Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
' ~+ k- F0 w2 {$ \5 sLeamer 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.
7 F0 J0 j! k: f8 h
Not 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.
+ t2 _6 @! E" c6 x
" r1 v' u5 b3 a" SLeamer 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:
$ o# _6 J  y9 T# f

In Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.

% ]) ^6 f( j$ i0 W  Q6 i- jSan Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
+ ^$ R) O, t. T+ Q3 ISan Diego’s current P/E is nearly 30, compared with a 1989 high of 23.4.
. K/ x& `" Z, \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.

If home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.

3 z2 T$ K; F5 QIf home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.
$ Q: s! b8 [2 K4 t' G# q
+ o. U3 ?" I5 X$ H. g Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
2 c# [9 l! m% O# i0 OBoston  20.5 30.2
2 @: \. n  \5 }/ R+ |San Diego  22.8 29.7
* J& S" F; W! a/ _6 o2 P' d  F9 f2 tSan Francisco  23.8 27.2
! }! q7 g! t; X8 t4 G! KLos Angeles  21.3 25.6
7 G) v* ~4 ?" A0 H( NSeattle  20.4 25
Denver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4

* Z7 r$ K5 O, {* e' I
* Z& k; V0 z, E! o. J, f# i9 k
* a/ o: C; y8 @0 LIt'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.


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.

* W( Z, G* s% u: Hit would be a good reference.
2 \( u+ q& ?: }  S- t
9 X& Q- ^* c$ R, k5 o% [2 v/ uthanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
$ ]* l  `2 ]( @( F7 _
[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]