Accessible Version
Measuring Spending in the Survey of Consumer Finances, Accessible Data
Figure 1: SCF and CE components: food, rent, and new vehicles
SCF Aggregates ($ in trillions), 2013-2025
| Food | Rent | New Cars | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | 0.99 | 0.39 | 0.24 |
| 2016 | 0.98 | 0.46 | 0.27 |
| 2019 | 1.05 | 0.50 | 0.27 |
| 2022 | 1.34 | 0.62 | 0.37 |
| 2025 | 1.51 | 0.75 | 0.36 |
CEX Aggregates ($ in trillions), 2014-2024
| Food | Rent | New Cars | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 | 0.86 | 0.46 | 0.20 |
| 2015 | 0.90 | 0.49 | 0.25 |
| 2016 | 0.93 | 0.52 | 0.21 |
| 2017 | 1.00 | 0.54 | 0.25 |
| 2018 | 1.04 | 0.56 | 0.24 |
| 2019 | 1.08 | 0.59 | 0.26 |
| 2020 | 0.96 | 0.58 | 0.27 |
| 2021 | 1.11 | 0.63 | 0.30 |
| 2022 | 1.25 | 0.67 | 0.29 |
| 2023 | 1.34 | 0.72 | 0.39 |
| 2024 | 1.38 | 0.77 | 0.34 |
Note: This figure plots the nominal aggregate spending on food, rent, and new vehicles in the SCF (navy circles) and the CE (orange squares). The 2025 CE data were not yet available at time of this writing. Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2026), Table 1110 of Consumer Expenditure Public tables (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2026). Interpretation: The trends in spending on food, rent, and new vehicles, which are spending categories that the SCF has collected historically, are similar between the SCF and CE over time
Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2026), Table 1110 of Consumer Expenditure Public tables (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2026).
Figure 2. Relationship between income and spending in the SCF, CE, and PSID
This is a scatter plot displaying the relationship between log of annual income and log of non-housing expenditures. The x-axis shows log of annual income, ranging from approximately 9 to 14. The y-axis shows log of non-housing expenditures, ranging from approximately 9.5 to 12.2. Three data series are plotted, each representing a different survey: SCF (Survey of Consumer Finances, shown as dark blue circles), CE (Consumer Expenditure Survey, shown as orange squares), and PSID (Panel Study of Income Dynamics, shown as green triangles). Each data point includes error bars indicating confidence intervals.
All three series show a generally positive relationship between income and expenditures, with data points trending upward from left to right. The SCF series begins at approximately (9.1, 9.8) and extends to about (14, 12.2), with the rightmost point appearing as a notable outlier. The CE series starts at approximately (9.1, 10.3) and extends to about (13.0, 11.7). The PSID series begins at approximately (9.1, 9.9) and extends to about (13.2, 11.6). The three series follow similar upward trajectories but with some variation in their positioning. The CE series generally shows higher expenditure values at given income levels in the lower to middle income ranges, while the SCF and PSID series track more closely together. Data points are more densely clustered in the middle income range (approximately 10 to 12 on the x-axis).
Note: Weighted means and conventional 95 percent confidence intervals for log real expenditures across 25 bins of income for the SCF (navy circles), CE (orange squares), and PSID (green triangles). This figure adjusts dollar amounts to 2025 dollars using the current methods version of the consumer price index for all urban consumers (CPI-U-RS). Bins with implausibly low real annual incomes in the CE and PSID are not shown. Lowest 3 bins in CE (not shown) have combined average annual income of $1,000 and average annual expenditures of $37,900. Lowest bin of PSID (also not shown) has average income of $500 and average expenditures of $20,100. Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2026), 2024 CE Interview public-use microdata (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2026), 2023 PSID survey microdata (University of Michigan, 2026).
Interpretation: Spending rises with income more quickly in the SCF compared with the CE and PSID. The SCF is the only dataset that samples the highest income families (top right circle), which have much higher spending than families in either the CE or PSID.
Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2026), 2024 CE Interview public-use microdata (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2026), 2023 PSID survey microdata (University of Michigan, 2026).
