FOR RELEASE: Tuesday, December 2nd, 2025
Contact:
Zac Rogers, Ph.D.
Logistics Manager’s Index Analyst
Associate Professor, Supply Chain Management
Department of Management
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, Colorado
(970) 491-0890
E-mail: [email protected]
http://www.the-lmi.com
Contact:
Zac Rogers, Ph.D.
Logistics Manager’s Index Analyst
Associate Professor, Supply Chain Management
Department of Management
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, Colorado
(970) 491-0890
E-mail: [email protected]
http://www.the-lmi.com
November 2025 Logistics Manager’s Index Report®
LMI® at 55.7
Growth is INCREASING AT AN INCREASING RATE for: Inventory Levels, Warehousing Capacity, and Transportation Prices
Growth is INCREASING AT A DECREASING RATE for: Inventory Costs, Warehousing Prices, Transportation Capacity, and Transportation Utilization.
Warehousing Utilization is CONTRACTING
LMI® at 55.7
Growth is INCREASING AT AN INCREASING RATE for: Inventory Levels, Warehousing Capacity, and Transportation Prices
Growth is INCREASING AT A DECREASING RATE for: Inventory Costs, Warehousing Prices, Transportation Capacity, and Transportation Utilization.
Warehousing Utilization is CONTRACTING
(Fort Collins, CO) —The November Logistics Manager’s Index reads in at 55.7, down (-1.7) from the back-to-back readings of 57.4 in October and September. Similar to dynamics observed in October, this slowdown is driven by a continued softening of inventory and warehousing metrics but tempered by some expansion in transportation. Unlike last month, in November the downward pressures slightly exceeded upward momentum. This is headlined by Warehousing Utilization, which is down (-9.0) to 47.5, marking the first time in the 9-year history of the index that this metric has contracted. Never before have LMI respondents reported that they were using less available warehousing space month-over-month. This shift is a product of the continued rundown of the large stocks on inventories that were built up through the first nine months of 2025 which has led to a softening in the warehouse market. This softening was seen in an increase (+2.8) in available Warehousing Capacity to 54.8 – the highest since April and a slowdown (-4.8) in Warehousing Price expansion to 62.9 – the lowest since March. While Inventory Levels did move back into mild expansion (+3.0) at 52.5, Inventory Cost expansion was down (-2.4) to 70.8. To give some perspective on how swiftly the costs of inventories have risen in 2025: Any reading over 70.0 is considered as significantly expansionary. Despite this, October’s reading of 70.8 is the second lowest of the year, only outpacing January’s reading of 70.2. That means that we have measured significant expansion in Inventory Costs in every month of 2025.
Conversely, Transportation markets are continuing the upward trend, with Transportation Capacity dipping (-4.5) to 50.0 and no movement. This is the lowest rate of expansion since September of 2024 and only the third time this metric has read no movement since March of 2022 when the freight market flipped. Transportation Prices are up (+3.2) to 64.9 which is their fastest rate of expansion since February. The 14.9-point spread between Transportation Prices and Capacity is the second largest since April of 2022 (behind only January of this year). Taken together, these metrics suggest that the freight market is relatively healthy in November. It is worth pointing out that Transportation Price metrics this month are mainly driven by Downstream retailers (70.6 to 63.0) and grew faster in the first half of the month (70.0) than the second (60.8). This suggests that the improvement in transportation metrics are likely tied to the seasonal movement of inventories to retailers, meaning they could recede again should dynamics change post-holidays.
Researchers at Arizona State University, Colorado State University, Florida Atlantic University, 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 November 2025.
The November LMI read in at 55.7, which is down (-1.7) from October and September’s readings of 57.4, which is unchanged (+/-0.0) from September’s reading. This is the lowest reading since June of 2024 and the ninth consecutive reading to come in below the all-time overall average of 61.4. In the reverse of what we saw in October, the rate of expansion was lower in the second half of the month, moving from 56.8 in the first half of November to 53.6 later in the month. What was similar to October is that the downward influence primarily came from slowdowns in inventory and warehousing metrics, which outweighed the upward momentum in transportation metrics.
The cross-pressures in our different metrics are reflective, and a product of, overall economic trends. Due to tariffs, persistent inflation, and a slow job market, many Americans are nervous about the economy. However, that has not stopped them from spending. U.S consumer sentiment read in at 51.0 in November 2025. This is down 2.6% month-over-month and down 29% from the same time a year ago. Despite the current pessimism regarding the economy, consumers did slightly lower their expectations of long-term inflation[1]. Interestingly, 44% of middle-income respondents reported that their financial situation has gotten worse over the last 12 months. This is primarily driven by inflation, as the average costs of goods and services are up 25% from 2020. The Consumer Confidence Index produced by the Conference Board was down 6.8 points in November, which is its lowest reading since April[2]. While overall inflation is lower than it was in 2021-2022, tariffs have driven the prices of some essentials like coffee and auto repairs up in 2025[3]. The impact of the recent rollbacks on tariffs on grocery items like coffee and beef will take while to impact prices, as grocers will first have to run through the inventory that was brought in when higher tariffs were in place[4].
Consumer forecasts for future economic movement are not much better. The Conference Board reports that consumers are increasingly pessimistic about the economic outlook six months from now. They are specifically concerned that the labor market will be worse, that household income growth will stall, and that inflation will be up[5]. What will happen with consumer behavior in 2026, at which point firms will no longer have the backlog of inventories that were brought in pre-tariffs, remains an open question. U.S. consumer spending has kept the economy afloat in 2025. If that slips in 2026 there could be several ramifications for the logistics industry and to the overall economy. One potential complication is that credit card debt is much higher this year than what we would normally expect prior to the holiday season. Generally, credit card debt increases during November and December and is then slowly paid down in the new year. This year debt is high going into the holiday. If consumers do rely on credit cards for holiday shopping, the pullback could be sharper than usual in January as they try to pay those debts down[6].
In spite of their gloomy confidence reports, consumers have actually been spending. The National Retail Federation (NRF) expects that to continue, predicting that 2025 will be the first U.S. holiday shopping season to eclipse $1 trillion. Where that spending is happening does seem to have shifted from last year however, with discount chains like T.J. Maxx and Walmart reporting strong growth in Q3 – some of which was driven by non-traditional discount shoppers[7]. Walmart had a strong third quarter, with combined online and brick and mortar sales up 4.5% from Q2. The nation’s largest retailer points to higher-earning consumers making over $100,000 as the largest source of growth as higher and middle-income shoppers look for bargains. They also reported that lower-income shoppers did pullback on spending during the government shutdown (likely due to the suspension of SNAP benefits) but that they seem to have returned not that the shutdown has concluded[8]. Best Buy is among those firms anticipating a strong consumer turnout in the post-Thanksgiving shopping weekend and throughout Q4. Their Q3 numbers were up 2.7% year-over-year, which is their biggest gain in four years. Much like Walmart, they anticipate a consumer base that is willing to spend, but that will also be driven by potential deals as they look to stretch their spending dollar[9]. Consumer spending in November is up 7.5% year-over year according to Adobe analytics. This is up from September, when seasonally adjusted retail sales were up 0.2%, just short of the 0.3% that had been expected by economists[10]. One caveat with regards to year-over-year increases is that some of it may be more price- than demand-driven. Market research firm Circana recently reported that the price of 40% of general merchandise that was sold in September was up 5% since Liberation Day[11]. The producer price index was up 0.3% month-over-month in September (the October numbers are delayed by the government shutdown) this is up from August (when PPI declined 0.1%) but is only up 2.6% year-over-year, which is the lowest annual increase since July 2024 and, along with softening employment numbers, may give the Fed some cover on lowering rates[12]. It is also worth noting that while inflation has softened, growth in hourly wages has stagnated for the last two months, meaning that prices are generally going up faster than earnings[13].
Much of the downward pressure on unemployment comes from smaller firms. As we have recorded throughout the year, smaller firms have had to store significant levels of inventory, which has led to high costs and stunted cashflow. While this is shifting now as smaller wholesalers continue transferring inventory to their larger customers, recent job reports would suggest that these increased costs took their toll. Smaller firms continue to struggle in the current economic situation. In October, private firms with 499 employees or less lost 31,000 jobs, while firms with 500 or more employees added 73,000[14]. This is a continuation of the trend we observed in September where smaller firms lost 60,000 positions but larger firms gained 33,000[15]. ADP updated their running report on jobs in the last week of November, suggesting that over the last four weeks private companies had cut an average of 13,500 jobs per week – 54,000 in total[16]. Many smaller firms have also had to deal with rising costs – often through price increases – that came due to the loss of the de minimis exception[17]. The normal surge in seasonal holiday jobs is down this as well, with the NRF predicting that retailers will hire between 265,000 and 365,000 seasonal workers in 2025. This would be the lowest number of seasonal workers hired in more than a decade and is down significantly from the 442,000 that were hired in 2024[18].
The transfer of inventory Downstream towards retailers continued in November. Overall Inventory Levels were up (+3.0) to 52.5, moving back to mild expansion after contracting last month. This increase was entirely driven at the retail level as Downstream respondents reported robust expansion at 65.8, 19.4 points higher than the mild contraction of 46.3 reported Upstream. Loading up on inventories seems to have been a good bet for retailers. Consumer spending has been strong in the Thanksgiving weekend holiday shopping window, particularly when it comes to ecommerce. In the U.S. consumers spent $6.4 billion online on Thanksgiving Day[19] and another $8.6 billion online on Black Friday. These numbers are up 5.3% and 9.4% respectively[20]. While sales are up, the character of Black Friday has changed, total Black Friday shopping in the U.S. is expected to be between $11.7 and $11.9 billion[21], which means that ecommerce now makes up shopping makes up over 70% of spending, providing a bump to last-mile delivery fulfillment. The fact that Inventory Levels declined in the first half of November (46.3) before increasing (57.6) in the second half of the month suggests that retailers stocked up later in the month, right before the big shopping holidays. That these are seasonally appropriate movements is corroborated by the recent statement by GXO Logistics CEO Patrick Kelleher, who stated that inventories have “normalized” to more seasonally appropriate levels after having been heightened through much of 2025[22].
