A recession is a natural element of the business cycle that occurs when the economy declines for two consecutive quarters. A depression, on the other hand, is a prolonged decline in economic activity that lasts years rather than months. This makes recessions far more common: in the United States, there have been 33 recessions and only one depression since 1854.
What are the similarities and differences between a recession and a depression?
A recession is a long-term economic downturn that affects a large number of people. A depression is a longer-term, more severe slump. Since 1854, there have been 33 recessions. 1 Recessions have lasted an average of 11 months since 1945.
A recession or a depression: which is worse?
That is an excellent question. Unfortunately, there isn’t a standard answer, however there is a well-known joke about the difference between the two that economists like to tell. But we’ll return to that eventually.
Let’s start with a definition of recession. As previously stated, there are various widely accepted definitions of arecession. Journalists, for example, frequently define a recession as two consecutive quarters of real (inflation adjusted) gross domestic product losses (GDP).
Economists have different definitions. Economists use the National Bureau of Economic Research’s (NBER) monthly business cycle peaks and troughs to identify periods of expansion and recession. Starting with the December 1854 trough, the NBER website tracks the peaks and troughs in economic activity. A recession, according to the website, is defined as:
A recession is a widespread drop in economic activity that lasts more than a few months and is manifested in real GDP, real income, employment, industrial production, and wholesale-retail sales. A recession begins when the economy reaches its peak of activity and concludes when it hits its lowest point. The economy is expanding between the trough and the peak. The natural state of the economy is expansion; most recessions are temporary, and they have been uncommon in recent decades.
While there is no universally accepted definition for depression, it is generally said to as a more severe form of recession. Gregory Mankiw (Mankiw 2003) distinguishes between the two in his popular intermediate macroeconomics textbook:
Real GDP declines on a regular basis, the most striking example being in the early 1930s. If the period is moderate, it is referred to as a recession; if it is more severe, it is referred to as a depression.
As Mankiw pointed out, the Great Depression was possibly the most famous economic slump in US (and world) history, spanning at least through the 1930s and into the early 1940s, a period that actually contains two severe economic downturns. Using NBER business cycle dates, the Great Depression’s first slump began in August 1929 and lasted 43 months, until March 1933, significantly longer than any other contraction in the twentieth century. The economy then expanded for 21 months, from March 1933 to May 1937, before experiencing another dip, this time for 13 months, from May 1937 to June 1938.
Examining the annual growth rates of real GDP from 1930 to 2006 is a quick way to highlight the differences in the severity of economic contractions associated with recessions (in chained year 2000dollars). The economy’s annual growth or decrease is depicted in Chart 1. The gray bars show recessions identified by the National Bureau of Economic Research. The Great Depression of the 1930s saw the two most severe contractions in output (excluding the post-World War II adjustment from 1945 to 1947).
In a lecture at Washington & Lee University on March 2, 2004, then-Governor and current Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke contrasted the severity of the Great Depression’s initial slump with the most severe post-World War II recession of 1973-1975. The distinctions are striking:
Between 1929 and 1933, when the Depression was at its worst, real output in the United States plummeted by over 30%. According to retroactive research, the unemployment rate grew from roughly 3% to nearly 25% during this time period, and many of those fortunate enough to have a job were only able to work part-time. For example, between 1973 and 1975, in what was likely the most severe post-World War II U.S. recession, real output declined 3.4 percent and the unemployment rate soared from around 4% to around 9%. A steep deflationprices fell at a rate of about 10% per year in the early 1930sas well as a plunging stock market, widespread bank failures, and a spate of defaults and bankruptcies by businesses and households were all aspects of the 1929-33 fall. After Franklin D. Roosevelt’s inauguration in March 1933, the economy recovered, but unemployment remained in double digits for the rest of the decade, with full recovery coming only with the outbreak of World War II. Furthermore, as I will show later, the Depression was global in scale, affecting almost every country on the planet, not just the United States.
