Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
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.
+ {1 V1 x8 ]5 Z1 j! R
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.

* U8 n4 p$ b+ j* P0 G0 }7 x9 r: i" ~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.
9 N; f- n. S. _; V1 n
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:
) {8 M2 \8 ^$ z% s

) L4 j( D6 f5 j7 a; {( YIn Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.

  A5 u1 A- O8 M/ O& D$ bSan Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
3 n; d% |( L! V2 R+ K) WSan Diego’s current P/E is nearly 30, compared with a 1989 high of 23.4.
( [' D/ ]. P% fNew 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.

If home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.
. I1 b. a" F8 p4 q
If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.
, F  K# Z6 }; r
Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
( K4 @; @0 q& C  Q+ c0 L9 k+ S Avg. 1988-2000 2001
- C5 `- y! R& y4 z$ O. w( `Boston  20.5 30.2
San Diego  22.8 29.7
2 V& _4 D2 V2 f! l7 t/ u) vSan Francisco  23.8 27.2
  s. B8 q, U$ lLos Angeles  21.3 25.6
  f! }  N, ]2 T  iSeattle  20.4 25
Denver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
. ~6 O5 K3 G5 L  jWashington, D.C.  17.1 20.4



5 G  O" w2 H% p& H# r' bIt'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.
, j' c9 u% z- v7 c
it would be a good reference.
. \' e; _- b4 w5 X
thanks

醉酒当歌

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

5 z; `, O8 M' A( M. l7 Q" ?0 ^1 c[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]