Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
; ^- w& i3 h+ F7 U1 {' @Leamer 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.
: E& ]5 z9 ~" G
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.

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.

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:
6 @4 G0 S' N4 ^5 ]$ Z0 g
* i$ J' m9 a9 g+ K
3 |  R5 i! K; [9 r& YIn Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
7 ?  p# f0 g% C+ y7 e5 G% d3 e0 G! C
San Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
" k/ R' K9 [: S( h! a" iSan 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.

If home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.

If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.

Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
6 g+ z* r7 T" Y6 [- k  [2 N. T Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  20.5 30.2
, `" r& l# a5 N+ f( x' YSan Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
7 N" `+ ~+ @  \" o0 A" A6 {; QLos Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
Denver  17.7 23.7
- A" K2 [+ y9 ]$ BNew York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
6 l$ l. H5 U- H! y: QWashington, D.C.  17.1 20.4

$ m" X! \" U* Q
: a  \1 `1 r; e- c
, `( W( d& t$ _  y" h" `: A4 @* uIt'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.

' J+ I  K8 S) C
! t/ N. |) w% l1 G. z; AFrom: 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.

it would be a good reference.

1 _5 G1 c- A4 J/ U1 h* `7 f3 S& fthanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
' h4 D( S- I7 U& _9 h' a
; c- `( e6 W5 H2 L% B: h0 }[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]