The question now is what will happen to inventories after the holiday shopping season. Container volumes arriving to U.S. ports in December 2025 will be down 430,000 containers – or 16.4% from December 2024 volumes when the inventory pull-forward that occurred earlier this year began. The decrease in demand has led to a significant dip in overall container utilization as well as international shipping costs. This would mean that overall U.S. trade volumes would be down 16.6 percent in 2025[23]. October imports were down 0.1% from September, which is only the second time in the last decade that October imports were down from September[24] and reflects the bifurcated peak season that has characterized supply chains in 2025. The Port of Los Angeles may be an exception to this, as they have brought in 8.65 million TEUs through the first 10 months of the year, which is up 2% from 2024[25].
One of the reasons that inventories are likely to be lower is the associated cost. Inventory Cost expansion slowed (-2.4) in November but is still elevated at 70.8. As mentioned above, any reading over 70.0 is considered to be a robust rate of expansion. Every reading through the first eleven months of 2025 has been above this level, demonstrating the extreme pressure that so many firms have been under this year, and explaining the more muted future predictions for Inventory Levels (56.7) over the next year. Increased costs will also continue to influence the source of imports. One of the effects of the ongoing trade disputes is that Mexico has surpassed Canada to become the top buyer of U.S. goods for the first time in 30 years. Mexico has been the top importer into the U.S. for two years, becoming the top exporter as well highlights the importance of the U.S. – Mexico relationship[26]. Looking elsewhere, the U.S. and the EU continue to negotiate over the final details of a trade deal. The deal will include a 15% tariff on EU goods, but several details including exceptions for critical goods have not yet been finalized[27]. Despite the current trade truce between the U.S. and China many firms are continuing to move production out of China, with Vietnam, India and other lower cost Asian countries receiving continued investment in manufacturing. Even with the current reduction in tariffs, many manufacturers believe that economic tensions between the world’s two largest economies are likely to continue over time[28].
The uncertainty regarding inventories has had a clear effect on warehousing metrics. Warehousing Utilization was the biggest mover this month, dropping (-9.0) to 47.5 and into contraction territory for the first time in the history of the index. This was driven by a sharp decline (39.3) early in the month, before moving back towards mild expansion (54.5) in the second half of November. This was likely the result of smaller firms moving inventories to larger partners, as small respondents also reported Warehousing Utilization contraction (44.4) and larger firms reported a slight uptick (52.0). We saw a similar dynamic with declining utilization Upstream (44.2) and an increase Downstream (55.6). At the same time, Warehousing Capacity was up (+2.8) to 54.8. It is still much tighter for smaller firms (50.0) than for their larger counterparts (62.0). The declining utilization could be representative of some long-term shifts in the warehousing market. 60 million square feet of warehousing were absorbed in the third quarter. This is up 148% from Q2 and is the highest quarterly net absorption since Q1 of 2023. This was led by the Phoenix and Indianapolis markets, both of which are expanding as both B2C fulfillment and B2B middle-mile distribution. Despite this growth, total net absorption in 2025 is down slightly from 2024 (down to 118 million square feet from 123 million a year ago). Overall, the expansion that has been fueling the warehousing market seems to be slowing, as the 270 million square feet under construction in Q3 is the lowest level in seven years – down 62% from the all-time peak of 711 million square feet that was under construction in the post-Covid bullwhip of 2022[29].
Even with some softening in demand, it seems likely that storage costs will continue to increase. Warehousing Price expansion slowed (-4.8) but still expanded at 62.9, which is a robust rate of expansion. Warehousing Prices are now the only metric that has never slipped into contraction. This metric has averaged a rate of expansion of 69.2 in 2025, highlighting the high costs of storage over the last 11 months. Firms have attempted to employ a few different strategies to counteract these rising costs. For instance, many importers are now looking to store goods in foreign trade zones (FTZs) to avoid tariffs, leading several 3PLs are attempting to expand their portfolios to include FTZs to meet this demand[30]. We have also seen a significant investment in warehousing automation, although that has come with mixed returns in the last month. Warehousing system integrators, which facilitate automation, have seen an uptick in deployment in B2C fulfillment. This is expected to continue throughout the decade, with this becoming a $100 billion market by 2030[31]. This targeted growth is epitomized by Walmart, which has significantly expanded the use of automation in their direct-to-consumer fulfillment network, but are still in the “early innings” of deployment in perishable and non-perishable distribution[32]. Whether or not perishable fulfillment and automation mix well was called into question in the last week of November with the announcement that Kroger would shutter three of their eight automated fulfillment centers. This is an abrupt shift from their previous initiative to fulfill ecommerce grocery orders on their own through their partnership with Ocado and will come with a charge of $2.6 billion against future earnings due to the shutdowns. Growth in online grocery fulfillment has waned since the pandemic so Kroger will instead lean more heavily into partnerships with third parties such as Instacart and Uber Eats in an attempt to reduce overhead. They anticipate that outsourcing grocery delivery will lead to a $400 million improvement in the profitability of their ecommerce segment in 2026[33].
Taken altogether, November’s report paints the picture of a warehousing sector in flux. Utilization is at its lowest level ever as capacity loosens up. However, this is all relative to what have been several years of significant expansion in prices and may represent more of a correction than any type of serious decline in the warehousing industry.
Any upward momentum that we do see in the November report came from our transportation metrics. Transportation Capacity moved down (-4.5) to 50.0, representing no movement. Transportation Capacity has not contracted since early 2022, and November’s reading of 50.0 is tied with two other occasions as the lowest reading on this metric since the start of the 2022 freight recession. This decline was driven by movements later in the month when available Transportation Capacity declined (46.1) after it had been increasing (55.2) in the first half of November. Interestingly, both smaller and larger respondents reported Transportation Capacity at 50.0, meaning that firms of all sizes were experiencing similarly increasing tightness in the transportation market. Capacity was also slightly tighter Upstream (49.0) than Downstream (52.8). Overall Transportation Prices were up (+3.2) to 64.9, the fastest rate of expansion since February. The 14.9-point difference between Transportation Prices and Capacity movements are a far cry from August and September, when capacity rose more quickly than price, which signaled a two-month negative freight inversion. This bounce-back is clearly driven by retail activity. Despite having slightly more capacity, Transportation Price expansion was higher for Downstream retailers (70.6) than it was for their Upstream counterparts (63.0) and larger respondents (who are more likely to be retailers) reported expansion of 72.0 which is significantly higher than the 60.7 reported by smaller respondents. We also see that prices slowed down later in the month (70.0 early and 60.8 late). These price increases come despite U.S. Diesel fuel being down slightly (-$0.037 per gallon) to $3.837 per gallon. This is up $0.292 per gallon from the same time last year[34].
Transportation Utilization was a bit of an outlier relative to capacity and price as it softened in November, with growth slowing (-5.8) to 51.5 which is close to no movement. The slowdown largely happened in the second half of November when Transportation Utilization slowed from expansion at 56.9 early to 47.3 later in the month. Downstream retailers played a role in this as well, reporting contraction (44.1) while their Upstream counterparts reported expansion (54.1). The dissonance between Downstream firms having tighter capacity, higher prices, but also slower utilization may come down to Upstream wholesalers having larger volumes, but retailers paying higher prices due to last mile delivery.
Respondents were asked to predict movement in the overall LMI and individual metrics 12 months from now. Respondent predictions for the overall index are 62.9, which is down (-1.7) from October’s prediction of 64.6 and would represent a slightly faster rate of growth than the all-time average of 61.4. This is driven by predictions of Inventory Levels contracting at expanding slowly at 56.7, which is up (+9.2) from October’s (often the high-water mark of retail inventories) prediction of contraction of 47.5 but consistent (+1.0) with September’s prediction of expansion at 55.7. Despite the softer predictions for inventories, cost expectations continue to be elevated, with Inventory Costs (+-0.8), Warehousing Prices -2.6), and Transportation Prices (-1.3) all predicted to read in over 70.0. This is consistent with the October readings and suggests that prices will expand significantly over the next 12 months, while inventories run much leaner. Taken together this suggests that firms are expecting inventory to be expensive next year but to also move quickly. They are likely hoping that trade policy will stabilize by then, which will allow shippers to bring inventories in at a steadier pace, which would in turn allow them to better utilize available warehousing and transportation capacity. It is interesting that predictions for available Warehousing Capacity is up (+6.7) while predictions for Transportation Capacity are down (-5.6) to 41.4, which would indicate steep contraction. This suggests that respondents are expecting tightness for freight but softness for warehousing, both of which are consistent with the idea that inventories will be lower but will also be turning over more quickly.
Conversely, Transportation markets are continuing the upward trend, with Transportation Capacity dipping (-4.5) to 50.0 and no movement. This is the lowest rate of expansion since September of 2024 and only the third time this metric has read no movement since March of 2022 when the freight market flipped. Transportation Prices are up (+3.2) to 64.9 which is their fastest rate of expansion since February. The 14.9-point spread between Transportation Prices and Capacity is the second largest since April of 2022 (behind only January of this year). Taken together, these metrics suggest that the freight market is relatively healthy in November. It is worth pointing out that Transportation Price metrics this month are mainly driven by Downstream retailers (70.6 to 63.0) and grew faster in the first half of the month (70.0) than the second (60.8). This suggests that the improvement in transportation metrics are likely tied to the seasonal movement of inventories to retailers, meaning they could recede again should dynamics change post-holidays.
