How the American Distress Index Works
The American Distress Index (ADI) is a composite measure of household financial distress, scored 0–100 against the country’s own record since 2005. It averages five domains of economic stress — delinquency, defaults and their legal aftermath, debt burden, the labor market, and the household safety net — with every input ranked within its own quarterly history.
For the press-ready reference with citation formats, replication links, and the GFC backtest chart, see the ADI methodology reference. For the MCP server, JSON and CSV endpoints, indicator catalog, and citation guidance for risk teams and engineers, see the data and API page.
The Five Domains
The ADI draws on 10 federal data series organized into five domains. Every domain carries the same weight, and within a domain every member series carries the same weight. There are no fitted weights anywhere in the chain — the weight rule is structural, so no era of the data gets to vote on which dimension matters most.
Delinquency 4 inputs
Share of borrowers behind on mortgage, credit card, consumer, and auto loans.
Delinquency Rate on Single-Family Residential Mortgages (90+ days) (DRSFRMACBS). Delinquency Rate on Credit Card Loans (DRCCLACBS). Delinquency Rate on Consumer Loans (ex credit card) (DROCLACBS). Auto Loan Serious Delinquency Rate (90+ days).
Default & Legal 2 inputs
Charge-offs and the foreclosure-stage outcomes that follow late payments.
Charge-Off Rate on Credit Card Loans (CORCCACBS). Charge-Off Rate on Single-Family Residential Mortgages (CORSFRMACBS).
Debt Burden 1 input
Required debt payments as a share of household income.
Household Debt Service Ratio (TDSP).
Labor 2 inputs
Unemployment and new jobless claims.
Unemployment Rate (UNRATE). Initial Unemployment Claims (SA) (ICSA).
Safety Net & Buffer 1 input
The savings cushion households hold against a bad quarter.
Personal Saving Rate (PSAVERT).
Why equal weights? A fitted weight is a standing maintenance liability: it depends on the sample it was estimated from, and it has to be defended every time the data refreshes. Equal weights make every domain's contribution legible. The membership rule, not the weighting, is where judgment lives — and it is written down in the ADI methodology reference.
How the Score Is Calculated
Each input is measured against its own full quarterly history. A composite of 50 means the inputs, on average, sit higher than in half of their own recorded quarters since 2005.
- Aggregate to quarters. A series-quarter exists only if at least one raw observation is dated within it; the quarterly value is the mean of the observations present. No interpolation, no carry-forward.
- Rank each series against its own history. Every quarterly value is converted to a Hazen percentile within that series’ full record:
(average_rank − 0.5) / n × 100, ties averaged. One yardstick — no baseline window, no regime split, no winsorization, no caps. Inputs where lower means more distress are inverted before ranking. - Average within domains. A domain’s score is the mean of its member percentiles present that quarter.
- Average the domains. The composite is the mean of the five domain scores. A quarter publishes only when all five domains have at least one member present — the engine refuses to publish a partial quarter.
The composite is a mean of input percentiles, not itself a percentile of quarters. The composite’s own rank within the published record is computed and published separately, so neither number gets quoted as the other.
The Five Bands
The 0–100 scale splits into five equal bands. The thresholds are uniform, not calibrated to any narrative period, and the labels apply to the national time axis only — states and counties get ranks, never these labels. A band label always publishes alongside the literal reading sentence.
| Band Number | Score Range | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| 5 · Severe | 80-100 | Inputs average near the top of their own histories |
| 4 · High | 60-80 | Inputs average above most of their own recorded quarters |
| 3 · Typical | 40-60 | Inputs average near the middle of their own histories |
| 2 · Low | 20-40 | Inputs average in the lower stretch of their histories |
| 1 · Minimal | 0-20 | Inputs average near the bottom of their own records |
Technical Details
Normalization, orientation, and validation gates
One Transform
The Hazen percentile is the only normalization in the index: percentile = (average_rank − 0.5) / n × 100, ties averaged, computed over each series’ entire available quarterly history in one pass. The same transform serves the state and county indexes, and a cross-engine parity test locks the three implementations together.
Orientation
Every input’s direction is read from its data file, never assumed. Values where lower means more distress are negated before ranking so higher always means more distress. A missing or unexpected direction aborts the build.
