Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
7 I3 Y) K0 J2 M2 G$ U* f: v! o. XLeamer 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.

$ q' s4 B* F1 N" F5 z3 K2 y+ hNot 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.
' u8 D1 S3 p; v5 G6 ?
% Y* d" r" r. H) D) ]+ mLeamer 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.
* k# x2 U3 w( j9 l8 O+ o
, ^' s& Y! d5 x# Q5 i  v4 g* s, ZTo 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:


In Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.

1 Q# N/ B+ w! ^6 A! qSan Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
) O9 }! L% t) }( J$ y$ c0 U# sSan Diego’s current P/E is nearly 30, compared with a 1989 high of 23.4.
" o0 y7 r  h3 i0 s5 G5 b9 y5 mNew 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
+ Q/ n5 q, q6 } Avg. 1988-2000 2001
/ O) l/ p2 x# v( eBoston  20.5 30.2
San Diego  22.8 29.7
( b3 Y1 {2 u& O/ d* @# C+ n' KSan Francisco  23.8 27.2
: c# v  b; M" Q( \2 {Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
% Q. ^' Z9 g& J+ S! xDenver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4

+ J+ }; M, _0 }/ M6 P8 t0 F% V
8 @$ u& s2 w: F+ n% C
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.


7 ?# B) {" h& fFrom: 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.
' L9 A# l" E& n% i7 J) U8 Q0 [
3 c8 N- a4 G% W% o% gthanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
% q4 S4 J7 \" R7 M0 Y
[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]