Main

Georgia’s almost unchanged industrial producer price index in September did not mean that prices were stable across industries: monthly declines in manufacturing and mining were partly offset by an increase in the energy group. BTU researchers calculate that manufacturing accounted for 69.7% of the published sector contributions to annual price growth, making the direction of a business’s own product prices more useful than the headline alone.

Key Takeaways

• According to Geostat, Georgia’s industrial producer prices declined by 0.02% between August and September 2026 but remained 4.6% above September 2025; monthly stability did not reverse the annual increase.
• BTU researchers calculate that manufacturing’s 3.22 percentage point contribution represented 69.7% of the four main sectors’ combined published annual contribution of 4.62 points; this measures participation in price growth, not manufacturing’s share of production or the index basket.
• Geostat recorded a 7.2% monthly decline in coke and refined petroleum product prices in September 2026 alongside a 21.0% annual increase; BTU assesses that procurement decisions need both comparisons and the terms of the relevant contract.

A Georgian business can read two different stories in September’s industrial price statistics. One is that the overall price index barely moved during the month. The other is that individual products experienced much larger changes: some became cheaper, others more expensive, and many still cost more than a year earlier. Reading only the headline erases those differences.

Geostat’s report, released on 20 October, covers September. The monthly change was −0.02%, while the annual change was +4.6%. These figures do not contradict one another. The first compares September with August; the second compares it with September of the previous year. A small monthly decline does not automatically return prices to their level a year earlier. [1, PDF p. 2]

The report also presents a third comparison: the latest 12-month average index against the preceding 12-month average is 106.0, meaning the average price level is 6.0% higher. That is neither September’s 4.6% year-on-year increase nor a cumulative January–September change. The three measures answer different questions: what changed in one month, how prices compare with the same month a year earlier, and how average levels differ between two complete 12-month periods. [1, PDF pp. 5–6]

BTU’s analysis asks whether a near-flat aggregate indicates broadly settled prices or the result of opposing movements. Published sector contributions support the second explanation. The modest monthly change is real, but it does not describe the same experience for every producer and purchaser.

How the aggregate approaches zero

Manufacturing prices declined by 0.1% during the month, contributing −0.05 percentage points to the overall change. Mining and quarrying prices also declined by 0.1%, but their contribution was only −0.01 points. A 0.4% increase in electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning added +0.04 points. The water supply, sewerage, waste management and remediation group rose by 0.1%, with its contribution rounded to 0.00 points. [1, PDF pp. 3–4]

The two declining sectors therefore contributed a combined −0.06 points, against the energy group’s +0.04 points. BTU researchers calculate that adding these published contributions produces −0.02 points. This is not a model of what would have happened had energy prices stayed unchanged. It is an accounting description of the movements already recorded in the overall index.

Georgia industrial price composition September 2026

Source: Geostat [1], PDF pp. 3–4. Month: September 2026 versus August; year: September 2026 versus September 2025. pp means percentage points. Final column: BTU calculation, annual sector contribution ÷ 4.62 × 100. Rounded shares are not basket weights. Sector names are abbreviated.

Percentages and percentage points answer different questions. A percentage price change describes how much a particular group became more or less expensive. A contribution describes how many points its movement added to or subtracted from the overall index. This is why the same reported 0.1% decline in manufacturing and mining has different effects on the aggregate. The speed of a price change and its influence on the total are not interchangeable.

The monthly table also displays an overall index of 100.0. That does not invalidate the smaller decline: an index rounded to one decimal place cannot display a 0.02% movement, while the report’s text and contribution column retain it. Similarly, a sector contribution displayed as 0.00 does not always mean an exactly zero movement. Precision matters particularly when the whole monthly result is close to zero.

The source of growth is not the fastest riser

All four main sectors made positive annual contributions. Mining and quarrying prices increased by 12.6%, manufacturing by 4.1%, the energy group by 3.2%, and water and waste-related services by 5.8%. Mining experienced the fastest sector-level increase, but manufacturing supplied the largest contribution to overall annual growth. [1, PDF pp. 2–4]

BTU researchers calculate that dividing manufacturing’s 3.22 points by the four sectors’ combined contribution of 4.62 produces 69.7%. On the same basis, mining accounts for 19.0%, energy for 7.4%, and water and waste-related services for 3.9%. The denominator is deliberately 4.62 rather than the headline’s 4.6: components reported at the same precision are being compared with one another.

This breakdown does not mean that manufacturing accounts for 69.7% of the index basket or of Georgian production. It describes its participation in this particular annual price change. Dividing a sector’s contribution mechanically by its price increase would not establish an exact base weight either: Geostat’s methodology treats weights and annual chain-linking separately. [2, sections 5 and 9.1.1]

The distinction is even clearer among subsectors. Crude petroleum and natural gas prices rose by 57.8% annually, contributing +0.19 points. Basic metals rose by 8.5% but contributed +0.54 points. A ranking based only on percentage increases would confuse the fastest movement with the largest influence on the aggregate.

