shortfall of

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "shortfall of" is correct and usable in written English.
It is typically used to describe a deficit or lack of something, often in financial or resource contexts. Example: "The company reported a shortfall of funds needed to complete the project on time."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Formal & Business

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

A shortfall of $35m was mentioned.

The Economist

These tests revealed a capital shortfall of just $75 billion.

The Economist

Today, we face a profound shortfall of demand.

The New York Times

That adds up to a shortfall of $1 trillion.

The Economist

There's no shortfall of shadows in the books below.

The New York Times - Books

Ms. Peters predicted a shortfall of $3.1 billion.

The New York Times

This means that there is a shortfall of $3.1tn.

The Guardian

The state faces a budget shortfall of about $5 billion.

The New York Times

"They were heading for a shortfall of £570m next year.

The Guardian

In January they predicted a shortfall of $12.5 billion.

The New York Times

The IFS says there is a shortfall of £44bn.

The Guardian

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When writing about abstract concepts, consider using alternatives like "lack of" or "deficiency of" for broader applicability.

Common error

Avoid using "shortfall of" to describe abstract or non-quantifiable lacks. For instance, instead of saying "a shortfall of creativity", consider phrases like "lack of creativity" or "deficiency in creativity" for a more natural and accurate expression.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "shortfall of" functions as a prepositional phrase, typically modifying a noun to indicate a deficit or deficiency. Ludwig AI confirms that it is correct and usable. The phrase connects the noun it modifies to the specific item that is lacking, as seen in examples like "shortfall of funds" or "shortfall of teachers".

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

44%

Science

33%

Formal & Business

9%

Less common in

Encyclopedias

0%

Wiki

0%

Social Media

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, "shortfall of" is a correct and frequently used prepositional phrase to denote a deficit or lack, particularly in quantifiable areas such as finances or resources. As Ludwig AI highlights, it’s grammatically sound and applicable across various contexts. While alternatives like "lack of" and "deficit of" exist, "shortfall of" maintains a specific nuance suitable for professional and formal communication. When employing this phrase, ensure the context clearly defines what is lacking to maximize clarity and impact. As demonstrated by numerous examples, authoritative sources commonly use "shortfall of", solidifying its place in standard English usage.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

deficit of

Implies a deficiency, particularly in financial contexts, and is highly similar in meaning.

lack of

A more general term for absence or deficiency, applicable in a broader range of situations.

scarcity of

Suggests a limited availability or insufficient quantity of something.

deficiency of

Indicates an inadequacy or lack, often in essential qualities or elements.

paucity of

Implies a smallness of quantity or insufficient amount.

inadequacy of

Highlights the insufficient or unsuitable nature of something for a particular purpose.

absence of

Focuses on the non-existence or complete lack of something.

insufficiency of

Emphasizes the inadequate amount or degree of something needed.

dearth of

Suggests a severe lack or scarcity, often in a specific area or context.

in want of

Implies a need or requirement due to a lack of something.

FAQs

How can I use "shortfall of" in a sentence?

You can use "shortfall of" to describe a deficit or lack of something tangible, such as "The company reported a "shortfall of funds"" or "There is a "shortfall of teachers" in the region".

What are some alternatives to "shortfall of"?

Some alternatives to "shortfall of" include "deficit of", "lack of", and "scarcity of". The best choice depends on the specific context.

Is it correct to say "shortfall in" instead of "shortfall of"?

While "shortfall of" is more common, "shortfall in" can be used when referring to a specific area or category. For example, "a shortfall in revenue" is acceptable, but "shortfall of funds" might be preferred in general.

What's the difference between "shortfall of" and "lack of"?

"Shortfall of" often implies a specific, measurable deficiency, while "lack of" is a more general term for the absence of something. For example, you might say "a "lack of communication"" to describe a general problem, but "a "shortfall of $5 million"" to describe a financial deficit.