Comparing the Consumer Price Index and the Personal Consumption expenditures price index.
McCully, Clinton P. ; Moyer, Brian C. ; Stewart, Kenneth J. 等
IN THE United States, there are two primary measures of the prices
paid by consumers for goods and services. One is the Consumer Price
Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI) prepared by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics (BLS), and the other is the Personal Consumption Expenditures
(PCE) chain-type price index prepared by the Bureau of Economic Analysis
(BEA). These two price indexes have different purposes and uses. Thus,
they are constructed differently and tend to behave differently over
time. (1) Chart 1 shows the quarterly growth rates for the two indexes
from the first quarter of 2002 through the second quarter of 2007.
Although the magnitude and direction of these differences vary, on
average, the CPI grew 0.4 percentage point per year faster than the PCE
price index over this period.
[GRAPHIC 1 OMITTED]
In recent years, there has been growing interest in explaining the
differences between the CPI and the PCE price index, in part because of
the important roles these indexes play in guiding economic policy. This
article identifies four primary sources of difference between the two
indexes. First, the CPI and the PCE price index are constructed using
different index-number formulas. The CPI is based on a modified
Laspeyres formula, while the PCE price index is based on a Fisher-Ideal
formula. This difference is referred to as the "formula
effect." Second, the relative weights assigned to each of the
detailed item prices in the CPI and in the PCE price index are based on
different data sources. The relative weights used in the CPI are based
primarily on household surveys, while the relative weights used in the
PCE price index are based primarily on business surveys. These
differences are referred to as the "weight effect." Third, the
CPI measures the out-of-pocket expenditures of all urban households,
while the PCE price index measures the goods and services purchased by
households and nonprofit institutions serving households within the
framework of the U.S. national income and product accounts (NIPAs). This
conceptual difference implies that some items in the CPI are
out-of-scope of the PCE price index; that is, some items in the CPI are
not included in the PCE price index. Even more importantly, some items
in the PCE price index are out-of-scope of the CPI. These differences
are referred to as the "scope effect." Finally, there are a
variety of other differences, consisting of seasonal adjustment
differences, price differences, and residual differences. Collectively,
these are referred to as "other effects."
This article reconciles the growth rates between the CPI and the
PCE price index for the first quarter of 2002 through the second quarter
of 2007. (See the box "Previous Reconciliations Between the CPI and
the PCE Price Index.") This article finds that almost half of the
0.4-percentage-point difference in growth rates between the CPI and the
PCE price index is explained by the formula effect. After adjusting for
formula differences, the weight effect--primarily differences in the
relative weights for "rent of shelter"--more than accounts for
the remaining difference in growth rates. The net scope effect, in
contrast, partly offsets the weight effect.
This article consists of three sections. The first section provides
a detailed discussion of the four sources of difference. The second
section introduces the reconciliation framework and discusses highlights
of the reconciliation. The final section describes upcoming work that
the BLS and the BEA plan to undertake, including plans to publish
regular updates to the reconciliation tables.
Differences in Growth Rates
This section describes four sources of the differences in growth
rates between the CPI and the PCE price index. Although a large number
of sources--or "effects"--may be important in explaining
differences in growth rates for a given period, the four effects
identified below were determined to be the most important for
reconciling the CPI and PCE price measures from the first quarter of
2002 through the second quarter of 2007. It is important, however, to
keep in mind that there is no "best" set of effects. Likewise,
there is no best way of estimating a particular effect. These choices
require weighing a variety of factors, including accuracy, transparency,
and computational simplicity.
Formula effect
The CPI and the PCE price index are based on different
price-index-number formulas. The CPI is based on a modified Laspeyres
formula, while the PCE price index is based on a Fisher-Ideal formula. A
Laspeyres price relative is defined as
[L.sub.t, t + 1] = [[summation].sub.i]([[p.sup.i.sub.t + 1]
[[q.sup.i.sub.t])/ [[summation].sub.i]([[p.sup.i.sub.t + 1]
where [[p.sup.i.sub.t is the price of item i in period t, and
[[q.sup.i.sub.t] is the quantity of item i in period t. (2) If a
specific base period is set to 0, then the resulting index is referred
to as a "fixed-weight Laspeyres price index."
Fixed-weight Lt = [L.sub.t] ([[p.sup.i.sub.0] [[q.sup.i.sub.0])/
[[summation].sub.i](([[p.sup.i.sub.0] [[q.sup.i.sub.0])
The CPI is based on the fixed-weight Laspeyres price index, where
the base period is updated every 2 years. (3)
The PCE price index is based on a Fisher-Ideal price-index-number
formula. First, note that a Paasche price relative is defined as
[P.sub.t, t + 1] = [[summation].sub.i]([[p.sup.i.sub.t + 1]
[[q.sup.i.sub.t + 1])/ [[summation].sub.i]([[p.sup.i.sub.t]
[[q.sup.i.sub.t +1]).
The Fisher-Ideal price relative is simply the geometric mean of the
Laspeyres and Paasche price relatives, that is,
[P.sub.t, t + 1], [([L.sub.t, t + 1] x [P.sub.t, t + 1])sup.1/2]
In general, the Paasche price relative is less than the Laspeyres
price relative, implying that the Fisher-Ideal price relative is
generally less than the Laspeyres price relative. Next, a Fisher-Ideal
chain-type price index is obtained by multiplicatively
"chaining" the Fisher-Ideal price relatives, that is,
Chained [F.sub.t + 1] = (Chained [F.sub.t + 1]) x ([F.sub.t, + 1 t
+ 1]).
