The Philippine Q3 2025 “4.0% GDP Shock” That Wasn’t

 

There is enormous inertia — a tyranny of the status quo — in private and especially governmental arrangements. Only a crisis — actual or perceived — produces real change. When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around. That, I believe, is our basic function: to develop alternatives to existing policies, to keep them alive and available until the politically impossible becomes politically inevitable—Milton Friedman  

In this issue

The Philippine Q3 2025 “4.0% GDP Shock” That Wasn’t

I. Q3 GDP Shock: A Collapse Few Saw Coming; The Loose Cauldron of Policy Support

II. Why Then the Surprise?

III. The Echo Chamber: Forecasting as Optimism Theater

IV. Statistics ≠ Economics: The Public’s Misguided Faith

V. Ground Truth: SEVN as a Proxy — Retail Reality vs. GDP Fiction

VI. The Consumer Slump is Structural, Not Episodic; Hunger as a Better Predictor; CPI Is Not the Whole Story

VII. So What Happened to Q3 GDP?

VIII. Household Per Capita: The Downtrend

IX. The Real Q3 2025 GDP Story: Consumer Slowdown

X. Government Spending Didn’t Collapse — It Held Up Amid Scandal; Public Construction Implosion

XI. External Sector: Trump Tariffs’ Exports Front-Loaded, Imports Slowing

XII. Corruption Is the Symptom; Policy Induced Malinvestment Is the Disease

XIII. Increasing Influence of Public Spending in the Economy

XIV. Crowding Out, Malinvestment, and the Debt Time Bomb

XV. Statistical Mirage: Base Effects and the GDP Deflator

XVI. Testing Support: Fragility in the Data, Institutional Silence

XVII. Overstating GDP via Understating the CPI

XVIII. Real Estate as a Case Study: GDP vs. Corporate Reality

XIX. Calamities and GDP: Human Tragedy vs. Statistical Resilience

XX. Calamities as a Convenient Political Explanation and Bastiat’s Broken Window Fallacy

XXI. Expanding Marcos-nomics: State of Calamity as Fiscal Stimulus

XXII. More Easing? The Rate-Cut Expectations Game

XXIII. A Fiscal Shock in the Making, Black Swan Dynamics

XXIV. Conclusion: Crisis as the Only Reform 

The Philippine Q3 2025 “4.0% GDP Shock” That Wasn’t 

Behind the typhoon-and-scandal headlines lies the real story: a shocked consensus, overstated aggregates, expanded stimulus, and a political economy running on malinvestment.

I. Q3 GDP Shock: A Collapse Few Saw Coming; The Loose Cauldron of Policy Support 

The Philippine government announced that Q3 GDP growth slumped to a mere 4%, the slowest pace since the pandemic recession. This came as a ‘shock’ to mainstream forecasters, who had projected a modest deceleration—not a plunge. 

Statistics must never be viewed in isolation. This GDP print must be seen in context. Q3 unfolded amid a deepening BSP easing cycle—six rate cuts (with a seventh in October or Q4), two RRR reductions, and a doubling of deposit insurance coverage. 

This stimulus-driven environment was reinforced by all-time-high bank lending, particularly in consumer credit, even as employment—though slightly weaker—remained near full employment levels. 

In short, Q3 growth occurred under the most accommodative financial and fiscal conditions in years—a cauldron of policy backstops. 

II. Why Then the Surprise? 

Forecasting errors were not only widespread—they were flagrant. 

Reuters called the result “shocking,” citing a corruption scandal linked to infrastructure projects that hammered both consumer and investor confidence. The report noted that growth came in “well below the 5.2% forecast in a Reuters poll and significantly weaker than the 5.5% expansion in the previous quarter.” 

BusinessWorld’s survey of 18 economists yielded a median forecast of 5.3%.

Philstar’s poll of six economists projected 5.45%, barely below Q2’s 5.5%. 

A 50-bps drop was labeled a ‘slowdown’? Really? 

That’s not analysis—it’s narrative management. 

Why such a brazen forecasting error? 

III. The Echo Chamber: Forecasting as Optimism Theater 

The DBM chief claimed that Q4 growth would “normalize,” insisting that the 5.5–6.5% full-year target “remains attainable.” 

Implicit in that projection was a soft but stable Q3—a forecast that proved disastrously optimistic. 

This consensus blindness mirrors past failures: the Q1 2020 COVID shock and the 2022 inflation spike. 

This isn’t ideological—it’s institutional. Forecasts aren’t tools for analysis; they are marketing vehicles for official optimism. Economic statistics are not used to diagnose, but to promote and reassure. 

Hence the futility of “pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey” forecasting: a guessing game played on deeply flawed metrics. 

IV. Statistics ≠ Economics: The Public’s Misguided Faith 

Statistics is NOT economics. 

Despite repeated misses, the public continues to cling to mainstream forecasts. They fail to see the incentive mismatch—institutions seek fees, commissions, and access, while individuals seek returns. 

Agency problems, asymmetric information, and lack of skin in the game define this relationship—core realities that mainstream commentary refuses to admit. 

V. Ground Truth: SEVN as a Proxy — Retail Reality vs. GDP Fiction

Figure 1 

Take Philippine Seven Corp. [PSE: SEVN]. In Q3: 

• Revenue rose just 3.8% YoY, its weakest since Q1 2021.
• Same-store sales contracted 3.9%, the worst since the pandemic.
• Store count rose 8.6%, yet total sales fell—signaling demand erosion. 

This downtrend, persisting since 2022, mirrors the slowdown in real retail and household consumption GDP, which posted 5.1% and 4.09% in Q3, respectively. (Figure 1, topmost and middle windows) 

Yet the gap between SEVN’s data and official GDP implies potential overestimation in national accounts. 

