Real Estate (Page 7)

For many independent real estate brokerages, competing with national franchises’ market insight has long meant a painful choice; stay boutique or surrender your brand and hang a new sign.

But Tim Rodland — founder of Rodland Real Estate in The Bahamas — believes artificial intelligence (AI) has changed that calculation entirely.

His company is introducing RoRo, an AI platform that delivers real-time market intelligence through a voice-driven conversational interface, to the U.S. market ahead of a phased global rollout.

Unlike traditional analytics platforms that rely on static dashboards, RoRo interprets live market data in real time — connecting pricing behavior, timing and micro-market trends.

Rodland sat down with HousingWire to explain how independent brokerages can now compete at scale without losing their identity.

Editor’s note: This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Jonathan Delozier: With all the consolidation happening in real estate, what are the biggest hurdles right now for an independent brokerage that technology alone might not be able to solve?

Tim Rodland: I think that most of the challenges that many independents have is they don’t have access to technology. Independents had two opportunities back in the day, or up to this point; stay small or join another larger system. Those were their two options.

We’re trying to scale independence by offering technology that was not available before. With AI and the new technologies that are out there these days, a lot of things have changed. People have evolved, and we’ve evolved fast. We were one of the first independents — I don’t know if we’re the first — to build infrastructure that the independent brokerage can actually use and adopt and apply into their own existing systems, rather than joining a unified end-to-end system.

Delozier: Where are today’s real estate AI tools falling short for brokers in everyday practice?

Rodland: I think most of the software, the tools that you’ve seen out there, are focused on the agent, so retail. Each agent gets their own tool and can say, ‘Hey, I got Claude or I got ChatGPT or I got this tool.’ None of it is unified on a brokerage level.

We work with you, implement your workflows into the tool and you distribute it amongst your agents. It’s an internal platform rather than fragmentation and disjointed tools that work differently for different persons. There’s a lot of little retail tools out there, but none that I’m aware of that operate from a B2B angle.

Delozier: What kind of decisions are brokers currently making with incomplete or outdated information, and what are the worst consequences?

Rodland: Listen, it’s like anything when you misdiagnose, whether that’s with a doctor or any other type of professional. With RoRo, we actually tie into MLS systems or any listing data repositories. As a sale updates today, the data changes tomorrow. Our tool works in real time.

Before this tool existed, let’s say you’re selling in Springfield. You would have to go online and do a bunch of research, download all the comps and the information, plug it into a spreadsheet, run formulas on the back end and then come back to the client. What we’ve done is integrated a lot of these systems and tools so that we can give the agent this information in real time, within half the time.

We are saving brokerages and agents time — so they can be out in the field doing what they love; connecting with people, building relationships and selling real estate. If you save more time, you’re able to sell more real estate.

Delozier: How does RoRo differ from other platforms that just show static charts?

Rodland: We are actually a tool where you can query the data. If I said, “How is the market in Springfield, Massachusetts, right now?” it can give me a whole breakdown of what’s happening.

I can ask, “What’s the average days on market for this segment?” and it can tell me. I can ask, “If I price the property at two thirds of the average price, how long will it take to sell?” It can give you estimates.

One of the hardest things in real estate is gaining experience. With RoRo, we actually help you with the experience level because you can ingest and question and answer this data. You can say, “What does that mean for investors? What does that mean for sellers?” It gives real insightful information that they wouldn’t have access to like this before — without doing a substantial amount of research.

Delozier: With firms adopting tools like RoRo, what safeguards or industry standards are still missing when it comes to data ownership and transparency?

Rodland: Every MLS has different rules and regulations on how the data is treated. We abide by those rules. Every listing data repository has their own rules. Every brokerage has their own confidentiality. That’s why we wanted to build our system where you can integrate your tools.

The way we built RoRo is completely separate. If you’re in Texas, you see Texas data. If you’re in New York, you see New York data. Their data is separate from everybody else’s. It’s not like you’re pulling in everybody’s data across the board.

For independent brokers, Rodland hopes to make the choice between scale and identity no longer mutually exclusive — offering a third path to leverage AI and think bigger.

This post was originally published on here. 

Homeowners are facing a crisis.

A crisis in property insurance. A crisis in affordability. And with hurricane season fast approaching, a growing sense of anxiety across the Southeast about what comes next.

We have seen this before. Hurricanes Helene and Milton caused more than $100 billion in damage across Florida alone, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Families are still rebuilding, still navigating insurance challenges and still asking how they can better protect their homes before the next storm hits.

At the same time, many are struggling to keep up with rising costs. The challenge today is not only buying a home. It is holding onto one.

Expanding credit access for home protection

That is why President Trump’s recent actions to expand access to credit and lower borrowing costs are so important. His Executive Order on promoting access to mortgage credit is a step in the right direction, and efforts to cap credit card interest rates recognize a simple reality. When financing is more affordable, families have a better chance of staying afloat.

But access to credit should not stop at the front door.

Homeowners also need practical, affordable ways to invest in the safety and resilience of the homes they already have. That is especially true in Florida, where preparing for hurricane season is not optional. It is essential.

We know what works. Stronger roofs, impact-resistant windows and doors and energy-efficient upgrades can make the difference between a home that withstands a storm and one that does not. They can also help lower utility bills and reduce pressure on property insurance premiums.

The problem is cost.

How R-PACE financing makes a difference

For many families, these upgrades are out of reach through traditional financing. That is where Residential Property Assessed Clean Energy financing, or R-PACE, has made a real difference.

In Florida alone, R-PACE has supported more than 155,000 home improvement projects, totaling over $3.9 billion in investment. It is a major economic driver and a key partner in strengthening communities.

It also delivers real results. According to a University of South Florida study, R-PACE-financed projects will help homeowners avoid $250 million in disaster displacement costs and over $970 million in disaster losses, leading to savings of over $1.2 billion in insurance premiums.

R-PACE works because it meets people where they are. It allows homeowners to use their home equity to finance critical upgrades with long-term, fixed-rate payments. Qualification is based on home equity and ability to repay, not just credit scores. That makes it more accessible, especially for Hispanic families and Hispanic-owned small businesses that often face barriers in traditional lending markets.

Florida has also taken steps to ensure the program is safe and transparent.

Balancing consumer protection with federal regulation

In 2024, state lawmakers passed Senate Bill 770 to modernize R-PACE and strengthen consumer protections. The law established clear ability-to-repay standards, income-based qualifications, stronger disclosures and contractor oversight. It also expanded the program to include septic-to-sewer conversions and flood mitigation projects.

Florida proved you can protect consumers while preserving access to a tool that helps homeowners prepare for real-world risks. But Biden-era regulations that recently went into effect are threatening the availability and affordability of R-PACE by adding red tape that only creates more confusion and delays for consumers.

At a time when families are already under pressure, the last thing we should be doing is adding more red tape to solutions that work.

An opportunity to revisit federal frameworks

Fortunately, President Trump’s Executive Order on access to mortgage credit provides an opportunity for regulators at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to revisit the federal regulatory framework for low-risk transactions, including R-PACE. 

Federal regulators should use this moment to tailor rules to the unique structure of low-risk financing like R-PACE, rather than forcing it into a one-size-fits-all mortgage framework. Doing so will preserve access to a proven tool that helps homeowners invest in resilience, reduce costs and stay in their homes.

Expanding access to mortgage credit is important. Making sure homeowners can protect and keep their homes is just as critical.

Julio Fuentes is the President and CEO of the Florida State Hispanic Chamber of Commerce
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners. To contact the editor responsible for this piece: zeb@hwmedia.com.

This post was originally published on here. 

Real estate professionals across the Greater Chicagoland area awoke Wednesday to find their listings removed from Zillow, as the fight between the listing portal giant and the local MLS, Midwest Real Estate Data (MRED), which already includes an antitrust lawsuit, escalated. 

On Wednesday morning, MRED announced that it was suspending listing data feeds to Zillow and Trulia after the portal allegedly refused to cure what the MLS called a “material breach” of its license agreements. MRED claims that, according to its licensing agreement with Zillow, the portal must display all of the listings MRED supplies it with. However, Zillow’s Listing Access Standards policy bans listings that are publicly marketed for more than one day before being available for display on sites powered by IDX or VOW data feeds, which resulted in nine listings in MRED’s data set being banned from Zillow.

Due to this, MRED pulled over 40,000 listings from Zillow, despite the portal asking the court in its antitrust lawsuit to stop MRED from taking this action.

As of Thursday morning, Zillow showed roughly 1,900 homes for sale in Chicago, compared to over 8,600 on Realtor.com and over 5,000 on Redfin. 

Agents in the middle

MRED’s decision to pull its listings has left thousands of agents in the middle of this dispute, forcing them to explain to their clients why their listing may not be on Zillow and why they won’t be able to see the area’s available inventory on Zillow. 

“It’s not lost on me there is a long history and genuine complexities in [this] battle. My frustration is that it’s working agents and home sellers who are paying the price with MRED cutting their feed to Zillow,” Nick Aufenkamp, the founder of DIY Homebuyer Academy and a Washington-based broker, wrote in an email. “If I’m selling my home in Chicagoland, I want it to be as visible and accessible to as many potential buyers as possible. As the seller, I do not care what my agent or their brokerage feels about Zillow and how they monetize leads. I just know that more potential homebuyers search on Zillow than anywhere else. Because it’s the biggest marketplace today, that’s where I want my home to show up above all else.”

As Carrie McCormick, a Chicago-based luxury-focused agent at @properties sees it, “the main issue is making sure things stay clear and consistent for buyers and sellers.”

“Real estate is already a complicated process, and when listing visibility or data sharing changes between platforms, it can create confusion around what’s actually available, where homes are being marketed and how that affects exposure and value,” McCormick wrote in an email.

With her clients, McCormick said her focus is always on ensuring that they understand “where and how their property is being promoted, getting the right level of exposure and adjusting the strategy as the market continues to evolve.”

“Especially in the luxury space, sometimes a more private or targeted approach can actually work better, while other properties benefit most from broad public exposure. It really depends on the property and the client’s goals,” she wrote. 

She added that for most sellers, getting as much visibility as possible is often key for driving interest in a property and that disconnects, like this one between MRED and Zillow, can impact how easily buyers are finding listings.

A direct feed to Zillow

While MRED has pulled its listings from Zillow, brokerage leaders do have the option of providing Zillow with a direct feed of their listings outside of the MLS. 

Compass International Holdings, which is the second defendant in Zillow’s antitrust lawsuit against MRED and the parent company of McCormick’s broker @properties, said on Thursday that it would not be providing Zillow with a direct listing feed. In a post on LinkedIn, Compass CEO Robert Reffkin wrote that his firm made this decision because the “way we can protect our clients’ data is if it’s entered securely into the MLS or directly into our platform.”

“Under Illinois law, brokerages are responsible for supervising how listings are marketed to consumers, and directly submitting listings to Zillow creates legal and regulatory risk for both the brokerage and agents,” Reffkin wrote. “Specifically, Illinois law prohibits advertising, ‘whether in print, via the Internet, or through social media, digital forums, or any other media’ that is ‘fraudulent, deceptive, inherently misleading, or proven to be misleading in practice.’” 

Regarding this, he noted that Zillow is currently facing a RESPA lawsuit accusing it of deceptive marketing. 

Berkshire, eXp go the direct listing route

But while McCormick’s listings are not currently on Zillow, those of Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices Chicago agent Keith Brand are. This is because Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices already had a direct listing feed in place, so its listings in the Chicagoland area were not impacted. 

“It doesn’t really change anything for us — if anything it is a net positive for our sellers because it means more eyeballs on their listings,” Brand said. 

For him, the fact that his firm has this direct listing feed shows that Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices is more driven by brokerage operations and supporting consumers than trying to drive traffic and lead generation to the company’s website.

Like Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices, eXp Realty already had a direct listing feed agreement with Zillow, meaning its listing are also still appearing on the listing portal giant, despite MRED pulling its feed.

“We built the backup plan. eXp won’t let MLS politics disrupt its agents’ business,” Wendy Forsythe, the chief marketing officer at eXp, wrote in a post on LinkedIn. “If you search for properties for sale in Chicago on Zillow today you will still find eXp listings.

“If an institution chooses to weaponize its data feed in a corporate dispute, our sellers won’t lose visibility and our buyers won’t lose inventory,” she added. “The consumer’s experience should never depend on which institutions are in a fight this week.”

Impact is varied

But while agents like Brand are not impacted by MRED pulling its listing feed, he noted that that may not be the case for other agents, including buyer’s agents who rely on Zillow for lead generation. 

“The interesting thing about this is it impacts everyone differently,” Brand said. “But if you are a team, whose entire business model is catered toward lead generation through Zillow, this flips that model on its head.”  

For agents and brokers trying to help clients understand what’s happening, Aufenkamp noted that there are pathways for agents to have their listings added directly to Zillow and that they should “take this opportunity to reflect on the kind of marketplace they envision for the future and vote with their feet if their brokerage and MLSs aims do not align with their own vision for a fair and transparent housing market.”

To Aufenkamp, an agent’s first priority should be to sell their client’s home. 

“Whether they like it or not, Zillow is one of, if not the most, powerful marketing tool to get exposure for their seller’s listing. For a brokerage/agent to prioritize lead capture over market exposure seems to me to be a violation of fiduciary responsibility,” he wrote. “I think that’s the tension a lot of agents and sellers in Chicagoland are feeling today. And while I don’t know who wins this fight, I know Chicagoland sellers are losing today.”

This post was originally published on here. 

Rocket Mortgage and Rocket Pro announced Thursday that they have begun using VantageScore 4.0 alongside Classic FICO scores in the mortgage qualification process, a move the company said is aimed at expanding access to home financing.

Rocket’s crosstown rival, United Wholesale Mortgage (UWM) began allowing its brokers to access both FICO and VantageScore credit scoring models for conventional loans at the end of April.

VantageScore 4.0 incorporates additional consumer payment data, including rent, utility and telecommunications payment histories, to assess creditworthiness.

According to VantageScore, the model could make it possible to generate credit scores for as many as 33 million additional Americans who may not be scored under traditional models.

“Rocket is giving more people than ever a fair shot at homeownership by leveraging diversified credit scoring,” Heather Lovier, chief operating officer of Rocket Companies, said in a statement. “Our evolving economy requires a more modern approach to evaluating credit, and VantageScore 4.0 uses an updated methodology designed to create a more inclusive view of creditworthiness.”

The company did not disclose how broadly the scoring model would be applied across its mortgage products or whether it would change underwriting standards for specific loan programs. Separately, UWM said its program includes a maximum 80% loan-to-value ratio, with borrowers’ VantageScore credit scores reduced by 20 points for eligibility and pricing purposes.

Rocket’s announcement comes a month after the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) launched a pilot program allowing the use of VantageScore 4.0 for loans sold to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, alongside plans to introduce FICO 10T and updated pricing tied to the new credit models.

FHFA Director Bill Pulte said lenders have already delivered about $10 million in VantageScore-based loans to Freddie Mac as part of an operational test.

In tandem with the FHFA’s announcement, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) said it plans to adopt FICO 10T and VantageScore 4.0 for Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans in the coming months.

This post was originally published on here. 

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) could finalize changes to its Regulation X servicing rules while creating a regulatory pathway for streamlined refinances through the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) by the end of this year, mortgage industry sources told HousingWire.

Meanwhile, prospects for changes to the loan originator compensation rule (LO Comp Rule) — particularly revisions that would allow compensation to vary based on loan terms, a restriction established under the Dodd-Frank Act — appear to be fading despite sustained lobbying from industry trade groups.

One source said the CFPB does not believe changes to the LO Comp rule would have a “meaningful” impact and that the agency “doesn’t have the bandwidth” to pursue the issue. By contrast, the CFPB sees “far more interest” in creating a streamlined refinance framework for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac due to its broader economic implications.

The Federal Housing Administration (FHA) and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) already offer streamlined refinance programs that allow loans backed by the agencies to bypass full reunderwriting requirements. The GSEs currently lack a comparable permanent option. Such a program would likely exempt certain rate-and-term refis from the ability-to-repay rule.

The CFPB did not immediately respond to HousingWire’s request for comment.

A potential rollback of the LO Comp rule, along with revisions to servicing requirements under the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) and Regulation X, appeared on a list of rules under review submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in June 2025.

President Donald Trump also issued two executive orders in March that aim to expand U.S. housing supply and increase consumer access to mortgage credit, touching on a broad range of housing finance issues.

LO Comp rule details

The Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) has been one of the industry’s most vocal advocates for revising the LO Comp rule. In a letter sent earlier this month to CFPB acting director Russell Vought, the MBA said it had prioritized three issues tied to Trump’s broader executive order agenda.

Among the group’s proposals were to allow loan originators to reduce their compensation to compete more effectively and better align compensation structures with different loan products, particularly housing finance agency (HFA) bond loans. The MBA also called for reforms to TRID tolerances, cure provisions and timing requirements, as well as updates to Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) reporting thresholds under Regulation C.

“Clearly, there are plenty of good ways to roll back red tape and make mortgages more affordable while still protecting borrowers,” MBA president and CEO Bob Broeksmit said this week during the group’s Secondary and Capital Markets Conference in New York.

“The White House has said that it wants to help community banks and smaller institutions. But they aren’t the only lenders who need relief from red tape. So do credit unions, IMBs, large banks and many others.”

Market participants, however, remain divided on the issue.

“MLOs, in their zeal for a deal, do need to be restrained somewhat so that we have a level playing field and they don’t do naughty things like they once did,” Jay Plum, executive vice president at Fifth Third Bank, said during the same conference.

Still, Plum acknowledged that aspects of the rule may warrant reconsideration.

“All that said, it is very difficult to have a consistent pay plan across all sizes of loans when you’re trying to accommodate affordable housing loans in low- to moderate-income census tracts,” he said. “Those in particular need some consideration, and that part of the policy, which was created like spraying peanut butter, does need to be adjusted.”

This post was originally published on here. 

A new white paper from BlackWolf Advisory Group says adoption of artificial intelligence in mortgage servicing is accelerating as firms seek to reduce costs, improve compliance and automate routine tasks.

While the paper says servicers are ready and actively adopting AI, regulatory scrutiny and legacy technology systems remain as major barriers.

The paper, titled “Mortgage Servicer’s Strategic Guide to AI Adoption,” said AI adoption among mortgage lenders more than doubled between 2023 and 2025, rising from 15% to 38% of companies. Servicers using AI are reporting 30% to 50% reductions in customer service costs and 25% to 40% decreases in document processing expenses, the report noted.

Mirza Hodzic, managing director and founder of BlackWolf, said that since servicers’ needs vary, it can be hard to pinpoint when and where each entity should start incorporating AI into workflows.

“No servicer is the same when it comes to the way they do business. … They have different data, they have different budgets and sizes, so when we look at the overall thought process and things that the servicers are looking at, they don’t know where to get started,” Hodzic told HousingWire.

“What we do is a foundational assessment of readiness to implement AI, and that’s generally to understand what the big needs at the moment are, what [their] technology looks like, current capabilities, and where [they] want to be six months, one year or further down the road.”

BlackWolf’s paper cited several examples of AI already in use across the mortgage industry. It said a pilot program at BSI Financial Services achieved a 73% resolution rate for AI-handled inquiries and reduced weekly calls to human agents by 400. Rocket Mortgage was also cited for processing more than 1.5 million documents per month using generative AI tools that automatically classify forms and extract data fields.

