Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
, q3 D( `' O- ~3 J. d: S! F, u' v% F- uLeamer 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.
! ~) t& F/ F2 {2 M" U  n% q3 k
+ |  n; R/ U' _$ W$ 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.
7 l2 C+ K3 c6 P, j
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.

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 k. Q- p% q" ]6 m& j0 ^# I, M
In Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
/ \1 l7 z' o: A  ~+ W) K
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.
% `0 t0 N; M6 H. KNew 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.
8 m4 |) P( i$ z; ?9 d6 m) F! [
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.
/ }1 N: K) o  W5 P" z
# S# Y! v: v7 c Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  20.5 30.2
! n$ a' @. I4 v( j+ SSan Diego  22.8 29.7
. c0 b/ l( F2 a$ _) ?* pSan Francisco  23.8 27.2
Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
, F+ B/ Q9 E- `# G' L' ?Seattle  20.4 25
Denver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
. u# t3 m5 D# F4 S/ U. M& s0 fChicago  17.2 20.8
0 x; B- o6 q( `% \3 k% M' O* TWashington, D.C.  17.1 20.4


( P9 D5 T5 }+ l( o+ E0 I
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 \' i9 g5 L; U$ F

* o. Y  Q5 R) I8 ~" |  NFrom: 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.

it 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.

[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]