While it is clear from the preceding discussion that recessions and depressions are serious matters, some economists have suggested that there is another, more casual approach to describe the difference between a recession and a depression (recall that I promised a joke at the start of this answer):
Was it a depression or a recession in 2008?
- The Great Recession was a period of economic slump that lasted from 2007 to 2009, following the bursting of the housing bubble in the United States and the worldwide financial crisis.
- The Great Recession was the worst economic downturn in the United States since the 1930s’ Great Depression.
- Federal authorities unleashed unprecedented fiscal, monetary, and regulatory policy in reaction to the Great Recession, which some, but not all, credit with the ensuing recovery.
What are the parallels between the Great Depression and the Great Recession?
In many other ways, the Great Depression and the Great Recession in the United States were similar. During both, the US economy experienced a sharp drop in output after a long period of economic expansion highlighted by financial excesses.
Can a downturn become a depression?
Although the following definition is bleak and detailed, its dullness serves to emphasize the fact that the recession/depression question is not so easy to solve. The Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco attempted to come to a conclusion in 2007 – What is the difference between a recession and a depression? They agreed with the National Bureau of Economic Research’s definition of a recession:
A recession is defined as a major drop in economic activity across the economy that lasts more than a few months and is reflected in real GDP, real income, employment, industrial output, and wholesale-retail sales. A recession starts when the economy reaches its peak of activity and concludes when it hits its lowest point. The economy is expanding between the trough and the peak. The typical state of the economy is expansion; most recessions are brief and have been uncommon in recent decades.
And I turned to Gregory Mankiw to help me understand the difference between two types of economic contraction:
Real GDP has been falling for many years, the most striking example being the early 1930s. If the period is moderate, it is referred to as a recession; if it is more severe, it is referred to as a depression.
Despite the Federal Reserve’s best efforts, the simpler and more widely recognized definition of a recession is a drop in GDP for two consecutive quarters. However, there is little agreement when it comes to depressions; the two most prevalent descriptions are:
While the two meanings are not mutually exclusive, they do differ significantly. The distinction between a recession and a depression, in my opinion, is more complex. A recession is an unavoidable component of the business (or credit, as the case may be) cycle. A depression, on the other hand, entails the physical ruin of the economy: enterprises are irrevocably damaged, job possibilities are obliterated, and investment must be completely written off.
Examining prior Great Depressions is an alternative technique. Unfortunately, this strategy is also inconclusive. The Great Depression of the 1930s, for example, is widely thought to have lasted from 1929 to 1941, yet as the graph below shows, there were only two separate phases of decreased GDP growth between 1930 and 1933, and again between 1937 and 1938:
Despite my more practical definition above, I prefer the two-year-plus definition to the one based on a dramatic drop in GDP. Some aspects of the economy are harmed during a recession. Depression is becoming more common.
A rise in the unemployment rate is another element frequently linked to recessions and depressions. Historically, increased unemployment has preceded the commencement of recessions, and recessions have only been labeled depressions after they have lasted for a long time.
Another factor to consider is the absolute degree of inflation. In general, central banks respond to rising inflation by boosting short-term interest rates. This aids in the cooling of overheated economies. However, if they tighten too quickly, they risk triggering a recession by forcing the credit cycle into a rapid contraction. A depression, on the other hand, is frequently accompanied by an absolute drop in the price level, which is produced by an excessive amount of domestic or corporate debt.
Why does a depression definition matter to you as an investor? Because financial markets are anticipatory. If investors believe the recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic will be ‘V’-Shaped, even a 20% drop in GDP, combined with zero interest rates, price support for government bonds, and fiscal expansion on a scale not seen since FDR’s ‘New Deal,’ will result in a steeply rising stock market. If, on the other hand, it becomes evident that a tsunami of creative destruction is sweeping entire industries away, even the most sumptuous of New Deals may not be enough to stem the flood of stock liquidation as investors flee to the safety of cash.
