Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
: i( `) Y2 Y9 w: `2 |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.
* g+ R: @, I. O; h- Z7 i$ W
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:
( d$ }6 y9 y- F, ?
, E, S5 [7 q! X7 b; Q$ z: @
9 R. f1 x  k3 _# d) V/ i2 CIn Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
7 s! J4 ~( w2 I- x# r+ v: d
& p- s. F3 I; ^3 zSan Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
5 h0 s  F8 l* c: R) X; P2 l7 ~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.

Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
/ N6 O" g- }' Q9 \/ Z Avg. 1988-2000 2001
0 \% \8 H) A- Y" S' n: qBoston  20.5 30.2
San Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
$ W1 r; W4 i5 h0 T% l( s  `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
- K( F0 K' Y% P( y$ x  B/ cWashington, D.C.  17.1 20.4


% X& Y4 x7 X& r7 R- x
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.
. T( ^6 \7 k) B. p
# {* r+ q/ o, p2 b' @( C
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.

it would be a good reference.
. l; [3 R3 o/ `8 {
thanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
. I& F4 C7 w1 o  T: F
* t# q  s1 i9 S7 r9 g3 v* M[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]