IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

A comparison of the CPI and the PCE price index

  • Todd E. Clark

In the United States, there are two broad indexes of consumer prices: the consumer price index, or CPI, and the chain price index for personal consumption expenditures, or PCEPI. Because the indexes are similar in many respects, the inflation rates measured with them often move in parallel. There are, however, some important differences, which, at times, can lead to large gaps between CPI and PCEPI inflation rates. In 1998, for example, the CPI rose 1.5 percent, while the PCEPI increased just 0.7 percent. The discrepancy was even larger excluding food and energy prices: the core CPI grew 2.4 percent in 1998, while the core PCEPI rose just 1.2 percent.> Such gaps between CPI and PCEPI inflation rates raise a simple question: Is one index better than the other? From a monetary policy perspective, an index could be superior in two respects. First, one of the price indexes might be a more accurate measure of inflation today and in the very recent past. To gauge progress toward price stability over the past year, for example, a policymaker would like to know if either the CPI or PCEPI more accurately measures consumer price inflation today. Second, one of the indexes could be a superior measure of historical inflation rates. A policymaker would probably want to use the better historical indicator for gauging long-term price trends and developing inflation forecasting models.> Because some observers have recently suggested the PCEPI may be a better price index, Clark examines whether the PCEPI is truly superior to the CPI. He reviews the differences in the construction of the indexes and examines the advantages and disadvantages of the CPI and PCEPI. He concludes that, while some observers might weigh the many pros and cons of the indexes differently, with recent improvements the CPI is the better price index.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City in its journal Economic Review.

Volume (Year): (1999)
Issue (Month): Q III ()
Pages: 15-29

in new window

Handle: RePEc:fip:fedker:y:1999:i:qiii:p:15-29:n:v.84no.3
Contact details of provider: Postal: One Memorial Drive, Kansas City, MO 64198
Phone: (816) 881-2254
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

Order Information: Email:

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fip:fedker:y:1999:i:qiii:p:15-29:n:v.84no.3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (LDayrit)

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.