gdp forecasts - chase.com forecasts output and employment june 2, 2014 regional perspectives:...
TRANSCRIPT
GDP Forecasts
OUTPUT AND EMPLOYMENT
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: Alabama Economic Outlook
Commercial Banking 2
REAL GDP (% over the four quarters of the year) 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
United States 1.9 -2.8 -0.2 2.8 2.0 2.0 2.6 3.5 3.8
Alabama 0.8 -1.3 -1.5 2.0 1.1 1.2 1.5 2.4 3.0Alaska 1.7 3.4 4.1 -0.4 1.5 1.0 1.2 2.6 3.6Arizona 1.0 -3.9 -5.3 0.5 2.0 2.5 2.7 3.7 4.1Arkansas 0.4 -0.6 -0.3 1.8 0.9 0.9 1.2 3.0 3.3California 0.5 -2.2 -3.1 0.6 2.0 3.5 3.6 4.1 4.3Colorado 1.9 0.0 -0.5 2.0 1.9 2.7 4.0 4.5 4.4Connecticut 0.5 -3.3 -1.8 0.7 -0.1 0.6 2.0 2.6 3.2Delaware -0.1 -2.1 2.0 0.5 0.6 1.3 3.1 3.2 3.7District of Columbia 2.4 1.6 0.8 2.6 1.3 1.0 2.0 3.1 3.7Florida -0.8 -4.4 -3.6 0.5 1.5 2.8 3.8 4.2 4.2Georgia 1.0 -2.6 -2.9 1.7 2.1 2.4 3.0 3.4 3.7Hawaii 1.2 -0.8 -1.2 2.7 1.9 1.9 2.6 3.2 3.8Idaho 2.4 -1.1 -1.2 1.0 0.2 1.2 2.8 3.5 3.8Illinois 0.2 -2.1 -1.5 1.9 2.0 1.6 1.4 2.6 3.4Indiana 0.7 -3.8 -1.5 4.8 2.6 2.6 2.0 3.4 4.0Iowa 1.9 -2.1 -0.3 2.0 2.3 2.1 1.9 2.9 3.6Kansas 3.1 -0.7 -1.1 2.8 2.5 1.4 1.8 2.9 3.5Kentucky -0.4 -1.7 -0.7 3.9 1.8 1.3 1.2 2.3 3.5Louisiana -2.4 0.3 4.2 2.6 -1.1 1.5 1.7 2.5 3.4Maine -0.4 -1.5 -0.4 1.3 0.5 0.6 1.4 2.5 2.9Maryland 1.5 0.4 0.5 2.7 1.9 1.9 1.5 2.7 3.5Massachusetts 1.3 -0.4 -0.1 3.0 1.9 2.0 2.1 3.3 3.8Michigan -2.3 -7.2 -4.0 4.4 3.0 2.1 2.1 3.1 4.2Minnesota 0.7 -0.4 -1.1 2.4 2.3 3.0 2.5 3.6 4.1Missouri 2.8 -0.7 -1.8 0.8 0.2 1.9 1.4 2.4 3.0Montana 1.1 -0.8 -2.0 1.3 0.9 1.9 2.0 2.9 3.3Montana 2.4 -1.2 -0.6 2.2 2.3 2.1 2.4 3.3 3.8Nebraska 2.4 0.6 1.4 3.1 1.7 1.4 1.8 3.1 3.6Nevada 1.2 -5.1 -5.3 0.4 1.7 2.0 3.6 4.6 4.2New Hampshire 0.1 -1.1 0.1 2.9 1.5 0.7 1.6 2.8 3.3New Jersey 0.5 -1.6 -2.1 1.0 0.6 1.5 1.8 2.3 2.9New Mexico 0.1 0.1 1.4 0.3 -0.1 0.3 1.4 3.4 3.8New York -0.2 -1.9 0.6 2.9 1.2 1.4 1.9 3.1 3.7North Carolina 1.5 -0.7 -0.1 1.6 1.3 2.8 3.0 3.3 3.8North Dakota 6.0 6.4 4.6 7.4 9.9 10.0 5.6 7.3 6.8Ohio -0.7 -3.7 -2.9 2.4 2.6 1.9 1.8 3.0 3.8Oklahoma 2.8 1.5 -0.9 1.1 2.0 1.8 2.0 3.5 4.0Oregon 3.7 1.5 0.1 4.9 3.7 3.3 2.9 4.0 4.1Pennsylvania 1.2 -1.1 -1.1 2.1 1.8 1.2 1.0 2.5 3.2Puerto RicoRhode Island -1.6 -2.0 -0.6 0.6 0.5 1.4 1.9 3.0 3.4South Carolina 1.3 -2.4 -1.8 2.4 2.4 2.5 2.6 3.6 4.1South Dakota 4.0 2.9 0.1 1.7 2.8 0.5 1.5 3.2 4.2Tennessee 0.1 -1.3 -1.5 2.4 2.7 2.6 2.1 3.6 4.1Texas 3.6 0.1 1.2 3.9 4.0 4.2 3.6 4.7 5.0Utah 4.0 1.2 0.2 2.5 3.0 3.4 3.7 4.6 5.1Vermont -0.6 -1.2 0.2 3.9 1.2 1.0 1.1 2.2 3.2Virgin IslandsVirginia 0.6 -0.3 0.9 2.8 1.1 1.1 1.3 2.4 3.4Washington 3.5 -0.4 -0.7 2.2 2.6 3.2 2.8 3.6 4.1West Virginia -0.9 -0.5 1.6 2.8 2.4 2.0 0.7 2.4 3.2Wisconsin -0.4 -2.5 -0.7 2.4 1.3 1.4 1.9 3.3 3.8Wyoming 4.3 4.5 1.6 -1.7 -1.4 0.4 1.5 3.2 3.6
Employment Forecasts
OUTPUT AND EMPLOYMENT
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: Alabama Economic Outlook
Commercial Banking 3
EMPLOYMENT (% over the four quarters of the years) 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
United States 0.9 -2.0 -4.1 0.6 1.5 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.4
Alabama 1.4 -2.4 -5.0 0.5 0.0 1.0 1.1 0.6 0.6Alaska 1.1 1.3 -0.7 2.2 1.4 1.5 0.5 0.7 1.2Arizona 0.9 -4.5 -6.8 0.1 1.7 2.3 1.9 2.2 1.6Arkansas 0.6 -1.1 -3.1 0.8 1.1 -0.1 0.6 1.4 1.0California 0.5 -2.7 -5.5 0.7 1.2 3.2 2.6 2.2 1.9Colorado 2.3 -0.7 -4.9 0.6 2.0 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.1Connecticut 1.0 -1.4 -4.3 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.9Delaware 0.1 -2.0 -4.4 1.1 0.1 1.4 2.4 1.2 1.3District of Columbia 1.3 0.6 0.0 1.7 1.6 2.0 0.8 1.1 1.4Florida -1.0 -5.1 -5.2 0.8 1.3 2.3 2.7 2.5 1.8Georgia 0.7 -2.8 -5.0 0.6 1.0 1.7 2.1 1.5 1.4Hawaii 0.7 -2.6 -4.2 1.1 1.2 2.5 1.6 1.2 1.4Idaho 1.8 -3.1 -4.9 0.1 1.8 2.0 1.7 1.6 1.5Illinois 0.6 -1.7 -5.0 0.9 1.0 1.4 0.9 0.8 1.0Indiana 0.4 -2.5 -4.9 1.3 2.0 1.4 1.8 1.5 1.5Iowa 0.9 -0.5 -3.3 0.6 1.4 1.3 1.9 0.9 1.2Kansas 1.8 0.0 -4.4 0.5 0.9 1.4 1.6 0.9 1.1Kentucky 0.9 -2.3 -3.5 1.2 1.3 1.3 0.7 0.6 1.0Louisiana 2.7 0.5 -3.0 0.2 1.2 1.2 1.6 0.5 1.0Maine 0.7 -1.4 -3.1 0.2 0.4 0.3 1.0 0.9 0.5Maryland 0.5 -1.3 -2.8 1.0 0.9 1.3 0.7 1.1 1.1Massachusetts 1.0 -0.6 -3.1 1.4 1.3 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.3Michigan -1.2 -3.9 -6.0 1.4 2.5 1.7 1.7 1.4 1.7Minnesota 0.5 -1.0 -4.0 0.9 1.9 1.6 2.0 1.9 1.6Missouri 0.7 -2.1 -4.3 0.8 0.0 0.9 1.4 0.2 0.7Montana 0.5 -1.2 -3.9 0.0 0.4 1.2 1.5 1.1 0.9Montana 2.3 -1.1 -3.2 0.1 1.6 2.2 1.2 2.1 1.4Nebraska 1.8 0.1 -2.8 0.6 1.1 1.6 1.0 1.5 1.2Nevada 0.4 -4.9 -8.3 -0.8 1.2 2.1 3.1 3.1 1.7New Hampshire 0.6 -0.7 -3.2 0.3 0.7 1.1 1.0 1.2 0.9New Jersey 0.2 -2.2 -3.3 -0.6 0.5 1.1 0.9 0.3 0.5New Mexico 1.3 -0.7 -4.5 -0.3 0.1 1.5 -0.4 1.4 1.4New York 1.3 -0.4 -2.8 1.2 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.3North Carolina 1.7 -2.2 -5.4 1.0 1.2 1.9 2.2 1.2 1.5North Dakota 1.9 2.0 -0.1 4.0 6.8 6.4 3.6 5.8 4.5Ohio -0.1 -2.5 -5.2 1.0 1.4 1.6 1.0 1.6 1.3Oklahoma 2.0 0.7 -4.4 1.1 1.7 2.3 0.9 2.1 1.6Oregon 1.1 -2.8 -5.6 1.0 0.9 1.5 2.6 2.3 1.6Pennsylvania 0.6 -0.9 -3.1 1.3 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.8Puerto Rico -1.2 -1.8 -7.6 -2.1 0.6 1.5 -1.5 0.9 1.0Rhode Island -1.3 -3.0 -3.7 0.5 0.7 1.1 1.2 1.6 1.0South Carolina 1.0 -2.8 -5.4 1.4 1.2 2.1 2.4 1.7 1.6South Dakota 1.7 0.7 -2.4 1.0 1.2 1.3 0.5 1.9 1.7Tennessee 0.7 -2.6 -4.9 1.3 2.1 1.7 1.5 1.9 1.6Texas 3.2 0.9 -3.7 2.0 2.2 3.3 2.7 3.3 2.4Utah 3.4 -2.0 -5.0 1.2 2.6 3.7 2.9 3.2 2.5Vermont -0.2 -1.1 -3.0 1.3 1.1 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.8Virgin Islands -0.7 -1.2 -4.1 3.4 -3.7 -8.4 -2.9 -2.4 -0.6Virginia 0.9 -0.8 -3.2 1.1 1.2 1.3 0.2 0.9 1.0Washington 2.6 -1.0 -4.5 0.7 1.3 2.2 2.0 2.2 1.6West Virginia 0.3 0.2 -2.7 1.2 1.8 0.2 0.0 0.9 0.8Wisconsin 0.4 -1.0 -4.7 1.0 0.8 1.3 1.5 1.4 1.3Wyoming 4.0 1.9 -6.2 1.3 2.0 0.1 1.2 1.6 1.2
Unemployment Rate Trends …
UNEMPLOYMENT RATE (PERCENT) WHAT THE CHART SHOWS:
Unemployment varies widely across the
nation, with the rate ranging from a low of
2.6 percent in North Dakota to 8.3 percent in
Rhode Island.
