Figure 1: Macro Model Usage in Alternative Scenarios Over Time
Note: Alternative scenarios exclude baseline projections.
Models with fewer than 15 total uses across all years are grouped into
“Other.” “Unspecified” represents scenarios in which model attribution
was not documented in the source materials. “Board Model” includes MPS
(MIT-Penn-SSRC model) and the Multi-Country Model, the Federal Reserve’s
primary staff macroeconomic models before FRB/US. The top panel shows
annual counts of scenarios by model. The bottom panel shows the number
of scenarios presented per FOMC meeting. Letters within bar segments
identify models. Bars are stacked in the same order as the legend,
though not all models appear in every year.
Source: Authors’ calculations using public Federal Reserve
Greenbooks, Bluebooks, Tealbooks, and other publicly available FOMC
historical materials.
This three-panel figure shows data from 1968 to 2020. The top two panels display stacked bar charts showing counts of alternative scenarios by macro model, with the smaller left panel grouping early years into four periods and the larger right panel showing annual totals from 1996-2020. The bottom panel is a line chart showing scenarios per FOMC meeting across the full time period. The top left panel shows period totals: 1968-80 (9 scenarios), 1981-85 (21), 1986-90 (20), and 1991-95 (39). The top right panel shows annual totals from 1996-2020 ranging from 11 to 64, peaking at 64 in 2007. Each bar is stacked by model: Board Model (bright blue), FRB/US (dark blue), SIGMA (olive green), FRB/Global (dark red), EDO (dark orange), Other (purple), and Unspecified (gray). Letters within segments identify models. The earliest period (1968-80) uses primarily Board Model (MPS and the Multi-Country Model, the Federal Reserve’s staff models from that era). Activity remains sparse through the early 1990s, then increases substantially from 1996 onward. FRB/US (dark blue) dominates from the mid-1990s onward. SIGMA (olive green) appears in 2005 and grows to second-largest. FRB/Global (dark red) emerges in 2000. EDO (dark orange) appears primarily 2014-2017. Unspecified (gray) appears when model attribution was not documented. By 2020, annual totals reach 53 scenarios, with FRB/US and SIGMA accounting for the majority. The bottom panel shows a black line tracking scenarios per meeting from 1968 to 2020, ranging from 0 to 10. Values at early meetings (1968-1988) are sparse, with long gaps between scenarios. Activity becomes more regular from 1989 onward, with most meetings presenting 3-7 scenarios. The maximum of 10 scenarios occurs at three meetings (January 2003, February 2005, June 2007). Meetings with 7+ scenarios are most frequent during 2000-2010. Prior to 2020, meetings typically present 6-7 scenarios. Four meetings at the onset of the pandemic feature only 3 scenarios. Note: Alternative scenarios exclude baseline projections. Models with fewer than 15 total uses are grouped into “Other”. “Unspecified” represents scenarios in which model attribution was not documented in the source materials. “Board Model” includes MPS (MIT-Penn-SSRC model) and the Multi-Country Model, the Federal Reserve’s primary staff macroeconomic models before FRB/US. Bars are stacked in the same order as the legend, though not all models appear in every period/year.
