumers spreading these trillions around among the retailers? How has it changed since 2015? And among those retailers, who are the winners and losers?

The winner is ecommerce: 250% growth since 2015. Sales in January by “nonstore retailers” hit a record three-month average of $131 billion. And their share of total retail sales nearly doubled to 17.5%, up from 8.9% in 2015, and up from a share of 5.4% in 2003, when retailers such as Walmart were still blowing off ecommerce; that newfangled thing would never threaten their brick-and-mortar business.

But a few years later, Walmart saw it coming, and it threw its entire corporate weight behind ecommerce (and groceries), and today Walmart is the second-largest ecommerce retailer behind Amazon, and its ecommerce sales count as ecommerce sales (and it’s the largest grocery store). The rest of the stuff in its aisles, meh.

In 2020, ecommerce became the #2 retailer category behind motor-vehicle and parts dealers, up from #5 or #6 in 2015 (dotted red line in the chart). And it’s closing in on motor vehicle dealers.

Ecommerce has structurally changed how Americans shop, and Americans are not backing off. It is even making headway into grocery sales, which many people said would never happen.

Restaurants and bars are the other big winner: 105% growth since 2015. Their share of total retail sales doubled to 13.6% from 6.8% in 2015. Sales rose to a record $100 billion three-month average in January (purple line in the chart).

Americans love to eat and drink out at “food services and drinking places,” as they’re called. And they’re doing more and more of it. This is largely discretionary spending that people do because they want to, not because they have to.

Sales of restaurants and bars surpassed sales at general merchandise stores and sales at food and beverage stores before the pandemic and became the #3 retailer category. During the lockdowns, they got crushed more than any other category, but then came roaring back.

Nevertheless, they’re still losing share to ecommerce. Nothing can keep up with the momentum of ecommerce.

Motor vehicles and parts dealers are still #1 in retail sales but are getting reeled in by ecommerce (black line in the chart). They sell new and used vehicles, recreational vehicles, motorcycles, ATVs, snowmobiles, other motor vehicles, boats, tires, and parts.

Their sales rose by 61% since 2015, but that was less than overall retail sales (+71%), and their share eased to 19.0% (top black line in the chart).

These top three retailer categories – motor vehicle and parts dealers, ecommerce, and restaurants and bars – accounted for 50.3% of total retail sales.

As total retail sales increased by 71% since 2015, the retailer categories that increases by less than 71% lost share. The ones that increased by more than 71% since 2015 gained share; there were only three:

Ecommerce: +250%
Restaurants & bars + 105%
Misc. retailers (includes cannabis retailers): +77%

The gains of the first two – ecommerce and restaurants & bars – are the result of big structural changes in how Americans spend their money and what they spend it on. The third was a result of the increasing legalization of cannabis retailers in more and more states.

All other retailer categories lost share.

Food and beverage stores, the #2 category in 2017 and 2018, dropped to #4 in 2022 and gave up more share since then (double green line in the chart above).

Since 2015, their sales increased by 51%, substantially below retail sales.

Some of those sales have wandered off to “general merchandise” retailers like Walmart, and some sales have wandered off to ecommerce, and they’re counted in those categories. And some of the sales have wandered off to restaurants as people eat out more often.

Here is how food & beverage store sales (blue) duked it out with restaurant & bar sales (red).

Gas station sales, the #6 category (blue in the first chart), rose by only 22% since 2015, way below the increase of total retail sales of 71% over the same period. But that increase, as small as it was, was driven entirely by the price increase of gasoline.

Gasoline consumption, measured in millions of barrels per day, fell in 2025 compared to 2015, and has been on a long-term structural decline I discussed and illustrated here.

Department stores are the biggest losers (brown line at the very bottom of the first chart). They have been crushed by bankruptcies, first the independent local stores and regional chains, and then the big ones. Thousands of stores were closed. Malls became zombie malls when their anchor store vanished. This drama has been going on for 10 years. The smaller and smaller number of surviving stores are splitting up amongst each other the shrinking sales.

They were once the iconic way in which Americans shopped. Their slow demise started in 2001 when their sales began their relentless decline as people could buy anything online that a department store had – and they did, and ecommerce pulled the rug out from under them. I have documented some of that drama since 2016 in my series, Brick-and-Mortar Meltdown.

