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.

! T) O5 b% y9 S2 u6 GNot 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.
; N4 P' v6 I# G' o/ i& p
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.

2 v- R% n8 \$ r. |6 f0 oTo 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:
: E2 z# A$ b% A! l3 U

2 d% N. b5 V, \8 y' F; QIn Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.

" E+ ]/ ~; }) r( f# V' RSan 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.
6 I# a% ~5 F7 mYou 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.
2 c; n8 s  U8 n7 C# D/ r
If home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.
! H  i+ V" s  j2 p! _
If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.

0 u% `# |' F! R3 H, a& E8 f Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  20.5 30.2
7 y+ O& z1 Y- ?5 e! F. ~San Diego  22.8 29.7
* r/ V9 P) _5 Q5 s: nSan Francisco  23.8 27.2
5 ^, S" [3 T9 f' y9 k+ TLos Angeles  21.3 25.6
6 E1 m6 Q. ^/ W# r% ^) lSeattle  20.4 25
Denver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
5 O% S5 |  Z; ~# s4 tChicago  17.2 20.8
* U! G9 ~" V  `Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4
6 }9 L1 \( \7 c* _  d% h- {' Y

, ?  B' Z' n, k* x
* g% R7 s$ R0 L9 S& y' M1 z9 ~" N; hIt'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.


; A) C6 b3 j3 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.

7 V7 N9 B9 V& p3 m. Eit would be a good reference.
7 N/ P  |& b- m2 w& @/ T4 O4 r
4 }# N# X4 A1 L+ ^9 |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 ]