Private Listings Clash: Why That 1.7% Premium Study Misses the Market | Brick & Bit
Housing Market
Private Listings Clash: Why That 1.7% Premium Study Misses the Market
A 700,000-sale study claims private listings fetch 1.7% more, but post-2020 policy erased that advantage. Smart sellers already chose MLS exposure. The window h
The purported 1.7% advantage vanished after 2020, falling to levels statistically indistinguishable from zero according to the study's own authors.
A 56-page academic study promises more money for selling homes off-MLS. Today's market reality tells a different story.
This research arrives at a critical juncture for agents and homeowners seeking to maximize returns in a transformed regulatory landscape.
A 56-page academic study promises more money for selling homes off-MLS. Today's market reality tells a different story.
This research arrives at a critical juncture for agents and homeowners seeking to maximize returns in a transformed regulatory landscape. The real estate industry is undergoing its most significant shift in decades, with the 2020 Clear Cooperation Policy fundamentally altering how properties are marketed and the February 2026 court decision upholding Zillow's right to ban private listings reshaping the digital marketplace. Against this backdrop, the University of Georgia's analysis of 700,000 Dallas-Fort Worth transactions provides important historical context but limited practical guidance for current decisions. Professionals who read only the headlines might draw dangerous conclusions, while those who examine the full context will understand why the market has already moved beyond the strategies the paper describes.
The Big Picture
At the heart of the private listing versus public MLS exposure debate, a University of Georgia study examined over 700,000 real estate transactions in the Dallas-Fort Worth area across two decades. Researchers employed sophisticated methodologies including coarsened exact matching and hedonic price equations to compare private sales (those completed before hitting the MLS) with conventional transactions. Their initial finding appears compelling: private sales commanded approximately 1.7% higher prices on average.
Yet the temporal context is everything. The study spans a 20-year period that includes market practices no longer existing in their original form. Since May 2020, the National Association of REALTORS® Clear Cooperation Policy requires listings to hit the MLS within one business day of public marketing. This regulatory shift fundamentally transformed the private listing ecosystem, creating an inflection point the study itself acknowledges but many commentators are ignoring. The research captures a market that no longer exists: one where listings could remain off-MLS indefinitely, creating parallel markets operating under different rules.
“The purported 1.7% advantage vanished after 2020, falling to levels statistically indistinguishable from zero according to the study's own authors.”
This decline isn't coincidental. The Clear Cooperation Policy eliminated the possibility of "trying it privately first" without consequences. Before 2020, a seller could show their property to select buyers for weeks or months, and only if that strategy failed, enter it on the MLS. Today, that approach is impossible without violating professional association rules. The change was so significant that researchers found the post-2020 premium dropped to roughly 0.9%, a figure statistically indistinguishable from zero. In practical terms, the advantage disappeared.
researcher analyzing housing data charts
By the Numbers
By the Numbers
Sample analyzed: Over 700,000 home sales in Dallas-Fort Worth
Time period covered: 20 years of real estate market data (2000-2020)
Initial premium: Approximately 1.7% higher for private sales versus MLS
Post-2020 premium: Fell to roughly 0.9%, statistically indistinguishable from zero
Illustrative value: On a $300,000 property, 1.7% represents about $5,100
Luxury properties analyzed: Over 15,000 transactions above $750,000
Private sale success rate: Only includes completed transactions, ignores failed attempts
chart showing premium decline post-2020
Why It Matters
This study lands at a particularly sensitive moment for the real estate industry. With platforms like Zillow banning private listings since February 2026 following a federal court upholding their right to do so, and with the Clear Cooperation Policy already implemented, the ecosystem that allowed private listings to operate effectively has fundamentally changed. The researchers acknowledge their analysis didn't capture the full impact of these regulatory and technological transformations. Zillow's decision is particularly significant because the platform represents approximately 70% of U.S. home search traffic. Without Zillow exposure, a private listing loses access to the largest digital marketplace audience.
