A Synthetic Estimate of September Consumer Sentiment, Frozen Before Michigan's Release
Protocol dated September 9, 2026 · Graded September 12, 2026 · n=1,000 · 48 states + D.C.
Both numbers below were on this page on September 9, two days before Michigan's Friday print. The forecast was frozen before the human result. The kitchen is not on this page.
Scorecard · appended September 12, 2026
WIN on guess #2. Michigan printed ICS 47.8. The September 9 nowcast of 52.1 was 4.3 points high.
Guess #1, the registered primary of 55.4, missed by 7.6 points and sits outside the original 50.4 to 60.4 win band. Guess #2 was a labeled companion on the same public page, not a number chosen after Friday. The no-change comparator of 51.7 was closer still, at 3.9 points. We are not claiming a Street beat.
Guess #1 · primary
55.4
vs 47.8 · miss · +7.6
Guess #2 · nowcast
52.1
vs 47.8 · WIN · +4.3
Michigan prelim
47.8
Friday, September 11, 10:00 a.m. ET
ICS (primary)
55.4
Frozen September forecast
ICC
61.8
Secondary
ICE
51.4
Secondary
What this run is, and is not
One synthetic panel. No humans interviewed. No live web research in the run.
In the August reconstruction, Lewis estimated Michigan's published ICS at 55.0 versus an actual 51.7, an error of 3.3 points. That is within the registered five-point band. ICC was much farther off at 61.0 versus 51.9, an error of plus 9.1. We are keeping that miss in full view.
The frozen September estimate is 55.4, which is 3.7 points above Michigan's published August result of 51.7. But most of that difference already existed in the August reconstruction. Lewis itself moved only about 0.4 points from August to September.
The useful finding is narrower: a census-grounded synthetic panel, run without external research tools, came reasonably close to the headline index in a retrospective month. That does not prove forecasting skill, and it does not show that Lewis beat economists. The 3.7-point gap should not be read as evidence that Lewis detected a September swing.
August diagnostic
We used the same 1,000 people on an August reconstruction and compared it with Michigan's published August final. The registered qualification test applied only to ICS. An absolute error greater than 15 would have changed the title to a failed-qualification prospective test. Lewis did not hit that threshold.
Passing the qualification test does not prove the model had not previously encountered Michigan's August result.
| Index | Lewis Aug 24 | Michigan Aug final | Signed error |
|---|---|---|---|
| ICS (primary) | 55.0 | 51.7 | +3.3 |
| ICC | 61.0 | 51.9 | +9.1 |
| ICE | 51.1 | 51.5 | -0.4 |
ICC is the largest miss, and we are leaving it visible. The registered primary measure is ICS.
September freeze
The frozen primary estimate is ICS 55.4. The component relatives are PAGO 78, PEXP 82, BUS12 63, BUS5 58, and DUR 80. The no-change comparator is Michigan's published August final of 51.7.
The September estimate of 55.4 is 3.7 points above the human August final of 51.7. Lewis itself moved only about 0.4 points from its own August estimate of 55.0. That distinction matters. We are not claiming Lewis detected a 3.7-point September improvement.
How Friday is scored
- Under the registered five-point rule, an absolute ICS error of 5 or less is a win. An error greater than 5 is a loss.
- The win interval around 55.4 is 50.4 to 60.4.
- If Friday prints 51.7, Lewis is still inside the win band, but the no-change comparator is closer.
- If Friday prints 60.0, Lewis is also inside the win band.
- Lewis is closer than no-change if Friday prints above 53.55.
- For larger errors, 5 to 10 is a miss, 10 to 20 is bad, and greater than 20 is embarrassing.
- The Street comparison uses the Reuters median, or Bloomberg if Reuters is unavailable, only if it is posted by Thursday 23:59 ET. We will not claim that Lewis beat the Street.
Friday official print · September 11, 2026, 10:00 a.m. ET
| Index | Official | Guess #1 | Signed error |
|---|---|---|---|
| ICS (primary) | 47.8 | 55.4 | +7.6 |
| ICC | 50.9 | 61.8 | +10.9 |
| ICE | 45.8 | 51.4 | +5.6 |
No-change comparator: 51.7. No-change ICS error: +3.9. Recorder: Lewsearch, September 12, 2026. Source: University of Michigan Surveys of Consumers.
