A series of high-profile cases—targeting everything from multiple listing services (MLS) and platform policies to algorithmic rent-setting—is painting a clear picture: antitrust scrutiny in the real estate industry is converging. What began as operational disputes in the late 2010s is now being reframed by regulators and courts as fundamental questions about market control, data governance, and competitive fairness. For an industry that has rapidly embraced technology, this shift represents a monumental challenge. Proptech companies are finding that the very foundations on which they built their products are now under a microscope.
The modern antitrust wave in real estate didn’t materialize overnight. It wasn’t born from lawsuits filed in 2023 or 2024. Its origins trace back nearly a decade, starting with a quiet but pivotal event that reshaped the rental landscape and unknowingly lit the fuse for today’s regulatory reckoning. I’m going to walk you through the key moments that brought the industry to this point and explore what this new era of scrutiny means for the future of real estate technology.
Before the lawsuits, there was 2017
The story begins in December 2017 when RealPage, a major player in property management software, acquired its only significant competitor in rental pricing algorithms, LRO, for $300 million. Internally, the Department of Justice (DOJ) raised alarms, noting the deal would effectively “double RealPage’s influence” in the pricing software market, expanding its reach from roughly 1.5 million to over 3 million priced units. Despite these internal concerns, the merger was approved.
This single transaction quietly transformed the rental industry. By consolidating the two largest pricing systems under one roof, RealPage gained unprecedented access to vast amounts of competitively sensitive, non-public data. This included everything from leasing information and occupancy levels to unit-level pricing histories and concession strategies. In that moment, rental pricing began its shift from a property-by-property decision made by individual landlords into a system driven by algorithms operating across entire metropolitan areas. The industry barely registered the change, and regulators let it pass. But the fuse for today’s antitrust explosion had been lit.
2020: Real estate’s antitrust warning signs
By 2020, regulatory concerns had widened beyond just pricing systems. When CoStar Group attempted to acquire RentPath for $588 million, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) stepped in, arguing the merger would stifle competition in the online rental advertising space. RentPath was eventually sold to another buyer, but the FTC’s intervention sent a subtle yet unmistakable message: proptech consolidation was no longer flying under the radar.
2022: The year proptech’s antitrust crisis went public
The issue exploded into public consciousness in mid-October 2022. Investigative reporting uncovered a pattern that regulators had previously overlooked: landlords across the country were using RealPage’s revenue-management software in near lockstep. They were often raising rents together, even in markets where occupancy was falling.
The investigation revealed several findings:
- In certain ZIP codes, 70% or more of apartments were controlled by landlords using the same RealPage algorithm.
- The software recommended rent hikes even when vacancies were high, at times encouraging lower occupancy to maintain higher price levels.
- RealPage was pooling non-public, competitive leasing data from numerous, otherwise competing, property management firms.
- Landlords increasingly relied on these algorithmic “recommendations” rather than competing on price independently.
The reaction was immediate and widespread. Within days, renters filed the first wave of class-action lawsuits. U.S. senators demanded an investigation, and the DOJ opened a federal antitrust probe. The period from late 2022 to early 2023 marked the “awakening”—the moment when algorithmic coordination morphed from a niche industry practice into a national antitrust crisis.
2023-2024: The antitrust fight goes federal in real estate
The legal and regulatory pressure mounted swiftly. By April 2023, over 40 class-action lawsuits were consolidated into a single multidistrict litigation (MDL) in Tennessee, creating a unified national case that alleged a vast price-fixing scheme covering millions of apartments.
In November 2023, the government’s stance became explicit. Washington, D.C., became the first government entity to file a public enforcement action, labeling RealPage’s system “a housing cartel.” Just days later, the DOJ and FTC issued a joint declaration, stating, “Automating an anticompetitive scheme does not make it less anticompetitive.” The era of regulatory silence was officially over.
The momentum carried into 2024. In early February, Arizona launched the first major state-level enforcement action, alleging that RealPage’s software was a key driver of rent spikes exceeding 30% in Phoenix and Tucson. However, the pivotal moment arrived in August 2024, when the DOJ, joined by eight states, filed a federal antitrust lawsuit against RealPage. The complaint argued that the company:
- Facilitated horizontal collusion among landlords.
- Coordinated pricing through the sharing of non-public data.
- Operated a hub-and-spoke price-fixing system by design.
This was a landmark case, representing the first time U.S. regulators explicitly targeted an algorithm as the central mechanism of a price-fixing conspiracy.