The PCE price index is based on the Fisher-Ideal chain-type price
index.
The fundamental difference between the fixed-weight Laspeyres price
index and the Fisher-Ideal chain-type price index involves the extent to
which the two indexes reflect consumer substitution among detailed items
as the relative prices of those items change. In general, consumers
substitute away from those items whose prices rise most rapidly and
toward those items whose prices rise less rapidly or decline. In theory,
the Fisher-Ideal price index better reflects this substitution; in this
regard, the Fisher-Ideal index is referred to as a
"superlative" index. (4) In practice, the Fisher-Ideal index
is difficult to implement because it requires expenditure data for the
most recent period for which the index is being estimated. It is often
the case that these data are not available. For example, data on
household consumer expenditures that are used to estimate the CPI are
not available for the most current period. Therefore, the Laspeyres
index--with regular base-period updates--provides a practical
alternative to the Fisher-Ideal index.
It also should be noted that the BLS publishes the Chained Consumer
Price Index for All Urban Consumers. This price index, like the PCE
chain-type price index, is based on a superlative index-number formula
that better reflects consumer substitution among item categories:
Because both the Chained CPI and the PCE chain-type price index are
based on superlative index-number formulas, they tend to behave more
similarly over time. The two indexes still diverge because of scope,
weight, and other effects.
To estimate the formula effect, the detailed price and quantity
data used to estimate the PCE price index were reaggregated using the
Laspeyres price-index formula. The base periods used in this calculation
were consistent with the base periods used to estimate the CPI:
Estimates for 2002-2003 were prepared using a 1999-2000 base period,
estimates for 2004-2005 used a 2001-2002 base period, and estimates for
2006 used a 2003-2004 base period. The formula effect was estimated as
the percentage-point difference in growth rates between the PCE
chain-type price index and the PCE fixed-weight price index. (6)
From the outset, the formula effect was expected to be negative
because the Fisher-Ideal price relative (on which the PCE chain-type
price index is based) is generally less than the Laspeyres price
relative (on which the PCE fixed-weight price index is based). In
addition, the formula effect was expected to be more important for the
categories in which there were large relative price changes, such as
gasoline and computers.
Weight effect
The relative weights assigned to comparable item prices in the CPI
and in the PCE price index differ because these weights are based on
different data sources. The relative weights used in the CPI are based
on the Consumer Expenditure Survey, a household survey conducted for BLS
by the Census Bureau. The relative weights used in the PCE price index
are based primarily on business surveys, such as the Census Bureau's annual and monthly retail trade surveys, the Service
Annual Survey, and the Quarterly Services Survey. The differences in
response rates and response quality between household and business
surveys are well known. (7) These issues, such as "recall
bias,' may play a key role in explaining differences in the
resulting weights. In addition, there are differences in total consumer
spending that may also affect the relative weights. (8)
To estimate the weight effect, the differences in the relative
weights between comparable items in the PCE fixed-weight price index and
the CPI are calculated. These differences are then multiplied by the
growth rates in the corresponding item price indexes to yield
percentage-point contributions; that is, the weight effect is computed
as
([[W.sup.i.sub.PCE] - [W.sup.i.sub.CPI]) x [([p.sup.i.sub.t +
1]/[[p.sub.sub.i.sub.t] - 1)],
where [[W.sup.i.sub.PCE] is the average relative weight for item i
in the PCE fixed-weight price index; [[W.sup.i.sub.CPI] is the average
relative weight for item i in the CPI; and [[p.sup.i.sub.t] is the price
for item i used in both the CPI and PCE price index calculations. (9) It
is important to note that weight differences resulting from different
base periods are not accounted for in the weight effect; these
differences are accounted for in the formula effect.
Scope effect
The CPI measures the out-of-pocket expenditures of all urban
households, while the PCE price index measures the goods and services
purchased by individuals and nonprofit institutions within the framework
of the NIPAs. As such, there are items in the CPI that are not included
in the PCE price index, and there are items in the PCE price index that
are not included in the CPI. For example, medical care services in the
CPI consist only of those services directly purchased by consumers. In
the PCE price index, medical care services include services directly
purchased by consumers and services paid for on behalf of consumers--for
example, medical care services paid for by employers through
employer-provided health insurance and medical care services paid for by
governments through programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. (10)
The scope effect adjusts for items that are not comparable between
the CPI and the PCE price index using a two-stage approach. First, the
percentage-point contributions to the growth in the PCE fixed-weight
price index for those items that are not included in the CPI are
calculated. Second, the percentage-point contributions to growth in the
CPI for those items that are not included in the PCE price index are
calculated. As will be discussed in the next section, the reconciliation
algorithm begins with the PCE price index and ends with the CPI;
therefore, the contributions for PCE items that are out-of-scope for the
CPI enter the reconciliation with negative signs, and the contributions
for CPI items that are out-of-scope for the PCE price index enter with
positive signs. A "net" scope effect is also calculated as the
difference between the contributions for CPI items that are out-of-scope
for the PCE price index and the contributions for PCE items that are
out-of-scope for the CPI.
Other effects
There are a variety of remaining differences--including seasonal
adjustment differences, price differences, and residual
differences--that must be taken into account for a complete
reconciliation of the CPI and the PCE price index.
Seasonal adjustment differences result from two factors:
Differences in revision cycles and differences in aggregation. First,
the BLS and the BEA revision cycles differ. For example, in February 2007, BLS revised the CPI seasonal factors for 2002-2006. In July 2007,
BEA revised the NIPAs for 2004-2006; however, because of BEA's
revision policy of only revising the 3 most recent years during an
annual revision, the revised seasonal adjustment factors for 2002-2003
were not incorporated into the PCE price index. Second, the BEA and the
BLS aggregation procedures differ. BEA uses the detailed, item-level CPI
price indexes (and their associated seasonal adjustment factors) in
constructing the PCE price index. In contrast, BLS uses 73
"selected CPI components" (and their associated seasonal
adjustment factors) in constructing the seasonally adjusted CPI. Because
the selected CPI components are seasonally adjusted independently of the
item-level CPI price indexes, there are often differences in the
seasonal adjustment factors used in the CPI and the PCE price index. An
adjustment is made to account for these differences.
There are two comparable items used to construct the PCE price
index for which BEA does not use an item-level CPI. The price index used
to deflate passenger air transportation is an implicit price deflator based on passenger revenues and the number of miles traveled by
passengers. Also, the gasoline price index used to construct the PCE
price index differs from the gasoline price index used to construct the
CPI because of mandated pollution control measures. (11) In these cases,
an adjustment is made to account for price differences.
Finally, the remaining sources of difference between the CPI and
the PCE price index are not addressed by this analysis. In general,
these differences are small. They are computed residually and provide a
"balancing item" for the reconciliation.
Reconciliation
This section presents the reconciliation of the CPI and the PCE
price index for the first quarter of 2002 through the second quarter of
2007. Table 1 presents the results on a quarterly basis. Notice that the
reconciliation begins with the growth rate in the PCE chain-type price
index and ends with the growth rate in the CPI. (12) The reconciliation
algorithm is summarized in the following seven steps.
1. The quarterly growth rates (at annual rates) in the PCE
chain-type price index (line 1) and the quarterly growth rates (at
annual rates) in the CPI (line 29) are calculated.
2. The formula effect is estimated. Line 2 shows the
percentage-point contribution of the formula effect to the growth rate
in the PCE chain-type price index. Lines 3-11 show the percentage-point
contributions of selected categories to the growth rate in the PCE
chain-type price index.
3. The weight effect is estimated. Line 13 shows the
percentage-point contribution of the weight effect to the growth rate in
the PCE fixed-weight price index. Lines 14-17 show the percentage-point
contributions of selected categories to the growth rate in the PCE
fixed-weight price index.
4. The PCE portion of the scope effect is estimated. Line 18 shows
the percentage-point contribution to the growth rate in the PCE
fixed-weight price index for those items that are out-of-scope for the
CPI. Lines 19-23 show the percentage-point contributions for selected
components.
5. The CPI portion of the scope effect is estimated. Line 24 shows
the percentage-point contribution to the growth rate in the CPI for
those items that are out-of-scope for the PCE price index. Lines 25-27
show the percentage-point contributions for selected components.
6. "Other effects" are estimated. Line 28 shows the
percentage-point contributions of seasonal-adjustment differences, price
differences, and other differences.
7. Finally, the growth rate in the CPI equals the growth rate in
the PCE chain-type price index less the formula effect, less the weight
effect, less the PCE portion of the scope effect, plus the CPI portion
of the scope effect, less "other effects."
Highlights of the reconciliation can be seen in table 2. This table
presents average annual estimates. From the first quarter of 2002
through the second quarter of 2007, the PCE chain-type price index (line
1) increased at an average annual rate of 2.5 percent, while the CPI
(line 32) increased at an average annual rate of 2.9 percent. Over that
period, the formula effect (line 2) contributed -0.17 percentage point
to the 2.5-percent growth rate in the PCE chain-type price index. (13)
As expected, the formula effect was negative, reflecting differences
between the fixed-weight Laspeyres price index and the Fisher-Ideal
chain-type price index. (14) Also as expected, the formula effect had a
larger impact for those categories with large relative price
changes--for example, gasoline and oil (line 3) and computers,
peripherals, and software (line 4). After adjusting for the formula
effect, the PCE fixed-weight price index increased at an average annual
rate of 2.7 percent (line 12).
The weight effect (line 13) contributed -0.67 percentage point to
the 2.7-percent growth in the PCE fixed-weight price index. Within the
weight effect, the rent of shelter category (line 14)--which includes
owners' equivalent rent--made the largest contribution. The
relative weight for rent of shelter in the CPI is consistently and
significantly higher than its relative weight in the PCE price index.
(15)
The scope effect consists of two parts. First, items in the PCE
price index that are out-of-scope for the CPI (line 18) contributed 0.76
percentage point to the 2.7-percent growth in the PCE fixed-weight price
index. Second, items in the CPI that are out-of-scope for the PCE price
index (line 24) contributed 0.24 percentage point to the 2.9-percent
growth in the CPI. Because the first part of the scope effect enters the
reconciliation with a negative sign and the second part enters with a
positive sign, the net contribution of the scope effect was -0.52
percentage point.
Within the scope effect, the components that made the largest
contributions were related to medical care services. These included
physician services (line 19 and line 25), hospitals and nursing homes
(line 20), and hospitals and related services (line 26). A large portion
of the total scope effect is accounted for by the differing concepts of
medical care services. Recall that for the CPI, medical care services
include only those services directly purchased by consumers. For the PCE
price index, medical care services include services purchased directly
by consumers and services paid for on behalf of consumers--for example,
medical care services paid for by employers through employer-provided
health insurance and medical care services paid for by governments
through programs such as Medicare and Medicaid.
Finally, "other effects" (line 28) was negligible over
the period, making only a small negative contribution to the 2.7-percent
growth rate in the PCE fixed-weight price index. As mentioned above,
this effect includes seasonal adjustment differences, price differences,
and residual differences.
In summary, the PCE price index increased at an average annual rate
of 2.5 percent over the period, and the CPI increased at an average
annual rate of 2.9 percent--a difference of 0.4 percentage point. The
formula effect explains almost half of this growth-rate difference.
After adjusting for formula differences, the weight effect more than
accounted for the remaining difference in growth rates between the CPI
and the PCE fixed-weight price index. The large weight effect was
primarily explained by the larger relative weight for rent of shelter in
the CPI than in the PCE price index. The scope effect, in contrast,
partly offset the weight effect. "Other effects" had only a
minor impact over the period.
It is important to keep in mind that this reconciliation is not
unique; using a different reconciliation framework will lead to
different results. For example, by comparing the CPI and the Chained
Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers, the formula effect could
be estimated last rather than first. In this case, using data from the
fourth quarter of 2001 through the fourth quarter of 2005 (the last year
for which final data for the chained CPI have been published) the
formula effect would be -0.33 percentage point (2.46 percent minus 2.79
percent), compared with -0.17 percentage point when the formula effect
is estimated first.
Upcoming Work
Beginning in early 2008, BEA plans to begin preparing tables that
reconcile the differences in growth rates between the CPI and the PCE
price index on an ongoing basis. These tables will be similar to table 1
and will be available on both the BLS and the BEA Web sites. Quarterly
and monthly reconciliation tables will be available. Quarterly tables
will be available after the release of the "advance" estimates
of gross domestic product (GDP) and will be revised after the release of
the "preliminary" and "final" estimates of GDP.
Monthly tables will be available after the release of the monthly
personal income and outlays.
BLS and BEA will also continue to review differences between the
CPI and the PCE price index and will adjust the reconciliation
procedures as needed. The reconciliation framework presented in this
article was determined to be the most relevant for reconciling the CPI
and PCE price measures over the specified period. It is possible that
sources of difference will change over time, either because of
structural changes in the economy or because of changes in data sources
and estimation procedures.
In July 2009, BEA plans to introduce a new classification structure
for the PCE estimates as part of the 2009 comprehensive revision of the
NIPAs. The new PCE classification structure will be more closely aligned
with the Classification of Individual Consumption by Purpose (COICOP)
and with the Classification of the Purposes of NonProfit Institutions
(COPNI). Both the COICOP and the COPNI are recommended by the 1993
System of National Accounts. This new PCE classification structure will
improve the consistency between detailed PCE items and detailed CPIs
used for deflation. While the impact of this new classification on the
reconciliation process is not yet known, it is expected that small
differences--currently being captured as part of weight effects and
"other effects"--will be reduced.
References
Bureau of Economic Analysis. 1978. "Reconciliation of
Quarterly Changes in Measures of Prices Paid by Consumers." SURVEY
or CURRENT BUSINESS 58 (March).
Cage, Robert, John Greenlees, and Patrick Jackman. 2003.
"Introducing the Chained Consumer Price Index." Presented at
the 7th meeting of the International Working Group on Price Indices in
Paris in May.
Clark, Todd E. 2003. "A Comparison of the CPI and the PCE
Price Index." Economic Review: Third Quarter 1999. Federal Reserve
Bank of Kansas City, 15-29.
Diewert, W. Erwin. 1976. "Exact and Superlative Index
Numbers?' Journal of Econometrics 4 (May): 115-145.
Fixler, Dennis, and Ted Jaditz. 2002. "An Examination of the
Difference Between the CPI and the PCE Deflator." Bureau of Labor
Statistics Working Paper no. 361, June.
Garner, Thesia I., George Janini, William Passero, Laura
Paszkiewicz, and Mark Vendemia. 2006. "The CE and the PCE: A
Comparison." Monthly Labor Review (September): 20-46.
Johnson, David S. 2003. "Comparison of Movements in the CPI
and PCE Price Indexes." Presented at the Federal Economic
Statistics Advisory Committee Meeting at the Bureau of Labor Statistics
in Washington, DC, on March 21.
Lebow, David E., and Jeremy B. Rudd. 2003. "Measurement Error
in the CPI: Where Do We Stand?" Journal of Economic Literature
(March): 159-201.
McCully, Clinton P., Brian C. Moyer, and Kenneth J. Stewart. 2007.
"A Reconciliation Between the Consumer Price Index and the Personal
Consumption Expenditures Price Index";
<www.bea.gov/papers/pdf/cpi_pce.pdf>.
Schultze, Charles L., and Christopher Mackie, editors. 2002.
"At What Price? Conceptualizing and Measuring Cost-of-Living and
Price Indexes." In National Research Council Panel on Conceptual,
Measurement, and Other Statistical Issues in Developing Cost-of-Living
Indexes. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Triplett, Jack E. 1981. "Reconciling the CPI and the PCE
Deflator." Monthly Labor Review (September): 3-15.
Previous Reconciliations Between the CPI and the PCE Price Index
The reconciliation presented in this article is an extension of
earlier work to detail and quantify the differences between the CPI and
the PCE price index. The following is an overview of some of this
earlier work.
In 1978, BEA decomposed changes in the CPI and the PCE implicit
price deflator for 1970-77. (1) Over that period, the CPI increased 0.5
percentage point per year more than the PCE deflator. Over half of the
difference was determined to be the weight effect. The scope effect
explained roughly 40 percent of the difference. Differences in the
methodologies used by BLS and BEA to estimate price changes for
owners' equivalent rent were an important part of the scope effect;
these differences were partly offset by other scope differences. (2) The
formula effect and "other effects" were small and offsetting.
(3)
In 1981, Triplett investigated the differences between the CPI and
the PCE implicit price deflator for 1972-80. Over that period, the CPI
increased 104.6 percent, while the PCE deflator increased 84.9 percent.
The difference between the two indexes was largely driven by differences
in the methodologies for estimating price changes for owners'
equivalent rent. In fact, these methodological differences accounted for
about two-thirds of the difference in growth rates between the CPI and
the PCE deflator. Most of the remaining difference was attributed to the
weight effect.
In 2002, Fixler and Jaditz analyzed the CPI and the PCE chain-type
implicit price deflator for the first quarter of 1992 through the second
quarter of 1997.4 Over that period, the CPI increased 14.1 percent,
while the PCE deflator increased 12.5 percent. They identified and
quantified differences using the formula, weight, scope, and price
effects) Table A summarizes the Fixler-Jaditz results. Much of the
difference in growth rates between the CPI and the PCE deflator was
attributed to the price and weight effects. (6) The formula effect also
accounted for a large share of the difference. The scope effect partly
offset the price and weight effects.
Finally, Johnson (2003) extended the Fixler-Jaditz methodology for
the fourth quarter of 1997 through the fourth quarter of 2001. Table B
summarizes Johnson's results. Most of the effects were similar in
magnitude to the Fixler-Jaditz results; the formula effect was somewhat
larger. (7)
(1.) The PCE implicit price deflator was defined as the ratio of
current-dollar PCE to constant (1972) dollar PCE.
(2.) Before 1983, BLS used an asset approach to measure the price
change for owners' equivalent rent; before 1983, BEA used the CPI
for residential rent to measure this price change. Since 1983, both BLS
and BEA have used a rental-equivalence approach to measure the price
change for owners' equivalent rent.
(3.) The formula effect was defined as the difference in growth
rates between the "PCE chain index" and the PCE implicit price
deflator. The PCE chain index was estimated using a chained Laspeyres
price-index-number formula.
(4.) Fixler and Jaditz completed their analysis in 1998; the
resulting paper was published in 2002.
(5.) In general, a "price effect" accounts for
differences that result from using different item-level price indexes to
deflate comparable items in the CPI and the PCE price index.
(6.) Within the price and weight effect, much of the difference was
attributed to BEA's use of price measures other than item-level
CPIs.
(7.) In addition to these reconciliations, there have been several
papers comparing the CPI and the PCE price index. For example, see Clark
(2003), Schultze and Mackie (2002), Lebow and Rudd (2003). Consumer
expenditures were compared in Garner et al. (2006).
(1.) The CPI measures the change in prices paid by urban consumers
for a market basket of consumer goods and services; it is primarily used
as an economic indicator and as a means of adjusting current-period data
for inflation. The PCE price index measures the change in prices paid
for goods and services by the personal sector in the U.S. national
income and product accounts; it is primarily used for macroeconomic analysis and forecasting.
(2.) In this article, the term "price relative" refers to
an aggregate measure of price change between two adjacent periods.
(3.) Because the base period is necessarily updated with a time
lag, the CPI is said to be based on a "modified" Laspeyres
index.
(4.) The Fisher-Ideal index is just one example of a superlative
index; another example is the Tornqvist index. Both of these indexes
possess a number of desirable properties that make them preferred over
the fixed-weight Laspeyres index. See Diewert (1976) for a discussion of
superlative index numbers.
(5.) The Chained Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers is
based on the Tornqvist chain-type price index. For more information on
the Chained Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers, go to
<www.bls.gov/cpi/super_paris.pdf>.
(6.) For the purposes of this analysis, BEA calculated a PCE
fixed-weight price index.
(7.) See Garner, et al. (2006) for a thorough examination of the
differences between the Consumer Expenditure Survey and the expenditure
surveys used to estimate the PCE price index.
(8.) See Appendix Table A in McCully, Moyer, and Stewart (2007) for
a detailed list of weight differences.
(9.) Symmetric to the weight effect is a "price effect."
It is estimated as
[W.sup.i] [(([[p.sup.i.sub.PCE,t + 1]/[[p.sup.i.sub.PCE,t +
1]sup.-1] - [(([[p.sup.i.sub.CPI,t + 1]/[[p.sup.i.sub.CPI,t]sup.-1)],
where [W.sup.i] is the average relative weight used for item i in
the CPI calculation; [[p.sup.i.sub.PCE,t] is the price for item i used
in the PCE price index calculation; and [[p.sup.sub.CPI,t], "is the
price for item i used in the CPI calculation. Empirically, the price
effect is small; for this analysis, it is included in "other
effects"
(10.) See Appendix Table A in McCully, Moyer, and Stewart (2007)
for a detailed list of scope differences.
(11.) In the CPI, mandated pollution control regulations, such as
improving auto emissions, are considered price increases. In the PCE
price index, these are considered quality changes. See
<www.bls.gov/cpi/cpitreat.pdf> for more information on how
mandated pollution control regulations are treated in the CPI.
(12.) An alternative would be to begin with the growth rate in the
CPI and end with the growth rate in the PCE price index. Either way is
correct; there is no "best" starting point for the
reconciliation.
(13.) Recall that the base periods used to estimate the formula
effect are consistent with the base periods used to construct the CPI.
(14.) Recall that BLS publishes another measure of price change,
called the Chained Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers
(C-CPI-U), which employs a superlative index-number formula. The C-CPI-U
moves more similarly to the PCE chain-type price index. For example,
from the fourth quarter of 2001 through the fourth quarter of 2005 (the
last date for which final C-CPI-U data have been published), both the
C-CPI-U and the PCE chain-type price index increased 2.5 percent at an
annual rate.
(15.) The relative weight for rent of shelter in the CPI is about
32 percent; its relative weight in the PCE price index is about 15
percent. While the data sources for expenditure estimates for rent of
shelter and for owners' equivalent rent differ in the CPI and the
PCE, the aggregate estimates for expenditures in each are similar. The
relative weight of rent of shelter is larger in the CPI than in the PCE
because total consumer expenditures (for nonrent of shelter components)
reported in the Consumer Expenditure Survey are less than those
estimated from business surveys used to prepare the PCE price index.
Differences in total expenditure estimates can be attributed to both the
different expenditure survey methods used as well as differences in
scope. See Garner et al. (2006) for a detailed description of the
differences between expenditure estimates derived from the Consumer
Expenditure Survey and those estimated for the PCE price index.
Clinton P. McCully is Chief of the Consumption Branch at the Bureau
of Economic Analysis (BEA). Brian C. Moyer is Chief of the Government
Division at BEA. Kenneth J. Stewart is the CPI Information and Analysis
Chief at the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Table A. Reconciliation Between the CPI
and the PCE Implicit Price Deflator
Line
PCE chain-type implicit price deflator (percent change) 1 12.5
Minus: Formula effect (percentage points) 2 -0.86
Equals: PCE fixed-weight price index (percent change) 3 13.3
Minus: Price and weight effects (percentage points) 4 -1.80
Minus: Scope effect (percentage points) 5 1.01
Equals: CPI (percent change) 6 14.1
Source: Based on Fixier and Jaditz (2002), table 9.
Table B. Reconciliation Between the CPI
and the PCE Implicit Price Deflator
Line
PCE chain-type implicit price deflator (percent change) 1 7.2
Minus: Formula effect (percentage points). 2 -1.82
Equals: PCE fixed-weight price index (percent change) 3 9.1
Minus: Price and weight effects (percentage points) 4 -1.79
Minus: Scope effect (percentage points) 5 1.06
Equals: CPI (percent change) 6 9.8
Source: Based on Johnson (2003).
Table 1. Quarterly Reconciliation Between the CPI and the PCE Price
Index
2002
Line
I II III IV
PCE chain-type price index
(percent change at annual
rates) 1 0.9 2.8 1.8 1.7
Less: Formula effect
(percentage points) 2 -0.08 -0.17 -0.14 -0.08
Gasoline and oil 3 0.02 -0.04 0.00 -0.01
Computers peripherals and
software 4 -0.06 -0.04 -0.05 -0.08
Video and audio goads 5 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02
Tobacco products 6 0.00 -0.02 -0.02 0.01
Medical care services 7 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03
Electricity, gas, fuel oil,
and other household fuels 8 0.02 -0.01 0.00 -0.01
Housing 9 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02
Food 10 -0.01 0.00 0.00 -0.01
Other 11 -0.03 -0.04 -0.05 0.03
Equals: PCE fixed-weight price
index (percent change at
annual rates) 12 1.0 3.0 1.9 1.7
Less: Weight effect
(percentage points) 13 -0.30 -0.65 -0.49 -0.54
Rent of shelter 14 -0.57 -0.47 -0.43 -0.40
Gasoline and oil 15 0.08 -0.36 -0.03 -0.10
Electricity, gas, fuel oil,
and other household fuels 16 0.08 0.00 0.00 -0.06
Other 17 0.11 0.19 -0.02 0.03
Less: Scope effect--PCE items
out-of-scope of the CPI
(percentage points) 18 0.33 0.50 0.67 0.36
Physicians 19 -0.13 0.01 0.04 0.04
Hospitals and nursing homes 20 0.32 0.23 0.32 0.34
Services furnished without
payment by financial
intermediaries except
life insurance and
pension plans 21 0.08 0.02 -0.03 -0.03
Foreign travel by U.S.
residents 22 0.00 0.10 0.16 -0.03
Other 23 0.06 0.13 0.18 0.04
Plus: Scope effect-CPI items
out-of-scope of the PCE
price index (percentage
points) 24 0.24 0.23 0.27 0.28
Physicians 25 0.03 0.01 0.08 0.06
Hospitals and related
services 26 0.13 0.14 0.11 0.14
Other 27 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08
Less: Other effects 28 -0.12 0.11 -0.15 -0.19
Equals: CPI (percent change at
annual rates) 29 1.3 3.2 2.2 2.4
2003
I II III IV
PCE chain-type price index
(percent change at annual
rates) 3.1 0.7 2.4 1.5
Less: Formula effect
(percentage points) -0.25 -0.03 -0.18 -0.11
Gasoline and oil -0.08 0.04 -0.03 0.01
Computers peripherals and
software -0.05 -0.07 -0.09 -0.03
Video and audio goads -0.02 -0.02 -0.03 -0.01
Tobacco products 0.00 0.01 -0.01 0.00
Medical care services 0.02 0.06 0.04 0.04
Electricity, gas, fuel oil,
and other household fuels -0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00
Housing -0.02 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02
Food -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 -0.05
Other -0.03 -0.04 -0.03 -0.04
Equals: PCE fixed-weight price
index (percent change at
annual rates) 3.3 0.7 2.5 1.6
Less: Weight effect
(percentage points) -1.11 -0.15 -0.50 -0.15
Rent of shelter -0.38 -0.21 -0.28 -0.36
Gasoline and oil -0.45 0.30 -0.19 0.08
Electricity, gas, fuel oil,
and other household fuels -0.22 -0.18 0.01 0.04
Other -0.06 -0.06 -0.04 0.08
Less: Scope effect-PCE items
out-of-scope of the CPI
(percentage points) 0.51 0.81 0.79 1.02
Physicians -0.04 0.18 0.10 0.05
Hospitals and nursing homes 0.40 0.27 0.29 0.31
Services furnished without
payment by financial
intermediaries except
life insurance and
pension plans -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 0.00
Foreign travel by U.S.
residents 0.09 0.12 0.02 0.09
Other 0.08 0.27 0.40 0.57
Plus: Scope effect-CPI items
out-of-scope of the PCE
price index (percentage
points) 0.18 0.12 0.24 0.33
Physicians 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.05
Hospitals and related
services 0.09 0.06 0.13 0.10
Other 0.07 0.03 0.08 0.18
Less: Other effects 0.27 -0.08 0.05 -0.13
Equals: CPI (percent change at
annual rates) 3.8 0.2 2.4 1.2
2004
I II III IV
PCE chain-type price index
(percent change at annual
rates) 3.5 3.8 2.0 3.0
Less: Formula effect
(percentage points) -0.07 -0.12 -0.16 -0.21
Gasoline and oil -0.02 -0.03 0.00 -0.03
Computers peripherals and
software -0.02 -0.02 -0.03 -0.06
Video and audio goads -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.01
Tobacco products 0.00 0.00 -0.01 0.00
Medical care services 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.00
Electricity, gas, fuel oil,
and other household fuels -0.01 0.00 -0.01 -0.03
Housing -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01
Food 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02
Other -0.02 -0.04 -0.07 -0.05
Equals: PCE fixed-weight price
index (percent change at
annual rates) 3.6 4.0 2.1 3.3
Less: Weight effect
(percentage points) -0.51 -0.96 -0.57 -0.86
Rent of shelter -0.29 -0.44 -0.35 -0.30
Gasoline and oil -0.31 -0.35 -0.01 -0.27
Electricity, gas, fuel oil,
and other household fuels -0.11 -0.06 -0.10 -0.09
Other 0.21 -0.12 -0.12 -0.20
Less: Scope effect-PCE items
out-of-scope of the CPI
(percentage points) 1.21 1.08 0.80 0.80
Physicians 0.13 0.03 0.03 0.04
Hospitals and nursing homes 0.40 0.36 0.30 0.31
Services furnished without
payment by financial
intermediaries except
life insurance and
pension plans 0.03 0.15 0.03 0.06
Foreign travel by U.S.
residents 0.08 0.09 0.08 0.09
Other 0.58 0.45 0.36 0.30
Plus: Scope effect-CPI items
out-of-scope of the PCE
price index (percentage
points) 0.35 0.25 0.24 0.26
Physicians 0.10 0.07 0.04 0.05
Hospitals and related
services 0.08 0.07 0.08 0.08
Other 0.17 0.11 0.12 0.14
Less: Other effects -0.22 -0.16 0.03 -0.10
Equals: CPI (percent change at
annual rates) 3.5 4.3 2.1 3.7
2005
I II III IV
PCE chain-type price index
(percent change at annual
rates) 2.2 3.4 4.3 2.8
Less: Formula effect
(percentage points) -0.11 -0.26 -0.53 -0.24
Gasoline and oil 0.00 -0.05 -0.23 0.06
Computers peripherals and
software -0.04 -0.04 -0.06 0.00
Video and audio goads -0.03 -0.02 -0.03 -0.03
Tobacco products -0.02 0.00 -0.02 -0.01
Medical care services 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00
Electricity, gas, fuel oil,
and other household fuels -0.01 -0.02 -0.06 -0.10
Housing -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 -0.01
Food 0.01 -0.01 0.01 -0.01
Other -0.03 -0.11 -0.13 -0.09
Equals: PCE fixed-weight price
index (percent change at
annual rates) 2.3 3.6 4.8 3.1
Less: Weight effect
(percentage points) -0.47 -0.79 -1.29 -1.11
Rent of shelter -0.41 -0.35 -0.35 -0.39
Gasoline and oil 0.08 -0.32 -0.84 0.14
Electricity, gas, fuel oil,
and other household fuels -0.12 -0.16 -0.24 -0.68
Other -0.02 0.04 0.15 -0.18
Less: Scope effect-PCE items
out-of-scope of the CPI
(percentage points) 0.84 0.92 0.80 0.91
Physicians 0.12 0.06 0.05 0.05
Hospitals and nursing homes 0.33 0.28 0.32 0.41
Services furnished without
payment by financial
intermediaries except
life insurance and
pension plans 0.02 0.14 0.15 0.15
Foreign travel by U.S.
residents 0.05 0.13 0.04 -0.08
Other 0.33 0.31 0.24 0.37
Plus: Scope effect-CPI items
out-of-scope of the PCE
price index (percentage
points) 0.28 0.23 0.19 0.22
Physicians 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.03
Hospitals and related
services 0.10 0.07 0.06 0.10
Other 0.12 0.10 0.09 0.09
Less: Other effects 0.07 -0.12 -0.11 0.07
Equals: CPI (percent change at
annual rates) 2.1 3.9 5.6 3.4
2006
I II III IV
PCE chain-type price index
(percent change at annual
rates) 1.7 4.3 2.6 -0.9
Less: Formula effect
(percentage points) -0.09 -0.19 -0.13 0.05
Gasoline and oil 0.03 -0.13 -0.02 0.18
Computers peripherals and
software -0.03 -0.05 -0.03 -0.02
Video and audio goads -0.02 -0.02 -0.03 -0.04
Tobacco products 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Medical care services -0.01 -0.01 0.00 0.00
Electricity, gas, fuel oil,
and other household fuels 0.02 0.06 0.00 0.02
Housing -0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00
Food 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01
Other -0.07 -0.05 -0.03 -0.07
Equals: PCE fixed-weight price
index (percent change at
annual rates) 1.8 4.5 2.7 -1.0
Less: Weight effect
(percentage points) -0.61 -1.07 -0.82 0.42
Rent of shelter -0.50 -0.73 -0.69 -0.63
Gasoline and oil 0.13 -0.59 -0.09 0.77
Electricity, gas, fuel oil,
and other household fuels -0.14 0.23 0.03 0.03
Other -0.09 0.02 -0.06 0.25
Less: Scope effect-PCE items
out-of-scope of the CPI
(percentage points) 0.56 0.82 0.72 0.73
Physicians -0.04 0.05 0.09 0.04
Hospitals and nursing homes 0.27 0.32 0.33 0.28
Services furnished without
payment by financial
intermediaries except
life insurance and
pension plans -0.06 -0.01 -0.07 0.15
Foreign travel by U.S.
residents -0.03 0.14 0.05 -0.06
Other 0.42 0.32 0.33 0.32
Plus: Scope effect-CPI items
out-of-scope of the PCE
price index (percentage
points) 0.14 0.23 0.22 0.20
Physicians -0.01 0.03 0.03 0.05
Hospitals and related
services 0.12 0.12 0.09 0.07
Other 0.03 0.08 0.10 0.08
Less: Other effects 0.11 -0.12 -0.11 0.24
Equals: CPI (percent change at
annual rates) 1.9 5.0 3.1 -2.1
2007
I II
PCE chain-type price index
(percent change at annual
rates) 3.5 4.3
Less: Formula effect
(percentage points) -0.21 -0.49
Gasoline and oil -0.06 -0.27
Computers peripherals and
software -0.01 -0.03
Video and audio goads -0.04 -0.03
Tobacco products -0.03 0.00
Medical care services 0.02 0.00
Electricity, gas, fuel oil,
and other household fuels -0.02 -0.02
Housing -0.01 0.00
Food 0.01 0.00
Other -0.06 -0.14
Equals: PCE fixed-weight price
index (percent change at
annual rates) 3.7 4.8
Less: Weight effect
(percentage points) -0.74 -1.49
Rent of shelter -0.55 -0.40
Gasoline and oil -0.17 -0.75
Electricity, gas, fuel oil,
and other household fuels -0.21 -0.07
Other 0.19 -0.26
Less: Scope effect-PCE items
out-of-scope of the CPI
(percentage points) 1.05 0.61
Physicians 0.49 0.00
Hospitals and nursing homes 0.27 0.25
Services furnished without
payment by financial
intermediaries except
life insurance and
pension plans -0.08 -0.07
Foreign travel by U.S.
residents 0.04 0.09
Other 0.33 0.34
Plus: Scope effect-CPI items
out-of-scope of the PCE
price index (percentage
points) 0.35 0.26
Physicians 0.13 0.03
Hospitals and related
services 0.10 0.12
Other 0.12 0.11
Less: Other effects -0.13 -0.11
Equals: CPI (percent change at
annual rates) 3.8 6.0
Table 2. Reconciliation of Quarterly Percent Changes
Between the CPI and the PCE Price Index
[2002 to Second Quarter of 2007]
Line
PCE chain-type price index (average annual percent
change) 1 2.5
Less: Formula effect (percentage points) 2 -0.17
Gasoline and oil 3 -0.03
Computers peripherals and software 4 -0.04
Video and audio goods 5 -0.02
Tobacco products 6 -0.01
Medical care services 7 0.01
Electricity, gas, fuel oil, and other household
fuels 8 -0.01
Housing 9 -0.01
Food 10 -0.01
Other 11 -0.05
Equals: PCE fixed-weight price index (average annual
percent change) 12 2.7
Less: Weight effect (percentage points) 13 -0.67
Rent of shelter 14 -0.43
Gasoline and oil 15 -0.15
Electricity, gas, fuel oil, and other household
fuels 16 -0.09
Other 17 0.00
Less: Scope effect-PCE items out-of-scope of the CPI
(percentage points) 18 0.76
Physicians 19 0.06
Hospitals and nursing homes 20 0.31
Services furnished without payment by financial
intermediaries except life insurance and pension
plans 21 0.02
Foreign travel by U.S. residents 22 0.06
Other 23 0.31
Plus: Scope effect-CPI items out-of-scope of the PCE
price index (percentage points) 24 0.24
Physicians 25 0.05
Hospitals and related services 26 0.10
Other 27 0.09
Less: Other effects 28 -0.04
Seasonal adjustment 29 -0.03
Price 30 -0.01
All other 31 0.00
Equals: CPI (average annual percent change) 32 2.9