Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
4 g0 ]3 E! y$ Y% `+ [8 J  `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.

0 w* d% m# _" g. a9 `$ i6 GNot 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.

, i7 X7 N2 B% b6 D1 Q; j0 LLeamer 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.
0 f; E2 x! ^: ^) Y0 F
, B  u" e: E+ \' }+ e0 gTo 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:
% M+ H" N- V: s: |

In Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.

6 ?4 A! y( [9 v  }  ~% W0 ?, L3 cSan 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.
: Y  V- a2 S/ o+ x3 f* JNew 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.

If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.
/ i8 q0 Z# c0 n7 I' N4 U5 Y+ [
* K3 i1 |% {: L+ n9 S9 l Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
: Q6 z6 m0 I  O3 j Avg. 1988-2000 2001
7 |) |; b+ h4 Q  ^5 o4 nBoston  20.5 30.2
San Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
; q& P/ S6 [+ x+ R, x# L' u$ vLos Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
Denver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
. X6 q2 Y; D- w$ bChicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4
+ @) K8 j- V& t. }0 e


3 `- Q1 Z6 K4 M/ D( kIt'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.

# y8 B( q( B5 S) B& F5 J; Z& q
: \* E( @; A$ Y; RFrom: 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.
) T2 W  S8 i) V$ Z
it would be a good reference.
$ l. Q+ ?, B( d. ]! h( s/ y
3 R  `6 e. r1 p; wthanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
% F, d! K5 l5 j! e# H
- r" S) f9 }8 N[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]