Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
3 Y  S, }* q6 C+ ~! j3 _- cLeamer 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.
' N" B, T! l* V* ?# s
2 t* K4 ~7 w) _, M; A6 BNot 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.
8 K( O$ t" g/ S/ ^
6 A, J* U4 b9 k/ Y. o( y6 LLeamer 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:
7 d, z% v* b8 X4 ?9 \5 C; L

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

! c! C$ f: u# T- eSan Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
' s) J$ n' a. U- H, |. G0 ]2 E% 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.
. E$ R9 y  ~  K" W' L; }1 ~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.
2 l: T/ V+ s+ W! d% W
If home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.
8 _  s$ U  ^: H  W8 [
If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.
0 I8 b# m1 }( L3 `( q8 S) H8 E% q
/ E( r# S! `2 S! l$ U5 }) P 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
  D# [5 M' Q' S9 G$ O7 V  pLos Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
Denver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
1 A$ G* u( M5 _6 {Chicago  17.2 20.8
7 X# j6 x3 H) \; }Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4

0 c$ T' u# K, J; ^5 G) N. A0 F* u

* ^$ Z" ~# p6 X3 x, a! A8 x" |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.
, j. h2 l2 ^- @  e$ ~
( x: \, K; @, o  \% o5 ?
6 q. ]5 T( R1 S! U& |* U/ W5 VFrom: 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.
7 ]$ y6 ~/ C' w' [/ M
( U5 J9 i0 F! ^, S: Y  \* f" git 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.

[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]