Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
* o& Z" x# `! e, F. K7 M6 _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.
7 v1 P& G0 w% z8 Z
) F( w( y8 j1 V4 hNot 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.

: q7 g, U) f# B/ O2 v. HLeamer 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.
) s" _' E* U0 I* {
' |% D8 \9 _" c! }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:
  j/ W: X' [0 V6 i3 L
0 a6 E0 t6 a$ X! k
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.
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.
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.

# \# p, w* J0 E: l$ t' NIf home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.
1 o* P& ^( Z) ^1 ?0 V
If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.
9 R8 N5 L) V! `# H. `
Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
$ V3 C' u$ x! U8 u5 A: T% sBoston  20.5 30.2
2 J: F4 G/ Z) N5 ^3 DSan Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
2 N" \9 C9 J, q. v: RLos Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
) y4 e& q3 z+ K7 G, m$ nDenver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
1 D+ z' B) K# B$ EWashington, D.C.  17.1 20.4

! y5 J% h# \& o2 o
& u3 u% x: ~' B6 k+ T# g( [8 Z
; P) E- L" x" PIt'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.


  W  m, c: q, IFrom: 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.

- d0 r& g6 D! ^$ C' I, ait would be a good reference.

+ Y$ E: f! @( ?# Cthanks

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 ]