Compass and Zillow, two real estate powerhouses, are locked in a high-stakes feud over “private” real estate listings – homes initially marketed off the public Multiple Listing Service (MLS). This conflict came to a head this week when Compass filed an antitrust lawsuit accusing Zillow of “anticompetitive” tactics for banning such privately marketed listings from its popular home-search platform.
At the heart of the dispute is a fundamental question: Should agents be allowed to market properties privately within their brokerage before exposing them to the wider market, or must every listing be immediately available to all consumers on big portals like Zillow?
The outcome of this battle could have far-reaching implications for agents and their clients, touching on MLS cooperation rules, consumer choice, and the rapidly evolving tech landscape of home sales.
What Are Private Listings, Anyway?
Private listings (often called “office exclusives” or “pocket listings”) are properties for sale that agents market outside of the open MLS system. Instead of instantly broadcasting the home to every agent and website, a private listing is initially shared only in a limited network – for example, exclusively among agents at a single brokerage or to select clients.
The idea is to create a “velvet rope” experience: a period where a home is available to certain buyers without being fully public. Traditionally, MLS rules (backed by the National Association of Realtors’ Clear Cooperation Policy) require that if a property is publicly marketed, it must be listed on the MLS within one business day.
This policy, enacted in 2020, aims to make sure all agents and buyers have equal access to new listings, and it was even nicknamed the “Compass Rule” because Compass and some others pushed back against it.
- Critics of private listings argue that “hiding” listings undermines the spirit of cooperation and could exclude buyers.
- Proponents counter that sellers deserve the choice to control how and where their property is marketed.
Compass’s Three-Phase Private Listing Strategy
Compass has been the most vocal champion of private listings, even developing a formal three-phase marketing strategy for its sellers.
- In the first phase, a home is listed as a “Private Exclusive”: it’s posted on Compass’s internal platform, viewable only by Compass agents and their immediate clients. This allows a homeowner to test the waters or maintain privacy while potentially finding a buyer within Compass’s network.
- In the second phase, if the home doesn’t sell privately, it can be rolled out as a “Coming Soon” on Compass’s public website – visible to anyone browsing online, but still not on the MLS or aggregator sites.
- Finally, in the third phase, the listing is placed on the MLS and distributed to all the major portals (Zillow, Realtor.com, etc.), reaching the broadest audience.
Compass says this graduated approach gives sellers flexibility and possibly an early-market buzz. According to Compass, nearly half of its sellers in early 2025 used the three-step strategy, and ultimately, 94% of those private-listing clients did end up listing on the MLS after the initial exclusive period.
In Compass’s view, this shows that private exclusives are typically a temporary stepping stone before going public – not an attempt to completely bypass the open market.
Why would a seller want this?
Some clients, especially high-profile or privacy-conscious ones, may not want their home sale immediately exposed to the world. Others might like the idea of an “exclusive” period to gauge interest or fine-tune pricing with less pressure.
Compass CEO Robert Reffkin argues that this system “protect[s] consumer choice” – giving sellers options in how they sell, rather than a one-size-fits-all approach. In an analogy, Reffkin said it’s like Amazon banning a merchant for selling on their own website first: “That’s what Zillow is doing in real estate… Consumers should have the right to choose how they sell their homes”.
Zillow’s Ban on Private Listings – and Why It Matters
From Zillow’s perspective, however, these private/off-MLS listings pose a problem. Zillow – which dominates online home search with billions of visits per quarter – announced a new “listing access policy” in April 2025.
The new policy is straightforward: if a home is publicly marketed anywhere but not posted on Zillow (via the MLS) within 24 hours, Zillow will permanently ban that listing from its site.
In practice, this means if an agent puts a “Coming Soon” sign in the yard or posts a sneak peek on social media or a brokerage website (i.e. any public marketing) and doesn’t add the home to the MLS within one day, Zillow will refuse to display that property even after it hits the MLS later.