Researchers at Arizona State University, Colorado State University, Florida Atlantic University, 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 November 2025.
The November LMI read in at 55.7, which is down (-1.7) from October and September’s readings of 57.4, which is unchanged (+/-0.0) from September’s reading. This is the lowest reading since June of 2024 and the ninth consecutive reading to come in below the all-time overall average of 61.4. In the reverse of what we saw in October, the rate of expansion was lower in the second half of the month, moving from 56.8 in the first half of November to 53.6 later in the month. What was similar to October is that the downward influence primarily came from slowdowns in inventory and warehousing metrics, which outweighed the upward momentum in transportation metrics.
The cross-pressures in our different metrics are reflective, and a product of, overall economic trends. Due to tariffs, persistent inflation, and a slow job market, many Americans are nervous about the economy. However, that has not stopped them from spending. U.S consumer sentiment read in at 51.0 in November 2025. This is down 2.6% month-over-month and down 29% from the same time a year ago. Despite the current pessimism regarding the economy, consumers did slightly lower their expectations of long-term inflation[1]. Interestingly, 44% of middle-income respondents reported that their financial situation has gotten worse over the last 12 months. This is primarily driven by inflation, as the average costs of goods and services are up 25% from 2020. The Consumer Confidence Index produced by the Conference Board was down 6.8 points in November, which is its lowest reading since April[2]. While overall inflation is lower than it was in 2021-2022, tariffs have driven the prices of some essentials like coffee and auto repairs up in 2025[3]. The impact of the recent rollbacks on tariffs on grocery items like coffee and beef will take while to impact prices, as grocers will first have to run through the inventory that was brought in when higher tariffs were in place[4].
Consumer forecasts for future economic movement are not much better. The Conference Board reports that consumers are increasingly pessimistic about the economic outlook six months from now. They are specifically concerned that the labor market will be worse, that household income growth will stall, and that inflation will be up[5]. What will happen with consumer behavior in 2026, at which point firms will no longer have the backlog of inventories that were brought in pre-tariffs, remains an open question. U.S. consumer spending has kept the economy afloat in 2025. If that slips in 2026 there could be several ramifications for the logistics industry and to the overall economy. One potential complication is that credit card debt is much higher this year than what we would normally expect prior to the holiday season. Generally, credit card debt increases during November and December and is then slowly paid down in the new year. This year debt is high going into the holiday. If consumers do rely on credit cards for holiday shopping, the pullback could be sharper than usual in January as they try to pay those debts down[6].
In spite of their gloomy confidence reports, consumers have actually been spending. The National Retail Federation (NRF) expects that to continue, predicting that 2025 will be the first U.S. holiday shopping season to eclipse $1 trillion. Where that spending is happening does seem to have shifted from last year however, with discount chains like T.J. Maxx and Walmart reporting strong growth in Q3 – some of which was driven by non-traditional discount shoppers[7]. Walmart had a strong third quarter, with combined online and brick and mortar sales up 4.5% from Q2. The nation’s largest retailer points to higher-earning consumers making over $100,000 as the largest source of growth as higher and middle-income shoppers look for bargains. They also reported that lower-income shoppers did pullback on spending during the government shutdown (likely due to the suspension of SNAP benefits) but that they seem to have returned not that the shutdown has concluded[8]. Best Buy is among those firms anticipating a strong consumer turnout in the post-Thanksgiving shopping weekend and throughout Q4. Their Q3 numbers were up 2.7% year-over-year, which is their biggest gain in four years. Much like Walmart, they anticipate a consumer base that is willing to spend, but that will also be driven by potential deals as they look to stretch their spending dollar[9]. Consumer spending in November is up 7.5% year-over year according to Adobe analytics. This is up from September, when seasonally adjusted retail sales were up 0.2%, just short of the 0.3% that had been expected by economists[10]. One caveat with regards to year-over-year increases is that some of it may be more price- than demand-driven. Market research firm Circana recently reported that the price of 40% of general merchandise that was sold in September was up 5% since Liberation Day[11]. The producer price index was up 0.3% month-over-month in September (the October numbers are delayed by the government shutdown) this is up from August (when PPI declined 0.1%) but is only up 2.6% year-over-year, which is the lowest annual increase since July 2024 and, along with softening employment numbers, may give the Fed some cover on lowering rates[12]. It is also worth noting that while inflation has softened, growth in hourly wages has stagnated for the last two months, meaning that prices are generally going up faster than earnings[13].
Much of the downward pressure on unemployment comes from smaller firms. As we have recorded throughout the year, smaller firms have had to store significant levels of inventory, which has led to high costs and stunted cashflow. While this is shifting now as smaller wholesalers continue transferring inventory to their larger customers, recent job reports would suggest that these increased costs took their toll. Smaller firms continue to struggle in the current economic situation. In October, private firms with 499 employees or less lost 31,000 jobs, while firms with 500 or more employees added 73,000[14]. This is a continuation of the trend we observed in September where smaller firms lost 60,000 positions but larger firms gained 33,000[15]. ADP updated their running report on jobs in the last week of November, suggesting that over the last four weeks private companies had cut an average of 13,500 jobs per week – 54,000 in total[16]. Many smaller firms have also had to deal with rising costs – often through price increases – that came due to the loss of the de minimis exception[17]. The normal surge in seasonal holiday jobs is down this as well, with the NRF predicting that retailers will hire between 265,000 and 365,000 seasonal workers in 2025. This would be the lowest number of seasonal workers hired in more than a decade and is down significantly from the 442,000 that were hired in 2024[18].
The transfer of inventory Downstream towards retailers continued in November. Overall Inventory Levels were up (+3.0) to 52.5, moving back to mild expansion after contracting last month. This increase was entirely driven at the retail level as Downstream respondents reported robust expansion at 65.8, 19.4 points higher than the mild contraction of 46.3 reported Upstream. Loading up on inventories seems to have been a good bet for retailers. Consumer spending has been strong in the Thanksgiving weekend holiday shopping window, particularly when it comes to ecommerce. In the U.S. consumers spent $6.4 billion online on Thanksgiving Day[19] and another $8.6 billion online on Black Friday. These numbers are up 5.3% and 9.4% respectively[20]. While sales are up, the character of Black Friday has changed, total Black Friday shopping in the U.S. is expected to be between $11.7 and $11.9 billion[21], which means that ecommerce now makes up shopping makes up over 70% of spending, providing a bump to last-mile delivery fulfillment. The fact that Inventory Levels declined in the first half of November (46.3) before increasing (57.6) in the second half of the month suggests that retailers stocked up later in the month, right before the big shopping holidays. That these are seasonally appropriate movements is corroborated by the recent statement by GXO Logistics CEO Patrick Kelleher, who stated that inventories have “normalized” to more seasonally appropriate levels after having been heightened through much of 2025[22].
The question now is what will happen to inventories after the holiday shopping season. Container volumes arriving to U.S. ports in December 2025 will be down 430,000 containers – or 16.4% from December 2024 volumes when the inventory pull-forward that occurred earlier this year began. The decrease in demand has led to a significant dip in overall container utilization as well as international shipping costs. This would mean that overall U.S. trade volumes would be down 16.6 percent in 2025[23]. October imports were down 0.1% from September, which is only the second time in the last decade that October imports were down from September[24] and reflects the bifurcated peak season that has characterized supply chains in 2025. The Port of Los Angeles may be an exception to this, as they have brought in 8.65 million TEUs through the first 10 months of the year, which is up 2% from 2024[25].
One of the reasons that inventories are likely to be lower is the associated cost. Inventory Cost expansion slowed (-2.4) in November but is still elevated at 70.8. As mentioned above, any reading over 70.0 is considered to be a robust rate of expansion. Every reading through the first eleven months of 2025 has been above this level, demonstrating the extreme pressure that so many firms have been under this year, and explaining the more muted future predictions for Inventory Levels (56.7) over the next year. Increased costs will also continue to influence the source of imports. One of the effects of the ongoing trade disputes is that Mexico has surpassed Canada to become the top buyer of U.S. goods for the first time in 30 years. Mexico has been the top importer into the U.S. for two years, becoming the top exporter as well highlights the importance of the U.S. – Mexico relationship[26]. Looking elsewhere, the U.S. and the EU continue to negotiate over the final details of a trade deal. The deal will include a 15% tariff on EU goods, but several details including exceptions for critical goods have not yet been finalized[27]. Despite the current trade truce between the U.S. and China many firms are continuing to move production out of China, with Vietnam, India and other lower cost Asian countries receiving continued investment in manufacturing. Even with the current reduction in tariffs, many manufacturers believe that economic tensions between the world’s two largest economies are likely to continue over time[28].
The uncertainty regarding inventories has had a clear effect on warehousing metrics. Warehousing Utilization was the biggest mover this month, dropping (-9.0) to 47.5 and into contraction territory for the first time in the history of the index. This was driven by a sharp decline (39.3) early in the month, before moving back towards mild expansion (54.5) in the second half of November. This was likely the result of smaller firms moving inventories to larger partners, as small respondents also reported Warehousing Utilization contraction (44.4) and larger firms reported a slight uptick (52.0). We saw a similar dynamic with declining utilization Upstream (44.2) and an increase Downstream (55.6). At the same time, Warehousing Capacity was up (+2.8) to 54.8. It is still much tighter for smaller firms (50.0) than for their larger counterparts (62.0). The declining utilization could be representative of some long-term shifts in the warehousing market. 60 million square feet of warehousing were absorbed in the third quarter. This is up 148% from Q2 and is the highest quarterly net absorption since Q1 of 2023. This was led by the Phoenix and Indianapolis markets, both of which are expanding as both B2C fulfillment and B2B middle-mile distribution. Despite this growth, total net absorption in 2025 is down slightly from 2024 (down to 118 million square feet from 123 million a year ago). Overall, the expansion that has been fueling the warehousing market seems to be slowing, as the 270 million square feet under construction in Q3 is the lowest level in seven years – down 62% from the all-time peak of 711 million square feet that was under construction in the post-Covid bullwhip of 2022[29].
