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.

, b: ?/ o5 b0 z8 [8 y7 L4 cNot 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.
. p8 s# }/ A+ b* f9 g
4 J2 P5 `  y0 S! |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:


  D8 i. m; c0 o& P+ w8 yIn Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
$ j, ^2 `* _$ K' p) ^  c
0 U( p: P9 m: ^San 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.
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.
, b- z# K1 w8 |
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.

$ f- N1 O$ F4 k: X& Q  z1 l Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
( N8 C1 V" F: R# G% xBoston  20.5 30.2
7 A: B; b. }7 j6 g0 ]% |9 qSan Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
5 j! z$ W$ k) y8 r+ sLos Angeles  21.3 25.6
3 k9 t$ A9 J8 E$ b) n; CSeattle  20.4 25
Denver  17.7 23.7
, H: E: ?) ^7 K" ^New York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
5 b; ~) a( ]6 G6 r! r& }Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4
' L/ u& J. O  X. O+ C# O
7 i. k9 V% x9 Q. m2 b
& u$ r+ a0 c- Y+ r; V/ i' [
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.

/ Q% s) k# u! F5 a- q6 |
: z; Z3 o# O# B1 u0 u( WFrom: 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.
: n2 q8 B! s; S2 r4 j
it would be a good reference.
8 ~% F, |) u0 w2 Q& E
" C4 l, R4 R2 r* o' a9 u. s/ i0 Hthanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
* ]1 e9 P  t7 n; \
2 D. y- J1 K- `  L8 U- z$ i/ w[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]