Validation Gates
Every engine run re-proves a set of gates — weights, label vocabulary, input dispositions, series-seam integrity, orientation, and byte-level reproducibility across two full passes — and writes nothing if any gate fails. An independent validator re-verifies the committed output across separate processes. The full gate list, registry, and replication scripts are on the ADI methodology reference.
The Record
The published series runs 2005-Q1 through 2025-Q4 — 84 quarters. Its peak is 85.3 in 2009-Q3, the depth of the financial crisis. Its low is 15.7 in 2021-Q4, when pandemic-era support programs left household buffers unusually full. Nothing in the method points at those quarters; they emerge from ranking each series against its own record.
Leading Indicator Research
Beyond tracking current conditions, the American Default research pipeline systematically tests all pairwise indicator combinations for statistically validated leading relationships — cases where one indicator consistently precedes another by multiple quarters. These are documented as structural projections: historical patterns observed across multiple economic crises, not forecasts. The pipeline operates on individual indicators, separately from the composite index.
Five-Stage Validation Pipeline
Every candidate pair must survive all five filters before being classified as "validated." This pipeline tested 64,897 raw pair-lag combinations and produced 7 fully validated relationships.
- Cross-correlation on raw levels — Identify pairs where one indicator's past values correlate with another's future values, corrected for multiple testing using the Benjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate (FDR α = 0.05).
- Cross-correlation on first-differenced series — Repeat on quarter-over-quarter changes. This eliminates spurious correlations driven by shared trends (e.g., two series that both trend upward over time).
- Multi-crisis validation — The relationship must hold during at least two of three economic crises: the 2001 recession, the 2008 financial crisis (GFC), and COVID-19. A relationship that only works in calm periods is not useful.
- Granger causality — The leader must statistically Granger-cause the follower (p < 0.05), meaning past values of the leader improve the follower model beyond what the follower's own history provides.
- Out-of-sample validation — Calibrate on 2000–2012 data, validate on 2013–2025. The relationship must hold in data the model never saw during calibration (OOS r > 0.3).
Validated Leading Relationships
7 indicator pairs passed all five filters:
| Leader | Follower | Lag | Correlation | Crises | OOS r |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initial Unemployment Claims (SA) | Continued Unemployment Claims (SA) | 1q | +0.95 | 3/3 | +0.94 |
| Initial Unemployment Claims (SA) | Unemployment Rate | 1q | +0.79 | 2/3 | +0.79 |
| CPI Inflation Rate (All Items) | Motor Vehicle Insurance CPI | 3q | +0.77 | 2/3 | +0.87 |
| Delinquency Rate on Credit Card Loans | Charge-Off Rate on All Loans | 3q | +0.76 | 2/3 | +0.83 |
| Energy CPI (All Items) | Lower-Income Wage Growth vs. Inflation Gap | 1q | -0.73 | 2/3 | -0.81 |
| Initial Unemployment Claims (SA) | U-6 Underemployment Rate | 1q | +0.72 | 2/3 | +0.70 |
| Initial Unemployment Claims (SA) | Part-Time for Economic Reasons | 1q | +0.56 | 2/3 | +0.54 |
Active structural projections based on these relationships are tracked on the Structural Outlook page.
Statistical methods detail
False Discovery Rate
With 63 indicators and up to 16 quarterly lags, the scanner evaluates 64,897 pair-lag combinations. Raw p-values are corrected using the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure at α = 0.05 to control the expected proportion of false positives among reported significant results.
Differencing
First-differencing (Δx_t = x_t − x_{t-1}) removes shared trends that create spurious correlations. A pair must be significant in both raw levels and first differences to proceed. This dual filter eliminates the majority of false positives from trending macro data.
Crisis Windows
Three crisis validation windows: 2001 recession (2001-Q1 to 2002-Q4), GFC (2007-Q3 to 2010-Q2), and COVID (2020-Q1 to 2021-Q4). For each window, the leader must show elevated values before the follower responds within the expected lag range. A pair must validate in at least two windows.
Granger Causality
Applied to the top 30 candidates by crisis count. Uses the standard F-test formulation: does adding lagged values of the leader to an autoregressive model of the follower significantly improve the model fit? Tested at α = 0.05.
Out-of-Sample Protocol
Calibration period: 2000-Q1 to 2012-Q4. Validation period: 2013-Q1 to latest available. The lag relationship estimated on calibration data is applied to validation data, and the Pearson correlation between estimated and actual follower values is computed. Minimum validation r = 0.3.