But the surviving department store chains have substantial ecommerce sales, and they’re not included here; they’re included in ecommerce sales. The chart shows their brick-and-mortar sales:

In case you missed it: Supply of Labor Fell in 2025 on Immigration Crackdown: Massive Change in Labor Market Dynamics that Explains a Lot

[russet] Supply of Labor Fell in 2025 on Immigration Crackdown: Massive Change in Lab...

russet — 3/7/2026 12:05:27 AM

Supply of Labor Fell in 2025 on Immigration Crackdown: Massive Change in Labor Market Dynamics that Explains a Lot

by Wolf Richter • Mar 6, 2026 • 0 Comments
The annual adjustments of the labor force to the new population estimates are in, and they’re revealing.

By Wolf Richter for WOLF STREET.

We’ve been watching a big structural change happening in the labor market. And it’s starting to show up in the data.

Once a year, the Bureau of Labor Statistics adjusts its Household Survey data – total employment, labor force, unemployment, unemployment rate, etc. – to the new population estimates from the Census Bureau. The entire adjustments for that year are taken to the data for the month of January, and not carried back to the prior 12 months. And today was that day when it adjusted its January data (belatedly due to the government shutdown), and the new February data were layered on top of it.

The Census Bureau latest population estimates, released in January, showed a dramatic drop in “net migration” (immigration minus emigration) in 2025 as a result of the crackdown on illegal immigration, and the Census Bureau indicated that net migration could turn negative next year at current trends.

The supply of labor fell in 2025.The labor force was adjusted down by 1.03 million people today for January (green segment in the chart below). And for February, the labor force grew by 18,000 people, to 170.48 million.

Last year at this time, the upward adjustment was gigantic because that was after the Census Bureau had finally figured out how to get a better handle on the huge influx of immigrants in the 2022-2024 period, and it caused the Census Bureau to dramatically raise its population data for that 2022-2024 period all in one data release. The BLS then made the massive upward adjustments to the January 2025 data (blue segment).

The labor force consists of people who are either working or are unemployed and are actively looking for a job. People who are retired and not looking for a job are no longer in the labor force. Newly arrived immigrants, regardless of status, who are either working or looking for a job, are in the labor force.

The labor force in January was 231,000 people below where it had been in January a year ago, indicating that the supply of labor declined, after soaring in prior years. This is a huge structural change for the US labor market.

At the same time, in 2025 and continuing, there was weak growth in nonfarm payrolls amid pressures from AI, automation, and in the tech world from “overhiring” in 2021-2023, as tech CEOs have been calling it, where they’re now cleaning house.

Unemployment in February, at 7.57 million, was roughly stable over the past six months, below September and November (no data for October) and above January and December.

The three-month average in February dipped a hair to 7.48 million.

The unemployment rate inched up to 4.4% in February from 4.3% in January, but was lower than in November (4.5%) and same as in September.

The unemployment rate reflects the number of unemployed people who are actively looking for a job (7.57 million) divided by the labor force (170.48 million):

This kind of unemployment rate is at the low end of the historical scale.

Immigration crackdown: Low unemployment rate despite stalled job creation.Job creation has slowed to a trickle over the past six months. If the labor force would have continued to grow as in prior years, that kind of stalled employment growth would have fueled a much higher unemployment rate.

Job growth over the past six months by industry:

Construction: +70,000
Healthcare & social assistances: +287,000
Leisure and hospitality: +52,000
Professional and business services: +10,000
Other services: +51,000
Utilities: +5,000
Wholesale trade: +8,000.

Job declines over the past six months by industry:

Government: -256,000
Information: -48,000
Financial activities: -19,000
Transportation & warehousing: -126,000
Retail trade: -14,000
Manufacturing: -42,000 automation being pushed to the next level
Mining & logging, which includes oil & gas extraction: -7,000.

We can see this in the prime-age labor force participation rate (25-to-54-year-olds), which has been running at 25-year highs, lower only than during the extraordinary period of the Dotcom Bubble. In February, it dipped to 83.9%, from the 25-year record in January (blue in the chart below).

The three-month average rose to 83.9%, a 25-year record (red).