Within mining, metal ore prices rose by 12.1% annually, contributing +0.67 points. During the month, however, metal ores fell by 1.2%, while crude petroleum and natural gas rose by 10.8%. Their monthly contributions were −0.07 and +0.05 points respectively. Opposing movements therefore appear not just between the four main sectors, but inside a single sector as well.

Cheaper this month can still mean dearer this year

Several pronounced movements sit behind manufacturing’s modest monthly decline. Coke and refined petroleum product prices fell by 7.2%, contributing −0.09 points to the overall index. A 5.2% decline in basic pharmaceutical products and preparations contributed −0.08 points. Chemical product prices fell by 1.8%, printing and reproduction services by 3.5%, and paper and paper products by 4.1%. [1, PDF p. 3]

At the same time, clothing prices rose by 4.4%, adding +0.08 points, while wood and related products rose by 6.8%, adding +0.05 points. Manufacturing’s −0.1% is consequently another summary of different directions, not evidence that all manufactured goods became uniformly cheaper.

Selected manufacturing prices September 2026

Source: Geostat [1], PDF p. 3. Same monthly and annual comparison periods. Percentage changes equal the published index minus 100; contributions are official and refer to the overall industrial index. This selection illustrates contrasts, not a complete basket or separate aggregate. The wood group excludes furniture and includes cork, straw and plaiting products.

Printing services were cheaper in September than in August but remained 34.4% more expensive than in September 2025. Paper’s annual increase was 17.3%, chemicals’ 10.8%, and pharmaceuticals’ 4.4%. Wood and related products showed the opposite combination: despite a substantial monthly increase, prices remained 2.3% below their level a year earlier. Changing the comparison period can change the direction of the assessment without creating a contradiction in the data.

Other products also matter to annual growth. Food products contributed +1.21 points, beverages +0.43, and basic metals +0.54. These subsectors are already included in manufacturing’s 3.22 points and must not be added to it again. In the water and waste-related sector, the +0.18 point contribution was concentrated in waste collection, treatment, disposal and material recovery services; the annual index for natural water and water supply services was 100.0. A broad group’s name does not mean that every service inside it became more expensive. [1, PDF pp. 3–4]

The price a business actually needs

The overall industrial producer price index combines domestic and export sales of goods produced in Georgia. It is therefore not a measure of local-market prices alone. Geostat uses factory-gate prices for the domestic component and the relevant export price for the export component; treating the whole index as a retail price measure would be incorrect. [2, sections 1.2–1.3; 3, pp. 1 and 5]

For businesses, the first practical step is to choose the appropriate comparison. A company purchasing paper and a manufacturer selling metal products would use the same headline for different decisions. One is assessing the terms of an input purchase; the other is assessing the selling price of its own output. A sector index can improve that assessment, but it cannot replace a price for a specified product, quality, delivery date and contract.

A monthly decline may matter when comparing new quotations. An annual increase helps explain why expenditure can still appear high against last year’s budget. Separating these questions matters both when discussing procurement and when assessing a request to revise a price. Invoking the overall index is a weak argument if the main product in the transaction is moving in a different direction.

BTU researchers assess that the report’s practical value lies in spotting these differences early. A lower current price can create purchasing opportunities for some buyers, but it is not yet a verified company saving. Establishing a saving requires the quantity actually purchased, the price paid and a comparable transaction under the previous terms. A decline in a statistical group cannot establish that every supplier reduced its quotation.

Nor does an increase in a producer’s selling price establish higher profit. Revenue also depends on the quantity sold, while profit depends on materials, labor, energy, financing and other costs. The published index does not combine those observations for an individual business. It cannot directly establish room for wage increases, expanding margins or the financial health of a producer.

September’s conclusion is therefore not that price concerns have ended. The overall monthly change is small because movements in several directions partly offset one another; manufacturing supplies most of the annual contribution. For Georgian businesses, the useful question is not just “What is the index?” but “Which component corresponds to my transaction, and which period am I comparing?”

Questions and answers

Does a monthly decline end the annual price increase?

No. The −0.02% figure compares September with August, while +4.6% compares it with September 2025. A small decline in one month does not automatically erase earlier differences or establish the future direction.

Why is manufacturing’s share 69.7% rather than 4.1%?

The 4.1% figure is the sector’s annual price increase. The 69.7% figure is BTU’s calculated share of the published annual sector contributions: 3.22 ÷ 4.62 × 100. It is neither a basket weight nor a production share.

Does an index of 100.0 mean that prices were exactly unchanged?

No. The overall monthly index in the table is rounded to one decimal place. The −0.02% change in the report’s text and contribution column retains a smaller movement. Contributions rounded to 0.00 require the same caution.

Can the index establish retail prices or business profit?

Not directly. It measures producer prices, not an individual company’s total costs, profit or a household consumption basket. Those outcomes require additional price, quantity and cost information.