 鲜花( 0)  鸡蛋( 0)
|
How to figure a home's fundamental value
" W5 Z2 E }, N; x$ ^# b" bLeamer 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.+ }4 ]) E5 q& b$ j" M
0 N* H* W9 C: f: i6 PNot 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.6 S. F/ v i1 N' d& w- ^0 `: }
. u5 M, n4 K/ n' X+ o [( B
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.
' y3 G2 j6 T7 k( ]3 |- N" r# p* m
: ? Z" h4 d- p9 F9 P: B: I' ATo 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:
2 B6 G1 P2 V( H, P2 `* q( n
# A1 a9 a6 S0 f( |! r) R# I! T v
( |4 }# G9 \. A; R' ?- f' JIn Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
5 S1 K3 u: S1 |" @4 }# \+ `. A* U! D9 X' S1 @, r
San Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
/ f( ^( ^- t8 W% vSan Diego’s current P/E is nearly 30, compared with a 1989 high of 23.4.2 x" A* {$ p6 n, \+ A6 A) j* k
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.' r" V% F o+ N% Q
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.
9 z) K0 v" |. k7 x7 n+ f8 Z7 }. Z
) i; R9 `8 h* {9 P# ~# w8 L$ qIf home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.4 d2 ?/ \) y2 T& ]# {
+ w A3 J! z4 c, T; V1 {If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable., B" S8 z/ a3 C0 d+ F" \7 p
0 h: J& ~2 k+ |* u0 I
Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
5 x8 y: L9 b d# _6 z( F( h5 \2 v Avg. 1988-2000 2001
" ]1 y8 s( a! m+ _Boston 20.5 30.2
( Z& [# u1 J0 _3 i/ ]4 W* CSan Diego 22.8 29.7 6 ]9 o" f: P' o/ R9 T5 k- @
San Francisco 23.8 27.2
! s" @) T5 R/ h9 E; DLos Angeles 21.3 25.6
- f! f! J; [, I) V, D* F) ^1 n3 BSeattle 20.4 25
/ N% V; H5 }2 A3 J4 O. C+ _5 G6 L% DDenver 17.7 23.7 * g9 h0 f) C, t7 g# y# Z& F! D
New York 21.2 22.5 / |2 j, E2 i& q8 C6 r9 R
Chicago 17.2 20.8
: ]; ~! t% u9 n. X/ d9 w. y9 s( q$ sWashington, D.C. 17.1 20.4
/ B9 r/ Y* ?# b$ [- P0 t3 g & L7 F; `0 D+ [! w. n
9 u# z6 ~( |0 w2 x3 q
: D" o# m/ k8 X, c4 d) E. u: G" `; OIt'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.
' V/ r O2 {6 P- g5 \3 ]
' B! M* I6 Q3 a& |' H- C' w. F1 N) e, _4 F! U
From: http://moneycentral.msn.com/cont ... ingguide/P37631.asp |
|