Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
" m: x& H: B" i( W3 K1 bLeamer 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.

1 O) ~  j2 ^& [/ VNot 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.

" Q) ~; A1 D5 @0 ?3 E6 |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.
) b8 o6 ?, q6 ~- Q$ A
, ]! P% \& F' c) ~- Z( `* T  `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:

7 @. l1 t/ ~7 J+ ~- p5 B
In Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.

* Q; r; g  ]& p5 B& uSan 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.
* ]8 A# c' K5 V8 JNew 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.

& g: W2 t. w3 P1 `5 t, b% j# E: zIf home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.
4 u  I4 i& ]- _' j2 S
If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.
; X1 q  {$ |' j/ `* S' u* `' L! b
2 C9 t! S5 t+ D! ~7 c Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
: [+ b9 [7 J* k  {& o4 _" H Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  20.5 30.2
San Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
! _0 v: v3 A) E$ W( RLos Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
Denver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
$ w4 V* ~! o. b0 p! l* p: a- i, WChicago  17.2 20.8
3 U) }$ G# w! w  ~0 dWashington, D.C.  17.1 20.4



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.
& Z/ J$ Z% k2 @# u  v8 c$ h
& J, S2 u. ]! U0 \% \
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.
5 i& A& f, m+ W
it would be a good reference.
! R7 X/ }( M) N" z: d; J. Q. g
0 A6 ]- M& I! P/ r8 F2 u  }0 G# Dthanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
& t$ T: `, C+ ]  u
6 B8 \$ t2 `6 I[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]