Nonetheless, the trends are highly
synchronized across all states—the main
point of the illustration on this page.
Also, the illustration gives the impression—
consistent with the data—that the hardest hit
states in the recession have been improving
the fastest.
KEY MESSAGES:
Despite the weaknesses of the
unemployment rate, the message remains
valuable, that labor markets are broadly
improving everywhere.
Source: US Department of Labor. Updated through April
2014 (state) and April 2014 (US).
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 4
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1976 1979 1982 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015
National unemployment represented by the thick black line
… Falling Everywhere
UNEMPLOYMENT RATE (PERCENT) WHAT THE CHART SHOWS:
This figure reflects a closer-up view of recent
employment trends shown in the figure on
the previous page.
Unemployment continues to drift down in
most states.
KEY MESSAGES:
Unemployment is expected to decline more
slowly in coming years, as previously-
discouraged workers re-enter the labor
force.
Source: US Department of Labor. Updated through April
2014 (state) and April 2014 (US).
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 5
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Al Ak
Az Ar
Ca Co
Ct De
DC Fl
Ga Hi
Id Il
In Ia
Ks Ky
La Me
Md Ma
Mi Mn
Ms Mo
Mt Ne
Nv NH
NJ NM
NM NC
ND Oh
Ok Or
Pa RI
SC SD
Tn Tx
Ut Vt
Va Wa
WV Wi
Wy US
National unemployment represented by the thick black line
Unemployment in Recession
STATE RANKINGS BY SEVERITY OF THE RECESSION IN UNEMPLOYMENT TERMS WHAT THE TABLE SHOWS:
The table ranks states in terms of the
current level of unemployment relative to
where it stood at the cycle low in March
2007.
Unemployment has fallen significantly in
states that were derailed by real estate
excesses, but it remains high in many of
those states relative to the national average.
KEY MESSAGES:
States derailed by the housing debacle are
turning the corner faster than many as the
real estate excesses are cleared.
Source: US Department of Labor. Updated through April
2014 (state) and April 2014 (US).
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 6
March 2007 Cycle Peak Change
(%) (%) (pct pts)
Nevada 4.3 13.9 9.6Florida 3.6 11.4 7.8California 5.0 12.4 7.4Michigan 6.8 14.2 7.4Alabama 3.2 10.4 7.2Arizona 3.7 10.8 7.1Rhode Island 4.8 11.9 7.1North Carolina 4.6 11.3 6.7Illinois 4.7 11.4 6.7Oregon 5.0 11.6 6.6Tennessee 4.4 11.0 6.6South Carolina 5.6 11.9 6.3Puerto Rico 10.6 16.9 6.3Indiana 4.6 10.8 6.2Idaho 2.7 8.8 6.1Georgia 4.4 10.4 6.0Utah 2.4 8.4 6.0Great Lakes 5.3 11.3 5.9Pacific Northwest 4.6 10.5 5.9Washington 4.4 10.2 5.8
US 4.4 10.0 5.6
Colorado 3.5 9.1 5.6New Jersey 4.2 9.7 5.5Connecticut 4.4 9.5 5.1Ohio 5.5 10.6 5.1Delaware 3.4 8.4 5.0DC 5.4 10.4 5.0Kentucky 5.7 10.7 5.0Missouri 4.7 9.6 4.9Tri-state (Northeast) 4.3 9.2 4.9Wyoming 2.8 7.5 4.7New York 4.3 8.9 4.6Hawaii 2.5 7.1 4.6Maryland 3.4 8.0 4.6New Mexico 3.4 8.0 4.6Mississippi 6.5 11.0 4.5Virginia 2.9 7.4 4.5Pennsylvania 4.2 8.7 4.5West Virginia 4.1 8.5 4.4Wisconsin 4.8 9.2 4.4Massachusetts 4.5 8.7 4.2Texas 4.3 8.3 4.0Maine 4.5 8.4 3.9Louisiana 3.9 7.8 3.9Minnesota 4.6 8.3 3.7Montana 3.2 6.8 3.6Kansas 4.1 7.5 3.4Vermont 3.9 7.2 3.3New Hampshire 3.7 6.7 3.0Oklahoma 4.2 7.2 3.0Arkansas 5.2 8.1 2.9Iowa 3.6 6.4 2.8South Dakota 2.9 5.3 2.4
Alaska 5.9 8.2 2.3
Nebraska 2.8 4.9 2.1
North Dakota 3.0 4.2 1.2
Note: Bold red fonts denote above-average changes.
Unemployment Report Card,
Fifth Quintile
DEVIATION OF UNEMPLOYMENT FROM MARCH 2007 RATE (PERCENTAGE POINTS) WHAT THE CHART SHOWS:
Trends in the unemployment rate since the
March 2007 low for the top quintile of states
that still suffer from the greatest increases in
unemployment.
KEY MESSAGES:
States troubled by real estate excesses
dominate the list.
Source: US Department of Labor. Updated through April
2014 (state) and April 2014 (US).
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 7
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Alabama
Nevada
Rhode Island
New Mexico
Arizona
Illinois
Puerto Rico
California
New Jersey
Florida
US
Unemployment Report Card,
Fourth Quintile
DEVIATION OF UNEMPLOYMENT FROM MARCH 2007 RATE (PERCENTAGE POINTS) WHAT THE CHART SHOWS:
Trends in the unemployment rate since the
March 2007 low (the cumulative change in
the unemployment rate in percentage points
since March 2007) for the second quintile of
states in terms of the severity of the rise in
unemployment.
KEY MESSAGES:
Unemployment has settled back down
recently, after edging up a bit this spring.
Source: US Department of Labor. Updated through April
2014 (state) and April 2014 (US).
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 8
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Florida
Georgia
Colorado
Connecticut
Tri-state (Northeast)
New York
Delaware
DC
Maryland
Idaho
Virginia
US
Unemployment Report Card,
Third Quintile
DEVIATION OF UNEMPLOYMENT FROM MARCH 2007 RATE (PERCENTAGE POINTS) WHAT THE CHART SHOWS:
Trends in the unemployment rate since the
March 2007 low for the middle quintile of
states, with regard to the rise in the
unemployment rate during the recession.
KEY MESSAGES:
Unemployment in this group of states
appears to have stalled.
Source: US Department of Labor. Updated through April
2014 (state) and April 2014 (US).
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 9
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
US
Kentucky
Tennessee
Hawaii
Oregon
West Virginia
Missouri
Pacific Northwest
Washington
North Carolina
Montana
Massachusetts
Pennsylvania
Unemployment Report Card,
Second Quintile
DEVIATION OF UNEMPLOYMENT FROM MARCH 2007 RATE (PERCENTAGE POINTS) WHAT THE CHART SHOWS:
Trends in the unemployment rate since the
March 2007 low for the states that rank in
the second-best quintile, with reference to
the deterioration in unemployment during the
recession.
KEY MESSAGES:
The states that fall in this “bucket” suffered
only a modest setback in the housing
recession and are supported by strength in
manufacturing, energy, or agriculture.
Source: US Department of Labor. Updated through April
2014 (state) and April 2014 (US).
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 10
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
US
Utah
Indiana
Maine
Arkansas
Great Lakes
Mississippi
Wisconsin
Texas
Wyoming
South Dakota
Unemployment Report Card,
First Quintile
DEVIATION OF UNEMPLOYMENT FROM MARCH 2007 RATE (PERCENTAGE POINTS) WHAT THE CHART SHOWS:
Trends in the unemployment rate since the
March 2007 low for the best quintile in terms
of the rise in unemployment.
KEY MESSAGES:
Some of the states in this category have had
a dramatic turnaround in their economies,
including Michigan, Iowa, Ohio, and
Massachusetts.
Source: US Department of Labor. Updated through April
2014 (state) and April 2014 (US).
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 11
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
US
Nebraska
Kansas
New Hampshire
Iowa
Oklahoma
Michigan
Louisiana
Alaska
Ohio
Minnesota
South Carolina
North Dakota
Unemployment Rate Drop,
Since the Respective Peaks
UNEMPLOYMENT SINCE THE RESPECTIVE PEAK UNEMPLOYMENT RATE WHAT THE TABLE SHOWS:
The table ranks states by how much the
unemployment rate has declined since the
respective peak in unemployment for each
state.
The Great Lakes region has seen the most
impressive declines in unemployment.
Also, states held back by real estate
excesses have recovered rapidly.
KEY MESSAGES:
Improvement in the job market is coming in
some surprising places.
Source: US Department of Labor. Updated through April
2014 (state) and April 2014 (US).
