What's Happening Behind the Scenes in Real Estate (the Good, the Bad and the Ugly-and How It Affects Mobility)
While real estate is a very localized business, there are some things happening on a national scale that are worth discussing, as they have downstream effects on local business practices and ultimately mobility. But the real buzz lies in the behind-the-scenes scenarios playing out in a not-so-behind-the-scenes way. Here are six topics you may want to pay attention to.
1. Acquisitions and Mergers:
Compass buying Anywhere (Century 21, Coldwell Banker, Sotheby’s International Realty, Corcoran Group, ERA, and BH&G) was pretty earth-shattering news. It closed in January 2026, months ahead of its expected close date. Compass purchased @Properties in January of 2025, and the total entity is now known as Compass Worldwide Holdings, Inc., the largest real estate company in the world with 340,000 real estate agents in 120 countries. See this article for my take on how it might affect the real estate and relocation industries: Why the Compass/Anywhere Closing Is Only the First Move — TRH Consulting
A couple of weeks ago, Compass International Holdings also took a controlling stake in Peerage USA Holdings LLC, a company that invests in and supports multiple Sotheby's International Realty (SIR) franchises, as part of a debt-restructuring transaction. Peerage had been primarily investing in Canadian companies until it moved into the US in 2019. They have invested in some notable entities such as Premier SIR, Four Seasons SIR, Briggs Freeman SIR, Jameson SIR, and Pacific SIR. I suspect Compass’ 51% stake in Peerage USA Holdings is a strategic move to expand its control in the luxury markets these brokers serve, integrate its technology, and gain greater influence with these brokers regarding its private listings initiative.
The Real Brokerage, Inc., announced last week that it is buying REMAX Holdings Inc. It was no surprise that REMAX was quietly on the market. They have lost traction in recent years to comparable models with much better technology and funding. The transaction has valued the franchisor at about $880 million, a deal that would combine one of the fastest-growing US brokerages with one of the industry’s largest global franchise networks. The new company will be known as Real REMAX Holdings and will include over 180,000 real estate professionals in 120 countries. Expect a heavy push for REMAX agents and broker-owners to adopt the Real technology. I suspect that Real will explore a more vertically integrated model in which the combined company captures value not just from brokerage commissions and franchise fees but also from related services and its large footprint. From what I know about both companies, they have VERY different cultures. So we’ll see how this plays out. This acquisition puts them at number in size three behind Compass Worldwide Holdings and Keller Williams.
The Takeaway: These behemoths will control a huge amount of the listing inventory. How they choose to display their listings will determine how consumers and agents gain access to that information. By controlling the listings, they may be able to attract more buyers who think that may be the only way to get a first peek at new inventory. Maybe we really do need a national MLS. More on that another time.
I don’t believe these acquisitions will have a negative impact on the real estate agents who work for these companies, but I do believe these changes may affect consumers. Even though a large percentage of Compass Worldwide and Real REMAX entities are franchised (which may imply independence), they may still face pressure from their parent to align with its policies, which may or may not be good for downstream customers. There is a reason Robert Reffkin of Compass has been on a nonstop road show to build trust with the franchise groups. He needs their loyalty to maintain the franchise dollars and to implement his private exclusive listings initiative. More on that below in #2.
Where are the positives for every other brokerage? They must capitalize on their local expertise and independence, which allows them to focus on a ‘customer first’ mentality. Compass, in particular, has made it clear that it is agent-centric and company-centered. It will be important to ensure that everyone understands who owns what and what that means to a person buying or selling real estate. It will be interesting to see how the luxury Anywhere brands respond. Bigger isn’t always better in the world of high-end real estate.
As an alternative: On May 4th, Brown Harris Stevens (NY, NJ, CT, FL) and FirstTeam (CA, AZ, WA) announced a multi-year marketing partnership designed to build cross-marketing, shared advertising, and public relations initiatives, as well as referrals. A quote from the FirstTeam marketing director in Inman News, “Rather than consolidation, it’s collaboration.” This is probably a test drive for a potential merger down the line. This model could be a nice option for independent brokers in lieu of selling, giving them access to expertise, shared resources, and programs they may not currently have in their firm. Both entities are members of the Leading Real Estate Companies of the World broker network. The combined firms have 5000 agents in 70 offices.
There are sure to be more mergers and acquisitions (and partnerships) among smaller regional brokers and maybe between large ones. With an aging population of broker owners, slim margins, and often no clear line of succession, some will want to call it quits. I believe we will also see the same in the relocation management company world. Some of the smaller entities may join forces or be gobbled up by larger ones. It is yet to be seen what plans Compass Worldwide has for Cartus.
