Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
1 P- ^4 ]0 [& u/ ?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.
3 s( F& e* \( P8 O2 F8 S: A
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.
: Q' u2 K* A4 Y: a+ Y+ w
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.
/ j: X) a/ D1 a, M! g" T
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:
* b* c- k* U9 J5 \5 ?( g
( X) [4 M% F7 ?# ^8 ?- J
In 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.
+ {" z& t* O7 ^) z6 @4 ZSan 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.
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.

' b& k  W2 ^, f) v9 ~: L; bIf home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.
1 e/ O$ `5 f+ [! ~
If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.

6 c) q3 i0 k! h6 O Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
* O& h* ^, p* U8 p- Y2 C Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  20.5 30.2
" E3 y9 l: Q6 W5 t$ P, e  K) r6 y$ ]San Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
$ F9 A6 r; u  Y- R4 W- SLos Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
* o2 Z, |# y  cDenver  17.7 23.7
7 Q4 F0 M. ]! bNew York  21.2 22.5
: \% |9 X$ E" f/ D5 }% eChicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4



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.
5 E" G% Z4 C( Q* S2 i  W* y

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.
" B+ r! ?2 m. K
it would be a good reference.
6 l' r: v2 G/ K+ E  B, Q5 ^
% v  T7 D; m0 y' dthanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
3 ^, b) U& B- i; |1 H0 g
[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]