FirstAlerts
Regulators & CourtsVersion 3

FTC settles antitrust case against Zillow and Redfin over rental listing partnership

The Federal Trade Commission announced a settlement with Zillow and Redfin on August 24, 2026, resolving antitrust concerns over their rental listing partnership.

5 reports on this incident · first at Aug 24, 2026, 9:05 a.m. ET

By AI ReporterFirst reported Aug 24, 2026, 1:01 p.m. ETUpdated Aug 26, 2026, 12:55 a.m. ET
The Federal Trade Commission announced a with Zillow and Redfin on August 24, 2026, resolving antitrust concerns over their rental listing partnership. The order takes effect in , according to The Epoch Times. The includes $2 million to the states, as reported by The Epoch Times. The FTC had alleged that Zillow agreed to pay Redfin to syndicate its listings, while Redfin would end its own advertising contracts and promise not to compete with Zillow for multifamily listings, as reported by The Verge. The deal effectively combined two of the three largest online apartment listing services against their main competitor, CoStar's Apartments.com, according to The Epoch Times. Sources differ on the nature of the proceeding: The Verge and TechCrunch describe it as , while The Epoch Times and The Inquirer report it as a district court matter. The resolution is described as a by The Verge, TechCrunch, and The Epoch Times, while The Inquirer calls it a . The FTC and the companies to the order, according to all four outlets.

Earlier reports

  1. Aug 24, 2026, 6:16 p.m. ET

    FTC settles antitrust case against Zillow and Redfin; $2 million to states

    The Federal Trade Commission announced a settlement with Zillow and Redfin on Aug. 24, 2026, resolving antitrust claims over a rental listing partnership, according to the FTC's press release and multiple outlets. The settlement includes $2 million to the states, as reported by The Epoch Times.

    The FTC had alleged that Zillow agreed to pay Redfin to syndicate its listings, while Redfin would end its own advertising contracts and promise not to compete with Zillow for multifamily listings, according to The Verge. The deal effectively combined two of the three largest online apartment listing services against their main competitor, CoStar's Apartments.com, The Epoch Times reported. The FTC alleged that in exchange for $100 million and other compensation from Zillow, Redfin had agreed to shut down its internet listings and exclusively repost Zillow's apartment listings, transition its customers to Zillow, and stay out of the apartment listings market for up to nine years, according to The Inquirer.

    The settlement was consented to by the parties, according to multiple outlets. The FTC's order takes effect in 2027, The Epoch Times reported. The case was resolved as a settlement, according to The Verge, TechCrunch, and The Epoch Times, though The Inquirer described it as a litigation release. The proceeding was in an administrative forum, according to The Verge and TechCrunch, while The Epoch Times and The Inquirer reported it as a district court matter.

  2. Aug 24, 2026, 5:08 p.m. ET

    FTC settles antitrust case over Zillow-Redfin agreement

    The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has secured a settlement order resolving antitrust concerns over an agreement between Zillow and Redfin, according to a press release dated August 24, 2026. The settlement ends a case that alleged the companies' partnership violated antitrust laws, as reported by The Verge and TechCrunch.

    The FTC's allegations, as reported by The Verge, were that Zillow agreed to pay Redfin to syndicate its listings, while Redfin would end its own advertising contracts and promise not to compete with Zillow for multifamily listings. TechCrunch reported that Zillow was paying one of its largest competitors to stop competing, potentially allowing the company to charge higher prices and provide less favorable terms to property managers. The case was described as civil by both outlets, and also as administrative by The Verge.

    The settlement was consented to by the parties, according to both outlets. The FTC's order resolves the matter without a finding of liability.

  3. Aug 24, 2026, 3:17 p.m. ET

    FTC settles antitrust case against Zillow and Redfin over listing agreement

    The Federal Trade Commission has announced a settlement resolving its antitrust case against Zillow and Redfin over a 2025 partnership, according to a press release dated August 24, 2026. The settlement ends the case, which had alleged that Zillow agreed to pay Redfin to syndicate its listings while Redfin would end its own advertising contracts and promise not to compete with Zillow for multifamily listings, as reported by The Verge.

    The FTC's order resolves concerns that the agreement allegedly violated antitrust laws. The case was brought as an administrative proceeding, according to The Verge. The settlement was consented to by the parties, and the FTC's press release describes it as an order resolving antitrust concerns.

  4. Aug 24, 2026, 9:05 a.m. ETFirst report

    FTC Secures Order Resolving Antitrust Concerns with Zillow-Redfin Agreement

    The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced on August 24, 2026, that it has secured an order resolving antitrust concerns with the Zillow-Redfin agreement. The enforcement action, as detailed in an FTC press release, addresses the competitive issues raised by the agreement.

    The FTC's action is part of its ongoing oversight of mergers and agreements in the real estate sector. The order aims to ensure that the Zillow-Redfin agreement does not harm competition in the market.

    Further details of the order, including specific terms and conditions, are available in the FTC's official press release.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 326 Aug 2026, 04:55current

    Updated to reflect the settlement announcement date and the $2 million to states, and clarified the conflict in proceeding type and resolution type.

  2. Version 224 Aug 2026, 21:08current

    Updated to reflect the settlement as consented, and to present the allegations as a sourced range per conflict rules.

  3. Version 224 Aug 2026, 22:22

    Updated to include the effective date of 2027 and the $2 million to states, and clarified the conflict in case type and forum.

  4. Version 124 Aug 2026, 22:16current

    First published.

  5. Version 124 Aug 2026, 19:17current

    First published.

  6. Version 124 Aug 2026, 18:52

    First published.

  7. Version 124 Aug 2026, 22:11

    First published.

  8. Version 124 Aug 2026, 13:05current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.