The report said predictive AI models are helping servicers identify borrowers at risk of default earlier, while fraud detection tools are shortening review timelines from weeks to seconds. It noted that Fannie Mae partnered with Palantir Technologies on fraud detection technology that can identify suspicious activity in about 10 seconds, compared with a traditional 60-day investigative process.

BlackWolf said most mortgage companies are relying on third-party vendors rather than building proprietary AI systems. The report cited a 2025 STRATMOR Group survey showing 63% of lenders using AI rely on vendor solutions, while only 20% are developing custom tools internally.

“You can’t just rely on a vendor and say, ‘Well, the vendor is the AI tool.’ You’re responsible for it,” Hodzic said. “Right now, buying is the option people choose when deciding whether to build or buy AI, [but] when you build it, you’re investing in it a bit longer term because you’re going to own the risk fully.”

Major servicing technology providers are embedding AI directly into their platforms, according to the report. ICE Mortgage Technology, whose MSP platform serves more than 100 clients, has integrated AI-powered automation agents into servicing workflows. Meanwhile, Sagent has added AI tools for document automation and predictive analytics to its Dara platform.

At the same time, the report warned that regulatory oversight of AI in mortgage servicing is intensifying. It highlighted new governance requirements from Freddie Mac that took effect in March 2026 and require servicers to implement formal AI governance policies, security assessments and executive oversight.

Organizational resistance remains one of the biggest obstacles to AI adoption. BlackWolf cited research from McKinsey & Co. showing 32% of respondents expect workforce reductions where AI is deployed.

The white paper also alluded to servicer errors when deciding to implement AI functionalities.

“Mistakes we’ve seen include jumping headfirst into AI without a plan, just to keep up with maybe some other competitors,” Hodzic said. “It takes a while. It takes experts in the field to understand and implement it correctly. Just throwing money and time at it, or asking your internal team to handle all of it, is putting them in a tough spot.”

This post was originally published on here. 

Every few years, the real estate industry gets a jolt that sends agents scrambling to reassess their careers and where they hang their license. The current wave of consolidation — eXp acquiring Next Home, Real acquiring Remax, Compass acquiring Anywhere — is the latest version of that jolt. And if the conversations I’m having with agents across the country are any indication, a lot of people are asking the same urgent question right now: What does this mean for me?

My answer tends to surprise people: less than you think — but that doesn’t mean you’re off the hook.

Buyers and sellers don’t choose brokerages — they choose agents.

Let’s get clear about what these acquisitions actually are. They’re significant capital plays. Brand expansions. Infrastructure bets. They’re a belief that if you get big enough — in recruiting, technology, and marketing — sustained market share growth will follow.

What they are not, at least not automatically, is a fundamental disruption to how real estate transactions happen.

What gets buried in all the consolidation headlines is that residential real estate is, at its core, a relationship business. When a homeowner is ready to make a move, the phone call goes to a person — not a logo. That dynamic doesn’t disappear just because two companies merged.

Where’s the real threat?

That said, agents who dismiss consolidation entirely are missing something important. Scale does matter in specific, concrete ways.

Larger entities can outspend regional and independent brokerages on brand advertising, technology development and agent recruitment incentives. That creates real pressure, not necessarily at the transaction level, but at the visibility level. If consumers are seeing more of a competitor’s brand in their daily lives, that’s worth paying attention to.

The vulnerability, in other words, isn’t that consolidated brokerages will steal your existing clients. It’s that they may, over time, capture the unaffiliated consumer — the buyer or seller who doesn’t already have someone they trust — before you ever get the chance to connect with them.

This is where agents need to be honest with themselves. If your business is primarily built around company-generated leads and brand recognition, you are competing on terrain where larger, better-capitalized organizations will eventually win. The agents who will weather this consolidation period most effectively are those who have built something harder to replicate: genuine relationships, a consistent prospecting habit and a personal reputation in their market that no merger can manufacture overnight.

The relationship imperative

Here’s something I’ve observed consistently across markets and business cycles: the agents who are most insulated from industry disruption — consolidation, technology shifts, commission compression, whatever the current threat is — are the ones with deep, well-maintained relationship networks. Not because relationships are a feel-good abstraction, but because they represent a concrete competitive moat.

An agent with 500 genuinely cultivated relationships in their sphere is not materially threatened by a competitor’s advertising budget. Their business is largely pre-sold. The leads that national brands spend heavily to generate — unaffiliated consumers with no existing agent relationship — are simply not the same consumers.

This has a direct practical implication for how you run your business: the most defensible position in a consolidating market is one where your clients don’t need a brand to find you — they already know you. That kind of business doesn’t get disrupted by a merger announcement.

Building it is harder than riding a company’s lead generation platform. It requires consistent prospecting, genuine follow-through, and showing up for people before they’re ready to transact. But it also produces something that no acquisition can replicate overnight — loyalty, referrals, and a personal brand that means something at the local level where transactions actually happen.

The practical takeaway for agents

If you’re an everyday agent trying to make sense of the current consolidation environment, here’s how I’d frame your priorities.

Resist the urge to react tactically to each acquisition announcement. Agents who make impulsive brokerage changes, or who spend their energy worrying about competitor moves, are playing a game they’re unlikely to win. You cannot out-resource a mega brokerage on their own terms.

What you can do is double down on what makes you distinct. Audit your prospecting habits honestly. Invest in the relationships and skills that produce measurably better results. Tighten your focus on the people in your sphere rather than chasing cold leads. And remind yourself — and your clients — why working with you specifically is different from calling a brand off a billboard.

The consolidation wave will continue. Some agents will be rattled by it. Others will lose business to better-resourced competitors. But the ones that will come through this period strongest are those who understood early that the answer to scale isn’t more scale — it’s depth. Deeper relationships, deeper skills, deeper roots in their communities.

That’s not just good coaching advice. In a consolidating market, it’s a viable career strategy.

Darryl Davis, CSP, has spoken to, trained, and coached more than 600,000 real estate professionals around the globe. He is a bestselling author for McGraw-Hill Publishing, and his book, How to Become a Power Agent in Real Estate, tops Amazon’s charts for most sold book to real estate agents.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners.
To contact the editor responsible for this piece: tracey@hwmedia.com

This post was originally published on here. 

Long Island’s Lucky To Live Here Realty has joined SERHANT., bringing a $1 billion-plus sales track record and a four-person team to the brokerage’s New York expansion, the company announced earlier this month.

Co-founders Elena D’Agostino and Joyce Mennella, both native Long Islanders, launched Lucky To Live Here Realty in 2010. Since then, the firm has closed more than $1 billion in sales volume and recorded $59 million over the past 12 months, according to the announcement.

Elena D’Agostino and Mennella bring a combined three decades of experience to SERHANT. D’Agostino has been recognized by the Suffolk County MLS for highest gross commission income and highest priced residential sale, and was named Long Island Business News’ (LIBN) 2015 Top Producer by GCI and Top Residential Sale. Mennella was named to LIBN’s Top 50 Women in Business in 2020.

Also joining from Lucky To Live Here are broker Sari Eidelkind, who was selected as a 2019 Long Island Board of Realtors (LIBOR) Top 20 Under 40 and salesperson Lauren D’Agostino.

“SERHANT. allows us to stay true to our boutique, relationship-driven roots while offering our clients an even greater level of service and exposure,” Elena D’Agostino said in the announcement. “We have always felt aligned with the brand as we were one of the first real estate companies on Long Island to utilize social media marketing. We feel incredibly lucky to be joining the like minded innovative thinkers at SERHANT., and look forward to introducing SERHANT. to our community and clients.”

The move gives SERHANT. a deeper foothold in the Long Island market as the firm continues to expand across both the East and West Coasts. Earlier the year, SERHANT. announced the launch of its Boston operation followed by its launch in five California markets, including Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco.

This article was written by Brooklee Han and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation. It was reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication. The system helps convert company announcements and industry data into HousingWire-style news coverage.

This post was originally published on here. 

Southern Land Company has launched an in-house mortgage division, SLC Lending, as the Nashville-based developer looks to tighten control of the homebuying process across its master-planned and single-family communities.

The move, announced by the company, extends Southern Land’s vertically integrated model beyond land planning, development, construction and property management into mortgage origination. It comes as more builders and developers push into captive or affiliated lending to better manage rate volatility, incentives and pipeline risk.

SLC Lending will initially operate in Southern Land’s core homebuilding markets of Colorado, Texas and Tennessee, and will expand in step with SLC Homes into additional regions, the company said.

“In today’s housing market, where financing has become one of the most complex parts of the process, bringing that capability in-house allows us to deliver greater certainty and control for our buyers,” Tim Downey, founder and CEO of Southern Land Company, said in the announcement. “SLC Lending is a natural extension of that philosophy and enables us to deliver a more cohesive, thoughtful experience across every stage of the homebuyer’s journey.”

Southern Land develops a mix of large-scale master-planned communities and smaller single-family projects. Its portfolio includes Westhaven, a 1,500-acre, roughly 3,500-home master-planned community in Franklin, Tennessee; the nearly 600-acre luxury LaurelBrooke community, also in Franklin; Fairington, a 373-acre, 700-home community in Nolensville, Tennessee; the 800-acre, 3,100-home Westerly community in Erie, Colorado; and Tucker Hill in McKinney, Texas, among others.

The company said SLC Lending is structured to work closely with its builder and sales teams, with an emphasis on market-specific financing options and tighter coordination between mortgage, construction and closing functions. The goal is to improve communication and visibility for buyers from application through closing and to make transactions more predictable for both the lender and builder.

