Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
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.
/ Z& A7 E: j9 B& f" |, h5 V2 g8 }
1 C. J4 \) H4 J% tNot 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.

8 e* F1 X: p+ h  }# aLeamer 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:
8 Z+ ]* m- j( k. x( q1 \

/ F4 U9 |& p7 d' pIn Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
; i3 f2 s- l' K3 y' [) L
! n7 p! R& |' j3 _6 M4 QSan Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
San 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.
4 Z9 [8 R! S0 R9 _1 l, u
- e% Z! P5 R* L8 @# t7 d2 l Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
/ g9 k+ q! k* ?" t3 d0 ?9 r: w Avg. 1988-2000 2001
- P7 J8 }6 _# E- z, _  |0 KBoston  20.5 30.2
San Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
% V1 _4 s! e: g( @$ B6 lDenver  17.7 23.7
- s& c6 [) ~, f, tNew York  21.2 22.5
% e/ e" K+ t& `' B/ d- ]6 k0 H8 T" |Chicago  17.2 20.8
* w4 r. \4 n) B. D( H; n% ^; ^Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4

, d; B; w  K( h

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.


' l$ c  w* x" _$ D; P" a) s/ ]2 WFrom: 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.
/ {4 B. i9 W5 O
it would be a good reference.
# @) O2 E9 k% M. L: P" s  X
' j6 a9 G  M5 N8 D7 Gthanks

醉酒当歌

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

7 r5 H. Z3 ?) Z& ]/ l[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]