| Year | FRB/US | SIGMA | FRB/Global | Board Model | EDO | Other | Unspecified | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1968 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 1971 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 1974 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 1975 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 1980 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| 1982 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 1983 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 8 |
| 1984 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 |
| 1985 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 5 |
| 1986 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 1988 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 1989 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 12 |
| 1990 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 4 |
| 1991 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 |
| 1992 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 8 |
| 1993 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 1994 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 12 |
| 1995 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 14 |
| 1996 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 |
| 1997 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 11 |
| 1998 | 18 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 23 |
| 1999 | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 30 |
| 2000 | 36 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 46 |
| 2001 | 16 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 28 | 53 |
| 2002 | 36 | 0 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 56 |
| 2003 | 35 | 0 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 50 |
| 2004 | 48 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 55 |
| 2005 | 42 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 57 |
| 2006 | 46 | 4 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 57 |
| 2007 | 47 | 4 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 64 |
| 2008 | 47 | 9 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 61 |
| 2009 | 48 | 9 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 60 |
| 2010 | 43 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 56 |
| 2011 | 37 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 48 |
| 2012 | 36 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 53 |
| 2013 | 36 | 16 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 52 |
| 2014 | 31 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 48 |
| 2015 | 20 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 3 | 0 | 49 |
| 2016 | 16 | 16 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 4 | 1 | 48 |
| 2017 | 27 | 16 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 53 |
| 2018 | 23 | 16 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 0 | 52 |
| 2019 | 24 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 14 | 0 | 51 |
| 2020 | 26 | 22 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 53 |
Figure 2: Evolution of Alternative Scenario Table Presentations
Note: The figure shows excerpts from alternative scenario
tables at four different time periods, illustrating changes in
presentation format, number of scenarios, and projection horizons over
nearly two and a half decades. Panel (a) March 1995 shows the complete
table. Panels (b) November 1999, (c) December 2006, and (d) September
2018 show clipped excerpts displaying only Real GDP projections as given
in larger tables. Panel (a) March 1995: The original Greenbook table
incorrectly labeled one variable as “CPI” when it should have read “CPI
excluding food and energy,” which was corrected in an attached erratum
to that Greenbook.
Source: Publicly available Federal Reserve Greenbooks and
Tealbooks.
This figure shows four panels displaying how alternative scenario tables evolved in Federal Reserve staff publications from 1995 to 2018. The panels are arranged in a 2x2 grid, with March 1995 and November 1999 in the top row, and December 2006 and September 2018 in the bottom row. Panel (a) March 1995 shows the complete table “Alternative Exchange Rate Simulations” with a baseline and two scenarios: “Stronger dollar” and “Weaker dollar.” The table presents three measures: Real GDP, Civilian unemployment rate, and CPI excluding food and energy (mislabeled as “CPI”). Projections cover 1994, 1995, and 1996. The subtitle indicates “Percent change, Q4 to Q4, unless otherwise noted”. The unemployment rate is indicated to be the “[a]verage for the fourth quarter.” Note: The original Greenbook table incorrectly labeled the third variable as “CPI” when it should have read “CPI excluding food and energy,” as indicated in an erratum following Greenbook publication. Panel (b) November 1999 shows “Alternative Federal Funds Rate and Stock Market Assumptions” with a baseline and six scenarios: “Faster productivity growth,” “Slower productivity growth,” “Flat funds rate,” “Tighter policy,” “15,000 Wilshire,” and “20 percent stock price decline.” The excerpt shows Real GDP with projections for 1999, 2000, and 2001. The subtitle indicates “Percent change, Q4 to Q4, except as noted.” The panel also lists “Civilian unemployment rate” at the bottom, indicating additional variables present in the full table. Panel (c) December 2006 shows “Alternative Scenarios” with a baseline and seven scenarios: “Faster labor force growth,” “Lower NAIRU” (Non-Accelerating Inflation Rate of Unemployment), “Greater wage acceleration,” “Stronger growth,” “Extended housing decline,” “Tighter financial conditions,” and “Market-based federal funds rate.” The excerpt shows Real GDP with projections for 2006H1, 2006H2, 2007H1, 2007H2, and 2008. The subtitle indicates “Percent change, annual rate, from end of preceding period except as noted.” The panel also lists “Unemployment rate” at the bottom, indicating additional variables present in the full table. Panel (d) September 2018 shows “Alternative Scenarios” with “Tealbook baseline and extension” plus seven scenarios: “Recession,” “Inflation fears,” “Faster wage growth, supply constraints,” “Faster wage growth, higher productivity,” “EME turbulence and stronger dollar,” “Higher trade barriers,” and “Higher trade barriers–see through.” The excerpt shows Real GDP with projections for 2018H2, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023-24. The subtitle indicates “Percent change, annual rate, from end of preceding period except as noted.” The panel also lists “Unemployment rate” at the bottom, indicating additional variables present in the full table.
