Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
  l. ~1 ^( g% Y* S: m  dLeamer 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.

Not 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.
9 s* v3 v  ^$ N. j; k
& P% M) k2 i4 ^% Z' wLeamer 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.
4 h3 B4 d  c$ f3 i5 Q
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:

5 d5 Q& C% G" q2 ?
# ]5 ?) {6 m) b: N2 Q6 R/ y9 ~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.
3 k4 ]9 O% ?# ^' W* n7 I5 {1 }6 XSan Diego’s current P/E is nearly 30, compared with a 1989 high of 23.4.
( V( P# y  f; 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.
$ M& w- ^' l5 `7 z( q+ R# `
If home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.

4 ^9 \4 ?: K+ Q, J+ SIf 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
  s; G9 g4 ]6 k$ \4 P  }Boston  20.5 30.2
8 l) Q+ T' ~% Y2 H: M/ _San Diego  22.8 29.7
( Z- d5 i& s* ^3 Q( q- qSan Francisco  23.8 27.2
Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
; {  V3 B/ A1 q6 J  [+ QDenver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
* v0 P! \8 F0 O3 V8 EChicago  17.2 20.8
: N% R6 X9 b, q$ B0 K) RWashington, D.C.  17.1 20.4
! U. J, c6 ?5 \* ]8 C7 G# }
" S8 x0 T9 A5 W5 `

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.
6 e4 P1 G7 q, }
/ u7 |+ y6 H' `! Q
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.
6 M4 ~: A5 j1 h/ w4 _. ~
1 E7 J% m, {' ait 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.
% o) a' G/ z1 x$ u$ Z9 {9 G' g9 I
) b) s/ X8 A$ X: a4 F. x[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]