The Private Listings Fix - Before We Destroy What We Built

March 18, 2026

The Private Listings Fix – Before We Destroy What We Built

What Every Agent, Broker, and Industry Leader Needs to Know Right Now

Last week, Zillow announced its Preview program – partnering with Keller Williams, RE/MAX, HomeServices of America, United Real Estate, and Side to enable “coming-soon” listings before MLS entry. The industry exhaled. Finally! A more responsible version of pre-marketing! Open to all buyers! MLS-compliant! Not a private club!

At least, that’s what everyone was thinking.

But before that relief could even settle in, the next move hit. eXp Realty announced its own pre-marketing syndication deal, giving agents the ability to push coming-soon listings to Homes.com, Realtor.com, and ComeHome.com before broader market exposure. Different structure, same signal: the race to control how listings are distributed is accelerating — fast.

And that’s the real story here. This isn’t about one program or one brokerage. It’s about an industry at a crossroads, where the decisions being made right now will determine whether we preserve an open, cooperative marketplace… or slowly fragment it into something far less consumer-friendly — and far more agent-controlled.

I understand the relief. And compared to what came before it, Zillow Preview is more open, more compliant, and more transparent. But I want to be direct with you — because those of you who know me know I don’t sugarcoat things — this is not the solution the industry thinks it is. It’s the most palatable version of a trend that, if left unchecked, will fundamentally change what our profession looks like in three to five years.

Zillow Preview doesn’t solve the private listings problem. It speeds it up.

Here is what I mean: when the MLS becomes the second stop instead of the first — even if that first stop is visible to all buyers on Zillow — it gets trained out of the market. Sellers learn that pre-marketing is normal. Agents learn that the private phase is expected. Brokerages learn that the MLS is where you go after the real action has already happened. The MLS will fade, and three years from now, we will look up and wonder how it happened.

I have been doing this for over 35 years. I have spoken in Germany, Greece, Australia, and across North America. I have coached tens of thousands of agents. And I am telling you that what is happening right now — with the industry treating the MLS as a fallback rather than a foundation — is one of the most serious threats I have ever seen to how we do real estate in the United States. I have the statistics to back up every word. And I have solutions. Let’s go through both.

The MLS: America’s Greatest Real Estate Asset

Let me put this in perspective. The Multiple Listing Service doesn’t exist anywhere else in the world the way it does here in the United States. Not even close. When I’ve traveled internationally and explained our system to agents in other countries where buying a home often means navigating a fragmented, opaque marketplace controlled by whoever holds the listing — they are genuinely stunned (and a little envious) by what we have.

In the American MLS system, any residential home buyer can see virtually every home for sale in one search. Any licensed agent can compete with any other agent on a level playing field. Sellers get maximum exposure to every qualified buyer in the market. It is, by every objective measure, the greatest infrastructure for residential real estate transparency ever built.

That is what we are putting at risk. And the threat is coming from within our own industry.

My Position – And Why the Rollout Is the Problem

Let me be clear about where I stand, because this conversation deserves more than a bumper sticker acknowledgement.

I am not anti-private listings. I have never been anti-private listings. I have consistently argued that seller choice is a foundational principle – and that means if a homeowner genuinely wants to work exclusively with their listing agent, keep their sale out of the public eye, or limit exposure for reasons of privacy or personal circumstance, that is their right. Full stop. I support it.

My objection has also never been to an association mandating how an individual broker runs their business. That position hasn’t changed. What has changed is the evidence of how these programs are actually being rolled out – and what that rollout is costing sellers who were never given the full picture.

The Numbers Don’t Lie – and They’re Alarming

Three years ago, approximately 2% of all listings in major U.S. markets were private or “coming soon” – meaning they never made it to the MLS or were withheld from full public marketing. Today, that number has climbed to somewhere between 5% and 10% in major markets. And according to current research, we are on a trajectory to reach 15% to 20% within the next two to three years.