If major retail chains show a sustained slowdown or outright contraction, then headline consumption growth of 4–5% either overstates economic reality—or implies that GDP should be even weaker than reported. 

These trend declines offer a structural lens into the economy’s underlying deterioration. 

VI. The Consumer Slump is Structural, Not Episodic; Hunger as a Better Predictor; CPI Is Not the Whole Story

The consumer slowdown did not emerge from the corruption scandal or recent natural calamities (earthquakes and typhoons)—it preceded both. The underlying weakness has long been visible to anyone looking beyond the official narrative. 

While economists missed the turn, sentiment data didn’t. 

The SWS hunger survey—a proxy for household stress—proved a far better leading indicator. Its late-September spike revealed deepening hardship among lower- and middle-income Filipinos—mirroring the Q3 GDP plunge. (Figure 1, lowest graph) 

Like SEVN’s revenue and the deceleration in consumption and retail GDP, hunger is not an anomaly—it’s a trend. One that has persisted since the pandemic and now appears to be accelerating.

Figure 2

With CPI steady at 1.4% for two consecutive quarters—assuming the number’s accuracy—the malaise clearly extends beyond price pressures. 

The hunger dilemma reflects deeper economic deterioration: slowing jobs, stagnant wages, weak investments, falling earnings, declining productivity, and eroding savings. (Figure 2, topmost image) 

This is the institutional blind spot—prioritizing political and commercial relationships over truth. 

VII. So What Happened to Q3 GDP? 

Aside from back-to-back typhoons, officials attributed the unexpected slowdown to concerns over the integrity of public spending and further erosion of investor sentiment. 

And it was not just investors. According to Philstar, the DEPDEV (Department of Economy, Planning, and Development) chief said consumer confidence has also been hit by the flood control probes, with many households postponing planned purchases. 

But unless there has been a call for nationwide civil disobedience (à la Gandhi or Etienne de La Boétie), why should people’s daily consumption habits suddenly be affected by politics? 

The reality is more complex. Universal commercial banks’ household loan portfolios surged 23.5% in Q3 2025—marking the 13th consecutive quarter of 20%+ growth. If households weren’t spending, what were they doing with interest-bearing loans? Investing? Speculating? Or simply refinancing old debt? (Figure 2, middle chart) 

VIII. Household Per Capita: The Downtrend 

Meanwhile, real household per capita consumption grew just 3.2%, its lowest since the BSP-sponsored recovery in Q2 2021. This wasn’t an anomaly—it reflected a downtrend in household spending growth since Q1 2022. (Figure 2, lowest visual) 

In short, the corruption scandal was not the root cause but an aggravating circumstance layered atop an existing structural slowdown. 

IX. The Real Q3 2025 GDP Story: Consumer Slowdown

Let us look at the real Q3 2025 expenditure trend, and how it compares with recent periods. 

Q3 2025 (4% GDP):

• Household spending: +4.1%
• Government spending: +5.8%
• Construction spending: –0.5%
• Gross capital formation: –2.8%
•  Exports: +7%
• Imports: +2.6%

Q2 2025 (5.5% GDP): 

• Household spending: +5.3%
•  Government spending: +8.7%
• Capital formation: +1.2%
• Construction: +0.9%
• Exports and imports: +4.7%, +3.5%

Q3 2024 (5.2% GDP): 

• Household spending: +5.2% 
• Government spending: +5%
• Capital formation: +12.8%
• Construction: +9%
• Exports and imports: –1.3%, +6.5%

X. Government Spending Didn’t Collapse — It Held Up Amid Scandal; Public Construction Implosion 

Despite the corruption scandal, government consumption remained positive and was even higher in Q3 2025 than in Q3 2024. This alone undermines the narrative that the GDP slump was simply "sentiment shock."

Figure 3

Government construction plummeted 26.6%, matching the pandemic lockdown era of Q3 2020. This single line item pulled construction GDP into a mild –0.5% decline. (Figure 3, topmost pane) 

But buried beneath the headline, private construction was strong:

• Private corporate construction: +14.4%
• Household construction: +13.3%

These robust figures cushioned the damage from the government crash.

Absent private-sector strength, construction GDP would have mirrored the government collapse. 

Government construction also contracted –8.2% in Q2, reflecting procurement restrictions during the midterm election ban. 

As we already noted last September: (bold original) 

"Many large firms are structurally tied to public projects, and the economy’s current momentum leans heavily on credit-fueled activity rather than organic productivity."

"Curtailing infrastructure outlays, even temporarily, risks puncturing GDP optics and exposing the private sector’s underlying weakness." 

The Q3 data has now validated this. 

A large network of sectors tied to public works absorbed the first-round impact—and that ‘shock’ bled into already stressed consumers. 

XI. External Sector: Trump Tariffs’ Exports Front-Loaded, Imports Slowing 

Exports rose +7% in Q3 2025, boosted by front-loading ahead of Trump tariffs. 

Imports slowed to +2.6%, the weakest pace in recent periods, reflecting consumer retrenchment. 

This divergence highlights how external momentum was artificially timed, while domestic demand faltered.

XII. Corruption Is the Symptom; Policy Induced Malinvestment Is the Disease

The controversial flood control scandal represents the visible tip of a much deeper corruption iceberg. It is not the anomaly—it is the artifact. 

Political power is, at its core, about monopoly. 

In the Philippines, political dynasties are merely its institutional symptom. The deeper question is: what incentives drive politicians to cling to power, and how do they sustain it? 

Public service often serves as a facade for the real intent: access to political-economic rents, impunity, and the machinery of patronage. Through electoral engineering—name recall, direct and indirect (policy-based) vote-buying, and bureaucratic capture—politicians commodify entitlement, turning public goods into tradable favors.

Dependency is weaponized or transformed into political capital, politicizing people’s basic needs to secure loyalty, votes, and tenure. 

Poverty becomes leverage. 

