Zillow pushes back against Compass’s claims of conspiracy, monopoly

A little over two weeks after Zillow filed letters responding to Compass’s motions for preliminary injunction and expedited discovery, the listing portal giant is officially firing back with its response to these motions.

Zillow filed its response and related declarations from company executives, including Chief Industry Development Officer Errol Samuelson, CEO Jeremy Wacksman and CFO Jeremy Hoffman, on Thursday, the day before the deadline to file a response. 

In its motion for a preliminary injunction, Compass asks the court to stop Zillow from implementing its listing access standards, which bans listings that are publicly advertised for more than 24 hours before being input into the MLS. In its suit filed in late-June, Compass argues that Zillow is a monopoly and is harming Compass by implementing a rule that allegedly punishes it for using its three-phased marketing strategy, which relies on soft-launching a property as a private exclusive and a coming soon before it hits the MLS. Despite Zillow’s policy stating that listings entered into the MLS within 24 hours of public marketing being ok, a Compass spokesperson claims that some listings held by its agents received violation notices from Zillow after being entered into their local MLS within 24 hours of marketing as coming soons and not active listings. As coming soon listings, these properties did appear in the MLS, but were not syndicated to Zillow or other sites through IDX feeds.

Zillow claims that if the judge grants this motion, the court would be forcing the company to display Compass’s “hidden listings.” The defendant argues that case law shows that businesses like Zillow do not have a duty to deal with other businesses.

“Through its motion, Compass asks the Court to force Zillow to display Compass listings on Compass’s terms,” the reply states. “But the antitrust laws do not permit Compass to force Zillow to deal with Compass on its preferred terms, or support hidden listings which harm consumers and Zillow. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that businesses — even those with market power — have no duty to assist their competitors.”

Has Compass failed to show harm?

Additionally, Zillow again argues that Compass has failed to show how its listing policy causes Compass irreparable harm, something it would need to do in order for the court to grant the preliminary injunction. Echoing sentiments shared in its letters, Zillow highlights that Compass waited nearly three months after the policy was announced to file the lawsuit and ask for a preliminary injunction.

“Compass’s claimed irreparable harms are completely undermined by its contradictory conduct and statements and three-month delay in filing suit. Compass argues that Zillow’s refusal to display its hidden listings is catastrophic to Compass’s business,” the filing states. “But the Standards do not harm competition or innovation as they apply only to Zillow’s platform; they do not prevent Compass (or any other brokerage) from displaying listings anywhere else. Just this weekend, he announced that Compass is using ‘all three phases of [t]he … Three Phase Marketing Strategy as designed,’ thus conceding that Zillow’s Standards have not foreclosed Compass’s Scheme. And just last week, Compass announced a new policy to share its hidden listings, except with platforms like Zillow.” 

The filing and declarations also address Compass’s antitrust allegations, including that Zillow is a monopoly. Zillow argues that Compass has not shown in its complaint that Zillow has market power in a valid market. 

“Compass advances no direct evidence of market power such as increased prices or reduced output. Instead, Compass principally alleges that 64% to 66% of homebuyers and sellers visit Zillow,” the filing states. “Those figures are not market shares and disregard the fact that Zillow facilitates only a single-digit share of for-sale transactions.”

Zillow also refutes the claims that it engaged in a conspiracy with other real estate industry entities, including Redfin and eXp Realty, to harm Compass. 

The brokerage plaintiff’s filings detail various meetings between Zillow and Compass, as well as Redfin and Compass, which it cites as evidence of collusion between Zillow and Redfin. In its initial complaint, Compass claims that within minutes of Zillow announcing its listing policy, Redfin CEO Glenn Kelman texted Compass CEO Robert Reffkin asking for a call. During that call, Compass claims that  Kelman revealed that while he agreed with some of Reffkin’s points “regarding pre-marketing and Zillow’s negative insights, Redfin had agreed to follow Zillow’s lead and would publicly announce as much.”

Compass argues that Redfin’s decision to announce a similar listing standards policy a few days after Zillow announced its policy is further evidence of a conspiracy.

According to Zillow’s filing no such collusion occurred. 

“On April 9, 2025, as part of its broader outreach, Zillow CEO Jeremy Wacksman called Mr. Kelman to advise that Zillow had decided to implement the Standards and would make a public announcement the next day,” the filing states. “During the call, Mr. Kelman expressed support for Zillow’s decision and indicated that Redfin would likely consider a similar policy. By then, Zillow had already independently decided to proceed with its Standards. At no point did Mr. Wacksman and Mr. Kelman ever discuss or enter into any agreement to boycott Compass.”

Zillow’s set of filings also addresses the allegations of a conspiracy with eXp Realty, which was the first brokerage to sign on to abide by Zillow’s listing standards policy. As part of this deal, eXp is providing Zillow with a direct feed to its listings, which is how Zillow previously received listings data prior to becoming a brokerage and gaining access to IDX feeds.  

Included in the filings is an unredacted copy of the formerly confidential agreement between Zillow and eXp. 

“Thousands of eXp agents are customers of Zillow’s advertising and referral services,” the filing states. “To seek feedback from a key partner, Zillow’s Chief Industry Development Officer, Errol Samuelson, contacted eXp CEO Leo Pareja about Zillow’s plans. Mr. Pareja expressed support for the Standards, and the parties began discussing a potential listing feed agreement.”

The filings also discuss Zillow’s meeting with Compass, which was held on April 1, 2025, a little over a week before Zillow announced its listing policy. At the meeting, Compass alleges that Zillow offered it “financial upside” if it abandoned its three-phase marketing strategy. 

According to a declaration by Zillow CFO Jeremy Hoffman, leaders from the two firms met to discuss “ways Zillow could help the firm grow its business while adhering to Zillow’s transparency principles.” During this meeting, Reffkin allegedly said, “All I care about is agents. Taking care of consumers is what you do.” Zillow argues that this is opposite of what Compass is claiming it is trying to do with its three-phased marketing strategy and push for seller choice. 

In an emailed statement a Compass spokesperson refuted this claim writing that the “case is about protecting homeowner choice.”

“No single company should have the power to ban agents or listings because they don’t follow that company’s business model,” the spokesperson wrote. “That’s not competition—it’s coercion. Imagine if Amazon banned a seller for listing a product on their own website first. That’s essentially what’s happening here. Homeowners deserve the right to choose how they sell their homes.”

Compass has until August 1 to file its reply if the Court decides to deny its motion for discovery. 

Additionally, Zillow is planning on filing a motion to dismiss the suit by Aug. 22, or 14 days after the court rules on the preliminary injunction motion. Compass has indicated that it intends to file an amended complaint if any or all of its claims are dismissed.

This article has been updated to add statements from Compass.