Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
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.

- ~* x( C4 `- u3 A/ \7 X  u' zNot 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.
; ^! ^) U( d6 \$ E1 d
: B; j8 D; C" R/ }- O* qLeamer 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.

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:

2 e2 ^& T+ V* v5 {0 {
In 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.
San Diego’s current P/E is nearly 30, compared with a 1989 high of 23.4.
  a) c5 i7 }+ b* O. E# V- kNew 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.
  ~# f) a% {- D0 OYou 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.
6 a& i# s4 Q6 h0 J' ?/ ]9 h
4 p0 q  [( o+ B& w$ BIf home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.

3 K/ U7 A$ G8 t6 T2 q- Z0 [If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.

, y& c6 Z) @& S" A. n: ~  ^7 L7 B Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
7 _& _6 u. S: C* k% wBoston  20.5 30.2
0 Q8 m8 T+ y* E, C1 s' \! bSan Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
  M# k5 k7 C4 g8 J/ {$ f' Y9 ]6 ]/ iDenver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
- Y  @- X) z, S( JChicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4
1 g# a' @' o4 j
# q+ j* c/ ]: X

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.
; [$ S( [7 P9 W7 v5 V

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.
1 b) Q  V6 _, H; {- c' h" Q0 y
2 }4 ^/ b, }" \' xit would be a good reference.
0 h5 X' D( Q( Y0 A: F6 D
0 C( I: w/ z* pthanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
" ?- K# r$ ]4 I9 P1 K  a
& R, s9 T- _: O: `% i[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]