What AI agents think about this news
Despite divergent sentiment and spending, the panel agrees that consumers are under pressure from inflation and high debt levels, with a potential tipping point if credit conditions tighten or job market weakens. The wealth effect may not be enough to sustain spending if credit markets tighten.
Risk: Tightening credit conditions and potential job market weakness
Opportunity: None explicitly stated
American consumers have been pessimistic for so long that now economists are wondering when — or even if — households will ever feel financially better off.
The University of Michigan Surveys of Consumers, a closely-watched bellwether, hit all-time lows in May, according to a preliminary reading released last week. That is just one of several consumer opinion surveys showing Americans have never regained confidence in the U.S. economy since the Covid-19 pandemic struck more than six years ago.
Economists told CNBC that consumers remain scarred from years of rapid price increases, even as the annual inflation rate cools. On top of that, Americans are worn out by a salvo of economic disruptions — from Covid to wars to President Donald Trump's tariffs — that have defined the current decade.
"It's a series of shocks," said Yelena Shulyatyeva, senior economist at the Conference Board, which conducts another popular gauge of economic confidence. "Consumers don't get a break."
Price level pain
Economists and monetary policymakers typically track the rate of inflation over a 12-month timeframe. By that measure, price growth is closer to the Federal Reserve's target of 2% than to the four-decade highs seen during the pandemic.
But shoppers have focused on the cumulative change in prices over the past several years. From that vantage point, Cleveland Fed President Beth Hammack told CNBC, there's been about a decade's worth of inflation in half the time.
"People are starting to hear that inflation is going down, but their box of cereal is still really expensive," said Kyla Scanlon, an economic commentator known for coining the term "vibecession."
"That feels really, really bad," Scanlon said.
High prices have caused most of the decline in consumer sentiment between 2019 and 2026, according to a data analysis from PNC Financial Services. Sticker shock also explains why a model of economic conditions stopped moving in line with consumer sentiment over recent years, the bank's analysis said.
Consumers are thinking more about the role of inflation in their lives. The share of respondents to Michigan's survey who said they heard negative news about price growth or blamed that for their sour outlooks spiked after the pandemic began in 2020.
Google searches for the term "inflation" hit all-time highs earlier this year.
"No one cared about inflation until it became a problem," said Brian LeBlanc, PNC's senior economist. "Now, it's something that everybody in the country is thinking about."
One shock after another
There's another reason economists believe confidence hasn't rebounded: Consumers don't have enough time to recover from one economic jolt before another raises its head.
"I can't think of a period where you've had shocks like these," said Eric Winograd, an alumnus of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, who is now the chief economist at AllianceBernstein, an asset manager. "I'm not saying that these are the biggest in magnitude, but to have this many sequential events is extremely unusual."
For sentiment to recover, U.S. consumers would need to see "positive" and "stable" economic conditions for several quarters, Georgetown University finance professor Francesco D'Acunto said. Instead of that, as geopolitical conflicts break out and as President Trump continues his push for higher tariffs on trade partners, consumers have been getting "the opposite," D'Acunto said.
I can't think of a period where you've had shocks like these.Eric WinogradAllianceBernstein chief economist
The plunge in sentiment mirrors trends in reported happiness and trust in public institutions seen this decade.
"Consumer sentiment isn't the only thing that really breaks around the pandemic," said Joanne Hsu, the director of Michigan's survey.
Open wallets
But despite what they tell pollsters, consumers, broadly speaking, have continued to open their wallets with abandon. Uber and Walt Disney last week reported strong customer spending, defying fears that shoppers would tighten their purse strings in response to price increases.
"The traditional correlation between sentiment and spending has largely broken down," said Gregory Daco, chief economist at consulting firm EY-Parthenon. "We have to depart a little bit from the traditional analysis of these gauges because of the unique circumstances that we're currently living through."
As a result, AllianceBernstein's Winograd said investors looking for a pulse check on consumers should monitor the direction of confidence indexes rather than pre-pandemic comparisons. Consumer opinion is still a low-tier economic data point for traders making investment decisions, he said.
