Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
/ a% H, N. ?+ ]0 PLeamer 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.
) f8 N" b8 S$ s6 B8 u- }! x* Y8 G7 K
8 Z/ N9 \3 u5 [6 ]+ }4 ~% H) 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.

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.
; Q. K; k: F- 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:
; a/ ^) W$ q  U
3 z! A( y: |# M( h
In Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.

0 a/ [7 H3 P9 E: FSan 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.
& p! B; x" M8 |8 Y9 V1 a* nNew 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.

0 P+ u" t. P9 q9 ^4 I3 q5 PIf home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.
9 j3 h9 v( X' ?, a4 S( B- C: @7 E* Y
$ T/ z1 {/ f6 vIf 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
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  20.5 30.2
3 F, W; w' V8 G$ W# ]/ Y: ESan Diego  22.8 29.7
' M( {0 G( f" S- R6 u) mSan Francisco  23.8 27.2
Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
+ @( Q1 E: w, O1 H" Y$ R2 x, E; P" nSeattle  20.4 25
3 [4 s( R) h3 x' ^Denver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4



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.

" C* d" Q( N% H3 h: n% O, g
( U* c9 O; e6 a# oFrom: 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.
/ q1 ^6 t) t, R. n$ {/ n
/ D. g5 {- g! P5 Z& P2 G, yit would be a good reference.

thanks

醉酒当歌

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

2 C; n6 N, Q+ e[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]