As it turns, six of 11 sectors we analyzed are doing fine, with output that is either stronger than or not too much worse than our model predicts. For example, consumer spending on services is exceeding the projection by $63 billion, with spending on nondurable goods undershooting by $74 billion. (Those numbers, like others contained in this analysis, are annualized). Business spending on intellectual property is a bit stronger than you would expect in a healthy recovery, spending on buildings a bit weaker. Trade is holding its own.

The following, however, are the five pieces that are the major culprits in the nation’s economic malaise, each vastly undershooting what they would look like in our model of a healthy economy: residential investment; consumption of durable goods; state and local government spending; business investment in equipment; and federal government spending.

Together their deficit adds up to $845 billion — in other words, if those sectors returned to their typical share of economic potential, the economy wouldn’t just be doing well, it would be in an outright boom.

Let’s take these five factors in failure one by one.

Housing is the biggest and least surprising, accounting for $239 billion in missing economic output. We examined this sector’s continued underperformance earlier in the year, but the short version is this: Even years after the housing bust, the United States is building far fewer houses than would be expected given demographic trends. It may be that a broader shift is underway in the desire and ability of young adults to get homes of their own. Regardless, it is holding back construction and home sales activity.