The dialog over the place, how and when houses must be listed — and who will get to set these guidelines — has intensified within the wake of the megamerger between Compass and Wherever Actual Property. The $1.6 billion deal gave Compass, the trade’s largest advocate for personal listings, the size to problem what it views because the powers that be, together with a number of itemizing companies and portals equivalent to Zillow.
Compass CEO Robert Reffkin’s chorus is “vendor selection,” which means that householders ought to management how and when their properties are marketed, with out third events dictating the phrases. He contends that MLSs and itemizing aggregators revenue from content material equipped by brokers and that brokers ought to have extra management over the distribution of their listings.
On the opposite aspect is Zillow CEO Jeremy Wacksman, who maintains that preserving listings inside non-public brokerage networks limits consumers from seeing what’s accessible and obscures essential data, like days on market. In his view, non-public listings come on the expense of customers, together with sellers, who, he claims, want extra eyeballs on their properties to attain the best value.
After Compass rolled out its three-phase advertising and marketing plan, which incorporates first introducing listings as non-public exclusives, Wacksman modified Zillow’s guidelines to primarily mandate that brokers add their listings to the MLS inside a day of public advertising and marketing or danger dropping the power so as to add the itemizing to Zillow later. The coverage replace launched the talk over non-public listings into a brand new, extra contentious stratosphere, leading to extra public mudslinging and litigation from allies and opponents.
Right here’s what the trade’s loudest voices have spent the previous yr arguing, and how one can piece collectively their speaking factors into the total story.
Jeremy Wacksman,
Zillow CEO
What it means: Wacksman argues that the foundations Zillow enacted are geared toward preserving the market clear. Which may be true. If brokerages don’t promote their listings outdoors of their very own inner databases, then potential consumers and brokers with out entry gained’t be capable of see the total image of accessible stock, which may additionally skew the market information that consumers and sellers use to tell their selections.
What Wacksman doesn’t typically point out in his requires transparency is that his firm makes cash on the client leads it generates from brokers’ listings on its website.
When a purchaser asks to attach with an agent on a Zillow itemizing, Zillow can direct that purchaser to an agent in its Most well-liked or Premier program, who doesn’t have a connection to the itemizing or vendor. If the client agrees to work with a Most well-liked agent, for instance, and the deal closes, the agent provides Zillow a reduce of their fee. As a result of many MLSs routinely syndicate their listings to Zillow, brokers who add them to share with the broader brokerage group have little selection however to even have them seem on Zillow.
Reffkin has pushed again on this a part of Zillow’s enterprise mannequin, as produce other brokers and a few homebuyers, who sued the platform over allegations that they had been unknowingly diverted to an agent in this system, leading to larger charges and residential costs. (A federal decide dismissed the go well with in July.)
“That coverage is admittedly about defending transparency…There are corporations within the house that wish to take these listings off the web and conceal them for themselves and never put them as a part of the database. We don’t suppose that’s an excellent factor.”
Robert Reffkin,
Compass CEO
What it means: Reffkin’s central “vendor selection” argument excludes consumers from the equation. The extra sellers select to market their properties on non-public itemizing networks, the less houses consumers will discover on consumer-facing platforms they’ve relied on for years.
Altering these go-to platforms is in the end Reffkin’s play. He needs Compass and its subsidiary manufacturers to turn into the first dwelling search locations, which might permit the corporate to take care of management over its information. Nonetheless, it may additionally imply that consumers gained’t be capable of entry all listings with out having to rent an agent within the Compass universe.
Then there’s the query of how a lot selection sellers even have. Compass and its manufacturers are already providing brokers incentives to take away their listings from certainly one of Zillow’s subsidiaries in New York Metropolis, Streeteasy. Sellers, after all, are likely to hearken to their brokers.
“Zillow isn’t banning and suing to guard the buyer, Zillow is simply making an attempt to guard their backside line. Whereas Compass is preventing to guard brokers and homesellers with selections, Zillow is preventing to manage brokers and homesellers.”