Even with some softening in demand, it seems likely that storage costs will continue to increase. Warehousing Price expansion slowed (-4.8) but still expanded at 62.9, which is a robust rate of expansion. Warehousing Prices are now the only metric that has never slipped into contraction. This metric has averaged a rate of expansion of 69.2 in 2025, highlighting the high costs of storage over the last 11 months. Firms have attempted to employ a few different strategies to counteract these rising costs. For instance, many importers are now looking to store goods in foreign trade zones (FTZs) to avoid tariffs, leading several 3PLs are attempting to expand their portfolios to include FTZs to meet this demand[30]. We have also seen a significant investment in warehousing automation, although that has come with mixed returns in the last month. Warehousing system integrators, which facilitate automation, have seen an uptick in deployment in B2C fulfillment. This is expected to continue throughout the decade, with this becoming a $100 billion market by 2030[31]. This targeted growth is epitomized by Walmart, which has significantly expanded the use of automation in their direct-to-consumer fulfillment network, but are still in the “early innings” of deployment in perishable and non-perishable distribution[32]. Whether or not perishable fulfillment and automation mix well was called into question in the last week of November with the announcement that Kroger would shutter three of their eight automated fulfillment centers. This is an abrupt shift from their previous initiative to fulfill ecommerce grocery orders on their own through their partnership with Ocado and will come with a charge of $2.6 billion against future earnings due to the shutdowns. Growth in online grocery fulfillment has waned since the pandemic so Kroger will instead lean more heavily into partnerships with third parties such as Instacart and Uber Eats in an attempt to reduce overhead. They anticipate that outsourcing grocery delivery will lead to a $400 million improvement in the profitability of their ecommerce segment in 2026[33].
Taken altogether, November’s report paints the picture of a warehousing sector in flux. Utilization is at its lowest level ever as capacity loosens up. However, this is all relative to what have been several years of significant expansion in prices and may represent more of a correction than any type of serious decline in the warehousing industry.
Any upward momentum that we do see in the November report came from our transportation metrics. Transportation Capacity moved down (-4.5) to 50.0, representing no movement. Transportation Capacity has not contracted since early 2022, and November’s reading of 50.0 is tied with two other occasions as the lowest reading on this metric since the start of the 2022 freight recession. This decline was driven by movements later in the month when available Transportation Capacity declined (46.1) after it had been increasing (55.2) in the first half of November. Interestingly, both smaller and larger respondents reported Transportation Capacity at 50.0, meaning that firms of all sizes were experiencing similarly increasing tightness in the transportation market. Capacity was also slightly tighter Upstream (49.0) than Downstream (52.8). Overall Transportation Prices were up (+3.2) to 64.9, the fastest rate of expansion since February. The 14.9-point difference between Transportation Prices and Capacity movements are a far cry from August and September, when capacity rose more quickly than price, which signaled a two-month negative freight inversion. This bounce-back is clearly driven by retail activity. Despite having slightly more capacity, Transportation Price expansion was higher for Downstream retailers (70.6) than it was for their Upstream counterparts (63.0) and larger respondents (who are more likely to be retailers) reported expansion of 72.0 which is significantly higher than the 60.7 reported by smaller respondents. We also see that prices slowed down later in the month (70.0 early and 60.8 late). These price increases come despite U.S. Diesel fuel being down slightly (-$0.037 per gallon) to $3.837 per gallon. This is up $0.292 per gallon from the same time last year[34].
Transportation Utilization was a bit of an outlier relative to capacity and price as it softened in November, with growth slowing (-5.8) to 51.5 which is close to no movement. The slowdown largely happened in the second half of November when Transportation Utilization slowed from expansion at 56.9 early to 47.3 later in the month. Downstream retailers played a role in this as well, reporting contraction (44.1) while their Upstream counterparts reported expansion (54.1). The dissonance between Downstream firms having tighter capacity, higher prices, but also slower utilization may come down to Upstream wholesalers having larger volumes, but retailers paying higher prices due to last mile delivery.
Respondents were asked to predict movement in the overall LMI and individual metrics 12 months from now. Respondent predictions for the overall index are 62.9, which is down (-1.7) from October’s prediction of 64.6 and would represent a slightly faster rate of growth than the all-time average of 61.4. This is driven by predictions of Inventory Levels contracting at expanding slowly at 56.7, which is up (+9.2) from October’s (often the high-water mark of retail inventories) prediction of contraction of 47.5 but consistent (+1.0) with September’s prediction of expansion at 55.7. Despite the softer predictions for inventories, cost expectations continue to be elevated, with Inventory Costs (+-0.8), Warehousing Prices -2.6), and Transportation Prices (-1.3) all predicted to read in over 70.0. This is consistent with the October readings and suggests that prices will expand significantly over the next 12 months, while inventories run much leaner. Taken together this suggests that firms are expecting inventory to be expensive next year but to also move quickly. They are likely hoping that trade policy will stabilize by then, which will allow shippers to bring inventories in at a steadier pace, which would in turn allow them to better utilize available warehousing and transportation capacity. It is interesting that predictions for available Warehousing Capacity is up (+6.7) while predictions for Transportation Capacity are down (-5.6) to 41.4, which would indicate steep contraction. This suggests that respondents are expecting tightness for freight but softness for warehousing, both of which are consistent with the idea that inventories will be lower but will also be turning over more quickly.
We observe some differences when comparing feedback from Upstream (blue bars) and Downstream (orange bars) respondents in October. In a reversal of the dynamics we observed in October, Downstream retailers reported significant expansion in Inventory Levels (65.8) while their Upstream counterparts reported contraction at 46.3. The difference in inventories bled over into Warehousing Utilization, which expanded Downstream (55.6) and contracted Upstream (44.2). Downstream firms also reported faster expansion across all three cost/price metrics as they engaged available supply chain capacity to move inventories down to consumers for holiday shopping. For most of 2025 it was the Upstream respondents that were reporting greater levels of logistics activity. This month’s readings continue the trend that started in the middle of October and will likely continue through the end of the year in the buildup to Christmas.
We observe some differences when comparing feedback from Upstream (blue bars) and Downstream (orange bars) respondents in October. In a reversal of the dynamics we observed in October, Downstream retailers reported significant expansion in Inventory Levels (65.8) while their Upstream counterparts reported contraction at 46.3. The difference in inventories bled over into Warehousing Utilization, which expanded Downstream (55.6) and contracted Upstream (44.2). Downstream firms also reported faster expansion across all three cost/price metrics as they engaged available supply chain capacity to move inventories down to consumers for holiday shopping. For most of 2025 it was the Upstream respondents that were reporting greater levels of logistics activity. This month’s readings continue the trend that started in the middle of October and will likely continue through the end of the year in the buildup to Christmas.
We also split future predictions by Downstream respondents (purple bars) and Upstream respondents (green bars). As has been the case for the last several months, we note several statistically significant differences between the predictions made across the supply chain.
Once again, Upstream firms are predicting significantly more activity over the next 12 months than their Downstream counterparts. Upstream firms are expecting higher readings across each of the cost/price metrics, with the difference in Inventory Costs (75.6 to 63.2) being statistically significant. Both groups are expecting moderate expansion in Inventory Levels (56.1 Upstream and 57.9 Downstream) to go along with significant expansions in costs and tight capacity (particularly Upstream). This is a continuation of October’s future predictions. Essentially it seems that all parties are expecting costs to be higher due to trade policies and plan to keep inventories lower to improve potential cashflow. This will mean rapid inventory turnover which will in turn increase utilization of available logistics capacity.
Once again, Upstream firms are predicting significantly more activity over the next 12 months than their Downstream counterparts. Upstream firms are expecting higher readings across each of the cost/price metrics, with the difference in Inventory Costs (75.6 to 63.2) being statistically significant. Both groups are expecting moderate expansion in Inventory Levels (56.1 Upstream and 57.9 Downstream) to go along with significant expansions in costs and tight capacity (particularly Upstream). This is a continuation of October’s future predictions. Essentially it seems that all parties are expecting costs to be higher due to trade policies and plan to keep inventories lower to improve potential cashflow. This will mean rapid inventory turnover which will in turn increase utilization of available logistics capacity.
Continuing what we saw in October, we observe a few notable differences in responses collected in early (gold bars) versus late (green bars) November. There were competing forces in the movements between early and late November, with transportation metrics slowing down and inventories picking up later in the month. This dynamic suggests that transportation networks were engaged early in the month as they moved goods forward to consumers. At the same time Inventory Levels were contracting (46.3) as retailers attempted to keep inventories lean. This shift back to expansion (57.6) in the second half of November as many retailers reach a late inventory peak ahead of Thanksgiving week shopping holidays. Inventory being positioned at the retail level would also explain the slowdown in Transportation Prices (70.0 early to 60.8 late) and Transportation Utilization (56.9 early to 47.3 and contraction late). This is the inverse of October, when transportation metrics were up in the second half of the month, suggesting that a significant volume of inventory matriculated from Upstream to Downstream between mid-October and Mid-November. The final burst of inventory also led to Warehousing Utilization going from steep contraction (39.3) in early November to expansion (54.5) in the second half of the month.