The prime-age labor force participation rate eliminates the issue of the retiring boomers. The overall labor force participation rate shows the percentage of the population that either has a job or is looking for a job. When people retire and stop looking for a job, they’re no longer “participating” in the labor force but remain in the population until they die. The surge of boomer retirements, which started about 15 years ago, has pushed down the overall labor force participation rate, as these retired boomers are still in the population but no longer “participating” in the labor force.

The high prime-age labor force participation rate speaks of the lower supply of labor in 2025 due to the crackdown on illegal immigration and its impact on overall population size, and of some strength in the labor market.

We can also see this in the solid growth of average hourly earnings. In the past, when job growth stalled, it did so as the labor force (supply of labor) continued to increase, thereby pushing up the unemployment rate, and pressuring down wage growth.

Now the growth in the supply of labor has stalled. And growth in demand for labor (job growth) is slow, so the unemployment rate remains low, and wages continue to grow at a decent rate.

Average hourly earnings in February rose by 0.40% from January (5.0% annualized) and have been in this 5.0%-annualized range for five of the past seven months.

Year-over-year, wage growth accelerated to 3.8%.

Despite weak job creation in the private sector and job cuts at the federal government.The federal government shed another 10,000 civilian jobs in February. Since the beginning of 2025, the federal government has shed 327,000 civilian employees, seasonally adjusted, or 10.9% of its staff.

Companies and private research institutions that lost government contracts, or whose contracts were reduced or paused, also laid off people. But those were private-sector jobs; they’re not included here; they’re included in private-sector employment below.

State governments added 5,000 employees in February, after having shed 50,000 jobs last year. Local governments shed 1,000 jobs in February but had added 123,000 over the past 12 months.

The private sector shed 86,000 jobs in February, undoing part of January’s gain of 146,000 (red and blue columns in the chart below).

The three-month average job growth, which irons out the month-to-month squiggles, declined to 18,000 jobs created on average per month over the December-February period. The low point of the three-month average was in August at zero jobs added (red line).

Over the past 12 months, private-sector employers added 392,000 jobs.

Total nonfarm payrolls, including governments, fell by 92,000 in February, after the 126,000 gain in January, seasonally adjusted.

The three-month average job growth declined to 6,000 jobs created on average in the December-February period.

Over the past 12 months, private-sector and government employers added only 156,000 jobs.

[russet] Companies Report Raging Inflation, Except in Wages & Rents by Wolf Richter ...

russet — 3/5/2026 3:18:33 PM

Companies Report Raging Inflation, Except in Wages & Rents

by Wolf Richter • Mar 5, 2026 • 47 Comments
Double-digit increases in employee health insurance costs hold down wage increases.

By Wolf Richter for WOLF STREET.

Manufacturers reported that the costs of health insurance for employees shot up by 14.2% on average; service firms reported an average increase of 12.9%, according to a report by the New York Fed based on a survey of companies in the New York-Northern New Jersey region.

These are averages, but “some firms reported increases of between 25% and 50% when they renewed their coverage,” the report said.

Manufacturers and service firms both reported that the costs of utilities jumped by about 8.5% on average. About one-fifth of the companies reported increases of 20% or more. “Indeed, sharply rising utilities costs in some areas have been tied to the explosive growth of AI-related data centers,” the report said.

For service firms, the third worst cost increases were in business insurance, which jumped by 6.8%. This includes liability, property, auto, and workers’ compensation insurance.

For manufacturers, business insurance increases were the fourth-worst, with an average increase of 7.4%.

Nearly one in ten of these companies reported massive spikes of 20% or more in business insurance costs.

For manufacturers, the third-worst increases were goods and material inputs, which jumped by 8.0%. They reported substantial increases in the costs of tariffed inputs, such as aluminum, steel, equipment, electrical supplies, auto parts, coffee, and cocoa, etc.

For service firms, cost increases of goods and material inputs averaged 5.5%.

“A greater exposure to tariffs may be part of the reason manufacturing firms faced a sharper increase in goods and materials costs” than service firms, the report said.

These are very serious cost increases.

The Producer Price Index (PPI), which track prices paid by companies, has also shown sharply accelerating cost increases across a wide range of industries, with big price increases for both services (which dominate the PPI) and goods. The price increases in goods were driven by companies shuffling the costs of the tariffs around to each other, but they’re having trouble passing them on to consumer-facing companies, which are having trouble passing them on to consumers without losing sales.