This erodes the civic ethic of self-reliance and responsibility, and it traps constituents—who participate out of a survival calculus—into legitimizing dynastic monopolies. 

This free-lunch electoral process, built on deepening dependence on ever-growing public funds, represents the social-democratic architecture of a political economy of control, centralization, and extraction—one that incentivizes corruption not as an aberration but as a structural outcome of concentrated power. 

XIII. Increasing Influence of Public Spending in the Economy 

Direct public spending reached 16.1% of 9M 2025 real GDP—the second highest on record after the 2021 lockdown recession.  (Figure 3, middle diagram) 

This figure excludes government construction outlays and the spending of private firms reliant on state contracts and agency revenues, such as PPPs, suppliers, outsourcing, etc. 

In this context, corruption is not merely a moral failure but a symptom of structural defects in the political-economic electoral process, reinforced by the misdirection of resources and finances, which signifies chronic systemic malinvestment. 

GDP metrics mask political decay, economic erosion, and institutional fragility. 

Yet even with statistical concealment, the entropy is visible. 

XIV. Crowding Out, Malinvestment, and the Debt Time Bomb 

The ever-rising share of public spending has coincided with a slowdown in GDP growth. Public outlays now prop up output, while pandemic-level deficits have shrunk the consumer share of GDP. (Figure 3, lowest graph) 

Crowding-out effects, combined with “build-and-they-will-come” malinvestments, have drained savings and forced greater reliance on leverage—weakening real consumption.

Figure 4 

Most alarming, nominal public debt rose Php 1.56 trillion YoY in September, equivalent to 126% of the Php 1.237 trillion increase in nominal GDP over the same period. 126%! (Figure 4, topmost visual) 

As a result, 2025 public debt-to-GDP surged to 65.11%—the highest since 2006. (Figure 4, middle graph) 

Needless to say, Corruption is what we see; malinvestment is what drives the crisis path. 

XV. Statistical Mirage: Base Effects and the GDP Deflator 

Yet, the “shocking” Q3 GDP overstates its actual rate. 

Because the headline GDP growth rate is derived from statistical base effects, almost no analyst examines the underlying price base, which is the most critical determinant of real GDP. The focus is always on the percentage change—never on the structural level from which the change is computed. 

For years, the consensus has touted the goal of “upper middle income status,” equating progress with high GDP numbers. 

But whatever outcome they anticipate, the PSA’s nominal and real GDP price base trends have consistently defied expectations. (Figure 4, lowest chart) 

The primary trend line was violated during the pandemic recession and replaced by a weaker secondary trend line. Statistically, this guarantees that base-effect growth will be slower than what the original trajectory implied. 

The economy is no longer expanding along its pre-pandemic path; it is merely oscillating below it. 

XVI. Testing Support: Fragility in the Data, Institutional Silence 

Recent GDP prints have repeatedly tested support levels. The risk is not an upside breakout but a downside violation—the path consistent with a recession.   

Q3 GDP brought both the nominal and real price base to the brink of its crucial support. A further slowdown could trigger its incursion. 

Yet you hear none of this discussed—despite all this coming straight from government data. 

The silence underscores a broader indictment: statistics are deployed as optimism theater, not as diagnostic tools. 

XVII. Overstating GDP via Understating the CPI 

And this brings us to a deeper issue that amplifies the problem. 

Real GDP is computed by dividing nominal GDP by the implicit GDP deflator. For the personal consumption component, the PSA uses CPI-based price indices to adjust nominal household spending.

Figure 5

The implicit price index is technically the GDP deflator. (Figure 5, topmost diagram) 

If CPI becomes distorted by widespread price interventions—such as MSRPs, the Php 20-rice rollout, or palay price floors—its measured inflation rate can diverge from actual market conditions. 

Any downward bias in CPI would mechanically lower the corresponding deflators used in the national accounts. 

A lower deflator raises the computed real GDP. 

Thus, even without access to PSA’s internal methodology, the basic statistical relationship still holds: systematic price suppression in CPI-tracked goods would tend to understate the deflator and, in turn, overstate real GDP. 

As noted in our August post: (bold & italics original) 

"Repressing CPI to pad GDP isn’t stewardship—it’s pantomine. A calculated communication strategy designed to preserve public confidence through statistical theater.  

"Within this top-down, social-democratic Keynesian spending framework, the objective is unmistakable: Cheap access to household savings to bankroll political vanity projects. These are the hallmarks of free lunch politics.  

"The illusion of growth props up the illusion of competence. And both are running on borrowed time.  

XVIII. Real Estate as a Case Study: GDP vs. Corporate Reality 

The GDP headline may be overstating growth due to deviations in calculation assumptions or outright political agenda— what I call as "benchmark-ism." 

Consider the revenues of the Top 4 listed developers—SM Prime, Ayala Land, Megaworld, and Robinsons Land. 

Despite abundant bank credit flowing to both supply and demand sides, their aggregate revenues increased only 1.16% in Q3 2025, barely above Q2’s 1.1%. This mirrors the slowing consumer growth trend: since peaking in Q2 2021, revenue growth rates have been steadily declining, leading to the current stagnation. The slowdown also coincides with rising vacancies. Reported revenues may still be overstated, given that the industry faces slowing cash reserves alongside record debt levels. 

Meanwhile, official GDP prints show:

• Real estate nominal GDP: +6.8%
• Real estate real GDP: +4.7% 

Yet inflation-adjusted revenues for the Top 4 translate to zero growth—or contraction. 

Their revenues accounted for 26.4% of nominal real estate GDP in Q3 2025. Real estate’s share of national GDP was 6.2% nominal, 6% real. (Figure 5 middle image) 

This gap between corporate revenues and GDP aggregates suggests statistical inflation of output. 

This highlights a broader point: The industry’s CPI barely explains the wide divergence between revenues and GDP. And this is just one sector. 

