In a world saturated with data, information has never been so abundant. And yet, a nuanced understanding of economic dynamics can sometimes seem elusive. GDP, inflation and productivity continue to structure much of our reading of the economy, but their ability to faithfully reflect today’s reality is increasingly being called into question.
This observation does not come from marginal voices, but from the very heart of institutions. In an article published by Finance & Development (IMF), Rebecca Riley, Director of the ESCoE in the United Kingdom, highlights the growing limitations of statistical tools inherited from the industrial era when faced with an economy now shaped by intangibles, data and rapidly changing behaviours.
We are operating in an economy where innovation, services and intangible assets play a central role, while many of our measurement instruments still rely on conceptual frameworks designed for a tangible, production-based economy. This gap creates a form of desynchronisation: economic decisions are sometimes based on data that struggle to capture ongoing transformations.
This paradox is all the more striking given that we have never had access to so much data. The challenge, therefore, is not access to information, but its relevance. Increasing computing power or the frequency of statistical releases is not sufficient if the indicators themselves no longer allow us to clearly distinguish genuine value creation from purely financial or inflation-driven effects.
Rebecca Riley therefore calls for a deeper reflection on what we are truly measuring. Improving accuracy without questioning meaning is akin to sharpening the image without better understanding the landscape. Distinguishing between real productivity, asset price inflation and nominal growth becomes essential if we are to avoid a partial, or even misleading, reading of the economic situation.
This line of thinking echoes that of many economists, including Jean-Marc Vittori, who reminds us that GDP remains a valuable, yet incomplete, indicator for grasping an economy that is increasingly complex and intangible. Yesterday’s tools must be complemented, contextualised and interpreted with discernment.
These statistical limitations are not merely an academic debate. They underline the importance for investors of not relying exclusively on aggregated figures, but of adopting a more qualitative and nuanced reading of economic and financial environments.
In a context marked by uncertainty and complexity, the challenge is not to dismiss indicators, but to place them within a broader analytical framework. This requires a refined understanding of the true drivers of value, close attention to the resilience of business models, and a wealth management approach grounded in coherence, diversification and time.
Rethinking our measurement tools is a long-term undertaking. In the meantime, the ability to take a step back, to interpret data with discernment and to support decision-making with rigour remains more essential than ever.