Zillow’s affiliate sites and allies – notably Trulia, Redfin, and eXp Realty – have agreed to similar measures, effectively blacklisting the offending listing from large segments of the internet’s real estate search platforms. Zillow’s policy took effect in late May 2025 and immediately sent ripples through the industry.
Why would Zillow do this?
Zillow argues the ban is about fairness and transparency for consumers. The company has publicly stated that when a listing is marketed, it “should be accessible to all buyers – across all platforms, including Zillow”, rather than available only to a select group. Allowing some listings to hide behind brokerage exclusivity creates “a fragmented market” and forces buyers to hunt through multiple channels (or miss out entirely), which Zillow says is “bad for buyers, sellers, and the industry at large”.
A Zillow spokesperson described the policy as making sure “listings are marketed to every buyer” without any “velvet rope controlled by any one company”. In Zillow’s view, private listings skew the playing field in favor of big brokerages with large networks, and they deprive consumers of equal access to information.
Most of the industry, Zillow claims, supports this stance – the company cites support from many brokerages, consumer advocates, and fair housing experts who worry that pocket listings could enable bias or limited exposure.
There’s also a competitive business aspect: Zillow is essentially an advertising platform that monetizes listings by attracting viewers and selling buyer leads to agents. Off-MLS listings threaten that model.
As Compass’s lawsuit puts it bluntly, “every home buyer search conducted on Compass instead of Zillow is a lost opportunity for Zillow… to make money selling [the buyer’s] information to agents for a lead fee — Zillow’s central business model”. In other words, if agents and consumers start going elsewhere (like Compass’s app or network) to see early listings, Zillow loses eyeballs and revenue.
Zillow doesn’t deny it wants listings on its site – but it frames the issue as one of open access versus closed networks, rather than its own bottom line. Hiding listings hurts the industry, Zillow insists, and “our focus remains on creating a level playing field that serves the best interests of everyone in the home buying and selling journey.”
Compass Fights Back: The Lawsuit
Unable to resolve this clash of philosophies, Compass took the fight to federal court. On June 23, 2025, Compass filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court (Southern District of NY) accusing Zillow of abusing its market power with this private-listing ban.
The complaint alleges that Zillow – as the nation’s largest real estate portal – is using “exclusionary” and “anticompetitive tactics to protect its monopoly and revenues” in violation of antitrust laws. Compass essentially casts Zillow as a gatekeeper unfairly punishing any agent or seller who doesn’t play by Zillow’s rules.
The so-called “Zillow Ban,” Compass says, “seeks to ensure that all home listings in this country are steered onto [Zillow’s] dominant platform so Zillow can monetize each listing and protect its monopoly.” The lawsuit even claims Zillow lobbied the Realtor association (NAR) to tighten the MLS rules against office exclusives – and when that failed, enacted its own stricter policy.
In its legal filing, Compass also names Redfin and eXp Realty as co-conspirators (though they are not defendants in the suit) for aligning with Zillow’s policy. Notably, both Redfin and eXp publicly stated in spring 2025 that they would support Zillow’s stance and refuse to display privately marketed listings as well.
Compass argues this reflects a coordinated effort by major industry players to stamp out the private listing model. (For its part, eXp’s CEO blasted Compass’s suit as “an act of desperation” and denied any collusion, saying eXp developed its policy independently in response to market conditions.)
The lawsuit seeks injunctive relief to block Zillow’s policy and stop it from banning Compass’s listings, as well as unspecified damages. Compass has even brought in heavyweight legal firepower – hiring Kenneth Dintzer, the antitrust attorney who led the U.S. Justice Department’s case against Google, to argue its case.
Compass CEO Reffkin insists “this lawsuit is about protecting consumer choice” and that “no one company should have the power to ban agents or listings simply because they don’t follow that company’s business model”.
By framing it as an issue of consumer freedom and competition, Compass hopes to rally support (and win in court) by showing that Zillow’s ban coerces agents and sellers into Zillow’s ecosystem at the expense of innovation.
Zillow’s response to the lawsuit was swift and unsurprising: the company calls Compass’s claims “unfounded” and says it will “vigorously” defend its policy. Zillow maintains that it is pro-consumer to require broad listing exposure, and it likens private listings to an unfair manipulation of the marketplace.
