Zillow says its own survey of real estate agents shows a split: most agents believe buyers deserve independent representation and full access to every listing on the market, but far fewer think those same practices help agents’ own bottom lines. Zillow, whose business model depends on wide public listing distribution, published the findings Monday as the industry’s fight over private listing networks and dual agency continues.
The survey, conducted by Zillow Group Population Science and published on Zillow’s newsroom, polled 366 U.S. real estate agents between July 2 and July 20. Researchers said the survey was unbranded, meaning agents were not told Zillow was behind it, and results were weighted using double regression with post-stratification against 2024 U.S. Census American Community Survey data to represent the broader population of licensed agents.
A consistent gap between “good for buyers” and “good for me”
Across five common industry practices, agents were consistently more likely to say a practice benefits buyers than to say it benefits agents themselves, according to Zillow. On written agreements laying out compensation and services, the gap was narrow: 89% of agents said the practice benefits buyers, and 86% said it benefits agents.
The gap widened elsewhere. Eighty-eight percent of agents said independent representation β meaning a buyer has their own agent, separate from the seller’s β is good for buyers, but only 61% said it benefits agents, a 27-point spread. On access to every listing on the market, 86% of agents said the practice serves buyers, versus 70% who said it serves agents. On a buyer’s ability to choose whether to hire an agent at all, the split was 81% to 52%. The widest gap was on fee negotiation: 77% of agents said buyers should be able to negotiate commissions, but only 46% said doing so benefits agents.
“Agents know what good representation looks like, and I believe that most are motivated primarily by doing right by their clients,” Zillow chief economist Mischa Fisher said in the release. “The data shows agents overwhelmingly agree on what buyers deserve: independent representation, access to every listing, the ability to negotiate. There is no substitute, though, for an informed buyer.”
The dual agency angle
Zillow frames the independent-representation gap as evidence of a financial incentive behind dual agency, in which one agent or brokerage represents both the buyer and the seller and can collect a commission from both sides of a transaction. The company points to its own prior research finding that sellers in same-agent dual-agency deals lost a combined $1.49 billion over three years, an average of roughly $2,165 per home, and cites a study in the Journal of Housing Economics that found agents’ incentive to close deals quickly in dual-agency transactions can override their duty to clients. Dual agency is illegal or restricted in several states, including Colorado, Texas and Florida.
Zillow did not name specific competitors in the release, but the survey lands amid an ongoing industry battle over “private listing networks” β marketing arrangements, most associated with Compass, that keep homes off open marketplaces like Zillow for a period before wider distribution. That fight has already drawn scrutiny in Washington: RealtyWire has reported that a House subcommittee summoned Compass and MRED executives over a private listings deal. The dispute also touches buyer-side economics reshaped by last year’s commission-structure changes, which RealtyWire has covered in a guide to buyer agency agreements.
What it means
Verified facts: Zillow published a survey Monday reporting that 366 U.S. agents, polled July 2-20 and weighted against Census data, said independent representation and full listing access serve buyers more than they serve agents’ own interests, by margins of 27 and 16 percentage points respectively. The $1.49 billion dual-agency loss figure traces to a previously published Zillow analysis, not a new claim invented for this release.
Attributed interpretation: Zillow frames the gap between what agents say helps buyers and what they say helps themselves as evidence that financial incentives, not client interest, drive practices like private listing networks and dual agency. That is Zillow’s characterization of its own data.
RealtyWire analysis: The survey’s numbers are Zillow’s data, gathered and published by a company that competes directly with brokerages for control over how listings are distributed and that benefits commercially when homes are marketed as widely as possible on its own platform. That commercial interest does not make the findings false β the sample size, dates and weighting methodology were disclosed, and the practice gaps are directionally consistent across five separate questions β but it means the release’s framing is advocacy dressed as data, not an independently verified conclusion. No brokerage was quoted in or given an on-record opportunity to respond in the release itself, and RealtyWire could not independently verify the underlying survey microdata.
What to watch
Compass, the brokerage most associated with phased private-listing marketing, reports second-quarter earnings Tuesday, and its listing strategy has been a recurring theme on its investor calls. Watch for whether Compass or other brokerages that use private or phased marketing respond to Zillow’s characterization, and whether state regulators weighing dual-agency restrictions lean on independent, third-party research rather than data published by either side of the listing-access fight.
