的见解

U.S. 住房——又来了一遍?

By
加布Lembeck
2021年9月7日
分享这篇文章

看一看下面的图表后.S. housing prices, can there be any doubt that we have another housing bubble?

图1. 一个普通版本的美国.S. 房屋价格图表
美国全国房价指数
来源:Robert Shiller

对此,我们说:“别着急,我的朋友。!” In our writing on various financial topics, we come across a similar pattern:

  1. 媒体大肆宣传“危机”或“机遇”.”
  2. As a result, investors/consumers pay heed to media’s “advice.”
  3. 因此,投资者/消费者的处境会更糟.

最近的媒体事件(在这个时候的许多事件中)是电子游戏官网另一个房地产泡沫和/或房地产崩溃的报道. 在谷歌上快速搜索“房地产泡沫”出现了:

Something to which we have alluded bears repeating: the financial media are not interested in giving you facts; Rather, 他们感兴趣的是卖给你一个故事. 这, 当然, by no means dissuades them from publishing contradictory pieces Case in point, 彭博社相隔三周:

So, in page one of a Google search, we have (in no particular order):

  1. 房地产泡沫正在逼近.
  2. 房地产泡沫已经出现.
  3. 房地产市场即将崩盘.
  4. 房地产崩盘就在眼前.

Like the financial media, we share a goal of being informative. 然而, 不像金融媒体, 我们努力做到正确, which is always easy retrospectively and not so easy prospectively. 那么,我们对这种情况的看法是什么呢?

虽然我们认识到自去年夏天以来价格的大幅上涨超过了历史先例, 我们不认为存在泡沫. 此外, 我们建议价格上涨, 经过一段时间的冷静, are likely to continue moving higher in the coming years.

我们的论文是一个三脚凳:

  1. current prices do not constitute a bubble - perception is not reality,
  2. 普遍存在的泡沫心态尚未出现,而且
  3. 基本面因素证明了迄今为止的价格上涨和未来的价格上涨是合理的.

In this piece, we will address the first two legs of the stool. Stay tuned for Part 2, in which we will address the third leg.

目前的价格并不构成泡沫.

近因效应”(或近期偏差), 定义为相信最近的事件会再次发生, 对相对罕见的事件给予不成比例的重视是一种常见的认知错误吗. In the context of the current housing bubble panic, this is relevant for two reasons. 第一个, 大规模地, some people view the past nine months of housing gains, as shown by the Case-Shiller National Home Price Index, 因为他们经历了引发2009年全球金融危机的房地产泡沫. 第二个, 在较小的范围内, 其他人看了过去9个月的数据后,认为房价上涨的轨迹将继续下去. Though these applications of recency bias are different, they both lead to what we believe are erroneous conclusions.

Exceeding Prices Found from a Bubble Peak Does Not Indicate a Bubble.

我们经常听到的说法是,现在的房价甚至比全球金融危机之前的房地产泡沫时期还要高. 对此,我们会说,这真是令人惊讶? 看看最近的另一个泡沫,可以帮助我们理解泡沫破裂后价格恢复所需的时间,并表明达到或超过之前的峰值并不一定意味着泡沫.

例如, let’s compare the housing price trajectory to the 2000 dotcom (i.e.纳斯达克100指数)泡沫(图2).纳斯达克100指数在泡沫的最后一年上涨了127%,然后在2009年下跌了79%.5年. The peak reached at the height of the bubble was regained in just over 15年.

图2. 纳斯达克100指数泡沫, 哪个比房地产泡沫大得多, 花了15年才达到之前的高点.
纳斯达克1999 - 2015
来源:FactSet和电子游戏网址

The 2002-2006 housing bubble was much smaller than the NASDAQ bubble; housing prices rose 42% over a three year period rather than 127% in one year. If we consider that it took NASDAQ 14 years to reach its previous high after the bubble, it is reasonable to expect that 15 ½ years after the housing bubble peak in March 2006, 价格将高于之前的高点.

Using the Wrong Type of Chart Can Lead to Misleading Conclusions.

经济学家用图表来解释商品价格和其他因素之间的关系, such as time in an effort to discern patterns that can help them predict market outcomes.

在图1中,我们绘制了月份与月份的关系. 以房价的方式来看,房价已经发生了变化,并可能随着时间的推移而继续变化. 这是一个算术关系的例子, 假设每个单位, 或者点表示月份+价格值, 以一定百分比的速率变化. 换句话说, the percent change between unit values is consistent. 在这种情况下, the percent change between months and prices is assumed to be equidistant, which you can tell by the way the y axis plots price values rather than percentages. Once we have plotted the values, we can draw a trend line using the slope of the graph. 我们可以用趋势线来预测未来的价值.

并非所有数据点之间的关系都可以精确地用算术表示,因为值之间的百分比变化并不一致. 在这些情况下,我们必须使用一种不同的图表来描绘它们之间的关系. Logarithmic charts use the percentage of change to plot data points, so, 规模价格不是等距定位的. 在这种情况下, the y axis plots percentages rather than prices and the x axis plots months.

The reason this is important is because 图1 is an arithmetic chart; it assumes that percent change is consistent. It is useful to look at the price of houses over time; 然而, because it does not reflect the different percent of change between prices, it distorts the most recent price gains at the expense of earlier price gains.

