Seven Recession Forecasts from Bloomberg: A Chronicle of Misses 2018–2026 and Why the Russian Economy Endured Again

Measure Seven Times, Cut Once: The Bloomberg Chronicles and the Paradox of the Russian Economy

In continuation of “The Industry of Illusions: Who Really Makes Money from Your Losses on the Stock Exchange? | Cui prodest”
and Tatiana Burmagina’s 2021 material “Facts and Trends vs Fantasies and Forecasts”
Specifically for Systemic Business Plans 

There’s an old joke: economists have predicted nine out of the last five recessions. So, the folks at Bloomberg, apparently, decided to break this record and run ahead in the number of “accurate shots in the dark.”

I periodically revisit my old posts. Back there, in 2022, when everything around was burning with a blue flame, and Western media were already burying the Russian economy (yet again), I wrote rather nervous, but as it turned out, overly pessimistic things. We were all a bit like Cassandras then, except that, unlike the Trojan prophetess, for some reason no one believed us, and thank God for that.

Four years have passed. The clock reads — 2026. Bloomberg has again taken the stage with a recession forecast. And looking at this seven-year epic of predictions, one no longer wants to be nervous, but rather sit down, sort everything out, and ask: what, actually, is the trick? Why is the economy not like a neural network that you can train on historical data and get an accurate answer? And most importantly — what should we, mere mortals who want not just to survive, but to earn money, do?

Here we go.

Recession Hunting Season Is Open (and Closed)

Let’s run through your dossier. I specially gathered all the data so as not to be unfounded.

Season 1. 2018–2019: The Era of Oil Melancholy.
Bloomberg: “Oil prices are low, stagnation is inevitable, the economy will grind to a halt.” Reality: the economy did not grind to a halt, but showed growth. Yes, modest, but growth. It turned out there is something besides oil. For example, import substitution began to show its first shoots, and the fiscal rule worked as a shock absorber. But the analysts didn’t notice this — they were too busy counting barrels.

Season 2. 2020: Plague, Bro, Plague.
Bloomberg (in chorus): “Covid + oil crash = say goodbye! We forecast a 6% GDP drop.” Reality: minus 3%. Exactly half as much. Yes, it was painful. Yes, small businesses were dying out. But the economy collapsed exactly as much as the whole world collapsed. Global synchronization worked as insurance. And then there was a rebound.

Season 3. 2022: The Pessimists’ Finest Hour.
This time Bloomberg really went for it. Forecasts jumped like crazy: from minus 3.5% to minus 11.9%! Western “partners” unanimously predicted collapse, capital outflow, and the country turning into North Korea with balalaikas. Reality: minus 2.1%. Less than during Covid. Industry, on the contrary, began to accelerate. Import substitution transformed from a nice idea into a matter of survival and it worked.

Season 4. 2023: A Storm is Coming, But Something Went Wrong.
Bloomberg: “Now for sure there will be a debt and banking crisis! Sanctions are working with a delay, everything will collapse!” Reality: GDP growth +3.6%. Instead of a crisis — a recovery growth. The financial system not only stood firm, but adapted. People continued to take out mortgages, companies continued to invest.

Season 5. 2025: Overheating Is Also Bad.
Bloomberg: “The economy is overheated! Too much money! There will be a debt crisis!” Reality: growth around 1%. Not a crash, but rather a “cooling down” after the turbulent 2023. Well, it happens.

Season 6. 2026. Premiere.
Bloomberg is back in the game: “Risks of recession and banking crisis if the share of non-performing assets exceeds 10% or a massive withdrawal of deposits begins.”

Seven times in eight years. This isn’t a forecast, it’s a series that’s dragged on.

Why Are They Always Wrong? (Spoiler: Not Only Because of Malicious Intent)

Of course, one wants to wave a hand and say: “They’re just Western propagandists, following orders!”. And there is a grain of truth here. Media is a business. Bad news sells better than good news. The headline “Russian Economy Unexpectedly Grows” gets fewer clicks than “Russia on the Brink of Disaster: New Shocks.”

But it would be foolish to reduce everything to propaganda. Bloomberg’s mistakes are methodological mistakes. And here there are three important nuances.

1. They are looking in the rearview mirror. Econometric models are built on past data. They extrapolate trends. But 2022 broke all trends. What worked in 2008 or 2014 stopped working. Models don’t know how to calculate “military Keynesianism,” when the state pours trillions into defense and import substitution, boosting demand. They don’t account for the fact that people can tighten their belts, but won’t starve to death because grandma has her own potatoes in the village.

