US Judge Rejects Compass' Bid for Injunction Over Zillow Online Home Listings

A federal judge on Friday rejected Compass' request for an injunction requiring Zillow to list more homes on its platforms. The ruling comes after Compass filed an antitrust lawsuit against Zillow in June 2025, alleging the platform used anticompetitive tactics to exclude certain listings. The decision allows Zillow to continue its current policy barring listings that have been marketed elsewhere first.

Compass had accused Zillow of violating antitrust law by refusing to list homes that brokers had previously marketed privately. The real estate brokerage also claimed Zillow had conspired with Redfin to keep such homes off their platforms. However, Judge Jeannette Vargas concluded that Compass failed to show direct evidence of an anticompetitive agreement between the two companies.

The judge also found no 'clear showing' that Zillow monopolizes online home listings, even assuming a market share as high as 66%. Compass had argued that Zillow's dominance in online listings gives it an unfair advantage over other brokers. The ruling means the case will continue without a preliminary injunction.

The decision is a major blow for Compass, which has sought to build a private listings network and encourage sellers to work with its agents. Compass' strategy has been to promote direct marketing before public listing, a practice that Zillow and Redfin have resisted. The ruling allows Zillow to maintain its existing listing rules for now.

Compass' lawsuit claims Zillow uses "anticompetitive tactics" to bar listings that haven't been posted to a local multiple-listing service within 24 hours. The brokerage argues this policy unfairly limits access to real estate data for smaller competitors. The judge denied the request for a preliminary halt to Zillow's policy.

The case is now set to proceed through the court system. Compass and Zillow may file additional motions before a trial date is set. The outcome could have broader implications for online real estate platforms and antitrust enforcement in the sector.

The decision underscores the legal challenges facing real estate brokerages in a digital marketplace dominated by online platforms. Compass had sought a temporary injunction to prevent Zillow from enforcing its listing rules during the lawsuit. The judge's ruling suggests a high burden of proof for antitrust claims in this case.

Why Did This Happen?

The judge emphasized the lack of direct evidence showing collusion between Zillow and Redfin. She noted Compass relied largely on circumstantial evidence and failed to prove an explicit agreement. This aligns with a broader trend in antitrust law, where courts often require direct evidence of collusion.

Compass also failed to demonstrate that Zillow's market share alone constituted monopolization. The judge noted that while Zillow dominates online home listings, it does not necessarily control the entire market. This distinction is critical in antitrust cases, where market power and anticompetitive behavior must be clearly established.

The ruling reflects a cautious judicial approach to antitrust claims in the real estate sector. Courts have historically been skeptical of such claims without clear evidence of market manipulation. This decision is likely to influence future antitrust cases involving online platforms.

What Are Analysts Watching Next?

Analysts will be watching for any appeals or additional legal motions in the case. The outcome could set a precedent for similar lawsuits against other online platforms. Investors may also be monitoring how the real estate sector reacts to the ruling.

The ruling could affect Compass' ability to compete with Zillow and Redfin in the online marketplace. If Zillow continues its current policy, it may strengthen its position in the market. This could have long-term implications for market share and competition.

The case also raises questions about the future of online home listings and how they are regulated. With real estate becoming increasingly digital, courts may see more antitrust cases involving online platforms. The outcome could shape the industry's landscape for years to come.