Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
1 B" g0 p# `% H+ W1 v1 b! nLeamer 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.

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.
! }" f/ s" W( A4 R7 a. z6 a
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.

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:
( G0 ~+ a: W0 O: D

In Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
1 d- V$ a, \$ A8 i7 ?! T
San Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
8 Z9 _2 `8 P  U. Y- mSan Diego’s current P/E is nearly 30, compared with a 1989 high of 23.4.
+ U! ]8 B0 k& R, e! H. JNew 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.
3 b2 l/ Z0 i+ @! E* yYou 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.
# N! C7 {& c3 Q* M5 k7 B3 g
If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.
& C6 ^/ J; m8 @9 J2 R* h
Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  20.5 30.2
San Diego  22.8 29.7
4 a! k5 y" x2 Y8 j- `San Francisco  23.8 27.2
* ?9 @& U1 Z* A2 ?9 v  k# `) QLos Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
Denver  17.7 23.7
% U; ?( Q. I1 N; BNew York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4


3 V7 J% G& D( ]6 O) {
0 ]  x7 ~+ ~1 k% Z9 k. T) TIt'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.
8 Z' A" X/ D$ {, F2 }3 X  T/ W0 F
& D: g, a: s7 {
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.
" {4 |# `% [4 J% {# |  Q& R6 P
thanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
2 T% r/ J3 q" w4 j1 H( D" T2 r
[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]