Let those numbers sink in. In San Francisco today, 17% of all listings are private. In the Mid-Atlantic region, it’s 8%. According to Zillow’s data — and yes, I have my issues with Zillow, but I trust their statistics on this – the off-MLS market has already cost sellers over a billion dollars in a single year.

Now let’s look at where this is coming from. There are at least six major brokerages actively building and promoting private listing platforms. Together, these companies account for roughly 14 to 16% of all U.S. real estate transactions nationwide. But their influence is disproportionate in the markets that drive the national narrative: New York, California, Boston, Seattle, South Florida, Houston, Denver, and Austin. In those major metro markets, these six brokerages control 40 to 45% of all listings.

In Northern California and the nation’s capital, their share is 60 to 80%.

That is not a fringe phenomenon. That is a tectonic shift.

The biggest brokerage in the United States currently has 55% of its new listings entering as private or coming soon – before they ever touch the MLS. That’s not seller preference. That’s a strategy.

Here’s the part that should stop every agent reading this in their tracks: of that 55% of new listings that start privately with the largest brokerage, 94% eventually end up on the MLS. That means roughly 6% actually sell in-house. So here’s the question I want someone to answer for me: if only 6% of your private listings are actually selling within your own brokerage network, why are 55% of your sellers choosing to start privately?

Are they choosing it? Or being guided to it? Because it’s tough to say it’s a choice when you look at the full picture of what it costs them.

What Private Listings Are Costing Your Sellers – in Real Dollars

This is where we have to get brutally honest. The research is consistent and clear: homes sold off-MLS sell for 1.5% to 3.7% less than comparable homes sold through the full MLS marketplace. On a $500,000 home, that’s a loss of $7,500 to $18,500 in equity. On a million-dollar home, you’re potentially leaving $10,000 to $37,000 on the table.

Why? Because the MLS creates competition. Competition creates multiple offers. Multiple offers drive prices up. When you limit the buyer pool to one brokerage’s internal network – even when it’s a big network — you are, by definition, reducing competition. There is no mathematical model in existence where fewer buyers lead to a higher price.

Any broker or agent who tells a homeowner otherwise is making a claim that is not supportable with data. And frankly, the class action lawsuits haven’t started yet – but they will. When sellers eventually sit across from an attorney and hear, “Your agent steered you into a private listing that cost you $15,000 in your sale price,” the liability exposure for these brokerages is going to be significant.

The Days on Market Problem – and Why It’s Being Used as a Smokescreen

I want to be fair, because one of the most frequently cited justifications for private listings is legitimate: the days-on-market clock.

Here’s the issue. The moment a listing hits the MLS, it flows to Zillow, Realtor.com, and every other consumer portal. Those portals display how many days the home has been on the market and flag any price reductions. This is a real problem, and I’ve said so publicly for years.

Why? Because buyers misuse that information. The moment a buyer sees “112 days on market” or “Price reduced: twice,” they stop thinking like a homebuyer and start thinking like a hostage negotiator. The focus shifts from finding a home to chasing a deal. That doesn’t help sellers, and it doesn’t actually help buyers either — it just introduces the wrong incentives.

I understand the argument: by keeping a listing private initially, agents can test the market quietly without starting the “doom clock” in public.

But here’s the thing: that problem has a direct solution that doesn’t require dismantling the MLS. The solution is to get Zillow, Realtor.com, Homes.com, and every other portal to simply remove days-on-market and price adjustment history from their public displays. That data serves no positive purpose for consumers. It hurts sellers and misleads buyers. Get rid of it.

That is a business decision the portals can make today — and doing so would remove one of the most powerful justifications the pro-private-listing camp has been using.

What Happens When the MLS Breaks Down: Look at Commercial Real Estate

I want to share a personal story, because this isn’t theoretical for me. I’m actively looking to buy a commercial property on Long Island right now. I drove past a Douglas Elliman sign on a large property — a significant piece of real estate listed by one of their top commercial agents. I went to the MLS. Not there. I went to Zillow. Not there. Realtor.com. Not there. I Googled the address. I tried every search tool I could think of.