“As our footprint expands nationally, alignment across every part of the process becomes increasingly critical,” Brian Sewell, president and COO of Southern Land Company, said. “SLC Lending allows us to deliver greater predictability, efficiency and transparency to our buyers, while reinforcing the foundation for long-term growth.”

Southern Land has tapped mortgage executive Bobby Frank to lead the new platform as vice president of mortgage operations. According to the announcement, Frank previously helped build a mortgage company from its first hire into a top-10 national lender over 28 years, funding more than $125 billion in residential loans. That experience gives SLC Lending leadership with a full-cycle view of origination, underwriting and collateral valuation as it scales, the company said.

Frank said the new unit is focused on customer experience and efficiency.

“Our focus is simple: build a culture focused on taking great care of the homebuyer while delivering a more efficient and predictable experience from application to closing,” Frank said in the release. He added that the long-term plan is to grow beyond exclusively serving Southern Land communities to support purchase and refinance business for outside real estate professionals and other builders, with an eventual goal of retaining servicing on its originations.

Why this matters for lenders and builders

The launch of SLC Lending underscores a broader trend of large homebuilders and developers bringing mortgage operations in-house or deepening joint ventures with lenders. In a high-rate, low-inventory environment, control over financing can be a competitive lever, allowing builders to structure rate buydowns, closing-cost incentives and quick approvals to keep absorption and cancellations in check.

For independent lenders and mortgage brokers, the expansion of captive builder finance channels increases competition for purchase leads in fast-growing markets like suburban Nashville, Austin and Denver. At the same time, SLC’s stated plan to eventually partner with outside agents and builders could create future third-party origination or referral opportunities.

For homebuilders and developers, the Southern Land move highlights several operational considerations: how closely mortgage operations are integrated with sales and construction, how data flows between divisions to manage cycle times, and how compliance and fair lending are handled as affiliated business arrangements proliferate.

Southern Land, founded in 1986, has a current project pipeline valued at about $3 billion across nine states, with regional offices in New York City; Philadelphia; Plano, Texas; Denver; and Vallejo, California, according to the announcement. The company said SLC Lending is designed to scale alongside that pipeline as its master-planned and single-family communities grow.

This post was originally published on here. 

KB Home has entered the Atlanta market and closed its first land purchase in the region, the homebuilder announced Thursday.

The Los Angeles-based public builder said it has acquired 110 homesites and plans to open its first Atlanta-area community, Whitley Meadows, in early 2027. The move adds a top-five housing market to KB Home’s footprint as large builders continue to chase population and job growth in the Southeast.

Bill Schmidt, who joined KB Home in 2025 as division president, will oversee the new Atlanta division, including land acquisition, construction, sales and customer service. He has more than 35 years of homebuilding experience, including over 25 years working in the Atlanta market for national and local builders, according to the company announcement.

KB Home said Schmidt has helped shape its Atlanta strategy and position the division for future growth since joining the company. Previously with Toll Brothers, Schmidt holds a bachelor’s degree in landscape architecture and planning from the University of Florida and an MBA in real estate development from Nova Southeastern University.

Atlanta has been a focus market for public builders in recent years as buyers migrate from higher-cost metros and demand remains resilient for new homes. KB Home’s entry adds another national operator to a field that already includes the likes of D.R. Horton, Lennar and PulteGroup.

Whitley Meadows, KB’s first community under the Atlanta division, will consist of single-family homes in Bethlehem, Georgia, in Gwinnett County. Plans call for homes ranging from 2,000 to 3,100 square feet, with amenities including a pool, cabana, playground and walking trails. The community will be zoned to what the builder described as highly rated schools and will offer access to State Route 316 and Interstate 85 for commuters.

KB Home now operates in 49 markets and has built more than 700,000 homes in its nearly 70-year history. The company has emphasized energy-efficient and fire-resilient construction and says it has delivered more ENERGY STAR-certified homes than any other U.S. builder.

This post was originally published on here. 

Equity Residential and AvalonBay Communities agreed to an all-stock merger of equals that will create a $69 billion multifamily giant controlling more than 180,000 apartments across the country, the companies announced Thursday.

The combined real estate investment trust will have a pro forma equity market capitalization of about $52 billion and an enterprise value of roughly $69 billion, according to the company announcement. The new entity will be headquartered in both Chicago and Arlington, Virginia, operate under a new name to be announced at closing, and maintain dual listings on the NYSE.

Under the terms of the deal, AvalonBay shareholders will receive 2.793 shares of Equity Residential common stock for each AvalonBay share. On a fully diluted basis, AvalonBay shareholders will own approximately 51.2% of the combined company and Equity Residential shareholders will own about 48.8%. The merger is expected to close in the second half of 2026, subject to shareholder votes at both companies and customary approvals. The parties expect the transaction to qualify as a tax-free reorganization for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

Leadership, governance and balance sheet

AvalonBay President and CEO Benjamin Schall will serve as president, CEO and a trustee of the combined company. Equity Residential CEO Mark Parrell will retire at closing after 27 years with the firm and eight years as CEO, the companies said.

The new board of trustees will include seven trustees from Equity Residential and seven directors from AvalonBay. Equity Residential’s lead independent trustee, Steve Sterrett, will become board chair. Equity Residential’s current non-executive chair, David Neithercut, and AvalonBay’s non-executive chair, Tim Naughton, will both serve as trustees.

The merged REIT will inherit “dual A3/A–” credit ratings and, according to company projections, roughly $2 billion in annual cash flow and self-funding capacity. Management is targeting $175 million in gross cost synergies and $125 million in net synergies after property tax reassessments, positioning the platform as one of the industry’s lowest-cost operators on an overhead-per-unit basis.

The combined company expects to pay an initial annualized dividend of $2.81 per share, matching Equity Residential’s current dividend per share and exceeding AvalonBay’s current yield. Both REITs intend to maintain regular quarterly dividends until the deal closes.

Why this matters for builders and developers

For the homebuilding and residential development community, the tie-up effectively creates the country’s dominant coastal multifamily buyer, operator and build-to-core developer at a moment when for-sale housing affordability is historically stretched and institutional demand for professionally managed rentals remains strong.

The merged company would control scale that no other U.S. apartment operator can match: more than 180,000 units, $4.4 billion of projects and 10,800 apartments currently under construction across 32 communities, and a reported $4.2 billion development-rights pipeline. More than half of the units under construction have affordable or mixed-income components, according to the announcement, signaling continued appetite for public-private and inclusionary zoning deals.

For land sellers and vertical builders, this platform consolidation means:

• A larger, more liquid counterparty for structured development partnerships, forward sales and joint ventures, particularly in high-barrier coastal metros.
• Greater pricing transparency and discipline in bidding as the combined entity leans on centralized data and underwriting standards across markets.
• A powerful competitor for sites in infill, transit-oriented and high-income renter submarkets where both REITs are already anchored.

Both companies have historically favored high-density, institutional-scale projects located in supply-constrained, high-rent markets such as New York, Boston, Washington, D.C., Seattle, Southern California and the Bay Area. That geographic overlap could concentrate land demand but also simplify entitlement and neighborhood negotiations, as many localities and community groups already know the players and product types.

Scaled development engine in a constrained capital market

The merger comes as development starts are under pressure from higher interest rates, construction cost inflation and tighter bank lending standards. Lesser-capitalized sponsors are struggling to line up both senior debt and equity commitments for large rental communities.

In that context, a multifamily REIT with an estimated $2 billion in annual internally generated cash flow, dual A-range credit ratings and a self-funding development model is positioned to keep building through the cycle. The companies framed their combined platform as a “leading creator of new rental housing” with the capital and pipeline to increase annual development starts once integration is complete.

For general contractors, subcontractors and materials suppliers, this level of predictable, programmatic work from a single sponsor can support capacity investments, long-term framework agreements and regional expansion strategies. But it may also put margin pressure on smaller contractors that are not able to match the scale, technology and procurement leverage of the combined REIT’s national vendor relationships.

Technology, operating leverage and NOI focus

Equity Residential and AvalonBay emphasized operating leverage as a core rationale for the deal. Management plans to deploy centralized services, artificial intelligence and automation across leasing, renewals, maintenance dispatch and customer service functions. They expect technology-driven efficiencies and “proximity benefits” — clustering communities in submarkets to share staff, marketing and services — to lift net operating income margins across the larger portfolio.

This is likely to accelerate existing trends affecting both for-sale and rental development:

• Standardized unit layouts and building systems to simplify operations and maintenance.
• Greater appetite for modularization, off-site components and repeatable design families that lower lifecycle cost, not just first cost.
• Higher expectations for smart-building infrastructure, resident apps and digital leasing, which developers will need to integrate early in design.

For third-party developers hoping to build for eventual sale to institutional owners, projects that are “plug and play” with this operating model — including centralized package rooms, flex workspaces, access control systems and building automation — may have a pricing advantage at exit.

Affordable housing and policy signaling

The combined REIT reiterated what it called a “continued commitment to affordable housing,” including direct capital to nonprofit developers and an affordable preservation program. More than half of its current construction pipeline is affordable or mixed-income, the companies said.

In practice, this likely means the new platform will remain active in LIHTC partnerships, workforce housing initiatives and inclusionary zoning deals where long-term, patient capital is valued. For mission-driven developers and housing agencies, the entity’s scale, credit profile and experience across markets may make it a preferred institutional partner on complex, multi-phase projects.

At the same time, policymakers and tenant advocates are likely to scrutinize the merger’s impact on rents and market concentration in core coastal metros. The companies stressed that they invest “with the intention of owning communities for the long term,” manage properties directly with local teams and reinvest in existing communities — messages aimed at addressing concerns about institutional ownership of large rental portfolios.

