“Paying off a competitor to stop competing against you is a violation of federal antitrust laws,” said Daniel Guarnera, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition. “Zillow paid millions of dollars to eliminate Redfin as an independent competitor in an already concentrated advertising market—one that’s critical for renters, property managers, and the health of the overall U.S. housing market.”
Investors reacted swiftly. Shares of Zillow fell nearly 4 percent on Tuesday, while Rocket Companies, Redfin’s parent, slid about 5 percent. The losses reflected unease not only over potential legal remedies—which could include divestitures or restructuring—but also over the broader regulatory appetite for policing online platforms that serve as gateways to the housing market.
Zillow defended the syndication deal as beneficial for both sides of the rental market. “Our listing syndication with Redfin benefits both renters and property managers and has expanded renters’ access to multifamily listings across multiple platforms,” a company spokesperson said. “It is pro-competitive and pro-consumer by connecting property managers to more high-intent renters so they can fill their vacancies and more renters can get home. We remain confident in this partnership and the enhanced value it has delivered and will continue to deliver to consumers.”
Redfin did not immediately comment.
A Consolidated Market
For regulators, the case highlights the increasing consolidation of internet listing services, which play a central role in how Americans search for rental housing. Zillow, Redfin and CoStar’s Apartments.com dominate the digital marketplace, with Zillow drawing more than 250 million visits monthly and Redfin attracting about 95 million. By contrast, Rent.com and ApartmentGuide.com register only a fraction of that traffic, generally in the low single-digit millions.