March 1995
| Scenario | Measure | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | Real GDP | 4 | 2.1 | 2.3 |
| Baseline | Unemployment rate | 5.6 | 5.7 | 5.8 |
| Baseline | CPI excluding food and energy | 2.8 | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Stronger dollar | Real GDP | 4 | 2.4 | 3.1 |
| Stronger dollar | Unemployment rate | 5.6 | 5.8 | 6.2 |
| Stronger dollar | CPI excluding food and energy | 2.6 | 2.7 | 2.6 |
| Weaker dollar | Real GDP | 4 | 2.4 | 3.1 |
| Weaker dollar | Unemployment rate | 5.6 | 5.6 | 5.4 |
| Weaker dollar | CPI excluding food and energy | 2.6 | 3.7 | 3.9 |
November 1999
| Scenario | Measure | 1999 | 2000 | 2001 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | Real GDP | 3.8 | 3.5 | 3.5 |
| Faster productivity growth | Real GDP | 3.8 | 4.2 | 5.6 |
| Slower productivity growth | Real GDP | 3.8 | 2.8 | 1.6 |
| Tighter policy | Real GDP | 3.8 | 3.2 | 2.7 |
| 15,000 Wilshire | Real GDP | 3.8 | 3.7 | 4.1 |
| 20 percent stock price decline | Real GDP | 3.8 | 2.4 | 2.4 |
December 2006
| Scenario | Measure | 2006H1 | 2006H2 | 2007H1 | 2007H2 | 2008 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Greenbook baseline | Real GDP | 4.1 | 1.7 | 2 | 2.4 | 2.5 |
| Faster labor force growth | Real GDP | 4.1 | 1.7 | 2.2 | 2.8 | 2.9 |
| Lower NAIRU | Real GDP | 4.1 | 1.7 | 1.9 | 2.4 | 2.8 |
| Greater wage acceleration | Real GDP | 4.1 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 2.1 | 2.1 |
| Stronger growth | Real GDP | 4.1 | 2.1 | 2.9 | 3.1 | 2.9 |
| Extended housing decline | Real GDP | 4.1 | 1.7 | 1.6 | 1.8 | 2.3 |
| Tighter financial conditions | Real GDP | 4.1 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 1.7 | 1.9 |
| Market-based federal funds rate | Real GDP | 4.1 | 1.7 | 2 | 2.6 | 3.1 |
September 2018
| Scenario | Measure | 2018H2 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023-2024 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tealbook baseline and extension | Real GDP | 2.8 | 2.5 | 1.9 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Recession | Real GDP | 2.8 | 2.5 | 1.9 | 0.1 | -0.8 | 2 |
| Inflation fears | Real GDP | 2.8 | 1.5 | 1.3 | 1.2 | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| Faster wage growth, supply constraints | Real GDP | 2.9 | 2.5 | 1.7 | 1.3 | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| Faster wage growth, higher productivity | Real GDP | 3.5 | 4 | 1.8 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.9 |
| EME turbulence and stronger dollar | Real GDP | 2.8 | 2 | 1.4 | 1.4 | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| Higher trade barriers | Real GDP | 1.8 | -0.3 | 1.1 | 1.3 | 1.1 | 1 |
| Higher trade barriers--see through | Real GDP | 2.2 | 0.4 | 0.9 | 1 | 0.8 | 0.9 |
Figure 3: Assessment of Forecast Uncertainty and the Balance of Risks
Note: The figure contains two separate panels showing
qualitative assessments over time, including both staff assessments and
FOMC participant assessments, the latter given in the Summary of
Economic Projections (SEP). Within each panel, bars are shown for both
GDP and inflation, with the staff and participant (SEP) assessments
displayed separately. The top panel shows the forecast uncertainty
assessment: elevated uncertainty (red with crosshatch pattern), typical
uncertainty (blue with diagonal stripes), and diminished uncertainty
(green solid). The bottom panel shows the balance-of-risks assessment:
downside risks (red with crosshatch pattern), balanced risks (blue with
diagonal stripes), and upside risks (green solid). Each vertical bar
represents one FOMC meeting, with SEP participant assessments submitted
quarterly and carried forward to subsequent meeting dates. Staff
assessments began in 2008; FOMC participant assessments began with the
start of the SEP in the fourth quarter of 2007 and are submitted four
times per year. SEP values are carried forward to subsequent meeting
dates until the next SEP submission. The color and pattern combinations
differ between the two panels.
