We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Halifax November: -0.9% MoM -0.6% QoQ -1.0% YoY
Comments
-
So why say you normalised the peaks? If you say you are normalising the peaks you would think you would do that.
So you normalised the halifax to the LR peak, very scientific of you.
Why not do it normalised to the nationwide and tell us what happens.;)
It is completely consistent with good scientific practice. The data is clearly labelled (and there is good reasoning behind why it is displayed the way it is) - the axis label describes the price as the percentage of the peak, so it is directly implied that the data-sets have been normalised to peak. There is no rationale for changing the time reference of either the Nationwide or the Halifax since they are concurrent (and correlate well with each other). There is a good rationale for shifting the LR because there is a time lag and it correlates better when shifted (when I say correlation here, I'm talking by visual inspection - the results of visual inspection are good enough not to bother doing the correlation). There is, again, good justification for normalising the magnitudes of the data-sets because of the 'average price' differences.
One thing that isn't particularly satisfactory is that the LR data is seasonally adjusted and the LR & Halifax aren't - but then again, this is stated on the first post. I would prefer to plot the LR as NSA as well.
"very scientific of you"
I do love the internet. Someone else was saying my stats were sub-GCSE level earlier!0 -
Indeed, in the plot below, the LR is between the two other plots since 2009, suggesting that the Nationwide is slightly overestimating prices and the Halifax is slightly underestimating prices. However, at the moment, the Halifax is comparatively closer to the LR, which backs up the idea that the Halifax is more accurately reflecting changes in house prices over the last year.
Nationwide isn't overestimating prices and neither is Halifax underestimating prices. The prices are a function of their own dataset that's all.
They are are two different house price indexes. Both, I'm sure, will be accurate within their different methodologies and, over time they both seem to follow, give or take, the LR trend.
That's why I focused on the argument that it's statistically invalid to take three YoY figures (all subject to errors) to demonstrate that Halifax more accurately reflects house price changes over the last year. There's a danger that any errors will be amplified using so few data points.0 -
It's is completely scientific to display data and label it for what it is - the axis label describes the price as the percentage of the peak, so it is directly implied that the data-sets have been normalised to peak. There is no rationale for changing the time reference of either the Nationwide or the Halifax since they are concurrent (and correlate well with each other).
Yes but Nationwide and Halifax peak at different times. You have placed the LR to one peak, the Halifax. Being concurrent is irrelvent as you have selected the peak to place the data against.
That is not scientific, you should normalise from bot peaks (two graphs) if they correlate, you cant decide which is the correct peak.
Nominally the nationwide was closer to LR than the Halifax so I would say there was more justification mathcing to that peak.0 -
You have to love the bulls.
They spend all their time trying to justify their preference for nationwide, even though by all accounts it suffers from many of the same issues Halifax does.
It's nice that you have a favourite house price indicator. Keep it to yourself because if you start telling people in the real world that Land Reg is the only way to fly they are going to think you are, well, a little peculiar.0 -
It's nice that you have a favourite house price indicator. Keep it to yourself because if you start telling people in the real world that Land Reg is the only way to fly they are going to think you are, well, a little peculiar.
Standard bullish lack of self awareness there.
That aside, pointing out the clear truth that land registry is considered far more accurate than Haliwide would seem to be
a piece of advise inhabitants of the "real world" might well appreciate under certain circumstances.
So we can only assume that the true point of your efforts is to point out that you didn't really like a particular turn of phrase.
I wonder how your compulsion to make this non-point would go over amongst your friends in the real world.
0 -
Asset prices failing to keep up with inflation.
Clearly a win for housing bulls. :rotfl:
It's not about 'winning' every single month (or indeed year) geneer. I bought in the 90's (as did many others and even before that too) they've gone up plenty since then, do you seriously believe it really matters what happens in the interim period, more than when you actually buy and sell?
It must be well over a decade since you graduated, if you had bought 10 years ago you would know exactly what I mean. But you didn't did you?Chuck Norris can kill two stones with one birdThe only time Chuck Norris was wrong was when he thought he had made a mistakeChuck Norris puts the "laughter" in "manslaughter".I've started running again, after several injuries had forced me to stop0 -
Nationwide isn't overestimating prices and neither is Halifax underestimating prices. The prices are a function of their own dataset that's all.
They are are two different house price indexes. Both, I'm sure, will be accurate within their different methodologies and, over time they both seem to follow, give or take, the LR trend.
That's why I focused on the argument that it's statistically invalid to take three YoY figures (all subject to errors) to demonstrate that Halifax more accurately reflects house price changes over the last year. There's a danger that any errors will be amplified using so few data points.
Yes you're right. I should have been more precise with my language. The Halifax is probably underestimating the national average and the Nationwide is probably overestimating the national average. Their own figures (for the small proportion of the housing market they represent) are representing the small proportion of the housing market they represent.0 -
Nationwide isn't overestimating prices and neither is Halifax underestimating prices. The prices are a function of their own dataset that's all.
They are are two different house price indexes. Both, I'm sure, will be accurate within their different methodologies and, over time they both seem to follow, give or take, the LR trend.
That's why I focused on the argument that it's statistically invalid to take three YoY figures (all subject to errors) to demonstrate that Halifax more accurately reflects house price changes over the last year. There's a danger that any errors will be amplified using so few data points.
:rotfl:Nice one Wotsthat.
"nationwide and halifax may be presenting average figures that have no bearing on reality, but that doesn't mean they are wrong, its a function of their own datasets. If that dataset involves a one armed man poking a headless chicken with rolled up newspaper, who are we to say otherwise".0 -
chucknorris wrote: »It's not about 'winning' every single month (or indeed year) geneer. I bought in the 90's they've gone up plenty since then, do you seriously believe it really matters what happens in the interim period, more than when you actually buy and sell?
It must be well over a decade since you graduated, if you had bought 10 years ago you would know exactly what I mean. But you didn't did you?
Yeah right Chuck. Given your urge to initiate some kind of financial "dance-off" its clearly not about the winning with you.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards