For the better part of a century, economists have been wrangling over the most effective and accurate way to measure the U.S. economy’s size and growth. Spoiler alert: they haven’t found it yet.1

To be fair, the task before them is monumental – measuring an economy as diverse, massive, and ever-changing as the U.S. economy is incredibly challenging. And it’s only becoming harder as the ‘invisible hand’ of technology touches nearly every facet of social and business life, adding value in ways that simply cannot be measured.

A good way to understand the GDP problem is to think about the economy in the 1960’s versus the economy today. Back then, when a company bought a new machine, it was easily counted as an investment and contributed directly to measured GDP. Today, when a group of entrepreneurs at Amazon come up with a new business idea and form a team to pursue it, the new endeavor doesn’t count as anything. Or when a firm reorganizes to improve productivity, for instance, there is no change to GDP. Yet these changes and new business pursuits are happening all of the time.2

In the 1970s, the value of all of the machines and equipment and inventory accounted for something like 80% of a company’s valuation.3 For technology companies today, the dynamic is arguably just the opposite, where the majority of a company’s value lies with intangibles like intellectual property, users, technology patents, and human capital. Research and development, for instance, has only recently been added to GDP calculations.

Another flaw I see with GDP is how imports are treated. The calculation subtracts imports from exports and ultimately does not treat imports as domestic demand. That’s a problem, in my view! Imports are often a critical component of total output, as often times imports are simply components used to develop a final product – which may be sold domestically. In my view, it’s total trade that matters – not surpluses or deficits.

At the end of the day, these GDP flaws are not new or groundbreaking revelations. In fact, the government agencies in charge of the calculation have themselves acknowledged that official data has almost certainly understated the changes in real output and productivity over the last few decades. According to officials at Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) and the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), real GDP growth may have been underestimated by about -0.4% annually from 2000 – 2015.4 Do the math on that, and we’re talking trillions of dollars of unaccounted-for GDP.

Bottom Line for Investors

I’m not sure there is a great solution for calculating GDP in the digital age, and I do not envy the economists tasked with the challenge of doing so. And the point of my writing the column this week is not to thrash the GDP calculation – it’s to remind investors not to rely solely on GDP as the holy grail of economic health. In my view, it’s too flawed to have such influence over investor sentiment.

The better measure of the economy’s overall health, in my view, is not a backward-looking indicator like GDP, but rather a forward-looking indicator that may give us some insight into the future value of the economy. I’m talking, of course, about the stock market.


1 The Economist, April 30, 2016,

2 The Economist, April 30, 2016,

3 The Economist, April 30, 2016,

4 The Economist, April 30, 2016,


Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Inherent in any investment is the potential for loss.

Zacks Investment Management, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Zacks Investment Research. Zacks Investment Management is an independent Registered Investment Advisory firm and acts as an investment manager for individuals and institutions. Zacks Investment Research is a provider of earnings data and other financial data to institutions and to individuals.

This material is being provided for informational purposes only and nothing herein constitutes investment, legal, accounting or tax advice, or a recommendation to buy, sell or hold a security. Do not act or rely upon the information and advice given in this publication without seeking the services of competent and professional legal, tax, or accounting counsel. Publication and distribution of this article is not intended to create, and the information contained herein does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment or strategy is suitable for a particular investor. It should not be assumed that any investments in securities, companies, sectors or markets identified and described were or will be profitable. All information is current as of the date of herein and is subject to change without notice. Any views or opinions expressed may not reflect those of the firm as a whole.

Any projections, targets, or estimates in this report are forward looking statements and are based on the firm’s research, analysis, and assumptions. Due to rapidly changing market conditions and the complexity of investment decisions, supplemental information and other sources may be required to make informed investment decisions based on your individual investment objectives and suitability specifications. All expressions of opinions are subject to change without notice. Clients should seek financial advice regarding the appropriateness of investing in any security or investment strategy discussed in this presentation.

Certain economic and market information contained herein has been obtained from published sources prepared by other parties. Zacks Investment Management does not assume any responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of such information. Further, no third party has assumed responsibility for independently verifying the information contained herein and accordingly no such persons make any representations with respect to the accuracy, completeness or reasonableness of the information provided herein. Unless otherwise indicated, market analysis and conclusions are based upon opinions or assumptions that Zacks Investment Management considers to be reasonable. Any investment inherently involves a high degree of risk, beyond any specific risks discussed herein.