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.

; r+ t' o! i- W8 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.
6 I5 M7 x/ b: V9 V2 H
+ s) z+ \4 n) P- m( D4 aLeamer 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.
* P( l5 K1 F0 I; r1 y# W# o) z) Q) a
8 N! H: C+ y5 \1 h4 CTo 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:

# }. i! B* W2 I* ^, |2 k, k
In Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.

San Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
3 G( c/ e: J% g. K" U* I0 L  RSan 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.
% H5 I. ?7 E+ W5 M
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.

Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
# B% N3 J# X  G% O. j2 Q Avg. 1988-2000 2001
3 o8 j/ u& d- b$ T1 bBoston  20.5 30.2
# y' x8 o' @2 _4 zSan Diego  22.8 29.7
% ]7 m8 S2 V+ nSan Francisco  23.8 27.2
Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
2 A! G5 v6 W$ s5 dSeattle  20.4 25
Denver  17.7 23.7
$ t' F2 Y4 W9 b7 p* ~6 ANew York  21.2 22.5
9 i2 X. G, |6 x9 G# v2 r* {Chicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4

6 p2 {' u: z0 i9 e5 {+ k7 p

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.
$ u* m/ m: C  W

7 D. [' R/ }* ~+ |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.

9 a) D/ F+ }; [  @5 {& q5 A7 iit would be a good reference.

/ z* q3 z* r9 _, W+ ^% F% k- `0 mthanks

醉酒当歌

20% buble at least. And it can take 3-5 years to digest the bubble if not burst.
! t3 I- I/ x' C, v% T6 ?
# E# I0 N, F7 G' P[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]