Source: Authors’ calculations using public Federal Reserve
Greenbooks, Tealbooks, and the Summary of Economic Projections.
Note: The figure contains two separate panels showing qualitative assessments over time, including both staff assessments and FOMC participant assessments, the latter given in the Summary of Economic Projections (SEP). Within each panel, bars are shown for both GDP and inflation, with the staff and participant (SEP) assessments displayed separately. The top panel shows the forecast uncertainty assessment: elevated uncertainty (red with crosshatch pattern), typical uncertainty (blue with diagonal stripes), and diminished uncertainty (green solid). The bottom panel shows the balance of risks assessment: downside risks (red with crosshatch pattern), balanced risks (blue with diagonal stripes), and upside risks (green solid). Each vertical bar represents one FOMC meeting, with SEP participant assessments submitted quarterly and carried forward to subsequent meeting dates. Staff assessments began in 2008; FOMC participant assessments began with the start of the SEP in the fourth quarter of 2007 and are submitted four times per year. “Tealbook” refers to the Greenbook (before June 2010) or the Tealbook (from June 2010 onward). SEP values are carried forward to subsequent meeting dates until the next SEP submission. The color and pattern combinations differ between the two panels.
| Date | Uncertainty: GDP: Staff | Uncertainty: GDP: SEP | Uncertainty: Inflation: Staff | Uncertainty: Inflation: SEP | Risk: GDP: Staff | Risk: GDP: SEP | Risk: Inflation: Staff | Risk: Inflation: SEP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007-10-31 | Elevated | Typical | Downside | Balanced | ||||
| 2008-01-30 | Elevated | Elevated | Typical | Typical | Downside | Downside | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2008-04-30 | Elevated | Elevated | Typical | Elevated | Downside | Downside | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2008-06-25 | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Downside | Downside | Upside | Upside |
| 2008-10-29 | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Downside | Downside | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2009-01-28 | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Downside | Downside | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2009-04-29 | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Downside | Downside | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2009-06-24 | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Downside | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2009-11-04 | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2010-01-27 | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2010-04-28 | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2010-06-23 | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Downside | Downside | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2010-11-03 | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Downside | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2011-01-26 | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2011-04-27 | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced | Upside |
| 2011-06-22 | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Downside | Downside | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2011-11-02 | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Downside | Downside | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2012-01-25 | Elevated | Elevated | Typical | Elevated | Downside | Downside | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2012-04-25 | Elevated | Elevated | Typical | Elevated | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2012-06-20 | Elevated | Elevated | Typical | Elevated | Downside | Downside | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2012-09-13 | Elevated | Elevated | Typical | Typical | Downside | Downside | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2012-12-12 | Elevated | Elevated | Typical | Typical | Downside | Downside | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2013-03-20 | Elevated | Elevated | Typical | Typical | Downside | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2013-05-01 | Typical | Typical | Downside | Balanced | ||||
| 2013-06-19 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Downside | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2013-07-31 | Elevated | Elevated | Downside | Downside | ||||
| 2013-09-18 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Downside | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2013-10-30 | Elevated | Elevated | Downside | Balanced | ||||
| 2013-12-18 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Downside | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2014-01-29 | Downside | Balanced | ||||||
