Is there a house bubble in Edmonton?

smalltown

How to figure a home's fundamental value
5 _% Y8 c- v1 q, |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.
6 N) |2 E: o2 B  ]! k
- R( `! d4 B$ o  C7 M. A5 `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.
5 \: a1 t' ?" s- h/ p/ a- }& f
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:

) ]7 O" g. _% n& Z5 A: h6 p
3 T- ~. a& z5 \3 o+ t$ E. QIn Boston, the residential real estate market’s P/E recently topped 30 -- compared with just under 20 in 1988.

" N! H6 s, ~; P9 s; i8 @, w( \San Francisco’s previous peak of 25.6 in 1989 has been eclipsed, with the P/E currently at just over 27.
San 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.
# o: T9 D$ A1 M- OYou 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.

( t: o. s; {7 Z4 S5 }If home prices are rising much faster than rents, as is true in Los Angeles, that’s a strong indication a bubble is forming.
' ~# C, B* D. p$ i
If home prices are rising while average rents are falling -- which is the situation in San Francisco -- the bubble is pretty much unmistakable.
0 m6 M4 T- V9 F, q9 g  K0 X
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
4 h6 n4 r/ F, Q0 d% i4 B8 dLos Angeles  21.3 25.6
Seattle  20.4 25
% e6 a8 N: P4 U0 x" K" h+ zDenver  17.7 23.7
( |2 `$ a6 R$ @9 B* F. J) F$ y: pNew York  21.2 22.5
Chicago  17.2 20.8
3 E. V) b; `9 }6 x4 R' _% p% J- o) CWashington, D.C.  17.1 20.4


) f1 _& b: u( a3 t
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.
* ~9 |2 \+ l' e, N! R5 K+ H

' b4 T3 Z. _3 a, Y7 ~3 SFrom: 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.

' t- P( f& _1 J; p' G' l* ?9 Xit would be a good reference.
8 X( J" K# N' @  n! Y! r
0 d; s% V7 `# G, |& f5 Tthanks

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 ]