Daily Commentary

MarketMinder’s View: There are a lot of eyeballs on data from the UK’s Office for National Statistics (ONS) right now, with household wealth (and specifically private pension wealth) being the latest item in the data-quality spotlight. The issue here is a bit different from the issues with the Labour Force Survey, where low response rates have led to problems with employment and inflation data, which the ONS is addressing. In this case, the ONS has revised the methodology for its household wealth measure and revised the recent readings accordingly … leading to the headline reading getting revised down by about £2 trillion. But are UK households actually substantially worse off than thought? “Despite the ONS changing the calculation, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) on Thursday said the revision itself may be flawed – meaning policymakers cannot actually be sure how wealthy households are. In a new IFS report on the £2 trillion revision, which concerns data covering 2018-2020, the group said: ‘It is quite possible that the ONS’s revised estimates of household wealth are actually further from the truth than the estimates it started with.’” The issue here is the way the ONS chose to value pensions (defined benefit plans), and specifically the future value of pension payments. The old method used interest rates. The new uses GDP forecasts. Economists are quibbling over which way is better, but we think the important thing to note here is that neither is a measure of actual household net worth. Both are exercises in accounting and estimation. Guessing at pensions’ future values doesn’t tell you how households are actually doing in the here and now. So it is an interesting debate, but we think it is beyond the point for stocks and the UK’s economic outlook.

MarketMinder’s View: This piece gets quite political, so as always, bear in mind MarketMinder prefers no politician nor any party—we assess developments for their market, economic and personal finance effects only. This week, the Social Security Administration (SSA) announced beneficiaries will have to verify their identity either online or in person, removing the ability to do it over the phone. The agency positions this as protection against fraud and identity theft, and there is quite a lot of political debate. Our interest here is more in the logistics for people. “The new requirements will impact anyone who needs to verify their bank information with the agency, as well as families with children who receive Social Security benefits and cannot verify a child's information on the SSA website. … beginning March 31, those who cannot properly verify their identity over the agency's ‘my Social Security’ online service will be required to visit an agency field office in person to complete the verification process.” For Internet savvy beneficiaries who live near a field office, this may not be a huge headache, but for older beneficiaries in more rural areas or those with mobility issues, it likely creates some big logistical challenges, especially for those without family nearby to help with tech support or transportation. There is some lobbying and legislative pushback, so some relief may yet be on the horizon. But in the meantime, if you are receiving or about to start receiving benefits—or if you know people who might be affected—take note of the new requirements.

MarketMinder’s View: This shows a simple, oft-overlooked point: Industry is very good at moving on from acute problems even when those problems don’t resolve. In late 2023, the shipping industry faced big disruptions and delays due to conflict in the Red Sea, where the Houthi militia in Yemen attacked commercial ships. Though Western naval ships escorted cargo ships, the skirmishes were enough to route trade around the Cape of Good Hope, sparking fears of big shipping delays and cost increases. The issue has since fallen out of headlines, but as this piece notes, the conflict—which escalated this week—hasn’t stopped, and ships haven’t returned to the Red Sea. Yet shipping costs have adjusted. After spiking in late 2023, they eased quickly and remain below pre-conflict levels. The article offers the standard early-year shipping lull as an explanation, but the Baltic Dry Index—a flagship freight cost measure—was lower in January 2025 than in January 2024 despite the apparent trade surge as businesses sought to front-run tariff threats. Its present level is also below late March 2024, both per FactSet. Seems to us the industry has adjusted to the extra friction and moved on. This is how false fears often work, which is why they are bricks in bull markets’ proverbial wall of worry.