Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
3 t, G& H5 e# r2 N5 X) u* jLeamer 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 ~! v5 b  p* @1 n  w/ \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.

  I5 ~2 {/ U) j1 ]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.
) ^8 i/ U8 Q5 Y2 B- ^7 y
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:


, l5 ]1 i% K- U$ b& [In Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
* f  u$ X0 v  z3 y( e- e
  D- g6 b" ^; ]( CSan Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
, m& o' p( \. v' ~/ YSan 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.

If home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.

2 u1 Z: x# `, B) y/ V+ s+ k& q, TIf home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.

Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
* a6 i1 O7 U- O Avg. 1988-2000 2001
% l0 U! v- E, x3 v7 B6 TBoston  20.5 30.2
6 }, ^/ Q) h* o8 e# BSan Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
1 s. Q9 L4 `$ Z7 @) T0 g1 G9 XLos Angeles  21.3 25.6
6 c. j+ f. N) ]Seattle  20.4 25
Denver  17.7 23.7
0 {5 Z5 t, ]+ X& y* d  yNew York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4

7 j8 G* B3 i7 P4 K
( [$ K( s. p0 Y! V
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.
/ T( B/ a8 ~* ^+ J

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.
; K5 Z: ^1 F4 Y5 @1 t* L
* @: z7 I- e' y& Q, B' s5 Yit would be a good reference.
$ H" c+ L; N6 h0 A; k7 w+ S
thanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
  B- Z1 b  w1 u- r6 y) J4 x1 e
[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]