FOR RELEASE: Tuesday, March 7th, 2023
Contact:
Zac Rogers, Ph.D.
Logistics Manager’s Index Analyst
Assistant Professor, Supply Chain Management
Department of Management
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, Colorado
(970) 491-0890
E-mail: Zac.Rogers@colostate.edu
http://www.logisticsindex.org
Twitter: @LogisticsIndex
Contact:
Zac Rogers, Ph.D.
Logistics Manager’s Index Analyst
Assistant Professor, Supply Chain Management
Department of Management
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, Colorado
(970) 491-0890
E-mail: Zac.Rogers@colostate.edu
http://www.logisticsindex.org
Twitter: @LogisticsIndex
February 2023 Logistics Manager’s Index Report®
LMI® at 57.6
Growth is INCREASING AT AN INCREASING RATE for: Warehousing Capacity, Warehousing Utilization, and Transportation Capacity
Growth is INCREASING AT AN DECREASING RATE for: Inventory Levels, Inventory Costs, Warehousing Prices, Transportation Utilization, and Transportation Prices
LMI® at 57.6
Growth is INCREASING AT AN INCREASING RATE for: Warehousing Capacity, Warehousing Utilization, and Transportation Capacity
Growth is INCREASING AT AN DECREASING RATE for: Inventory Levels, Inventory Costs, Warehousing Prices, Transportation Utilization, and Transportation Prices
(Fort Collins, Colorado) — The Logistics Managers’ Index reads in at 54.7 in February, down (-2.9) from January’s reading of 57.6. While the overall index continues to expand, this breaks the streak of two consecutive readings of increased growth. The biggest movers in this month’s index are Transportation Costs, which are back down (-5.9) and are now contracting at the fastest rate we have measured in the 6.5-year history of the index. There is some evidence that January’s slower rate of contraction was due to weather issues pushing shipments meant for December back a month. February is generally a low point seasonally due to the consumer spending hangover from the holidays in the U.S. combined with slowness in imports due to Chinese New Year, and that was certainly reflected this year. There is optimism from some corners that traffic will pick back up sometime in Q2 as retailers begin to rebuild inventories ahead of back-to-school and holiday shopping, but as of this moment that has yet to materialize.
What has finally materialized is a loosening in Warehousing Capacity. After 2.5 years of contraction, Warehousing Capacity crossed back into expansion (+10.2) in February, reading in at 56.6. A moderate increase in available storage capacity will be a welcome sign to consumers and firms throughout the supply chain, as it will likely lead to lower costs (which could impact supply-driven inflation) and prevent congestion from taking place at other points throughout the supply chain. That being said, with Warehousing Prices (73.3) and Inventory Costs (70.9) still expanding at accelerated rates, it will take a significant and prolonged expansion of Warehousing Capacity to push the market back towards normal cost levels.
Researchers at Arizona State University, Colorado State University, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rutgers University, and the University of Nevada, Reno, and in conjunction with the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP) issued this report today.
Results Overview
The LMI score is a combination of eight unique components that make up the logistics industry, including: inventory levels and costs, warehousing capacity, utilization, and prices, and transportation capacity, utilization, and prices. The LMI is calculated using a diffusion index, in which any reading above 50.0 indicates that logistics is expanding; a reading below 50.0 is indicative of a shrinking logistics industry. The latest results of the LMI summarize the responses of supply chain professionals collected in February 2023.
The economic clarity that many have been hoping for did not come in February, as this month we saw a continuation of the mixed signals that have been prevalent for the last several months. Inflation is often high and January, and this year was no exception with rates up 6.4% from a year earlier. This is down from the high levels of inflation observed last summer, but the high prices of headline items like food and fuel remained high, leading to the assumption there will be further action from the Fed. The recent inversion of the yield curve marks another factor in favor of a continued regime of hawkish interest rates[1]. Analysts continue to call the impact of these rate hikes into question. According to the San Francisco Fed, a significantly higher amount of current inflation is due more to supply factors than to demand factors[2]. Even is demand can be curtailed supply shortages of products like eggs or fuel, or the high costs of storing goods due to warehousing shortages will still put pressure on prices. The Fed continues to loom large however, as the recent yield curve inversion may be more due to changes in anticipation of Fed activities than for analyst expectations of an actual recession[3].
Despite this, consumers are still spending, just in different ways than they were during the pandemic. This is most reflected in the movement away from goods and back towards services. U.S. consumers are now dedicating 33% of their spending towards goods, similar to pre-pandemic levels of 30% In terms of physical goods, U.S. consumers continue to spend on necessities like groceries and energy, turning away from discretionary spending on apparel and electronics[4]. This is backed up by ISM’s recent reading on the services PMI, which read in at 59.5 in February – up 2.8-points from January and above analyst expectations. It was not all bad for goods either though, with new orders up to 61.9 from January’s 57.9[5]. Increased orders align with increased production coming out of the world’s factory. The Chinese manufacturing PMI was up to 52.6. This is the highest rate of expansion since April of 2012[6]. This suggests that the Chinese economy is coming back online more quickly than anticipated, which may provide some relief from the high rates of supply inflation we have observed over the past year.
When these goods arrive from China, firms may find that many of the supply chain bottlenecks that existed over the past several years have eased. The big change in the LMI this month is the shift in Warehousing Capacity, which reads in at 56.6 (+10.2) and has finally moved into expansionary territory after 30 consecutive months of contraction. This is a continuation of what we observed in the second half of January’s numbers, when Warehousing Capacity swung to positive territory. We questioned whether or not this would be a preview of things to come in February and that has clearly been the case. Increased Warehousing Capacity will be a welcome sign for many firms as the lack of capacity has been a source of significant costs throughout the supply chain. Warehousing Prices are growing at a rate of 73.3 (-1.7) and are likely to continue to stay somewhat elevated even as more capacity comes online due to the long-term nature of warehousing leases. Another factor in favor some price growth is the continued growth of Warehousing Utilization, which is up (+3.2) to an elevated growth rate of 70.3 in February.