But wages increased by only 3.4% at both service firms and manufacturers, amid indications that soaring employee health insurance costs – average annual premium for employer-sponsored family health insurance rose to about $27,000, according to the NY Fed – were putting downward pressure on wage growth.

“Businesses providing insurance to their workers indicated that absent these cost increases, they would have raised wages by roughly an additional percentage point, on average, (so an overage by 4.4%), suggesting that rising health insurance costs resulted in a drag on wage growth for workers at these firms,” the report said.

But increases of rent & lease payments were relatively modest at 2.2% for service firms and 1.8% for manufacturers – thanks to the depression in Commercial Real Estate.

This chart shows the cost increases by category for service firms. Note, business insurance in third position (+6.8%):

This chart shows the cost increases by category for manufacturers. Note, goods & material inputs in third position (+8.0%), and business insurance in fourth position:

The report also pointed out that service firms and manufacturers were impacted differently by these cost increases:

“For example, utilities and materials inputs would represent a larger share of costs for manufacturers compared to, say, a consulting firm, where labor costs would have more of an impact. Thus, cost increases for any category could have more of an effect on some firms than others.”

Costs overall for service firms jumped by 7% in 2025, an acceleration from the 5% increase a year earlier.

Costs overall for manufacturers jumped by 8.5%, a hot acceleration from the 5% increase a year earlier.

These are just indications based on companies in the New York and Northern New Jersey region, and not national indications. Firms in other parts of the US may experience cost factors that are somewhat different, such as the average increase in the costs of utilities, which are the newest hot button in many places.

So inflation is raging beneath the consumer-level surface again. It has also shown up in the GDP inflation adjustments: The Price Index for Gross Domestic Purchases, which reflects inflation adjustments in GDP except for imports – so a measure of overall domestic inflation for consumers, businesses, and governments – jumped by 3.7% in Q4, the worst in three years.

[russet] U.S. electricity generation in 2025 hit a record, again March 5, 2026 This TIE...

russet — 3/5/2026 3:08:30 PM

U.S. electricity generation in 2025 hit a record, again

March 5, 2026

This TIE has been updated to correct data sources linked in the TIE.

Data source: U.S. Department of Energy, Monthly Energy Review and Electricity Data Browser
U.S. electricity net generation reached a record in 2025 based on data from our Electricity Data Browser. In 2025, the United States generated 4.43 terawatthours (TWh) of electricity, up 2.8% from 2024 generation, which previously had been the highest annual total in our Monthly Energy Review Data Browser dataset dating back to 1949.

This growth contrasts with the trend of relatively flat electricity generation between the mid-2000s and early 2020s. Net generation is related to electricity demand. Much of the recent growth in electricity demand comes from the commercial sector, which includes data centers, and the industrial sector, which includes manufacturing establishments. In 2025, U.S. retail sales of electricity to ultimate customers, which is a key indicator of demand, increased compared with 2024 in all three sectors: residential (by 10%), commercial (by 4%), and industrial (by 1%).

We expect in our Short-Term Energy Outlook that electricity generation, driven by higher electricity demand, will continue to grow in 2026 and 2027.

Principal contributor: Kimberly Peterson

[russet] Charted: Oil Trade Through the Strait of Hormuz by Country March 3, 2026 By N...

russet — 3/3/2026 3:21:52 PM

Charted: Oil Trade Through the Strait of Hormuz by Country

March 3, 2026

By Niccolo Conte
Graphics/Design:

Anna Diederichs

Se more visuals like this on the Voronoi app.

Charted: Oil Trade Through the Strait of Hormuz by CountrySee visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways

China receives 37.7% of all oil exports that pass through the Strait of Hormuz, the most of any country.
Asian countries are most affected by a closure of the strait, receiving 89.2% of the Strait’s crude oil and condensate flows.

The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most critical energy chokepoints, with both exporters and importers of crude oil heavily reliant on flows through the Strait.

This visualization maps which countries export crude oil and condensate through the Strait of Hormuz—and, more importantly, which countries import those flows. The data is from the U.S. Energy Information Administration and is for Q1 2025.

Which Countries Export Oil Through the Strait of Hormuz?

Oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz are heavily concentrated among a few Gulf producers. Saudi Arabia accounts for the largest share of crude and condensate exports transiting the strait, at 37.2% of the total.

