The Taylor Rule

May 16, 2011

The Taylor rule, proposed by John Taylor, is a formula for determining the target Fed Funds rate. In the Taylor Rule, the Fed Funds rate baseline is set to the target nominal rate (target real rate plus target inflation), and then adjusted based on economic conditions. The rule states that the Fed Funds rate should be raised when inflation is higher than target inflation (“Inflation Gap”), and lowered when economic output is lower than potential output (“Output Gap”). The equation for the Taylor rule is shown below:

Target Fed Funds = Inflation + Target Real Rate + a1(Inflation Gap) + a2(Output Gap)

Though the rule itself is relatively simple, there are many different interpretations of how to implement it. There are of course multiple measures of inflation, and multiple measures of the output gap. In the chart, we use the Core Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) deflator, one of the measures favored by the Fed, as our measure of inflation. To measure the output gap, we use the CBO real potential GDP series, a trend line estimate, less actual real GDP.

The other two important components of the Taylor rule are the “weights” placed on the inflation gap and the output gap. These are the terms a1 and a2 in the formula. The larger the weighting, the more the prescribed Fed Funds rate moves in response to changes in inflation and output. In his original formulation, Taylor proposed weights of 0.5 for both inflation and output.

While the Fed does not explicitly follow the Taylor rule, it has proved to be a reasonable approximation of Fed policy. However, the Fed has indicated that it places more “weight” on the output gap than Taylor originally suggested. The graph shows the “original” Taylor rule, as well as an “alternate” Taylor rule with more weight placed on the output gap. In normal times these rules track fairly closely, however, when the output gap is large the alternate rule prescribes a much lower Fed Funds rate than the original rule. This formulation currently suggests a negative Fed Funds rate. Because the Fed Funds rate is up against a zero lower bound, this explains why the Fed engaged in unconventional monetary policy actions such as quantitative easing.

The graph projects out the target Fed Funds rate based on both formulations of the Taylor rule. Real GDP is projected using Bloomberg consensus estimates, and a constant 1.5% inflation rate based on the PCE deflator is assumed. This inflation rate is lower than the 2% target, but higher than the recent reading of 0.9%. Given these assumptions, the alternate rule does not imply an increased Fed Funds rate until 3Q 2012. This is roughly in line with the futures market, which suggests a greater than 50% chance of an increased Fed Funds rate in 2Q 2012.

Finally, this chart is not intended as a forecast, but merely as a template for understanding Fed policy. Any large surprise either to the upside or downside for GDP could impact Fed policy. The more important indicator to watch may be measures of core inflation. The Fed has stated that it favors measures of core inflation (inflation less food and energy), and has described the current commodities led uptick in CPI as “transient.” As long as measures of core inflation remain subdued there is little pressure on the Fed to raise rates until the output gap narrows. Economists should debate why the Fed makes its decisions; investors should only be concerned with how the Fed makes its decisions to determine likely outcomes.

The opinions expressed herein are those of Marquette Associates, Inc. (“Marquette”), and are subject to change without notice. This material is not financial advice or an offer to purchase or sell any product. Marquette reserves the right to modify its current investment strategies and techniques based on changing market dynamics or client needs.

Related Content

Stacked column chart showing Weight in S&P 500 Index in 1985, 1995, 2005, 2015, and 2025 for top 10 companies at that time, with companies stacked for each year by weight. From 1985-2015, top 10 weight ranged from 17.6% to 21.1%, but 2025's weight was 40.6%. Company makeup changes over time, with no companies from 1985/1995 categories in 2025. For full dataset, please contact marquettemarketing@marquetteassociates.com.

05.04.2026

This Too Shall Reconstitute

Rooted in medieval Persian Sufi thought, the adage “this too shall pass” speaks to the fleeting and impermanent nature of…

Three-line chart comparing cumulative returns for MSCI EM Latin America Index, MSCI EAFE Index, and S&P 500 Index, Jan 1, 2026 through April 24, 2026. Dashed line at February 28 demarcates U.S. strikes on Iran. While all three indices dipped after war began, Latin America Index was higher to begin with and remains high. Most recent data point (4/24) for Latin America is 20.36%, EAFE is 5.7%, and S&P 500 is 5.06%. For full dataset, please email marquettemarketing@marquetteassociates.com.

04.27.2026

Let’s Hear It for Latin America

Latin American equity markets have shown remarkable strength in 2026. After a strong start to the year, the MSCI Emerging…

Two-line chart showing unemployment rate for All U.S. Workers and Recent College Graduates (Ages 22–27), 12/31/05 to 12/31/25. Up to 2020 period, Recent College Graduates generally had a lower unemployment rate than all U.S. workers category, but since then, the opposite has been true. Lines begin at ~3% to ~5% range in 2005, rose during Global Financial Crisis of '07-'09 to near 10% for All, ~7% for Grads, then both lines declined fairly steadily up to COVID. Peak for both series was 6/30/20, with All at 12.8% and Grads at 13.4%. Most recent data for 12/31/25 is ~4% for All and ~5.5% for Grads. For full dataset, please email marquettemarketing@marquetteassociates.com.

04.20.2026

The Sorrows of Young Workers

Entry-level jobs have traditionally served as the primary bridge between education and stable employment, offering young workers a foothold from…

Combination column and line chart showing Net Duties Received (columns, left-hand axis, ranging $0 to $35 billion) and Effective Tariff Rate (line, right-hand axis, ranging 0 to 12%) monthly, from April 2024 through February 2025. Up to March 2025, both data series held relatively steady, averaging around $7B for net duties received, and 2% for effective tariff rate, but both series have quadrupled since then. Most recent (Feb-26) is $26B and 8%. Please contact us for the full data set at marquettemarketing@marquetteassociates.com.

04.13.2026

Liberation Day: One Year Later

On April 2, 2025, President Donald Trump announced a sweeping set of tariffs on imports into the United States. Dubbed…

Line chart showing commercial & industrial loans as percent of total bank credit since 1980. Peak of line is September 1982 at 38%; since then there has been a steady decrease, with several peaks following global crises, with February 2026 datapoint at 21%. Basel I labeled at 1988, Basel II labeled at 2004, Basel III labeled at 2010. For full dataset, please contact marquettemarketing@marquetteassociates.com.

04.06.2026

Regulation Abdication?

The Basel capital framework was created to ensure that banks maintain sufficient capital to absorb losses and reduce the risk…

04.02.2026

1Q 2026 Market Insights Webinar

This video is a recording of a live webinar held April 16 by Marquette’s research team analyzing the first quarter…

More articles

Subscribe to Research Email Alerts

Research Email Alert Subscription

Research alerts keep you updated on our latest research publications. Simply enter your contact information, choose the research alerts you would like to receive and click Subscribe. Alerts will be sent as research is published.

We respect your privacy. We will never share or sell your information.

Thank You

We appreciate your interest in Marquette Associates.

If you have questions or need further information, please contact us directly and we will respond to your inquiry within 24 hours.

Contact Us >