Despite the loosening in Warehousing Capacity, many firms are still moving forward with network expansions, specifically by investing in facilities that will be able to provide better service through proximity to customers, automation, or both. For instance, Amazon continues to reorient their warehousing network for speed with their ultra-fast same day delivery sites. These smaller warehouses are located in large metro areas and are much smaller than their traditional FC’s – only carrying their most popular 100,000 SKUs. Amazon has built 45 of these smaller FC’s since 2019 and plans to construct another 150 over the next few years[7]. Sam’s Club is adding five “high automation” fulfillment centers in 2023, with 14-16 more to come over the next five years. This is increasingly important for the chain as their ecommerce sales are 21% year-over-year[8]. Target is also investing $100 million into it’s next-day delivery capabilities, with six new sortation centers set to come online by the end of 2026. The added sortation centers will allow them to shift goods more quickly to their network of approximately 2,000 stores which they use to fill orders[9]. While 20% of warehouses used some form of automation in 2022, it is unlikely that many firms will pursue a fully “dark warehouse” that relies solely on automation[10] – exacerbating the effects of the ongoing labor crunch.
Transportation Prices are down (-5.9) to 36.1, which is the lowest reading for this metric in the 6.5 year of the LMI. After Transportation Prices increased in January, we had postulated that this could be a sign of recovery in the transportation market. It seems now that was not necessarily the case. While the freight recovery has not yet begun, it does seem that we may have hit, or at least gotten close to, the bottom of the market. Old Dominion reported a “stabilization” of their LTL business in a recent investor call. While February was down for firms like OD and Saia, the severity of the month-over-month drop from January is likely more due to December loads that poor weather forced into January than due to a huge drop in February demand. Despite the slowness seen so far in 2023, many carriers still believe that orders will pick up again soon as retailers begin building their inventories back up[11],[12]. Transportation Utilization is essentially flat, reading in at 51.9 (-5.1). We are unlikely to see prices come back up in a significant way as long as Transportation Capacity remains elevated. Transportation Capacity is up slightly (+0.1) to 70.1, marking five of six months with a reading over 70.0. Despite the current excess capacity, Class 8 truck orders were up 10% year-over-year in February, with manufacturers receiving orders for 22,800 trucks. Net orders for the last 12 months have been approximately 303,000 trucks, suggesting that carriers remain optimistic about volumes picking back up sometime in 2023[13]. There is no argument that freight volume is anything but slow, but freight is often down at this time of the year, and there is some anecdotal evidence that freight volume is following normal seasonality and is beginning to ramp back up in late February and early March and the Chinese New Year lull ends and U.S. produce begins to move[14]. It should be noted that a potential increase may not be seen throughout the supply chain. As will be discussed in-depth below, Downstream respondents are much more bullish on future growth across out transportation metrics than their Upstream counterparts. If those future predictions were to bear out, we may find ourselves in a situation similar to 2019, where the transportation market is down due to weakness in B2B freight, but the overall economy and some elements of the logistics industry are buoyed by strong consumer spending.
For volumes to truly increase, international commerce would have to pick back up after the recent period of relative slowness. There is some optimism this will happen as Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC) is the world’s largest freight line and expects to see volumes increase later in 2023. They specifically cite the resurgence of Chinese manufacturing as well as strong U.S. employment and energy exports as indicators that freight will pick back up this Summer[15]. Inventory Level growth is relatively unchanged (-0.1), reading in at 62.4 and lending further credence to the idea that firms are continuing to rebuild inventories after running them down through much of the back half of 2022. This is reflected for Inventory Costs which read in at 70.9, which is down (-3.3) but still indicates a significant rate of expansion.
It will be easier for firms to build inventories back up if they have space to store them and uncongested supply chains to move them through. Fortunately, there is some evidence that Supply chain constraints continue to loosen. Firms like Hasbro, Under Armour, and O’Reilly Auto all cited cheaper and more readily available transportation and port operations[16]. With the U.S., Europe, and China all reporting stronger than expected business activity in the first two months of 2023[17] (Hannon et al., 2023), having “room to grow” in the supply chain will be very important.
This brings us back to the importance of Warehousing Capacity expanding for the first time in 2.5 years. As the current and future readings for price indicate, a moderate expansion in capacity will not tank the warehousing market. Rather it will make it more sustainable over the long run. The chart below shows changes in our Warehousing Capacity metric throughout the lifetime of the index. Warehousing Capacity regularly expanded from 2016 to early 2020, contracting only seven of 29 readings pre-pandemic at moderate rates which all fell in the 50’s. A moderate rate of expansion is normal for this industry. Warehousing cannot be expanded quickly like trucks; there are limits on resources including money, materials, and most finitely, the space to build them (particularly when everyone wants the same urban infill areas). A lack of Warehousing Capacity has ripple effects throughout supply chains. When warehouses are full and there’s nowhere for inventory to go, it creates a bottleneck that can lead to congestion for over the road and intermodal carriers, as well as at the ports. As mentioned above, a lack of supply has been the primary driver behind inflation over the last year; this includes the lack of the necessary supply of warehousing. As warehousing becomes more available, supply chains will become more efficient, and the costs of holding and moving goods will decrease – something that should have a significant impact on inflation.
What has finally materialized is a loosening in Warehousing Capacity. After 2.5 years of contraction, Warehousing Capacity crossed back into expansion (+10.2) in February, reading in at 56.6. A moderate increase in available storage capacity will be a welcome sign to consumers and firms throughout the supply chain, as it will likely lead to lower costs (which could impact supply-driven inflation) and prevent congestion from taking place at other points throughout the supply chain. That being said, with Warehousing Prices (73.3) and Inventory Costs (70.9) still expanding at accelerated rates, it will take a significant and prolonged expansion of Warehousing Capacity to push the market back towards normal cost levels.
Researchers at Arizona State University, Colorado State University, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rutgers University, and the University of Nevada, Reno, and in conjunction with the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP) issued this report today.
Results Overview
The LMI score is a combination of eight unique components that make up the logistics industry, including: inventory levels and costs, warehousing capacity, utilization, and prices, and transportation capacity, utilization, and prices. The LMI is calculated using a diffusion index, in which any reading above 50.0 indicates that logistics is expanding; a reading below 50.0 is indicative of a shrinking logistics industry. The latest results of the LMI summarize the responses of supply chain professionals collected in February 2023.
The economic clarity that many have been hoping for did not come in February, as this month we saw a continuation of the mixed signals that have been prevalent for the last several months. Inflation is often high and January, and this year was no exception with rates up 6.4% from a year earlier. This is down from the high levels of inflation observed last summer, but the high prices of headline items like food and fuel remained high, leading to the assumption there will be further action from the Fed. The recent inversion of the yield curve marks another factor in favor of a continued regime of hawkish interest rates[1]. Analysts continue to call the impact of these rate hikes into question. According to the San Francisco Fed, a significantly higher amount of current inflation is due more to supply factors than to demand factors[2]. Even is demand can be curtailed supply shortages of products like eggs or fuel, or the high costs of storing goods due to warehousing shortages will still put pressure on prices. The Fed continues to loom large however, as the recent yield curve inversion may be more due to changes in anticipation of Fed activities than for analyst expectations of an actual recession[3].
Despite this, consumers are still spending, just in different ways than they were during the pandemic. This is most reflected in the movement away from goods and back towards services. U.S. consumers are now dedicating 33% of their spending towards goods, similar to pre-pandemic levels of 30% In terms of physical goods, U.S. consumers continue to spend on necessities like groceries and energy, turning away from discretionary spending on apparel and electronics[4]. This is backed up by ISM’s recent reading on the services PMI, which read in at 59.5 in February – up 2.8-points from January and above analyst expectations. It was not all bad for goods either though, with new orders up to 61.9 from January’s 57.9[5]. Increased orders align with increased production coming out of the world’s factory. The Chinese manufacturing PMI was up to 52.6. This is the highest rate of expansion since April of 2012[6]. This suggests that the Chinese economy is coming back online more quickly than anticipated, which may provide some relief from the high rates of supply inflation we have observed over the past year.
When these goods arrive from China, firms may find that many of the supply chain bottlenecks that existed over the past several years have eased. The big change in the LMI this month is the shift in Warehousing Capacity, which reads in at 56.6 (+10.2) and has finally moved into expansionary territory after 30 consecutive months of contraction. This is a continuation of what we observed in the second half of January’s numbers, when Warehousing Capacity swung to positive territory. We questioned whether or not this would be a preview of things to come in February and that has clearly been the case. Increased Warehousing Capacity will be a welcome sign for many firms as the lack of capacity has been a source of significant costs throughout the supply chain. Warehousing Prices are growing at a rate of 73.3 (-1.7) and are likely to continue to stay somewhat elevated even as more capacity comes online due to the long-term nature of warehousing leases. Another factor in favor some price growth is the continued growth of Warehousing Utilization, which is up (+3.2) to an elevated growth rate of 70.3 in February.
Despite the loosening in Warehousing Capacity, many firms are still moving forward with network expansions, specifically by investing in facilities that will be able to provide better service through proximity to customers, automation, or both. For instance, Amazon continues to reorient their warehousing network for speed with their ultra-fast same day delivery sites. These smaller warehouses are located in large metro areas and are much smaller than their traditional FC’s – only carrying their most popular 100,000 SKUs. Amazon has built 45 of these smaller FC’s since 2019 and plans to construct another 150 over the next few years[7]. Sam’s Club is adding five “high automation” fulfillment centers in 2023, with 14-16 more to come over the next five years. This is increasingly important for the chain as their ecommerce sales are 21% year-over-year[8]. Target is also investing $100 million into it’s next-day delivery capabilities, with six new sortation centers set to come online by the end of 2026. The added sortation centers will allow them to shift goods more quickly to their network of approximately 2,000 stores which they use to fill orders[9]. While 20% of warehouses used some form of automation in 2022, it is unlikely that many firms will pursue a fully “dark warehouse” that relies solely on automation[10] – exacerbating the effects of the ongoing labor crunch.
Transportation Prices are down (-5.9) to 36.1, which is the lowest reading for this metric in the 6.5 year of the LMI. After Transportation Prices increased in January, we had postulated that this could be a sign of recovery in the transportation market. It seems now that was not necessarily the case. While the freight recovery has not yet begun, it does seem that we may have hit, or at least gotten close to, the bottom of the market. Old Dominion reported a “stabilization” of their LTL business in a recent investor call. While February was down for firms like OD and Saia, the severity of the month-over-month drop from January is likely more due to December loads that poor weather forced into January than due to a huge drop in February demand. Despite the slowness seen so far in 2023, many carriers still believe that orders will pick up again soon as retailers begin building their inventories back up[11],[12]. Transportation Utilization is essentially flat, reading in at 51.9 (-5.1). We are unlikely to see prices come back up in a significant way as long as Transportation Capacity remains elevated. Transportation Capacity is up slightly (+0.1) to 70.1, marking five of six months with a reading over 70.0. Despite the current excess capacity, Class 8 truck orders were up 10% year-over-year in February, with manufacturers receiving orders for 22,800 trucks. Net orders for the last 12 months have been approximately 303,000 trucks, suggesting that carriers remain optimistic about volumes picking back up sometime in 2023[13]. There is no argument that freight volume is anything but slow, but freight is often down at this time of the year, and there is some anecdotal evidence that freight volume is following normal seasonality and is beginning to ramp back up in late February and early March and the Chinese New Year lull ends and U.S. produce begins to move[14]. It should be noted that a potential increase may not be seen throughout the supply chain. As will be discussed in-depth below, Downstream respondents are much more bullish on future growth across out transportation metrics than their Upstream counterparts. If those future predictions were to bear out, we may find ourselves in a situation similar to 2019, where the transportation market is down due to weakness in B2B freight, but the overall economy and some elements of the logistics industry are buoyed by strong consumer spending.
For volumes to truly increase, international commerce would have to pick back up after the recent period of relative slowness. There is some optimism this will happen as Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC) is the world’s largest freight line and expects to see volumes increase later in 2023. They specifically cite the resurgence of Chinese manufacturing as well as strong U.S. employment and energy exports as indicators that freight will pick back up this Summer[15]. Inventory Level growth is relatively unchanged (-0.1), reading in at 62.4 and lending further credence to the idea that firms are continuing to rebuild inventories after running them down through much of the back half of 2022. This is reflected for Inventory Costs which read in at 70.9, which is down (-3.3) but still indicates a significant rate of expansion.
It will be easier for firms to build inventories back up if they have space to store them and uncongested supply chains to move them through. Fortunately, there is some evidence that Supply chain constraints continue to loosen. Firms like Hasbro, Under Armour, and O’Reilly Auto all cited cheaper and more readily available transportation and port operations[16]. With the U.S., Europe, and China all reporting stronger than expected business activity in the first two months of 2023[17] (Hannon et al., 2023), having “room to grow” in the supply chain will be very important.
