Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
5 p0 w5 R$ ^' p! ?' fLeamer 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.
* t) c; c* i/ r* X# y; y& K- j' ~7 J
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.
! v6 ?  x( y9 c* v% M
+ d( y% Y( a: ~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.
7 Y/ h4 \0 S" F* S3 [6 ~
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:


' r$ B0 A/ l& w, N* `In Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.
" |( f$ Q+ z* D
9 P5 q1 N, N. `# dSan Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
3 F+ F5 O( S: O- {4 QSan 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.
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.
/ s6 E, d. X3 i4 R, F
If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.
2 r  H2 Y  f9 q" Q4 _" n- L
, c, [+ j. j$ p4 ~  ^ Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
% [- N3 H/ l4 I Avg. 1988-2000 2001
- V: G4 p, s+ {+ J$ }% U0 IBoston  20.5 30.2
" c+ J# {( v. _3 R# x6 P$ @San Diego  22.8 29.7
San Francisco  23.8 27.2
& S2 _3 E1 l1 i. V- x/ P# LLos Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  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
" J+ L+ D' |- w% _3 y) ]+ ^4 g! C
/ @0 w4 M! n  h9 S: ]6 d& ~3 ?4 n) M; C
0 ~, L* t" `1 {
  }1 v, c4 g0 N) M  DIt'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.
  }+ P6 F) l* ]6 l! k1 b" N# H& A- O
it would be a good reference.
/ A7 ~5 i% e: Z( p
thanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
/ F% r5 d3 T* P* j& F0 H
2 P+ B, X. E. [[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]