Continuing what we saw in October, we observe a few notable differences in responses collected in early (gold bars) versus late (green bars) November. There were competing forces in the movements between early and late November, with transportation metrics slowing down and inventories picking up later in the month. This dynamic suggests that transportation networks were engaged early in the month as they moved goods forward to consumers. At the same time Inventory Levels were contracting (46.3) as retailers attempted to keep inventories lean. This shift back to expansion (57.6) in the second half of November as many retailers reach a late inventory peak ahead of Thanksgiving week shopping holidays. Inventory being positioned at the retail level would also explain the slowdown in Transportation Prices (70.0 early to 60.8 late) and Transportation Utilization (56.9 early to 47.3 and contraction late). This is the inverse of October, when transportation metrics were up in the second half of the month, suggesting that a significant volume of inventory matriculated from Upstream to Downstream between mid-October and Mid-November. The final burst of inventory also led to Warehousing Utilization going from steep contraction (39.3) in early November to expansion (54.5) in the second half of the month.
We also compare smaller firms (those with 0-999 employees, represented by maroon lines) to larger firms (those with 1,000 employees or more, represented by gold lines) in November. While both large and small respondents are slowly building up Inventory Levels at similar rates (52.9 for small and 52.0 for large) the smaller firms continue to struggle to find the space to hold their large stocks of inventory. Larger firms reported Warehousing Capacity expanding at 62.0 while their smaller counterparts saw available space hold steady at 50.0. Despite this, larger firms saw faster expansion for Warehousing Utilization (52.0 to 44.4) and Warehousing Prices (68.0 to 59.5). This suggests that while larger respondents (who are often, but are not always, retailers operating in urban areas) are having an easier time finding storage space, but they are paying more for it. The other statistically significant difference is that larger firms saw faster expansion for Transportation Prices (72.0) than our smaller respondents (60.7). Both saw expansion in freight prices, but it was more pronounced for large firms, which may reflect inventory replenishment via more expensive urban corridors, larger shipments, last-mile delivery to consumers, or some combination of all three. Small firms have borne the burnt of tariffs through much of the year. November’s readings suggest this has shifted, with the costs now being transferred to larger retailers. The big question now is what portion of these costs will also be passed on to consumers?
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. The rate of expansion for the overall index is 57.4, which is down (-1.7) from October’s reading. The majority of the downward pressure was due to slowdown in warehousing metrics. Warehousing Utilization dropped (-9.0) to 47.5 and indicates, for the first time in the history of the index, that utilization of available warehousing capacity has contracted from month to month. This comes with expansion (+2.8) in Warehousing Capacity and some relief (-4.8) in the rate of Warehousing Price expansion. At the same time transportation metrics were up, with Transportation Price increasing (+3.2) to 64.9 which is its fastest rate of expansion since February. Transportation Capacity declined (-4.5) to 50.0 and no movement. This is the lowest rate of expansion since September of 2024 and only the third time this metric has read no movement since March of 2022 when the freight market flipped. All of these things are likely due to consumer activity due to the holiday season which has allowed the inventories that were stored up for most of 2025 to finally move downstream, awakening transportation markets and leading to relief for packed warehouses.
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. The rate of expansion for the overall index is 57.4, which is down (-1.7) from October’s reading. The majority of the downward pressure was due to slowdown in warehousing metrics. Warehousing Utilization dropped (-9.0) to 47.5 and indicates, for the first time in the history of the index, that utilization of available warehousing capacity has contracted from month to month. This comes with expansion (+2.8) in Warehousing Capacity and some relief (-4.8) in the rate of Warehousing Price expansion. At the same time transportation metrics were up, with Transportation Price increasing (+3.2) to 64.9 which is its fastest rate of expansion since February. Transportation Capacity declined (-4.5) to 50.0 and no movement. This is the lowest rate of expansion since September of 2024 and only the third time this metric has read no movement since March of 2022 when the freight market flipped. All of these things are likely due to consumer activity due to the holiday season which has allowed the inventories that were stored up for most of 2025 to finally move downstream, awakening transportation markets and leading to relief for packed warehouses.
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®
The October Logistics Manager’s Index reads in at 55.7, which is down (-1.7) from August’s reading of 57.4 and represents the lowest reading for the overall index since June of 2024. This decline was driven by the first ever contraction in Warehousing Utilization (47.5) and a significant slowdown in the expansion of Transportation Utilization (51.5) both of which suggest that inventories have arrived at retailers and are now being sold to consumers. This month’s reading is down (-2.7) from November 2024’s 58.4 but is up (+5.7) from the contraction of 49.4 two years ago, which was the last time the overall index contracted. There were no significant differences between the overall index readings from Upstream/Downstream, Large/Small, or Early/Late respondents.
When asked to predict what conditions will be over the next 12 months, respondents foresee a rate of expansion of 62.9, which is down (-2.7) from October’s future prediction of 64.6 and would be just above the all-time average of 61.4. Respondent expectations vary across the supply chain, with Upstream respondents predicting overall expansion of 65.0, and Downstream respondents predicting a slower (although still notable) rate of expansion at 58.0.
The October Logistics Manager’s Index reads in at 55.7, which is down (-1.7) from August’s reading of 57.4 and represents the lowest reading for the overall index since June of 2024. This decline was driven by the first ever contraction in Warehousing Utilization (47.5) and a significant slowdown in the expansion of Transportation Utilization (51.5) both of which suggest that inventories have arrived at retailers and are now being sold to consumers. This month’s reading is down (-2.7) from November 2024’s 58.4 but is up (+5.7) from the contraction of 49.4 two years ago, which was the last time the overall index contracted. There were no significant differences between the overall index readings from Upstream/Downstream, Large/Small, or Early/Late respondents.
When asked to predict what conditions will be over the next 12 months, respondents foresee a rate of expansion of 62.9, which is down (-2.7) from October’s future prediction of 64.6 and would be just above the all-time average of 61.4. Respondent expectations vary across the supply chain, with Upstream respondents predicting overall expansion of 65.0, and Downstream respondents predicting a slower (although still notable) rate of expansion at 58.0.
Inventory Levels
The Inventory Level index is 52.5, which is up (+3.0) from October’s reading of 49.5, shifting this metric from contraction back to mild expansion. Inventory Levels are 3.6 points lower than a year ago, and 8.2 points higher than two years ago at this time. In November Upstream respondents returned a slight decrease at 46.3, while Downstream returned 65.8, a difference of 19.4 points. Upstream showed a slight decrease, while Downstream a large increase. This would seem likely attributable to product flowing from suppliers to retailers for the current holiday shopping season. For comparison, last November, Upstream returned a small increase at 56.3, while Downstream had a large decrease at 65.7, almost exactly this month’s value. So Downstream is fairly consistent year-over-year, but Upstream is significantly lower – likely because they had so much inventory to get rid of. This month, early respondents (46.3) were 11.3 points lower than later (57.6). Respondents showed increasing Inventory Levels throughout the month.
Predictions for future Inventory Level growth are 56.7, up (+9.2) from October’s prediction of 47.5 but very similar to September’s prediction of 55.7 but still suggesting an expectation for leaner inventories in 2025. Upstream (56.1) reported a value 1.8 points lower than Downstream (57.9). Both Upstream and Downstream expect similar, mild increases in Inventory Levels over the next year, with Downstream expecting slightly higher increases. This is in sharp contrast to last month, when both Upstream (51.7) expected a small increase, while Downstream (40.2) expected a significant decrease over the next year.
The Inventory Level index is 52.5, which is up (+3.0) from October’s reading of 49.5, shifting this metric from contraction back to mild expansion. Inventory Levels are 3.6 points lower than a year ago, and 8.2 points higher than two years ago at this time. In November Upstream respondents returned a slight decrease at 46.3, while Downstream returned 65.8, a difference of 19.4 points. Upstream showed a slight decrease, while Downstream a large increase. This would seem likely attributable to product flowing from suppliers to retailers for the current holiday shopping season. For comparison, last November, Upstream returned a small increase at 56.3, while Downstream had a large decrease at 65.7, almost exactly this month’s value. So Downstream is fairly consistent year-over-year, but Upstream is significantly lower – likely because they had so much inventory to get rid of. This month, early respondents (46.3) were 11.3 points lower than later (57.6). Respondents showed increasing Inventory Levels throughout the month.
Predictions for future Inventory Level growth are 56.7, up (+9.2) from October’s prediction of 47.5 but very similar to September’s prediction of 55.7 but still suggesting an expectation for leaner inventories in 2025. Upstream (56.1) reported a value 1.8 points lower than Downstream (57.9). Both Upstream and Downstream expect similar, mild increases in Inventory Levels over the next year, with Downstream expecting slightly higher increases. This is in sharp contrast to last month, when both Upstream (51.7) expected a small increase, while Downstream (40.2) expected a significant decrease over the next year.
Inventory Costs
Inventory Costs are 70.8, which is down (-2.4) from October’s reading of 73.2 but still represents significant expansion in the cost of holding inventory. The current value is 2.0 points higher than last year at this time, and 8.7 points higher than two years ago. Inventory Levels are a significant driver of Inventory Costs and have had several periods of decline in the last two years, and yet the Inventory Cost index has had no decreasing levels in the last two years. Inventory levels had a small increase this month, and yet Inventory Costs show a significant increase. Upstream respondents returned a value of 68.3, and Downstream returned a higher value, at 76.3. There was almost no difference between early (70.4) and late (71.2) or larger (72.0) and small (70.4) responses, suggesting that November’s significant expansion in Inventory Costs was fairly uniform across supply chains.