2025: A cascade of consequences
By 2025, the legal pressure had escalated into a nationwide crackdown. When I look at the timeline, it’s stunning how quickly things accelerated:
January: Cortland, a major landlord, settled with the DOJ and agreed to stop using RealPage’s software entirely.
April: Washington State filed its own lawsuit, estimating that 800,000 leases in the state had been affected. New Jersey followed, suing RealPage and several landlords, calling them a “rent-setting cartel.”
June: Washington, D.C., secured its first settlement, banning a 9,000-unit landlord from using any rent-setting software.
August: Greystar, the nation’s largest property manager, agreed to a sweeping settlement with the DOJ that barred it from using any pricing tool based on competitor data.
September & October: RealPage reached its first state-level settlement in Nevada, and 26 landlords agreed to MDL settlements totaling $142 million.
November: Nine states announced a coordinated $7 million settlement with Greystar that required significant behavioral reforms.
By the end of 2025, multiple cities—including Philadelphia, Minneapolis, and San Francisco—had gone even further, banning algorithmic rent-setting tools outright. The quiet 2017 merger had snowballed into one of the most significant antitrust battles in modern housing history.
Proptech platforms face their own antitrust storm
While the rental market grappled with algorithmic collusion, the for-sale sector faced its own antitrust challenges, centered on platform control and listing visibility. A dispute between Zillow and Chicago’s MLS (MRED) brought a critical question to the forefront: Who decides when a listing becomes public?
This conflict intensified when Compass filed a federal lawsuit challenging Zillow’s one-day listing rule, which required new listings to be posted on the MLS within one business day. Compass argued the rule restricted competition, limited seller flexibility, and reinforced Zillow’s platform dominance.
These cases are forcing courts to evaluate whether platform-level rules harm consumers, disadvantage smaller brokers, or concentrate too much power in the hands of a few dominant tech players. Platform governance is no longer just a technical detail; it’s a market-power question. And it’s unfolding at the same time as the rental pricing cases.
How antitrust regulators now view real estate and proptech
Viewed individually, these legal battles might seem disconnected: Zillow vs. MRED is about listing visibility, Compass vs. Zillow is about platform power, and RealPage vs. the DOJ is about rental price-fixing. But when I step back and look at them together, they form a cohesive narrative.
Regulators are now scrutinizing four fundamental questions that cut across all corners of real estate:
Who controls the data? Whether it’s MLS structures, platform data pipelines, or rental-pricing databases, control over information is being treated as a key competitive lever.
Who decides when information becomes public? Delays or restrictions on data visibility are now seen as potential competitive chokepoints.
Are algorithms or platforms shaping market outcomes? Both pricing tools and listing rules are being examined for their potential to reduce competition.
Where is the line between innovation and distortion? Proptech has spent years building systems based on centralization and black-box optimization. Regulators are now demanding transparency, accountability, and independent decision-making.
The entire industry is being forced to reconsider how technology and competition should coexist.
The proptech landscape after antitrust intervention
The assumptions that once felt safe for proptech companies are now being challenged. The ideas that “more data is always better” and that “algorithmic optimization is neutral” no longer hold.
Regulators have sent clear signals:
- Pricing algorithms using non-public competitor data are likely illegal.
- Visibility rules that influence competitive conditions will face heavy scrutiny.
- Data-sharing practices must be transparent, limited, and auditable.
- Platforms and algorithms must be held accountable for their market impact.
With cities and states already banning certain pricing tools and the federal government making housing affordability a political priority, this shift is structural, not temporary. Proptech has officially entered its antitrust era.
What’s next for proptech
This is no longer a collection of isolated disputes. It is a coordinated, multi-front antitrust wave that is reshaping the industry. From the 2017 merger that concentrated rental-pricing power to the 2025 flood of settlements and reforms, a new set of rules is being written in real time.
Real estate is entering a new phase where:
- Data governance is central to competition policy.
- Transparency is becoming mandatory.
- Platform power is actively monitored.
- Algorithmic systems will be regulated.
For proptech companies, the path forward requires a fundamental rebuilding of systems around principles of ethics, compliance, and a reliance on public, not proprietary data. The industry is being reshaped—not softly, but decisively. I believe the rules being defined today will determine the landscape of real estate technology for the next decade—and companies that adapt quickly will be the ones that survive.
Sources: Pro Publica, Office of the Attorney General (Columbia), Office of the Attorney General (Washington), Federal Trade Comission, Multifamily Dive, American Bar, CRE Daily, Justice.gov, Private Equity Stakeholder Project, Cohen Milstein, Reuters, Ap News, Housing Wire