It simply didn’t exist in any searchable database. The only way to find it was if you happened to drive past the sign or happened to know somebody who knew somebody.

That’s commercial real estate. That’s the world we’re already living in when it comes to commercial property — fragmented, opaque, relationship-dependent. And it is a nightmare for buyers.

If we let private listings become the norm in residential real estate, we are headed toward that same fragmented future. Instead of one comprehensive database where any buyer can find any home with any agent, we’ll have a patchwork of private platforms, network-only listings, and proprietary portals — where the best properties are only visible to people who are already connected to the right brokerage.

That’s not a market. That’s a club. And the people it hurts most are everyday buyers who aren’t already plugged in to the right network.

A Fair Housing Problem We Shouldn’t Ignore

I’ll be honest — I’ve always rolled my eyes a little when Fair Housing gets invoked as the reflexive response to every policy debate in real estate. But on this issue, I’ve come to believe it deserves serious attention.

When listings are marketed exclusively through a single brokerage’s private network, the pool of potential buyers is limited to the demographics of that network. If that brokerage operates primarily in affluent communities then buyers from other backgrounds, income levels, or zip codes may never even know those homes are available. It’s not intentional steering, but the effect can be the same.

We need to be honest about that. Transparency in the marketplace isn’t just good for business. It’s a fair housing imperative.

Stop Complaining. Start Solving. Here’s What We Can Actually Do

I’ve spent enough time on the problem. Let me talk about solutions – because that’s where I want this conversation to truly go. Everybody in this industry, from the CEOs of the largest brokerages to the individual agent sitting at their kitchen table, has a role to play here. I’ve identified eight solutions. Some can be implemented today. Others require industry coordination or legislative action. All of them are worth the fight.

SOLUTION 1: Remove days-on-market and price adjustment data from public portals.

This is the simplest, fastest win available. Zillow, Realtor.com, and every other consumer portal should strip this data from their public displays. It serves no positive purpose for buyers or sellers. It introduces the wrong incentives on both sides – turning a home purchase into a negotiation game rather than a life decision. And it removes one of the strongest arguments the private listing camp has been using. This is a business decision – not a legal change, not a NAR policy fight. Just a decision by the portals to stop displaying data that actively harms the transaction. Easy peasy! Let’s start there.

SOLUTION 2: Require MLS entry for all listings – but with a “private” status toggle

This is, in my opinion, the single best structural solution to this entire debate, and here’s why: instead of fighting about whether private listings should exist – they’re not going away, so accept that – let’s require that every listing enter the MLS database with a status field that clearly marks it as “private.” That means: the listing exists in the system. Every agent in every MLS can see the address, the price, and the basic details. But no one can show it without permission from the listing broker.

Here’s where it gets powerful. If I’m a buyer’s agent and I see a private listing on the MLS that’s a perfect match for my client, I can pick up the phone and call the listing agent: “I see you’ve got 10 Main Street listed as private. I’ve got a cash buyer, fully pre-qualified, ready to move fast – and they’re willing to come in at or above your asking price. Will you co-broke this with me just for this one buyer?”

Now the listing agent has a decision to make. And here’s the critical point: if that buyer is ready, willing, and able – and represents a legitimate opportunity to get their seller the highest possible price – that listing agent cannot say no without potentially breaching their fiduciary duty to their seller. They are legally and ethically obligated to act in their seller’s best financial interest. Blocking a qualified buyer to protect a double-dip commission is not acting in the seller’s best interest. It’s the opposite. And it’s the kind of thing that gets licenses revoked and cases settled in court.

This approach gives brokerages everything they’ve been asking for: the ability to test the market, protect the days-on-market clock, and keep showings controlled during a private phase. But it does so transparently – inside the system – where every other agent in the marketplace knows the listing exists and can advocate for their buyers. The MLS isn’t mandating how anyone runs their business. It’s just maintaining a record. And that one record could be the difference between a seller getting $15,000 more for their home because the right buyer’s agent knew to call.

