Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
0 v9 p7 ^' f1 H! f. [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.

; H8 f* Z- D$ S& L' PNot 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.

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.

! e3 I  I- ?3 k: H2 i$ nTo 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:
2 ?5 D# K- L" N0 [" X+ M

+ C( @, X0 W8 ~$ P+ ]3 N/ T& p* R6 |2 xIn Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.

San Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
6 w* @9 N* `8 t, i  S0 ?0 TSan Diego’s current P/E is nearly 30, compared with a 1989 high of 23.4.
: V, x4 D* f# S" B6 oNew 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.
! b& E1 y/ O+ VYou 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.

0 [1 J' T3 \7 l$ G/ _& q' P Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  20.5 30.2
San Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
  A" w3 H  T- w8 ZLos Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
7 @* y' h( \. e. JDenver  17.7 23.7
) e& i/ x! |: H$ S- JNew York  21.2 22.5
, q$ v# U# l4 |# O3 XChicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4
& c# }# j2 A1 g) R- e: A

& a( d2 d! N7 g
& F# O8 p, B8 \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 P  q; X% d/ p5 q9 B" E- x/ I
: P  P- F( d, |! X& T$ I: [' h6 K* x
4 `: X2 J  b$ U0 GFrom: 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.
; \  j& C2 R: d& b- S3 x- n
it would be a good reference.
3 \9 F. E, s6 Z( w2 m4 K( T& H
9 ~: z: G3 V4 [( l' N7 E/ Ethanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
! b5 Y1 ~$ x# T% q  e0 Q/ C
: ^5 V/ F; t9 z% _[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]