Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
: X8 }( @* D" ZLeamer 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.
* x8 u5 H* }+ t1 K& _
: n5 h  e3 [& e+ Y& P& I. WNot 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% t9 \# L; l1 pLeamer 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:

5 D6 m* P0 P% G: M
8 Z# V5 c7 o9 qIn Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
7 h/ K; H' ^9 c4 z3 P8 m/ R
" }( d0 R6 f* g& c1 D4 oSan 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.
( \4 x. Y; q' w: xNew 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.
2 W& K: o* _! F8 g' \9 b, PYou 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.
, S  \. d+ B5 S7 X' k8 U
1 \# i6 N  h! YIf home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.
, \. @- e4 }! L  h
! Z+ n& s8 u9 V Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  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
- O4 ^; p# n9 gDenver  17.7 23.7
( [0 T, J& o& ONew York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
) J8 u7 u# e* h1 S: ~  UWashington, D.C.  17.1 20.4
) |/ e8 W: D  ]) J

( |' q3 R6 Y6 i. Z
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.
: n: l6 P& g. d* U, Q* p
; |- I, J! `  `& i, O  t. V/ K( e- |7 }' h
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.

* y  e8 k+ t  Ythanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
9 X. b( V- y; J8 J
5 N/ S. h2 n' P* u' {. G1 X  }% L[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]