| 2014-03-19 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Downside | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2014-04-30 | Typical | Typical | Downside | Balanced | ||||
| 2014-06-18 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Downside | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2014-07-30 | Typical | Typical | Downside | Balanced | ||||
| 2014-09-17 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Downside | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2014-10-29 | Typical | Typical | Downside | Downside | ||||
| 2014-12-17 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Downside | Balanced | Downside | Balanced |
| 2015-01-28 | Typical | Typical | Downside | Downside | ||||
| 2015-03-18 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Downside | Balanced | Downside | Balanced / Downside |
| 2015-04-29 | Typical | Typical | Downside | Downside | ||||
| 2015-06-17 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Downside | Balanced | Downside | Balanced |
| 2015-07-29 | Typical | Typical | Downside | Downside | ||||
| 2015-09-17 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Downside | Balanced | Downside | Downside |
| 2015-10-28 | Typical | Typical | Downside | Downside | ||||
| 2015-12-16 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Downside | Balanced | Downside | Balanced |
| 2016-01-27 | Typical | Typical | Downside | Downside | ||||
| 2016-03-16 | Typical | Typical | Elevated | Typical | Downside | Balanced | Downside | Downside |
| 2016-04-27 | Typical | Typical | Downside | Downside | ||||
| 2016-06-15 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Downside | Balanced | Downside | Balanced |
| 2016-07-27 | Typical | Elevated | Downside | Downside | ||||
| 2016-09-21 | Typical | Typical | Elevated | Typical | Downside | Balanced | Downside | Balanced |
| 2016-11-02 | Typical | Typical | Downside | Balanced | ||||
| 2016-12-14 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Downside | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2017-02-01 | Elevated | Typical | Downside | Balanced | ||||
| 2017-03-15 | Elevated | Typical | Typical | Typical | Downside | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2017-05-03 | Elevated | Typical | Downside | Balanced | ||||
| 2017-06-14 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2017-07-26 | Typical | Typical | Balanced | Balanced | ||||
| 2017-09-20 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2017-11-01 | Typical | Typical | Balanced | Balanced | ||||
| 2017-12-13 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2018-01-31 | Typical | Typical | Balanced | Balanced | ||||
| 2018-03-21 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2018-05-02 | Typical | Typical | Balanced | Balanced | ||||
| 2018-06-13 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2018-08-01 | Typical | Typical | Balanced | Balanced | ||||
| 2018-09-26 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2018-11-08 | Typical | Typical | Balanced | Balanced | ||||
| 2018-12-19 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2019-01-30 | Elevated | Typical | Balanced | Balanced | ||||
| 2019-03-20 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced | Balanced |
| 2019-05-01 | Typical | Typical | Balanced | Balanced | ||||
| 2019-06-19 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Downside | Downside | Downside | Downside |
| 2019-07-31 | Typical | Typical | Downside | Downside | ||||
| 2019-09-18 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Downside | Downside | Downside | Balanced |
| 2019-10-30 | Typical | Typical | Downside | Downside | ||||
| 2019-12-11 | Typical | Typical | Typical | Typical | Downside | Downside | Downside | Balanced |
| 2020-01-29 | Typical | Typical | Downside | Downside | ||||
| 2020-03-15 | Elevated | Elevated | Downside | Downside | ||||
| 2020-04-29 | Elevated | Elevated | Downside | Downside | ||||
| 2020-06-10 | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Downside | Downside | Downside | Downside |
| 2020-07-29 | Elevated | Downside | ||||||
| 2020-09-16 | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Downside | Downside | Downside | ||
| 2020-11-05 | Elevated | Downside | ||||||
| 2020-12-16 | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Elevated | Downside | Balanced | Balanced | Downside |
Figure 4: Alternative Scenarios Presented to the FOMC by Risk Category,
1968-2020
Note: Each horizontal band represents a scenario category.
Shading intensity indicates the number of scenarios in that category at
each FOMC meeting: solid shading represents 3 or more scenarios, medium
shading represents 2 scenarios, and faint shading represents 1 scenario.
No shading indicates zero scenarios in that category at the meeting.
Source: Authors’ calculations using public Federal Reserve
Greenbooks, Bluebooks, Tealbooks, and other publicly available FOMC
historical materials.