2. Private, exclusive listings:
I am not going to go too in-depth here because you can read all about it here: Involved in buying or selling a residential property any time soon? You are going to want to read this. — TRH Consulting
In a nutshell, some brokerages (with Compass being the largest) are peddling this strategy and convincing sellers to withhold their listings from the MLS and public real estate portals. The pros of not exposing a listing to the most eyeballs possible are few, in my opinion. But those who might not want their property publicly visible might be:
High-profile, wealthy clients who want privacy
Estate properties with a lot of expensive art, etc.
Properties with tenants
People who don’t want prospects and agents in their home
What some pro-private brokers claim it does:
Tests the market and the list price before going public
Target buyer matching (smells of exclusionary tactics to me)
Keeps days on market out of public view (benefits the sellers, not the buyers)
Builds excitement in a ‘coming soon’ phase
What it really does:
Generates fewer offers
Potentially lower offers
Risks leaving money on the table
Buyers and agents have to go multiple places to see what is on the market
Ethical and transparency concerns (also potential Fair Housing issues)
Attracts buyers who come to their sites since it is the only place they can see this inventory
Allows the brokerage to sell the listing ‘in-house’ and retain the entire commission without sharing with outside brokers
The Takeaway: Compass is the main driver of this initiative, and I assume that to take some heat off, they have partnered with Redfin to expose their private, exclusive listings on their portal. It is another way to reach buyers who might not visit the Compass site. But the Redfin traffic pales in comparison to the number of visits Zillow gets in a month. Compass claims that, according to a recent independent report, these private listings sell for more. I don’t buy it. It may work for ultra-luxury properties where the buyer pool is very small and often targeted. Some states are starting to pay attention and legally prohibit the behavior. More lawsuits will surely follow. It all comes down to transparency and our duty to our customers.
What should mobility providers pay attention to? Ensure you are listing with a broker who offers marketing options for transferees to achieve the highest price, the fastest sale, and the most exposure. It is their choice how they want to expose their property, but ensure they understand the pros and cons.
3. The 21st Century Road to Housing Act:
The Senate’s bipartisan 21st Century Road to Housing Act includes incentives for office conversions, manufactured and modular housing, ADUs, and changes aimed at expanding small-dollar mortgages. The bill also ties some federal funding to local housing production, although several provisions may take until 2027 or later to actually affect supply. While it is heading in the right direction, there are potential downsides, including slow adoption, pushback from certain local groups, fewer investors, and the unintended consequence of raising construction prices. It’s too soon to tell.
It focuses on increasing housing supply and lowering costs by cutting federal red tape, speeding up development, and improving existing housing programs.
It modernizes federal housing and community development programs and encourages more private-sector participation.
It also includes measures to streamline affordable housing construction, expand financing tools, and support local flexibility without overriding zoning control.
A key (and controversial) provision would limit or ban large institutional investors from buying large numbers of single-family homes. Let’s dig into this one.
What it is meant to do:
Keep large investors, REITs, and private equity firms from owning over 350 properties. It is perceived that large investor groups are squeezing out mom-and-pop investors and individual buyers. Many of these properties end up as rentals. While in theory, this proposal makes sense, there are some unintended consequences:
There may be less rental housing
Rents could be driven higher
It targets the wrong group. Only approximately 2%- 5% of homes were purchased by large institutional investors over the last five years. 20%-30% is the number if you include small private investors, but they aren’t the target.
The Takeaway: Here is the problem for the mobility industry. Relocation management companies or corporations may, at any given time, own more than 350 inventory properties in their home sale programs. And what about 1031 exchange companies? These were not the targets, but are swept up in the Act unless we can convince lawmakers to exclude these unique scenarios. Go here to read more about it from WERC and act: Template - Home Sale Programs FINAL 3-3-26.docx
An unfortunate side effect is that the mobility industry may have to develop creative workarounds if certain entities are not excluded. It is unfortunate that this initiative seeks to make institutional investors the poster children for unaffordable housing. Institutional investors (100+ homes) typically own <1% of all homes nationally. The institutional share of rental homes (not all homes) is around 2%–3% nationally. They are not the root cause of affordability issues; they are a small part of the problem. Some large markets (such as Atlanta and Phoenix) have a much higher share, and those should be addressed at the local and individual levels because they are likely driving up rent prices in those markets.
4. What about FinCEN (Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, a bureau of the US Treasury Dept)? I am not going to get too far in the weeds here because it is a complex situation; your title/escrow provider should be able to fill you in as this unfolds.
