Another month, another dip.

In May, Dutch manufacturer confidence slipped once again—this time from -3.3 to -3.9, according to CBS. The headlines will call it “a minor decline.” But confidence doesn’t move in decimals. It erodes in patterns. And patterns are how systems whisper before they break.

Let’s be clear: the average over the last 20 years sits at -1.3. So -3.9 isn’t catastrophic. But it’s not a number you can ignore—especially in a context where confidence hasn’t touched positive territory for over a year, and hasn’t approached anything resembling strategic optimism since mid-2022.

So, what’s really going on?

Expected Activity Is Still Positive. That’s Not Comforting.

If we reduce producer confidence to a single average, we miss the point entirely. Confidence is a composite—built from three sub-indicators:

• Expected Activity (still positive, but softening): +4.3
• Order Portfolio (still seen as weak): -9.6
• Stock of Finished Products (increasingly seen as excessive): -6.4

The fact that expectations remain positive while actual stock levels and order books decline should make any strategic leader pause.

Confidence divorced from inventory reality is not optimism. It’s misalignment.

All Sectors Negative. One Systemic Message.

Not one industrial sector reported positive sentiment in May. Some—like wood, textiles, and food—are only slightly pessimistic. Others—particularly petroleum, paper, and metals—have fallen deep into the red.

But the story here isn’t which sector is doing “less badly.” The story is convergence. When every vertical shows negative sentiment, you’re no longer looking at sectoral volatility. You’re looking at systemic fatigue.

And that’s the real diagnostic. Not the number—but its uniformity.

Production Is Up. So Why the Anxiety?

March 2025 saw a 1.3% increase in industrial production compared to the year before—the third consecutive month of growth after eighteen months of decline.

So why isn’t confidence following?

Because production isn't belief. It’s reaction.

Producers may be ramping up to clear old backlogs, hedge against future uncertainty, or leverage short-term gains before macro risks bite again. But no one’s calling it sustainable. And that’s what the confidence index measures: not output, but conviction.

You can produce more while trusting less. That’s precisely what’s happening.

Strategic Takeaways: What These Numbers Don’t Tell You, but Should

1. Confidence is lagging trust, not just data.

Producers aren’t pessimistic because of weak numbers. They’re pessimistic because they don’t trust the next six months to play fair. Trust erosion is harder to detect—but far more dangerous.

2. Inventory isn’t just logistics—it’s psychology.

Rising stock levels suggest that producers aren’t misjudging demand—they’re bracing for its disappearance. This isn't about warehouse space. It's about strategic hesitation.

3. Sectoral convergence reveals structural imbalance.

The fact that confidence is negative across the board should trigger every GRC radar. Uniform sentiment signals one thing: that risk has become ambient, not isolated.

4. Leaders must interrogate their own internal contradictions.

If your company is growing while confidence drops, ask the uncomfortable question: What part of this growth is real—and what part is tactical noise?

Beyond the Metrics: What We See at Xtroverso

At Xtroverso, we teach our clients not to chase comfort in quarterly shifts, nor panic at dips. We don’t react to numbers. We interpret what the numbers expose—about systems, incentives, governance, and blind spots.

The May figures aren’t telling us that manufacturing is failing. They’re telling us that trust in continuity is fraying. That expectations are no longer synchronized with operational realities. That producers are showing up to work, but not betting on tomorrow.

This is not a crisis. It’s a mirror. One we should all be looking into—without flinching.

Final Word:

Confidence is not a mood. It is a structural outcome.

When it disappears, it tells you that the rules of the game no longer feel legitimate. That’s the moment for GRC—not to manage risk, but to reframe what should be trusted.