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.

2 V2 s1 r5 f$ W/ ]' mNot 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.
9 ]: x3 E8 {) B: v0 ?2 R
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.
" f. R, [$ ^$ @7 O; v: g4 Y
% T" }8 K* @' E2 {5 y1 VTo 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.

San Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
' r9 n2 m+ ]/ R9 ^San Diego’s current P/E is nearly 30, compared with a 1989 high of 23.4.
+ \  V2 V% B' U$ KNew 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.
  ?7 m# Z! U: t5 i# `: o, C5 U
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.

1 F- [& ^( V% t Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  20.5 30.2
, a1 ?5 l+ P0 ASan Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
8 g2 ~9 f. d% c+ N2 d5 h/ ^Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
" h0 ~) r3 z+ e+ i# {2 E+ ?Denver  17.7 23.7
, u; ]8 q" ^6 t' j9 d, @# PNew York  21.2 22.5
4 w* H" W. c6 X8 a6 `& b6 I4 B0 {Chicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4

; q" k9 Q3 Z- B# |0 I
: _" _% G, ?, E
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.
' Y) ^# T4 e+ Y- |+ I" @; b
/ {4 ?0 t1 z* L9 F9 x; T1 B0 K
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.

2 z/ z; w1 Y# r; _+ R+ I0 othanks

醉酒当歌

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

9 j% r' T  G3 u7 K[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]