Data Sources and Update Schedule
All ADI data comes from public federal sources. No proprietary data, no paywalled sources, no models. Everything is independently verifiable.
| Data Series | Publisher | Unit |
|---|---|---|
| Delinquency Rate on Single-Family Residential Mortgages (90+ days) (DRSFRMACBS) | Board of Governors via FRED | percent |
| Delinquency Rate on Credit Card Loans (DRCCLACBS) | Board of Governors via FRED | percent |
| Delinquency Rate on Consumer Loans (ex credit card) (DROCLACBS) | Board of Governors via FRED | percent |
| Auto Loan Serious Delinquency Rate (90+ days) | NY Fed Household Debt and Credit Report | percent |
| Charge-Off Rate on Credit Card Loans (CORCCACBS) | Board of Governors via FRED | percent |
| Charge-Off Rate on Single-Family Residential Mortgages (CORSFRMACBS) | Board of Governors via FRED | percent |
| Household Debt Service Ratio (TDSP) | Federal Reserve via FRED | percent |
| Unemployment Rate (UNRATE) | BLS via FRED | percent |
| Initial Unemployment Claims (SA) (ICSA) | DOL via FRED | count |
| Personal Saving Rate (PSAVERT) | BEA via FRED | percent |
Most inputs update quarterly after source data lands; claims and unemployment series arrive faster and are aggregated to quarters. The composite recomputes whenever its inputs refresh, and a quarter publishes only once all five domains have data. Analysis of each release lands under Analysis.
Attribution requirement: FRED data use is subject to the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Terms of Use. Full source attribution appears on every indicator detail page.
Variable Definitions
The American Distress Index tracks 92 economic indicators across nine categories. Each indicator is linked to its detail page with full time-series data, methodology notes, and downloadable datasets.
The Published History (2005–2025)
The table below shows the last published quarter of each year. The full quarterly series, domain scores, and member percentiles ship in the ADI JSON API and the CSV download.
| Quarter | Score | Band |
|---|---|---|
| 2005-Q4 | 62.7 | Band 4 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 63% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
| 2006-Q4 | 61.5 | Band 4 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 61% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
| 2007-Q4 | 74.8 | Band 4 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 75% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
| 2008-Q4 | 78.3 | Band 4 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 78% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
| 2009-Q4 | 83.8 | Band 5 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 84% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
| 2010-Q4 | 74.7 | Band 4 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 75% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
| 2011-Q4 | 63.8 | Band 4 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 64% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
| 2012-Q4 | 51.3 | Band 3 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 51% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
| 2013-Q4 | 59.7 | Band 3 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 60% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
| 2014-Q4 | 41.4 | Band 3 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 41% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
| 2015-Q4 | 39.5 | Band 2 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 39% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
| 2016-Q4 | 43.9 | Band 3 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 44% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
| 2017-Q4 | 40.0 | Band 3 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 40% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
| 2018-Q4 | 28.9 | Band 2 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 29% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
| 2019-Q4 | 31.8 | Band 2 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 32% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
| 2020-Q4 | 28.4 | Band 2 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 28% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
| 2021-Q4 | 15.7 | Band 1 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 16% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
| 2022-Q4 | 25.9 | Band 2 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 26% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
| 2023-Q4 | 29.3 | Band 2 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 29% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
| 2024-Q4 | 41.4 | Band 3 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 41% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
| 2025-Q4 | 44.6 | Band 3 of 5 On average, its inputs sit higher than in 45% of their own quarterly histories since 2005 |
How to Cite This Methodology
If you use the American Distress Index or its methodology in academic work, policy analysis, or journalism, please cite as follows.
APA Format
Kilburn, R. (2026). American Distress Index: Methodology and composite scoring. American Default Research https://americandefault.org/methodology/
BibTeX
@techreport{adi_methodology_2026,
title = {American Distress Index: Methodology and Composite Scoring},
author = {Kilburn, Ross},
year = {2026},
institution = {American Default Research},
url = {https://americandefault.org/methodology/},
note = {Five-domain equal-weighted composite; each input ranked
against its own quarterly history (Hazen percentile);
published 2005--present}
}
For individual indicator citations, use the citation tools on the press page or download .bib / .ris files from any indicator detail page. For a print-friendly summary of current ADI data, see the ADI one-pager.
Interactive Tools
For national methodology, use the ADI methodology page. For state-level analysis, the Zip Code Stress Test shows your state's distress score and foreclosure protections.