Guess #2 · companion, scored because it was public before Friday
After the August and September synthetic outputs were complete, but before Friday's human result, we published a labeled companion nowcast of 52.1. The recipe is not on this page.
The original registration did not allow this adjusted number to become the lead forecast. We are not pretending there was only one forecast, and we are not swapping after the fact. Guess #2 was on this page on September 9. Michigan printed 47.8 on September 11. The nowcast error is +4.3, inside a five-point band around 52.1. That is the WIN. Guess #1 stays visible at +7.6.
Five items · relatives and option shares
For each item, A is favorable and C is unfavorable. B and D are neutral in the index and are shown separately.
The panel is pessimistic about business conditions and only mildly pessimistic about personal finances. A large share of the probability sits in neutral or mixed responses. That helps explain why ICS lands near 55 rather than 51.7 or 76.
PAGO · x1
Would you say that you (and your family living there) are better off or worse off financially than you were a year ago?
August x=77 · September x=78
August 24
- A Better off17.3%
- B About the same39.8%
- C Worse off40.0%
- D Uncertain / don't know2.9%
September 7
- A Better off17.4%
- B About the same40.2%
- C Worse off39.4%
- D Uncertain / don't know2.9%
PEXP · x2
A year from now, will you be better off financially, worse off, or just about the same as now?
August x=81 · September x=82
August 24
- A Better off11.6%
- B Just about the same49.6%
- C Worse off30.4%
- D Uncertain / don't know8.4%
September 7
- A Better off12.1%
- B Just about the same49.7%
- C Worse off30.2%
- D Uncertain / don't know8.0%
BUS12 · x3
During the next twelve months, will we have good times financially, or bad times, or what?
August x=62 · September x=63
August 24
- A Good times8.0%
- B Uncertain / mixed43.3%
- C Bad times45.7%
- D Don't know3.0%
September 7
- A Good times8.3%
- B Uncertain / mixed43.7%
- C Bad times45.1%
- D Don't know3.0%
BUS5 · x4
Looking ahead five years, continuous good times, or periods of widespread unemployment or depression, or what?
August x=59 · September x=58
August 24
- A Continuous good times3.5%
- B Uncertain / mixed48.0%
- C Unemployment or depression44.6%
- D Don't know3.9%
September 7
- A Continuous good times3.3%
- B Uncertain / mixed48.3%
- C Unemployment or depression44.8%
- D Don't know3.6%
DUR · x5
Is now a good or bad time for people to buy major household items?
August x=79 · September x=80
August 24
- A Good time to buy24.3%
- B Uncertain / depends27.0%
- C Bad time to buy45.8%
- D Don't know2.9%
September 7
- A Good time to buy24.8%
- B Uncertain / depends27.5%
- C Bad time to buy44.7%
- D Don't know2.9%
Methods
This experiment uses Michigan's published index questions and scoring formula in a synthetic adaptation. It is not a reproduction of the Michigan survey. Michigan has used web interviewing since July 2024. A preliminary release is based on about 420 interviews, and a final is based on about 1,000. Michigan's human sample covers the 48 coterminous states and D.C.
Our panel contains 1,000 census-grounded adult synthetic respondents across the 48 coterminous states and D.C., excluding Alaska and Hawaii. Each respondent carries equal weight. The same roster answered all five items on both dates.
Outputs were processed using Lewsearch's frozen production calibration pipeline. The pipeline and configuration were cryptographically committed before inference and were not modified after observing results. The primary forecast was not adjusted toward the known August value of 51.7.
Indexes use Michigan's published scoring formula. The primary forecast remains 55.4.
Hashes on this page
- Roster: e16e31518c1546d4b4b4ca8618aed217aa0232b0f14deeb071c3dd00f793b524
- August cells: b500dbd826718d1c10ece28091c337286840120318ee1184a5f946ba5da7779b
- September cells: 523c04b069e81f66b0d97e9fc3cc0e54dbca60c1ff2273a0b5c05c00ccb7b8e5
- Runner: f06ca50ec6866d98d5e77baa1cb8e97e7327b687a733f6b157aee2dad3a5ceac
Read before citing
This is a synthetic panel, not a probability sample. No humans were interviewed. This is a custom Issue for The Lewsearch Report, not a result from the standard production pipeline. The protocol was frozen publicly before the result, but the numerical forecast itself was not published in that protocol freeze.