At The Cash: Tips on how to Handle Your Information & Knowledge Stream (August 13, 2025)
We dwell in an age of infinite information and spin. We depend on information and information releases, but it surely’s very easy to get tripped up by all of it. How ought to traders handle this firehose of numbers?
Full transcript under.
~~~
About this week’s visitor:
Michael Hiltzik covers enterprise for the Los Angeles Instances, is a two-time winner of the Gerald Loeb Award and has authored quite a few books on enterprise.
For more information, see:
~~~
Discover the entire earlier On the Cash episodes right here, and within the MiB feed on Apple Podcasts, YouTube, Spotify, and Bloomberg. And discover your entire musical playlist of all of the songs I’ve used on On the Cash on Spotify
TRANSCRIPT:
Notice: This was recorded in July 2025, previous to President Trump’s firing of BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer.
Barry Ritholtz: Wall Avenue depends on information: Financial releases, quarterly earnings efficiency comparisons, but it surely’s very easy to get tripped up by all of this math. How ought to traders handle this fireplace hose of numbers to assist us navigate this firehose of numbers?
Let’s herald pulled shock successful reporter, Michael Hiltzik. He covers enterprise for the Los Angeles Instances. He’s a two-time winner of the Gerald Loeb Award and has authored quite a few books on enterprise.
Michael, let’s simply begin with the fundamentals. How do you handle this infinite torrent of knowledge that comes our method?
Michael Hiltzik: That’s an excellent query. Principally, I attempt to ignore. Most of it, and I curate what I take advantage of and what I depend on.
And principally the best way I work is I begin with a subject that I wish to discover, a topic I wish to discover, after which I am going get your hands on the information, uh, that I would like. And that method, I’m not affected. I imply, there are some sources who, uh, you already know, come throughout my emails often that I’ll pay some consideration to.
However most of it, I, I don’t, and I do know the place to go more often than not for, for what I would like.
Barry Ritholtz: So let’s discuss that. If you happen to’re going to be writing about or researching a specific topic, what sources of financial information do you depend on, and what sources do you discover troublesome and finest ignored?
Michael Hiltzik: Effectively, I feel if I’m writing about, you already know, one thing that touches on macroeconomics or, uh, uh, home economics, I feel you may’t do higher than the BLS, the Bureau of Labor Statistics or the Bureau of Financial Evaluation. And up to now they haven’t been, uh, undermined. Possibly slightly bit, however not an excessive amount of by Trump. So their information is admittedly nonetheless dependable.
I additionally go to Fred, that’s the service from the St. Louis Fed that may scale back a variety of this, of the, of the information from BLS and BEA to, uh, graphical kind. And I’ve printed Fred Charts if there’s a month that passes with out it that’s uncommon.
Barry Ritholtz: So how do you, I depend on these. How do you assess the credibility and accuracy of any supply? Clearly, BLS and BEA and Fred have a really lengthy observe document, however what elements do you take into account whenever you’re taking a look at a supply of financial information?
Barry Ritholtz: Michael Hiltzik: I take a look at these sources, the best way I take a look at any sources, I search for consistency.
My father was a CPA and he used to say, “Verify the arithmetic.”
And I try this as a result of, uh, you already know, over time or many years that I’ve been writing about enterprise and finance, I search for outliers within the information. After I see one thing like that, it warrants additional checking and skepticism, truly. I search for developments to be constant. I search for the information to be coherent, uh, and cohesive and principally, you already know, I, if I can I examine one supply towards the opposite after which, attempt to see if doing that turns up some flaw or flaws within the. Within the print,
Barry Ritholtz: So that you talked about, examine the maths. Are there some other widespread information high quality points that you just encounter that traders ought to pay attention to?
Michael Hiltzik: There’s some constant. Legal guidelines or errors or errors that, that I discover usually in, uh, information experiences that, that use the, these information, uh, after which attempt to attract conclusions. I feel each in all probability really feel that information that’s produced with out an inflation deflator or with out an acknowledgement, significantly if it’s a pattern line one thing that I attempt to repair if I can, however, definitely that’s a context that’s, is constantly missing in experiences of the information. Um
After I’m studying a report of a, of an financial launch you already know, in, in nearly any newspaper. I’ll all the time attempt to return to the unique print, not depend on someone’s interpretation.
I’ve simply seen interpretations of knowledge, simply, uh. Be in every single place, significantly if we’re speaking about authorities applications that depend on monetary statistics like social safety, uh, Medicare, Obamacare, I simply, see so many issues in reporting on these applications. As a result of reporters don’t do the maths, uh, or they don’t do their homework or they, they arrive at these applications by means of a political perspective that principally permits them to disregard what’s actually taking place.
Barry Ritholtz: So that you talked about ensuring the information is inflation-adjusted. You and I’ve spoken about seasonality and, and the way typically that appears to journey up customers of knowledge. What different issues are inclined to come up whenever you see a, a generally used? Knowledge supply or information sequence.
Michael Hiltzik: Effectively, these are the massive, these are the massive ones. you already know, if I’m taking a look at a chart, if it’s a trendline chart and it doesn’t go to zero, so that you just don’t actually know, you may’t actually inform, you already know, if a change is important or if it’s, uh, an artifact of huge numbers or small numbers, I wish to be suspicious about that.
We see these flaws in reporting in every single place, the main newspapers, the wire companies, cable information, they’re principally winging it they usually’re utilizing, uh, information, they’re utilizing numbers that they get. They’re misinterpreting them, generally wilds me.
Barry Ritholtz: You, you talked about Fred, which I actually consider as a web-based software program device that depicts information sequence in a graph or a picture. Another software program or instruments that you just discover helpful?
Michael Hiltzik: Occasionally, at occasions we’ve used FactSet. We’ve used Y-charts. (I’m fairly certain that we’re not even subscribers to them anymore). However we use them, you already know, for uncooked information, and, graphical shows. I discover Yahoo Finance is nearly as good as, as the rest. you already know, after I’m utilizing these, these sources, I do wanna return and double examine, uh, the numbers simply to be sure that what, what I’m utilizing, uh, uh, are, are the figures that have been produced initially.
Barry Ritholtz: What about commerce organizations? I recall ceaselessly, particularly through the monetary disaster, being irritated by a variety of the spin from the Nationwide Affiliation of Realtors who’re the unique supply of a variety of housing gross sales information.
Michael Hiltzik: I feel you’re completely proper about that. I imply, if I would like to show to an business supply or a lobbying group or what have you ever, just like the NAM, the franchisees have one thing they usually all produce figures.
If I’m searching for a determine that they produce, I imply, if I wish to say, you already know, the Nationwide Affiliation of Producers says this, I’ll use it. However with the caveat that that. That’s who they’re. You possibly can’t all the time belief ’em. Uh, they’re nearly all the time speaking their ebook, so to talk, and we have now to maintain that in thoughts and it’s gotta be mirrored in what I write as nicely.
A few of these outfits are sources that, that I depend on to debunk, and it’s all the time an excellent column if I can say, “look, right here’s what these guys mentioned, and right here’s how they acquired the numbers fallacious, and right here’s why. They in all probability intentionally acquired the numbers fallacious.”
Barry Ritholtz: What about suppose tanks? They publish analytical information ceaselessly, however I’d hardly take into account them goal or disinterested events.
Michael Hiltzik: Yeah, I agree. Some are higher than others. I’ll quote with out an excessive amount of worry. The Peterson Institute of Worldwide Economics I discover constantly fairly good.
For commerce, uh, points, commerce figures, commerce commentary. there’s one other Peterson funded, uh, suppose tank, the, uh, fee for the, uh, accountable federal finances that mm-hmm. I, I imply, generally I, I discover them helpful. Generally their, uh, evaluation is so contaminated by, uh, ideology or partisanship that, um.
You, I, I’ve to stroll again what I see. I’ve to kind of what, you already know, recalculate what, what they’ve used.