Bess Freedman,
Brown Harris Stevens CEO
What it means: Freedman and different critics of Compass additionally say its technique is geared toward permitting its brokers to double-end extra offers. If Compass brokers are encouraging their purchasers to introduce their listings as non-public exclusives and consumers really feel like they’ve to rent a Compass agent to see the stock, then it stands to cause {that a} Compass agent could possibly be on each side of the transaction.
Freedman, like Wacksman, has angled her opposition to non-public listings on the implications for customers. The change may even have a big affect on her brokerage: BHS is a midsize, unbiased store, not a behemoth like Compass. Her brokers depend on cooperation throughout the trade, and the extra Compass takes each side, the extra sharply her firm will get reduce out of the market. With fewer brokers, BHS additionally gained’t have sufficient unique stock to maintain consumers on their platform, as a substitute of Compass.
She might say she’s preventing for shopper transparency, however she’s additionally pushing again in opposition to non-public listings for her brokerage’s survival.
“If individuals can’t see what’s in the marketplace and it’s being hidden, what does that do for customers? Bear in mind, transparency just isn’t a luxurious. We will at all times accommodate sellers who need to have issues quiet, however what they’re doing just isn’t that.”
Pam Liebman,
Corcoran CEO
What it means: That’s true. For one, Compass and its manufacturers show their “Coming Quickly” listings and others on their web sites and on Redfin.
In New York, Liebman and Reffkin have been encouraging brokers to add their listings on the Actual Property Board of New York’s residential itemizing service and mark them as “Participant Solely,” which implies brokers from any agency can see them, however they gained’t be disseminated outdoors of the RLS.
Within the Midwest, one of many area’s prime MLSs, Midwest Actual Property Information, shows Compass’ non-public listings community, permitting its member brokers outdoors of the Compass umbrella to entry these listings.
Most brokerages additionally feed their listings into back-end platforms hooked up to their brokerage web sites, and people platforms in flip push to different brokerage web sites. Even when a dealer doesn’t put their itemizing on Streeteasy or Zillow, customers may conceivably discover them in certainly one of these places, although that’s a shopper expertise so disjointed you see why a platform like Zillow caught on.
“A house doesn’t ‘disappear from the market’ when a vendor chooses to not promote on each shopper web site.”
Caroline Burton,
StreetEasy
What it means: The info is something however clear, particularly as a result of a lot of the numbers are coming from research backed by the businesses on the heart of the non-public itemizing debate.
Within the publish, Burton hyperlinks to a Zillow report which discovered that properties that weren’t listed on the MLS traded for a mere $5,000 much less on common than people who had been, primarily based on an evaluation of tens of millions of dwelling gross sales between 2023 and 2024. A separate report from Shiny MLS within the Mid-Atlantic area discovered that listings that began as non-public exclusives usually took two weeks longer to promote than people who started on the MLS.
However one other research by Compass’ in-house analysis group indicated the other. The brokerage examined greater than 70,000 Compass transactions between April 1, 2025 and March 31, 2026 and located that houses for which the itemizing was first marketed outdoors of the MLS bought for 4.6 % extra and went into contract 34 % quicker as soon as on the open market, in comparison with absolutely public listings.
The research are from completely different time durations and areas and use completely different methodologies. It’s unclear whether or not anybody is extra dependable than the opposite.
“The info is obvious: houses bought off-market persistently commerce for lower than comparable houses given full public publicity.”
Rebecca Jensen,
Midwest Actual Property Information CEO
What it means: Each battle wants foot troopers, and Jensen has been on the entrance because the begin of the combat, defending Reffkin and Compass on the philosophical stage in addition to by pulling the plug on Zillow’s itemizing feed, axing 43,000 Chicago-area houses from the platform earlier this yr. Zillow sued, however Jensen prevailed when a federal decide in September ruled in favor of MRED and Compass. That victory may permit non-public networks to develop, although any momentum could possibly be tempered by Compass dropping its New York case in opposition to Zillow over the latter’s guidelines tamping down on non-public listings.
“I’m not going to again down… I’m the referee. I don’t care how huge Zillow thinks they’re on the sphere.”