So far, the official policy response has been enough to persuade investors that a slump will not occur. If you scratch the surface of the S&P 500, though, you’ll see a very different image. The graph below depicts the market’s performance through the end of May. Since then, the S&P 500 index has been driven by the same five technology stocks:
The most successful industry has been technology. One rationale for such high valuations is that the pandemic has hastened a wide range of technological advancements, resulting in the possibility of considerably faster profits. The net present value of future technology cash flows has been shifted forward by several years, according to some analysts. It’s no surprise, they say, that these equities have shattered new all-time highs and will continue to rise.
The broader stock market has been riding the coattails of tech since May (at the time of writing, the MSCI World Index is up 1.73 percent YTD). For the time being, hope wins out over fear, although vaccines are still months away from becoming publicly available. Meanwhile, autumn is approaching in the Northern Hemisphere, bringing with it fears of a second wave of diseases.
The scenario is even worse for emerging markets. In Foreign Affairs The Pandemic Depression, Carmen and Vincent Reinhart wrote:
Despite being labeled a “global financial crisis,” the 2008 downturn was mostly a banking crisis in 11 advanced economies. Emerging economies were remarkably immune to the volatility of the recent global crisis, thanks to double-digit growth in China, strong commodity prices, and lean balance sheets. The current economic downturn is unique. Because of the worldwide nature of this shockthe new coronavirus knows no national bordersa bigger percentage of the global society is in recession than at any point since the Great Depression. As a result, the recovery will be slower and less robust than the downturn. Finally, the fiscal and monetary policies implemented to combat the contraction will alleviate rather than erase economic losses, implying that the global economy will take a long time to recover to where it was at the beginning of 2020.
According to the World Bank, more than 60 million people will be forced into extreme poverty globally. Meanwhile, in wealthy countries, bankruptcies that have been postponed due to government involvement may experience personal epiphanies as fiscal generosity is abruptly withdrawn. The demise of broad swaths of sophisticated market economies has just been postponed unless the lockdown limitations are relaxed and people feel safe, both medically and financially, to venture out and spend.
We will have had two quarters of reduced growth by next month, indicating that we are already in a serious recession. Large swaths of the economy have been irreversibly transformed, increasing the likelihood of a slump. Millions of workers have been displaced, and retraining them will take far longer than a few months. It will be difficult for new and existing businesses to grow and hire new staff without the consumer demand from these former employees.
Fiscal spending will have to be done on a far larger scale and for much longer than previously anticipated. Since 1850, it has taken an average of eight years for per capita GDP to recover to pre-crisis levels in all major financial crises. The G20 response to the epidemic is estimated to have cost $11 trillion so far. The majority of these actions have been described as “temporary” or “short-term.” It is becoming increasingly evident that the disruption to employment, business, and economic sectors will be lengthy and, in many cases, permanent.
According to the IMF, the deficit-to-GDP ratio in advanced nations will grow from 3.3 percent in 2019 to 16.6 percent this year. The ratio is predicted to rise from 4.9 percent last year to 10.6 percent in 2020 for emerging nations, where budgetary expansion is more limited. While borrowing rates in established economies have stayed low, they have increased in emerging markets. The burden of fiscal stimulus will invariably fall most heavily on the advanced economies’ treasuries.
Conclusion
This isn’t the conclusion of the story. This isn’t even the start of the end. But it’s possible that this is the end of the beginning.
Individual economic needs are still important in Western (and other) aging civilizations. Governments in developed countries are fortunate in that they can borrow at lower rates than at any other period in history. While it goes against my Austrian, free-market principles, I have to admit that fiscal policy is the least painful weapon available to resist the pandemic’s economic catharsis. There will be a significant cost in terms of economics, but the alternative is a deadly mix of political fragmentation and polarization.
The goal of securing consistent real income for investors remains difficult. High-yielding private debt and asset-backed lending carries both default and liquidity risk. Financial repression is rampant across the credit spectrum, as shown in the chart below, which looks at some of the public market options:
High-income stocks may be a viable option, but no matter how ‘blue-chip’ the name, there is no certainty. Growth stocks, in general, are benefiting from the historically low-interest environment, but there will be a higher number of failures because the cost of speculative capital is also at an all-time low. Active management has been out of favor for at least a decade, but in the future, capital preservation will be more important than reaping large returns.
