Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
" {' o" L; R9 h5 @) T/ kLeamer says he can tell because homes, just like stocks, have a price-to-earnings ratio (P/E) that he believes determines their fundamental value. The “earnings” part of the ratio consists of the annual rent the house could command. Homebuyers can compare current P/Es with historical levels, Leamer says, to get some idea of whether houses in their cities are becoming overvalued.

Not everyone buys the idea that P/Es dictate value. But investors who completely ignore P/Es do so at their peril, as many have learned in recent years. Leamer, who heads the prestigious Anderson Forecast at the University of California in Los Angeles, points out that the P/E for the Standard & Poor’s 500, a key stock benchmark, was nearly double its previous historical high when the stock market bubble burst in 2000. When home P/Es peaked in California, Boston, Dallas and other markets in the mid-1980s, devastating real estate recessions followed.
) z0 \) `# s8 ]
. q) u5 H: G8 ^0 X3 n$ T( B. k* `Leamer didn’t invent the concept of P/Es for homes. But his willingness to proclaim bubbles in several of the nation’s hottest markets has brought him lots of attention recently.
9 Z9 V4 C/ u  Z- k; Q- D
To calculate P/Es for entire cities, Leamer divided the median home price in each by the annual rent for a two-bedroom unit in each city -- and looked at P/Es each year since 1988. Here’s what he found:


5 n# m: v' \; Z1 A: d$ G- fIn Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.

; T- W+ z5 P0 a8 X, CSan Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
  n8 s3 ?0 U& z, W: TSan Diego’s current P/E is nearly 30, compared with a 1989 high of 23.4.
New York, by contrast, is actually well below previous peaks. The area’s current 22.5 P/E is above its recent nadir of 17.6 in 1993, but down from 28.6 in 1988.
You don’t have to know exact P/Es, however, to spot signs of trouble, Leamer says. Any time there’s a disconnect between prices and the underlying value of homes, as measured by their market rents, there’s the potential for a bubble.
7 d. m+ F9 F4 [) X
If home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.

6 |' q2 i% N5 PIf home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.
! k( `( C% ~6 `- R" q# p! Z! T
Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
& X" K5 v& A6 D Avg. 1988-2000 2001
6 l! t$ W1 B' W! B, P" M5 G& H9 oBoston  20.5 30.2
& v' K1 p, s: P; m1 g# S* fSan Diego  22.8 29.7
3 C6 W4 |8 H' J9 \San Francisco  23.8 27.2
Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
- Z/ m! l& c' }" LDenver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
+ n0 p5 `, C- J+ J9 dWashington, D.C.  17.1 20.4



" h1 v" T: @% _! b! n( {4 o4 tIt's difficult to compare P/Es from one city with those from another. P/Es in Atlantic City, N.J., have wavered between 17.3 and 11.6 since 1988; in San Diego, P/Es have not dropped below 20. But you can look on the P/E as a measure of risk -- that is, the higher the P/E is above its average level, the greater the risk, no matter where you live.
6 W7 k* B* V# T! r1 ^1 F

From: http://moneycentral.msn.com/cont ... ingguide/P37631.asp

CANDYMAN

Who has the P/E for Edmonton for the last 20 years, please post it here.
9 G6 Q+ B1 o$ S
it would be a good reference.
% G3 [# E' H1 l: g# ~: S  C- b
+ ^" f8 l2 ^1 f- C$ bthanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.

* E6 u* Y5 d, Z' }5 ~9 E[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]