Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
5 {  Q4 e' N4 ^* {' n% FLeamer 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.

7 D) z7 i& j. Y2 p' ]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.
2 `* K; G& J3 z6 i( f
( a, _9 [# z7 oLeamer 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.
* C5 u/ R4 {9 c# s1 ^/ \% [3 ~$ R
! V( G% g6 g# k* P; j$ L, @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:

4 n! g- A1 i8 g# I) g4 S# @' X
8 Q& l2 J6 o3 l8 q; }, `In Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.

1 H- _$ s4 l, e( oSan Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
- H& B+ v9 v. ~San 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.
5 X3 K; M# {4 T4 EYou 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.
3 T. F- q+ L& c: }) J) ?# g- `4 {
If home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.
) z* e2 E6 \$ [$ g( _. c
% D& D$ C2 D/ z7 QIf home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.
( d7 h/ s+ F% E# D3 T, l
Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  20.5 30.2
San Diego  22.8 29.7
4 J. q8 H2 C  c+ xSan Francisco  23.8 27.2
Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
$ [* N/ {- j7 @8 }: ^" nDenver  17.7 23.7
5 `1 p1 D6 E5 w( E3 V" @4 t" q" ]New York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4

" r5 \2 V2 v8 `1 X& g) d
: G  V; R2 t  |1 T2 q' E9 d
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.


6 o; J( {' [, R. RFrom: 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.
* A) v8 v) [$ d; n6 o
: F# `3 G! D/ Y" f( sit 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.

- F9 P) }( x0 R6 A" ^/ \6 f. C. A5 i[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]