Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
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.

$ {( N. \8 w9 @* A4 c3 E4 i+ aNot 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.
# \+ G$ Z3 ]6 e5 W2 i/ a
# q5 U# h  e) y: \$ I- 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:
: R+ L& i$ r1 U

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.
' e0 A4 E& N, w5 D8 W  eSan 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.
" ^- q" Y% r" A- dYou 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.
4 ?8 ]3 N' X7 r$ J. Y& i7 A
: [* J8 v) H# a+ I5 `If home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.
' `' f3 K9 \# i
If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.
9 f$ ^: o+ R" D
Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
) [5 x0 c1 }* [& c- U" y4 { Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  20.5 30.2
7 i5 z  A/ |; L; ~. ^0 G* HSan Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
+ X& c& h. I2 d% I+ u4 vDenver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
8 p8 \" C: [  V) xWashington, D.C.  17.1 20.4
2 d% V( m' E6 \$ i6 A
/ o5 R8 s+ H0 o! {5 o+ n2 w
0 A4 v9 N  |5 ?3 b5 ]: L7 z
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.
7 W9 g# K. {; \9 Z$ x( r, B- H
, P9 X5 F" d2 B- }
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.

7 ^( ?  x4 M7 b8 _% E* Q" H/ Z% ]it would be a good reference.
- f8 r! G9 N8 H& T1 ~% u- I. S% Z
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 ]