What to make of surprisingly low US crop ratings: Braun
NAPERVILLE, Illinois - The U.S. corn crop has gotten off to a somewhat disappointing start in what is supposed to be a record producing season.
Meanwhile, U.S. spring wheat is experiencing its second-worst start to the growing season in history after this year's plantings dropped to a 55-year low.
What might these early figures mean for the growing season overall? How do they compare with past years? And where are the problem spots and near-term prospects for improvement?
SHORT OF EXPECTATIONS
The U.S. Department of Agriculture on Tuesday afternoon rated 68% of the U.S. corn crop in good-to-excellent (GE) condition in this season's initial rating, marking the lowest starting health since 2019.
That was well below analysts' average estimate of 73% GE, though initial condition reports from the Crop Watch producers over the weekend averaged out to a six-year low, at least.
A 68% GE is not all that bad. On average over the last three years, the initial U.S. corn score comes in around 72%. Additionally, the slower start may be explainable.
The unanimous feedback from the Crop Watch producers was that it has been too cold, cloudy and rainy, and the plants are not growing quickly. Hail, frosts, wind, rain and even a period of excessive heat recently stressed crops in the western Corn Belt, which was reported by Crop Watchers.
This showed up in USDA's data on Tuesday. Averaging initial corn conditions by state over the past three years, North Dakota and Ohio stand out. North Dakota at 48% GE is 24 percentage points below average and Ohio's 41% is 37 points below.
Conditions in top producer Iowa are 4 percentage points ahead of normal, Illinois is 7 points behind, South Dakota is down 16 points, Nebraska is down 2 points and Minnesota is 4 points behind.
OK OUTLOOK?
Three factors may help ease any concerns about current U.S. corn crop health.
The corn crop is only two-thirds emerged nationally, a lower-than-usual portion to coincide with the first condition scores. This allows for some play in the near-term figures, as newly emerged crops, if in good shape, could boost the overall score next week.
Although not necessarily unusual, less than 40% of corn in Ohio and North Dakota was emerged as of Sunday, possibly allowing for future improvement.
All Crop Watch producers last weekend expressed the dire need for heat and sun, and that should start arriving over the weekend after this week finishes out on the cooler, cloudy side.
The pattern might not necessarily be long-lasting, but even a short, warm, sunny spell in early June can go a long way for early crop growth.
U.S. corn was initially rated 65% GE in 2017, and calculations at the time pointed to near or below-trend yield probabilities. This caused the market to misjudge the crop potential all year, and the 2017 corn crop achieved a new record yield.
The 2017 crop was rated 60% GE by the end of July, not too huge of a change from the initial. So even though 60% would not be considered stellar by itself, the lack of large rating swings that season may have been telling.
WHEAT WOES
U.S. spring wheat was rated 45% GE as of Sunday, tied with 2021 as the second-lowest initial rating over the 40-year history. The worst was 34% in 1988.
Those two years are bad company, as they featured well-below-trend U.S. spring wheat yields as both seasons included drought. The 2025 crop is already starting in the hole as U.S. farmers intend to plant their smallest spring wheat area since 1970.
Some 60% of U.S. spring wheat was emerged by Sunday, comparable to 66% on the same date in 2021.
North Dakota, which produces half of the U.S. spring wheat crop, must remain on watch as only 37% of the wheat there is GE and 26% is considered poor or very poor. Recent cold and wet weather has battered the young wheat crop, so the coming flip to better weather may offer improvement opportunities.
Market analysts had expected the initial spring wheat conditions to come in at 71% GE, so the result was much more shocking than the one for corn.
But the lighter figures for both certainly set up the potential for market scares this summer if an unfavorable weather pattern were to set in. Karen Braun is a market analyst for Reuters. Views expressed above are her own.
