Nigeria’s 2025 Inflation was on Decline – But It’s The NBS Revised Method, Not Prices Falling

Nigeria’s inflation picture for 2025 looks markedly different after the National Bureau of Statistics’ December overhaul of its Consumer Price Index methodology, even though the broad direction of travel remains downward.

What has changed is not the reality of prices Nigerians faced throughout the year, but how that reality is measured, compared, and interpreted.

A close comparison of the CPI year-on-year series released with the November 2025 report and the revised series published in December shows a clear pattern: inflation was higher in every single month from January to November than earlier figures suggested. The revisions are not the result of new price shocks or late-arriving data. Instead, they stem from a fundamental statistical re-anchoring of Nigeria’s inflation base.

According to the comparison first reported by NairaMetrics, until November, Nigeria’s year-on-year inflation readings for 2025 were calculated using a single-month reference base under the old 2009 CPI structure. In December, the NBS rebased the index and moved to a 12-month average reference period for 2024, setting that annual average CPI to 100.

The bureau explained that keeping a single-month base would have distorted inflation readings through strong base effects, particularly toward the end of 2025, when comparisons with a volatile prior month could exaggerate apparent declines. The new approach, which spreads the base across an entire year, is designed to improve stability, smooth volatility, and align Nigeria’s inflation framework with international best practice.

Crucially, the change was not prospective. It forced a full recalibration of the already published inflation path for January to November 2025, effectively rewriting the narrative of how quickly price pressures eased during the year.

The revised month-by-month data show just how material the adjustment was. In January 2025, inflation previously reported at 24.48% was lifted to 27.61%, an upward revision of more than three percentage points. February followed a similar pattern, moving from 23.18% to 26.27%. March and April were also pushed higher, from 24.23% to 27.35% and from 23.71% to 26.82%, respectively.

Through the second quarter, the same story held. May inflation was revised from 22.97% to 26.06%, while June moved from 22.22% to 25.29%. By mid-year, the gap began to narrow, but it did not disappear. July was adjusted from 21.88% to 24.94%, and August from 20.12% to 23.14%.

Even as inflation edged lower into the final quarter, the recalibration remained significant. September’s rate increased from 18.02% to 20.98%, October’s from 16.05% to 18.97%, and November’s from 14.45% to 17.33%. In effect, inflation stayed above 20% until August and above 18% until October, a much stickier profile than earlier data implied.

December’s reading, however, still confirms that disinflation was real. Headline inflation eased further to 15.15% in December 2025, down from the revised 17.33% in November. The downward momentum remains intact. What has changed is the starting point and the slope of the descent. Inflation did not fall as quickly as previously believed, meaning households and businesses endured higher underlying price pressure for longer.

That distinction matters because, under the old series, 2025 appeared to be a year of rapid cooling, strengthening the case for aggressive easing of monetary policy. The revised data paint a more cautious picture of gradual disinflation, one that supports restraint when assessing real interest rates and inflation expectations.

For the Federal Government, the recalibrated numbers still offer some validation. By December, inflation had moved closer to the 15% target embedded in the 2025 Appropriation Bill submitted to the National Assembly in 2024. The destination has not changed, but the journey now looks slower and more uneven.

Markets and analysts also gain a clearer baseline. The revised CPI series improves comparability with regional peers and historical trends, reducing the risk of misreading Nigeria’s inflation performance due to statistical distortions rather than genuine economic shifts.

International institutions have taken a similar view. The International Monetary Fund endorsed both Nigeria’s December 2025 inflation outcome and the revised CPI methodology, describing the changes as consistent with global best practice and supportive of macroeconomic stability.

But beyond the endorsement and statistical debates, public sentiment tells a harsher story. Across major cities and rural communities, Nigerians say the lived experience of inflation has not eased in a way that matches the data. Food prices remain the dominant pressure point, driven by supply disruptions, insecurity in farming regions, transport costs, and currency weakness. Rents, electricity tariffs, fuel-related expenses, and basic services continue to strain household budgets.

Market traders and salaried workers lament that purchasing power has eroded sharply. Wages have not kept pace with prices, and any marginal slowdown in inflation has yet to translate into relief at the checkout. For many families, consumption has been cut to essentials, with protein intake reduced and healthcare deferred. Small businesses report thinning margins as customers trade down or delay purchases.

This disconnect between statistical easing and everyday hardship has reinforced skepticism about headline inflation numbers. Some analysts note that disinflation, even when genuine, does not mean prices are falling. It means prices are rising more slowly, from a very high base. After years of double-digit inflation, the price level is already elevated, and a slowdown does little to reverse that accumulated burden.

In practical terms, the revision underscores a simple point. Nigeria’s inflation problem in 2025 was never as benign as earlier data suggested, nor is the recent easing a statistical illusion. The direction of travel remains downward, but the recalibrated figures denote that the path to price stability has been longer and more demanding than it first appeared.