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.

' [. o3 K  m6 V6 c4 ]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.

( u: y0 o3 p, ?( RTo 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:


, f1 {7 _- _3 c7 x$ h6 GIn Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
$ H! A+ u! J( V$ E- r: g4 o
) b8 D  O' R* ^- w; H  MSan 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.
3 c$ e1 L5 R: x* u$ DNew 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.
/ q. w5 A! h  C! O9 I
+ e! Q2 F8 y, h8 b; nIf home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.

7 E  [3 W+ I2 ?" f0 nIf home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.
& y- y; |* i$ @4 W/ Y; a4 l
Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  20.5 30.2
San Diego  22.8 29.7
. M3 p0 p7 R7 M# BSan Francisco  23.8 27.2
% Q6 W3 N* Z9 Z5 c3 V- MLos Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
Denver  17.7 23.7
2 a# k, a, r4 G7 ~" `New York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4

* ]  F! L1 s5 x5 }
8 D. Y8 R. k& n+ v' J9 r' @0 w
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.
4 C& r- K) t2 A' {# F9 C

+ t- _" y# ?+ d2 a6 zFrom: 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.
* j6 |  y: \0 j7 T" T2 Z
it would be a good reference.
4 _, g  m1 g7 q4 _
thanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
5 G' v! Y$ D3 V, h# Q: M
3 g, s1 t- f3 A9 Q* c* s[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]