Private home listings spark real estate rift between Compass, Zillow, Redfin

Real Estate Power Clash: Will Compass’s Private Listings Help or Hurt Sellers?

A deepening industry conflict over listing visibility

The U.S. residential real estate market is witnessing an intensifying conflict between major players — with Compass advocating for private home listings and digital platforms like Zillow and Redfin fighting to keep listings publicly accessible. The outcome of this battle could dramatically reshape how homes are bought and sold, with direct implications for sellers' profits and buyers' access.

Compass, one of the largest brokerages in the country, is pushing a model where home listings are initially kept private and shown only to its agents and clients. In contrast, Zillow and Redfin insist that listings should be public from the outset to ensure transparency, fairness, and market efficiency. The debate strikes at the heart of how the digital housing economy functions.

A seller’s close call: Private listing almost cost $100,000

San Francisco homeowner Caitlin Bigelow’s experience sheds light on what’s at stake. Initially opting for a “premarket” listing through Compass, Bigelow’s $2.1 million condo was shown only to Compass agents and their clients. She received a full-price offer early on — but it fell through.

That turned out to be fortunate. Once the listing hit public portals like Zillow and Redfin, interest surged. Over 2,000 online views and 60 in-person visits later, Bigelow secured a $2.15 million sale — with the buyer even covering the $55,000 agent commission typically paid by the seller.

“I was relieved,” she said. “The exposure made all the difference.”

What Compass wants — and why it’s controversial

Compass is challenging a long-standing norm in real estate: that listings must be shared on a local Multiple Listing Service (MLS) within 24 hours of being publicly marketed. These MLS feeds syndicate to consumer-facing sites like Zillow, ensuring listings are visible to millions of potential buyers.

Instead, Compass wants agents to have the flexibility to market properties privately — known as “office exclusives” — before they’re published to the broader MLS system. According to Compass, this strategy can help sellers test pricing and attract early offers without full exposure.

But critics argue this approach undermines market transparency. Zillow’s chief industry development officer, Errol Samuelson, warns it may create “a fragmented inventory system,” where buyers miss out on listings unless they work with a specific brokerage.

The fight escalates: Lawsuits and policy threats

Zillow has taken a hard stance. Starting late May, it plans to block listings that were initially held back from public view — a direct response to Compass’s strategy. Compass, in turn, sued the Northwest MLS, alleging anti-competitive practices after the service refused to accept its premarketed listings.

Compass CEO Robert Reffkin claims current MLS policies stifle innovation. He insists that Compass’s “Private Exclusives” are not about double-ending deals — where one agent represents both buyer and seller — but about offering choice to homeowners.

“The current system is focused on preventing alternatives to the MLS,” Reffkin argues.

Private listings: Old idea, new momentum — but do they work?

Private sales aren’t new. However, platforms like Compass are now institutionalizing them as a first step in marketing. Bright MLS, which tracks home sales across several U.S. regions, analyzed 100,000 transactions and concluded that private listings offer no price benefits and take longer to sell.

“Private listings showed no measurable advantages,” Bright MLS stated. “More public exposure leads to better results for most sellers.”

Transparency and access: What’s at risk for buyers?

Buyer agents say clients are already feeling the impact. New York agent David Bibian recounted a case where his clients were unable to view a listing in Manhattan’s West Village because it was exclusive to Compass agents. The buyer ultimately had to sign an agreement with a Compass agent just to see the property — a move that complicated the process and eroded trust.

“It's hard to tell clients they need to jump through hoops just to see homes,” Bibian said.

Such practices can alienate casual house hunters, especially those unwilling or unable to commit to one brokerage. Critics argue that these restrictions recreate the gatekeeping of pre-internet real estate, when information was less accessible and more easily manipulated.

When private listings might make sense

While public listings offer broader reach, private sales still appeal in certain cases. Industry professionals suggest off-market listings may suit:

• High-profile individuals wishing to avoid public attention

• Law enforcement personnel concerned with safety

• Owners of tenant-occupied properties looking to minimize disruptions

• Executives wanting to avoid misinterpretations about their finances

For these sellers, discretion may outweigh visibility.

Sellers: Should you go public or stay private?

Experts agree that for most sellers seeking top dollar, the answer is clear: go public.

“You want competition,” said Jeff Jackson of Corcoran Centric Realty. “More eyeballs, more offers.”

However, he also acknowledged that off-market listings have valid uses — provided sellers understand the trade-offs. Ultimately, it’s a balancing act between privacy, profit, and exposure.

As the real estate landscape evolves under pressure from technology and regulation, sellers and buyers alike must remain vigilant. The push toward private listings may appeal to some, but it also risks rolling back hard-won transparency in the housing market.

Stay tuned to The Horizons Times for more insights on how industry shifts are shaping your next move in real estate.