The data table below breaks down the origin countries and their shares of crude oil and condensate exports through the Strait of Hormuz as of Q1 2025:

CountryShare of the Strait of Hormuz's Oil and Condensate Exports

???? Saudi Arabia	37.2%
???? Iraq	22.8%
???? United Arab Emirates	12.9%
???? Iran	10.6%
???? Kuwait	10.1%
???? Qatar	4.4%
Other	1.9%

Iraq follows with 22.8%, while the United Arab Emirates contributes 12.9%. Iran (10.6%) and Kuwait (10.1%) round out the top five exporters. Together, these five countries account for 93.6% of all crude and condensate volumes moving through the strait.

This concentration underscores how closely global oil markets are tied to production in the Persian Gulf.

With recent military conflict in the Middle East and Iran’s announcement that it would attack any ship passing through the Strait, more than 20% of global oil flows are now at risk.

The Countries Reliant on Oil From the Strait of HormuzOn the demand side, Asia is overwhelmingly reliant on oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz. Asian countries collectively receive 89.2% of the crude oil and condensate that transit the waterway.

The data table below shows the destination countries and their shares of crude oil and condensate exports through the Strait of Hormuz as of Q1 2025:

CountryShare of Oil and Condensate Imports From the Strait of Hormuz

???? China	37.7%
???? India	14.7%
Other Asia	13.9%
???? South Korea	12.0%
???? Japan	10.9%
???? Europe	3.8%
???? United States	2.5%
Other	4.5%

China alone accounts for 37.7% of total flows—more than any other country by a wide margin. India is the second-largest destination at 14.7%, followed by South Korea at 12.0% and Japan at 10.9%. Other Asian countries make up 13.9% of crude oil and condensate flows that pass through the Strait.

In contrast, the United States receives just 2.5% of these flows, reflecting its increased domestic production and diversified import sources.

Any closure or disruption of the Strait of Hormuz would disproportionately impact Asian economies, particularly China and India, which together receive over half of all volumes passing through the strait.

[russet] Drill Baby Drill for 20+ Years: US Natural Gas Production Jumps to Record, E...

russet — 3/2/2026 5:25:31 PM

Drill Baby Drill for 20+ Years: US Natural Gas Production Jumps to Record, Exports via LNG & Pipeline Spike to Record in 2025

by Wolf Richter • Mar 2, 2026 • 17 Comments
And the price of US natural gas fell back to where it had been 30 years ago.

By Wolf Richter for WOLF STREET.

Marketed production of natural gas jumped by 4.5% in 2025, to a record 43.2 trillion cubic feet. Since 2006, production has soared by 123%; since 2016 by 52%, according to EIA data.

The fracking boom in the US generates enormous amounts of hydrocarbons across the spectrum, and a substantial part of natural gas – along with other hydrocarbon gases and liquids – is produced as a byproduct of fracked oil wells. Drill Baby Drill since the mid-2000s.

The US is also the largest producer of crude oil and petroleum products in the world, and a large exporter of them. This massive amount of reliable energy produced in the US has had a huge impact on the global energy landscape, on the US economy, and on how the US can conduct its foreign policy.

Drill Baby Drill milestones:

In 2011, the US became the largest natural gas producer in the world.
The price of US natural gas began collapsing in 2008 amid this new overproduction with no outlet at the time via liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports in the lower 48 states and only limited pipeline exports to Mexico and Canada (see last chart, price of natural gas).
In 2016, natural gas passed coal as the dominant fuel for power generation in the US (my analysis: Power Generation by Source in 2025).
In 2025, power generation from natural gas accounted for 40% of total power generation in the US, while coal accounted for 16%.
The first LNG export terminal in the lower 48 states came on line in 2016, and large-scale LNG exports began. As more export terminals came online, LNG exports soared.
In 2017, the US became a net exporter of natural gas, exporting more than importing.
In 2023, the US became the largest exporter of LNG in the world and has since then further outdistanced Qatar and Australia.

US natural gas exports spiked to record.The US began exporting LNG in 2016 when the first LNG export terminal became operational. As more export terminals were built, LNG exports soared and turned the US into the largest LNG exporter in the world by 2023, surpassing Australia and Qatar. And the lead has widened.

The US also exports natural gas via pipelines to Mexico and Canada.