This brings us back to the importance of Warehousing Capacity expanding for the first time in 2.5 years. As the current and future readings for price indicate, a moderate expansion in capacity will not tank the warehousing market. Rather it will make it more sustainable over the long run. The chart below shows changes in our Warehousing Capacity metric throughout the lifetime of the index. Warehousing Capacity regularly expanded from 2016 to early 2020, contracting only seven of 29 readings pre-pandemic at moderate rates which all fell in the 50’s. A moderate rate of expansion is normal for this industry. Warehousing cannot be expanded quickly like trucks; there are limits on resources including money, materials, and most finitely, the space to build them (particularly when everyone wants the same urban infill areas). A lack of Warehousing Capacity has ripple effects throughout supply chains. When warehouses are full and there’s nowhere for inventory to go, it creates a bottleneck that can lead to congestion for over the road and intermodal carriers, as well as at the ports. As mentioned above, a lack of supply has been the primary driver behind inflation over the last year; this includes the lack of the necessary supply of warehousing. As warehousing becomes more available, supply chains will become more efficient, and the costs of holding and moving goods will decrease – something that should have a significant impact on inflation.
The index scores for each of the eight components of the Logistics Managers’ Index, as well as the overall index score, are presented in the table below. Warehousing Capacity is back to expansion after 30 months of contraction. The only metric that is still contracting is Transportation Prices, which are down for the eight consecutive month and have reached a new all-time low.
The index scores for each of the eight components of the Logistics Managers’ Index, as well as the overall index score, are presented in the table below. Warehousing Capacity is back to expansion after 30 months of contraction. The only metric that is still contracting is Transportation Prices, which are down for the eight consecutive month and have reached a new all-time low.
Downstream firms (orange bars) reported significantly greater rates of positive change for all three transportation metrics in February than their Upstream counterparts. This suggests that retailers are staying somewhat busy meeting steady consumer demand. Whether these metrics pick back up for Upstream firms as the Chinese holidays wrap up remains to be seen. Interestingly, they are also facing a significantly slower rate of expansion for Warehousing Prices than their Upstream counterparts. This may reflect the cessation of shorter-term facility leases retailers used in Q4. The ending of which allows them to move back towards cheaper, long-term warehousing contracts.
Respondents were asked to predict movement in the overall LMI and individual metrics 12 months from now. The future predictions for February represent a continuation of what we have observed since November of last year. We classify readings in the 50s or 60s as normal, sustainable rates of growth. With February’s future predictions ranging from 50.0 – 70.4 they respondents are clearly expecting some levels of moderation over the next year. It is notable that Warehousing Capacity is projected to increase at a rate of 61.4 – by far the fastest rate of expansion we have seen for a future prediction for this metric in years. It will be interesting to observe what the impacts of readily available storage capacity will be on supply chains and supply-driven inflation writ large.
There are some differences in expectations for future change depending on the supply chain position of our respondents[18]. Significant differences were apparent for both Warehousing Capacity and Transportation Price. Upstream respondents expect to have significantly more Warehousing Capacity come online over the next 12 months, perhaps reflecting a more muted inventory ramp-up than what is being anticipated at the retail level. Consistent with this, Downstream respondents are expecting fairly significant rates of expansion for Transportation Prices (61.5) while their Upstream counterparts are expecting contraction (44.4). This is consistent with anecdotal reports from carriers that Downstream retailers are looking to increase inventories again in anticipation of consumer spending later in 2023. This Upstream/Downstream split is similar to what we saw during 2019 when the consumer economy stayed hot but we fell into a freight recession due to softness on the B2B and industrial side. Whether this will also be the case moving through 2023 remains to be seen.
Historic Logistics Managers’ Index Scores
This period’s along with prior readings from the last two years of the LMI are presented table below:
This period’s along with prior readings from the last two years of the LMI are presented table below:
LMI®
February’s overall Logistics Manager’s Index reads in at 54.7, down (-2.9) from January’s reading of , but fairly consistent with December’s reading of 54.6. The comparison to December is pertinent here as there is anecdotal reports that January’s transportation market was slightly inflated due to delayed holiday shipments. This month’s transportation metrics suggest that the excess capacity that pushed down prices through 2022 is still with us, however given the split in Upstream and Downstream respondents vis-à-vis transportation is remains to be seen if these trends will continue. One trend that does seem to be shifting – and pushing the overall index down – is the sudden shift from contraction to expansion in Warehousing Capacity. This looseness is likely welcome to many shippers as my may foreshadow a coming decrease in the costs of warehousing and overall inventories.
Respondents expect this moderate rate of growth to continue over the next 12 months, predicting an expansion rate of 56.7 for the overall index, which is up very slightly (+0.6) from January’s prediction of 56.1. This moderate rate of growth would be very consistent with 2019, when the overall index averaged a score of 58.3 through 12 months.
February’s overall Logistics Manager’s Index reads in at 54.7, down (-2.9) from January’s reading of , but fairly consistent with December’s reading of 54.6. The comparison to December is pertinent here as there is anecdotal reports that January’s transportation market was slightly inflated due to delayed holiday shipments. This month’s transportation metrics suggest that the excess capacity that pushed down prices through 2022 is still with us, however given the split in Upstream and Downstream respondents vis-à-vis transportation is remains to be seen if these trends will continue. One trend that does seem to be shifting – and pushing the overall index down – is the sudden shift from contraction to expansion in Warehousing Capacity. This looseness is likely welcome to many shippers as my may foreshadow a coming decrease in the costs of warehousing and overall inventories.
Respondents expect this moderate rate of growth to continue over the next 12 months, predicting an expansion rate of 56.7 for the overall index, which is up very slightly (+0.6) from January’s prediction of 56.1. This moderate rate of growth would be very consistent with 2019, when the overall index averaged a score of 58.3 through 12 months.
Inventory Levels
The Inventory Level value is 62.4, almost identical (+0.1) to January’s reading of 62.5. We are now a year away from the all-time high of 80.2 reached last February and have come full-circle as firms ran their Inventory Levels down through much of 2023 but have now reported increasing rates of growth for the past three months. The current reading is very close (-0.2) from the all-time average of 62.6 for this metric. This has also been consistent across the different levels of the supply chain as downstream respondents reported only slightly greater inventory growth than their Upstream counterparts.
When asked to predict what conditions will be like 12 months from now, the average value is 55.7, down slightly (-0.4) from January’s future prediction of 56.1., up slightly from last months’ value (54.4) and a small decrease from the current actual value of 62.5. Upstream respondents returned a higher average (58.8 vs 51.1). Upstream respondents are expecting slightly higher levels (55.2 to 53.8), but overall both Upstream and Downstream firms are predicting relatively mild rates of growth over the next year.
The Inventory Level value is 62.4, almost identical (+0.1) to January’s reading of 62.5. We are now a year away from the all-time high of 80.2 reached last February and have come full-circle as firms ran their Inventory Levels down through much of 2023 but have now reported increasing rates of growth for the past three months. The current reading is very close (-0.2) from the all-time average of 62.6 for this metric. This has also been consistent across the different levels of the supply chain as downstream respondents reported only slightly greater inventory growth than their Upstream counterparts.