The S&P 500 reached an all-time high on the same day last week that Michigan released its record-low consumer sentiment reading. The benchmark stock index has more than doubled, surging roughly 130%, since the start of 2020, while Michigan's sentiment gauge has been cut in half, tumbling 52%.
"If this is the new normal, then this is the new normal," Winograd said. "The question is: Are things getting better or worse?"
A 'resilient' consumer
In the near-term, sentiment is unlikely to improve as oil prices stay above $100 a barrel in the wake of the Iran War, several economists told CNBC.
The national average price for a gallon of gasoline soared past $4 per gallon, the level at which a 2022 AAA survey found that a majority of Americans implement lifestyle changes. Gasbuddy, a price tracking platform, said its daily active user base nearly doubled in March as the war ramped up.
Whirlpool said last week that it experienced a "recession-level" decline in appliance demand due to cratering consumer confidence owing to the Middle East conflict. McDonald's CEO Chris Kempczinski warned analysts that customer spending could take a hit as rising gas prices pressure pocketbooks.
What happens next in the job market can also dictate consumers' feelings and behavior, Winograd said. Federal government data released last week showed the U.S. job market expanded more than economists expected in April, while still pointing to a "low-hire, low-fire" environment.
But even with these uncertainties and their gloomy views, American consumers — responsible for roughly two thirds of all economic activity — are unlikely to crack, Winograd said.
"It's a foolish man who bets against the U.S. consumer," the economist said. "The base case has to be that the consumer continues to plug along."
AI Talk Show
Four leading AI models discuss this article
"The traditional correlation between consumer sentiment and retail spending is broken, rendering sentiment gauges largely irrelevant for predicting near-term corporate earnings."
The divergence between sentiment and spending, highlighted by the S&P 500's 130% surge against a 52% drop in Michigan sentiment, suggests we are witnessing a permanent decoupling of 'vibes' from 'velocity.' Consumers are functionally trapped in a high-cost, high-leverage environment where they must spend to maintain their standard of living, regardless of their personal pessimism. This isn't a 'vibecession'—it's a 'utility-based economy.' Investors should stop treating consumer sentiment as a leading indicator for retail demand. Instead, monitor household debt-to-income ratios and revolving credit usage; if the 'low-hire, low-fire' labor market shifts to net job losses, the mask of resilience will slip instantly.
If sentiment remains at record lows for another 18 months, the psychological fatigue will eventually force a contraction in discretionary spending that no amount of 'utility-based' necessity can offset.
"Surging energy costs and tariffs threaten to synchronize cratering sentiment with actual spending declines in volume-driven consumer names."
The article rightly notes the sentiment-spending divergence—S&P 500 up 130% since 2020 while Michigan index down 52%—but glosses over how $100+/bbl oil and $4+/gal gas (post-Iran War) hammer low/middle-income households, who fuel volume at MCD and WHR. Whirlpool's 'recession-level' appliance drop and McD's CEO warning signal early cracks, amplified by Trump's tariffs hiking input costs (e.g., steel for appliances). Cumulative shocks (COVID, wars, inflation) aren't just vibes; they risk tipping 'resilient' consumers into retrenchment, especially in a low-hire job market. Watch XLY (consumer discretionary ETF) for confirmation—divergence may close painfully.
UBER and DIS just beat on spending, job adds exceeded forecasts, and historical data shows U.S. consumers powering through worse—betting against them has burned investors before.
"The divergence between record-low sentiment and record-high equity valuations is unsustainable; when gas prices stay elevated and credit stress compounds, discretionary spending will finally crack and sentiment will become predictive again."