Total exports of natural gas via pipeline and LNG in 2025 spiked by 16.4% year-over-year to a record 9.0 trillion cubic feet, or about 21% of US marketed production.

LNG exports spiked by 26.1% to a record 5.5 trillion cubic feet.

Pipeline exports to Mexico rose by 3.4% to a record 2.42 trillion cubic feet; to Canada, exports rose by 4.6% to record 1.04 trillion cubic feet.

Imports remained roughly stable at 3.16 trillion cubic feet, essentially all of it via pipeline from Canada, and only minuscule amounts via LNG in the Boston area, which is still inadequately connected via pipeline to the producing areas in the US.

This chart shows imports (blue) as a negative figure and total exports as a positive figure (red). The import peak was in 2007.

“Net exports” of natural gas spike to new high.The US became a net exporter of natural gas in 2017, exporting more than importing. In 2025, net exports soared by 27.5% to a record 5.82 trillion cubic feet (red in the chart below).

Imports from and exports to Canada are a function of where producing areas, pipelines, and population centers in both countries are. The trade goes in both directions: The US exported 1.04 trillion cubic feet to Canada and imported 3.14 trillion cubic feet from Canada. On net, the US imported 2.1 trillion cubic feet more from Canada than it exported to Canada; net exports to Canada were therefore a negative 2.1 trillion cubic feet (blue line); this figure is included in global next exports.

LNG exports by region. In 2025, US exports to Europe (includes the UK) spiked by 62% to a record 3.4 trillion cubic feet, accounting for almost two-thirds of total LNG exports. Europe became the largest buyer of US LNG in 2022 (dotted red line in the chart below). The importing countries are those that have LNG import terminals that feed into the European system of pipelines, in that order in 2025: the Netherlands, France, Spain, the UK, Spain, Germany, and Italy.

LNG exports to Asia fell by 38% to 899 billion cubic feet in 2025 (green line). The biggest importers were South Korea, Japan, India, and Taiwan. LNG exports to China collapsed to near-nothing.

Exports to the Middle East and Africa spiked by 105% in 2025 to a record 857 million cubic feet, nearly equating Asia, on a massive increase by Egypt, which accounted for over half of the 2025 volume (dotted blue line).

Exports to Latin America fell by 18% to 330 million cubic feet (yellow).

Production boom crushed the price of natural gas.Currently, natural gas futures trade at $2.89 per million Btu. The brief spike in January to $7.50 due to weather conditions has been wrung out. The price of natural gas was already in this range 30 years ago, despite 30 years of inflation in other products and services.

The reason natural gas can be priced this low is that it’s a byproduct of oil production, and even wells that are primarily natural gas produce significant amounts of other hydrocarbons, including crude oil.

In 2008, a few years after US production from fracking took off, the price collapsed as overproduction set in with no LNG export terminals in the lower 48 states as an outlet.

This low price of natural gas in the US makes US LNG very competitive on the global market. It also transformed the US power-generation industry (see my analysis linked below the chart).

And in case you missed it last week: WHOOSH Goes Demand for Electricity. US Power Generation by Source in 2025: Natural Gas, Coal, Nuclear, Wind, Hydro, Solar, Biomass, Geothermal, Petroleum

[russet] Construction Spending on Data Centers, Factories, Powerplants, and Office Buildi...

russet — 2/28/2026 9:44:02 PM

Construction Spending on Data Centers, Factories, Powerplants, and Office Buildings: Boom, Bust, and in Betweenby Wolf Richter • Feb 28, 2026 • 0 Comments
Despite the hoopla about data centers, spending on factory construction was five times larger.By Wolf Richter for WOLF STREET.Construction spending on data centers in 2025 exploded by 32% from the prior year, by over 100% in two years, and by 344% from 2020, to $41 billion, according to the Census Bureau on Friday. Spending on construction costs of data centers used to be buried in office construction and was minimal compared to office construction. But more recently, the Census Bureau split out data-center construction spending going back to 2014.

Construction costs of data centers are only a relatively small portion of the immense amounts spent on AI infrastructure, most of which goes into electronic and electrical equipment, from AI servers to power generation equipment. Construction spending on data centers does not include the costs of the servers and racks but does include the cooling systems in the building and other built-in electrical equipment.

It takes years from the decision to build a data center to the data center being actually operational. And the massive amounts of capital expenditures announced by AI-related Corporate America in 2025 and the plans for 2026 haven’t yet shown up in the construction costs.