The survivorship bias identified in the analysis is particularly revealing. The study only considers transactions that actually completed privately, ignoring all those properties that attempted off-MLS sales but never found buyers, or that ended up on the MLS after private attempts failed. This creates a distorted picture that overestimates the strategy's success, akin to evaluating casino profitability by interviewing only winners. In practice, many properties attempting private sales end up on the MLS after weeks or months of failure, losing valuable market time and potentially selling for less than they would have with immediate exposure.
The data on high-net-worth seller behavior is equally telling. Contrary to the narrative that private listings particularly benefit luxury properties, the study finds that sellers of the most valuable homes consistently prefer the broad exposure of the MLS. Those with the most at stake - and presumably access to the best advice - are voting with their decisions in favor of public market transparency and competition. This preference intensifies in markets like Dallas-Fort Worth, where the luxury segment is highly competitive and buyers expect to see all available options before committing millions of dollars.
What This Means For You
What This Means For You
For real estate agents, this analysis provides an opportunity to educate clients with concrete data rather than anecdotes. The supposed price advantage some private listing advocates promise appears to have evaporated in the current regulatory environment. More importantly, the study provides solid evidence that strategies that worked in the past may be ineffective today. Agents who understand this transition can offer more valuable advice and protect clients from obsolete strategies.
1Evaluate the full context: When considering sales strategies, examine not just premium percentages but the market conditions that made them possible. What worked between 2000 and 2020 may not apply after key regulatory changes. Always ask: "Do these data reflect the current market or one that no longer exists?"
2Prioritize exposure over secrecy: The data shows the most sophisticated sellers prefer maximizing the potential buyer pool. For most properties, broad visibility remains the safest strategy. In a market where 90% of buyers start their search online, limiting exposure means drastically reducing opportunities.
3Account for survivorship bias: Remember that studies of completed transactions ignore all failed attempts. A strategy that looks profitable on paper may have a much lower success rate in practice. Ask for data on failed attempts, not just successes.
agent explaining charts to homeowners
What To Watch Next
The February 2026 court decision upholding Zillow's right to ban private listings marks only the beginning of a broader transformation. Watch how other technology platforms respond to this legal precedent and whether fragmentation emerges in the listing ecosystem. Companies attempting to create parallel markets will face the fundamental challenge of achieving the user critical mass that makes any transaction platform viable. Redfin, Realtor.com, and other major platforms will likely follow similar policies, consolidating the trend toward total transparency.
On the regulatory front, implementation of the Clear Cooperation Policy will continue showing its full effects in transaction data. Coming quarterly price and days-on-market reports in key metropolitan markets will offer more current evidence about whether any residual advantage persists for limited-exposure strategies. Also watch for legal challenges to technology platform policies, particularly in jurisdictions with different regulatory frameworks. States like California and New York, with unique real estate markets, might develop distinct regulatory approaches.
Finally, watch high-net-worth seller behavior. If they continue preferring the MLS even for properties worth tens of millions of dollars, this will confirm that transparency has won the cultural battle in the market's most demanding segment. Data from the next 12-18 months will be crucial in determining whether the private listing trend reverses completely or finds residual niches in very specific markets.
The Bottom Line
The Bottom Line
The University of Georgia study offers valuable academic exercise but limited guidance for current decision-making. Its central finding - that a premium once existed for private sales - has been effectively nullified by regulatory and technological changes that transformed the market. The savviest sellers already recognized this reality, opting for broad MLS exposure even for high-value properties.
Beyond specific percentages, the analysis reveals a more fundamental principle: in liquid, transparent markets, secrecy rarely beats open competition. As technology platforms and regulatory frameworks continue evolving, the trend points toward more transparency, not less. Market participants who understand this fundamental direction will be better positioned to navigate the changes still to come. The future belongs to those who recognize that in the digital age, visibility is the most valuable asset, and trying to hide a property from the open market is like trying to sell a product without showing it to buyers.