When asked to predict what conditions will be like 12 months from now, the average value is 55.7, down slightly (-0.4) from January’s future prediction of 56.1., up slightly from last months’ value (54.4) and a small decrease from the current actual value of 62.5. Upstream respondents returned a higher average (58.8 vs 51.1). Upstream respondents are expecting slightly higher levels (55.2 to 53.8), but overall both Upstream and Downstream firms are predicting relatively mild rates of growth over the next year.
Inventory Costs
The current Inventory Costs index value reads in at 70.9, down (-3.3) from January’s reading of 74.2. This is down by 20.1-points from the all-time high reached 11 months ago in March and below the all-time average of 74.9 for this metric. While Downstream respondents reported slightly higher Inventory Level expansion, Upstream firms reported slightly higher inventory cost numbers by 1.4 points, (71.4 vs 70.0), which is consistent with the higher Warehousing Prices that they reported as well.
Above, we saw that respondents expect Inventory Levels to increase slightly over the next 12 months (55.7). It is not surprising that Inventory Costs are expected to grow significantly (65.9) over the next 12 months, nearly unchanged from 65.2 last month. However, upstream respondents (70.2) expect substantially greater inventory cost increases than downstream respondents (61.3).
The current Inventory Costs index value reads in at 70.9, down (-3.3) from January’s reading of 74.2. This is down by 20.1-points from the all-time high reached 11 months ago in March and below the all-time average of 74.9 for this metric. While Downstream respondents reported slightly higher Inventory Level expansion, Upstream firms reported slightly higher inventory cost numbers by 1.4 points, (71.4 vs 70.0), which is consistent with the higher Warehousing Prices that they reported as well.
Above, we saw that respondents expect Inventory Levels to increase slightly over the next 12 months (55.7). It is not surprising that Inventory Costs are expected to grow significantly (65.9) over the next 12 months, nearly unchanged from 65.2 last month. However, upstream respondents (70.2) expect substantially greater inventory cost increases than downstream respondents (61.3).
Warehousing Capacity
The warehousing capacity index registered in at 56.6 for February, this is up significantly (+10.2) from January’s reading of 46.4, and up 14.5-points from the reading one year ago. More importantly though, his reading marks the first time since August of 2020 that Warehouse Capacity registered in at an increasing rate, which is presumably a welcome sign for an exceedingly tight market and for general supply chain costs. This seems to have been the case across the board as there was no statistically significant difference between the Upstream (55.1) and Downstream (56.3) readings for this metric. Whether or not new capacity is coming online (i.e., via facility expansion, or shifting from retail to industrial distribution) or if demand is shifting remains to be seen, but should be monitored, particularly in light of the inventory and warehousing price dynamics.
Looking forward at the next 12 months, respondents continue to expect available Warehousing Capacity to growth at a rate of 61.4, which is up slightly (+1.4) from January’s future prediction of 60.0. This is expected to be a significantly faster expansion for Downstream (71.8) than Upstream (55.2) firms. This may represent the ongoing construction of urban fulfillment centers designed to decrease delivery times.
The warehousing capacity index registered in at 56.6 for February, this is up significantly (+10.2) from January’s reading of 46.4, and up 14.5-points from the reading one year ago. More importantly though, his reading marks the first time since August of 2020 that Warehouse Capacity registered in at an increasing rate, which is presumably a welcome sign for an exceedingly tight market and for general supply chain costs. This seems to have been the case across the board as there was no statistically significant difference between the Upstream (55.1) and Downstream (56.3) readings for this metric. Whether or not new capacity is coming online (i.e., via facility expansion, or shifting from retail to industrial distribution) or if demand is shifting remains to be seen, but should be monitored, particularly in light of the inventory and warehousing price dynamics.
Looking forward at the next 12 months, respondents continue to expect available Warehousing Capacity to growth at a rate of 61.4, which is up slightly (+1.4) from January’s future prediction of 60.0. This is expected to be a significantly faster expansion for Downstream (71.8) than Upstream (55.2) firms. This may represent the ongoing construction of urban fulfillment centers designed to decrease delivery times.
Warehousing Utilization
The Warehousing Utilization index registered in at 70.3 in February, up (+3.2) from January’s reading of 67.1. Utilization has continued to increase at a healthy clip since November’s low point of 56.8. Interestingly, the difference between the utilization Upstream (70.3) and Downstream (68.8) was not statistically significant. Further to this point the reported inventory levels remained virtually unchanged from the period prior. This metric should be observed very carefully, as the rate of utilization is typically dependent upon changes in capacity and price for these services (and to a large extent the dynamics around Inventory) and thus future months’ values will be critical to monitor.
Looking forward at the next 12 months, the predicted Warehousing Utilization index is 67.6, up slightly (+3.0) from January’s future prediction of 64. This suggests firms will be waiting to snap up whatever additional capacity does come online fairly quickly in 2023.
The Warehousing Utilization index registered in at 70.3 in February, up (+3.2) from January’s reading of 67.1. Utilization has continued to increase at a healthy clip since November’s low point of 56.8. Interestingly, the difference between the utilization Upstream (70.3) and Downstream (68.8) was not statistically significant. Further to this point the reported inventory levels remained virtually unchanged from the period prior. This metric should be observed very carefully, as the rate of utilization is typically dependent upon changes in capacity and price for these services (and to a large extent the dynamics around Inventory) and thus future months’ values will be critical to monitor.
Looking forward at the next 12 months, the predicted Warehousing Utilization index is 67.6, up slightly (+3.0) from January’s future prediction of 64. This suggests firms will be waiting to snap up whatever additional capacity does come online fairly quickly in 2023.
Warehousing Prices
The Warehousing Price index reads in at 73.3, down (-1.7) from January’s reading of 75.0. This represents over a 13.1-point decrease from this time a year ago when inventories peaked. Additionally, when examining the Upstream (78.2) compared with the Downstream (66.3) there is a statistically significant difference between the two. This reading is also noteworthy, particularly given the heightened interest rate environment, coupled with the (albeit slowing) pace of inflation that the rest of the economy is seeing. Should Warehousing Capacity continue to increase, we may finally see some relief on price growth, which would have ripple effects throughout the economy.