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 12
Peak rate April 2014 Change(% ) (% ) (pct pts)
Michigan 14.2 7.4 -6.8
South Carolina 11.9 5.3 -6.6
Nevada 13.9 8.0 -5.9
Florida 11.4 6.2 -5.2
Indiana 10.8 5.7 -5.1
North Carolina 11.3 6.2 -5.1
Ohio 10.6 5.7 -4.9
Tennessee 11.0 6.3 -4.7
Oregon 11.6 6.9 -4.7
Great Lakes 11.3 6.7 -4.6
California 12.4 7.8 -4.6
Utah 8.4 3.8 -4.6
Pacific Northwest 10.5 6.4 -4.1
Washington 10.2 6.1 -4.1
Arizona 10.8 6.9 -3.9
Vermont 7.2 3.3 -3.9
Idaho 8.8 5.0 -3.8
Wyoming 7.5 3.7 -3.8
US 10.0 6.3 -3.7
Minnesota 8.3 4.7 -3.6
Rhode Island 11.9 8.3 -3.6
Alabama 10.4 6.9 -3.5
Illinois 11.4 7.9 -3.5
Mississippi 11.0 7.5 -3.5
Georgia 10.4 7.0 -3.4
Wisconsin 9.2 5.8 -3.4
Louisiana 7.8 4.5 -3.3
Puerto Rico 16.9 13.6 -3.3
Texas 8.3 5.2 -3.1
Colorado 9.1 6.0 -3.1
Missouri 9.6 6.6 -3.0
Kentucky 10.7 7.7 -3.0
Pennsylvania 8.7 5.7 -3.0
DC 10.4 7.5 -2.9
New Jersey 9.7 6.9 -2.8
Kansas 7.5 4.8 -2.7
Maine 8.4 5.7 -2.7
Hawaii 7.1 4.4 -2.7
Massachusetts 8.7 6.0 -2.7
Delaware 8.4 5.8 -2.6
Connecticut 9.5 6.9 -2.6
Maryland 8.0 5.5 -2.5
Virginia 7.4 4.9 -2.5
West Virginia 8.5 6.0 -2.5
Tri-state (Northeast) 9.2 6.8 -2.4
Oklahoma 7.2 4.8 -2.4
New Hampshire 6.7 4.4 -2.3
New York 8.9 6.7 -2.2
Iowa 6.4 4.3 -2.1
Montana 6.8 4.8 -2.0
Alaska 8.2 6.4 -1.8
North Dakota 4.2 2.6 -1.6
Arkansas 8.1 6.6 -1.5
South Dakota 5.3 3.8 -1.5
Nebraska 4.9 3.6 -1.3
New Mexico 8.0 6.8 -1.2
Note: states in blue ink are faring bEVter than the national average while those in red are worse than the national average.
Jobs Progress
PERCENTAGE OF JOBS LOST DURING THE RECESSION THAT HAVE BEEN REPLACED WHAT THE TABLE SHOWS:
The table ranks states by the progress the
business community has made recovering or
replacing jobs lost during the recession. The
table on this page identifies only the states
whose job market recovery has exceeded
the national average.
Job losses have been virtually completely
reversed in the national economy and in the
states on this table.
KEY MESSAGES:
For the nation as a whole, 95 percent of jobs
lost during the recession have been
recovered or replaced.
Note: Alaska and North Dakota are excluded from the
rankings because employment never declined during the
2008 recession.
Source: US Department of Labor. Updated through April
2014 (state) and April 2014 (US).
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 13
Texas 3.755 1
South Dakota 2.270 2
New York 1.721 3
Oklahoma 1.706 4
Massachusetts 1.659 5
Nebraska 1.608 6
Utah 1.561 7
Colorado 1.523 8
Louisiana 1.338 9
West Virginia 1.330 10
Montana 1.315 11
Minnesota 1.283 12
Iowa 1.213 13
Washington 1.186 14
Wyoming 1.033 15
Kansas 0.964 16
Maryland 0.959 17
California 0.956 18
All Employees: Total Nonfarm (SA, Thous) 0.951 19
New Hampshire 0.921 20
Virginia 0.915 21
Tennessee 0.906 22
Indiana 0.883 23
South Carolina 0.860 24
Vermont 0.853 25
Hawaii 0.838 26
Jobs Progress, Continued
PERCENTAGE OF JOBS LOST DURING THE RECESSION THAT HAVE BEEN REPLACED WHAT THE TABLE SHOWS:
The table on this page focuses on the
states that have lagged the national
average.
The low ranking of New Jersey and
Connecticut in terms of jobs lost that have
been recovered may be exaggerated by the
recovery of the Downtown Manhattan area,
with the rebuilding of the World Trade
Center complex, that is pulling jobs back into
the City.
KEY MESSAGES:
The rising national tide is pulling some
regions up more than others.
Note: Alaska and North Dakota are excluded from the
rankings because employment never declined during the
2008 recession.
Source: US Department of Labor. Updated through April
2014 (state) and April 2014 (US).
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 14
Wisconsin 0.807 27
Oregon 0.804 28
North Carolina 0.794 29
Pennsylvania 0.783 30
Florida 0.765 31
Delaware 0.757 32
Idaho 0.720 33
Georgia 0.720 34
Missouri 0.703 35
Arkansas 0.688 36
Michigan 0.685 37
Kentucky 0.679 38
Ohio 0.677 39
Rhode Island 0.624 40
Connecticut 0.584 41
Arizona 0.577 42
Illinois 0.571 43
Maine 0.550 44
Nevada 0.543 45
Mississippi 0.381 46
New Jersey 0.374 47
Alabama 0.340 48
New Mexico 0.235 49
* Alaska and North Dakota excluded, because employment never declined in the recession.
The State of Layoffs
LAYOFF RATE VERSUS PRE-RECESSION CLAIMS (RATIO TO 2007 Q4 CLAIMS LEVEL) WHAT THE TABLE SHOWS:
The table ranks states by the progress they
have seen in layoffs falling back.
States that have seen weekly layoffs come
down the most are listed at the top of the
table.
The figures in the right hand column
translate what national jobless claims would
look like, if the national average matched the
performance of the state.
Layoffs have returned to pre-recession
levels in much of the Midwest, the
Southeast, and energy-intensive states.
KEY MESSAGES:
Many states that were laggards in the last
decade now have moved to the front lines of
new growth.
Source: US Department of Labor. Updated through May 17,
2014 (states) and May 23, 2014 (US).
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 15
If national
Ratio of joblless claims
jobless claims were like the
to 2007 Q4 state's trendlevel (thousands weekly)
North Carolina 0.45 153
Michigan 0.49 167
Indiana 0.55 184
Kentucky 0.60 203
Arkansas 0.66 223
South Carolina 0.68 229
Ohio 0.69 233
Oregon 0.71 241
Puerto Rico 0.75 254
Vermont 0.75 254
Iowa 0.77 259
Missouri 0.79 266
Alabama 0.79 267
Illinois 0.79 268
Idaho 0.80 270
Georgia 0.84 282
Pennsylvania 0.84 285
Oklahoma 0.86 290
Tennessee 0.87 293
Wisconsin 0.89 300
Massachusetts 0.89 300
Delaware 0.89 302
Louisiana 0.90 303
North Dakota 0.91 308
Virginia 0.92 313
Mississippi 0.94 317
New Jersey 0.95 322
West Virginia 0.96 324
US 0.96 325
Nebraska 0.97 328
Alaska 0.97 329
Kansas 0.98 332
Connecticut 0.98 333
Maine 0.98 333
Washington 1.02 343
New Hampshire 1.03 347
California 1.03 348
Nevada 1.04 351
South Dakota 1.04 353
New Mexico 1.05 354
Rhode Island 1.05 356
Maryland 1.09 367
Florida 1.10 373
Minnesota 1.11 375
Wyoming 1.17 394
New York 1.20 404
Colorado 1.24 417
Arizona 1.24 418
D.C. 1.24 419
Montana 1.25 421
Texas 1.29 435
Hawaii 1.35 456
Utah 1.39 469
The Auto Footprint
EMPLOYMENT IN AUTO-RELATED ACTIVITIES (% OF STATE EMPLOYMENT BASE) WHAT THE CHART SHOWS:
Percent of employment in the motor-vehicle
and motor-vehicle parts manufacturing
industries that are located in the states
indicated.
KEY MESSAGES:
The auto industry has a heavy presence in
the states that are doing better in the past
year.
Source: US Department of Labor. Updated through April
2014 (state) and April 2014 (US).
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 16
6.7%
0.8%
23.3%
3.2%
35.4%
0.8% 1.4%3.2%
20.4%
0.3%2.4% 2.1%
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
Ala
bam
a
Cal
iforn
ia
Indi
ana
Ken
tuck
y
Mic
higa
n
Mis
siss
ippi
Mis
sour
i
New
Yor
k
Ohi
o
Okl
ahom
a
Texa
s
Wis
cons
in
Residential Property
CONSUMER PRICE INDEX (CPI) RESIDENTIAL RENT (% CH VS 12 MN EARLIER) WHAT THE CHART SHOWS:
The figure tracks residential rents in selected
metropolitan areas.
Rented residential property enjoys robust
demand, as reflected in strong rent
increases across the country.
KEY MESSAGES:
The housing debacle has shifted demand
from home ownership to rented units.
Source: US Department of Labor. Updated through April
2014.
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 17
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
US
Seattle
SF
Atlanta
Miami
Houston
Dallas
Boston
LA
Detroit
NY
Chicago
Cleveland
Philadelphia
DC
Residential Property
CPI OWNER OCCUPIED RENT IN KEY METROPOLITAN AREAS (% CH VS 12 MN EARLIER) WHAT THE CHART SHOWS:
The figure tracks rents of owner-occupied
property in selected metropolitan areas.
Demand to own property that is the principal
place that people reside has weakened in
the wake of the housing debacle.
KEY MESSAGES:
The housing debacle has shifted demand
from home ownership to rented units.
Source: US Department of Labor. Updated through April
2013.
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 18
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
US
Dallas
SF
Seattle
Miami
DC
Detroit
Boston
LA-Riverside-Orange
County
Commercial Property Prices
CRE Price Index, East WHAT THE CHART SHOWS:
The figure shows a transaction-based index
of prices of all types of commercial real
estate property (CRE) in the East
(Connecticut, Delaware, Kentucky, Maine,
Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire,
New Jersey, New York, North Carolina,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina,
Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia).
In the East, CRE prices have recovered
about two thirds of the losses suffered in
2008.
KEY MESSAGES:
The commercial real estate sector did not
suffer from the speculative excesses that hit
the residential real estate sector and it
benefits from low interest rates.
Source: National Council of Real Estate Investment
Fiduciaries. Updated through 2014 Q1.
Note: data are not available prior to 1994.
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 19
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014
Commercial Property Prices
CRE Price Index, Midwest WHAT THE CHART SHOWS:
The figure shows a transaction-based index
of prices of all types of commercial real
estate property (CRE) in the Midwest
(Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan,
Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North
Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and
Wisconsin).
In the Midwest, CRE prices have recovered
about half of the losses suffered in 2008.
KEY MESSAGES:
The commercial real estate sector did not
suffer from the speculative excesses that hit
the residential real estate sector and it
benefits from low interest rates.
Source: National Council of Real Estate Investment
Fiduciaries. Updated through 2013 Q1.
Note: data are not available prior to 1994.
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014
Commercial Property Prices
CRE Price Index, South WHAT THE CHART SHOWS:
The figure shows a transaction-based index
of prices of all types of commercial real
estate property (CRE) in the South
(Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia,
Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma,
Tennessee, and Texas).
In the South, CRE prices have recovered
about two thirds of the losses suffered in
2008 and are back on the previously-visible
track.
