 鲜花( 0)  鸡蛋( 0)
|
How to figure a home's fundamental value1 ^9 M: j7 P$ g D; M! M+ j# Q
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.
8 M( a8 H, k2 {+ A+ `! I/ n5 x
" U! M' `: T) r7 N% H! p+ x# @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.
% b9 A4 ~$ H* |' b6 i8 k- N9 j1 W* v$ b7 d
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.
V' c$ c# ^4 [3 ?! d1 B2 Q# _8 i# h" z. o) @9 d+ A( J6 e
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:
# {. W: C) W/ }% [4 @- ]; H. z, ~0 y) g
% f* ~' e! B5 Q0 b* w7 }3 c* w4 l
In Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
% h& u+ u$ [! @/ E5 A* R
7 K6 H+ X- P/ g& h0 L4 G I% ZSan Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
$ y, Y% g. J1 ~$ @San Diego’s current P/E is nearly 30, compared with a 1989 high of 23.4.
3 q5 ?2 C8 d* Z! v5 p0 GNew 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.
# _. q. P- Z# J( dYou 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. 0 B4 |0 {) T2 L7 s# J) l% ?4 Q
, W7 ?8 J0 [- I2 SIf home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.
! [4 H6 [) a- H) I8 A9 T" _" h5 D' @% K. I+ U4 @3 A) o; U6 z6 W
If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.
" R6 B: ~" ]3 I+ U$ V2 J! I( o, ?: y* R5 i/ q# c
Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas 5 a, C, z) n! r2 f$ W! d$ @
Avg. 1988-2000 2001 : }# m% B2 ^: i8 d1 C5 s
Boston 20.5 30.2
7 s/ H* K- Z, }9 G; USan Diego 22.8 29.7 & L' A0 C. M7 J. E$ z
San Francisco 23.8 27.2
7 J4 a7 i& i% n& O, R+ N( t3 F9 H" O9 QLos Angeles 21.3 25.6
' Y; ?0 N) m( a5 t8 f. pSeattle 20.4 25
J- n7 g! r9 w( I% L7 e9 j7 eDenver 17.7 23.7
, g7 V* o, o: |, {7 W2 Z) |New York 21.2 22.5 ' n4 n* T! |7 j% y* u% F
Chicago 17.2 20.8
0 O' t, \- R0 w7 S+ n7 hWashington, D.C. 17.1 20.4
H4 d( `( t$ h \ v' b" i # T: C. s/ }; b; B0 J( _
& r: u( z, i9 P/ O2 u- B S
$ G5 C. k: ~! C) y! Q# E0 ]/ aIt'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.6 O% i% z a6 p* I3 K
+ F. x9 C! q3 t/ g% n
/ ]. E* z+ g! x. LFrom: http://moneycentral.msn.com/cont ... ingguide/P37631.asp |
|