例如, 考虑从60到80的变化百分比等于从180到240的变化百分比, 33%, 然而算术图上180到240的距离比图上60到80的距离要大. 这是一种误导,因为它让人觉得从180人增加到240人的幅度要大得多. 当我们用对数图分析数据时, which represents percent of change between data points, 当我们加入更多的数据, 回到1968年, 我们可以更准确地看到房价上涨的速度(图3).

图3. 更准确地描述美国.S. 房价图表,包括规模和持续时间.
美国全国房价指数
来源:Robert Shiller

从这个角度来看, the chart looks less like a bubble 和更多的 like a consistent upward trend, which can be seen even more effectively in 图4 when we insert a trendline.

图4. 包括一条趋势线,这幅图就完整了.
美国全国房价指数与趋势线
资料来源:Robert Shiller和电子游戏网址

趋势线与实际数据有96%的相关性,表明尽管目前的价格高于2006年的峰值, 许多人会惊讶地发现,价格低于基于潜在趋势的预期. 换句话说, 换句话说, the 50+ year trendline suggests housing prices should be higher than they are now.

让我们从一个稍微不同的角度来看这个问题. 图4展示了美国使用这种方法的时间.S. home prices have been above and below trend expectations. But it’s hard to get a precise grasp for how much deviation from trend there is. 所有的资产市场都会偏离其趋势. 如果这些偏差相对温和,那就是市场涨落的正常过程. If, 然而, 这些偏差是惊人的, 那么这就是泡沫(或泡沫)的标志, 在看跌的情况下, 这是矫枉过正的标志). 再一次。, 为了便于比较, 让我们从纳斯达克100指数开始,看看巨大的泡沫偏差是什么样子的(图5).

图5. 纳斯达克100指数泡沫 in 2000 demonstrated a massive trend deviation.
偏离趋势线的百分比
来源:FactSet和电子游戏网址

在这里,我们看到明显偏离趋势,远远超出任何合理或符合历史标准的水平. Now, let us take a look at the housing market 回到1968年.

图6. Though not as egregious as the NASDAQ, housing prices were a bubble in their own right.
Though not as egregious as the NASDAQ, housing prices were a bubble in their own right
资料来源:Robert Shiller和电子游戏网址

我马上想到了两点:1)房价泡沫没有互联网泡沫那么大, and 2) housing prices still remain well below the trend, even with the recent coronavirus-induced spike (which will be addressed later).

普遍存在的泡沫心态尚未出现.

Zooming out for a moment, defining a general market bubble is trickier than it would seem. All industries are going to have their fair share of booms and busts, so what makes these different from the idea of a bubble?
Empirical research of media publications shows more opinions at this time calling housing a bubble than not a bubble; this is not a bubble mentality; rather this is a wall of worry that will provide the opportunity for prices to ascend higher, 而不是更低.

这是一个关键点——只有在许多怀疑论者认输并承认失败之后,泡沫才能真正形成. There are the classic, oft-quoted 1600s tulip mania, 1700s South Sea Company, 1920s U.S. 股票市场, 20世纪80年代日本经济, 90年代。com股票市场, 2000年全球住房, 所有这些都有一个关键原则:
大多数投资者都接受了从众心理,因为“新范式”在面对相反的事实时是合理的, thereby relegating the skeptics and contrarians to a relatively small subset.

Now, this is not to suggest that there all deviations from trend are a problem. 所有的资产市场都会偏离其趋势, providing shorter-term traders opportunities to buy low and sell high around the trends. The problem is where a normal deviation becomes a feedback loop, where price appreciation begets further price appreciation. 这种动态是由广泛的乐观情绪驱动的,只要有“更大的傻瓜”愿意出售,这种乐观情绪就会使价格超出基本面或典型的供求经济规律所支撑的价值. 换句话说, 理性的人会忽略他们不一定相信的估值,只要他们相信有人会以更高的价格买入.

当然, market participants don’t view themselves as paying up; rather, the rationalizations of “it’s different this time” pervade. 上面描述的人类倾向导致了一个相当可预测的结果:在一个想法形成之后,产品的市场就形成了, people believe both that they are among the few who have spotted the trend early, and that they will be smart enough to pull out at the right time. 当然, 这种情况会一直持续下去,直到买家枯竭,而“最大的傻瓜”被留下来承担后果. 在这之前不久, 先是金融媒体,然后是主流媒体都把这个故事作为头条新闻. 图7中的一个例子, 2005年6月《电子游戏网址》杂志的封面, 就在油价见顶前9个月:

图7. When it hits the magazine covers, generally the end is near
时代杂志封面-甜蜜的家
来源:时代杂志

Suffice it to say that such a bubble mentality is far from ubiquitous today. 事实上, we would posit quite the opposite; people are looking for any reason to scoff and call for a bubble as asset prices rise.

We will delve into this dynamic more in Part 2 of this blog, 除了看:1)凳子的第三支脚——基本面证明了迄今为止的价格上涨和未来的价格上涨是合理的, 2)泡沫发生的原因, 以及为什么我们认为泡沫叫叫者已经集体出局, 3)从这里到哪里找房子.

Browse our collection of resources from trusted thought leaders.

电子游戏网址 experts offer their authentic take on the latest financial topics, 包括我们的独家市场出版物, 新闻, 社区活动, 和更多的.