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.

, U& o' L) d" y3 J/ iNot 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.
' `* t+ W" s+ a* Z. X  p% j
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.

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:
/ a2 c! p/ \9 ^& n; j5 v
3 g% U' |; S# @5 t9 H7 w
9 d9 e( H' O* R$ q7 F9 kIn 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.
$ u- ]$ @5 J; K; M  Y9 @San Diego’s current P/E is nearly 30, compared with a 1989 high of 23.4.
( X/ D: ]+ V8 a! \* f( m; Y1 @) INew 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.
7 d7 {$ y7 G, t1 D( |5 l
- E2 @9 Y( Y& {6 c& H: TIf home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.
7 |# i% Q& C* J  Z! i( p
If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.

5 i1 y" n+ d; O  o; b/ \ Home P/E ratios for 9 metro areas
Avg. 1988-2000 2001
Boston  20.5 30.2
San Diego  22.8 29.7
" F: N" A9 F7 Z& L' R" XSan Francisco  23.8 27.2
Los Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
8 \. @( ?/ _7 z; B! t; \9 sDenver  17.7 23.7
6 D" H, `% c. r* Y$ T0 X2 f; TNew York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
Washington, D.C.  17.1 20.4

! Z4 W5 G2 ~* B' @8 l

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.


5 o) _8 d; z6 N1 `+ W+ }/ w; _9 yFrom: 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.
- {, O) @$ C. B, O; i+ N
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.

; S. ~( ?$ n8 w" r- S" u" E[ 本帖最后由 醉酒当歌 于 2007-1-14 16:41 编辑 ]