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' }) N* c0 a5 O0 m7 Y
6 K* x% Q, L, s5 e" p3 t" X4 ]- @5 O8 UNot 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.

& C) |8 J6 H* I8 B( tLeamer 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.
( Q% d2 |/ v/ X+ M; a, T* {
/ Z8 D6 ^$ z& h, @( X4 p7 ?0 KTo 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:

, V( l+ h! d6 U7 \& [8 X- y
: Q( i4 t, u& d1 k! g+ g: Y0 i2 dIn Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
- L9 a7 |1 q5 Q; L) X2 ~
San Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
* m6 V9 J6 Z) I9 o6 [$ |, \. rSan Diego’s current P/E is nearly 30, compared with a 1989 high of 23.4.
* s6 K5 S4 u7 V" ]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.
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.

If home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.

$ i$ l; `- R* c8 {/ T) Q- ^" XIf home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.

- i5 T5 x" j0 W4 h* O. Q Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
- [2 w% P' v: ~2 H5 e, w4 R: ~1 o* v Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  20.5 30.2
San Diego  22.8 29.7
0 }$ B( M8 m: i# M2 i$ l- NSan Francisco  23.8 27.2
1 o' `6 |" [1 f0 t6 @+ ?Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
Denver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4



0 W, h4 R' m3 }) b# S+ ?8 wIt'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.


$ |- I# \0 I! v: ?5 c' eFrom: 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.

3 m  X  {' j, t0 P3 Lit would be a good reference.

* g" u: A- d, ?+ u# @0 U; Tthanks

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 ]