Leading, Slipping, Gaining, Lagging Analysis:
Assessing Administrative and Waste Services Earnings Growth
Across Utah Counties
Real* Administrative and Waste Services
Earnings Growth
County vs Statewide Average: 2010-2017 and 2017
Real* Administrative and Waste Services
Earnings Growth
Utah:
2010-2017 = 7.23%
2017 = 5.71%
Borrowing from an approach that sometimes appears in the finance sections of the popular press, LSGL analysis is a handy and versatile way to compare, portray and classify the patterns of real administrative and waste services earnings growth across all of Utah's 29 counties. In finance, this technique is used for comparing and assessing the market performance of individual securities or across industry sectors. For example, the performance of the 30 stocks contained within Dow are compared with one another over the past week in contrast to their performance over the past month using the Dow's respective averages as the points of reference.
Here in this Utah Regional Economic Analysis Project report, we adopt this approach to gauge and compare the real administrative and waste services earnings growth of Utah's 29 counties over the latest available year (2017) against the backdrop of their growth over the long term period (2010-2017). In so doing we classify their growth and performance into 4 broad categories: Leading, Slipping, Gaining and Lagging.
Real* Administrative and Waste Services
Earnings Growth
County vs Statewide Average: 2010-2017 and 2017
Real* Administrative and Waste Services
Earnings Growth
Utah:
2010-2017 = 7.23%
2017 = 5.71%
This figure displays the 29 counties of Utah as dots on a scattergram, with the vertical axis representing the average annual real administrative and waste services earnings growth rate over the long-term period (2010-2017), and the horizontal axis representing the real administrative and waste services earnings growth rate for the near-term (2017).
This figure sets apart those counties whose long-term real administrative and waste services earnings growth exceeded the statewide average of 7.23%, by portraying them in the top two quadrants demarcated at 7.23% on the vertical axis. County whose long-term average annual real administrative and waste services earnings growth rate trailed the statewide average (7.23%) are distributed in the bottom two quadrants. In all, 7 counties surpassed the statewide average over 2010-2017, while 7 counties fell below.
Similarly, the two quadrants on the right of this figure present the positions of the 8 counties whose most recent (2017) real administrative and waste services earnings growth rate exceeded the statewide average (5.71%). The two quadrants on the left feature those 6 counties whose real administrative and waste services earnings growth over 2017 trailed the statewide average.
Accordingly, each quadrant portrays the performance of all 29 counties corresponding with their long-term (2010-2017) and near-term (2017) performance relative to their respective statewide averages of 7.23% over 2010-2017 and 5.71% over 2017:
Leading counties () (top-right quadrant)...are counties whose average annual real administrative and waste services earnings growth rate surpassed the statewide average both long-term (7.23%) and near-term (5.71%).
Slipping counties () (top-left quadrant)...are counties whose long-term average annual real administrative and waste services earnings growth rate exceeded the statewide average (7.23%), but whose near-term growth has "slipped" by falling below the Utah average (5.71%).
Gaining counties () (bottom-right quadrant)...are counties whose long-term average annual real administrative and waste services earnings growth rate fell below the statewide average (7.23%), but whose near-term growth has "gained" by registering above the average (5.71%) statewide.
Lagging counties () (bottom-left quadrant)...are counties whose average annual real administrative and waste services earnings growth rate fell under the statewide average both long-term (7.23%) and near-term (5.71%).
   
 
Summary of Utah's 29 County Totals
 
Short Term Average
 
 
Below
(5.71%)
Above
(5.71%)
 