Comparing listed company performance with GDP aggregates exposes the disconnect between macro statistics and micro realities, not just episodic shocks—a motif that recurs across retail, consumption, and sentiment indicators. 

Yet, natural calamities—especially typhoons—are often blamed, but their impact on national output is minimal—much like the weak revenue trends, the real slowdown lies deeper than headline statistics suggest. 

XIX. Calamities and GDP: Human Tragedy vs. Statistical Resilience

Despite public perception, the Philippine economy has been structurally resilient to typhoon disruptions—not because disasters are mild, but because GDP barely registers them. 

In Q3 2025, ten tropical cyclones passed through or enhanced the monsoon system, with the July cluster (Crising, Dante, Emong + Habagat) causing an estimated Php 21.3 billion in officially reported damages and the September cluster (Nando/Ragasa, Bualoi/Ompong + Habagat) adding another Php 1.9 billion in infrastructure and agricultural losses. 

The combined Php 23.1 billion destruction sounds enormous, but in macroeconomic terms it is equal to just 0.37% of quarterly nominal GDP. 

This pattern is consistent with past experience: Yolanda (Q4 2013, 5.4%), Odette (Q4 2021, 7.9%), Ompong (Q3 2018, 6.1%), Pablo (Q4 2012, 7.8%), and Glenda (Q3 2014, 5.9%) all inflicted large localized damage yet barely dented national output. (Figure 5, Table) 

The reason is structural: GDP is weighted toward services and urban economic activity, while disasters strike geographically narrow areas. Catastrophic in human terms, typhoons seldom materially affect national accounts. 

The Q3 2025 storms fit the same pattern: human tragedy, fiscal strain, and regional losses—but minimal macroeconomic imprint. Resilience in the data conceals suffering on the ground, because GDP measures transactions, not destroyed livelihoods. 

XX. Calamities as a Convenient Political Explanation and Bastiat’s Broken Window Fallacy 

Given this historical consistency, attributing the Q3 slowdown to typhoons is politically convenient but analytically weak. It reflects self-attribution bias—positive outcomes are claimed as accomplishments, negative ones pinned on exogenous forces. 

GDP simply does not respond to weather shocks of this scale. At most, calamities intensify pre-existing consumption weakness rather than create it. They add entropy to a deteriorating trend; they do not determine it. 

The same applies to earthquakes. The deadly July 1990 Luzon earthquake claimed over 1,600 lives and caused Php 10 billion in damage, yet Q3 1990 GDP posted +3.7% growth. The slowdown that followed led to a technical recession in Q2 (-1.1%) and Q3 1991 (-1.9%), driven more by political crisis (coup attempts, post-EDSA transition) and the US recession (July 1990–March 1991) than by the quake itself. 

Recovery spending from calamities gets factored into GDP, but as Frédéric Bastiat taught us, this is the broken window fallacy—a diversion of resources, not genuine growth. 

XXI. Expanding Marcos-nomics: State of Calamity as Fiscal Stimulus 

The administration has relied on this same narrative today. 

The cited calamities—Typhoon Tino and Uwan, plus the Cebu and Davao earthquakes—occurred in Q4 2025. These events contributed to entropic consumer conditions but did not create them. 

But their political and bureaucratic timing proved useful. 

Authorities tightened the national price freeze a day before the USD/PHP broke 59 (see reference discussion on the USDPHP breakout) 

Typhoon Tino, followed by Uwan, justified declaring a State of Nationwide Calamity for one year—the longest fixed-term declaration in Philippine history. (By comparison, the COVID-era State of Calamity lasted 2.5 years due to repeated extensions.) 

This one-year window: 

• Reinforces the price freeze, aggravating distortions.
• Enables liberalized public spending under relief and rehabilitation cover.
• Allows budget realignments, procurement exemptions (RA 9184 Sec. 53[b]), calamity/QRF access, and inter-agency mobilization (RA 10121). 

In effect, the national calamity declaration acts as a workaround to the spending constraints imposed by the flood-control corruption scandal. It restores fiscal maneuvering room under the guise of emergency relief and rehabilitation. 

This is emergency Marcos-nomics, designed to lift headline GDP via public-sector outlays—on top of pandemic-level deficits, easy-money liquidity, and the FX soft-peg regime. 

XXII. More Easing? The Rate-Cut Expectations Game 

Layered onto this is the growing consensus expectation of a jumbo BSP rate cut in November. One must ask: 

• Are establishment institutions applying indirect pressure on the BSP?
• Or is the BSP conditioning the public for an outsized cut to stem a crisis of confidence? 

Both interpretations are possible—and neither signals macro-stability. 

Meanwhile, supermarkets warn that “noche buena” food items may rise due to relief-driven demand—a symptom of distortions. 

This is the predictable byproduct of a price-freeze regime: shortages, hoarding, cost-pass-through, and black-market substitution.

XXIII. A Fiscal Shock in the Making, Black Swan Dynamics 

At worst, emergency stimulus during a slowdown widens the deficit and accelerates fiscal deterioration—pushing the economy toward the fiscal shock we warned about in June: 

"Unless authorities rein in spending—which would drag GDP, risking a recession—a fiscal shock could emerge as early as 2H 2025 or by 2026.  

"If so, expect magnified volatility across stocks, bonds, and the USDPHP exchange rate."

Figure 6 

Market behavior is already signaling intensifying stress: the USDPHP and the PSE remain under pressure despite repeated rescue efforts. (Figure 6) 

XXIV. Conclusion: Crisis as the Only Reform 

A political-economic crisis—a black swan event—doesn’t happen when expected. It occurs because almost everyone is in entrenched denial and complacency, blinded by past resilience. Like substance abuse, they believe unsustainable events can extend indefinitely: It hasn’t happened, so it won’t (appeal to ignorance). 