To me, this is the most elegant, least invasive, and most powerful solution on this entire list.

SOLUTION 3: Display private listings on portals – with leads routed to the listing firm

Here’s a dynamic that doesn’t get enough attention. On most major portals right now, when a buyer clicks “Contact Agent” on a listing, the lead doesn’t go to the listing agent — it goes to whoever paid for the premier advertising spot. This creates a perverse financial incentive for large brokerages to keep listings private: control the listing, control the lead, capture both sides of the transaction.

At least one major portal – Homes.com – already operates differently. Their model routes every lead directly to the listing agent. This is legal. No MLS rule prevents it. According to NAR’s own IDX Policy Statement 7.58, lead routing is a business decision, not an MLS compliance issue.

If Zillow and Realtor.com shifted to the Homes.com model, a major financial incentive for private listings evaporates. Private listings could be visible on every portal — buyers can see the inventory, but the listing agent keeps control of the relationship. Everybody wins except the portal’s resale revenue model. Will Zillow do this voluntarily? Probably not. But the legal pathway is clear, and industry pressure can move the needle.

SOLUTION 4: Mandatory seller’s disclosure – the private listing equivalent of the lead paint form

This is the solution that every individual agent can implement today, with zero permission from anyone.

I’ve designed a disclosure form that lays out the tradeoffs of private versus MLS listing in plain language. It includes: the average sales price reduction for off-MLS homes (1.5% to 3.7% per a Northwestern University study and NAR market exposure data), the real dollar impact at various price points, the difference in buyer pool reach (100% of active agents through MLS versus roughly 50% through a private network), fair housing implications of limiting buyer access, and a written acknowledgment that the seller understands the tradeoffs and is making an informed choice.

Walk into every listing appointment with this form. If a homeowner mentions the private listing model – or if you’re competing against a brokerage that’s pushing it – pull it out and say: “I can absolutely do a private listing with you. But first I want to make sure you have the full picture of what that choice costs. Let’s go through this together.”

If a brokerage is routing 55% of its new listings through a private channel, there is something being said in those appointments that isn’t giving sellers the complete picture. Your job is to change that. Make transparency your competitive edge.

SOLUTION 5: Cross-brokerage consumer portal

Here’s a longer-term vision worth working toward: a neutral, cross-brokerage platform that aggregates all listings – including those in private networks — into one free, consumer-accessible database. This would route around the brokerage walls without requiring any individual company to change its business model. It’s an infrastructure play, not a mandate. Whether this comes from the MLSs working together, a new industry coalition, or a technology partner willing to invest in the public good, the concept is sound. The goal is simple: one place where every listing — public or private — is registered and visible. Buyers deserve to know what’s on the market.

SOLUTION 6: Federal or state law – and a Residential Listing Transparency Act

I want to be clear about where I stand on mandates. Our associations – whether national or local — do not and should not have the right to tell individual brokers how to run their businesses. That’s always been my position, and that will not change any time soon. Association mandates in this space risk antitrust exposure and overstep appropriate boundaries.

But federal or state law is a different matter entirely. If government steps in the way it did with lead paint disclosure – requiring that sellers receive documented, written information about the financial implications of listing choices before they sign — I’m fully supportive. That’s not the association telling brokers what to do. That’s consumer protection law. And it’s the correct mechanism for something this consequential.

I’d take it further. I’d like to see something called a Residential Listing Transparency Act – modeled on SEC filing requirements. The concept: you can market your property privately, but every listing must be registered in a public database within seven days. Sellers keep full control of showings, photos, and access. But the existence of the listing is public knowledge. Think of it like a public company that can operate confidentially day-to-day — but still has to file with the SEC. The market needs the data. The public deserves the transparency. And sellers deserve to know their property is on the record.