KEY MESSAGES:
The commercial real estate sector did not
suffer from the speculative excesses that hit
the residential real estate sector and it
benefits from low interest rates.
Source: National Council of Real Estate Investment
Fiduciaries. Updated through 2013 Q1.
Note: data are not available prior to 1994.
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 21
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Commercial Property Prices
CRE Price Index, West WHAT THE CHART SHOWS:
The figure shows a transaction-based index
of prices of all types of commercial real
estate property (CRE) in the West (Arizona,
California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana,
Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah,
Washington, and Wyoming).
In the West, CRE prices have recovered
about half of the losses suffered in 2008.
KEY MESSAGES:
The commercial real estate sector did not
suffer from the speculative excesses that hit
the residential real estate sector and it
benefits from low interest rates.
Source: National Council of Real Estate Investment
Fiduciaries. Updated through 2014 Q1.
Note: data are not available prior to 1994.
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 22
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Office Markets
PERCENT OF OFFICE SPACE THAT IS VACANT WHAT THE CHART SHOWS:
The figure illustrates trends in office vacancy
rates in selected metropolitan markets.
Office vacancy rates echo local economic
conditions.
Atlanta’s office markets remain weak but
conditions in many other markets are
improving, significantly so in San Francisco,
Houston, Chicago, and Dallas.
New York’s office markets reflect robust
demand.
KEY MESSAGES:
Improving commercial real estate conditions
are benefiting from the recovering economy
and low interest rates.
Source: CB Richard Ellis (formerly CB Commercial Property
Information Systems), Office Vacancy Index of the United
States. Updated through 2013 Q4.
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 23
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
Dallas
MiamiChicago
LA
Boston
NY-DowntownSFNY-Midtown
US average (shaded zone)
Tax Burdens Ranks
STATE TAX BURDEN WHAT THE TABLE SHOWS:
The table ranks states by the attractiveness
of the tax burden for a number of tax
sources. The lower the rank, the lighter the
tax burden.
Taking all sources of taxes into account,
states in the Northeast and Midwest tend to
have higher overall tax burdens than
elsewhere.
KEY MESSAGES:
State rankings vary considerably depending
on the source of revenue.
Sources: Tax Foundation's State Business Tax Climate
Index available at
http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/78.html
Updated through 2012.
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 24
Source: 2013 State Business Tax Climate Index, Background Paper, October 2012, Number 64, Tax Foundation.
Note: Rankings do not average across to total rank. A ranking of "1" is the lowest tax burden.
State Overall Corporate Tax Individual Income Sales Tax Index Unemployment Property Tax
Rank Insurance Tax
Wyoming 1 1 1 18 14 22
South Dakota 2 1 1 33 35 20
Nevada 3 1 1 42 41 16
Alaska 4 27 1 5 28 13
Florida 5 13 1 18 10 25
Washington 6 30 1 48 18 22
New Hampshire 7 48 9 1 42 43
Montana 8 16 20 3 21 7
Texas 9 38 7 36 14 32
Utah 10 5 14 22 20 3
Indiana 11 28 10 11 11 11
Michigan 12 7 11 7 44 31
Oregon 13 31 32 4 37 10
Delaware 14 50 29 2 3 14
Tennessee 15 14 8 43 26 41
Missouri 16 8 24 27 6 6
Mississippi 17 11 19 28 7 29
Colorado 18 20 16 44 39 9
Pennsylvania 19 46 12 20 36 42
Idaho 20 19 23 23 47 2
Alabama 21 17 18 37 13 8
Massachusetts 22 33 15 17 49 47
West Virginia 23 25 22 19 27 24
Kentucky 24 26 26 9 48 18
Arizona 25 24 17 50 1 5
Tax Burden Ranks, Continued
STATE TAX BURDEN, Continued WHAT THE TABLE SHOWS:
The table ranks states by the magnitude of
the tax burden for a number of tax sources.
The lower the rank, the lighter the tax
burden.
Taking all sources of taxes into account,
states in the Northeast and Midwest tend to
have higher overall tax burdens than
elsewhere.
KEY MESSAGES:
State rankings vary considerably depending
on the source of revenue.
Sources: Tax Foundation's State Business Tax Climate
Index available at
http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/78.html
Updated through 2012.
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 25
Kansas 26 36 21 32 9 28
Virginia 27 6 38 6 38 27
North Dakota 28 21 35 16 17 4
Illinois 29 47 13 34 43 44
Maine 30 41 27 10 32 39
Nebraska 31 34 30 26 8 38
Louisiana 32 18 25 49 4 23
Arkansas 33 37 28 41 19 19
Georgia 34 9 40 13 25 30
Oklahoma 35 12 36 39 2 12
South Carolina 36 10 39 21 33 21
Hawaii 37 4 41 31 30 15
New Mexico 38 39 34 45 15 1
Ohio 39 22 42 29 12 34
Connecticut 40 35 31 30 31 50
Maryland 41 15 45 8 46 40
Iowa 42 49 33 24 34 37
Wisconsin 43 32 46 15 23 33
North Carolina 44 29 43 47 5 36
District of Columbia 45 35 36 42 24 48
Minnesota 46 44 44 35 40 26
Rhode Island 47 42 37 25 50 46
Vermont 48 43 47 14 22 48
California 49 45 49 40 16 17
New Jersey 50 40 48 46 24 49
New York 51 23 50 38 45 45
Source: 2013 State Business Tax Climate Index, Background Paper, October 2012, Number 64, Tax Foundation.
Note: Rankings do not average across to total rank. A ranking of "1" is the lowest tax burden.
State Overall Corporate Tax Individual Income Sales Tax Index Unemployment Property Tax
Rank Insurance Tax
Unfunded Pension Liabilities
STATUS OF STATE & LOCAL GOVERNMENT PENSION SYSTEMS WHAT THE TABLE SHOWS:
The table ranks states by the magnitude of
per capita unfunded pension liabilities in the
state and local government sector (first five
columns of figures).
The percentage of liabilities that are funded
are identified in the last five columns of the
table. .
The favorable position of New York, Texas,
and Florida stand in stark contrast to that in
New Jersey, Illinois, Connecticut, Kentucky,
and Pennsylvania, to name a few.
KEY MESSAGES:
State legislators are taking actions to
address the obligations.
Source: Morningstar. Updated through 2012.
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 26
Unfunded Liability Per Capita Percent Funded
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Tennessee 0 0 0 0 0 96.2% 90.6% N/A 92.1% N/A
Wisconsin 51 45 34 23 18 99.6% 99.7% 99.8% 99.8% 99.9%
Washington 740 723 907 657 160 90.4% 91.1% 89.6% 92.5% 98.1%
North Carolina –265 46 264 311 415 104.6% 99.2% 95.9% 95.3% 93.9%
Michigan 201 259 344 455 598 86.6% 83.6% 78.9% 73.3% 66.4%
South Dakota 231 776 365 362 795 97.4% 91.7% 96.1% 96.3% 92.6%
New York –411 –542 –111 461 814 105.9% 107.4% 101.5% 94.3% 90.5%
Florida –358 951 1011 1024 1089 105.3% 87.1% 86.6% 86.9% 86.4%
Delaware 119 467 693 870 1150 98.5% 94.5% 92.1% 90.7% 88.3%
Texas 567 1016 1126 1188 1302 90.7% 84.1% 83.3% 82.9% 82.0%
Nebraska 420 643 888 1059 1339 91.3% 87.5% 83.6% 81.5% 78.5%
North Dakota 190 437 903 1061 1350 93.3% 85.8% 74.5% 71.7% 66.3%
Idaho 530 2021 1723 848 1378 92.8% 73.7% 78.5% 89.8% 84.4%
Georgia 677 871 1297 1533 1589 91.5% 89.1% 84.7% 82.5% 81.9%
Ohio 237 1603 1672 1496 1695 96.1% 75.2% 75.2% 78.9% 77.2%
Arizona 1008 1237 1464 1592 1702 81.8% 78.9% 76.2% 75.0% 74.3%
Colorado 1347 1349 1548 1804 1771 67.9% 67.0% 62.8% 57.7% 59.2%
Missouri 1443 1821 2095 1564 1952 81.8% 78.0% 75.5% 80.8% 76.9%
Maine 2278 3008 3243 1913 2005 74.3% 67.9% 66.2% 77.6% 77.2%
Iowa 947 1686 1701 1959 2041 88.6% 80.9% 81.0% 79.5% 79.5%
Vermont 747 1689 1611 1909 2158 86.5% 71.1% 72.7% 70.4% 68.4%
Indiana 1595 1916 2103 2284 2415 68.7% 63.4% 61.8% 59.6% 58.4%
Utah 1164 1301 1660 2198 2472 86.5% 85.8% 82.7% 78.3% 76.5%
Arkansas 962 1781 2092 2412 2614 87.2% 77.5% 74.8% 72.5% 71.4%
Oklahoma 3279 3653 3968 2603 2850 60.6% 57.7% 56.1% 67.0% 65.3%
Oregon –1,716 2855 2148 2059 2932 112.2% 80.2% 85.8% 86.9% 82.0%
Alabama 1958 2307 2706 3059 3051 77.0% 73.9% 70.3% 66.9% 66.2%
Virginia 1405 1369 1787 2707 3054 81.8% 83.5% 79.7% 72.0% 69.5%
West Virginia 1964 2699 3417 3427 3078 70.4% 63.6% 55.9% 57.9% 64.0%
Wyoming 2648 1522 1999 2486 3100 79.3% 88.8% 85.9% 83.0% 79.6%
Minnesota 1961 2691 2388 2559 3197 83.8% 78.6% 80.2% 79.1% 75.0%
Massachusetts 1620 3141 2828 2589 3338 80.5% 63.8% 68.7% 72.6% 66.4%
South Carolina 2672 2923 3265 3097 3468 70.1% 68.6% 66.5% 67.9% 65.4%
New Hampshire 1921 2696 2843 3252 3470 68.0% 58.5% 58.6% 57.5% 56.2%