What it is supposed to do:
Collect financial intelligence
Fight money laundering and financial crime
Sets compliance rules
What it means for real estate:
Pulling back the curtain on who actually owns a property (some high-profile people use LLCs and trusts to disguise their ownership)
Exposes what they paid for their property
Focused on cash transaction details
The title companies are now fully responsible for the FinCEN portal reporting
It means more transparency but less anonymity for buyers (particularly those who are laundering money via real estate)
Agents may be required to report any suspicious activity and really know who their client is and where their money comes from (particularly cash buyers)
This may put more pressure on escrow and title entities. They will now be compliance allies with the agent
Could increase challenges for foreign buyers
This could mean longer closing timelines and required verification steps on certain deals
There are some exceptions, such as transfers due to death, bankruptcy, 1031 exchanges, etc.
The Takeaway: FinCEN real estate rule as of right now:
It was implemented and is currently being legally challenged, and is in limbo.
Beneficial ownership rules have been significantly scaled back (for now). More oversight is coming; it is just not finalized yet. This will be a tracking, disclosure, and privacy issue for clients of title, escrow, and real estate brokerages. There are many nuances that can be clarified by escrow/title professionals and closing attorneys.
How might it affect mobility? When high-profile executives or government officials (such as FBI agents, CEOs, judges, pro athletes, etc.) do not want their real estate business made public, there will be an obligation to disclose it. So agents, in general, may need to become more comfortable asking a lot of questions. And corporations and government agencies need to figure out how to protect their high-profile transferees during relocation.
5. Real Estate Agents are on the Move:
Whenever the real estate market is in flux or the economy is struggling, real estate agents often think that changing brokerages is the answer to give their career a boost. Sometimes it is, but often, they need to look inward at their own business practices. Real estate is very much the 80/20 rule. 80% of the agents do very little, and 20% carry the heavy load. Yet another reason to depend on a preferred broker network to determine the best agents for the transferees.
According to a study referenced in Inman News and their sources, “External agent moves increased 25 percent quarter over quarter and 7 percent year over year during the first quarter of 2026, with those agents representing a $16 billion in annualized production. Agents closing at least $1 million annually were most likely to move during Q1 (55 percent), followed by agents closing at least $4 million (19 percent). Meanwhile, agents closing less than $1 million (13.5 percent) and agents closing $8 million or more (11.7 percent) were the least likely to make a move.”
The Takeaway: With all the changes in real estate, it is time for broker owners and their staff to focus heavily on recruiting and retention. Offering a value proposition, such as company-generated business, is the way to show that they are investing in their high-performing agents’ future. It’s not about bodies; it's about bringing in and retaining productive people who know how to use tools, stay up to date on the changing environment, are committed to real estate (and relocation) as a career, and see the value their brand brings to their business. Bigger isn’t necessarily better.
6. Challenges still exist in every market:
Mortgage rates, ‘Lock-In Effect’, and rebalancing markets are the key drivers on a national scale. Each of these varies in response to a wide range of influences and local conditions.
Inventory is finally rising a bit, and those who were hell-bent on hanging onto their low interest rates (lock-in effect) have finally made their peace with moving on at a higher rate.
The average sales prices ticked up a bit in the first quarter, which is typically fueled by an increase in demand.
We are still at a historically low national transaction volume, with approximately 4 million sales in Q1. As a reference point, sales hit 6 million+ in 2022. It has stabilized a bit, but is nowhere near the previous numbers.
After talking to many Relocation Directors recently, I get the sense that their referral volume is rising and that we are entering a more normal seasonal market, one we haven’t really seen since before COVID.
Each market is hyperlocal and may be positively or negatively affected by those seeking greater affordability and are willing to move to a new state or city to achieve that.
People are staying in their homes longer overall, and we are still seeing an increase in multi-generational living.
Many sellers are still hanging on to what they think their home is worth based on previous standards, which has led to a high number of price reductions and elongated days on market. The good news is that the days-on-market numbers were slightly lower in the first quarter of 2026.
Builders are cautious as they don’t want to be stuck with a lot of inventory. While everyone talks about housing shortages, builders sometimes don’t want to build in markets that need affordable housing priced for first-time homebuyers and lower-income buyers.
Back-to-the-office initiatives are pushing employees to make decisions about their work-life balance. Skyrocketing fuel prices may be giving employees ammo to push back on commuting into the office.
The war in Iran will likely have long-term effects on the economy, and when the economy is in flux, corporations and consumers get nervous, which may stall relocation and local moves. Economic uncertainty tends to freeze behavior and shake consumer confidence.
The Overall Takeaway: Real estate can be remarkably resilient, and it is still the American dream. But with all the variables above, it is more important than ever to use a reputable brokerage and support suppliers with experienced, knowledgeable agents and staff to help navigate them. BTW, a lot of this is my opinion, so take it for what you will.
“You can’t live in a stock certificate.” — Oprah Winfrey, media mogul, philanthropist, actress, and talk show host.