Figure 3. Implied saving rates in the SCF, CE, and PSID
This is a scatter plot displaying the relationship between log of annual income and saving rate. The x-axis shows log of annual income, ranging from approximately 9 to 14. The y-axis shows saving rate, ranging from approximately -4 to 1. Three data series are plotted, each representing a different survey: SCF (Survey of Consumer Finances, shown as dark blue circles), CE (Consumer Expenditure Survey, shown as orange squares), and PSID (Panel Study of Income Dynamics, shown as green triangles). Each data point includes error bars indicating confidence intervals.
All three series show a generally positive relationship between income and saving rate, with data points trending upward from left to right. At lower income levels, all three series show negative saving rates. The PSID series begins at approximately (9.1, -3.0), the CE series starts at approximately (9.1, -3.7), and the SCF series begins at approximately (9.1, -1.0). As income increases, all three series show increasing saving rates that transition from negative to positive values. The crossover to positive saving rates occurs at approximately log income of 10.5 to 11.5 for all three series. The series continue to increase and converge as income rises, with values ranging between approximately 0.2 and 0.5 in the middle to upper income ranges. At the highest income levels shown, the SCF series extends to approximately (14, 0.6), the CE series reaches about (13, 0.4), and the PSID series extends to approximately (13.3, 0.6).
Note: Weighted means and conventional 95 percent confidence intervals for household-level saving rates across 25 bins of real income for the SCF (navy circles), CE (orange squares), and PSID (green triangles). This figure adjusts dollar amounts to 2025 dollars using the current methods version of the consumer price index for all urban consumers (CPI-U-RS). Bins with saving rates less than -500 percent in CE and PSID are not shown (lowest 3 bins in CE with average annual income of $1,000 and lowest bin in PSID with average income of $500). Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2026), 2024 CE Interview public-use microdata (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2026), 2023 PSID survey microdata (University of Michigan, 2026).
Interpretation: The implied saving rate in the SCF is comparable to the PSID at lower income levels and to the CE at higher income levels. Across all three surveys, about one-quarter of families have negative saving rates. Because of its sample design, the SCF can also capture the saving rate of the highest income families (top right circle) that the PSID and CE cannot.
Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2026), 2024 CE Interview public-use microdata (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2026), 2023 PSID survey microdata (University of Michigan, 2026).
Figure 4. Share of total spending by income and wealth deciles
Panel A. Share of total spending by decile, 2025 SCF
| Income decile | Wealth decile | |
|---|---|---|
| 0-10 | 0.03208058 | 0.053804723 |
| 10-20 | 0.040104074 | 0.04242455 |
| 20-30 | 0.051990571 | 0.064873862 |
| 30-40 | 0.060144878 | 0.068667614 |
| 40-50 | 0.071270226 | 0.073853718 |
| 50-60 | 0.08855636 | 0.077107704 |
| 60-70 | 0.107296443 | 0.090137104 |
| 70-80 | 0.122731276 | 0.109022137 |
| 80-90 | 0.142943554 | 0.141164724 |
| 90+ | 0.282882038 | 0.278943865 |
Panel B. Spending share by income decile, SCF and CE
| CEX 2024 | SCF 2025 | SCF 2025 AP only | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0-10 | 0.043034039 | 0.03208058 | 0.031927167 |
| 10-20 | 0.052418065 | 0.040104074 | 0.044085921 |
| 20-30 | 0.062681111 | 0.051990571 | 0.053791601 |
| 30-40 | 0.071462506 | 0.060144878 | 0.066397676 |
| 40-50 | 0.082679989 | 0.071270226 | 0.080093249 |
| 50-60 | 0.090452037 | 0.08855636 | 0.098271101 |
| 60-70 | 0.104646257 | 0.107296443 | 0.117644996 |
| 70-80 | 0.12553759 | 0.122731276 | 0.132886774 |
| 80-90 | 0.152782749 | 0.142943554 | 0.146579264 |
| 90+ | 0.214305656 | 0.282882038 | 0.228322252 |
Note: Panel A shows share of aggregate non-housing spending by SCF income decile and wealth decile. Panel B repeats the share of spending by SCF income decile and compares that with the share reported in the public CE survey tables, and to the share in the SCF using a sample that excludes the SCF wealthy oversample so that the no oversample SCF is comparable with the CE. The keys for each panel identify bars within each percentile range in each panel in order from left to right. Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2026) and CE Table 1110 (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2026).