2. They underestimate “manual control.”
Economics textbooks say: if the Central Bank raises the rate, inflation slows down, but businesses stop taking loans and growth halts. In reality, the Central Bank can raise the rate to 20%, but at the same time issue subsidized loans to factories at 2% directly from the budget. Market mechanisms are distorted by administrative ones. The model doesn’t see this. But reality does.

3. The subjective factor: “survivorship bias.”
Analysts look at countries that have gone through isolation and see devastation there. Iran, North Korea. But they forget that Russia is not Iran. We have a different level of education, a different resource base, a different mentality. The Russian economy is like a stove: it’s cold outside, but hot inside, because there’s firewood, and the draft is good.

2026: Will There Be a Recession This Time?

And here’s where the most interesting part begins. When you’re wrong seven times in a row, it doesn’t mean you’ll be wrong an eighth time. Probability theory doesn’t work with idiots (sorry, with the optimists from Bloomberg).

I see three scenarios that are currently being discussed behind the scenes.

Scenario A (Bloomberg is right).
The share of bad debts really could exceed 10%. People who took out a mortgage at 5% in 2023 might lose their jobs in 2026. Corporate loans taken for working capital might not be repaid if demand falls. If panic happens simultaneously and depositors rush to withdraw money (like in 2004), banks could face a liquidity crisis. Yes, this is possible. The probability, in my view, is not 100%, but not 0% either. Somewhere around 25%.

Scenario B (Missed again).
The state will again turn on the printing press (in the form of budget injections) or use administrative resources. Banks will be told: “Don’t you dare go bankrupt, restructure the debts.” Depositors will be told: “Don’t you dare run, here’s an increased rate on deposits in state banks.” And the system will again hang by a thread and on oil and gas revenues. GDP will show +0.5% or -0.5% — a statistical error that will be called “stabilization.” Probability 60%.

Scenario C (Growth).
Absolutely unbelievable for Bloomberg, but possible. If import substitution in machine tool building and electronics bears fruit, if logistics with the East settle down, if China starts investing more. Then we will see not a recession, but a structural transformation. It will be hard, but we will grow. The chance is minuscule, but it exists — 15%.

What Does This Have To Do With Me and My Business?

You and I do not live in Bloomberg’s macro models. We live in a micro-world, where every day we need to pay salaries, sell goods, and figure out how to retain a client.

And right here, looking at these seven forecasts, I draw one simple but important conclusion for myself.

Running from a recession is useless. Preparing for it is pointless. You just need to be faster.

Economists guess whether there will be a crisis or not. But the entrepreneurs who in 2022 did not close their business, but remade it for the new realities (some started handling parallel imports, some opened a production of consumables), — they didn’t guess. They acted.

Remember our article about AI agents? We said copying yourself is boring, but teaching a neural network what you don’t know how to do yourself is groundbreaking. It’s the same here. Forecasting a recession by the textbook is copying yourself (or Bloomberg). But doing what competitors don’t know how to do — seeking new niches where old ones have died — that is your personal quantum leap.

Summary (So You Have Something to Save to Favorites)

1. Bloomberg is wrong not because they are stupid. But because their models cannot keep up with our reality. Our economy has become too “hands-on” and politicized for pure mathematical calculations.

2. 2026 is a borderline year. The overheating of previous years could lead to a debt crisis. But it might not, if the authorities lay down straw in time. It will be fun in any case.

3. Personal vs. State. While macroeconomists argue about GDP rates, you and I are doing concrete things. And in such times, the winner is not the one who predicted more accurately, but the one who adapted faster.

4. Remember the 2.1% in 2022. Instead of the promised 12. This is not just a number. It is a symbol that “all is lost” happens much less often than it seems to us.

So let’s go without panic. We keep an eye on bad debts, but don’t forget to develop our own business. And forecasts… what about forecasts? Reading them is useful, but believing them is too costly.

ITHINKSO
Tatiana Burmagina & Bureau of Control System Design | EWA

P.S. If the recession does happen, we’ll just teach our AI agents to work during a crisis. If not — we’ll teach them to make money on growth. This is the main skill of modernity — adaptability. Not fortune-telling on Bloomberg’s coffee grounds.