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.

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.
/ d: N  P6 ?+ ^' o
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.
, h$ Z, w8 G* S4 x) R8 i6 o
& t  }* L+ B: nTo 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:
  }9 y# A1 B5 ?: Z

9 S" W, H* i8 s1 m/ \( E# zIn Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
; P$ ^1 O3 H  `* Q3 _  Y- z) U9 z% q
San Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
, V. I" s1 u2 l% H% E. }) k7 x' {* ySan Diego’s current P/E is nearly 30, compared with a 1989 high of 23.4.
! Z- \" r0 Y* R: @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.
% E6 D1 n+ I1 D
If home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.

If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.

Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  20.5 30.2
San Diego  22.8 29.7
) {# q$ d% X$ Z+ s, N2 pSan Francisco  23.8 27.2
Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
, e0 q; m& i  uDenver  17.7 23.7
1 j7 G2 H0 u9 D9 o+ yNew York  21.2 22.5
* p+ Z, T+ B. V1 t' `5 QChicago  17.2 20.8
/ A9 V, G; E3 e8 I8 y2 PWashington, D.C.  17.1 20.4
* F0 f4 h; [  G9 R7 Y5 `


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.
/ b, b( V# b9 _1 B& f/ y
+ O& s% w9 D# i  Q* r% d
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.
2 I: u1 _, F( Q, H
% z! B/ W5 a3 x1 A. c: u- Uit would be a good reference.

& M/ j6 w5 p8 L( ~; A9 @thanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.

% i; `: v% t+ f" q2 W3 P  {[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]