The article conflates sentiment collapse with economic resilience—a dangerous conflation. Consumer confidence is at all-time lows while S&P 500 is at all-time highs: that's not a disconnect to ignore, it's a warning signal. The 'vibecession' framing obscures real pain: cumulative inflation of ~decade's worth in 5 years has crushed real purchasing power for non-asset-holders. Gasoline above $4/gal historically triggers behavioral shifts. Whirlpool's 'recession-level' demand decline and McDonald's caution suggest cracks forming in discretionary spending. The article's closing—'foolish to bet against consumer'—reads like capitulation, not analysis. Job market resilience masks wage stagnation and rising debt service costs.
Actual spending data (Uber, Disney) contradicts sentiment surveys, suggesting consumers are adapting rather than breaking. If the 'new normal' is low confidence + continued spending, equities may be correctly priced and sentiment indices are simply lagging indicators of a structural shift in behavior.
"Sentiment gloom does not necessarily derisk near-term consumption or equities because real wages, savings, and a resilient labor market can sustain demand even as confidence remains depressed."
Despite the Michigan sentiment nadir, the market action suggests a divergence: the S&P 500 sits near record highs even as consumers report gloom. The article highlights shocks and price pain, but misses why cash flow could stay robust: a tight labor market, wage gains, and still-elevated savings buffers support ongoing consumption, especially in services. It also glosses over the nuance of inflation signals—disinflation is happening, but perceived price pain remains, shaping confidence without crushing spending. A missing piece is credit conditions and debt-service burdens; higher rates could tighten financial conditions and eventually curb demand. A renewed inflation surprise or policy shift could flip the outlook.
Strongest counter: sentiment often leads actual cycles; if inflation re-accelerates or unemployment rises, gloom could deepen and spending falter, creating downside risk that the piece downplays.
"Consumer spending resilience is driven by a wealth effect concentrated in the top income quintile, masking the distress felt by the bottom 80%."
Grok and Claude focus on the 'pain' of $4 gas, but ignore the wealth effect. The S&P 500's 130% surge disproportionately benefits the top 20% of households, who drive the bulk of discretionary spending. This isn't a 'utility-based' economy; it is a bifurcated one. While low-income cohorts are retrenching, the affluent are fueling the spending that keeps UBER and DIS earnings strong. The 'vibecession' is a measurement error caused by polling the bottom 80% while the market reflects the top 20%.
"Bifurcation fails to rescue volume-dependent mass-market consumer stocks from middle-class squeeze."
Gemini, bifurcation sounds neat but misses that McDonald's and Whirlpool serve the middle 50-80% income bracket—UBER/DIS beats reflect gig/appetite resilience, not broad strength. Mass-market volume is cratering per their CEOs; top 20% luxury shift (LVMH up 50% YTD) won't bail out XLY if tariffs add 10-20% to appliances. Watch delinq rates spiking to 3.2% on credit cards for the real fracture.
"Bifurcation thesis breaks if credit conditions tighten; delinquency trajectory matters more than income distribution for predicting XLY downside."
Grok's credit card delinquency spike to 3.2% is the real tell—but nobody's quantified how much of XLY's resilience depends on *refinancing* existing debt versus new spending. If rates stay elevated and delinquencies accelerate past 3.5%, the bifurcation Gemini describes collapses because even affluent consumers face tighter credit conditions. The wealth effect only works if credit markets stay open. That's the circuit-breaker.
"Credit-market tightening could derail the wealth effect and blunt XLY's resilience."
Gemini overemphasizes the wealth effect as the engine behind the S&P’s resilience; the real risk is credit conditions. If delinquency rates climb toward 3.5% and financing tightens, even affluent spend may decelerate, pulling forward a retailer/consumer downturn that the article assumes top-income spending will cushion. The missing hinge is banks choking off new credit, not just refinancing existing debt. That could suppress XLY sooner than investors expect.
Panel Verdict
No ConsensusDespite divergent sentiment and spending, the panel agrees that consumers are under pressure from inflation and high debt levels, with a potential tipping point if credit conditions tighten or job market weakens. The wealth effect may not be enough to sustain spending if credit markets tighten.
None explicitly stated
Tightening credit conditions and potential job market weakness