Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
/ W1 U9 ~) d) p  n) R+ uLeamer 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.
8 ?+ s! a$ h9 \( h/ T/ ]
. Z' w2 l, a& ?8 f1 T5 w7 U0 {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.

' H* k$ w* b& L; I  E' jLeamer 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.
+ D. j7 \" I. r, w9 Z7 J0 I$ g
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:


9 i9 j8 y$ z( ]8 V) IIn Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
2 \4 g' P0 f, C
San Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
# ]) w) D# ]* s5 l& ISan Diego’s current P/E is nearly 30, compared with a 1989 high of 23.4.
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.
7 K3 U  G9 J" y- p+ k  }5 n' kYou 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.
0 D) P( M3 Q" e8 K0 P, @
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.

+ E$ u# E: |1 S/ a, i, p Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
: R) M; O0 `5 h4 \; r Avg. 1988-2000 2001
8 z+ }" x0 `! {% q; w, {& i: rBoston  20.5 30.2
San Diego  22.8 29.7
7 t4 r2 b0 N9 nSan Francisco  23.8 27.2
Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
Denver  17.7 23.7
8 V0 |# n9 f8 u: rNew York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4


% h. J0 M3 d& o+ ], |5 d
/ O; {6 H" `- q4 Q* Z* W& ?, g6 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.


& @. R; J$ @7 r" EFrom: 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.

thanks

醉酒当歌

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

5 f, R8 w* v. ?5 P( `% u. K1 G[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]