Predictions for future Inventory Cost growth is 71.7, down (-0.8) from October’s future prediction of 72.5, suggesting that costs will continue to increase significantly over the next 12 months. Upstream respondents returned 75.6, while Downstream returned 63.2. Upstream clearly showed a greater increase, by 12.5 points, which is interesting because they both predicted similar predictions for Inventory Levels (56.1 for Upstream, 57.9 for Downstream). This disparity may suggest that Upstream firms are once again expecting to bear more of the costs associated with tariffs in 2026.
Inventory Costs are 70.8, which is down (-2.4) from October’s reading of 73.2 but still represents significant expansion in the cost of holding inventory. The current value is 2.0 points higher than last year at this time, and 8.7 points higher than two years ago. Inventory Levels are a significant driver of Inventory Costs and have had several periods of decline in the last two years, and yet the Inventory Cost index has had no decreasing levels in the last two years. Inventory levels had a small increase this month, and yet Inventory Costs show a significant increase. Upstream respondents returned a value of 68.3, and Downstream returned a higher value, at 76.3. There was almost no difference between early (70.4) and late (71.2) or larger (72.0) and small (70.4) responses, suggesting that November’s significant expansion in Inventory Costs was fairly uniform across supply chains.
Predictions for future Inventory Cost growth is 71.7, down (-0.8) from October’s future prediction of 72.5, suggesting that costs will continue to increase significantly over the next 12 months. Upstream respondents returned 75.6, while Downstream returned 63.2. Upstream clearly showed a greater increase, by 12.5 points, which is interesting because they both predicted similar predictions for Inventory Levels (56.1 for Upstream, 57.9 for Downstream). This disparity may suggest that Upstream firms are once again expecting to bear more of the costs associated with tariffs in 2026.
Warehousing Capacity
Very slightly increasing, and remaining in expansionary territory, we see the reading for Warehousing Capacity notching in at 54.8 for November 2025 reflecting a 2.8-point increase from October’s reading of 52.0. This reading is down 1.9 points from the reading one year ago and is also down by 5.8 points from the reading two years ago. In addition, there was a rather small 1.1-point split between Upstream (54.5) and Downstream (55.6) which was not statistically significant (p>.1), but notable as the Upstream value entered back into expansionary territory from its previous retreat into contraction. We saw similar seesawing in September to October of 2025. Comparing the differences between small (<999 employees) and large (>999) employees we see that these values are 50.0 and 62.0, showing larger firms are expanding (more rapidly than last month) while smaller firms seem to be contracting. This 12.0-point split was marginally statistically significant (p <.1).
Finally, exploring the future predictions for Warehousing Capacity, respondents predict very expansion of 58.2, which is up (+6.7) from October’s milder prediction of 51.5 and suggests that firms may not be holding onto inventories for long next year. Downstream respondents expect to continue to break the pattern of contraction from the past two months and enter expansionary territory with a value of 58.1 with Upstream’s growth also expected to continue expanding, with the predicted value one year out registering in at 58.3. This 0.2-point difference was not statistically significant (p>.1).
Very slightly increasing, and remaining in expansionary territory, we see the reading for Warehousing Capacity notching in at 54.8 for November 2025 reflecting a 2.8-point increase from October’s reading of 52.0. This reading is down 1.9 points from the reading one year ago and is also down by 5.8 points from the reading two years ago. In addition, there was a rather small 1.1-point split between Upstream (54.5) and Downstream (55.6) which was not statistically significant (p>.1), but notable as the Upstream value entered back into expansionary territory from its previous retreat into contraction. We saw similar seesawing in September to October of 2025. Comparing the differences between small (<999 employees) and large (>999) employees we see that these values are 50.0 and 62.0, showing larger firms are expanding (more rapidly than last month) while smaller firms seem to be contracting. This 12.0-point split was marginally statistically significant (p <.1).
Finally, exploring the future predictions for Warehousing Capacity, respondents predict very expansion of 58.2, which is up (+6.7) from October’s milder prediction of 51.5 and suggests that firms may not be holding onto inventories for long next year. Downstream respondents expect to continue to break the pattern of contraction from the past two months and enter expansionary territory with a value of 58.1 with Upstream’s growth also expected to continue expanding, with the predicted value one year out registering in at 58.3. This 0.2-point difference was not statistically significant (p>.1).
Warehousing Utilization
The Warehousing Utilization index registered in at 47.5-points for the month of November 2025, reflecting a sharp 9.0-point decline from October’s reading of 56.5 and moving into contraction. This is a continuation of previous month's decline in capacity levels, which are now down nearly 18 points from two months ago. This reading is down 11.4 points from the reading one year ago, and down by 5.4 points from the reading two years ago. In addition, there was an 11.4-point split between Upstream (44.2) and Downstream (55.6) which was also not statistically significant (p>.1) which reflects a continuation of the previous oscillation pattern between contraction and expansion where this month, Upstream entered back into contraction from its previous state of expansion. Comparing the differences between small (<999 employees) and large (>999) employees we see that these values are 44.4 and 52.0 (reflecting a dramatic shift from last month's values of 64.6 and 48.0), with small firms clearly retreating into contraction and larger firms expanding relative to last month. This 7.6-point split was not statistically significant (p >.1).
Finally, exploring the future predictions for Warehousing Utilization, respondents predict expansion at 60.7, which is down (-9.3) from October’s more robust prediction of 70.0 but more in line with September’s future prediction of 58.2. Expectations for growth are consistent across the supply chain with future Upstream expectations (60.5) being predicted to be growing slower than Downstream expectations (61.1), where this .6-point difference was not statistically significant (p>.1).
The Warehousing Utilization index registered in at 47.5-points for the month of November 2025, reflecting a sharp 9.0-point decline from October’s reading of 56.5 and moving into contraction. This is a continuation of previous month's decline in capacity levels, which are now down nearly 18 points from two months ago. This reading is down 11.4 points from the reading one year ago, and down by 5.4 points from the reading two years ago. In addition, there was an 11.4-point split between Upstream (44.2) and Downstream (55.6) which was also not statistically significant (p>.1) which reflects a continuation of the previous oscillation pattern between contraction and expansion where this month, Upstream entered back into contraction from its previous state of expansion. Comparing the differences between small (<999 employees) and large (>999) employees we see that these values are 44.4 and 52.0 (reflecting a dramatic shift from last month's values of 64.6 and 48.0), with small firms clearly retreating into contraction and larger firms expanding relative to last month. This 7.6-point split was not statistically significant (p >.1).
Finally, exploring the future predictions for Warehousing Utilization, respondents predict expansion at 60.7, which is down (-9.3) from October’s more robust prediction of 70.0 but more in line with September’s future prediction of 58.2. Expectations for growth are consistent across the supply chain with future Upstream expectations (60.5) being predicted to be growing slower than Downstream expectations (61.1), where this .6-point difference was not statistically significant (p>.1).
Warehousing Prices
The Warehousing Pricing index registered in at 62.9 in November, down (-4.8) from October’s reading of 67.7 but still represents robust expansion. This reading is down 5.9 points from the one year ago but is up 0.7 points from the reading two years ago. points from the reading one year ago, and down 1.3-points from the reading two years ago. In addition, there was a 5.3 -point split between Upstream (61.4) and Downstream (66.7) which was not statistically significant (p>.1). Comparing the differences between small (<999 employees) and large (>999) employees we see that these values are 59.5 and 68.0 (yet another dramatic shift from the previous month's values of 71.7 and 63.3) reflecting an 8.5 -point difference between the two which was not statistically significant (p >.1).
Finally, exploring the future predictions for Warehouse Price, respondents predict robust expansion at 75.0 which is up (+2.6) from October’s future prediction of 72.4. Expectations across the supply chain are elevated, with future Upstream expectations (77.9) being predicted to be increasing at a faster rate than Downstream expectations (68.4). This month's 9.5-point difference was not statistically significant (p>.1). It is interesting that respondents are expecting capacity and utilization to ease but prices to increase. This may suggest that storage will get more expensive on a per-unit basis over the next 12 months.
The Warehousing Pricing index registered in at 62.9 in November, down (-4.8) from October’s reading of 67.7 but still represents robust expansion. This reading is down 5.9 points from the one year ago but is up 0.7 points from the reading two years ago. points from the reading one year ago, and down 1.3-points from the reading two years ago. In addition, there was a 5.3 -point split between Upstream (61.4) and Downstream (66.7) which was not statistically significant (p>.1). Comparing the differences between small (<999 employees) and large (>999) employees we see that these values are 59.5 and 68.0 (yet another dramatic shift from the previous month's values of 71.7 and 63.3) reflecting an 8.5 -point difference between the two which was not statistically significant (p >.1).
Finally, exploring the future predictions for Warehouse Price, respondents predict robust expansion at 75.0 which is up (+2.6) from October’s future prediction of 72.4. Expectations across the supply chain are elevated, with future Upstream expectations (77.9) being predicted to be increasing at a faster rate than Downstream expectations (68.4). This month's 9.5-point difference was not statistically significant (p>.1). It is interesting that respondents are expecting capacity and utilization to ease but prices to increase. This may suggest that storage will get more expensive on a per-unit basis over the next 12 months.
Transportation Capacity
The Transportation Capacity Index dropped read in at 50.0, down (-4.5) from October’s reading of 54.5. With this third consecutive drop, the Transportation Capacity index reads in at “no movement” a level that was last seen in September of 2024, more than one year ago. While the Upstream Transportation Capacity index is at 49.0, the Downstream index is slightly higher at 52.8 but the difference is not statistically significant. Capacity did loosen up later in the month, going from contraction at 46.3 early to marginal expansion at 57.6 later in the month.
