The Econoday consensus for Friday is +55,000.
Private Employers Add 38,000 in August
ADP reports Private Employers Add 38,000 in August
- Private employers posted their slowest pace of job creation since January. Manufacturing, professional services, and information shed jobs.
- Education and health care, construction, and leisure and hospitality all showed solid hiring.
- Dr. Nela Richardson, Chief Economist, ADP: “Pay can tell us a lot about today’s choppy hiring. To understand hiring patterns, you have to look deeply into where pay growth is accelerating, where it’s slowing, and for whom. Once-predictable wage growth has been overtaken by the complexities of demographic change, persistent inflation, and AI’s effects on jobs.”
ADP Change in Employment by Employer Size
ADP Change by Employer Size Detail
- 1-19: 20,000
- 20-49: -17,000
- 50-249: 2,000
- 250-499: -2,000
- 500+: 34,000
- Small: 3,000
- Medium: 0
- Large: 34,000
ADP vs BLS Private Payrolls
ADP offers little insight to BLS nonfarm payrolls on a month-over-month basis.
Over time, the series converge because both ADP and the BLS have significant revisions.
ADP vs Nonfarm Payrolls Change Year-Over-Year
In July 2026, ADP reported a year-over-year gain in private employment of 1.593 million.
The BLS reported 635,000. That’s a year-over year difference of 958,000.
But what numbers do you believe? My answer is neither of them.
QCEW Year-Over Year
The latest quarterly Census of Employment and wages (QCEW) give us a believable, but lagging set of numbers.
QCEW is through March of 2026. March 2025 was 154,686,000 and March 2026 was 154,772.
The year-over-year QCEW change is 86,000.
QCEW, ADP, BLS Year-Over-Year March 2026
- QCEW: 86,000
- ADP Private: 708,000
- BLS Private: 461,000
- BLS Nonfarm: 211,000
There is only one set of numbers above that you can have any faith in and that is the QCEW report.
ADP is miles high.
I will have a full QCEW report shortly.
Will the Fed Hike in September?
Unless the BLS report on Friday is miserable and the next CPI report is tame, the Fed is going to hike on September 16.
Related Posts
August 31, 2026: Political Realities May Force the Fed to Hike in September
It will be a stretch for the Fed to pause for many reasons, not just the CPI.
September 1, 2026: Global Bond Market Rout Continues, Fed’s Barr Ponders Decisive Action
Oil is up again along with bond market yields. Fed rate hike is more likely.
September 1, 2026: September Fed Rate Hike Odds Shift Dramatically Back Towards a Hike
It’s been a complete round trip in the last month.
meanwhile: Netherlands moves billions in gold to London in ‘crisis preparedness’ move
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgy51xlz39o
heard that on public radio today. remember when france came to NYC to take back their gold before 1971. the arabs did NOT. so they reacted by placing embargo on oil. payback for getting screwed by amerikan default on gold convertability with dollars.
I really don’t trust any of the governments data.
“It’s not inflation… it’s the boomers”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1KomlztSuA
Skip to 14:20 mark Chapter 8.
news flash. assholes in amerika for the past 4 to 10 generations including the pre boomers and post boomers keep voting for assholes to do asshole things. democracy works.
Wow, that’s enlightening. I never thought of that.
folks hate to admit democracy works. it means looking in the mirror. in amerika we see trump and schumer and biden and nancy………
Unless the BLS report on Friday is miserable and the next CPI report is tame, the Fed is going to hike on September 16.
That will add significantly to the head wind velocity for republicans in the midterms
The Fed is in a tough place. Inflation is up, but it is not being driven by an economy running hot. It is being driven by a wildly incompetent administration. Raising rates will slow an already slow economy, but won’t do a thing to fix inflation because its being driven by deficit spending, tariffs and an idiotic war.
Don’t know how you define “an economy running hot”?
But unemployment rate is 4.1% (before this Friday)?
And real GDP for Q3 is currently estimated at 4.8% growth (from GDPNow)?
Estimates could be off, of course, but in a historical context, these statistics portray a recent economy far from “slow”.
Facts Only
* Econoday consensus for Friday is +55,000.
* Private Employers added 38,000 jobs in August according to ADP.
* ADP reported private employers added 38,000 in August.
* Private employers posted their slowest pace of job creation since January.
* Manufacturing, professional services, and information shed jobs.
* Education and health care, construction, and leisure and hospitality showed solid hiring.
* Dr. Nela Richardson, Chief Economist, ADP, stated that understanding hiring requires looking at where pay growth is accelerating, slowing, and for whom, considering demographic change, inflation, and AI effects on jobs.
* ADP Change in Employment by Employer Size: 1-19 reported 20,000; 500+ reported 34,000.
* QCEW year-over-year change is 86,000 (through March 2026).
* QCEW Y-o-Y: 86,000; ADP Private: 708,000; BLS Private: 461,000; BLS Nonfarm: 211,000 (March 2026 figures).
Executive Summary
Private employers reported adding 38,000 jobs in August, marking their slowest pace since January. These additions were distributed across sectors, with job creation observed in manufacturing, professional services, and information shedding jobs, while education and healthcare, construction, and leisure and hospitality showed solid hiring. Chief Economist Dr. Nela Richardson noted that understanding hiring patterns requires examining where wage growth is accelerating, slowing, and for whom, citing complexities introduced by demographic change, inflation, and AI's effects on jobs.
Data comparisons across sources show divergence: the year-over-year changes between ADP and the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) nonfarm payrolls differ significantly. Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) data provides a lagging view through March 2026, showing an eight-month year-over-year change of 86,000. The QCEW figure for the private sector is substantially lower than the ADP estimate, which reported a gain of 708,000 compared to the BLS private payrolls of 461,000. The uncertainty in comparing these metrics leads to debate regarding economic momentum and Federal Reserve policy decisions, as future rate hikes depend on forthcoming reports.
Full Take
The juxtaposition of different employment metrics—ADP, BLS, and the lagged QCEW—highlights a systemic challenge in gauging current economic reality. The disparity between ADP's private payroll estimates and the official BLS data suggests that leading indicators may not align with established measures, feeding uncertainty into monetary policy decisions. The narrative surrounding inflation is framed not just by economic factors but also by perceived structural shifts, specifically referencing demographic changes and the impact of AI on job structures, which Dr. Richardson identifies as crucial for understanding wage dynamics.
The commentary pivots toward distrust in official data streams, suggesting that consensus derived from government reports may be obscured or misaligned with actual trends. The implication is that relying on singular official figures presents a limited view of economic complexity. Furthermore, the discussion regarding the Federal Reserve's stance acknowledges that policy actions are influenced by narratives beyond purely macroeconomic indicators, including political context and public sentiment about the pace of change. The focus shifts from mere statistical reporting to questioning the underlying assumptions used to generate those statistics and the resulting implications for societal outcomes.
Bridge questions: If official data consistently lag behind private estimates, how should policymakers calibrate their anticipation of economic shifts? What mechanisms exist to reconcile differing methodologies across employment statistics, and what are the long-term consequences of prioritizing one set of numbers over others? What assumptions about demographic change and technological acceleration should be explicitly integrated into the framework for measuring future labor market health?