Next steps and integration risk

The companies will spend the coming months securing shareholder approvals, advancing regulatory review and building out an integrated management team. They have not disclosed specific integration costs or timelines beyond the synergy targets, but noted that leadership will be drawn from both organizations and that they intend to maintain “meaningful and ongoing” presence in both headquarters.

For builders and residential developers, the key watchpoints over the next 12 to 24 months will be:

• Whether the combined REIT sustains, increases or pauses new starts as it integrates systems and teams.
• How it prioritizes its $4.2 billion development-rights pipeline by market, product type and affordability mix.
• Any shifts in deal structures — such as a preference for more JV development, land banking arrangements or forward-purchase commitments — that could reshape how third-party developers work with institutional capital.

If the transaction closes on schedule in the second half of 2026 and the projected synergies materialize, the U.S. multifamily landscape will have a single, dominant coastal REIT with capital and operating scale unmatched in the sector — a reality that homebuilders and residential developers will need to factor into land strategy, pipeline planning and capital stack design in core apartment markets.

This post was originally published on here. 

Between 2021 and 2025, despite market headwinds, as well as macroeconomic and industry challenges, Tony DeAnna and his team at CENTURY 21 DeAnna Realty, recorded 110% transaction side growth. This performance earned the firm the No. 6 rank in the 2026 RealTrend Verified GameChanger rankings.

DeAnna, who founded the firm with his father and his college roommate, attributes the growth of his firm to a combination of M&A and organic growth. During this five year period, DeAnna said his firm completed five M&A deals. 

“When we started the firm, it was just the three of us and we wanted to grow, but we didn’t want to do it the wrong way,” DeAnna said. “For us, the right way meant that even though we knew there would be changes throughout the system as we expanded, we didn’t want to lose that close-knit feeling within the group. So many companies talk about camaraderie and office culture as something they work on, but for us we actually really focus on it.” 

In regards to choosing M&A partners, DeAnna said this meant they were more focused on finding partners that fit in well with their existing culture.

“We never had a criteria for number of sales or volume or anything like that,” he said. “First and foremost, we wanted to make sure that the agents that were merging with us were happy and excited and that the move would also be good for our current agents.” 

So far, DeAnna said this approach has garnered not only positive growth results for the company, but also ensured that it has fostered a “collaborative culture where no one is afraid to raise their hand and ask a question.” 

Never lose sight of organic growth

But while much of the firm’s growth had been led by M&A, DeAnna said they try to never lose sight of internal and organic growth. 

“We focus on the individual agent because there are so many different ways agents can get business and run things,” DeAnna said. “We lay out some of the options for them and help them find what interests them the most, but we never want anyone to feel like they have to fit some sort of mold.” 

This means that DeAnna and his team spend a lot of time meeting one-on-one with agents helping them work towards their goals and increase production. 

Although these strategies help with agent retention, when it comes to mergers, DeAnna said they employ other strategies to help prevent agent breakage. This mainly consists of DeAnna and his team avoiding changing anything for the merging agents “unless it is necessary.” 

“We keep the current staff that was at the previous company, and we keep the systems in place,” DeAnna said. “We, of course, put our own spin on things, but we try not to make a bunch of changes because if we are doing a merger, that means we were interested in and liked their company and their people. So, if it isn’t broken, just leave it alone.” 

This approach, DeAnna said, has led to successful mergers with minimal agent breakage. 

Looking back on how his firm has successfully navigated the market turmoil of the past five years, DeAnna also attributes much of the company’s success to the support of its entire ownership group, including his dad Mike DeAnna, as well as the CENTURY 21 corporate leadership team. 

“I have so many agents that come over to us from other companies who say they felt like they were just a number or that they never met their broker or manager and that isn’t the case here,” DeAnna said. “There are certain things we all focus on, but we are all out there meeting one-on-one with agents and finding ways to support them and their businesses.” 

According to DeAnna, all of this work goes back to a shared goal of helping their agents be the best they can be, so they can serve their clients to the best of their ability. 

“We’ve had our growing pains, but we have gotten all of these systems in place over the years and everyone has their role, knows what they are doing and importantly, knows what everyone else is doing,” he said. “We have always maintained a growth mindset and are content with what we have built, but are always looking down the road.”

This post was originally published on here. 

NEXA Lending announced Thursday that it has entered into a strategic investment and phased acquisition agreement with Copper Ridge Ventures, cementing a growth and scaling strategy for both companies.

Copper Ridge is a mortgage joint venture holding company founded by Tim Owens, a longtime industry executive with past tenures at loanDepot, CrossCountry Mortgage and Cardinal Financial.

NEXA‘s plans to pursue joint ventures were teased to HousingWire in February when CEO Mike Kortas shared that he was in the process of acquiring several shell companies to build JVs.

The partnership announced this week is aimed at expanding NEXA’s joint venture strategy by combining Copper Ridge Ventures’ relationships with mortgage loan officers and real estate professionals with NEXA’s operational and technology platform.

Under the agreement, NEXA said it will provide support across marketing, information technology, licensing, loan processing, human resources, compliance and operational infrastructure. In turn, Copper Ridge Ventures and its affiliates will integrate NEXA’s systems and strategic partnerships as part of the arrangement.

The move marks another growth initiative since NEXA’s rebrand in October 2025 from NEXA Mortgage to NEXA Lending. Following the rebrand, the Arizona-based company overhauled its leadership team, tapping Todd Bitter as national director of sales and Von Maharaj as chief financial officer.

NEXA also promoted Rana Mortensen to chief administrative officer, hired Tammy Richards as chief strategy officer, named Jason DuPont as chief operating officer and added Geri Farr as chief growth officer.

The company also launched new artificial intelligence tools within its Agenetic AI platform in January. The next month, Kortas also acquired for-sale-by-owner platform FSBO.com, telling HousingWire that while NEXA does not own FSBO.com, the platform will benefit NEXA due to lead discounts and lead aggregation.

“This is exactly the kind of strategic move NEXA is built for,” Kortas said in a statement regarding the agreement with Copper Ridge Ventures. “We have the platform, the technology, the infrastructure, and the people to help strong operators scale faster.”

Farr, who now serves as NEXA’s president, said the move marks an investment in the “right people” and operators to bring value to NEXA’s originators.

“NEXA is uniquely positioned to be an ideal partner for Copper Ridge Ventures,” Farr said. “Our asset-light, technology-enabled operating model, AI-forward approach, and deep experience in rapid joint venture formation will help Tim Owens and his team accelerate CRV’s growth and drive operational efficiencies.”

Owens called the agreement “a significant milestone” for the company.

“By leveraging NEXA’s centralized technology, compliance, and operational resources, CRV is well-positioned to expand our joint venture footprint and enhance the support we provide to our partners and clients,” he added.

NEXA said the transaction is part of its broader strategy to partner with mortgage industry operators to expand origination, marketing and joint venture formation capabilities.

Columbia West Capital served as financial adviser to NEXA on the transaction.

This post was originally published on here. 

Vermont’s legislature took two steps Wednesday to make factory-built homes easier to buy and keep affordable, advancing bills that now head to a Senate floor vote and the governor’s desk.

Two Senate committees approved H.757, which passed the House in March. The bill expands protections for manufactured homeowners and locks in long-term affordability for housing cooperatives. It awaits a full Senate vote.

The House passed a rural housing finance and production bill that creates new tools for factory-built home construction across Vermont. It is a scaled-back version of a more aggressive approach and now heads to the governor.

Vermont’s progress comes as manufactured housing secures widening recognition as one of the most viable, practical measures to address supply constraints at the root of the housing affordability crisis. At least 10 states have enacted legislation that protects manufactured homes from discriminatory local zoning.

Congress folded significant manufactured housing reforms into the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, sweeping bipartisan legislation the House approved Wednesday. Section 301 would scrap the requirement that manufactured homes be built on a permanent chassis. Advocates say the change would unlock new design possibilities and reduce production costs at scale.

What’s in it for builders

Researchers and industry analysts have long documented manufactured housing’s cost advantage over site-built construction. For an equally long stretch, policy barriers have suppressed the sector’s potential.

A November 2025 study by Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies found that off-site construction methods offer affordable housing developers a faster, less costly path than conventional site-built construction. The study validated what manufactured housing producers have argued for years.

“We just don’t see starter homes anymore,” Jason Webster, president of Huntington Homes, a Vermont modular manufacturer, said in testimony at a late April committee hearing on the rural financing bill. “I honestly can’t tell you in the last 25 years the last starter home we built.”

Vermont’s sales tax exemption expansion does not guarantee a surge in buyers. It signals, however, that the state treats manufactured housing as a legitimate, permanent part of its housing stock. That posture reduces regulatory risk for manufacturers, dealers and community developers deciding where to invest.

When states layer favorable tax treatment onto anti-exclusion zoning protections, they create a stable, predictable environment that can support site selections, inventory investment and financing product development – the upstream decisions that determine whether manufactured housing scales as an affordability tool.

Vermont’s zoning foundation

Vermont’s commitment to manufactured housing predates the current wave of state-level reform by more than two decades. The state’s anti-exclusion statute has barred municipal zoning bylaws from excluding manufactured homes since 2004. Towns must treat factory-built housing the same as site-built single-family homes.

The law gave homeowners and developers a statutory shield against exclusionary local bylaws. Enforcement, however, remained uneven across Vermont’s 246 municipalities.

In 2023, lawmakers strengthened the broader zoning framework with the HOME Act. The law required towns to allow duplexes anywhere single-family homes are permitted, capped parking requirements and mandated minimum densities in areas served by water and sewer. Those provisions opened more land to higher-density and alternative housing types statewide.

Vermont has stopped short of the more aggressive standard that other states have enacted. At least five states – Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Montana and Virginia – have passed equal-treatment laws since 2024 requiring localities to permit manufactured housing wherever single-family homes are allowed. Maine and Maryland went further, legalizing manufactured housing by right in any zone permitting single-family dwellings.

