Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
- L0 q1 r$ {2 C* t% ?; s# r& xLeamer 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, ~' N& {1 j
7 g4 h' j8 m# K* }( b  |* SNot 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.
7 q/ [* T( \+ D3 m' T: `
6 m- Q6 o8 \5 y- f! i% y6 }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.
" z3 j# M( T. b
0 d# V, P# m& B' _9 p, Q% 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:

& U# J- E3 b  [! e; t
) B" o0 M  y! O% M+ VIn Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
% @4 I& B! ~/ [
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.
! p5 G3 G- h* x7 Y6 INew 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.

) n1 ]. D: `3 o' m, RIf 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 M3 i' Y8 J8 z Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
. o" u( B, B6 D4 c- e' o( m# WBoston  20.5 30.2
3 A3 w7 C8 k' H, ?San Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
' s( Y6 @. ^6 K* }$ r  @Denver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
) N5 E! t) W* GChicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4



4 Y: I" m5 p0 hIt'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.


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.

it would be a good reference.

8 E, Y/ U* ^; `! x( Dthanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.

! w' j0 k$ `* i6 X7 T[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]