Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
4 I) \& C4 O" hLeamer 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 ]# h, M0 _( V& I; H. E
: @* W# f: }" e+ ?, PNot 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.

, s! o" o/ X* KLeamer 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.

! W# g+ b6 q/ {  q; FTo 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:


In Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
  a* D0 [/ g' B0 H/ q9 q5 B, u% S
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.
7 x& w! p9 M1 R2 FNew 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.

; y) q+ t( o& \9 g8 b# OIf 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.
: ~$ C* V) ^  [1 A6 D; w! F$ P
Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  20.5 30.2
+ Y1 s! {( k. l0 z5 BSan Diego  22.8 29.7
2 n6 s- ^4 Q) |$ u3 L1 B% K. uSan Francisco  23.8 27.2
Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
; r) S4 ?$ p2 s4 _& gSeattle  20.4 25
; m) R* r9 [7 A' f0 N3 @5 A# ADenver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
) T' a+ d) ?: R7 H/ B8 jChicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4
5 w# W. ?4 u6 `: x! y( d! Z& [7 F

5 ~$ x; P  u& u2 m) u% x
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.

# e5 W7 |6 Q! q' e: D1 b3 W1 ]
# V3 H. I; @6 F) y  {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.

it would be a good reference.
8 V9 ^; D, ?  Q/ Z' m* a% D
thanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
  n# I; B6 z& K# \
# l0 K( I) L! K[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]