But history gives us a blueprint: 

economic strains → political tensions → revolution/reforms

• EDSA I followed the 1983 debt crisis.
• EDSA II followed the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis.

Economic strains were visible even before the flood-control scandal. This is Kindleberger’s and Minsky’s late-cycle phase: swindles/fraud/deflacation emerge when liquidity thins, growth slows, tenuous relationships and political coalitions fracture. 

More improprieties—public and private—will surface as slowing growth exposes hidden malfeasance, nonfeasance, and misfeasance. 

The sunk-cost architecture of vested interests, built on free-lunch trickle-down policies, points to a grand finale: either EDSA 3.0 or a putsch. 

A crisis, not politics, will force change. 

To repeat our conclusion last October, 

In the end, because both political and economic structures are ideological and self-reinforcing, reform from within is improbable.  

The deepening economic and financial imbalances will not resolve through policy, but will ventilate through a crisis—again the lessons of the post-1983 debt restructuring of EDSA I and the post-Asian Financial Crisis of EDSA II.  

____

References

Prudent Investor Newsletter, When Free Lunch Politics Meets Fiscal Reality: Lessons from the DPWH Flood Control Scandal, Substack, September 07, 2025 

Prudent Investor Newsletter, The 5.5% Q2 GDP Mirage: How Debt-Fueled Deficit Spending Masks a Slowing Economy, Substack, August 10, 2025 

Prudent Investor Newsletter, Is the Philippines on the Brink of a 2025 Fiscal Shock? Substack, June 08, 2025

Prudent Investor Newsletter, The Political Economy of Corruption: How Social Democracy Became the Engine of Decay, Substack, October 26, 2025 

Prudent Investor Newsletter, The USD-PHP Breaks 59: BSP’s Soft Peg Unravels, Exposing Economic Fragility, Substack, November 02, 2025

  

Q2–1H Debt-Fueled PSEi 30 Performance Disconnects from GDP—What Could Go Wrong

A lack of transparency results in distrust and a deep sense of insecurity — Dalai Lama 

In this issue

Q2–1H Debt-Fueled PSEi 30 Performance Disconnects from GDP—What Could Go Wrong

I. PSEi 30 Q2 2025: The Illusion of Resilience

IA. Q2 GDP at 5.5%: Headline Growth vs. Corporate Stagnation

IB. Structural Downtrend and Policy Transmission Breakdown

IC. Real Value Output in Decline, Political Optics and GDP Credibility

ID. Meralco’s Electricity Consumption Story: A Broken Proxy

II. Real Estate: The Recovery That Wasn’t

IIA. Overton Window vs. Market Reality

IIB. Property Developer Falling Revenues, Debt Surge and Liquidity Strain

IIC. Downstream Demand Weakness: Home Improvement & Construction Retail

III. Retail and Food Services: Mixed Signals

IIIA. Retail: Consumer Strain Amid Policy Sweet Spot

IIIB. Divergence Between Store Expansion and Organic Demand, Retail Growth vs. GDP Trends

IIIC. Food Services: Jollibee’s Dominance and Sector’s Growth Deceleration

IV. Banking Revenues and Income: A Stalling Engine

IVA. Banking Sector: Credit Surge, Revenue Stall

V. The PSEi 30 Net Income Story

VA. Earnings Breakdown: SMC’s Income Dominance, Accounting Prestidigitation?

VB. SMC’s Financial Engineering? Escalating Systemic Risk

VI. Debt and Liquidity: The Structural Bind

VIA. Mounting Liquidity Stress: Soaring Debt and The Deepening Leverage Trap

VIB. Transparency Concerns, Desperate Calls for Easing, Cash Reserves Under Pressure

VII. Conclusion: The Illusion of Resilience: As the Liquidity Tide Recedes, Who’s Swimming Naked? 

____

Q2–1H Debt-Fueled PSEi 30 Performance Disconnects from GDP—What Could Go Wrong 

Beneath headline growth lies a fragile mix of policy stimulus, rising leverage, and mounting stagnation—masking systemic fragility. 

I. PSEi 30 Q2 2025: The Illusion of Resilience 

Nota Bene:

PSEi 30 data contains redundancies, as consolidated reporting includes both parent firms and their subsidiaries.

Chart Notes:

1A: Based on same year index members; may include revisions to past data

1B: Historical comparison; includes only members present during the end of each respective period; based on unaudited releases

IA. Q2 GDP at 5.5%: Headline Growth vs. Corporate Stagnation

Q2 GDP at 5.5%?   

On paper, that should have translated into strong corporate earnings—especially when juxtaposed with the financial pulse of the PSEi 30. 

Yet that headline growth masks a deeper dissonance: These firms, positioned as frontline beneficiaries of BSP’s easing cycle and historic deficit spending, should have reflected the policy tailwinds.

Figure 1

Instead, the disconnect is glaring: while nominal GDP surged 7.2% in Q2 and 7.4% in H1, aggregate revenues of the PSEi 30 contracted by 0.3% in Q2 and barely budged at 1.7% for the first half. (Figure 1, upper graph) 

IB. Structural Downtrend and Policy Transmission Breakdown 

More troubling, this isn’t a one-off anomaly. 

2025’s performance merely extends a structural downtrend that peaked in 2022—raising uncomfortable questions about transmission mechanisms, institutional fragility, and the real beneficiaries of expansionary policy. 

Consider this: Universal bank credit hit a historic high in June 2025, with 12.63% growth, the fastest pace since 2022. Yet PSEi 30 revenue growth in H1 limped to just +1.7%. The juxtaposition is telling. (Figure 1, lower window) 

Rather than fueling productive consumption or corporate expansion, credit appears channeled into asset churn and balance sheet patchwork—rolling debt, patching liquidity gaps, gaming duration mismatches. It’s a kinetic mirage, where velocity substitutes for vitality—hallmarks of overleveraging and diminishing returns. 