In June, I published a piece called A Brave New World for Value Investing, in which I concluded that:
Since late March, the stock and corporate bond markets have restored most of their stability. The repercussions of the global economic slowdown have been mitigated by central banks and governments. As the dust settles, the financial markets will adjust to a new environment, one in which value-based stock and bond market analysis will be an invaluable tool for navigating the waters.
The simultaneous supply and demand shocks, as well as their impact on global supply networks, have heightened the geopolitics of trade policy, which was already a source of conflict before the epidemic arrived. Supply networks will become shorter and more diverse. In the months and years ahead, robustness, not efficiency, will be the watchword. This shift in the global economy’s functioning will not come without a price. It will manifest itself in higher pricing or lower corporate profits. In this brave new world, value-based investment analysis will be the finest guidance.
An additional approach, a momentum overlay, would be added to the investment toolbox. Capital flows will be a formidable arbiter of investment return as fiscal and monetary policy continue to support economies as they transition to the new world order. By most conventional measures, technology companies appear to be overvalued, yet the trend is undeniable. After all, financial market liquidity flows like a tide, so don’t be like Cnut The Great and follow Brutus’ advice in the opening statement.
In a downturn, what should you buy?
During a recession, you might be tempted to sell all of your investments, but experts advise against doing so. When the rest of the economy is fragile, there are usually a few sectors that continue to grow and provide investors with consistent returns.
Consider investing in the healthcare, utilities, and consumer goods sectors if you wish to protect yourself in part with equities during a recession. Regardless of the health of the economy, people will continue to spend money on medical care, household items, electricity, and food. As a result, during busts, these stocks tend to fare well (and underperform during booms).
In a downturn, where should I place my money?
Federal bond funds, municipal bond funds, taxable corporate funds, money market funds, dividend funds, utilities mutual funds, large-cap funds, and hedge funds are among the options to examine.
What was the worst depression in the history of the United States?
The Great Depression, which lasted from 1929 to 1939, was the worst economic downturn in the history of the industrialized world. It all started after the October 1929 stock market crash, which plunged Wall Street into a frenzy and wiped out millions of investors.
Is there going to be a recession in 2021?
The US economy will have a recession, but not until 2022. More business cycles will result as a result of Federal Reserve policy, which many enterprises are unprepared for. The decline isn’t expected until 2022, but it might happen as soon as 2023.
What are the three most significant distinctions between the Great Depression and the Great Recession?
Although some superficial parallels have been drawn between the Great Recession and the Great Depression, there are significant differences between the two catastrophes. Actually, if the original shocks were the same magnitude in both circumstances, the recovery from the most recent one would be faster. In March 2009, economists were of the opinion that a slump was unlikely to materialize. On March 25, 2009, UCLA Anderson Forecast director Edward Leamer stated that no big predictions of a second Great Depression had been made at the time:
“We’ve scared people enough that they believe there’s a good chance of another Great Depression. That does not appear to be the case. Nothing resembling a Great Depression is being predicted by any reliable forecaster.”
The stock market had not fallen as much as it had in 1932 or 1982, the 10-year price-to-earnings ratio of stocks had not been as low as it had been in the 1930s or 1980s, and inflation-adjusted U.S. housing prices in March 2009 were higher than any time since 1890 (including the housing booms) (where as in 2008 and 2009 the Fed “has taken an ultraloose credit stance”).
Furthermore, the unemployment rate in 2008 and early 2009, as well as the rate at which it grew, was comparable to other post-World War II recessions, and was dwarfed by the Great Depression’s 25 percent unemployment rate peak. In a 2012 piece, syndicated columnist and former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Paul Craig Roberts argued that if all discouraged employees were included in U.S. unemployment figures, the actual unemployment rate would be 22%, equal to the Great Depression.