The amounts of capital expenditures being thrown around for 2026 are fantastical. Five companies alone – Amazon, Alphabet, Microsoft, Meta, and Oracle – have announced plans for $700 billion in capital expenditures for 2026, largely for AI-related projects. And how will they get this cash next year?

So this construction boom is not slowing down, unless tripped up by further the shortages of all kinds, such as power from the grid, power generators when there is no grid power, electrical equipment, electricians, specialized labor, etc.

Inflation for construction costs for nonresidential buildings jumped by 1.1% in January from December, according to the Producer Price Index (PPI) for nonresidential construction, released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics on Friday ( it was hot all around). Year-over-year, the nonresidential construction PPI was up by 2.8%, almost all of which occurred over the past four months.

From January 2021 through December 2022, over those two years, prices had exploded by 34%. From the beginning of 2023 to mid-2025, prices flattened out. But they’re now taking off again.

Over the years 2021-2025, the PPI for nonresidential construction rose by 41%. With spending on data center construction up by 344% over the same period, the red-hot construction spending boom is not a result of inflation – but of the AI investment mania.

Construction spending on manufacturing plants has soared coming out of the pandemic. In 2025, at $220 billion, it was up by 192% from 2020.

This $220 billion in 2025 is over five times the amount spent on data centers ($41 billion).

The production equipment in the plant, such as the industrial robots, is not part of the construction costs. And they’re much more costly than the building itself.

Though still running at a red-hot pace, construction spending on factories has backed off from the spike in 2024, possibly as construction resources have been pulled away by the boom in data center construction, and amid reports of bottlenecks, shortages of skilled labor, and ICE hauling off workers from construction sites.

After decades of globalization, there is now a widespread rethink underway about production in the US.

These factories will all be highly automated to where manual labor is only a relatively small part of the product costs. Every year, year after year, decade after decade, automation improves, and companies try to cut their labor costs by expanding automation.

Within factory construction, spending on factories for computers, electronic, and electrical equipment exploded by 1,300% since 2020, from $9 billion in 2020 to $104 billion in 2025. This includes semiconductor plants and plants that build electrical equipment for the AI infrastructure boom.

Powerplant construction is a highly regulated process in terms of permitting and approvals, and it takes years from the decision to build a power plant to having a functional power plant hooked to the grid.

In 2025, a record $158 billion was spent on building power plants, up by 34% from 2020.

Electricity prices have soared by 41% over the past five years as demand for electricity has surged, after being roughly flat for 14 years. This increase in demand was largely driven by the new data centers.

But utilities and power generators are leery of spending billions of dollars on generation and distribution capacity for data centers that might never work out after the AI investment mania fizzles, which would turn these investments into stranded assets.

This leeriness is fed by the many hedge funds with ag land that want a utility to commit billions of dollars to run a high-voltage powerline to it, and possibly build a power plant to supply it with power, so that the hedge fund can then sell the ag land at a huge profit as data-center ready to some hyperscaler. If that deal doesn’t happen, the utility ends up with an expensive stranded asset.

Office building construction has taken a massive hit after it became clear that office landlords were getting into serious trouble as demand for office space collapsed during the pandemic. Countless landlords defaulted on their office mortgages, and numerous buildings were seized by lenders and sold in foreclosure sales for cents on the dollar. The going rate for office building transactions is now at discounts of 30% to 70% from pre-pandemic prices. The delinquency rate for office CMBS spiked to record 12.3% in January. And there are efforts underway in expensive markets to convert office towers into residential towers, while smaller office buildings get torn down and replaced with housing. Office CRE has been in a depression since 2022.

In a way, it seems surprising that anyone would still spend good money on office buildings, but it’s the old office towers that are in trouble, while the latest and greatest office towers see more demand from the flight to quality that high vacancy rates made possible.

So spending on office construction (not including data centers) dropped further in 2025, to $49 billion, the lowest since 2015, and down by 32% from the peak in 2020.

Some of this spending is for buildings that were planned years ago and that are being completed now. For example, JP Morgan’s $3-billion tower at 270 Park Avenue in Manhattan was announced in 2018, was formally topped off in November 2023, and had its grand opening in October 2025.

