Recent revisions to U.S. payroll employment data have prompted renewed scrutiny of the reliability of official labor market statistics. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported in August that adjustments to May and June 2025 figures resulted in a downward revision of 258,000 jobs combined, leaving monthly gains for those periods below 20,000 positions each. July’s reported gain was 73,000 jobs.
Despite the size of these changes, researchers from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco argue that such revisions are not out of line with historical trends. In a March 2025 study, Sylvain Leduc and Luiz Edgard Oliveira found that short-term revisions to both payroll employment and consumer price index (CPI) inflation data over recent years were similar to those seen before the pandemic.
“Our findings ease some concerns about the reliability of the data and that monetary policy may become too gradual. During times of high uncertainty, policymakers may put less weight on their forecasts and let the evolution of incoming data have more influence on their actions (see, for example, Daly 2023). If policymakers also perceive the data as more uncertain, they may need more evidence that the economy is moving in a particular direction before adjusting policy, which runs the risk of falling behind the curve.”
Concerns about economic data reliability have persisted throughout this period. Media outlets such as The Economist questioned whether U.S. economic data has become less clear in recent months. In July 2025, BLS addressed reductions in CPI-related data collection.
Leduc and Oliveira used real-time datasets from the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia to compare average monthly payroll employment revisions since 1990. Their analysis showed that first-round revisions for January through June 2025 remained within historic ranges—higher than those in 2023 and 2024 but consistent with pre-pandemic norms.
Monthly breakdowns reveal that June’s first revision was notably larger than others from recent months or years but comparable to several instances since December 2023.
“It is important to note, however, that Figures 1 and 2 focus on the first revision for each month, so they do not capture the second and latest large revision to May 2025 data. We repeat our analysis focusing on second revisions only, or on the average between first and second revisions. Under these alternate definitions, the latest readings are closer to those of preceding months and the historical sample average (not shown). Our general results also hold true when we scale the revisions by total payroll employment for each month.”
Extending their review back to November 1964 using available real-time datasets allowed them to evaluate how often large adjustments occur. They found that while substantial negative or positive changes like those seen recently are rare—occurring about seven percent of the time—they are not unprecedented.
“Overall, some recent revisions to payroll employment gains data were large relative to those issued over the last year or so. Still, over the last 60 years, there have been examples of first revisions that were of similar or greater magnitude. This continues to suggest that the incoming data are within the historical range and not generally subject to greater fluctuations—and thus may not reflect higher uncertainty—than in the past.”
The authors conclude that while sizable short-term changes can attract attention and raise questions about economic conditions or policymaking responses, current patterns do not signal an unusual level of unpredictability compared with previous decades.