Interpretation: Spending is concentrated among the highest income or wealth families. Compared with the CE, spending in the SCF is more focused in the highest income decile. Part of this difference between the CE and SCF is because the SCF oversamples wealthy families.
Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2026) and CE Table 1110 (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2026).
Figure 5. Budget shares and spending concentration, by income decile
Panel A. Budget share
| Shares Food at Home (+Deliv) | Shares Food Out | Shares Vacation | Shares New Cars | Shares Used Cars | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st Decile | 0.294259995 | 0.061390646 | 0.033848792 | 0.033429984 | 0.039861236 |
| 2nd Decile | 0.296334028 | 0.071704634 | 0.043595064 | 0.026310571 | 0.059975933 |
| 3rd Decile | 0.259989351 | 0.065881327 | 0.036418967 | 0.021442007 | 0.073923782 |
| 4th Decile | 0.232024893 | 0.078807928 | 0.053627715 | 0.054328121 | 0.056087047 |
| 5th Decile | 0.220515773 | 0.076313771 | 0.055240355 | 0.0760215 | 0.043009799 |
| 6th Decile | 0.17719093 | 0.066283382 | 0.076358877 | 0.054684449 | 0.075473733 |
| 7th Decile | 0.163650513 | 0.061904632 | 0.074278146 | 0.075376444 | 0.087674603 |
| 8th Decile | 0.166582644 | 0.069251053 | 0.088733695 | 0.082818255 | 0.061999355 |
| 9th Decile | 0.148419634 | 0.063279927 | 0.095898025 | 0.089556016 | 0.046353437 |
| 90-95 | 0.124424942 | 0.061071832 | 0.120179102 | 0.071643129 | 0.049189761 |
| 95-99 | 0.097542576 | 0.050585955 | 0.12767075 | 0.075816087 | 0.027772747 |
| 99+ | 0.053304523 | 0.038889464 | 0.135164589 | 0.094557658 | 0.014110689 |
| 10th Decile | 0.097306108 | 0.051667542 | 0.125932907 | 0.079878529 | 0.032609542 |
Panel B. Concentration of spending
| Conc Food at Home (+Deliv) | Conc Food Out | Conc Vacation | Conc New Cars | Conc Used Cars | Conc Total Spend | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st Decile | 0.056529462 | 0.031184068 | 0.012475878 | 0.015316286 | 0.023908967 | 0.03208058 |
| 2nd Decile | 0.071165815 | 0.045532774 | 0.020086836 | 0.015069326 | 0.044971086 | 0.040104076 |
| 3rd Decile | 0.080943421 | 0.054234456 | 0.021753941 | 0.015920809 | 0.07185825 | 0.051990572 |
| 4th Decile | 0.083566964 | 0.075051077 | 0.037057292 | 0.046665765 | 0.063070908 | 0.060144879 |
| 5th Decile | 0.09411291 | 0.086119086 | 0.045232475 | 0.077378385 | 0.057311717 | 0.071270227 |
| 6th Decile | 0.093964249 | 0.092942163 | 0.077689983 | 0.069160588 | 0.124963582 | 0.088556357 |
| 7th Decile | 0.105148748 | 0.105171204 | 0.091565549 | 0.115503743 | 0.175884262 | 0.107296444 |
| 8th Decile | 0.122429594 | 0.134576738 | 0.125120804 | 0.145163164 | 0.142269 | 0.122731276 |
| 9th Decile | 0.127044931 | 0.143225029 | 0.157492533 | 0.182824507 | 0.123883754 | 0.142943561 |
| 90-95 | 0.076342642 | 0.099080376 | 0.141472816 | 0.104835398 | 0.094232544 | 0.102460936 |
| 95-99 | 0.068707272 | 0.09421616 | 0.172537789 | 0.127363071 | 0.061079264 | 0.117627017 |
| 99+ | 0.02004399 | 0.038666874 | 0.097514093 | 0.084798954 | 0.016566655 | 0.062794082 |
| top decile | 0.165093904 | 0.231963411 | 0.411524698 | 0.316997424 | 0.171878463 | 0.282882035 |
Note: Panel A shows the share of annual income that is devoted to five different types of spending captured in the SCF, broken down by income decile. In this way, the top panel shows the share of family budgets devoted to each type of spending. Panel B shows the share of aggregate spending of the five different types of spending that each income decile is responsible for—a concentration of spending measure. The keys for each panel identify bars within each decile in each panel in order from left to right. Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2026).
