Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
4 D2 y9 R+ s6 ULeamer 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.
8 z7 x7 a7 @7 W( l+ M: ]- g
* M# E' [  |6 a8 [+ y7 ?( \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.
$ U5 }, ]5 z4 Q, J6 a- F& n
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.
! b7 l9 Y8 j" T8 J
: T) E! V6 l! D4 c( ?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:


$ W' |  s& v6 A1 xIn Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.

; ]: {' k; Y9 n. ]$ h* i+ \San Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
4 s* e' B! _: S/ hSan 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.
8 g+ i1 b4 |% z% T. S" f  N+ o- qYou 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.
" R# o( s+ }: x  _" S( T5 ]& Z
If home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.
& B+ I0 u* \, w( [0 K7 b
If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.

: G) h5 y8 [; ` Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
! q1 m% F' q1 V$ _; q Avg. 1988-2000 2001
) z! |0 r( S; R3 ~) m) I. KBoston  20.5 30.2
San Diego  22.8 29.7
9 e1 f3 x1 R* `7 z/ D: C& lSan Francisco  23.8 27.2
Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
Denver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4

. x5 Q  z/ |3 m9 z- v

It'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.

' ~+ [" \! n$ Y% O0 }, ^: R% x9 h) Q
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.
/ ^+ S- s8 W( i% @/ \# \/ Y+ E
it would be a good reference.

thanks

醉酒当歌

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

[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]