(Writing by Karen Braun Editing by Matthew Lewis)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Tahawul Tech
a minute ago
- Tahawul Tech
legal uncertainties Archives
"The current supply is not adequate to meet the demand from large data centres and will not be adequate in the foreseeable future". Learn more about the resulting strain on the U.S. electricity grid below. #tahawultech #DataCentres #EnergyGrid
Tahawul Tech
31 minutes ago
- Tahawul Tech
Cisco President outlines the biggest AI adoption mistake
Cisco's President Jeetu Patel doesn't believe in the doomsaying from other tech leaders that AI will make entry-level jobs vanish. 'I just refuse to believe that humans are going to be obsolete. It just seems like it's an absurd concept', Jeetu Patel, who's also the Chief Product Officer at AI infrastructure company Cisco, told CNN. While Patel acknowledged there will be 'growing pains where people will get disrupted,' he strongly pushed back on Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei's comments saying AI will spike unemployment to as high as 20% and eliminate half of all white-collar entry level jobs. He's one of several tech leaders that have pushed back on Amodei's narrative; others have said AI is likely to change jobs by requiring workers to adopt new skills rather than wiping out jobs completely. Still, his comments come amid a plunge in entry-level hiring and as tech giants are increasingly using AI in the workplace, raising questions about the future of work. 'Dario is a friend. We are investors in Anthropic. I have a ton of respect for what he's done. In this area though, I have a slightly different opinion on a couple of different dimensions,' Patel at Ai4, an AI conference in Las Vegas. 'I reject the notion that humans are going to be obsolete in like five years, that we're not going to have anything to do and we're going to be sitting on the beach… It doesn't make any sense.' In particular, Patel said he has a 'huge concern' with Amodei's line of thinking that AI could wipe out entry-level jobs because companies benefit from adding younger workers who often better understand new technologies. 'If you just say, 'I'm going to eradicate all entry-level jobs,' that's the stupidest thing a company can do in the long term because what you've done is you've actually taken away the injection of new perspective,' the Cisco exec said. 'A really bad strategy' Patel argued that for some jobs, having significant experience can be a 'massive liability.' For instance, he said people often hold assumptions about things that may not have worked five years ago, but do now. That's why Patel said he spends 'an enormous amount of time' with younger employees and interns. 'I learn a lot from people who've just gotten out of college because they have a fresh and unique perspective. And that perspective coupled with (my) experience makes magic happen,' Patel said. 'It would be a really bad strategy to not have early in career people and entry level people injected in your workplace.' Is AI already hurting entry-level workers? Some economists say there are early signs suggesting AI may already be depressing entry-level jobs. Even though the overall job market has been mostly healthy, the Class of 2025 faces the worst job market for new college graduates in years. For the first time since tracking started in 1980, the unemployment rate for recent graduates (those 22 to 27 years old with at least a bachelor's degree) is higher than the national unemployment rate, according to Oxford Economics. Entry-level hiring has tumbled by 23% between March 2020 and May 2025, outpacing the 18% decline in overall hiring over that span, according to data from LinkedIn. This is happening for a variety of reasons, some of them unrelated to AI. But AI does seem to be playing a role, some economists say. For instance, Oxford Economics noted that employment in two industries vulnerable to AI disruption — computer science and mathematics — has dropped by 8% since 2022 for recent graduates. By comparison, employment has little changed in those industries for older workers. 'AI is definitely displacing some of these lower-level jobs,' Matthew Martin, senior US economist at Oxford Economics, told CNN in June. 'AI can't buy you a steak dinner' Economists and AI researchers say the jobs most at risk involve repetitive tasks that can be automated, such as data input. 'The less interesting clerical jobs will go away. They will be automated. And if you don't automate, you'll go out of business,' Alan Ranger, vice president of marketing at Cognigy, told CNN on the sidelines of Ai4. Cognigy would know: It sells conversational AI agents that provide customer support for banks, airlines and other companies. Ranger said Cognigy's AI agents came to the rescue when German airline Lufthansa had to cancel every flight due to a strike in Germany earlier this year. The technology allowed Lufthansa to rebook thousands of flights per minute, he said. Ranger argued that companies won't massively lay off customer support workers because humans still need to manage the AI agents, design the software and tackle other complex issues. Yet he did concede that companies will have fewer customer support workers in the future as people leave the industry and retire, and because firms will hire for different roles. 'Account management and sales roles won't get replaced anytime soon,' Ranger said. 'An AI can't buy you a steak dinner.' Patel, the Cisco executive, said the onus is on the tech industry and society as a whole to ensure a smooth transition to superintelligent AI. 'In tech, we live in a bubble. We keep thinking, 'Oh, disruption is just part of it.' But when a steel mill worker gets disrupted, they don't become an AI prompt engineer,' he said. Patel said there is a lot of retraining and reskilling that must be done in tandem with governments and educators. 'The tech community has to actually take some responsibility for this,' he said. 'Because if we don't, you will create some level of pain in society and we want to make sure we avoid that.' Source: CNN Image Credit: Stock Image