Alternative Scenarios Presented to the FOMC by Risk Category, 1968-2020 This chart displays six horizontal time series from 1968 to 2020, with each horizontal band representing a different scenario category. The categories shown from top to bottom are: Aggregate Demand, Aggregate Supply, External/Global Risks, Financial Markets and Stability, Fiscal and Regulatory, and Public Expectations. The x-axis shows years from 1970 to 2020 at five-year intervals. The y-axis labels identify the six categories but do not represent a quantitative scale. Within each horizontal band, shading indicates the number of scenarios in that category at each Federal Open Market Committee meeting. A legend at the bottom of the chart indicates that solid shading represents 3+ scenarios, medium shading represents 2 scenarios, and faint shading represents 1 scenario. When no shading appears, no scenarios in that category were presented at that meeting. The earliest scenarios appear in 1968 (External/Global Risks), with sporadic activity in Fiscal and Regulatory during the 1970s-1980s. Regular scenario presentation begins in 1989. All categories feature increased activity after 2000. The Aggregate Demand category (top band) shows some appearances of 1-2 scenarios in the mid-1990s, and increased activity after 2000, with frequent appearances of 1-2 scenarios and occasional periods with 3+ scenarios. The Aggregate Supply category (second band) shows increased activity from the mid-2000s onward, with multiple instances of 2 or 3+ scenarios, especially during 2008-2009 and continuing through 2020. The External/Global Risks category (third band) shows the earliest activity (1968), then sporadic activity through the 1980s. It becomes more consistent from 1989 onward, with most meetings showing 1-2 scenarios after 2000. The Financial Markets and Stability category (fourth band) shows frequently during the 1997-2001 period, then at a slightly lower frequency, appearing mostly as instances of 1-2 scenarios during the 2005-2010 and 2013-2020 periods. The Fiscal and Regulatory category (fifth band) shows historical scenarios in the 1970s-1980s, then reappears infrequently from 1989 onward, with a mix of 1 and 2 scenarios and increased frequency in later years. The Public Expectations category (bottom band) appears somewhat regularly from the late 1990s, with most instances showing 1 scenario when present but with 2 scenarios per meeting in the 2009-2010 post-crisis period. Source: Authors’ calculations using public Federal Reserve Greenbooks, Bluebooks, Tealbooks, and other publicly available FOMC historical materials..
Figure 5: Alternative Scenario Deviations from the Baseline by Category
Note: Values show deviations from the baseline in percentage
points. Each circle represents one alternative scenario. The six panels
correspond to different scenario categories. Black reference lines mark
zero deviation on both axes.
Source: Authors’ calculations using public Federal Reserve
Greenbooks and Tealbooks.
Alternative Scenario Deviations from the Baseline by Category This faceted scatter plot shows GDP and inflation deviations from baseline across six scenario categories arranged in two rows of three panels. The x-axis is labeled “Inflation” and y-axis is labeled “GDP”. Each hollow circle represents one scenario. Black lines mark zero (baseline) on both axes. Values show deviations from baseline in percentage points. Top row: Aggregate Demand (left) shows most points concentrated between -3 to 3 percentage points for GDP and –0.5 to +0.5 for inflation, moving together in the same direction. Aggregate Supply (center) displays points showing negative GDP paired with positive inflation (lower-right quadrant) and positive GDP with lower inflation (upper-left quadrant). External/Global Risks (right) shows notably wide spread with GDP from -6 to +1 and inflation from –1.5 to +1 percentage points, covering more range than most other panels. Bottom row: Financial Markets and Stability (left) concentrates points along the GDP axis in both positive and negative GDP territory (-3 to +3 percentage points) with inflation varying from –0.5 to +0.75 percentage points. Fiscal and Regulatory (center) shows few points with limited dispersion clustered near zero. Public Expectations (right) displays horizontal spread along the inflation axis from -1 to +1 percentage points while GDP varies from –1.5 to +1.75 percentage points. Most panels (with the exception of Aggregate Supply and Fiscal and Regulatory) cluster in the lower-left quadrant (negative GDP, negative or neutral inflation). Aggregate Supply shows points in upper-left and lower-right quadrants. Aggregate Demand, Financial Markets and Stability, and External/Global Risks show the most negative GDP deviations. External/Global Risks and Aggregate Demand show the widest overall spread. Source: Authors’ calculations using public Federal Reserve Greenbooks and Tealbooks.
Figure 6: Alternative Scenarios and Realized Values
Note: Values show deviations from the baseline in percentage
points. Small gray dots represent alternative scenarios from FOMC
meetings between January 2000 and March 2020; positions are slightly
jittered for visibility. Hollow orange diamonds represent realized
deviations from baseline forecasts. Black reference lines mark zero
deviation on both axes. Scenarios developed following the onset of COVID
feature a wider range of outcomes than would fit on this chart.
Source: Authors’ calculations are based on public Federal
Reserve Greenbooks and Tealbooks; realized values are obtained from
Bureau of Economic Analysis and Bureau of Labor Statistics via FRED.