The very tools meant to stimulate growth now signal policy transmission failure, where liquidity flows but impact stalls. 

IC. Real Value Output in Decline, Political Optics and GDP Credibility 

Worst still, when adjusted using the same deflators applied to GDP, the PSEi 30’s real output doesn’t just stagnate—it slips into quasi-recession. Both Q2 and H1 figures turn negative, ≈ -2% and -.4%, exposing a structural rot beneath the nominal gloss. (Note 1)

Figure 2 

And this isn’t a statistical fluke. 

A full third of the index—10 out of 30 firms—posted revenue contractions, led by holding firms San Miguel, Alliance Global, and Aboitiz Equity. These aren’t fringe players—they’re positional market leaders. (Figure 2, upper table) 

As a side note, AGI’s revenue decline was partly driven by the deconsolidation of Golden Arches Development Corp, following its reclassification as an associate in March 2025 (Note 2) 

The gap is too wide, too persistent a trend, to be dismissed as cyclical noise. 

Was the PSEi 30 shortfall simply papered over by government spending, with a boost from external trade? 

Or was GDP itself inflated for political ends—to justify lower interest rates, defend the proposed Php 6.793 trillion 2026 budget (+7.4% YoY), and tighten the administration’s grip on power? 

Most likely, the truth lies in some combination of both. 

ID. Meralco’s Electricity Consumption Story: A Broken Proxy 

That’s not all. 

Meralco’s electricity sales volume contracted −0.33% YoY in Q2, dragging H1 growth down to a mere +0.51%. This isn’t just a soft patch—it’s historic: 

• First Q2 contraction since Q1 2021,
• First negative H1 since 2020, —both periods marked by pandemic-induced recession. 

More tellingly, Meralco’s quarterly GWh chart—once a reliable proxy for real GDP—has broken correlation. The divergence, which began in Q1 2024, has now widened into a chasm. (Figure 2, lower chart) 

To compound this, peso electricity peso sales shrank by 1.74% in Q2, and Meralco’s topline declines—both in pesos and GWh—dovetailed with the 8% sales slump in aircon market leader Concepcion Industries Corporation, as we discussed in an earlier post. (see references) 

When electricity consumption decouples from GDP, it raises uncomfortable questions: 

• Is real consumption being overstated? 
• Are headline figures engineered to justify policy optics—lower rates, ballooning budgets, and political consolidation? 

The numbers suggest more than statistical noise. They hint at a manufactured narrative, where growth is declared, but not felt. 

II. Real Estate: The Recovery That Wasn’t 

IIA. Overton Window vs. Market Reality 

There’s more. The public has recently been bombarded with official-consensus messaging about a supposed real estate ‘recovery.’ 

 The BSP even revised its property benchmark to show consistently rising prices—curiously, at a time of record vacancies. (see references) By that logic, the laws of supply and demand no longer apply. 

To reinforce the recovery echo chamber, authorities published modest Q2 and H1 NGDP/RGDP figures of 5.7% and 5.4%, respectively. 

IIB. Property Developer Falling Revenues, Debt Surge and Liquidity Strain 

Figure 3

Yet the hard numbers tell another story: stagnation gripped the top 5 publicly listed property developers—SMPH, ALI, MEG, RLC, and VLL—whose aggregate Q2 revenues grew by a paltry 1.23% YoY. (Figure 3 topmost image)

Adjusted for GDP deflators, that’s a real contraction. In effect, published rent and real estate sales may be teetering on the brink of recession.

The relevance is clear: these five developers accounted for nearly 30% of the sector’s Q2 GDP, meaning their results are a critical proxy for actual conditions—assuming their disclosures are accurate.

Yet, if there’s one metric that’s consistently rising, it’s debt.

Published liabilities surged 5.5% or Php 53.924 billion, reaching a record Php 1.032 trillion in Q2. Meanwhile, cash reserves plunged to their lowest level since 2019. (Figure 3, middle chart)

And yet, net income rose 11.15% to Php 35.4 billion—a figure that invites scrutiny, given flat revenues, rising leverage, and tightening liquidity.

In reality, developers appear forced to draw down cash to sustain operations and patch liquidity gaps, a fragile foundation to prop up the GDP consensus.

IIC. Downstream Demand Weakness: Home Improvement & Construction Retail

Worse, the sector’s downstream segment remains mired in doldrums.

Sales of publicly listed market leaders in home improvement and construction supplies—Wilcon and AllHome—fell -1.95% and -22.1% in Q2, respectively. Both chains have been struggling since Q2 2023, but the latest data are striking: despite no store expansion, AllHome reported a -28% collapse in same-store sales, while Wilcon’s growth lagged despite opening new outlets in 2024–2025, underscoring weak organic demand and the record vacancies. (Figure 3, lowest visual)

Strip away the official spin, and the underlying pattern emerges: insufficient revenues, surging debt, and shrinking liquidity. Overlay this with record-high employment statistics, historic credit expansion and fiscal stimulus—what happens when these falters? 

Consumers are already struggling to sustain retail and property demand. Yet, embracing the ‘build-and-they-will-come’ dogma, developers continue to expand supply, worsening the malinvestment cycle: supply gluts, strained revenues, debt build-up, and thinning cash buffers—a crucible for a future real estate debt crisis. 

III. Retail and Food Services: Mixed Signals 

IIIA. Retail: Consumer Strain Amid Policy Sweet Spot 

It’s not all bad news for consumers. 

Some segments gained traction from the “sweet spot” of easy money and fiscal stimulus—manifested in record bank credit and near all-time high employment rates. 

