Chicago Fed Midwest Manufacturing Index (CFMMI)
The Chicago Fed Midwest Manufacturing Index (CFMMI) was a monthly estimate by major industry of manufacturing output in the Seventh Federal Reserve District states of Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan and Wisconsin. It was a composite index of 15 manufacturing industries that used hours worked data to measure monthly changes in regional activity.
The CFMMI is no longer being released.
More about the CFMMI
The CFMMI provided a regional comparison with the manufacturing component of the industrial production index (IPMFG) compiled by the Federal Reserve Board. Although the IPMFG is constructed differently than the CFMMI, it also uses hours worked data as measures of industry output for about 60 percent of its total. (Some of the data used to construct the CFMMI are from Haver Analytics. In addition, the series referred to as IPMFG here corresponds to the Haver Analytics mnemonic IPMFN.)
The Midwest Manufacturing Index: The Chicago Fed's New Regional Economic Indicator
The Chicago Fed Midwest Manufacturing Index (CFMMI) debuted in 1987 after the publication of this Economic Perspectives article, which explains the CFMMI, its conceptual background, construction, and data-base manipulations.
Reconsidering the Regional Manufacturing Indexes
The popularity of regional manufacturing indexes among Reserve Banks started to increase about 1989. This Economic Perspectives article discusses eight different regional index models -- both nonparametric and parametric.
New! Improved! The MMI Gets a Different Look
In 1989, three substantial changes were made to the Chicago Fed Midwest Manufacturing Index. This Chicago Fed Letter explains the changes and what prompted them. They include the movement of the base year from 1973 to 1983, a shift in methodology, and the change of the national comparative index.
Tracking Midwest Manufacturing and Productivity Growth
This 1993 Economic Perspectives article explores the 1980's manufacturing boom. It explains how Midwestern manufacturing output grew more rapidly than the nation's output, even as Midwestern employment levels were dropping.