This scatter plot shows inflation and GDP deviations from baseline at a one-year horizon for both alternative scenarios and realized outcomes from January 2000 through March 2020. Scenarios developed following the onset of COVID feature a wider range of outcomes than would fit on this chart. The x-axis is labeled “Inflation” and y-axis is labeled “GDP”. Values show deviations from baseline in percentage points. Black lines mark zero (baseline) on both axes. The plot displays two marker types. Small gray filled dots represent alternative scenarios, with each dot showing one scenario from one FOMC meeting; positions are slightly jittered for visibility. Hollow dark orange diamonds represent realized values, showing actual GDP and inflation deviations from baseline forecasts one year after each meeting. The gray scenario dots spread across all four quadrants but concentrate in the lower-left (negative inflation, negative GDP) and upper-left (negative inflation, positive GDP) quadrants. Scenarios span -1.4 to +1.6 percentage points for inflation and -5.9 to +3.3 percentage points for GDP. The distribution emphasizes downside GDP risks and deflationary scenarios. The dark orange realized values cluster more tightly, primarily within –0.5 to +1 percentage points for inflation and -4 to +2 percentage points for GDP. Most realized values fall within the scenario envelope, indicating scenarios successfully captured actual outcomes. Realized values show less extreme deviations than the most adverse scenarios, particularly for GDP. Both scenarios and realized outcomes display a generally positive relationship between inflation and GDP deviations: lower GDP tends to pair with lower inflation, and higher GDP tends to pair with higher inflation, although some realized values reflect a negative relationship. Note: Realized values are measured as of the fourth subsequent quarter for meetings in the first half of the quarter, and as of the fifth subsequent quarter for meetings in the second half of the quarter, to ensure comparable data maturity given the lag in economic data availability. Source: Authors’ calculations are based on public Federal Reserve Greenbooks and Tealbooks; realized values are obtained from Bureau of Economic Analysis and Bureau of Labor Statistics via FRED.
Figure 7: Realized Forecast Error of Most Accurate Scenario by Meeting
Note: Each point represents the most accurate alternative
scenario at a given FOMC meeting from 1997 onward, showing the root
squared forecast error relative to realized outcomes for GDP and
inflation. Colors and shapes indicate the scenario category. The gray
line shows the one-year moving average of forecast errors. Only meetings
with three or more alternative scenarios are included.
Source: Authors’ calculations are based on public Federal
Reserve Greenbooks and Tealbooks; realized values are obtained from
Bureau of Economic Analysis and Bureau of Labor Statistics via FRED.
This time series chart shows the forecast accuracy of the most accurate alternative scenario at each Federal Open Market Committee meeting from 1997 through 2020. The x-axis shows dates and the y-axis shows root squared error in percentage points. Only meetings with three or more alternative scenarios are included. Each point represents each meeting’s most accurate scenario, identified by comparing forecasted deviations to realized economic outcomes. Points use different shapes and colors to indicate the scenario category: teal circle-plus symbols for Baseline, dark blue squares for Aggregate Demand, olive green upward triangles for Aggregate Supply, dark red circles for External/Global Risks, dark orange downward triangles for Financial Markets and Stability, purple diamonds for Fiscal and Regulatory, and bright blue stars for Public Expectations. A solid gray line represents the 1-year moving average. The forecast errors range from near zero to approximately 3.5 percentage points, with most points falling between 0.5 and 2.5 percentage points. The one-year moving average fluctuates between roughly 0.25 and 2.5 percentage points for most of the period. Notable patterns include relatively low errors (under 1.5 percentage points) in the early 2000s, a spike to around 3 percentage points during 2008 corresponding to the financial crisis, and generally elevated errors (above 0.5 percentage points) from 2008 through 2012. Errors return to lower levels (around 0-0.5 percentage points) from 2013 onward, later spiking in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The most accurate scenarios vary by category across time, with no single category consistently outperforming others. Source: Authors’ calculations are based on public Federal Reserve Greenbooks and Tealbooks; realized values are obtained from Bureau of Economic Analysis and Bureau of Labor Statistics via FRED.