Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
$ Q( s8 f3 k) E  @  b' Y9 |' W5 l) S6 JLeamer 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.
# N* _9 j+ z. z& H" W
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.
' y# ]6 @; H/ P
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.
! G% {- K% o2 j
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:


In Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
9 N( T* D! k$ g) s8 W- h
! U' J$ x1 O5 C$ g  XSan 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.
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.
% A# x+ G( L& @" G7 T8 _' _# XYou 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.
7 l6 e5 \$ @+ B- \7 c
4 ?+ s3 R( c6 ~6 Y0 [8 KIf home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.
# i+ ?8 i4 a. X4 `# v* `, Z
If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.
' |+ R: D, k, J/ s" i
5 H9 O! A: _9 B: @ Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
* a+ o, W  O0 {0 j4 O Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  20.5 30.2
San Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
% ?) S5 n( g/ h& [. v# jDenver  17.7 23.7
1 q7 h% d6 l  JNew York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4

4 Y. C# X4 O5 ?* g* O' }2 V3 l
- d2 p- p0 p6 v, B0 {2 w
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.
  y, g! e5 G$ g5 w

% T6 U0 i2 D7 pFrom: 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 S/ c8 L+ C* G, Oit would be a good reference.
; \9 H' P4 ^, z7 j- U
/ k! b, m* q: ~9 e+ F8 `, Hthanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
% |  U  k; f  w% W) l
[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]