Future predictions suggest that respondents are expecting prices to continue to grow at a rate of 70.4, down (-3.0) from January’s future prediction of 73.4. While anything over 70.0 is still quite elevated, this would be a significant slowdown in the expansion rate from what we have seen over the last two years.
The Warehousing Price index reads in at 73.3, down (-1.7) from January’s reading of 75.0. This represents over a 13.1-point decrease from this time a year ago when inventories peaked. Additionally, when examining the Upstream (78.2) compared with the Downstream (66.3) there is a statistically significant difference between the two. This reading is also noteworthy, particularly given the heightened interest rate environment, coupled with the (albeit slowing) pace of inflation that the rest of the economy is seeing. Should Warehousing Capacity continue to increase, we may finally see some relief on price growth, which would have ripple effects throughout the economy.
Future predictions suggest that respondents are expecting prices to continue to grow at a rate of 70.4, down (-3.0) from January’s future prediction of 73.4. While anything over 70.0 is still quite elevated, this would be a significant slowdown in the expansion rate from what we have seen over the last two years.
Transportation Capacity
The Transportation Capacity Index registered 70.4 percent in February 2023. This constitutes a small increase of .2 percentage points from the January reading of 70.2. As such, the Transportation Capacity Index continues to remain elevated and near all-time highs. The upstream transportation capacity index is slightly lower, indicating 65.8 while the downstream index indicates 77.8.
The future Transportation Capacity Index continues to indicate expansion, registering 62.9. Upstream firms indicate a Transportation Capacity index of 61.5 while Downstream firms indicate a future expectation of 63.5. As such, it can be concluded that the expectations of continued Transportation Capacity expansion are relatively uniformly diffused across the supply chains.
The Transportation Capacity Index registered 70.4 percent in February 2023. This constitutes a small increase of .2 percentage points from the January reading of 70.2. As such, the Transportation Capacity Index continues to remain elevated and near all-time highs. The upstream transportation capacity index is slightly lower, indicating 65.8 while the downstream index indicates 77.8.
The future Transportation Capacity Index continues to indicate expansion, registering 62.9. Upstream firms indicate a Transportation Capacity index of 61.5 while Downstream firms indicate a future expectation of 63.5. As such, it can be concluded that the expectations of continued Transportation Capacity expansion are relatively uniformly diffused across the supply chains.
Transportation Utilization
The Transportation Utilization Index registered 51.9 in February 2023. This denotes a significant decrease of 5.1 percent from the 57.0 level registered in January. With this decrease we are getting very close to the critical level of 50 that separates expansion and contraction. Downstream Transportation Utilization Index is at 59.5, indicating expansion, while the upstream index is significantly lower at 45.1, indicating contraction. As such, our data indicates that the Downstream supply chain transportation continues to expand while upstream transportation is contracting.
The future Transportation Utilization Index increases significantly and a 68.1 level for the next 12 months. The expectations of future growth are diffused across the supply chain, with Downstream firms expecting slightly greater expansion rates (73.0) than Upstream firms (63.9).
The Transportation Utilization Index registered 51.9 in February 2023. This denotes a significant decrease of 5.1 percent from the 57.0 level registered in January. With this decrease we are getting very close to the critical level of 50 that separates expansion and contraction. Downstream Transportation Utilization Index is at 59.5, indicating expansion, while the upstream index is significantly lower at 45.1, indicating contraction. As such, our data indicates that the Downstream supply chain transportation continues to expand while upstream transportation is contracting.
The future Transportation Utilization Index increases significantly and a 68.1 level for the next 12 months. The expectations of future growth are diffused across the supply chain, with Downstream firms expecting slightly greater expansion rates (73.0) than Upstream firms (63.9).
Transportation Prices
The Transportation Prices Index indicates a big drop of 5.9 points this month, moving to 36.1 in February 2023 from 42.0 in January 2023. With this significant drop, the Transportation Prices Index established a brand new all-time low. The Upstream price index is even lower at 30.6 while the Downstream Transportation Price index at 44.9. The price trend is reversed again, with reported price drops being a little more pronounced in the later portions of the month than in the beginning of the month.
The future index for Transportation Prices is now at the critical 50.0 level, indicating stable Transportation Prices in the next 12 months. These expectations are greater for Downstream firms (61.5) than Upstream firms (44.4). As such, while downstream firms expect prince increases, Upstream firms expect further price drops in transportation over the next 12 months.
The Transportation Prices Index indicates a big drop of 5.9 points this month, moving to 36.1 in February 2023 from 42.0 in January 2023. With this significant drop, the Transportation Prices Index established a brand new all-time low. The Upstream price index is even lower at 30.6 while the Downstream Transportation Price index at 44.9. The price trend is reversed again, with reported price drops being a little more pronounced in the later portions of the month than in the beginning of the month.
The future index for Transportation Prices is now at the critical 50.0 level, indicating stable Transportation Prices in the next 12 months. These expectations are greater for Downstream firms (61.5) than Upstream firms (44.4). As such, while downstream firms expect prince increases, Upstream firms expect further price drops in transportation over the next 12 months.
About This Report
The data presented herein are obtained from a survey of logistics supply executives based on information they have collected within their respective organizations. LMI® makes no representation, other than that stated within this release, regarding the individual company data collection procedures. The data should be compared to all other economic data sources when used in decision-making.
Data and Method of Presentation
Data for the Logistics Manager’s Index is collected in a monthly survey of leading logistics professionals. The respondents are CSCMP members working at the director-level or above. Upper-level managers are preferable as they are more likely to have macro-level information on trends in Inventory, Warehousing and Transportation trends within their firm. Data is also collected from subscribers to both DC Velocity and Supply Chain Quarterly as well. Respondents hail from firms working on all six continents, with the majority of them working at firms with annual revenues over a billion dollars. The industries represented in this respondent pool include, but are not limited to: Apparel, Automotive, Consumer Goods, Electronics, Food & Drug, Home Furnishings, Logistics, Shipping & Transportation, and Warehousing.
Respondents are asked to identify the monthly change across each of the eight metrics collected in this survey (Inventory Levels, Inventory Costs, Warehousing Capacity, Warehousing Utilization, Warehousing Prices, Transportation Capacity, Transportation Utilization, and Transportation Prices). In addition, they also forecast future trends for each metric ranging over the next 12 months. The raw data is then analyzed using a diffusion index. Diffusion Indexes measure how widely something is diffused or spread across a group. The Bureau of Labor Statistics has been using a diffusion index for the Current Employment Statics program since 1974, and the Institute for Supply Management (ISM) has been using a diffusion index to compute the Purchasing Managers Index since 1948. The ISM Index of New Orders is considered a Leading Economic Indicator.
