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.

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.
) n2 ]# }% V( Q' \' _9 _$ p
, _+ d/ N: K- O( {+ H- C, q: PLeamer 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.
& p% t$ o/ U( K4 V, f
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:

4 @8 h; ]- i) b7 \( a9 j
! p: [4 L2 o3 I+ v9 HIn 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.
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.
5 V! f/ B; v( M1 U( ~8 GYou 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.
' v# `5 e' J  U+ P$ U9 Y
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.

6 L# O7 ^& n3 U Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
% z3 h  F6 [1 C& F Avg. 1988-2000 2001
0 n2 m/ c1 O/ B1 t8 u+ i% CBoston  20.5 30.2
San Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
4 ^. O" H9 H- r4 j! LLos Angeles  21.3 25.6
. ?, J0 Z1 Y; O6 SSeattle  20.4 25
% j% V& d* W9 X) _- S  i: d& aDenver  17.7 23.7
  R! a! j; g1 `" K7 `! G. H+ QNew York  21.2 22.5
- [! d2 i5 n  D% w0 mChicago  17.2 20.8
6 |: y' y# r" |- HWashington, D.C.  17.1 20.4
5 r, Q3 j8 T5 t2 ^3 q

0 g; i& _! ?7 U- g0 o
5 k4 ~( o2 K5 f3 T/ x2 x( l" x8 }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.


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.

8 T9 n0 H  z: l- M; K) `it would be a good reference.

# ~% E" i4 Y8 U8 W; ?thanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
) d2 Y% o9 @! c; w  t, m
7 x1 F( ?) z. [5 A[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]