Lawmakers in neighboring New Hampshire tried to follow suit last year. Procedural maneuvering killed the bill despite its passing in both chambers. Vermont relies instead on its 2004 anti-exclusion statute – a meaningful protection that stops short of affirmatively guaranteeing placement.

Vermont’s latest bills build on that foundation.

A bill scaled back but still standing

H.775 began as an ambitious attempt to use the state’s financial infrastructure to accelerate factory-built housing production in rural Vermont. As introduced in January, it would have created an off-site construction accelerator pilot program.

The program would have been backed by roughly $12 million in State Treasurer credit facilities. That would have given builders a reliable financing pipeline for small rural projects that the private market has long ignored. It didn’t survive.

S.328, introduced in the Senate, addressed the rental side of the affordability equation. The bill tied rent stabilization to the Consumer Price Index to prevent lower-income residents from being priced out of housing they might eventually buy.

The two bills were merged in the Senate Economic Development Committee into a single housing production vehicle. The bill’s most ambitious provision did not survive. Department of Housing and Community Development officials told lawmakers the agency lacked the capacity to administer the accelerator. Gov. Phil Scott requested its removal, and the committee agreed.

“While this may be pragmatic, it is still disappointing to see a pilot that promises to transform our housing development pipeline and reduce per-unit costs be put back on the shelf,” the Campaign for Vermont noted in a legislative update.

Inside H.757

The legislation targets two distinct mechanisms. It would require limited-equity cooperative housing corporations to hold a first right of repurchase of a departing member’s interest, keeping units permanently affordable and out of market-rate resale. That preserves a cooperative’s affordability mission across generations, preventing the market drift that has eroded affordable housing stock in higher-cost states.

The bill also increases the percentage of sales receipts exempt from Vermont’s sales and use tax for mobile and modular homes. Supporters say the change aligns tax treatment with site-built homes and reduces a price gap that puts factory-built housing out of reach for some lower-income buyers.

H.757’s movement through two Senate committees on Wednesday signals broad bipartisan support. But the bill faces a procedural hurdle: the Senate Economic Development Committee attached a proposed amendment.

If the full Senate adopts changes, the House must concur or the chambers will negotiate a final version in conference committee. The session ends May 29.

This post was originally published on here. 

For many real estate brokers, the dream of artificial intelligence (AI)-powered efficiency has crashed against a hard reality; agents are reluctant to use tools that force them to change habits.

Tyler Morton — broker-owner of REMAX Victory + Affiliates in Beavercreek, Ohio — learned this lesson the expensive way.

After his first AI platform Victoria failed because agents refused to download “just another app,” Morton rebuilt from scratch. The result was Victoria’s update, Tori 2.0 — a brokerage operating system that unifies disjointed systems from messaging to documents.

Morton sat down with HousingWire to share hard-won lessons on building an AI infrastructure that agents actually use.

Editor’s note: This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Jonathan Delozier: You mentioned that the first version of your AI platform failed because agents had to change their behavior and log into another tool. What are the biggest lessons brokers should learn about AI adoption before they invest heavily?

Tyler Morton: We tried to make it as easy as possible. I mean, even with the fact that I initially built the app with the agents in mind, thinking it would make their lives easier, they didn’t want to download just another app. That’s not where their mind goes when they have a pressing question. They still want to call the broker and get a quick answer, or shoot a text, a Facebook message or even an email. That’s where the agent lives.

We tried to make it as easy as an agent texting a question to Victoria, and it would give an instant response. But they just weren’t programmed to do that, right? They’ve been doing business the same way for years.

Delozier: So how did you fix it with Tori 2.0?

Morton: We really tore it all down. I started looking at the platform and all the gaps or holes that it had for other tools that we needed to integrate and tried to think about where agents actually live. I said, ‘Let’s break this down and look at the entire stack that we’re using for all of this stuff. I can probably rebuild 90% of it relatively easily.’ And I say relatively easily with 2,000 hours of vibe coding experience and tens of thousands of dollars. We don’t call them mistakes, we call them tuition, because I certainly learned from it.

Delozier: What does that unified system do for agents day to day?

Morton: One of my most-used functions of Tori OS is an agent goes in and asks a question, and proactively, the system, based on our knowledge base, is answering those questions in stream. If an agent asks, “Hey, what plumber do you recommend in Westchester, Ohio?” it’s going to look at all of our previous conversation history and say that John recommended ABC Plumbing six months ago. It might say, “You may want to check to see how that job went,” or “Carol recommended 123 Plumbing.” It will give them that entire list, and it’s just learning and growing from that.

Agents know what they’re used to, and so that’s what we built. We built the voice-to-contract model with that in mind. What we sought to build was — using Dotloop’s API — a simple voice-to-contract where agents can be driving back from their showing and hit a button in the app and say, “Write me an offer for 123 Main Street for $500,000, two weeks for inspections and close it in 30 days.”

Delozier: You’re running a pilot with Amazon on something even more advanced. What does that look like?

Morton: We are running that through a company [Amazon] acquired called Bee, or bee.computer, using conversational intelligence. Instead of an agent still reacting to a conversation they had earlier with their clients, there’s a bracelet that can listen in real time. Through what we’ve built in our platform, it can understand the context of the conversation — possibly even who they’re with — and know that they’re sitting at the kitchen counter at 125 Main Street and the client wants to write an offer for $560,000. It will go ahead and proactively create that contract for them.

Delozier: What’s the separation right now between practical AI use cases that agents want versus flashy stuff that ends up being more marketing?

Morton: The flashy is the cool. I just did a webinar an hour ago for agents on building their first AI employee. But one of the biggest things that I’ve taught over the last year and a half, two years, is when you don’t know what to ask AI, ask AI what you should be asking. We were building [tech] all the wrong ways — thinking of how we wanted things to be built and not where the agents were.

Delozier: Where should brokers build their own technology versus relying on outside platforms?

Morton: For years we’ve been pigeonholed into buying technology, and now you could have a working concept of a simple tool within 24 hours if you really spent the time doing it. That’s not to say that everyone should, or could, because there is a learning curve. I remember banging my head against the wall because I spent six weeks developing the first version of Victoria — only to realize that I’ve got to pay a developer to get this up and running.

I think a lot of companies are going this way; don’t try to be everything to everyone. Be very narrow and great at what your tool does. I don’t want to reinvent IDX. I don’t want to reinvent e-signatures. I want to be the hub that ties all these different things together, so that users can pick whatever they’re used to using. As soon as an agent or a broker has to learn a new system, that’s where you create the friction that causes lower close rates.

Delozier: Looking at the next five years, what will be the biggest differentiator for brokerages with AI?

Morton: I don’t think it’s even five years. I certainly can’t predict out that far. I don’t even know what the next five months hold. You’ll see more consolidation. The ones that are not adopting AI or looking at the possibilities of agentic AI — they’re not able to streamline and they’re not able to scale. I’m not saying that AI is going to replace X, Y and Z. I just think that the ones that do adopt it will be light years ahead in terms of employees. You literally can scale a larger operation with very minimal employees with the technologies that we have available today.

This post was originally published on here. 

The late, legendary Bob Toll once laid bare the fact that he was personally incapable of installing a curtain rod in a living room, let alone knowing the first thing about building a home from the ground up.

What Bob did intuit was that the second-floor walls of a typical 1960s two-story home could be bumped out to be flush with the first-floor building enclosure, creating palpably more square footage for the resident. Add interior finishes like crown molding and chair railing, and suddenly, professional-level Philadelphians would be drawn farther and farther along the Route 23 trolley line toward Chestnut Hill.

Some might call this visionary.

More practically, Bob Toll – who did not know the first thing about home construction – knew intrinsically how to become an unsurpassed student in how to build a homebuilding company: from product development, to land positioning and strategy, to customer focus and white-glove service, to survive and even thrive, come what may.

The Toll Brothers through-line to Q2 2026

Fast-forward nearly 60 years, and Toll Brothers’ Q2 2026 financial and operational performance stands as real-time proof that the original game plan still works.

During a public-builder earnings season largely defined by interest-rate sensitivity, affordability pressures, buyer hesitation and downward adjustments to delivery expectations, Toll Brothers stood apart. 

It beat expectations, raised full-year guidance across key homebuilding metrics, held incentives flat, maintained strong margins, and continued to convert its brand – “America’s Luxury Homebuilder” – into two mainsprings of a resilient organization: One is a powerful impetus for households of means to decide that now – despite how external forces are playing out – is a good time to buy the “home of one’s dreams.” The other is causally related: operating leverage.

Executive Chairman Doug Yearley called this out in his earnings call opening commentary:

“Our second-quarter results reflect our unique position as America’s luxury homebuilder, as well as the success of our strategies to expand our geographies, product lines, and price points.” He added: “We are quite simply a more efficient and less cyclical homebuilder. Even in a difficult market, our business continues to perform well.” 

The numbers support his assertion as elegantly and persuasively as words do.

Toll delivered 2,491 homes at an average price of $1.009 million, generating $2.51 billion in home sales revenue. Adjusted gross margin came in at 26.2%, 70 basis points above guidance, and SG&A was 10.3% of home sales revenue, 40 basis points below guidance. Net signed contracts rose 7% in units and 8% in dollars, to 2,834 homes and $2.81 billion.

Evercore ISI’s Stephen Kim framed the quarter as a beat where it mattered: adjusted diluted EPS of $2.99 versus Evercore’s $2.66 estimate and the Street consensus of $2.58; gross margin of 26.2% versus the expected 25.5%; SG&A of 10.3% versus the expected 10.6%; and orders up 7% versus Evercore’s 3% forecast. 

Not exempt from challenge

Does that mean Toll is immune to the market?

