All the recessions have followed after curve inverted, but not all curve inversions has caused recession. It is similar to quote by Paul Samuelson. "The stock market has forecast nine of the last five recessions. Paul Samuelson (1966), quoted in: John C Bluedorn et al. Do Asset Price Drops Foreshadow Recessions? (2013), p. 4"
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/T10Y2Y#0 This 10 - 2 year spread has been a typically been used to discuss inversion in the media. This not yet inverted. I can't comment on the 10 - 3 month spread that inverted recently and caught attention See for yourself the predictive quality and timimg. Slide the chart back in time . I domt remember anything before the "great sag" in the late 1800's Greenspan was young then as well.
10-3 month spread is used typically than 10-2 year spread to predict the recession. Fed. reserve uses this measure
Yup and here it is: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/T10Y3M It's more than just "it predicts a recession" by forecasting the expected path of the Fed policy, but it also partially causes it by hammering the financial sector.
Recessions follow yield curve inversions because everyone makes it so. They believe so strongly that a recession MUST follow a fucking yield-curve inversion, they MAKE IT HAPPEN with their actions. Kids in a sandbox I tell you. There is no NEED for a recession. But everyone now wants one to happen. And thus, it will happen soon now.
Nonsense pure and simple. Why did the chicken cross the road, because everyone thought it should duh.