Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
7 z1 l8 g5 Q! A; n1 E; ]! }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.

  f6 @& M+ _+ E1 U0 y0 r- ^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.

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 v  T* b- |" P
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:
- v2 K8 ~! B9 A0 R. c7 D

In Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
. W5 h& W& F; a$ p1 h4 A" x$ @
San Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
# p, G( H. G# gSan 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.
6 Y% V0 T- T, P0 z6 rYou 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.

( p, R0 j& [! p! F& M6 |If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.

# k' }. Y* X* @3 ^9 n4 S Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
5 g, |; m! c7 LBoston  20.5 30.2
8 s, l; w2 l/ b, k$ dSan Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
9 c  J; d3 K6 e( H- |/ A, g$ iDenver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
/ ~0 D/ d; D- c& L+ a& F. ]Chicago  17.2 20.8
  O) {8 a- E% Q8 i, TWashington, D.C.  17.1 20.4


, z# J) \1 e$ n# c1 P
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.

3 K! `/ u) b  U$ v$ v
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.

: C8 `! [1 x9 Q7 @  j$ Iit 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.

" d* J; {+ `; p$ [" a[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]