Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
+ c; K, r- n6 R" O" U/ tLeamer 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.
% n4 D. g4 `  N" ~7 W/ e' `& i7 G. g
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.

9 p9 \% [( G/ {$ \: M( YTo 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:
1 j* @8 o; {6 g7 e! p& `( |" X

% N! g4 U; V$ c# [& gIn 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.
" Y2 z7 V3 r+ p  Y. z$ DSan 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.
  F; g* h8 c4 \8 }4 G! Z8 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.

If 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
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  20.5 30.2
5 b9 X3 k" R! o# [. eSan Diego  22.8 29.7
2 m+ i) X3 e9 y" lSan Francisco  23.8 27.2
0 o9 F8 S! E0 Z' z! t7 ~# P* ULos Angeles  21.3 25.6
/ W' o3 ~  D4 e$ `+ J8 USeattle  20.4 25
) e" b4 Q% s, ]( _* n! Q+ K* ^Denver  17.7 23.7
% `4 v  e, p5 o9 d( Y1 jNew York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4
) L( a" f; H; F% g+ x, S4 G9 O

2 n5 V/ h/ i+ m# |# D* \, T/ x6 Z
: k! S$ g. E" I4 eIt'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.

( R& M' \7 @& _: u7 h- h
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.
: R: f0 V! w0 V  r
8 J  Q5 |3 m  r" b. kit would be a good reference.
$ k8 B. @) D5 D) A; ~
thanks

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 ]