California 1669 2557 3022 3410 3587 86.4% 80.6% 78.2% 76.9% 76.0%
Maryland 1885 3238 3405 3465 3620 78.6% 65.0% 64.1% 64.7% 64.4%
Kansas 2947 2729 2942 3285 3650 58.8% 63.7% 62.2% 59.2% 56.4%
Pennslyvania 1088 1691 2334 3264 3749 87.0% 80.8% 75.1% 67.8% 63.9%
Louisiana 2523 2175 3921 3975 4161 69.2% 69.9% 55.6% 56.0% 55.5%
Nevada 2765 3468 3944 4192 4265 76.2% 72.4% 70.5% 70.1% 71.0%
Rhode Island 4010 4495 3892 4230 4280 61.7% 58.7% 61.3% 58.6% 58.2%
Montana 1658 2717 3405 3965 4427 83.4% 74.3% 70.0% 66.3% 63.9%
Kentucky 2877 3481 3944 4488 4983 63.8% 58.2% 54.3% 50.5% 46.8%
Mississippi 2653 3434 3872 4242 4983 73.0% 67.4% 64.2% 62.3% 58.0%
New Jersey 3791 5104 4448 4786 5239 73.2% 66.6% 69.2% 67.5% 65.4%
New Mexico 2293 3432 4136 5310 6218 82.8% 76.2% 72.4% 67.0% 63.0%
Hawaii 3875 4676 5353 6114 6329 68.8% 64.6% 61.4% 59.4% 59.2%
Connecticut 4316 4472 4894 5885 6922 56.6% 61.6% 58.0% 53.4% 49.1%
Illinois 4267 4899 5943 6505 7421 54.3% 50.6% 45.4% 43.4% 40.4%
Puerto Rico 5031 N/A 6458 6792 8934 24.8% N/A 14.5% 13.5% 11.2%
Alaska 5188 5115 8641 9717 10235 74.1% 75.7% 61.1% 59.5% 59.2%
State Population Rankings
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 27
Rank State Population
1 California 38,041,430
2 Texas 26,059,203
3 New York 19,570,261
4 Florida 19,317,568
5 Illinois 12,875,255
6 Pennsylvania 12,763,536
7 Ohio 11,544,225
8 Georgia 9,919,945
9 Michigan 9,883,360
10 North Carolina 9,752,073
11 New Jersey 8,864,590
12 Virginia 8,185,867
13 Washington 6,897,012
14 Massachusetts 6,646,144
15 Arizona 6,553,255
16 Indiana 6,537,334
17 Tennessee 6,456,243
18 Missouri 6,021,988
19 Maryland 5,884,563
20 Wisconsin 5,726,398
21 Minnesota 5,379,139
22 Colorado 5,187,582
23 Alabama 4,822,023
24 South Carolina 4,723,723
25 Louisiana 4,601,893
26 Kentucky 4,380,415
27 Oregon 3,899,353
28 Oklahoma 3,814,820
29 Connecticut 3,590,347
30 Iowa 3,074,186
31 Mississippi 2,984,926
32 Arkansas 2,949,131
33 Kansas 2,885,905
34 Utah 2,855,287
35 Nevada 2,758,931
36 New Mexico 2,085,538
37 Nebraska 1,855,525
38 West Virginia 1,855,413
39 Idaho 1,595,728
40 Hawaii 1,392,313
41 Maine 1,329,192
42 New Hampshire 1,320,718
43 Rhode Island 1,050,292
44 Montana 1,005,141
45 Delaware 917,092
46 South Dakota 833,354
47 Alaska 731,449
48 North Dakota 699,628
49 Vermont 626,011
50 Wyoming 576,412
State Population Trends
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 28
1790 1900 1950 1990 2000 2004 2010 2011 2012 1950 1990 2000
Nevada — 42,335 160,083 1,201,833 1,998,257 2,334,771 2,700,551 2,723,322 2,758,931 4.70 3.85 2.72
Utah — 276,749 688,862 1,722,850 2,233,169 2,389,039 2,763,885 2,817,222 2,855,287 2.32 2.32 2.07
Arizona — 122,931 749,587 3,665,228 5,130,632 5,743,834 6,329,013 6,482,505 6,553,255 3.56 2.68 2.06
Texas — 3,048,710 7,711,194 16,986,510 20,851,820 22,490,022 25,145,561 25,674,681 26,059,203 1.98 1.96 1.88
Idaho — 161,772 588,637 1,006,749 1,293,953 1,393,262 1,567,582 1,584,985 1,595,728 1.62 2.12 1.76
Georgia 82,548 2,216,331 3,444,578 6,478,216 8,186,453 8,829,383 9,687,653 9,815,210 9,919,945 1.72 1.96 1.61
North Carolina 393,751 1,893,810 4,061,929 6,628,637 8,049,313 8,541,221 9,535,475 9,656,401 9,752,073 1.42 1.77 1.61
Florida — 528,542 2,771,305 12,937,926 15,982,378 17,397,161 18,801,311 19,057,542 19,317,568 3.18 1.84 1.59
Colorado — 539,700 1,325,089 3,294,394 4,301,261 4,601,403 5,029,196 5,116,796 5,187,582 2.23 2.09 1.57
South Carolina 249,073 1,340,316 2,117,027 3,486,703 4,012,012 4,198,068 4,625,364 4,679,230 4,723,723 1.30 1.39 1.37
Delaware 59,096 184,735 318,085 666,168 783,600 830,364 897,934 907,135 917,092 1.72 1.46 1.32
Washington — 518,103 2,378,963 4,866,692 5,894,121 6,203,788 6,724,540 6,830,038 6,897,012 1.73 1.60 1.32
Wyoming — 92,531 290,529 453,588 493,782 506,529 563,626 568,158 576,412 1.11 1.10 1.30
Alaska — 63,592 128,643 550,043 626,932 655,435 710,231 722,718 731,449 2.84 1.30 1.29
Virginia 7,476,103 1,854,184 3,318,680 6,187,358 7,078,515 7,459,827 8,001,024 8,096,604 8,185,867 1.47 1.28 1.22
Hawaii — 154,001 499,794 1,108,229 1,211,537 1,262,840 1,360,301 1,374,810 1,392,313 1.67 1.04 1.17
New Mexico — 195,310 681,187 1,515,069 1,819,046 1,903,289 2,059,180 2,082,224 2,085,538 1.82 1.46 1.15
Oregon — 413,536 1,521,341 2,842,321 3,421,399 3,594,586 3,831,074 3,871,859 3,899,353 1.53 1.45 1.10
Tennessee 35,691 2,020,616 3,291,718 4,877,185 5,689,283 5,900,962 6,346,110 6,403,353 6,456,243 1.09 1.28 1.06
California — 1,485,053 10,586,223 29,760,021 33,871,648 35,893,799 37,253,956 37,691,912 38,041,430 2.08 1.12 0.97
Montana — 243,329 591,024 799,065 902,195 926,865 989,415 998,199 1,005,141 0.86 1.05 0.90
Maryland 319,728 1,188,044 2,343,001 4,781,468 5,296,486 5,558,058 5,773,552 5,828,289 5,884,563 1.50 0.95 0.88
Oklahoma — 7,903,912 2,233,351 3,145,585 3,450,654 3,523,553 3,751,354 3,791,508 3,814,820 0.87 0.88 0.84
DC — 278,718 802,178 606,900 572,059 553,523 601,723 617,996 632,323 -0.38 0.19 0.84
South Dakota — 401,570 652,740 696,004 754,844 770,883 814,180 824,082 833,354 0.39 0.82 0.83
Arkansas — 1,311,564 1,909,511 2,350,725 2,673,400 2,752,629 2,915,921 2,937,979 2,949,131 0.70 1.04 0.82
Minnesota — 1,751,394 2,982,483 4,375,099 4,919,479 5,100,958 5,303,925 5,344,861 5,379,139 0.96 0.94 0.75
North Dakota — 319,146 619,636 638,800 642,200 634,366 672,591 683,932 699,628 0.20 0.41 0.72
Alabama — 1,828,697 3,061,743 4,040,587 4,447,100 4,530,182 4,779,735 4,802,740 4,822,023 0.74 0.81 0.68
Nebraska — 1,066,300 1,325,510 1,578,385 1,711,263 1,747,214 1,826,341 1,842,641 1,855,525 0.54 0.74 0.68
Kentucky 73,677 2,147,174 2,944,806 3,685,296 4,041,769 4,145,922 4,339,362 4,369,356 4,380,415 0.64 0.79 0.67
Missouri — 3,106,665 3,954,653 5,117,073 5,595,211 5,754,618 5,988,927 6,010,688 6,021,988 0.68 0.74 0.61
Indiana — 2,516,462 3,934,224 5,544,159 6,080,485 6,237,569 6,483,800 6,516,922 6,537,334 0.82 0.75 0.61
Kansas — 1,470,495 1,905,299 2,477,574 2,688,418 2,735,502 2,853,118 2,871,238 2,885,905 0.67 0.70 0.59
New Hampshire 141,885 411,588 533,242 1,109,252 1,235,786 1,299,500 1,316,472 1,318,194 1,320,718 1.47 0.80 0.56
Wisconsin — 2,069,042 3,434,575 4,891,769 5,363,675 5,509,026 5,686,986 5,711,767 5,726,398 0.83 0.72 0.55
Connecticut 237,946 908,420 2,007,280 3,287,116 3,405,565 3,503,604 3,574,097 3,580,709 3,590,347 0.94 0.40 0.44
New Jersey 184,139 1,883,669 4,835,329 7,730,188 8,414,350 8,698,879 8,791,894 8,821,155 8,864,590 0.98 0.62 0.44
Iowa — 2,231,853 2,621,073 2,776,755 2,926,324 2,954,451 3,046,350 3,062,309 3,074,186 0.26 0.46 0.41
Mississippi — 1,551,270 2,178,914 2,573,216 2,844,658 2,902,966 2,967,297 2,978,512 2,984,926 0.51 0.68 0.40
Massachusetts 378,787 2,805,346 4,690,514 6,016,425 6,349,097 6,416,505 6,547,629 6,587,536 6,646,144 0.56 0.45 0.38
Maine 96,540 694,466 913,774 1,227,928 1,274,923 1,317,253 1,328,361 1,328,188 1,329,192 0.61 0.36 0.35
Pennsylvania 434,373 6,302,115 10,498,012 11,881,643 12,281,054 12,406,292 12,702,379 12,742,886 12,763,536 0.32 0.33 0.32
Illinois — 4,821,550 8,712,176 11,430,602 12,419,293 12,713,634 12,830,632 12,869,257 12,875,255 0.63 0.54 0.30
New York 340,120 7,268,894 14,830,192 17,990,455 18,976,457 19,227,088 19,378,104 19,465,197 19,570,261 0.45 0.38 0.26
Louisiana — 1,381,625 2,683,516 4,219,973 4,468,976 4,515,770 4,533,372 4,574,836 4,601,893 0.87 0.39 0.24
Vermont 85,425 343,641 377,747 562,758 608,827 621,394 625,741 626,431 626,011 0.82 0.49 0.23
West Virginia — 958,800 2,005,552 1,793,477 1,808,344 1,815,354 1,852,996 1,855,364 1,855,413 -0.13 0.15 0.21
Ohio — 4,157,545 7,946,627 10,847,115 11,353,140 11,459,011 11,536,502 11,544,951 11,544,225 0.60 0.28 0.14
Rhode Island 68,825 428,556 791,896 1,003,464 1,048,319 1,080,632 1,052,567 1,051,302 1,050,292 0.46 0.21 0.02
Michigan — 2,420,982 6,371,766 9,295,297 9,938,444 10,112,620 9,883,635 9,876,187 9,883,360 0.71 0.28 -0.05
Total U.S. 3,929,214 76,212,168 152,271,417 248,709,873 281,421,906 292,936,109 308,745,538 311,591,917 313,914,040
Average Annual Population Growth Since:
(% at Annual Rate)
Metro Population Trends
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 29
Metropolitan Area 2011
(Titles of metropolitan divisions are indented.) 2000 2011 Rank by Size % change Rank
Abilene, TX 160,108 166,416 269 3.9 304
Akron, OH 695,971 701,456 103 0.8 344
Albany, GA 157,757 157,688 281 0.0 352
Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY 827,227 871,478 83 5.3 274