Figure 4

The most notable beneficiaries were non-construction retail chains, where expanded selling space (malls, outlets, stores) lifted revenues. The combined sales of the six listed majors—SM, Puregold, Robinsons Retail, Philippine Seven, SSI, and Metro Retail—rose 8.6% in Q2, their strongest showing since Q2 2023. (Figure 4, topmost graph) 

Still, signals remain mixed. In Q2, retail NGDP slipped to its lowest level since Q1 2021, while real consumer GDP bounced to 5.5%, its highest since Q1 2023. 

Company results reflected this divergence:

• SM: +8.9% YoY (best since Q4 2023)
• PGOLD: +12.3%
• RRHI: +5.9%
• SEVN: +8.6%
• SSI: −1.6%
• MRSGI: +6.6%

IIIB. Divergence Between Store Expansion and Organic Demand, Retail Growth vs. GDP Trends 

Interestingly, while Philippine Seven [PSE: SEVN] continues to boost headline growth via new store openings, same-store sales have operated in negative territory from Q4 2024 to Q2 2025. This divergence reveals how money at the fringes conceals internal vulnerabilities—weakening demand paired with oversupply. Once the benefit of new outlets erodes, excess capacity will magnify sales pressure, likely translating into eventual losses. (Figure 4, middle pane) 

Even as listed non-construction retail firms outpaced retail NGDP (6.8%) and RGDP (6.15%), their performance only partially resonates with the real GDP dynamic. 

Yet, the embedded trend across retail sales, consumer GDP, and retail NGDP remains conspicuously downward. 

IIIC. Food Services: Jollibee’s Dominance and Sector’s Growth Deceleration 

The food service industry echoes this entropy. Jollibee’s domestic sales grew 10.13% in Q2, pulling aggregate revenue growth of the four listed food chains—JFC, PIZZA, MAXS, FRUIT—to 9.6%, still below the 10.7% NGDP and 8.34% RGDP for the sector. The growth trajectory, led by JFC, continues to decelerate. (Figure 4, lowest diagram) 

Notably, JFC accounted for 86% of aggregate listed food service sales, yet only 54% of Q2 Food Services GDP—a testament to its PACMAN strategy of horizontal expansion—an approach I first described in 2019—enabled by easy-money leverage in its pursuit of market dominance (see references) 

Unfortunately, visibility on the sector is now diminished. Since AGI reclassified Golden Arches (McDonald’s Philippines) as a non-core segment, its performance is no longer disclosed. For reference, McDonald’s sales plunged 11.5% in Q1 2025. 

Losing this datapoint is regrettable, given McDonald’s is Jollibee’s closest competitor and a critical indicator of industry health. 

IV. Banking Revenues and Income: A Stalling Engine 

IVA. Banking Sector: Credit Surge, Revenue Stall 

Finally, despite all-time high loan volumes, bank revenues slowed sharply in Q2—an unexpected deceleration given the credit surge. The top three PSEi 30 banks—BDO, BPI, and MBT—posted a modest 7.02% revenue increase, dragging 1H growth down to 7.99%. For context, Q1 2025 revenues rose by 9%, while Q2 2024 saw a robust 21.8% jump. Full-year 2024 growth stood at 20.5%, making Q2 2025’s performance less than half of the prior year’s pace. 

We dissected the worsening conditions of the banking sector in depth last week (see reference section) 

V. The PSEi 30 Net Income Story 

VA. Earnings Breakdown: SMC’s Income Dominance, Accounting Prestidigitation? 

For the PSEi 30, if revenue stagnation already stands out, net income tells a similar story.

Figure 5 

Q2 2025 net income rose by 11.5% (Php 28.7 billion), pulling down 1H income growth to 13.8% (Php 68.6 billion). While Q2 gross net income was the highest since 2020, its marginal increase and subdued growth rates marked the second slowest since 2021. (Figure 5, upper chart) 

The devil, of course, lies in the details. 

The biggest contributor to the PSEi 30’s net income growth in Q2 and 1H 2025 was San Miguel Corp. Its net increase of Php 18.7 billion in Q2 and Php 53.19 billion in H1 accounted for a staggering 65.2% and 77.54% of the total PSEi 30 net income growth, respectively—despite comprising just 8.5% and 11.8% of the index’s gross net income. (Figure 5, lower table) 

In effect, SMC was not merely a contributor but the primary engine behind the index’s earnings rebound.

Yet this dominance raises more questions than it answers.

Despite a sharp revenue slowdown and only marginal improvements in profit margins—still below pre-pandemic levels—SMC reported a substantial jump in cash holdings and a deceleration in debt accumulation. But this apparent financial strength stems not from operational resilience, but from non-core gains: fair value revaluations, FX translation effects, and dividends from associates.

The result is a balance sheet that appears healthier than it is, with cash levels inflated by accounting maneuvers rather than organic surplus.

VB. SMC’s Financial Engineering? Escalating Systemic Risk

Beneath the surface, SMC’s debt dynamics resemble quasi-Ponzi finance—borrowing Php 681 billion to repay Php 727 billion in 1H 2025, while plugging the gap with preferred share issuance and asset monetization. The latter includes the deconsolidation and valuation uplift of its residual stakes in the Ilijan power facility and Excellent Energy Resources Inc. (EERI), as well as the $3.3 billion LNG deal with Meralco and AboitizPower in Batangas. Though framed as strategic partnerships, these transactions involved asset transfers that contributed heavily to the surge in reported profits.

The simulacrum of deleveraging—from Php 1.56 trillion in Q4 2024 to Php 1.506 trillion in Q2/1H 2025—appears to be a product of financial engineering, not structural improvement. This disconnect between reported profitability and underlying liquidity mechanics raises concerns about transparency and sustainability.

In a market where banks, corporates, and individuals hold significant exposure to SMC debt (estimated at 4.3% of June 2025’s total financial resources), the company’s accounting-driven cash buildup may signal escalating systemic fragility—a risk that the recent equity selloff seems to be pricing in ahead of the curve.

