Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
% M* l0 b4 h) J0 z& G0 HLeamer 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.

8 c6 H- z6 `; `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.
2 \+ E* U7 y: e: t& H
# ~" d* O9 [8 i" l" J; `/ aTo 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:

; {4 T3 G7 l; G
% h3 H) T* Y/ I5 R" UIn 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.
: Q' O% S- {/ C# g4 j  |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.
9 R, a0 |2 C! A) T: z1 x# IYou 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.

If 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.
" \/ F7 I/ I. U$ V
Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
1 Y: N6 `& |1 X7 v1 c% z  s5 {Boston  20.5 30.2
0 h9 L. V+ S. [" }San Diego  22.8 29.7
9 k  U3 v5 q8 m  ?6 w! G& HSan Francisco  23.8 27.2
$ Q. `) T' }3 `- b; C7 ?; XLos Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
Denver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
0 _1 \; o+ i* p3 T" p- A% m" zChicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4


2 J' l; o4 i( Z
; n' S, [! C  T; ^1 DIt'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: K2 u! r5 g# N  p3 V
. c" N; F4 @. A, H* K& c
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.
9 u2 Z) T: Y- i6 S9 \4 o. }( m
it would be a good reference.
7 N9 \8 g- @; [" b/ Z, g
9 `! F0 H4 L# ^( Hthanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
* I( x' f; v: s! J) M
( k5 O6 G' Y; M[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]