Albuquerque, NM 731,712 898,642 80 22.8 56
Alexandria, LA 145,079 154,505 286 6.5 254
Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA-NJ 741,937 824,916 88 11.2 181
Altoona, PA 129,030 127,099 334 -1.5 362
Amarillo, TX 227,117 253,823 213 11.8 173
Ames, IA 80,127 89,663 385 11.9 169
Anchorage, AK 320,434 387,516 162 20.9 72
Anderson, IN 133,275 131,235 324 -1.5 363
Anderson, SC 166,319 188,488 251 13.3 148
Ann Arbor, MI 324,491 347,962 175 7.2 242
Anniston-Oxford, AL 111,342 117,797 345 5.8 267
Appleton, WI 202,508 227,403 223 12.3 164
Asheville, NC 370,492 429,017 144 15.8 114
Athens-Clarke County, GA 166,903 193,317 248 15.8 113
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 4,281,905 5,359,205 12 25.2 40
Atlantic City-Hammonton, NJ 253,038 274,338 198 8.4 225
Auburn-Opelika, AL 115,511 143,468 305 24.2 47
Augusta-Richmond County, GA-SC 500,235 561,858 120 12.3 163
Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos, TX 1,265,715 1,783,519 52 40.9 8
Bakersfield-Delano, CA 663,484 851,710 85 28.4 30
2000-2011Population
Metro Population Trends, continued
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 30
Metropolitan Area 2011
(Titles of metropolitan divisions are indented.) 2000 2011 Rank by Size % change Rank
Baltimore-Towson, MD 2,557,501 2,729,110 28 6.7 252
Bangor, ME 144,907 153,786 288 6.1 261
Barnstable Town, MA 223,245 215,769 227 -3.3 376
Baton Rouge, LA 707,429 808,242 90 14.3 133
Battle Creek, MI 138,021 135,490 317 -1.8 364
Bay City , MI 110,091 107,110 364 -2.7 369
Beaumont-Port Arthur, TX 384,688 390,535 161 1.5 336
Bellingham, WA 167,760 203,663 238 21.4 68
Bend, OR 116,618 160,338 277 37.5 11
Billings, MT 139,091 160,097 278 15.1 119
Binghamton, NY 252,042 250,074 215 -0.8 357
Birmingham-Hoover, AL 1,053,394 1,132,264 73 7.5 232
Bismarck, ND 94,840 110,879 359 16.9 101
Blacksburg-Christiansburg-Radford, VA 151,479 162,487 273 7.3 238
Bloomington, IN 175,831 194,193 247 10.4 190
Bloomington-Normal, IL 150,897 170,556 264 13.0 157
Boise City-Nampa, ID 468,874 627,664 113 33.9 16
Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH 4,402,611 4,591,112 13 4.3 299
.Boston-Quincy, MA 1,816,879 1,903,947 46 4.8 287
.Cambridge-Newton-Framingham, MA 1,468,934 1,518,171 59 3.4 318
.Peabody, MA 725,379 748,930 96 3.2 320
.Rockingham County-Strafford County, NH 391,419 420,064 150 7.3 234
Boulder, CO 271,669 299,378 188 10.2 193
Bowling Green, KY 104,476 127,607 331 22.1 62
Population 2000-2011
Metro Population Trends, continued
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 31
Metropolitan Area 2011
(Titles of metropolitan divisions are indented.) 2000 2011 Rank by Size % change Rank
Bremerton-Silverdale, WA 232,355 254,633 211 9.6 207
Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT 884,420 925,899 79 4.7 290
Brownsville-Harlingen, TX 336,443 414,123 153 23.1 55
Brunswick, GA 93,226 112,923 355 21.1 70
Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY 1,169,159 1,134,039 72 -3.0 373
Burlington, NC 131,521 153,291 290 16.6 106
Burlington-South Burlington, VT 199,590 212,535 230 6.5 255
Canton-Massillon, OH 406,966 403,869 157 -0.8 356
Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL 443,916 631,330 112 42.2 5
Cape Girardeau-Jackson, MO-IL 90,429 97,024 379 7.3 236
Carson City , NV 52,551 55,439 395 5.5 269
Casper, WY 66,554 76,366 393 14.7 123
Cedar Rapids, IA 237,853 260,575 206 9.6 208
Champaign-Urbana, IL 210,511 232,336 221 10.4 191
Charleston, WV 309,387 303,674 185 -1.8 365
Charleston-North Charleston-Summerville, SC 550,875 682,121 106 23.8 49
Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC 1,340,417 1,795,472 50 33.9 15
Charlottesv ille, VA 174,784 203,882 237 16.6 104
Chattanooga, TN-GA 477,213 533,372 126 11.8 172
Cheyenne, WY 81,745 92,680 383 13.4 147
Chicago-Joliet-Naperv ille, IL-IN-WI 9,117,732 9,504,753 5 4.2 300
.Chicago-Joliet-Naperv ille, IL 7,643,102 7,922,566 6 3.7 309
.Gary, IN 676,422 708,672 101 4.8 288
.Lake County-Kenosha County, IL-WI 798,208 873,515 82 9.4 211
Population 2000-2011
Metro Population Trends, continued
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 32
Metropolitan Area 2011
(Titles of metropolitan divisions are indented.) 2000 2011 Rank by Size % change Rank
Chico, CA 203,926 220,266 225 8.0 227
Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN 2,014,665 2,138,038 42 6.1 262
Clarksv ille, TN-KY 232,719 277,701 195 19.3 86
Cleveland, TN 104,307 116,834 347 12.0 168
Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH 2,147,948 2,068,283 43 -3.7 381
Coeur d'Alene, ID 109,541 141,132 309 28.8 28
College Station-Bryan, TX 185,469 231,623 222 24.9 44
Colorado Springs, CO 540,111 660,319 109 22.3 61
Columbia, MO 146,026 175,831 261 20.4 76
Columbia, SC 649,181 777,116 95 19.7 83
Columbus, GA-AL 282,164 301,439 186 6.8 248
Columbus, IN 71,737 77,870 391 8.5 221
Columbus, OH 1,619,514 1,858,464 48 14.8 122
Corpus Christi, TX 403,199 431,381 142 7.0 246
Corvallis, OR 78,197 85,928 387 9.9 200
Crestv iew-Fort Walton Beach-Destin, FL 183,482 253 #N/A
Cumberland, MD-WV 101,841 102,884 368 1.0 341
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX 5,196,188 6,526,548 7 25.6 35
.Dallas-Plano-Irv ing, TX 3,475,160 4,345,790 16 25.1 41
.Fort Worth-Arlington, TX 1,721,028 2,180,758 38 26.7 33
Dalton, GA 120,838 142,741 306 18.1 93
Danville, IL 83,796 81,509 389 -2.7 370
Danville, VA 110,000 105,696 366 -3.9 383
Davenport-Moline-Rock Island, IA-IL 375,820 381,342 163 1.5 337
Population 2000-2011
Metro Population Trends, continued
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 33
Metropolitan Area 2011
(Titles of metropolitan divisions are indented.) 2000 2011 Rank by Size % change Rank
Dayton, OH 848,093 845,388 86 -0.3 354
Decatur, AL 146,050 154,070 287 5.5 270
Decatur, IL 114,476 110,730 360 -3.3 375
Deltona-Daytona Beach-Ormond Beach, FL 445,060 494,804 131 11.2 182
Denver-Aurora-Broomfield, CO 2,194,022 2,599,504 30 18.5 91
Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA 483,210 580,255 116 20.1 80
Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI 4,457,471 4,285,832 18 -3.9 382
.Detroit-Livonia-Dearborn, MI 2,058,758 1,802,096 49 -12.5 392
.Warren-Troy-Farmington Hills, MI 2,398,713 2,483,736 33 3.5 313
Dothan, AL 131,053 146,562 299 11.8 171
Dover, DE 127,109 164,834 270 29.7 23
Dubuque, IA 89,232 94,648 382 6.1 264
Duluth, MN-WI 275,580 279,815 194 1.5 335
Durham-Chapel Hill, NC 426,151 512,979 130 20.4 77
Eau Claire, WI 148,689 162,657 272 9.4 212
El Centro, CA 142,396 177,057 259 24.3 46
Elizabethtown, KY 107,694 121,771 342 13.1 156
Elkhart-Goshen, IN 183,521 198,941 245 8.4 226
Elmira, NY 91,079 88,840 386 -2.5 367
El Paso, TX 680,942 820,790 89 20.5 75
Erie, PA 280,734 280,985 193 0.1 351
Eugene-Springfield, OR 323,505 353,416 173 9.2 215
Evansville, IN-KY 342,992 359,879 171 4.9 282
Fairbanks, AK 82,769 99,192 372 19.8 82
Population 2000-2011
Metro Population Trends, continued
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 34
Metropolitan Area 2011
(Titles of metropolitan divisions are indented.) 2000 2011 Rank by Size % change Rank
Fargo, ND-MN 174,791 212,171 231 21.4 69
Farmington, NM 114,035 128,200 330 12.4 162
Fayettev ille, NC 336,893 374,157 166 11.1 185
Fayettev ille-Springdale-Rogers, AR-MO 349,562 473,830 135 35.5 13
Flagstaff, AZ 116,717 134,511 318 15.2 117
Flint, MI 436,885 422,080 148 -3.4 377
Florence, SC 193,260 206,161 235 6.7 253
Florence-Muscle Shoals, AL 143,006 147,293 296 3.0 324
Fond du Lac, WI 97,384 102,079 370 4.8 286
Fort Collins-Loveland, CO 253,152 305,525 184 20.7 74
Fort Smith, AR-OK 273,816 300,087 187 9.6 206
Fort Walton Beach-Crestv iew-Destin, FL 170,966 #N/A
Fort Wayne, IN 391,066 419,453 151 7.3 240
Fresno, CA 801,444 942,904 78 17.7 95
Gadsden, AL 103,313 104,303 367 1.0 342
Gainesville, FL 233,142 266,369 202 14.3 132
Gainesville, GA 140,886 183,052 254 29.9 22
Glens Falls, NY 124,348 128,996 328 3.7 307
Goldsboro, NC 113,297 123,697 338 9.2 217
Grand Forks, ND-MN 97,331 98,054 375 0.7 345
Grand Junction, CO 117,488 147,083 298 25.2 39
Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI 743,092 779,604 94 4.9 283
Great Falls, MT 80,201 81,837 388 2.0 332
Greeley, CO 183,045 258,638 208 41.3 7
Population 2000-2011
Metro Population Trends, continued
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 35