Interpretation: The share of a family’s budget dedicated to food at home falls with income, while food away from home, new cars, and vacations rise with income. All types of spending are concentrated at the top of the income distribution, but spending on new cars and vacations are the most concentrated.
Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2026).
Figure 6. Income, wealth, and spending concentration
| income | wealth | Spending | Spending on vacations, food out, new vehicles | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0-10 | 0.006882 | 0.00 | 0.014953 | 0.01056 |
| 10-20 | 0.020707 | 0.00 | 0.027205 | 0.01696 |
| 20-30 | 0.030765 | 0.00 | 0.038295 | 0.02624 |
| 30-40 | 0.038697 | 0.01 | 0.048681 | 0.03136 |
| 40-50 | 0.052059 | 0.01 | 0.061528 | 0.04584 |
| 50-60 | 0.063777 | 0.02 | 0.07721 | 0.04944 |
| 60-70 | 0.079291 | 0.04 | 0.096027 | 0.06872 |
| 70-80 | 0.106886 | 0.07 | 0.122699 | 0.0944 |
| 80-90 | 0.139919 | 0.13 | 0.193058 | 0.1536 |
| 90+ | 0.461018 | 0.72 | 0.320344 | 0.504 |
| Memo: | ||||
| 90-95 | 0.102432 | 0.14 | 0.086584 | 0.1568 |
| 95-99 | 0.172737 | 0.27 | 0.146204 | 0.2216 |
| 99+ | 0.185848 | 0.32 | 0.087557 | 0.1256 |
Note: The deciles in this figure are defined based on each measure of well-being, and the height is the share of each measure. For example, the “90+” bars indicate that the wealthiest 10 percent hold about 75 percent of aggregate wealth, the top 10 percent by income receive about 46 percent of aggregate income, the top 10 percent of spenders account for 32 percent of all spending, and the top 10 percent of luxury good spenders (food out, vacations, travel, new vehicles) account for about 50 percent of luxury spending. The key identifies bars within each percentile range in order from left to right. Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2026).
Interpretation: While all four measures are concentrated, overall spending is the least concentrated, and wealth is the most. Spending on discretionary components is more concentrated than overall spending
Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2026).
Figure 7. Share reporting spending increased over past year, by income and wealth deciles
Share reporting spending increased, by income decile
| Income decile | Wealth decile | |
|---|---|---|
| 0-10 | 0.430576182 | 0.450312962 |
| 10-20 | 0.461276848 | 0.391470323 |
| 20-30 | 0.488064467 | 0.451698909 |
| 30-40 | 0.459908806 | 0.557620173 |
| 40-50 | 0.465208919 | 0.494860232 |
| 50-60 | 0.507830154 | 0.498039132 |
| 60-70 | 0.541054114 | 0.509740116 |
| 70-80 | 0.497281705 | 0.505614921 |
| 80-90 | 0.475934618 | 0.516337857 |
| 90+ | 0.458330786 | 0.410203395 |
Note: This figure plots the share of families that reported an increase in average monthly spending relative to one year ago as and grouping “substantial increase” and “small increase” together. An increase in the share as income or wealth deciles rise is consistent with a “k-shaped” economic recovery pattern. The key identifies bars within each percentile group in order from left to right. Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2026).
Interpretation: The share of families reporting higher spending over the last year does not appear to be related to its income or wealth decile. As such, the evidence in this figure is inconsistent with a K-shaped economy.
Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2026).
Figure 8. Share reporting that spending increased, decreased, remained the same over past year, by income decile
| A lot | Same | A little | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0-10 | Increase | 0.164388 | #N/A | 0.266188 |
| Same | #N/A | 0.283829 | #N/A | |
| Decrease | 0.143189 | #N/A | 0.142406 | |
| 10-20 | Increase | 0.209876 | #N/A | 0.251401 |
| Same | #N/A | 0.269857 | #N/A | |
| Decrease | 0.102381 | #N/A | 0.166485 | |
| 20-30 | Increase | 0.165559 | #N/A | 0.322506 |
| Same | #N/A | 0.280679 | #N/A | |
| Decrease | 0.105226 | #N/A | 0.12603 | |
| 30-40 | Increase | 0.157199 | #N/A | 0.302709 |
| Same | #N/A | 0.334262 | #N/A | |
| Decrease | 0.079336 | #N/A | 0.126494 | |
| 40-50 | Increase | 0.17862 | #N/A | 0.286589 |
| Same | #N/A | 0.300471 | #N/A | |
| Decrease | 0.056196 | #N/A | 0.178124 | |
| 50-60 | Increase | 0.21671 | #N/A | 0.29112 |
| Same | #N/A | 0.295383 | #N/A | |
| Decrease | 0.056161 | #N/A | 0.140626 | |
| 60-70 | Increase | 0.22928 | #N/A | 0.311774 |
| Same | #N/A | 0.298039 | #N/A | |
| Decrease | 0.042156 | #N/A | 0.118751 | |
| 70-80 | Increase | 0.150266 | #N/A | 0.347015 |
| Same | #N/A | 0.351229 | #N/A | |
| Decrease | 0.034297 | #N/A | 0.117193 | |
| 80-90 | Increase | 0.150946 | #N/A | 0.324988 |
| Same | #N/A | 0.391209 | #N/A | |
| Decrease | 0.026344 | #N/A | 0.106513 | |
| 90+ | Increase | 0.115893 | #N/A | 0.342438 |
| Same | #N/A | 0.412043 | #N/A | |
| Decrease | 0.030727 | #N/A | 0.098899 | |
Note: The dark areas in the increase (decrease) bars represent responses of “substantial” increase (decrease), and lighter areas represent “a little” increase (decrease) in spending. Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2026).
Interpretation: The share of families reporting a decrease in spending is concentrated among lower-income families. Higher-income families do not appear to be disproportionately increasing spending.
Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2026).
Figure 9. Share of families reporting changes in financial well-being, income, and spending over past year, by income decile
Panel A. Outcomes that decrease
| Financially worse off | Decrease in income | Decrease in spending | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0-10 | 0.323978604 | 0.287178898 | 0.285595113 |
| 10-20 | 0.35505274 | 0.241544147 | 0.268866217 |
| 20-30 | 0.329986193 | 0.249605904 | 0.231256935 |
| 30-40 | 0.318759745 | 0.190526741 | 0.205829576 |
| 40-50 | 0.244481538 | 0.248025755 | 0.23432016 |
| 50-60 | 0.260438952 | 0.233872982 | 0.196786735 |
| 60-70 | 0.244271142 | 0.186664242 | 0.160906388 |
| 70-80 | 0.187648133 | 0.12697132 | 0.151489612 |
| 80-90 | 0.194114902 | 0.170894143 | 0.132856734 |
| 90+ | 0.191951218 | 0.21377357 | 0.129626512 |
Panel B. Outcomes that increase
| Financially better off | Increase in income | Increase in spending | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0-10 | 0.23384226 | 0.334850861 | 0.430576182 |
| 10-20 | 0.235570323 | 0.385758798 | 0.461276848 |
| 20-30 | 0.251549602 | 0.343701152 | 0.488064467 |
| 30-40 | 0.259270543 | 0.307378925 | 0.459908806 |
| 40-50 | 0.253510562 | 0.337310862 | 0.465208919 |
| 50-60 | 0.213216405 | 0.407446924 | 0.507830154 |
| 60-70 | 0.243866833 | 0.437022644 | 0.541054114 |
| 70-80 | 0.302216783 | 0.478616095 | 0.497281705 |
| 80-90 | 0.280006751 | 0.426313845 | 0.475934618 |
| 90+ | 0.292627435 | 0.389462409 | 0.458330786 |
Note: This figure shows the share of families that report—relative to one year ago—being financially worse off, income decreasing, or a decrease in spending (panel A), and the share of families that report—relative to one year ago—being financially better off, income increasing, or an increase in spending (panel B). The keys for each panel identify bars within each decile in each panel in order from left to right. Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2026).
Interpretation: Lower-income families are more likely to report being financially worse off than a year ago (panel A). However, there does not appear to be a relationship between income and reporting being financially better off (panel B).
Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2026).