“When a listing is publicly marketed, it should be accessible to all buyers,” Zillow’s spokesperson reiterated, arguing that open access “leads to better outcomes for buyers, sellers and agents alike”.
In Zillow’s view, Compass’s strategy might benefit Compass and its agents, but at a cost to the wider market. Thus, the stage is set for a major legal showdown, with a brokerage’s high-tech business model on one side and a portal’s platform power on the other.
Industry Reactions - MLS Rules, Portals, and a Divided Industry
The Compass vs. Zillow feud is the flashpoint of a broader industry debate over listing transparency and competition. Over the past year, several big brokerages (Compass, Corcoran, Douglas Elliman, and others) have rolled out or teased their own private listing networks.
At the same time, many leaders in real estate have publicly criticized the pocket listing trend. In March 2025, NAR (the industry’s governing association) considered doing away with the Clear Cooperation Policy but ultimately decided to keep it, albeit adding a small tweak to allow limited “delayed marketing” of listings in certain cases.
The message from NAR was essentially that broad cooperation via MLS remains the rule – a blow to those who hoped the policy would be loosened. Some brokerages, like Midwest giant Howard Hanna, have even rebelled against the rule openly, arguing it stifles their business; others insist it’s essential for an “open marketplace.”
The divide is stark...
Realtor.com's Stance
Not all real estate portals are following Zillow’s exact playbook, either. Realtor.com, Zillow’s primary competitor among listing sites, pointedly announced it would not ban private listings (because its contracts with MLSs require it to display all listings).
However, Realtor.com’s CEO, Damian Eales, didn’t mince words about his stance. In a June 2025 blog post, Eales called the arguments in favor of private listings “utter nonsense,” saying it’s “anathema to common sense that more and more sellers want the ‘choice’ of fewer free eyeballs.”
He questioned why an agent should be allowed to hold back a listing to a restricted pool of buyers while still enjoying full access to all the other listings on the MLS: “One shouldn’t turn up to a potluck dinner carrying only a fork,” Eales quipped, implying that you shouldn’t expect to benefit from a cooperative system if you don’t contribute to it.
Realtor.com’s chief also warned that brokers running private networks “are likely to find themselves on the wrong side of history” – and even risk lawsuits from sellers who feel they got an inferior outcome, or from buyers who believe they were unfairly excluded from a hidden opportunity.
In short, even though Realtor.com isn’t banning the listings, its leadership is clearly aligned philosophically with Zillow on the value of an all-inclusive marketplace.
Homes.com Joins In
Meanwhile, CoStar Group – the commercial real estate data giant that now owns Homes.com and is angling to challenge Zillow – saw an opening in this controversy. CoStar’s CEO, Andy Florance, derided Zillow’s new rule as a “blacklist” against private listings done for “economic interest.”
He announced that Homes.com would actively “support any agent who gets blackballed or blacklisted on Zillow” by boosting the visibility of their listing for free on Homes.com.
In Florance’s view, banning listings isn’t right, so his platform is doing the opposite – essentially using Zillow’s ban as a marketing tool to lure agents and inventory to Homes.com. This is a prime example of how the competitive tech landscape in real estate is heating up: rival portals positioning themselves as more agent-friendly or consumer-friendly in contrast to Zillow’s policies.
It’s a portal war, and agents and brokers are caught in the middle as these companies vie for control of listing eyeballs.
MLSs, Too...
It’s worth noting that Compass’s battle over private listings isn’t just with Zillow. The brokerage has also tangled with some MLS organizations directly. In one case, Compass sued the Northwest MLS (in Seattle) for allegedly changing its rules to shut down Compass’s office exclusives, even temporarily cutting off Compass’s data feed in that market. Compass claimed the MLS’s tactics were “monopolistic” and harmed their clients, mirroring the same arguments now aimed at Zillow.
Although that is a separate case, it underscores how contentious the private listing issue has become across the country. Private listings are testing the boundaries of long-established norms in real estate, and multiple fronts of litigation and policy fights are emerging as a result.