We compute the Diffusion Index as follows:
PD = Percentage of respondents saying the category is Declining,
PU = Percentage of respondents saying the category is Unchanged,
PI = Percentage of respondents saying the category is Increasing,
Diffusion Index = 0.0 * PD + 0.5 * PU + 1.0 * PI
For example, if 25 say the category is declining, 38 say it is unchanged, and 37 say it is increasing, we would calculate an index value of 0*0.25 + 0.5*0.38 + 1.0*0.37 = 0 + 0.19 + 0.37 = 0.56, and the index is increasing overall. For an index value above 0.5 indicates the category is increasing, a value below 0.5 indicates it is decreasing, and a value of 0.5 means the category is unchanged. When a full year’s worth of data has been collected, adjustments will be made for seasonal factors as well.
Logistics Managers Index
Requests for permission to reproduce or distribute Logistics Managers Index Content can be made by contacting in writing at: Dale S. Rogers, WP Carey School of Business, Tempe, Arizona 85287, or by emailing dale.rogers@asu.edu Subject: Content Request.
The authors of the Logistics Managers Index shall not have any liability, duty, or obligation for or relating to the Logistics Managers Index Content or other information contained herein, any errors, inaccuracies, omissions or delays in providing any Logistics Managers Index Content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. In no event shall the authors of the Logistics Managers Index be liable for any special, incidental, or consequential damages, arising out of the use of the Logistics Managers Index. Logistics Managers Index, and LMI® are registered trademarks.
About The Logistics Manager’s Index®
The Logistics Manager’s Index (LMI) is a joint project between researchers from Arizona State University, Colorado State University, University of Nevada, Reno, Rochester Institute of Technology and Rutgers University, supported by CSCMP. It is authored by Zac Rogers Ph.D., Steven Carnovale Ph.D., Shen Yeniyurt Ph.D., Ron Lembke Ph.D., and Dale Rogers Ph.D.
The data presented herein are obtained from a survey of logistics supply executives based on information they have collected within their respective organizations. LMI® makes no representation, other than that stated within this release, regarding the individual company data collection procedures. The data should be compared to all other economic data sources when used in decision-making.
Data and Method of Presentation
Data for the Logistics Manager’s Index is collected in a monthly survey of leading logistics professionals. The respondents are CSCMP members working at the director-level or above. Upper-level managers are preferable as they are more likely to have macro-level information on trends in Inventory, Warehousing and Transportation trends within their firm. Data is also collected from subscribers to both DC Velocity and Supply Chain Quarterly as well. Respondents hail from firms working on all six continents, with the majority of them working at firms with annual revenues over a billion dollars. The industries represented in this respondent pool include, but are not limited to: Apparel, Automotive, Consumer Goods, Electronics, Food & Drug, Home Furnishings, Logistics, Shipping & Transportation, and Warehousing.
Respondents are asked to identify the monthly change across each of the eight metrics collected in this survey (Inventory Levels, Inventory Costs, Warehousing Capacity, Warehousing Utilization, Warehousing Prices, Transportation Capacity, Transportation Utilization, and Transportation Prices). In addition, they also forecast future trends for each metric ranging over the next 12 months. The raw data is then analyzed using a diffusion index. Diffusion Indexes measure how widely something is diffused or spread across a group. The Bureau of Labor Statistics has been using a diffusion index for the Current Employment Statics program since 1974, and the Institute for Supply Management (ISM) has been using a diffusion index to compute the Purchasing Managers Index since 1948. The ISM Index of New Orders is considered a Leading Economic Indicator.
We compute the Diffusion Index as follows:
PD = Percentage of respondents saying the category is Declining,
PU = Percentage of respondents saying the category is Unchanged,
PI = Percentage of respondents saying the category is Increasing,
Diffusion Index = 0.0 * PD + 0.5 * PU + 1.0 * PI
For example, if 25 say the category is declining, 38 say it is unchanged, and 37 say it is increasing, we would calculate an index value of 0*0.25 + 0.5*0.38 + 1.0*0.37 = 0 + 0.19 + 0.37 = 0.56, and the index is increasing overall. For an index value above 0.5 indicates the category is increasing, a value below 0.5 indicates it is decreasing, and a value of 0.5 means the category is unchanged. When a full year’s worth of data has been collected, adjustments will be made for seasonal factors as well.
Logistics Managers Index
Requests for permission to reproduce or distribute Logistics Managers Index Content can be made by contacting in writing at: Dale S. Rogers, WP Carey School of Business, Tempe, Arizona 85287, or by emailing dale.rogers@asu.edu Subject: Content Request.
The authors of the Logistics Managers Index shall not have any liability, duty, or obligation for or relating to the Logistics Managers Index Content or other information contained herein, any errors, inaccuracies, omissions or delays in providing any Logistics Managers Index Content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. In no event shall the authors of the Logistics Managers Index be liable for any special, incidental, or consequential damages, arising out of the use of the Logistics Managers Index. Logistics Managers Index, and LMI® are registered trademarks.
About The Logistics Manager’s Index®
The Logistics Manager’s Index (LMI) is a joint project between researchers from Arizona State University, Colorado State University, University of Nevada, Reno, Rochester Institute of Technology and Rutgers University, supported by CSCMP. It is authored by Zac Rogers Ph.D., Steven Carnovale Ph.D., Shen Yeniyurt Ph.D., Ron Lembke Ph.D., and Dale Rogers Ph.D.
