Flash Report: February Jobless Data Suggest Low-Hire, Low-Fire Stasis Continues
KEY TAKEAWAYS
- The U.S. unemployment rate ticked up to 4.4% in February from 4.3% in January. More precise data show the rate rose to 4.441% from a revised 4.322%, respectively.
- Fewer unemployed workers who were able to find jobs primarily drove the bump in February’s reading.
- The modest increase in unemployment and weaker-than-expected job creation in February suggest the labor market remains in a “low hire, low fire” state.
Unemployment
February 2026
4.441%
Precise Rate
Unemployment ticked up modestly in February, reversing two consecutive declines that had brought it down from 4.5% in November to 4.3% in January. (See the FRED chart above.) Total nonfarm payrolls shrank by 92,000 jobs in February—below expectations and a sharp reversal of January’s strong gains. Together, the rise in unemployment and weak payroll gains suggest the U.S. labor market remains locked in the “low hire, low fire” stasis that has prevailed since July 2024.
Over the past 12 months, nonfarm payroll growth averaged just 13,000 jobs per month, with the unemployment rate increasing a mere 0.02 percentage points per month on average—and remaining at a moderate level by historical standards—during that time. This stability in the labor market is due to a decline in labor supply growth, likely tied to sharply lower immigration flows in 2025. Despite weaker job creation, gains in labor productivity—whether arising from capital deepening, total factor productivity gains, or some combination thereof—have helped growth in gross domestic product remain relatively strong.
Next, the analysis looks at how estimated flows into and out of unemployment during February affected the overall unemployment rate.
DATA HIGHLIGHTS
- While the headline unemployment rate ticked up to 4.4% in February, the unrounded rate shows a slightly larger increase from January of 0.12 percentage points.
- This modest uptick stemmed primarily from a drop in the number of unemployed workers who were able to find jobs.
| Average Monthly Change in Unemployment Rate (Percentage Points) |
People Losing or Leaving Their Jobs and Becoming Unemployed |
Unemployed People Finding Jobs |
People Previously Not in the Labor Force Who Are Now Seeking Work |
Unemployed Workers Leaving the Labor Force (e.g. Discouraged Workers) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| February 2026 | +0.12 | +0.95 | -0.99 | +1.12 | -0.97 |
| Last 3 Months | -0.03 | +0.93 | -1.08 | +1.10 | -1.00 |
| Last 12 Months | +0.02 | +0.97 | -1.09 | +1.12 | -0.99 |
| SOURCES: Bureau of Labor Statistics and Research staff’s calculations. | |||||
| NOTES: The average over the last 12 months excludes the months of October and November, for which data were unavailable. Data are seasonally adjusted. The overall change is based on the precise unemployment rate for these periods; for example, the unemployment rates were 4.4409% in February and 4.3223% in January. January’s precise number was revised slightly because the BLS made revisions to the January household survey data. The flow components into and out of unemployment add up to the change in unemployment with a negligible residual. See Maximiliano Dvorkin and Serdar Ozkan’s St. Louis Fed On the Economy blog post “The Recent Ins and Outs of Unemployment: Using Flows to Study Labor Market Dynamics” for more information about this method. | |||||
The rate of unemployed people finding jobs has fallen significantly below its average over the last 12 months. (See the table above.) Other unemployment flow components—people losing or leaving their jobs and becoming unemployed, and labor force transitions (that is, people exiting or entering the labor force)—remain stable and near their historical norms.
Overall, recent developments suggest the labor market was unable to sustain momentum built over the prior two months.
Citation
ldquoFlash Report: February Jobless Data Suggest Low-Hire, Low-Fire Stasis Continues,rdquo St. Louis Fed On the Economy, March 6, 2026.
This blog offers commentary, analysis and data from our economists and experts. Views expressed are not necessarily those of the St. Louis Fed or Federal Reserve System.
Email Us
All other blog-related questions