Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
1 J" h2 j0 O1 N$ zLeamer 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.

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.
" S9 J$ |5 x% W- E* d0 s& |3 U, z! n
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.
6 s; s4 ?2 W2 d- N) J+ h  W
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:

' [- e2 b& R% @# f
: ~& e- d4 M0 J- @! j" NIn Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
9 j4 @( I( V! ?, b# }% n
! ]# d! T: `' }San Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
! g( c: C8 Z+ [& T( QSan Diego’s current P/E is nearly 30, compared with a 1989 high of 23.4.
1 l, Y+ V+ a; E3 [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.
! g, S  d/ n+ g( s4 z1 k/ 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.

If home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.
5 n# O+ b% X6 z" R& T
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
/ ?2 c  R' h, J' D Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  20.5 30.2
San Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
+ I4 w, P) N4 W8 a  E6 G- zLos Angeles  21.3 25.6
; B- T8 a$ o+ h* Z. n) ^) _" K  NSeattle  20.4 25
, {7 B2 |8 ^. R- sDenver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
1 G- e/ {/ d5 [( yChicago  17.2 20.8
8 b' V6 }. N/ P9 c0 M# ]# O2 KWashington, D.C.  17.1 20.4

; J! ?  S& v" e9 {0 \% l/ X, |. u
) C9 J7 C; s8 F# e; G
: s) }$ |2 C" u- y' j/ [# oIt'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.
  E) b7 {& \5 _" `6 e+ i

! |; P3 u9 J% F- F1 hFrom: 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.
$ k, h! U9 x& }1 l7 b
! k# n# P& K' q6 @it would be a good reference.
( D8 @. \, h$ q7 g* F" L) N
/ @) P+ n4 P- ^0 Cthanks

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 ]