[1] Guilford, G. (2023, February 14). Annual Inflation Cooled Slightly in January as Pace of Moderation Levels Off. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/us-inflation-january-2023-consumer-price-index-f080e30b
[2] Shapiro, A. (2023, March 4). Supply- and Demand-Driven PCE Inflation January 2023. San Francisco Fed. https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/indicators-data/supply-and-demand-driven-pce-inflation/
[3] Tobey, J. S. (2023, February 28). This Inverted Yield Curve Is Not Forecasting A Recession. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/johntobey/2023/02/28/this-inverted-yield-curve-is-not-forecasting-a-recession/
[4] Kapner, S., & Seal, D. (2023, March 2). Macy’s, Best Buy Sales Decline, Reflecting Shopper Pullback. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/macys-best-buy-sales-declines-reflect-shopper-pullback-on-discretionary-goods-3294ce3
[5] Saraiva, A. (2023, March 3). US Service Sector Expands Suggesting Hiring Ahead of February Jobs Report—Bloomberg. Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-03/services-in-us-expand-more-than-forecast-on-stronger-orders#xj4y7vzkg
[6] Gao, L., & Cash, J. (2023, March 1). China’s factory activity stuns with fastest growth in a decade. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/markets/asia/china-feb-manufacturing-activity-expands-fastest-since-april-2012-official-pmi-2023-03-01/
[7] Herrera, S. (2023, February 26). Amazon Expands Same-Day Delivery, With Fees, While Battling Slow Growth. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/amazon-expands-same-day-delivery-with-fees-while-battling-slow-growth-344bd3a6
[8] Young, L. (2023, February 28). Sam’s Club Adding Distribution Centers to Speed Up Online Fulfillment. WSJ. https://www.wsj.com/articles/sams-club-adding-distribution-centers-to-speed-up-online-fulfillment-672948e
[9] Young, L. (2023, February 23). Target Investing $100 Million to Expand Next-Day Delivery. WSJ. https://www.wsj.com/articles/target-investing-100-million-to-expand-next-day-delivery-291269c
[10] Young, L. (2023a, February 17). Companies Are Slow to Adopt Robot-Operated ‘Dark’ Warehouses. WSJ. https://www.wsj.com/articles/companies-are-slow-to-adopt-robot-operated-dark-warehouses-46e1c887
[11] Maiden, T. (2023a, March 2). Saia’s tonnage declines carry into Q1. FreightWaves. https://www.freightwaves.com/news/saias-tonnage-declines-carry-into-q1
[12] Maiden, T. (2023b, March 3). Old Dominion says shipments ‘have largely stabilized.’ FreightWaves. https://www.freightwaves.com/news/old-dominion-says-shipments-have-largely-stabilized
[13] Adler, A. (2023, March 3). Why Class 8 truck orders are outperforming shaky economy. FreightWaves. https://www.freightwaves.com/news/why-class-8-truck-orders-are-outperforming-shaky-economy
[14] Rudolph, M. (2023, March 3). Seasonality can’t save a battered market. FreightWaves. https://www.freightwaves.com/news/seasonality-cant-save-a-battered-market
[15] LaRocco, L. A. (2023, March 1). MSC, world’s biggest shipping company and U.S.-China trade bellwether, is betting on a rebound for global economy. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/01/worlds-biggest-shipping-firm-isnt-talking-like-a-recession-is-coming.html
[16] Berger, P., & Young, L. (2023, February 21). Supply-Chain Headaches Ease for Many Companies. WSJ. https://www.wsj.com/articles/supply-chain-headaches-ease-for-many-companies-42f3de8b
[17] Hannon, P., Torry, H., & Xie, S. Y. (2023, March 3). The World Economy Is Doing Well—This Is Bad News for Central Bankers. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-world-economy-is-doing-wellthis-is-bad-news-for-central-bankers-8beeb7c
[18] Note that not all respondents identify their industry, so some responses are missing from the Upstream/Downstream calculations.
[2] Shapiro, A. (2023, March 4). Supply- and Demand-Driven PCE Inflation January 2023. San Francisco Fed. https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/indicators-data/supply-and-demand-driven-pce-inflation/
[3] Tobey, J. S. (2023, February 28). This Inverted Yield Curve Is Not Forecasting A Recession. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/johntobey/2023/02/28/this-inverted-yield-curve-is-not-forecasting-a-recession/
[4] Kapner, S., & Seal, D. (2023, March 2). Macy’s, Best Buy Sales Decline, Reflecting Shopper Pullback. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/macys-best-buy-sales-declines-reflect-shopper-pullback-on-discretionary-goods-3294ce3
[5] Saraiva, A. (2023, March 3). US Service Sector Expands Suggesting Hiring Ahead of February Jobs Report—Bloomberg. Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-03/services-in-us-expand-more-than-forecast-on-stronger-orders#xj4y7vzkg
[6] Gao, L., & Cash, J. (2023, March 1). China’s factory activity stuns with fastest growth in a decade. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/markets/asia/china-feb-manufacturing-activity-expands-fastest-since-april-2012-official-pmi-2023-03-01/
[7] Herrera, S. (2023, February 26). Amazon Expands Same-Day Delivery, With Fees, While Battling Slow Growth. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/amazon-expands-same-day-delivery-with-fees-while-battling-slow-growth-344bd3a6
[8] Young, L. (2023, February 28). Sam’s Club Adding Distribution Centers to Speed Up Online Fulfillment. WSJ. https://www.wsj.com/articles/sams-club-adding-distribution-centers-to-speed-up-online-fulfillment-672948e
[9] Young, L. (2023, February 23). Target Investing $100 Million to Expand Next-Day Delivery. WSJ. https://www.wsj.com/articles/target-investing-100-million-to-expand-next-day-delivery-291269c
[10] Young, L. (2023a, February 17). Companies Are Slow to Adopt Robot-Operated ‘Dark’ Warehouses. WSJ. https://www.wsj.com/articles/companies-are-slow-to-adopt-robot-operated-dark-warehouses-46e1c887
[11] Maiden, T. (2023a, March 2). Saia’s tonnage declines carry into Q1. FreightWaves. https://www.freightwaves.com/news/saias-tonnage-declines-carry-into-q1
[12] Maiden, T. (2023b, March 3). Old Dominion says shipments ‘have largely stabilized.’ FreightWaves. https://www.freightwaves.com/news/old-dominion-says-shipments-have-largely-stabilized
[13] Adler, A. (2023, March 3). Why Class 8 truck orders are outperforming shaky economy. FreightWaves. https://www.freightwaves.com/news/why-class-8-truck-orders-are-outperforming-shaky-economy
[14] Rudolph, M. (2023, March 3). Seasonality can’t save a battered market. FreightWaves. https://www.freightwaves.com/news/seasonality-cant-save-a-battered-market
[15] LaRocco, L. A. (2023, March 1). MSC, world’s biggest shipping company and U.S.-China trade bellwether, is betting on a rebound for global economy. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/01/worlds-biggest-shipping-firm-isnt-talking-like-a-recession-is-coming.html
[16] Berger, P., & Young, L. (2023, February 21). Supply-Chain Headaches Ease for Many Companies. WSJ. https://www.wsj.com/articles/supply-chain-headaches-ease-for-many-companies-42f3de8b
[17] Hannon, P., Torry, H., & Xie, S. Y. (2023, March 3). The World Economy Is Doing Well—This Is Bad News for Central Bankers. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-world-economy-is-doing-wellthis-is-bad-news-for-central-bankers-8beeb7c