Today, the U.S. housing market is running on conditions that feel stacked against buyers.
Median home values have climbed roughly 60 percent since 2019, according to the Joint Center for Housing Studies, pushing the typical single-family home price above $412,000.
Existing-home sales have fallen to their lowest point in nearly three decades, and first-time buyers are aging into the market later than ever. The average age of a first-timer has reached 40, and only a thin slice of renters can afford a median-priced home at all.
In this environment, how listings reach the market matters more than ever. Buyers need greater visibility, but the industry is shifting toward less of it.
An increasing shift toward private inventory
A growing number of brokerages now use private or delayed listing channels before a home appears on the open market, a shift that makes an already difficult market even harder for buyers to navigate. Some offer internal previews to their own agents and clients.
Others use “coming soon” periods that keep listings off the MLS while they circulate privately:
- Howard Hanna promotes its Find It First program on its own website before listings reach public portals.
- Douglas Elliman has introduced a private database called Black Label.
- Corcoran runs a similar platform known as Corcoran Reserve.
- Long and Foster markets Private Exclusive listings inside its own network.
MLSs, whose purpose is to keep the market open and visible, are also not aligned on how to handle private listings.
MRED in Chicago operates a formal Private Listing Network inside the MLS, while NorthstarMLS uses a limited early access structure for coming soon listings.
Others, including CRMLS, have rejected PLNs altogether, arguing they undermine consumer access. The result is a patchwork system where the visibility a buyer gets depends less on the housing market and more on which MLS happens to serve it.
Compass as a case study
Compass pushes the model further. Its Private Exclusives program keeps homes off public search sites and markets them only to Compass agents and their clients. Compass describes these listings as a way to maintain privacy and control, with no public days on market and limited visibility until the seller chooses to go public.
The consequences show up in everyday interactions. Just last week, I received a LinkedIn message from a Compass agent offering a curated list of off-market homes in the D.C. region:
Amit… I hope you’re doing well. I recently curated a list of private exclusive, off-market homes for sale in the DMV area that are not on any of the major websites, Zillow, Redfin, etc. I know our clients really appreciate receiving the list, as it gives them an edge in the homebuying process to see these properties before they hit the open market.
The pitch framed this as a benefit for buyers, even though the advantage exists only because those homes are kept out of public view. What reads as service is really selective visibility. A home withheld from the open market is a home many buyers will never know existed, and that loss of visibility directly weakens price discovery.
For consumers, the effects are immediate. Buyers see fewer options. Sellers face fewer bidders. Transparency weakens, and the marketplace narrows.
Why the incentives matter
The motivation for Compass and others is survival in an environment where margins are thin, commissions are under scrutiny, and the economics of traditional brokerage are growing tighter.
Even before the NAR settlement reshaped commission expectations, many brokerages were struggling to maintain profitability. Inman and HousingWire have both reported on shrinking margins across large firms, rising operating costs and an uneven post-pandemic market.
Agents are frustrated with their split structures. Brokerage leaders are frustrated with their cost structures. The settlement has only intensified those pressures by putting downward force on the fees the industry has relied on for decades.
In that context, private inventory is more than a marketing tool. It is a revenue strategy.
Internal listings increase the chances that a brokerage will capture both sides of the transaction, hold more of the commission and retain more of the client relationship inside the firm. For companies under strain, that is far more attractive than sending a listing straight into the open market, where competition is strongest.
Compass’s financial picture illustrates why this approach is spreading. The company continues to grow its top line, reporting $1.85 billion in revenue in the third quarter of 2025, up nearly 24 percent from the year before, according to its earnings release. But it still posted a GAAP net loss of $4.6 million.
That kind of uneven performance is not unique to Compass. Many national firms are navigating the same volatility. What Compass demonstrates is how private inventory becomes a lever when the economics of brokerage are no longer forgiving and technology has not delivered the margin relief investors once expected.
The cost of withholding access
When access becomes a competitive advantage, the effects are measurable. Buyers routinely miss out on homes they could have afforded because the listings never reached them.
In a market where inventory remains about 25 percent below pre-pandemic levels, even one hidden listing can change a buyer’s trajectory. It can influence whether they stay a renter, stretch into a less affordable neighborhood or move farther from work than they planned.
Sellers see real losses, too.
Zillow found that off-market sales in some regions closed for $20,000 to $30,000 less than comparable on-market homes, with a national shortfall of roughly $5,000. Bright MLS reported an even steeper gap.
If private channels continue to expand, the public market will not collapse, but it will erode quietly. Each withheld listing narrows access a little more, until buyers and sellers are navigating a marketplace that shows them only part of what is actually for sale.
A better path for the industry
The pressures facing brokerages are real. Margins are thin, costs keep rising, and the traditional growth playbook no longer delivers what it used to. But the answer does not have to be private inventory or shrinking visibility. There are ways to build healthier businesses without limiting who gets to see which homes.
Brokerages could turn their technology toward the parts of the transaction that actually slow consumers down. Better pricing tools, clearer analytics, faster underwriting and smoother closing workflows would generate value buyers and sellers can feel. These improvements reduce friction, shorten timelines and create outcomes that do not depend on controlling access.
Scale can serve the market rather than wall it off. Firms with large footprints are in a position to improve how listings and data move across systems, to work with MLSs on cleaner, more complete feeds, and to develop tools that help buyers and sellers understand the market rather than navigate around hidden corners of it. Revenue grows more reliably through service and efficiency than through scarcity.
The road the industry chooses now matters, maybe more than ever.
The question is not just how brokerages will compete in a tougher environment, but what kind of market they will leave behind.
When access becomes a business model, the people who rely on the system lose first. A stronger path is still available, one built on openness, clarity and the kind of competition that benefits the entire market instead of a select few.
Amit Kulkarni is co-founder of Alloy Advisors. Connect with him on LinkedIn.