No. Toll, like its peers, is mortal, not supernatural. Its second-quarter home sales revenue declined from the prior year; delivered homes were down from 2,899 in the prior-year quarter; and backlog value was $6.32 billion, down from $6.84 billion in the prior-year quarter.

But Toll’s distinction is that it has a buyer, brand, land model, product system, and balance sheet that give it more room to maneuver – commonly referred to as “optionality” – than most peers.

Yearley said Toll buyers are “less sensitive to affordability pressures” because they have benefited from income growth, stock market gains, and home equity appreciation. He added: “Serving this market is in our DNA. We have spent nearly 60 years building and refining the business model required to meet the high standards of the luxury segment of the new home market.”

Karl Mistry, Toll’s CEO, refined the operational definition of that business model in today’s market. In the quarter, luxury move-up buyers accounted for 62% of home sales revenue, up from 59% in the first quarter.

That segment, Mistry said, carries the company’s highest margin. At the same time, incentives on new contracts remained unchanged at 8% of gross sales price for the fourth consecutive quarter. Roughly one in four (23%) buyers paid in cash, and mortgage buyers had an average loan-to-value ratio of about 69%. 

That is Toll Brothers’ enviable advantage in customer segmentation.

It also helps explain why Toll can maintain a more balanced build-to-order and spec strategy without sacrificing the economics of luxury customization. Spec homes accounted for 51% of deliveries and 41% of home sales revenue in the quarter. Mistry noted that roughly one-third of specs sell before framing is complete, with margins similar to Toll’s roughly 30% adjusted gross margin on build-to-order homes. 

That is not commodity spec production. It is a luxury production platform with customization still embedded in the value proposition.

“The ability to customize remains an important competitive advantage for Toll Brothers,” Mistry said, noting that design studio upgrades, structural options, and lot premiums averaged $219,000, or 25% of the average base sales price, in the quarter.

Meanwhile, the company reduced finished-spec inventory by 28% in the first half of fiscal 2026, to 2 finished specs per community from 2.8 at fiscal year-end 2025. Build-to-order cycle time improved to about nine months, and spec cycle time was about one month shorter. Building costs remained flat despite pressure on lumber. 

Zigging when others zag

Land is the other half of Bob Toll’s formula.

At quarter-end, Toll owned or controlled about 76,800 lots, 58% of which were optioned. Mistry described a disciplined land posture built around seller financing, joint ventures, traditional option arrangements, and land banking where appropriate. He also highlighted a luxury-builder advantage that rarely appears in basic absorption tables: “Because we are a luxury builder buying land at the corner of Main and Main, where not as many of the big public and private builders play, we often find there are fewer bidders at the table when we are pursuing deals.”

The Buffington Homes acquisition last month fits that playbook.

Toll’s entry into Northwest Arkansas brings Toll into the Fayetteville-Bentonville market. Mistry described Buffington as “the leading builder of luxury homes in the area” and “a great fit for Toll Brothers.” Wolfe Research noted that Buffington brings about 1,500 lots, homes priced from $400,000 to more than $1 million, and roughly 50 expected closings this year. 

The deal is not transformational in size. What it is is another strategically aligned geographical launch pad: a bolt-on acquisition in a wealth-creating, employment-anchored growth market where Toll can add its brand, capital, design system and operating discipline to a strong local land position.

For the full year, Toll now expects 10,400 to 10,700 deliveries, an average delivered price of $985,000 to $1 million, an adjusted home sales gross margin of 26.1%, SG&A of 10.1%, and a year-end community count of 480 to 490. The company also reaffirmed its $650 million share repurchase target.

Gregg Ziegler, Toll’s CFO, said the company expects to close about 4,100 homes from backlog in the back half of the year, implying it needs to sell and settle roughly 2,000 spec homes in that period.

That guidance carries at least some execution and externalities risk. Evercore’s Kim notes the broader risks as well: tight mortgage availability, rising rates, employment weakness, land acquisition and entitlement challenges, competition, and Toll’s specific exposure to a high-end housing slowdown.

Still, the quarter’s message is clear.

Toll Brothers is not merely selling expensive houses. It is monetizing a nearly six-decade-old operating model: desirable land, aspirational architecture, production-scale luxury, deep customization, affluent segmentation, and a brand strong enough to make a Toll home, to many buyers, feel indistinguishable from the home of their dreams.

That was Bob Toll’s practical genius.

In Q2 2026, it was still reflected in orders, margins, land strategy, customer behavior, and guidance.

This post was originally published on here. 

Mortgage lenders are getting creative to combat the housing affordability crisis fueled by rising interest rates, rolling out novel products and blending existing options to keep borrowers in the market.

Bayview Asset Management — which closed its acquisition of Guild Mortgage in November — rolled out a new program on Monday. Partnering with real estate startup Estately, the firm is combining a traditional mortgage with a land lease.

“We do a first mortgage that’s Fannie Mae-eligible, a first mortgage loan on just the house, and then Estately is going to buy the land underneath that house and do it on a 50-year leaseback to the consumer at 5%,” Michael Lau, managing director at Bayview, announced on stage Tuesday during a session on lender perspectives at the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA)’s Secondary and Capital Markets Conference in New York.

The product, Lau explained, cuts monthly mortgage payments by roughly $300 in high-cost areas. The initial rollout is targeting Colorado, where land accounts for up to 35% of a property’s total loan amount. Estately also notes on its website that the program significantly reduces upfront costs for homebuyers.

If a borrower defaults, Lau explained that the land and the home will be repackaged together and returned to Fannie Mae.

Michael P. Patterson, chief operating officer at Freedom Mortgage, said in the same session that prolonged periods of high rates naturally breed industry innovation. Lately, he has observed a notable uptick in buydowns paired with adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs).

“We are looking at the products that are there and probably starting to be creative with the options, putting the options together,” Patterson said. “We just, as an industry, got to make sure we don’t go too far in that creativeness that we try to offset an affordability issue and create a delinquency issue later.”

Where are rates heading?

The executives’ comments come as mortgage rates inch closer to the 7% threshold, driven by inflation fears tied to the ongoing Iran conflict.

Even if hostilities were to cease immediately, executives estimate the economic ripple effects will linger for six to 12 months, hindered by supply-chain inertia, depleted strategic petroleum reserves, and the pass-through of surging diesel and energy costs.

“We’re going to feel the effects for a long time,” Patterson said.

Overall, the mood among mortgage executives about rates remains cautiously pessimistic. The base-case forecast anticipates rates hovering in the 6.3% to 6.5% range for the remainder of the year, with a maximum of one Federal Reserve rate cut potentially dropping them near 6.1%.

Conversely, an upside scenario could push rates to 7% or beyond if triggered by one or two more geopolitical shocks. The consensus is that there are few catalysts on the horizon to drive rates meaningfully lower.

Jeana Curro, managing director and head of agency MBS research at Bank of America, weighed in on the macroeconomic outlook during a market trends session. Curro said mortgage rates are currently running hotter than expected, but the bank still projects rates settling near the 6% mark by year’s end.

“We headed into this year thinking affordability is the most important topic for the midterm elections; you’re going to see some effort to push mortgage rates lower. We got a bit of that in January with the MBS purchase announcement,” Curro said.

“The events in the Middle East have really been a challenge, they’ve really injected a lot of volatility into the market, pushing rates higher. … But this administration moves really fast when it moves.”

John Sim, managing director at JPMorgan Chase, added that the bank’s rate forecast has shifted to 6.25%, up from sub-6% projections at the start of the year. Still, he cautioned that these figures can “change very rapidly.” 

This post was originally published on here. 

On Wednesday, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) released a detailed deregulation roadmap aimed at state and local governments that, it argues, could lower per-unit costs and shorten cycle times for homebuilders.

HUD’s new “State and Local Best Practices for Home Construction” report offers a set of recommended policy changes that target permitting fees, building codes, land-use limits and inspection timelines that add costs and risks to new-home projects.

The report would implement President Trump’s March 13, 2026, executive order, which gave HUD 60 days to outline recommended permitting and zoning practices. 

The recommendations come amid a wave of local regulatory reforms, from increasing transit-oriented development to expanding mixed-density zoning, legalizing single-room occupancy and reducing minimum lot size requirements, among many othes.

Removing Regulatory Barriers to Affordable Home Construction 

HUD Secretary Scott Turner, in a statement, framed the report as a clear starting point for states and municipalities to “take inventory of their regulations and policies and make changes that will lower the cost to build and enable more efficient housing supply growth.” 

For builders, the document functions as a potential list of changes that trade groups and executives can carry into conversations with governors, legislators, mayors and planning departments.

HUD cited data that regulatory costs now contribute more than $100,000 to the final price of a new single-family home, and that certain state and local green energy mandates can add up to $30,000 to construction costs. It projects that deregulation measures taken in 2025 will ultimately save Americans a combined $212 billion.

Since Trump took office last year, HUD said it has:

• Rescinded the 2021 International Energy Conservation Code  
• Ended the Obama-Biden-era Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule
• Rolled back rules within the Federal Housing Administration’s single-family mortgage insurance program it characterized as onerous
• Supported homeownership and affordability for more than 1 million Americans, including over 500,000 first-time buyers

Three levers for builders: cost, land and time

The HUD guidance grouped recommended actions into three categories that map directly to developers and homebuilders:

• reduce fees, mandates and code-driven construction expenses
• open more sites to residential development
• compress permitting and inspection timelines

Across all three categories, HUD encourages jurisdictions to use technology — including e-signatures, online portals and artificial intelligence — to replace manual, paper-based processes that slow projects. In that vein, many municipalities, such as Seattle, Honolulu and Denver, are already experimenting with AI platforms that streamline permitting and plan reviews.