Metropolitan Area 2011
(Titles of metropolitan divisions are indented.) 2000 2011 Rank by Size % change Rank
Green Bay, WI 283,337 309,469 181 9.2 216
Greensboro-High Point, NC 645,536 730,966 97 13.2 149
Greenville, NC 153,156 192,690 249 25.8 34
Greenville-Mauldin-Easley, SC 561,900 647,401 111 15.2 118
Gulfport-Bilox i, MS 246,838 253,511 214 2.7 327
Hagerstown-Martinsburg, MD-WV 223,526 271,488 201 21.5 67
Hanford-Corcoran, CA 129,774 153,765 289 18.5 90
Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA 509,454 552,911 122 8.5 223
Harrisonburg, VA 108,285 126,562 335 16.9 102
Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT 1,150,915 1,213,255 68 5.4 271
Hattiesburg, MS 124,325 145,428 301 17.0 100
Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton, NC 343,120 364,567 170 6.3 259
Hinesville-Fort Stewart, GA 71,802 80,587 390 12.2 165
Holland-Grand Haven, MI 239,490 266,300 203 11.2 180
Honolulu, HI 875,061 963,607 76 10.1 195
Hot Springs, AR 88,350 97,124 378 9.9 199
Houma-Bayou Cane-Thibodaux, LA 194,435 208,583 234 7.3 237
Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX 4,739,414 6,086,538 8 28.4 29
Huntington-Ashland, WV-KY-OH 288,355 287,599 191 -0.3 353
Huntsv ille, AL 343,798 425,480 147 23.8 51
Idaho Falls, ID 102,081 132,073 323 29.4 25
Indianapolis-Carmel, IN 1,531,156 1,778,568 54 16.2 108
Iowa City , IA 132,182 154,893 284 17.2 98
Ithaca, NY 96,662 101,723 371 5.2 278
Population 2000-2011
Metro Population Trends, continued
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 36
Metropolitan Area 2011
(Titles of metropolitan divisions are indented.) 2000 2011 Rank by Size % change Rank
Jackson, MI 158,735 159,748 280 0.6 348
Jackson, MS 498,252 545,394 123 9.5 209
Jackson, TN 107,581 115,396 350 7.3 239
Jacksonville, FL 1,126,224 1,360,251 60 20.8 73
Jacksonville, NC 149,774 179,719 256 20.0 81
Janesville, WI 152,499 160,092 279 5.0 280
Jefferson City , MO 140,320 150,480 294 7.2 241
Johnson City , TN 181,989 199,818 243 9.8 201
Johnstown, PA 152,240 143,728 304 -5.6 388
Jonesboro, AR 108,135 122,829 341 13.6 144
Joplin, MO 157,718 176,849 260 12.1 167
Kalamazoo-Portage, MI 315,398 328,205 177 4.1 302
Kankakee-Bradley, IL 103,879 113,698 353 9.5 210
Kansas City , MO-KS 1,842,924 2,052,676 44 11.4 177
Kennewick-Pasco-Richland, WA 192,710 264,133 205 37.1 12
Killeen-Temple-Fort Hood, TX 332,022 411,595 156 24.0 48
Kingsport-Bristol-Bristol, TN-VA 298,438 309,793 180 3.8 305
Kingston, NY 177,831 182,448 255 2.6 329
Knoxville, TN 617,573 704,500 102 14.1 138
Kokomo, IN 101,528 98,588 374 -2.9 372
La Crosse, WI-MN 127,020 134,488 319 5.9 266
Lafayette, IN 178,844 203,608 239 13.8 140
Lafayette, LA 239,107 277,307 196 16.0 110
Lake Charles, LA 193,463 200,822 242 3.8 306
Population 2000-2011
Metro Population Trends, continued
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 37
Metropolitan Area 2011
(Titles of metropolitan divisions are indented.) 2000 2011 Rank by Size % change Rank
Lake Havasu City-Kingman, AZ 156,194 202,351 240 29.6 24
Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL 485,378 609,492 115 25.6 37
Lancaster, PA 471,818 523,594 127 11.0 188
Lansing-East Lansing, MI 448,543 465,138 137 3.7 308
Laredo, TX 194,523 256,496 210 31.9 18
Las Cruces, NM 174,973 213,598 228 22.1 63
Las Vegas-Paradise, NV 1,393,370 1,969,975 45 41.4 6
Lawrence, KS 100,295 112,211 357 11.9 170
Lawton, OK 114,675 125,815 336 9.7 203
Lebanon, PA 120,416 134,311 321 11.5 175
Lewiston, ID-WA 57,952 61,476 394 6.1 263
Lewiston-Auburn, ME 103,845 107,398 363 3.4 316
Lexington-Fayette, KY 409,656 479,244 134 17.0 99
Lima, OH 108,577 106,094 365 -2.3 366
Lincoln, NE 267,955 306,503 183 14.4 130
Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conway, AR 612,149 709,901 98 16.0 111
Logan, UT-ID 103,220 127,549 333 23.6 52
Longview, TX 194,010 216,666 226 11.7 174
Longview, WA 93,012 102,478 369 10.2 194
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA 12,398,950 12,944,801 2 4.4 295
.Los Angeles-Long Beach-Glendale, CA 9,542,578 9,889,056 4 3.6 310
.Santa Ana-Anaheim-Irv ine, CA 2,856,372 3,055,745 24 7.0 247
Louisv ille/Jefferson County, KY-IN 1,165,132 1,294,849 63 11.1 184
Lubbock, TX 250,130 290,002 190 15.9 112
Population 2000-2011
Metro Population Trends, continued
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 38
Metropolitan Area 2011
(Titles of metropolitan divisions are indented.) 2000 2011 Rank by Size % change Rank
Lynchburg, VA 228,918 254,171 212 11.0 186
Macon, GA 222,387 232,920 219 4.7 289
Madera-Chowchilla, CA 123,566 152,925 291 23.8 50
Madison, WI 504,044 576,467 117 14.4 131
Manchester-Nashua, NH 382,409 401,696 159 5.0 279
Manhattan, KS 109,039 130,240 326 19.4 85
Mankato-North Mankato, MN 85,850 97,204 377 13.2 150
Mansfield, OH 128,797 123,510 339 -4.1 384
McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX 573,398 797,810 93 39.1 10
Medford, OR 181,798 204,822 236 12.7 161
Memphis, TN-MS-AR 1,208,269 1,325,605 62 9.7 204
Merced, CA 212,122 259,898 207 22.5 59
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL 5,025,806 5,670,125 11 12.8 159
.Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach-Deerfield Beach, FL 1,631,723 1,780,172 53 9.1 219
.Miami-Miami Beach-Kendall, FL 2,258,765 2,554,766 32 13.1 154
.West Palm Beach-Boca Raton-Boynton Beach, FL 1,135,318 1,335,187 61 17.6 96
Michigan City-La Porte, IN 110,158 111,374 358 1.1 339
Midland, TX 115,487 140,308 310 21.5 66
Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI 1,502,305 1,562,216 58 4.0 303
Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI 2,981,616 3,318,486 22 11.3 178
Missoula, MT 96,170 110,138 361 14.5 129
Mobile, AL 400,061 412,577 155 3.1 322
Modesto, CA 449,702 518,522 128 15.3 116
Monroe, LA 170,043 177,651 258 4.5 293
Population 2000-2011
Metro Population Trends, continued
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 39
Metropolitan Area 2011
(Titles of metropolitan divisions are indented.) 2000 2011 Rank by Size % change Rank
Monroe, MI 146,412 151,560 293 3.5 315
Montgomery, AL 347,002 378,608 165 9.1 218
Morgantown, WV 111,190 132,251 322 18.9 88
Morristown, TN 123,564 137,494 315 11.3 179
Mount Vernon-Anacortes, WA 103,475 118,109 344 14.1 135
Muncie, IN 118,733 117,660 346 -0.9 359
Muskegon-Norton Shores, MI 170,485 171,302 263 0.5 350
Myrtle Beach-North Myrtle Beach-Conway, SC 198,132 276,340 197 39.5 9
Napa, CA 124,545 138,088 313 10.9 189
Naples-Marco Island, FL 254,070 328,134 178 29.2 27
Nashville-Davidson--Murfreesboro--Franklin, TN 1,317,580 1,617,142 56 22.7 57
New Haven-Milford, CT 824,992 861,113 84 4.4 297
New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA 1,315,616 1,191,089 69 -9.5 391
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA 18,352,743 19,015,900 1 3.6 311
.Edison-New Brunswick, NJ 2,182,433 2,349,499 35 7.7 231
.Nassau-Suffolk, NY 2,759,802 2,843,252 25 3.0 323
.Newark-Union, NJ-PA 2,100,567 2,153,014 41 2.5 330
.New York-White Plains-Wayne, NY-NJ 11,309,941 11,670,135 3 3.2 321
Niles-Benton Harbor, MI 162,556 156,941 283 -3.5 378
North Port-Bradenton-Sarasota, FL 709,355 100 #N/A
Norwich-New London, CT 259,575 273,502 199 5.4 273
Ocala, FL 260,285 332,529 176 27.8 31
Ocean City , NJ 102,307 96,601 380 -5.6 387
Odessa, TX 120,685 140,111 311 16.1 109
Population 2000-2011
Metro Population Trends, continued
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 40
Metropolitan Area 2011
(Titles of metropolitan divisions are indented.) 2000 2011 Rank by Size % change Rank
Ogden-Clearfield, UT 444,874 555,916 121 25.0 43
Oklahoma City , OK 1,097,874 1,278,053 64 16.4 107
Olympia, WA 208,304 256,591 209 23.2 54
Omaha-Council Bluffs, NE-IA 769,117 877,110 81 14.0 139
Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL 1,656,835 2,171,360 40 31.1 20
Oshkosh-Neenah, WI 157,082 167,699 267 6.8 250
Owensboro, KY 110,006 115,333 351 4.8 285
Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA 756,366 831,771 87 10.0 196
Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusv ille, FL 477,735 543,566 124 13.8 143
Palm Coast, FL 50,560 97,376 376 92.6 1
Panama City-Lynn Haven-Panama City Beach, FL 148,258 169,856 265 14.6 126
Parkersburg-Marietta-Vienna, WV-OH 164,443 162,248 274 -1.3 360
Pascagoula, MS 151,034 162,790 271 7.8 230
Pensacola-Ferry Pass-Brent, FL 413,171 453,218 138 9.7 205