Long
Term
Average
Above
(7.23%)
2
5
7
Below
(7.23%)
4
3
7
 
6
8
14
 
   
Leading Counties
2017 vs. 2010-2017 Averages
Leading Counties
Utah:
2010-2017 = 7.23%
2017 = 5.71%
Turning attention to the top-right quadrant from the discussion above, this figure features the distribution of the Utah counties classified as Leading. These counties surpassed Utah's average annual real administrative and waste services earnings growth both long-term (2010-2017 = 7.23%) as well as near-term (2017 = 5.71%). Each is identified by its corresponding ranking based on it's average annual real administrative and waste services earnings growth rate over 2010-2017.
Of Utah's 29 counties, 5 (17%) are classified within the Leading () category. Those counties ranked by their long-term average include:
Slipping Counties
2017 vs. 2010-2017 Averages
Slipping Counties
Utah:
2010-2017 = 7.23%
2017 = 5.71%
This figure depicts the distribution of the 2 Utah counties classified as Slipping (top-left quadrant), in that their long-term average annual real administrative and waste services earnings growth rate outpaced the average statewide (2010-2017 = 7.23%), while they trailed the statewide average near-term (2017 = 5.71%). Again, each county is identified by it's corresponding ranking based on its average annual real administrative and waste services earnings growth rate over 2010-2017.
Only 2 (7%) of Utah's 29 counties are classified as Slipping (). Those counties ranked by their long-term average include:
Gaining Counties
2017 vs. 2010-2017 Averages
Gaining Counties
Utah:
2010-2017 = 7.23%
2017 = 5.71%
This figure shows the distribution of the 3 Utah counties classified as Gaining (bottom-right quadrant), in that their long-term average annual real administrative and waste services earnings growth rate posted below the average statewide (2010-2017 = 7.23%), while they outpaced Utah's average near-term (2017 = 5.71%). Again, each county is identified by its corresponding ranking based on its average annual real administrative and waste services earnings growth rate over 2010-2017.
Of Utah's 29 counties, only 10% (3) are featured as Gaining (). Those counties ranked by their long-term average include:
Lagging Counties
2017 vs. 2010-2017 Averages
Lagging Counties
Utah:
2010-2017 = 7.23%
2017 = 5.71%
This figure depicts the distributions of the 4 Utah counties classified as Lagging (bottom-left quadrant). These counties trailed the statewide average annual real administrative and waste services earnings growth both long-term (2010-2017 = 7.23%) as well as near-term (2017 = 5.71%). Again, each county is identified by its corresponding ranking based on it's average annual real administrative and waste services earnings growth rate over 2010-2017.
14% of Utah's counties, 4 of 29, are characterized here as Lagging (). Those counties ranked by their long-term average include:
   
 
Utah
Real* Administrative and Waste Services Earnings Growth
County vs. Statewide Average
 
2010-2017
 
2017
 
 
Leading Counties
 
2
16.30
 
3
20.07
31,834
 
1
19.76
 
7
9.39
2,587
 
6
8.23
 
11
6.06
2,603,121
 
7
7.39
 
6
13.14
64,010
 
4
10.16
 
9
7.80
317,724
Slipping Counties
 
5
8.49
 
14
1.14
18,933
 
3
15.08
 
21
-21.58
7,211
Gaining Counties
 
9
6.46
 
8
9.33
279,174
 
13
0.83
 
1
25.62
2,172
 
14
-2.81
 
5
17.18
94,246
Lagging Counties
 
11
4.41
 
16
-5.95
15,188
 
12
1.83
 
17
-12.83
23,212
 
8
6.70
 
15
-1.04
575,319
 
10
5.37
 
13
1.41
101,288
Undefined/Suppressed Counties
 
U
U
 
S
S
S
 
U
U
 
2
24.04
80,516
 
U
U
 
S
S
S
 
U
U
 
S
S
S
 
U
U
 
S
S
S
 
U
U
 
S
S
S
 
U
U
 
S
S
8,205
 
U
U
 
19
-15.46
3,271
 
U
U
 
S
S
S
 
U
U
 
S
S
S
 
U
U
 
10
6.50
2,048
 
U
U
 
12
4.63
8,399
 
U
U
 
20
-18.38
8,253
 
U
U
 
4
18.72
24,520
 
U
U
 
18
-14.87
166
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
7.23
 
5.71
4,284,021
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5.29
 
6.86
504,601,000
November 2018
REAP_PI_CA1600N_611400_LSGL
 
   
Copyright © 2019. Pacific Northwest Regional Economic Analysis Project (PNREAP). All Rights Reserved.

Please stay tuned...
while your request is processing:

Please wait while your request is being processed...
To offer the most comprehensive set of interactive options in support of your research, UT-REAP calculates and crunches most of the data and generates the narrative and graphic analysis on demand in response to your request.
Your request will soon be available.
Just a few more seconds....Your request has been generated and is now loading the results.