SOLUTION 7: Transform the MLS into a public utility

I’ll be honest – this is the nuclear option, and I’d prefer we don’t need it. But it’s on the table, and we should say so clearly.

If the voluntary cooperative nature of the MLS continues to erode – if major players keep opting out, fragmenting the market, and treating listing data as proprietary competitive intelligence – then the argument for making the MLS a public utility, like county land records or the electrical grid, becomes harder to dismiss.

Listing data is civic infrastructure. It affects buyers, sellers, agents, appraisers, lenders, researchers, and policymakers. When the largest brokerages in the country can unilaterally decide to withhold 35 to 55% of their inventory from the shared marketplace, the voluntary model has already broken down. A public utility framework would ensure that listing data remains a public resource – not a competitive weapon.

Would I prefer the industry solve this without government intervention? Absolutely! But I’d rather see the MLS become a public utility than watch it become irrelevant. Because irrelevance is what we’re heading toward if this trend continues unchecked.

What You Can Do Right Now

I am not someone who believes in complaining without acting. So, here’s what I’m asking from everyone reading this:

If you’re an individual agent: Adopt the seller disclosure form. Start using it on every listing appointment. Make transparency your competitive edge. When a seller has seen both sides of the equation – the benefits and the real costs of going private — they will respect you for showing them both. And most of the time, they’ll choose the full market.

If you’re a broker or brokerage leader: Ask yourself honestly what you’re telling sellers to result in a 55% private listing rate. What story is being told in those listing appointments? If the answer isn’t full, documented disclosure of the tradeoffs, you have exposure – legally, ethically, and in terms of your professional legacy.

If you’re an industry leader, MLS executive, or association official: Stop the CCP debate. It’s a dead end. The private listing trend is not going away because of an association policy fight – the courts and market forces are moving against it. Instead, focus on what the MLS can do: create the private status toggle. Build the infrastructure that lets private listings exist transparently within the system, rather than outside it entirely.

If you have relationships with elected officials or consumer protection agencies: Share this. The lead paint disclosure didn’t come from our industry – it came from government recognizing a consumer protection need. A mandatory private listing disclosure — one that requires sellers to sign that they understand they may be selling for less money — is a reasonable, defensible consumer protection measure. Let’s make the case for it.

The Legacy Question

I want to close with something I think about a lot. The leaders of the largest brokerages in this country are, in many cases, people I genuinely like and respect. The companies they’ve built have contributed enormously to our profession. Their agents are talented, hardworking people who serve their clients well.

But I would not want my legacy to be part of what fragments the American real estate market for stock price. I don’t think they want that legacy either. I believe that if the full picture is on the table – the data, the consumer harm, the long-term implications – many of these leaders will make different choices.

The MLS isn’t just a database. It is the architecture of a fair, transparent, competitive residential real estate marketplace that the rest of the world envies. We built something extraordinary here. We owe it to every buyer who’s saving up for their first home, every seller who worked for thirty years to build equity in their property, and every independent agent who built a career on the promise of a level playing field – to protect it.

Private listings are here to stay. The question isn’t whether they exist. The question is whether transparency and fairness survive alongside them. That’s the fight worth having.

I’m committed to a solution. I hope you are too.

About Your Author Darryl Davis, CSP, Speaker, Coach, Author 

Darryl Davis is an award-winning speaker, coach, and best-selling author of three books published by McGraw Hill Publishers, including, How to Become a Power Agent in Real Estate which continues to top Amazon’s charts for most sold book to real estate agents. For more than 35 years, he has trained over 600,000 sales and service professionals worldwide to double their production. Darryl holds the CSP designation-awarded to less than 2% of speakers globally—by the National Speakers Association.

He is also the creator of The Power Program®, a groundbreaking real estate coaching and training system that has helped thousands of agents build stronger businesses and more balanced lives. And as a member of the American Bar Association, Darryl taps into the latest legal perspectives and compliance resources to better support real estate professionals in understanding and adapting to today’s complex legal and regulatory environment.