[russet] Services PPI Inflation Explodes. Goods PPI Jumps as Companies Shuffle Tariff...

russet — 2/27/2026 5:20:47 PM

Services PPI Inflation Explodes. Goods PPI Jumps as Companies Shuffle Tariffs to Each Other. Food & Energy Plunge

by Wolf Richter • Feb 27, 2026 • 13 Comments
It will further fuel the acceleration of the Fed-favored PCE Price Index.

By Wolf Richter for WOLF STREET.

The Producer Price Index (PPI) for services spiked by 0.81% (+10.2% annualized) in January from December, seasonally adjusted, the second spike in a row. The PPI for “core” goods, which excludes food and energy products, spiked by 0.68% (+8.5%), the most since 2022. PPI does not track import prices and tariffs; it tracks prices that companies charge each other. So it tracks how companies are shuffling the costs of the tariffs around amongst each other. But the PPI for finished core goods rose by a more modest but still high 0.42% (+5.2% annualized), suggesting that there is resistance to price increases among consumer-facing companies as they’ve had a hard time passing on price increases to consumers without losing sales.

The worst inflation impulses were in services in January, and the services PPI weighs 68% of the overall PPI. It moves the needle.

The PPI for Final Demand Services spiked by 0.81% (+10.2% annualized) in January from December after the 0.67% spike in December, seasonally adjusted, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics today (blue in the chart). The 6-month average rose by 4.1% annualized, a hair less than in December, which had been the worst since February 2025 (red).

Within the services PPI, two of the three major categories moved up sharply:

Trade services PPI (weighs 19% in overall PPI): +2.5% month-to-month not annualized, driven by professional & commercial equipment wholesaling: +14.4%.
Transportation & warehousing services PPI (weighs 4.9% in overall PPI): +1.0% month-to-month not annualized.
Finished services less trade, transportation & warehousing (weighs 38% in overall PPI): unchanged.

Year-over-year, the services PPI accelerated to 3.44%, the third month in a row of acceleration.

The low point, the point of the coolest recent services PPI inflation, was in December 2023 at 1.8%.

Impact on the Fed-favored PCE Price Index:The PPI for Portfolio management, which feeds into the PCE Price Index of January (to be released March 13), spiked by 1.5% month to month not annualized in January, the fourth month in a row of big spikes. Year-over-year, it spiked by 17.9%. This ads to indications that the Fed-favored core PCE price index, which was already 3.0% in December, will further accelerate away from the Fed’s 2% target.

Goods prices.The PPIs final demand for both food and energy plunged month-to-month:

PPI for Food: -1.5%;
PPI for Energy: -2.7%.

But goods prices without food and energy were another thing.

The Core Goods PPI final demand (excludes food and energy) spiked by 0.68% in January from December (+8.5% annualized).

The 6-month average rose by 4.7% annualized. Both were the worst since 2022.

The tariffs are percolating through the goods categories at various stages of the PPI as companies try to pass them on to each other. But consumer-facing companies have resisted price increases because consumers have resisted price increases, and these companies had trouble passing on higher costs to consumers without losing sales.

Year-over-year, the core goods PPI jumped by 4.2%, the worst since March 2023.

The “finished core goods” PPI — goods ready to be sold to the end-user — also accelerated, but not to the extent the “core goods” PPI has: 0.42% month-to-month (+5.2% annualized). The 6-month average rose by 4.1% annualized.

Year-over-year, the finished core goods CPI jumped by 3.8%, the worst since July 2023.

“Core PPI Final Demand, which includes all goods and services except food and energy, spiked by 0.80% month-to-month (+10.0% annualized), driven by 0.81% spike in the services PPI.

The 6-month average rose by 4.3% annualized, same as in December, and both were the worst since January 2025.

Year-over-year, core PPI accelerated to +3.58%, the worst since March 2025.

The overall PPI Final Demand, muffled by the plunge in food and energy prices, jumped by a more modest but still bad 0.48% month-to-month (+5.9% annualized).

Year-over-year (red in the chart), the overall PPI rose by 2.9%.

Inflation has been broadly accelerating since 2023 at the producer level, except in energy products, where prices have plunged.

Here we’re looking at this mess on a year-over-year basis for overall PPI (green double line), core PPI (purple line), services PPI (red line), and core goods PPI (yellow line), and it clearly shows the trend that started in 2023: