At The Cash: Find out how to Handle Your Information & Information Movement (August 13, 2025)
We dwell in an age of infinite information and spin. We depend on knowledge and information releases, however it’s very easy to get tripped up by all of it. How ought to buyers handle this firehose of numbers?
Full transcript under.
~~~
About this week’s visitor:
Michael Hiltzik covers enterprise for the Los Angeles Occasions, is a two-time winner of the Gerald Loeb Award and has authored quite a few books on enterprise.
For more information, see:
~~~
Discover the entire earlier On the Cash episodes right here, and within the MiB feed on Apple Podcasts, YouTube, Spotify, and Bloomberg. And discover the complete musical playlist of all of the songs I’ve used on On the Cash on Spotify
TRANSCRIPT:
Observe: This was recorded in July 2025, previous to President Trump’s firing of BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer.
Barry Ritholtz: Wall Avenue depends on knowledge: Financial releases, quarterly earnings efficiency comparisons, however it’s very easy to get tripped up by all of this math. How ought to buyers handle this fireplace hose of numbers to assist us navigate this firehose of numbers?
Let’s herald pulled shock successful reporter, Michael Hiltzik. He covers enterprise for the Los Angeles Occasions. He’s a two-time winner of the Gerald Loeb Award and has authored quite a few books on enterprise.
Michael, let’s simply begin with the fundamentals. How do you handle this infinite torrent of information that comes our manner?
Michael Hiltzik: That’s a great query. Principally, I attempt to ignore. Most of it, and I curate what I take advantage of and what I depend on.
And principally the way in which I work is I begin with a subject that I wish to discover, a topic I wish to discover, after which I’m going get hold of the info, uh, that I want. And that manner, I’m not affected. I imply, there are some sources who, uh, you already know, come throughout my emails repeatedly that I’ll pay some consideration to.
However most of it, I, I don’t, and I do know the place to go more often than not for, for what I want.
Barry Ritholtz: So let’s speak about that. In case you’re going to be writing about or researching a specific topic, what sources of financial knowledge do you depend on, and what sources do you discover troublesome and finest ignored?
Michael Hiltzik: Properly, I feel if I’m writing about, you already know, one thing that touches on macroeconomics or, uh, uh, home economics, I feel you may’t do higher than the BLS, the Bureau of Labor Statistics or the Bureau of Financial Evaluation. And to this point they haven’t been, uh, undermined. Possibly slightly bit, however not an excessive amount of by Trump. So their knowledge is de facto nonetheless dependable.
I additionally go to Fred, that’s the service from the St. Louis Fed that may cut back quite a lot of this, of the, of the info from BLS and BEA to, uh, graphical kind. And I’ve printed Fred Charts if there’s a month that passes with out it that’s uncommon.
Barry Ritholtz: So how do you, I depend on these. How do you assess the credibility and accuracy of any supply? Clearly, BLS and BEA and Fred have a really lengthy observe file, however what elements do you take into account whenever you’re a supply of financial knowledge?
Barry Ritholtz: Michael Hiltzik: I take a look at these sources, the way in which I take a look at any sources, I search for consistency.
My father was a CPA and he used to say, “Test the arithmetic.”
And I do this as a result of, uh, you already know, over time or a long time that I’ve been writing about enterprise and finance, I search for outliers within the knowledge. Once I see one thing like that, it warrants additional checking and skepticism, truly. I search for traits to be constant. I search for the info to be coherent, uh, and cohesive and principally, you already know, I, if I can I examine one supply in opposition to the opposite after which, attempt to see if doing that turns up some flaw or flaws within the. Within the print,
Barry Ritholtz: So that you talked about, examine the mathematics. Are there every other frequent knowledge high quality points that you simply encounter that buyers ought to pay attention to?
Michael Hiltzik: There’s some constant. Legal guidelines or errors or errors that, that I discover usually in, uh, information stories that, that use the, these knowledge, uh, after which attempt to attract conclusions. I feel each most likely really feel that knowledge that’s produced with out an inflation deflator or with out an acknowledgement, significantly if it’s a pattern line one thing that I attempt to repair if I can, however, definitely that’s a context that’s, is constantly missing in stories of the info. Um
Once I’m studying a report of a, of an financial launch you already know, in, in virtually any newspaper. I’ll all the time attempt to return to the unique print, not depend on any individual’s interpretation.
I’ve simply seen interpretations of information, simply, uh. Be everywhere, significantly if we’re speaking about authorities packages that depend on monetary statistics like social safety, uh, Medicare, Obamacare, I simply, see so many issues in reporting on these packages. As a result of reporters don’t do the mathematics, uh, or they don’t do their homework or they, they arrive at these packages by a political perspective that principally permits them to disregard what’s actually taking place.
Barry Ritholtz: So that you talked about ensuring the info is inflation-adjusted. You and I’ve spoken about seasonality and, and the way typically that appears to journey up customers of information. What different issues are inclined to come up whenever you see a, a generally used? Information supply or knowledge sequence.
Michael Hiltzik: Properly, these are the massive, these are the massive ones. you already know, if I’m a chart, if it’s a trendline chart and it doesn’t go to zero, so that you simply don’t actually know, you may’t actually inform, you already know, if a change is important or if it’s, uh, an artifact of massive numbers or small numbers, I wish to be suspicious about that.
We see these flaws in reporting everywhere, the most important newspapers, the wire providers, cable information, they’re principally winging it they usually’re utilizing, uh, knowledge, they’re utilizing numbers that they get. They’re misinterpreting them, generally wilds me.
Barry Ritholtz: You, you talked about Fred, which I actually consider as an internet software program software that depicts knowledge sequence in a graph or a picture. Another software program or instruments that you simply discover helpful?
Michael Hiltzik: Every now and then, at instances we’ve used FactSet. We’ve used Y-charts. (I’m fairly positive that we’re not even subscribers to them anymore). However we use them, you already know, for uncooked knowledge, and, graphical shows. I discover Yahoo Finance is nearly as good as, as the rest. you already know, after I’m utilizing these, these sources, I do wanna return and double examine, uh, the numbers simply to guarantee that what, what I’m utilizing, uh, uh, are, are the figures that had been produced initially.
Barry Ritholtz: What about commerce organizations? I recall steadily, particularly throughout the monetary disaster, being aggravated by quite a lot of the spin from the Nationwide Affiliation of Realtors who’re the unique supply of quite a lot of housing gross sales knowledge.
Michael Hiltzik: I feel you’re completely proper about that. I imply, if I want to show to an business supply or a lobbying group or what have you ever, just like the NAM, the franchisees have one thing they usually all produce figures.
If I’m searching for a determine that they produce, I imply, if I wish to say, you already know, the Nationwide Affiliation of Producers says this, I’ll use it. However with the caveat that that. That’s who they’re. You may’t all the time belief ’em. Uh, they’re virtually all the time speaking their e book, so to talk, and we’ve got to maintain that in thoughts and it’s gotta be mirrored in what I write as properly.
A few of these outfits are sources that, that I depend on to debunk, and it’s all the time a great column if I can say, “look, right here’s what these guys stated, and right here’s how they received the numbers unsuitable, and right here’s why. They most likely intentionally received the numbers unsuitable.”
Barry Ritholtz: What about suppose tanks? They publish analytical knowledge steadily, however I’d hardly take into account them goal or disinterested events.
Michael Hiltzik: Yeah, I agree. Some are higher than others. I’ll quote with out an excessive amount of concern. The Peterson Institute of Worldwide Economics I discover constantly fairly good.
For commerce, uh, points, commerce figures, commerce commentary. there’s one other Peterson funded, uh, suppose tank, the, uh, fee for the, uh, accountable federal price range that mm-hmm. I, I imply, generally I, I discover them helpful. Typically their, uh, evaluation is so contaminated by, uh, ideology or partisanship that, um.
You, I, I’ve to stroll again what I see. I’ve to type of what, you already know, recalculate what, what they’ve used.
Barry Ritholtz: So that you had a column lately on Tesla. What about public firms? How can we consider issues like not simply earnings, however ahead steering and all types of generally it’s slightly little bit of blissful speak about what’s coming sooner or later.
Michael Hiltzik: Properly, I feel, you already know, if we’re, uh, you already know, to the extent they’re placing out disclosed financials, topic to SEC oversight, they’re, that’s what it’s. I can say that is what they’ve disclosed, that is what they’ve stated.
Ahead steering to me is principally, making an attempt to shoehorn a long-term perspective right into a snapshot. It’s very uncommon, uncommon that it’s, helpful in any respect. And it, in fact, it additionally is dependent upon who’s doing the ahead steering.
After we had Elon Musk, uh, you already know, ship a you already know, monetary Q&A simply final evening, I’m undecided. I’m undecided that any of that, uh, uh, is helpful. Uh, any greater than something he says is helpful. And it was, it was very Muskian, “We’re gonna have have robots cleansing our home and care of our youngsters by the tip of subsequent 12 months.
You already know, I imply, his timelines are all the time suspect, and others are an organization that’s in bother. Um. You wish to be you already know, very cautious about, you already know, what they’re saying. you already know, an organization that’s revising its ahead steering or dropping its ahead steering. I, I feel everyone knows these are purple flags.
Barry Ritholtz: I’ve been ready for absolutely self-driving vehicles now for 10 years and it’s all the time two years away.
So let me ask a, a barely. Offbeat query. early in my profession, there was this complete group of conspiracy theorists who believed that the BLS was cooking the info that you simply couldn’t belief BEA, that the entire authorities sources of data had been partisan and biased and fully unreliable.
That hasn’t been my expertise, however, however what’s your expertise like?
Michael Hiltzik: Properly, no, it hasn’t been my expertise. And, uh, look, the, you already know, the, the, the info, the statistics that come out of these, uh, businesses, uh, uh, uh, principally, you already know, these are are Time-Pattern prints primarily, they usually’re the benchmarks.
I feel we’ve got to depend on them as, as benchmarks. And we all know that, uh, BLS and BEA, I feel periodically revise their methodology, however they’re clear about it. And, uh, you already know, so long as we acknowledge that there’s a break in, um. Within the trendline, then, I feel we are able to take care of it safely.
However you already know, politicians are all the time type of attacking these sources when the, the, the numbers that they produce, you already know, are inimical to their, their partisan targets. And, you already know, we’ve got to get used to it. And we’re definitely seeing that now. I feel we’ll see it extra, you already know, we’re gonna see an assault on Fed knowledge simply intensifying.
Barry Ritholtz: What are the opposite pitfalls that buyers ought to pay attention to in relation to financial knowledge?
Michael Hiltzik: Properly, I feel buyers all the time must be delicate to the supply, uh, of the info they’re counting on. They must be, uh, cautious about type of second order or third order interpretations of information.
The info definitely on a macroeconomic or company degree is all the time accessible, however I sympathize with buyers who simply don’t have the time to, to return and look. I feel projections of market exercise. These are, you already know, by no means of nice worth. You already know, projections are all the time good and correct, proper as much as the purpose that they’re not so, you already know, and type of bigger, bigger points, you already know, after I, after I hear any individual speaking about, properly, uh, liquidity is gonna drive the market or one thing like that, I don’t actually put a lot belief for reliance in that.
Barry Ritholtz: To wrap up, buyers who wish to study extra from financial knowledge have to go to the unique sources. Prioritize. Be sure you are conscious of issues like inflation adjusting and seasonal changes. Be cautious about commerce organizations and suppose tanks. Not all of them are goal.
The identical is true about ahead steering from firms, public firms, about what they see sooner or later. And simply typically use frequent sense in relation to analyzing the infinite hearth hose of financial knowledge.
I’m Barry Ritholtz. You might be listening to On the Cash On Bloomberg.
Discover our complete music playlist for On the Cash on Spotify.
