Zillow’s new policy, set to take effect in May 2025, takes a hard stance against listings that are marketed publicly without being listed on the MLS and displayed via MLS feeds. Zillow says it’s about fairness and protecting consumers. But is it? Or is it about consolidating control of listing visibility under the guise of transparency? And with Zillow now operating as a licensed brokerage—and a member of many MLSs—is this policy actually benefiting consumers, or simply solidifying Zillow’s role as a gatekeeper?
Zillow claims alignment with NAR’s Clear Cooperation Policy, but that claim deserves a closer look. NAR’s recent revision—specifically its creation of the Delayed Marketing – Exempt Listing category—was designed to give sellers more flexibility. Under that rule, listings can be publicly marketed but kept off the MLS for a limited time, with the caveat that they be accessible through a broker’s VOW. Zillow’s new rule goes beyond NAR’s, rejecting listings that follow NAR’s delayed marketing policy if they aren’t also fed through the MLS. So is Zillow really following NAR’s lead—or are they charting their own, more restrictive path?
This raises a number of questions that the industry—and consumers—should be asking. Is Zillow’s new policy truly pro-consumer, or does it limit choice and access by filtering listings through only the channels it chooses to recognize? Is it fair to require listings to be on the MLS and publicly syndicated in order to be seen on the largest home search platform? Is this policy aimed at leveling the playing field, or is it about limiting the options brokerages have in how they market homes? Could Zillow’s alignment with MLS feeds—while shutting out VOW-only listings—put it in violation of fair competition principles?
And what about the relationship between Zillow and NAR? While Zillow cites NAR’s policy to justify its actions, it seems to be implementing a stricter version of it. Is this a coincidence—or are we witnessing a deeper collaboration between the country’s largest real estate platform and its most powerful trade group? Are there antitrust implications when dominant platforms and associations appear to move in sync in ways that reduce listing flexibility and centralize control?
Perhaps the most important question of all is this: Who wins in this new environment? Is it the consumer, who may get a more uniform home search experience—but possibly fewer listings to choose from? The agent, who now has fewer tools for pre-marketing a home? The MLS, which benefits from more required listing input? Or Zillow itself, which sits at the center of it all, deciding what gets seen and what doesn’t?
As this policy rolls out next month, agents, brokers, and consumers alike would do well to dig beneath the surface. At MORE, REALTORS®, we’re watching these developments closely—not just to understand what’s changing, but to ask the tough questions about why, and who it ultimately serves.
