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.
; \& n2 {. @$ y. @2 E: I
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.

$ p2 d3 t$ ^, w; bLeamer 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:
5 `# ~* m5 }  ~8 g$ _6 Q, o  f2 e, O

In Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
: N7 S; ]8 C- j# o* ^" F
San Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
# Z; p" Q0 A5 |8 K. F8 O: \) C; oSan 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.
6 \+ w, W1 s' [2 V* L+ 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.
  }: W& j% ]/ c/ t$ L! p3 R2 Q# a5 o
9 b/ O( e3 A" eIf 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.
* A- K1 r) C0 u" w. |
  f6 F& Q9 ?; y% o  B, _% b Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  20.5 30.2
; C7 f$ R5 x* o. h& XSan Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
3 j" G4 s/ M3 S: L1 u9 M* Y+ H! }/ O7 wSeattle  20.4 25
5 e+ X! `' f% [* U* X% ^+ J4 ^Denver  17.7 23.7
New York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4

' j  Z7 r" ^1 \

* W3 c( F+ ~# l/ P4 a+ HIt'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.


* ]2 l" C5 \; k: Y/ R  f( ]- R7 Z6 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.
  i* D1 d/ m  v* W
it would be a good reference.
" M$ ?1 N, Q* c+ b! `
: L* N  r& s" m! R% H. F5 T! ]. `thanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
" R, ~3 \* O' U6 P
[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]