Stripped of SMC’s potentially inflated income, Q2 and H1 net income for the PSEi 30 would rank as the second-lowest and lowest since 2021, respectively—underscoring the fragility behind the headline performance.

At the same time, and with curious timing, SMC announced its intent to undertake large-scale flood control across Metro Manila and Laguna—"at no cost to the government or the Filipino people". Whether this reflects a genuine civic gesture or a strategic bid to accumulate political capital remains unclear. But the optics are unmistakable: as SMC’s earnings distort the index’s headline strength, it simultaneously positions itself as a public benefactor.

Yet, is this narrative groundwork for a future bailout, or a preemptive reframing of corporate rescue as national service?

VI. Debt and Liquidity: The Structural Bind

VIA. Mounting Liquidity Stress: Soaring Debt and The Deepening Leverage Trap 

Finally, let us move on to the PSEi 30’s liquidity metrics: debt and cash. 

If there’s one structurally entrenched dynamic in the PSEi 30, it’s borrowing.

Figure 6

Published short- and long-term debt of the non-financial PSEi 30 surged to an all-time high of Php 5.95 trillion in 1H 2025—up 7.66% year-on-year. (Figure 6, topmost chart) 

The net increase of Php 423 billion amounted to 74.7% of the gross net income and a staggering 617% of the YoY net income increase. 

Including the bills payable of the four PSEi 30 banks—Php 859.7 billion, excluding bonds—total leverage rises to Php 6.8 trillion—with net borrowing gains of Php 760.5 billion, overshadowing declared net income of Php 566.7 billion. 

In short, the PSEi 30 borrowed Php 1.34 to generate every Php 1 in profit—assuming SMC’s profits are genuine. 

And this borrowing binge wasn’t isolated. Among the 26 non-financial firms, 18 increased their debt in 1H 2025. 

On average, debt now accounts for 27% of assets—or total liabilities plus equity. 

SMC, once the poster child of corporate borrowing, ceded the title this period to Meralco, Ayala Corp, and Aboitiz Equity Ventures. (Figure 6, middle table) 

Notably, MER and AEV’s borrowing spree coincides with their asset transfer deals with SMC. Whether this reflects strategic alignment or a quiet effort to absorb or ‘share’ SMC’s financial burden to deflect public scrutiny—such optics suggest a coordinated dance. 

If true, good luck to them—financial kabuki always yields to economic gravity. 

VIB. Transparency Concerns, Desperate Calls for Easing, Cash Reserves Under Pressure 

The thing is, transparency remains a persistent concern, especially in periods of mounting financial stress or pre-crisis fragility. 

First, there’s no assurance that published debt figures reflect full exposure. Some firms may be masking liabilities through other liabilities (leases, trade payables) or off-balance sheet arrangements. 

Second, asset valuations underpinning declared balance sheets may be unreliable. Accounting ratios offer little comfort when market liquidity evaporates—see the 2023 U.S. bank crisis or China’s ongoing property implosion. 

Despite historic borrowing and declared profits, PSEi 30 cash reserves barely budged—up just 0.96% YoY, with a net increase of Php 14.07 billion following two years of retrenchment. Cash levels have been on a steady decline since their 2020 peak. We suspect that recent upticks in cash are not in spite of borrowing, but because of it. 

This growing debt-income-revenue mismatch explains the establishment’s increasingly desperate calls for “MOAR easing” and declarations of a real estate “recovery.” 

VII. Conclusion: The Illusion of Resilience: As the Liquidity Tide Recedes, Who’s Swimming Naked? 

The PSEi 30’s revenue stagnation belies the optics of headline GDP growth. Even in the supposed “sweet spot”—BSP easing, FX soft-peg subsidies, and record stimulus—consumer strain cuts across sectors.

Stimulus may persist, but its marginal impact is fading—manifesting the law of diminishing returns. The disconnect between policy effort and real economy traction is widening.

Q2 and H1 income growth seem to increasingly reflect on balance sheet theatrics driven more by financial engineering and accounting acrobatics than by operational reality.

When earnings are staged rather than earned, the gap between corporate performance and macro reality doesn’t just widen—it exposes a deepening structural mismatch. 

Deepening leverage also anchors the PSEi 30’s fundamentals. On both the demand and supply sides, debt props up activity while cash thins. The same fragility echoes through the banking system and money supply mechanics. 

This is not resilience—it’s choreography. And when liquidity recedes, the performance ends. 

As Buffett warned: "when the liquidity tide goes out, we’ll see who’s been swimming naked" We might be hosting a nudist festival. 

___ 

Notes: 

Note 1 While GDP measures value-added and corporate revenues reflect gross turnover, applying the same deflators provides a reasonable proxy for real comparison. 

Note 2: Alliance Global 17 Q August 18, 2025: Effective March 17, 2025, GADC was deconsolidated and ceased to be a business segment as it becomes an associate from that date, yet the Group’s ownership interest over GADC has not changed p.2 

References 

Prudent Investor Newsletter, Q1 2025 PSEi 30 Performance: Deepening Debt-Driven Gains Amid Slowing Economic Momentum, June 01, 2025 (Substack) 

Prudent Investor Newsletter, Concepcion Industries Cools Off—And So Might GDP and the PLUS-Bound PSEi 30 (or Not?) July 28, 2025 

Prudent Investor Newsletter, The Confidence Illusion: BSP’s Property Index Statistical Playbook to Reflate Property Bubble and Conceal Financial Fragility, July 13, 2025(Substack) 

Prudent Investor Newsletter, Jollibee’s Fantastic Paradigm Shift: From Consumer Value to Aggressive Debt-Financed Pacman Strategy March 3, 2019 

Prudent Investor Newsletter, Philippine Banks: June’s Financial Losses and Liquidity Strains Expose Late-Cycle Fragility, August 17, 2025 (Substack)