Why This Matters for Agents
For working real estate agents, this debate isn’t just industry gossip – it has real, practical implications for how you conduct business...
Marketing Strategy Choices
Agents affiliated with Compass (or any brokerage offering a private network) now face a tricky choice when listing a property. Using a “Private Exclusive” strategy might please a seller who values discretion or an early pre-MLS push, but it currently means forfeiting Zillow (and Redfin) exposure for that listing. Zillow is by far the most visited real estate site, so being absent from Zillow could significantly reduce a home’s visibility.
As an agent, you’ll need to educate your sellers on this trade-off. Do they value a controlled, private marketing period more, or the widest immediate exposure? It’s a delicate conversation about what’s in the client’s best interest. Some savvy sellers might ask you directly about “that Zillow issue” – you should be ready to explain it in simple terms.
MLS Rules
The continued enforcement of the Clear Cooperation Policy means that, in most markets, if you publicly market a listing (even on your Facebook page or a brokerage email blast or yard sign), you must submit it to the MLS within 24 hours.
Agents have been fined for violating this rule. The only safe harbor is keeping the listing truly private (internal to your brokerage with no public-facing ads) – but if any word leaks out publicly, the clock starts ticking.
This puts pressure on agents to be very careful with “Coming Soon” advertising. Make sure you understand your local MLS’s implementation (some MLSs now have a “Coming Soon” status or the new “Delayed marketing” option that NAR enabled).
Client Expectations and Fiduciary Duty
Agents also must consider their fiduciary duties to clients. If you suggest keeping a listing off MLS, you should have a clear, compelling reason and document that the seller understands the pros and cons.
One risk of private listings is that if the home sells for less than the seller later thinks it was worth, they might argue that limited exposure failed to find the best price.
On the buyer side, if certain homes are selling off-market without ever hitting MLS, some buyers (or their agents) might feel they were unfairly left out.
Realtor.com’s CEO explicitly warned that brokers could face litigation from “sellers who feel shortchanged, as well as buyers who claim they were selectively excluded” by private marketing practices.
In essence, you should use pocket listings very carefully and only when appropriate (for instance, at a seller’s insistence for privacy), and even then, make sure all parties are informed. Document everything.
Competitive Landscape – Staying Informed
The Compass vs. Zillow saga also highlights how quickly the tech landscape in real estate can shift. New policies from a listings portal can suddenly impact your marketing reach. New platforms (like Homes.com under CoStar) may offer alternative channels for exposure.
As an agent, it’s wise to stay plugged into these industry developments. Today it’s Zillow vs. Compass; tomorrow it could be another portal or brokerage making a change that affects how you find leads or advertise listings. By keeping up with reliable industry news sources (Inman, HousingWire, The Real Deal, etc.), you can anticipate changes.
For example, if you know Zillow’s ban is in effect, you might decide to adjust your strategy by using the MLS “Coming Soon” status (which typically still gets picked up by Zillow) instead of a purely off-market approach. Knowledge is power: being aware of the “rules of the game” on each platform helps you serve your clients better.
Future Outcomes – What to Watch
The legal outcome of Compass’s lawsuit could take a long time to play out, but it’s something agents should watch. If Compass wins and Zillow is forced to roll back its ban, we might see an expansion of private listing practices (since the major deterrent – loss of Zillow – would be gone).
Other brokerages might double down on their own exclusive networks. On the other hand, if Zillow prevails (or if Compass drops the fight), the status quo remains: private listings would stay as a niche tool with significant exposure trade-offs, and the portal powerhouses would reinforce the primacy of MLS-fed listings.
There’s even a scenario where regulators or courts could step in with broader rules on data sharing or antitrust in real estate – which could fundamentally change how listings are handled across the board.
For now, no immediate rules have changed for agents, but the precedents being set now – in courtrooms and industry boards – could shape the future of your business. Keep an eye on this case and similar ones; they are bellwethers for the balance between tech platforms and traditional brokerage practices.
Either way, keep calm and sell on!