Barry Ritholtz: So that you had a column not too long ago on Tesla. What about public firms? How can we consider issues like not simply earnings, however ahead steering and all types of generally it’s slightly little bit of glad discuss what’s coming sooner or later.
Michael Hiltzik: Effectively, I feel, you already know, if we’re, uh, you already know, to the extent they’re placing out disclosed financials, topic to SEC oversight, they’re, that’s what it’s. I can say that is what they’ve disclosed, that is what they’ve mentioned.
Ahead steering to me is principally, attempting to shoehorn a long-term perspective right into a snapshot. It’s very uncommon, uncommon that it’s, helpful in any respect. And it, after all, it additionally relies on who’s doing the ahead steering.
Once we had Elon Musk, uh, you already know, ship a you already know, monetary Q&A simply final evening, I’m unsure. I’m unsure that any of that, uh, uh, is helpful. Uh, any greater than something he says is helpful. And it was, it was very Muskian, “We’re gonna have have robots cleansing our home and care of our youngsters by the tip of subsequent 12 months.
You understand, I imply, his timelines are all the time suspect, and others are an organization that’s in hassle. Um. You wish to be you already know, very cautious about, you already know, what they’re saying. you already know, an organization that’s revising its ahead steering or dropping its ahead steering. I, I feel everyone knows these are crimson flags.
Barry Ritholtz: I’ve been ready for totally self-driving vehicles now for 10 years and it’s all the time two years away.
So let me ask a, a barely. Offbeat query. early in my profession, there was this complete group of conspiracy theorists who believed that the BLS was cooking the information that you just couldn’t belief BEA, that the entire authorities sources of data have been partisan and biased and utterly unreliable.
That hasn’t been my expertise, however, however what’s your expertise like?
Michael Hiltzik: Effectively, no, it hasn’t been my expertise. And, uh, look, the, you already know, the, the, the information, the statistics that come out of these, uh, companies, uh, uh, uh, principally, you already know, these are are Time-Pattern prints primarily, they usually’re the benchmarks.
I feel we have now to depend on them as, as benchmarks. And we all know that, uh, BLS and BEA, I feel periodically revise their methodology, however they’re clear about it. And, uh, you already know, so long as we acknowledge that there’s a break in, um. Within the trendline, then, I feel we will cope with it safely.
However you already know, politicians are all the time kind of attacking these sources when the, the, the numbers that they produce, you already know, are inimical to their, their partisan targets. And, you already know, we have now to get used to it. And we’re definitely seeing that now. I feel we’ll see it extra, you already know, we’re gonna see an assault on Fed information simply intensifying.
Barry Ritholtz: What are the opposite pitfalls that traders ought to pay attention to on the subject of financial information?
Michael Hiltzik: Effectively, I feel traders all the time must be delicate to the supply, uh, of the information they’re counting on. They must be, uh, cautious about kind of second order or third order interpretations of knowledge.
The info definitely on a macroeconomic or company degree is all the time accessible, however I sympathize with traders who simply don’t have the time to, to return and look. I feel projections of market exercise. These are, you already know, by no means of nice worth. You understand, projections are all the time good and correct, proper as much as the purpose that they’re not so, you already know, and kind of bigger, bigger points, you already know, after I, after I hear someone speaking about, nicely, uh, liquidity is gonna drive the market or one thing like that, I don’t actually put a lot belief for reliance in that.
Barry Ritholtz: To wrap up, traders who need to be taught extra from financial information have to go to the unique sources. Prioritize. Ensure you are conscious of issues like inflation adjusting and seasonal changes. Be cautious about commerce organizations and suppose tanks. Not all of them are goal.
The identical is true about ahead steering from firms, public firms, about what they see sooner or later. And simply usually use widespread sense on the subject of analyzing the infinite fireplace hose of financial information.
I’m Barry Ritholtz. You’re listening to On the Cash On Bloomberg.
Discover our complete music playlist for On the Cash on Spotify.
