 鲜花( 0)  鸡蛋( 0)
|
How to figure a home's fundamental value' r5 W* I9 P" [% 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.$ R, R% O+ O) U/ M$ q! ?! _& U7 M
A O, [; B+ WNot 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. g& I" t3 t5 y3 d" ?6 R0 l
# d9 c: r% \' @9 ?" v2 v% [
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.- e$ ~+ G- q" ]1 I; [
/ ]( b: p- p u0 Y- `3 uTo 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: R& H+ U% x5 A5 j1 |; R
/ J; T8 X7 ~9 b) u/ }
2 \5 [ {! W; Q" G+ z4 _( }In Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.5 g) S' p) B- C6 F+ |: \, f
' o% {+ r% T. G0 Y7 t3 a1 NSan Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
! ~7 x/ X( T r7 @7 Q' k+ l' GSan Diego’s current P/E is nearly 30, compared with a 1989 high of 23.4.) B# P/ M [; o% D+ n
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 1988.5 }! A7 p7 J+ G+ d6 ]
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.
! Q$ a; R- Z1 s( Y" }: i9 D- x6 v" \" F2 U$ J
If home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.9 U: `( M# P4 M
4 m( c6 B$ b# e9 ?0 ^ U/ b
If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.0 Q6 k" C9 u: S6 r; I/ b/ Y
" w$ h% X. z) @1 a: m: a8 B Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas 9 X+ ~# z& E" U3 r, |* W/ T( o, h
Avg. 1988-2000 2001 " k7 d7 ?. W! M, B, T2 B
Boston 20.5 30.2
( {$ P3 P' E5 ?6 u0 rSan Diego 22.8 29.7 7 x+ l7 G) k& k5 q; L
San Francisco 23.8 27.2 # }2 z6 W5 {* `+ E
Los Angeles 21.3 25.6
2 u# L& t5 b* Y# f+ F" {2 QSeattle 20.4 25
. }7 o" x5 g; r% m/ o {4 H1 TDenver 17.7 23.7 3 t5 r$ k, D0 N4 X" n
New York 21.2 22.5 / ~7 s, ~, h, b& v8 h7 d0 v/ n
Chicago 17.2 20.8
# a" q5 `8 B7 A& [7 P1 g+ O6 `Washington, D.C. 17.1 20.4
; y V* B4 g) x( {# R
H# M% t1 s$ Q; _9 E! L. u& h* e' I( N
9 s5 F# ]* o; S5 O4 i) u8 Y% f
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.
0 [* n' ~, ]5 i8 S1 x9 G; j3 N, W* K. o
# i! I: ?4 @7 d. i6 X3 p a6 YFrom: http://moneycentral.msn.com/cont ... ingguide/P37631.asp |
|