The future Transportation Capacity index increased 5.6 points, and it is now at 47.0, indicating slight contraction for the next 12 months. While the future Upstream index is at 44.0, the Downstream Transportation Capacity index is at 55.9, but the difference is not statistically significant.
The Transportation Capacity Index dropped read in at 50.0, down (-4.5) from October’s reading of 54.5. With this third consecutive drop, the Transportation Capacity index reads in at “no movement” a level that was last seen in September of 2024, more than one year ago. While the Upstream Transportation Capacity index is at 49.0, the Downstream index is slightly higher at 52.8 but the difference is not statistically significant. Capacity did loosen up later in the month, going from contraction at 46.3 early to marginal expansion at 57.6 later in the month.
The future Transportation Capacity index increased 5.6 points, and it is now at 47.0, indicating slight contraction for the next 12 months. While the future Upstream index is at 44.0, the Downstream Transportation Capacity index is at 55.9, but the difference is not statistically significant.
Transportation Utilization
The November Transportation Utilization Index is 51.5, down (-5.8) from October’s reading of 57.3, suggesting that utilization increased only marginally in November. This is 9.0 points lower than the reading a year ago but up 1.5 points from November 2023. The slowdown in utilization was driven by retailers, as the Downstream Transportation Utilization Index is now at 44.1, while the Upstream index indicates 54.1, but the difference is not statistically significant. Like capacity, Transportation Utilization loosened up later in November, going from expansion at 55.2 early to contraction at 46.1 later in the month.
The future Transportation Utilization Index is 66.4 in November, down (0.9) from October’s future prediction of 67.3. 12 months. The future Upstream Transportation Utilization index at 70.0 and the Downstream index at 55.9 and the difference is marginally significant. As such expectation of increased utilization are stronger Upstream than Downstream.
The November Transportation Utilization Index is 51.5, down (-5.8) from October’s reading of 57.3, suggesting that utilization increased only marginally in November. This is 9.0 points lower than the reading a year ago but up 1.5 points from November 2023. The slowdown in utilization was driven by retailers, as the Downstream Transportation Utilization Index is now at 44.1, while the Upstream index indicates 54.1, but the difference is not statistically significant. Like capacity, Transportation Utilization loosened up later in November, going from expansion at 55.2 early to contraction at 46.1 later in the month.
The future Transportation Utilization Index is 66.4 in November, down (0.9) from October’s future prediction of 67.3. 12 months. The future Upstream Transportation Utilization index at 70.0 and the Downstream index at 55.9 and the difference is marginally significant. As such expectation of increased utilization are stronger Upstream than Downstream.
Transportation Prices
The November Transportation Prices Index read in at 64.9, up +3.2) from October’s reading of 61.7. This is the fastest rate of expansion since February of this year. This month’s reading is 0.9 points up from a year ago and a somewhat staggering 20.7 points up from November 2023, which was the tail end of the 2022-2023 freight recession. While the Upstream Transportation Prices Index is at 63.0, the Downstream index is at 70.6 but the difference is not statistically significant. Like the other transportation metrics, Transportation Price growth softened later in November, going from significant expansion at 70.0 early to 60.8 in the second half of the month. We also see larger firms reporting significantly faster Transportation Price expansion than their smaller counterparts (72.0 for large and 60.7 for small respondents).
The future index for Transportation Prices read in at 78.4, down slightly (-1.5) from October’s future prediction of 79.9. The Upstream future Transportation Prices index is at 80.0 while the Downstream Transportation Prices index is at 73.5, this difference is not statistically significant and suggests that respondents across the supply chain are expecting higher costs over the next 12 months.
The November Transportation Prices Index read in at 64.9, up +3.2) from October’s reading of 61.7. This is the fastest rate of expansion since February of this year. This month’s reading is 0.9 points up from a year ago and a somewhat staggering 20.7 points up from November 2023, which was the tail end of the 2022-2023 freight recession. While the Upstream Transportation Prices Index is at 63.0, the Downstream index is at 70.6 but the difference is not statistically significant. Like the other transportation metrics, Transportation Price growth softened later in November, going from significant expansion at 70.0 early to 60.8 in the second half of the month. We also see larger firms reporting significantly faster Transportation Price expansion than their smaller counterparts (72.0 for large and 60.7 for small respondents).
The future index for Transportation Prices read in at 78.4, down slightly (-1.5) from October’s future prediction of 79.9. The Upstream future Transportation Prices index is at 80.0 while the Downstream Transportation Prices index is at 73.5, this difference is not statistically significant and suggests that respondents across the supply chain are expecting higher costs 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 Exchange 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 [email protected] 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, Florida Atlantic University, 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 Exchange 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 [email protected] 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, Florida Atlantic University, 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] Hsu, J. (2025, November 21). Surveys of Consumers. Survey of Consumer - Final Results for November 2025. https://www.sca.isr.umich.edu/
[2] Cox, J. (2025a, November 25). Consumer confidence hits lowest point since April as job worries grow. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/25/consumer-confidence-lowest-point-since-april.html
[3] Ensign, R. L., & Wolfe, R. (2025, November 21). The Middle Class Is Buckling Under Almost Five Years of Persistent Inflation. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/personal-finance/the-middle-class-is-buckling-under-almost-five-years-of-persistent-inflation-4d783aee
[4] LaRocco, L. A. (2025b, November 21). Why Trump’s tariff rollback won’t lower grocery prices right away. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/21/food-inflation-price-trump-tariffs.html
[5] Cox, J. (2025a, November 25). Consumer confidence hits lowest point since April as job worries grow. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/25/consumer-confidence-lowest-point-since-april.html
[6] Peters, S. (2025, November 28). U.S. consumers are heading into the holiday season with record credit card debt. Marketplace. https://www.marketplace.org/story/2025/11/28/americans-start-holiday-season-with-record-credit-card-debt
[7] Kapner, S., & Nassauer, S. (2025, November 23). Americans Are on a Year-End Shopping Spree. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/business/retail/americans-are-on-a-year-end-shopping-spree-fc8307eb
[8] D’Innocenzio, A. (2025, November 20). Walmart raises profit expectations as more Americans hunt deals in sluggish economy. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/walmart-economy-retail-consumers-dbdf4780a301ab1c4ba5e1ac523f81e6
[9] D’innocenzio, A. (2025a, November 25). Best Buy ups sales outlook heading into holiday shopping ramp-up. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/best-buy-earnings-economy-a82022e44a9f4eac0196d898509b3cae
[10] Torry, H. (2025, November 22). Inflation Canceled Out Pay Gains in September. The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-today-dow-sp-500-nasdaq-11-21-2025/card/inflation-canceled-out-pay-gains-in-september-D1jIr7hF7nfg5NVd6PjT
[11] D’innocenzio, A. (2025b, November 28). US retailers are about to see if Black Friday benefits from a holiday halo effect. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/black-friday-deals-holiday-shopping-2d85fcbab82d71ecd930b6fe1060f3c1
[12] Timiraos, N., & Grossman, M. (2025, November 25). Wholesale Price Gains Hint at Muted Rise in Fed’s Preferred Inflation Gauge. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/economy/central-banking/wholesale-prices-rose-in-september-filling-in-some-data-for-the-fed-88329165
[13] Torry, H. (2025 November 22). Inflation Canceled Out Pay Gains in September. The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-today-dow-sp-500-nasdaq-11-21-2025/card/inflation-canceled-out-pay-gains-in-september-D1jIr7hF7nfg5NVd6PjT
[14] ADP. (2025b, November 5). ADP National Employment Report: Private Sector Employment Increased by 42,000 Jobs in October; Annual Pay was Up 4.5%. ADP Media Center. https://mediacenter.adp.com/2025-11-05-ADP-National-Employment-Report-Private-Sector-Employment-Increased-by-42,000-Jobs-in-October-Annual-Pay-was-Up-4-5
[15] ADP. (2025a, October 1). ADP National Employment Report: Private Sector Employment Shed 32,000 Jobs in September; Annual Pay was Up 4.5%. ADP Media Center. https://mediacenter.adp.com/2025-10-01-ADP-National-Employment-Report-Private-Sector-Employment-Shed-32,000-Jobs-in-September-Annual-Pay-was-Up-4-5
[16] Cox, J. (2025b, November 25). Private payroll losses accelerated in the past four weeks, ADP reports. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/25/private-payroll-losses-accelerated-in-the-past-four-weeks-adp-reports-.html
[17] Gavrielov, N. (2025, November 24). Trade Chaos Leads Small Businesses to Rethink U.S. Relationships. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/24/business/tariffs-trade-small-business.html
[18] Rhone, K. (2025, November 20). Holiday Hiring Slows, Frustrating Job Seekers. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/20/business/retailers-scale-back-holiday-hiring.html
[19] Lin-Fisher, B. (2025, November 28). What do record Thanksgiving sales mean for Black Friday shoppers? USA TODAY. https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2025/11/28/online-shopping-data-thanksgiving-black-friday/87508948007/
[20] Reuters. (2025, November 28). US Black Friday online sales hit $8.6 billion, says Adobe Analytics. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/us-black-friday-online-sales-hit-86-billion-says-adobe-analytics-2025-11-28/