Peoria, IL 366,602 379,556 164 3.5 314
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 5,693,275 5,992,414 9 5.3 277
.Camden, NJ 1,188,535 1,251,921 66 5.3 275
.Philadelphia, PA 3,852,150 4,030,926 20 4.6 292
.Wilmington, DE-MD-NJ 652,590 709,567 99 8.7 220
Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ 3,278,661 4,263,236 19 30.0 21
Pine Bluff, AR 107,236 98,924 373 -7.8 390
Pittsburgh, PA 2,429,023 2,359,746 34 -2.9 371
Pittsfield, MA 134,787 130,458 325 -3.2 374
Pocatello, ID 83,171 91,457 384 10.0 197
Population 2000-2011
Metro Population Trends, continued
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 41
Metropolitan Area 2011
(Titles of metropolitan divisions are indented.) 2000 2011 Rank by Size % change Rank
Portland-South Portland-Biddeford, ME 489,359 515,807 129 5.4 272
Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA 1,936,108 2,262,605 36 16.9 103
Port St. Lucie, FL 320,593 427,874 145 33.5 17
Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, NY 624,156 672,871 107 7.8 229
Prescott, AZ 168,886 211,888 232 25.5 38
Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA 1,586,744 1,600,224 57 0.8 343
Provo-Orem, UT 379,919 540,834 125 42.4 4
Pueblo, CO 141,839 160,545 275 13.2 151
Punta Gorda, FL 142,246 160,511 276 12.8 158
Racine, WI 188,991 195,388 246 3.4 317
Raleigh-Cary, NC 804,436 1,163,515 70 44.6 3
Rapid City , SD 113,008 128,361 329 13.6 145
Reading, PA 374,521 412,778 154 10.2 192
Redding, CA 163,782 177,774 257 8.5 222
Reno-Sparks, NV 344,808 429,606 143 24.6 45
Richmond, VA 1,100,196 1,269,380 65 15.4 115
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA 3,277,578 4,304,997 17 31.3 19
Roanoke, VA 288,503 308,861 182 7.1 245
Rochester, MN 164,427 187,612 252 14.1 137
Rochester, NY 1,041,595 1,055,278 74 1.3 338
Rockford, IL 321,042 348,360 174 8.5 224
Rocky Mount, NC 143,045 152,157 292 6.4 257
Rome, GA 90,811 95,989 381 5.7 268
Sacramento--Arden-Arcade--Roseville, CA 1,808,442 2,176,235 39 20.3 78
Population 2000-2011
Metro Population Trends, continued
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 42
Metropolitan Area 2011
(Titles of metropolitan divisions are indented.) 2000 2011 Rank by Size % change Rank
Saginaw-Saginaw Township North, MI 209,931 199,088 244 -5.2 386
St. Cloud, MN 168,045 190,014 250 13.1 155
St. George, UT 91,256 141,666 308 55.2 2
St. Joseph, MO-KS 123,967 127,574 332 2.9 325
St. Louis, MO-IL 2,701,634 2,817,355 27 4.3 298
Salem, OR 348,222 394,865 160 13.4 146
Salinas, CA 403,065 421,898 149 4.7 291
Salisbury, MD 109,582 125,529 337 14.6 127
Salt Lake City , UT 972,653 1,145,905 71 17.8 94
San Angelo, TX 105,812 113,443 354 7.2 244
San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX 1,719,262 2,194,927 37 27.7 32
San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA 2,824,987 3,140,069 23 11.2 183
Sandusky, OH 79,603 76,751 392 -3.6 379
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 4,136,658 4,391,037 15 6.1 260
.Oakland-Fremont-Hayward, CA 2,403,412 2,595,971 31 8.0 228
.San Francisco-San Mateo-Redwood City , CA 1,733,246 1,795,066 51 3.6 312
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA 1,739,669 1,865,450 47 7.2 243
San Luis Obispo-Paso Robles, CA 247,878 271,969 200 9.7 202
Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Goleta, CA 399,784 426,878 146 6.8 249
Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA 255,834 264,298 204 3.3 319
Santa Fe, NM 129,840 145,648 300 12.2 166
Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA 460,411 488,116 132 6.0 265
Savannah, GA 293,668 355,576 172 21.1 71
Scranton--Wilkes-Barre, PA 559,537 563,223 118 0.7 347
Population 2000-2011
Metro Population Trends, continued
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 43
Metropolitan Area 2011
(Titles of metropolitan divisions are indented.) 2000 2011 Rank by Size % change Rank
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA 3,052,379 3,500,026 21 14.7 124
.Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, WA 2,348,394 2,692,122 29 14.6 125
.Tacoma, WA 703,985 807,904 91 14.8 121
Sebastian-Vero Beach, FL 113,387 138,894 312 22.5 60
Sheboygan, WI 112,742 115,149 352 2.1 331
Sherman-Denison, TX 110,993 121,419 343 9.4 213
Shreveport-Bossier City , LA 376,127 403,595 158 7.3 235
Sioux City , IA-NE-SD 143,005 144,062 302 0.7 346
Sioux Falls, SD 188,344 232,433 220 23.4 53
South Bend-Mishawaka, IN-MI 316,977 318,688 179 0.5 349
Spartanburg, SC 254,418 286,868 192 12.8 160
Spokane, WA 418,826 473,761 136 13.1 153
Springfield, IL 201,586 211,547 233 4.9 281
Springfield, MA 680,453 693,204 105 1.9 334
Springfield, MO 369,775 440,142 140 19.0 87
Springfield, OH 144,661 137,691 314 -4.8 385
State College, PA 135,930 154,722 285 13.8 142
Steubenville-Weirton, OH-WV 123,243 340 #N/A
Stockton, CA 567,968 696,214 104 22.6 58
Sumter, SC 104,655 107,460 362 2.7 328
Syracuse, NY 649,817 662,553 108 2.0 333
Tallahassee, FL 321,372 369,758 167 15.1 120
Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL 2,404,273 2,824,724 26 17.5 97
Terre Haute, IN 170,813 172,663 262 1.1 340
Population 2000-2011
Metro Population Trends, continued
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 44
Metropolitan Area 2011
(Titles of metropolitan divisions are indented.) 2000 2011 Rank by Size % change Rank
Texarkana, TX-Texarkana, AR 129,681 136,552 316 5.3 276
Toledo, OH 659,224 650,266 110 -1.4 361
Topeka, KS 224,800 234,647 218 4.4 296
Trenton-Ewing, NJ 351,561 367,063 169 4.4 294
Tucson, AZ 848,521 989,569 75 16.6 105
Tulsa, OK 861,369 946,962 77 9.9 198
Tuscaloosa, AL 193,425 221,553 224 14.5 128
Tyler, TX 175,500 213,381 229 21.6 65
Utica-Rome, NY 299,428 298,447 189 -0.3 355
Valdosta, GA 119,741 142,307 307 18.8 89
Vallejo-Fairfield, CA 396,974 416,471 152 4.9 284
Victoria, TX 111,650 116,230 349 4.1 301
Vineland-Millv ille-Bridgeton, NJ 146,362 157,095 282 7.3 233
Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC 1,580,387 1,679,894 55 6.3 258
Visalia-Porterv ille, CA 368,628 449,253 139 21.9 64
Waco, TX 214,093 238,564 217 11.4 176
Warner Robins, GA 111,248 143,925 303 29.4 26
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV 4,821,031 5,703,948 10 18.3 92
.Bethesda-Rockville-Frederick, MD 1,073,885 1,226,539 67 14.2 134
.Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV 3,747,146 4,477,409 14 19.5 84
Waterloo-Cedar Falls, IA 163,668 168,289 266 2.8 326
Wausau, WI 125,905 134,400 320 6.7 251
131,618 #N/A
Wenatchee-East Wenatchee, WA 99,379 112,448 356 13.2 152
Population 2000-2011
Metro Population Trends, continued
June 2, 2014
Regional Perspectives: State of the States
Commercial Banking 45
Metropolitan Area 2011
(Titles of metropolitan divisions are indented.) 2000 2011 Rank by Size % change Rank
Wheeling, WV-OH 152,850 147,197 297 -3.7 380
Wichita, KS 572,045 625,526 114 9.3 214
Wichita Falls, TX 151,584 150,261 295 -0.9 358
Williamsport, PA 119,957 116,747 348 -2.7 368
Wilmington, NC 275,827 369,685 168 34.0 14
Winchester, VA-WV 103,566 130,065 327 25.6 36
Winston-Salem, NC 423,413 482,025 133 13.8 141
Worcester, MA 752,684 801,227 92 6.4 256
Yakima, WA 222,696 247,141 216 11.0 187
York-Hanover, PA 382,749 436,770 141 14.1 136
Youngstown-Warren-Boardman, OH-PA 602,171 562,739 119 -6.5 389
Yuba City , CA 139,483 167,497 268 20.1 79
Yuma, AZ 160,675 200,870 241 25.0 42
Source: Census. Updated through July 2011.
Population 2000-2011
CONTACT:
James E. Glassman
Telephone: (212) 270-0778
© 2014 JPMorgan Chase & Co. All rights reserved. Chase, JPMorgan and JPMorgan Chase are marketing names for certain businesses of JPMorgan Chase & Co. and its subsidiaries worldwide
(collectively, “JPMC”). The material contained herein is intended as a general market commentary. To the extent indices have been used in this commentary, please note that it is not possible to
invest directly in an index. Opinions expressed herein are those of James Glassman and may differ from those of other J.P. Morgan employees and affiliates. This information in no way constitutes
J.P. Morgan research and should not be treated as such. Further, the views expressed herein may differ from that contained in J.P. Morgan research reports. The above
summary/prices/quotes/statistics have been obtained from sources deemed to be reliable, but we do not guarantee their accuracy or completeness.