Zawya
an hour ago
- Zawya
Markets, Trump in delicate policy dance: McGeever
(The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters.) ORLANDO, Florida - U.S. President Donald Trump has faced little opposition in his drive to rip up the global economic rule book, whether from his fellow Republicans, political opponents or institutional guard rails. The only exception has been "the market". But now even investors are holding their fire, enabling more risk to build up in the financial system. Wall Street's reaction to Trump's "Liberation Day" tariffs on April 2 was so ferocious that the president did something he had rarely done: he backed down. Trillions of dollars were wiped off the value of U.S. stocks amid a 10% nosedive from April 3-4. The only two-day selloffs since the 1930s that were bigger occurred during the Second World War, "Black Monday" in 1987, the Global Financial Crisis in 2008, and the pandemic in 2020. The stock market bottomed out on April 7 after Trump paused most of his country-specific tariffs. Wall Street has not looked back since, with the S&P 500 rebounding 35% to a new all-time high. This episode suggests that "the market" is one of the few true checks on Trump's apparent pursuit to re-shape the U.S. – and indeed the world – economy. The only problem is that the president has continued to pursue unorthodox policies in recent months - including challenging the independence of the Federal Reserve, firing statisticians and slapping tariffs on countries for non-economic reasons – and investors have failed to tap the brakes. FED PUT The so-called "Trump put" -- the idea that the president won't let the markets fall too far -- is essentially a funhouse mirror version of the famous "Fed put", the long-held belief that, in the event of a crisis, the central bank will step in to restore stability. Trump seemingly did just that in April, but it was to clean up a mess of his own making. And one could argue that it was actually investors who came to the economy's rescue by putting pressure on the president to reconsider policies considered ill-advised by most economists. Trump and markets are therefore now in a curious dance. Investors appear to believe that markets can ultimately stop Trump from pushing the envelope too far on tariffs or other policies. But as a result, investors are not over-reacting – or reacting at all – to the latest controversies around the Bureau of Labor Statistics firing, his attacks on Fed Chair Jerome Powell, his pressure on Intel's CEO to resign, or the outsized tariffs slapped on Brazil and India. This, in turn, has powered the markets to new record highs, emboldening Trump to push the envelope even further. RISK ON So even though the market has the power to rein in the president's economic policy excesses, it's not using it. Why hasn't the market pushed back? As the cliche goes, equity investors are paid to be optimistic. It's in their interest to keep the train hurtling along provided there aren't any immediate obstacles to derail it. There are, of course, a few pretty large hurdles on the horizon for the U.S. economy, including the highest tariffs since the 1930s and some of the biggest budget deficits since World War II outside of crisis periods. But until these or other issues present an immediate economic threat, markets can choose to ignore them. By under-reacting to Trump's unorthodox policies, markets may be not only delaying the day of reckoning but amplifying the potential impact. Why? Genuine economic and geopolitical paradigm shifts are underway, and investors are not pricing in the attendant risk. Nobody knows what the ultimate impact of these shifts will be, but we do know that with greater uncertainty comes greater downside risk. Yet equity volatility is currently the lowest it has been this year, and even in the bond market – not known for its optimism – volatility is the lowest in three and a half years, while U.S. corporate bond spreads are the tightest since 1998. Ultimately, the market is unlikely to call Trump's bluff until something truly unexpected or extreme hits. In the meantime, investors can justify this nonchalance by saying that corporate earnings growth is solid, AI enthusiasm is high, economic growth remains decent, unemployment is low, and consumers are still spending. Wall Street is choosing not to put on the brakes, meaning this train will continue rolling on. Whether it's heading for a collision is an open question. (The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters) (By Jamie McGeever Editing by Aidan Lewis)