[21] DiNapoli, J., McKay, R., Cavale, S., & DiNapoli, J. (2025, November 29). Black Friday consumers go online, rather than stand in line. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/black-friday-paradox-more-shoppers-fewer-dollars-2025-11-28/
[22] Young, L. (2025b, November 5). GXO Eyes Expansion as Tariffs Bolster Demand for Foreign Trade Zones. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/gxo-eyes-expansion-as-tariffs-bolster-demand-for-foreign-trade-zones-b4ac132a
[23] LaRocco, L. A. (2025a, November 20). “This is a structural goods recession”: U.S. freight market is starting to roll over as Chinese trade plummets. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/20/trump-tariffs-trade-china-import-decline-freight-recession.html
[24] Chirls, S. (2025a, November 13). Rare October as container volumes, China recovery diverge. FreightWaves. https://www.freightwaves.com/news/rare-october-as-container-volumes-china-recovery-diverge
[25] Chirls, S. (2025b, November 19). Trade volatility pushes LA port towards new record. FreightWaves. https://www.freightwaves.com/?p=567901
[26] Wagner, J. (2025, November 19). Mexico Is Not Just the Top Supplier to the U.S. Now It Is the Top Buyer. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/19/world/americas/us-mexico-trade.html
[27] Swanson, A., & Smialek, J. (2025, November 24). Why Europe and the U.S. Are Still Haggling on Trade. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/24/business/eu-trade-trump-tariffs.html
[28] Stevenson, A. (2025, November 12). Why Factories Will Keep Looking for Alternatives to China. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/12/business/trump-tariffs-china-vietnam.html
[29] MHL Staff. (2025b, October 27). Industrial Vacancy Rate Sees Slight Increase in Q3. MHL News. https://www.mhlnews.com/warehousing/news/55325486/industrial-vacancy-rate-sees-slight-increase-in-q3
[30] Young, L. (2025b, November 5). GXO Eyes Expansion as Tariffs Bolster Demand for Foreign Trade Zones. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/gxo-eyes-expansion-as-tariffs-bolster-demand-for-foreign-trade-zones-b4ac132a
[31] MHL Staff. (2025a, August 19). Warehouse Automation Market to Hit $100 Billion by 2030. MHL News. https://www.mhlnews.com/warehousing/news/55310444/warehouse-automation-market-to-hit-100-billion-by-2030
[32] Garland, M. (2025a, November 20). Walmart grows automation usage throughout supply chain | Supply Chain Dive. Supply Chain Dive. https://www.supplychaindive.com/news/walmart-fulfillment-automation-progress-q3-earnings/806074/
[33] Ryan, T. (2025, November 24). Has Kroger Discovered the Limits of Automated Warehouses? https://retailwire.com/discussion/has-kroger-discovered-the-limits-of-automated-warehouses/
[34] U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2025, November 25). Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update—November 25, 2025. https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/gasdiesel/index.php
[2] Cox, J. (2025a, November 25). Consumer confidence hits lowest point since April as job worries grow. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/25/consumer-confidence-lowest-point-since-april.html
[3] Ensign, R. L., & Wolfe, R. (2025, November 21). The Middle Class Is Buckling Under Almost Five Years of Persistent Inflation. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/personal-finance/the-middle-class-is-buckling-under-almost-five-years-of-persistent-inflation-4d783aee
[4] LaRocco, L. A. (2025b, November 21). Why Trump’s tariff rollback won’t lower grocery prices right away. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/21/food-inflation-price-trump-tariffs.html
[5] Cox, J. (2025a, November 25). Consumer confidence hits lowest point since April as job worries grow. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/25/consumer-confidence-lowest-point-since-april.html
[6] Peters, S. (2025, November 28). U.S. consumers are heading into the holiday season with record credit card debt. Marketplace. https://www.marketplace.org/story/2025/11/28/americans-start-holiday-season-with-record-credit-card-debt
[7] Kapner, S., & Nassauer, S. (2025, November 23). Americans Are on a Year-End Shopping Spree. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/business/retail/americans-are-on-a-year-end-shopping-spree-fc8307eb
[8] D’Innocenzio, A. (2025, November 20). Walmart raises profit expectations as more Americans hunt deals in sluggish economy. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/walmart-economy-retail-consumers-dbdf4780a301ab1c4ba5e1ac523f81e6
[9] D’innocenzio, A. (2025a, November 25). Best Buy ups sales outlook heading into holiday shopping ramp-up. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/best-buy-earnings-economy-a82022e44a9f4eac0196d898509b3cae
[10] Torry, H. (2025, November 22). Inflation Canceled Out Pay Gains in September. The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-today-dow-sp-500-nasdaq-11-21-2025/card/inflation-canceled-out-pay-gains-in-september-D1jIr7hF7nfg5NVd6PjT
[11] D’innocenzio, A. (2025b, November 28). US retailers are about to see if Black Friday benefits from a holiday halo effect. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/black-friday-deals-holiday-shopping-2d85fcbab82d71ecd930b6fe1060f3c1
[12] Timiraos, N., & Grossman, M. (2025, November 25). Wholesale Price Gains Hint at Muted Rise in Fed’s Preferred Inflation Gauge. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/economy/central-banking/wholesale-prices-rose-in-september-filling-in-some-data-for-the-fed-88329165
[13] Torry, H. (2025 November 22). Inflation Canceled Out Pay Gains in September. The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-today-dow-sp-500-nasdaq-11-21-2025/card/inflation-canceled-out-pay-gains-in-september-D1jIr7hF7nfg5NVd6PjT
[14] ADP. (2025b, November 5). ADP National Employment Report: Private Sector Employment Increased by 42,000 Jobs in October; Annual Pay was Up 4.5%. ADP Media Center. https://mediacenter.adp.com/2025-11-05-ADP-National-Employment-Report-Private-Sector-Employment-Increased-by-42,000-Jobs-in-October-Annual-Pay-was-Up-4-5
[15] ADP. (2025a, October 1). ADP National Employment Report: Private Sector Employment Shed 32,000 Jobs in September; Annual Pay was Up 4.5%. ADP Media Center. https://mediacenter.adp.com/2025-10-01-ADP-National-Employment-Report-Private-Sector-Employment-Shed-32,000-Jobs-in-September-Annual-Pay-was-Up-4-5
[16] Cox, J. (2025b, November 25). Private payroll losses accelerated in the past four weeks, ADP reports. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/25/private-payroll-losses-accelerated-in-the-past-four-weeks-adp-reports-.html
[17] Gavrielov, N. (2025, November 24). Trade Chaos Leads Small Businesses to Rethink U.S. Relationships. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/24/business/tariffs-trade-small-business.html
[18] Rhone, K. (2025, November 20). Holiday Hiring Slows, Frustrating Job Seekers. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/20/business/retailers-scale-back-holiday-hiring.html
[19] Lin-Fisher, B. (2025, November 28). What do record Thanksgiving sales mean for Black Friday shoppers? USA TODAY. https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2025/11/28/online-shopping-data-thanksgiving-black-friday/87508948007/
[20] Reuters. (2025, November 28). US Black Friday online sales hit $8.6 billion, says Adobe Analytics. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/us-black-friday-online-sales-hit-86-billion-says-adobe-analytics-2025-11-28/
[21] DiNapoli, J., McKay, R., Cavale, S., & DiNapoli, J. (2025, November 29). Black Friday consumers go online, rather than stand in line. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/black-friday-paradox-more-shoppers-fewer-dollars-2025-11-28/
[22] Young, L. (2025b, November 5). GXO Eyes Expansion as Tariffs Bolster Demand for Foreign Trade Zones. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/gxo-eyes-expansion-as-tariffs-bolster-demand-for-foreign-trade-zones-b4ac132a
[23] LaRocco, L. A. (2025a, November 20). “This is a structural goods recession”: U.S. freight market is starting to roll over as Chinese trade plummets. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/20/trump-tariffs-trade-china-import-decline-freight-recession.html
[24] Chirls, S. (2025a, November 13). Rare October as container volumes, China recovery diverge. FreightWaves. https://www.freightwaves.com/news/rare-october-as-container-volumes-china-recovery-diverge
[25] Chirls, S. (2025b, November 19). Trade volatility pushes LA port towards new record. FreightWaves. https://www.freightwaves.com/?p=567901
[26] Wagner, J. (2025, November 19). Mexico Is Not Just the Top Supplier to the U.S. Now It Is the Top Buyer. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/19/world/americas/us-mexico-trade.html
[27] Swanson, A., & Smialek, J. (2025, November 24). Why Europe and the U.S. Are Still Haggling on Trade. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/24/business/eu-trade-trump-tariffs.html
[28] Stevenson, A. (2025, November 12). Why Factories Will Keep Looking for Alternatives to China. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/12/business/trump-tariffs-china-vietnam.html
[29] MHL Staff. (2025b, October 27). Industrial Vacancy Rate Sees Slight Increase in Q3. MHL News. https://www.mhlnews.com/warehousing/news/55325486/industrial-vacancy-rate-sees-slight-increase-in-q3
[30] Young, L. (2025b, November 5). GXO Eyes Expansion as Tariffs Bolster Demand for Foreign Trade Zones. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/gxo-eyes-expansion-as-tariffs-bolster-demand-for-foreign-trade-zones-b4ac132a
[31] MHL Staff. (2025a, August 19). Warehouse Automation Market to Hit $100 Billion by 2030. MHL News. https://www.mhlnews.com/warehousing/news/55310444/warehouse-automation-market-to-hit-100-billion-by-2030
[32] Garland, M. (2025a, November 20). Walmart grows automation usage throughout supply chain | Supply Chain Dive. Supply Chain Dive. https://www.supplychaindive.com/news/walmart-fulfillment-automation-progress-q3-earnings/806074/
[33] Ryan, T. (2025, November 24). Has Kroger Discovered the Limits of Automated Warehouses? https://retailwire.com/discussion/has-kroger-discovered-the-limits-of-automated-warehouses/
[34] U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2025, November 25). Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update—November 25, 2025. https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/gasdiesel/index.php