Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
; k  n3 a# T# U) X; XLeamer 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.

- `. Z2 n& x4 q- X2 DNot 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.
$ B/ Z- a! `3 `2 g
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( X+ Z) S1 Q# V$ a4 l: T
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:


In Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
  B- m6 A  d# \- K
3 ?) v8 k0 Z& F4 c! Y! ~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.
) z4 A+ @& x$ U  rNew 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.

8 F) t& ]* V/ G! P! C: ^! kIf home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.

- }  D0 v- I' C% LIf home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.
; S0 q. E0 R0 i5 H9 ~: ~
; [7 [. x+ k3 V) r Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
- w& }( Q' S+ o2 x: t  NBoston  20.5 30.2
San Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
+ H) ?8 Y$ |+ b8 T- tDenver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
0 h2 ~3 P. K- \5 R: `* e8 KWashington, D.C.  17.1 20.4
( O$ `8 ?* ^$ x; }* Z4 l# c


) N/ p* v; s6 N( z  `- x" u+ A( Y. JIt'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.

- ?' S4 ~& |- t5 r/ q( L5 p
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.
6 T7 b& n) d- o5 K' ^
it would be a good reference.
5 Y, \7 U6 l0 Y  U* m
thanks

醉酒当歌

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

. B- [* |/ r* B( ^# X+ E[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]