Cost: fee caps, code limits and more flexibility on construction methods

On the cost side, HUD’s recommendations line up with long-standing builder concerns. The report recommends that states and municipalities simplify and reduce fees that make new home construction more costly. The report recommends that local and state governments do the following:

• Cap permitting fees and eliminate impact fees that cannot be directly tied to the specific project
• Cut miscellaneous charges by curtailing other fees, mandates and taxes on new development and construction
• End unrelated offsite requirements by prohibiting mandates to build offsite infrastructure not directly connected to the project
• Increase fee transparency by requiring jurisdictions to publish a list of all development fees.
• Stop retroactive codes by barring the application of new or amended building codes to projects already in the pipeline.
• Limit local code add-ons by restricting state and local additions to building, environmental and labor codes, as well as ICC and federal standards, except for resilience or where they reduce costs.

The report also urges local governments to roll back cost-adding mandates by eliminating or sunsetting green energy requirements and other similar code provisions. It also urges the repeal of mandatory electrification of appliances and heaters. 

Additionally, HUD recommends that municipalities open the door to factory-built housing by regulating manufactured and modular homes based on objective safety standards instead of the construction method. This includes reexamining bans or tight restrictions where comparable site-built homes are allowed, and easing aesthetic mandates. 

Many of these regulations, the report argues, directly affect hard costs (materials and systems required to meet local codes) and soft costs (fees, engineering and redesigns triggered by late code changes). Builders operating in states that adopt these practices could see more predictable cost structures and fewer project-specific code fights, HUD says. 

Land: more lots, fewer growth caps and clearer rules

Land access is another focus of the report. HUD recommends that jurisdictions:

• Speed up the disposition of public land for housing, including middle-income housing
• Remove growth controls outside urban cores, such as urban growth boundaries, moratoriums and commuting penalties that limit where new subdivisions can go.
• Dial back tree protection rules that impose minimum tree standards and high removal fees on single-family lots.
• Allow by-right single-family development, and reduce discretionary approvals for typical detached product.
• Use in-lieu fee structures for wetlands mitigation instead of project-by-project barriers
• Publish all required inspections, permits and approvals so builders can clearly see each step in the process.

The HUD report argues that these changes would reduce entitlement risk, particularly on fringe and infill projects that are now constrained by growth caps or discretionary approvals. By-right standards and clearer rulebooks could translate into more predictable lot pipelines and better control over absorption planning, the report argues. 

Time: shot clocks, fast lanes and third-party inspectors

The timeline section focuses on shortening the path from land control to vertical construction. HUD’s recommendations include:

• Streamlined permit processes, including a dedicated “fast lane” for residential and new-building permits and the elimination of unnecessary duplicate reviews.
• Binding timelines for government decisions, including a “shot clock” of less than 60 days for right-to-build approvals and less than 30 days for construction permitting and inspections.
• Unified development ordinances to consolidate disparate land-use rules.
• Revisiting planning and zoning procedures, including meeting schedules, publication rules and in-person appearance mandates that can drag out hearings.
• Technology-enabled approvals, including the use of artificial intelligence to expedite permit review and flag issues.
• Third-party inspections and studies, allowing builders to choose from state-certified inspectors for code inspections and state-certified engineers for environmental, site plan and plat reviews.
• Faster dispute resolution, with both government agencies and private parties on construction issues.
• License reciprocity across and within states for building contractors. 

The HUD report argues that these recommendations would lead to shorter and more predictable permitting and inspection windows. It could also translate into faster inventory turns, lower interest carry, less weather risk and more accuracy in start and delivery schedules for buyers and lenders, the report claims. 

Why this matters for homebuilders

Most of the national housing policy discussion is focused on the bipartisan 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, which passed the House on Wednesday. However, homebuilders know that most of the important reforms happen at the state and local levels. 

HUD’s best practices report isn’t a mandate that is binding for any state or municipality. There are also provisions in there that may evoke controversy or disagreement. 

However, the report does give the industry a federally endorsed checklist to push for locally, and reinforces the Trump administration’s larger push to “restore housing affordability”.

The report signals where federal housing leadership wants state and local policy to move: lower fees, fewer add-on codes, more by-right development and faster approvals. How quickly or broadly that vision translates into on-the-ground change will depend on decisions in state capitols, county commissions and city councils over the next several years.

Tyler Williams reported and wrote this article with drafting assistance from HousingWire Automation, an editorial tool that helps transform announcements and industry data into HousingWire-style news coverage.

This post was originally published on here. 

The build-to-rent (BTR) industry, which has been under siege from legislative uncertainty since March, just got a modicum of welcome news. 

On Wednesday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed an amended version of the U.S. Senate’s 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act by a margin of 396 to 13 that removed the proposed seven-year selloff rule for new build-to-rent communities. 

The legislation does, however, ban institutional investors that already own 350 or more single-family homes from purchasing additional single-family properties.

Still, the House’s bill – which now volleys back to the Senate for reconciliation and another vote – includes significant carve-outs for build-to-rent and renovate-to-rent projects and other exemptions that were not included in the Senate’s version. 

How the House legislation differs from the Senate’s

The House overwhelmingly approved its original version of the legislation, which included no institutional investor ban, on February 9 in a 390-9 vote. The Senate followed on March 12, passing its version 89-10. However, the Senate’s bill included a last-minute provision, Section 901, which has significantly reduced the amount of build-to-rent supply under construction. 

The controversial provision banned institutional investors from purchasing single-family homes. While it included narrow carve-outs for renovate-to-rent projects, it didn’t provide exemptions for build-to-rent communities. It also mandated that new BTR communities be sold to individual homeowners within seven years of completion. 

The House unveiled an updated version of the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act that overhauled that section last week and released the final draft of the bill on Tuesday. 

Section 1001 of the updated House legislation similarly defines single-family homes as duplexes, as well as traditional detached and attached single-family properties. Manufactured housing isn’t included in the definition.  

The section further states that “no large institutional investor may purchase, or enter into a contract to directly or indirectly purchase, any single-family home.” 

To discourage those firms from buying more properties, the legislation would institute a” civil penalty in an amount that is not more than $1,000,000 per violation, or 3 times the purchase price of the property involved, whichever is greater.”

However, there are exemptions to this penalty for any single-family property that is:

• “newly constructed, renovated, or a rental conversion for sale by a large institutional investor and not as a residence rented pending sale.” 
• “pursuant to a build-to-rent program where the large institutional investor purchases, constructs, or constructs and retains a newly constructed single-family home to be managed as a rental property, whether as part of a community made up exclusively of renter-occupied single-family homes or as part of a community made up of single-family homes that are both owner- and renter-occupied.”
• “pursuant to a renovate-to-rent program” that “makes improvements in an aggregate dollar amount of not less than 15 percent of the purchase price of the single-family home”. 
• part of an eligible homeownership program or an eligible program aimed at converting renters into homeowners. 
• purchased from “another large institutional investor that either owned the single-family home on the date of enactment of this Act or purchased the single-family home in compliance with this section.” 
• “newly constructed, renovated, or a rental conversion that is intended and operated for occupancy as part of a community for households with 1 or more members aged 55.”

Additionally, there is an exemption for any purchase of a single-family home that happens as part of changing or reorganizing the ownership structure of homes that an institutional investor already owned or bought before this law took effect.

How the bill would incentivize local reform

Another major change made by the House was removing the Senate’s Build Act Now provision, which sought to encourage pro-housing zoning and land-use reforms by linking community development block grant (CDBG) funding to municipalities and states that adopted positive housing reforms. 

However, the House added in the Housing Supply Frameworks Act, which instructs HUD to establish voluntary land-use and zoning recommendations to help communities expand and streamline housing development on a local level.

What comes next

The bill must now get a nod of approval from the Senate, which has so far been reluctant to make changes to its original bill. Politico reported on Tuesday that Speaker Mike Johnson reached an agreement with President Donald Trump on the updated legislation, indicating that Trump would sign the bill into law if Congress sends it to the Oval Office. 

However, how the Senate will respond to the housing package is an open question. On Wednesday, Senators Tim Scott (R-S.C.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) issued a joint statement indicating that they may make further changes to the legislation. 

“We worked closely with the White House and our colleagues in both chambers on a bill that puts families first and addresses the housing crisis. There’s still work to be done, and we are committed to continuing to work with the White House and our colleagues in the House on a housing bill that can pass the Senate and get to the President’s desk,” the statement read.

Strong housing industry support

The housing industry, with broad support, has rallied behind efforts in Congress to pass the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act. Among other changes, the legislation would tackle the housing affordability crisis by doing the following:

• Modernizing legacy federal housing programs
• Streamlining regulations across HUD, USDA and related agencies
• Expanding affordable housing financing

Organizations that advocate on behalf of the housing industry have almost unanimously backed the House’s legislation. 

“The amended bill includes a number of meaningful reforms that will help modernize federal housing programs, reduce barriers to development, and encourage the production and preservation of a wide range of rental properties and single-family homes for homebuyers,” David M. Dworkin, President and CEO of the National Housing Conference, said in a statement. 

“This amended bill provides communities with new resources and best practices to modernize zoning and boost supply, streamlines federal permitting, and expands financing options for manufactured and rural housing,” Shannon McGahn, the National Association of Realtors’ executive vice president and chief advocacy officer, said. “The bill also modernizes key programs like CDBG and HOME to strengthen local housing investment, improves credit access for homebuyers, and helps ensure veterans take full advantage of their VA home loan benefits.

Bill Owens, chairman of the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), also spoke in support of the House measure, noting, “the package eliminates a forced-sale provision on rental housing that would have reduced supply, raises and indexes multifamily loan limits to help spur new apartment development, and provides meaningful relief to community banks.”

The Community Home Lenders of America (CHLA), in a statement, praised a provision that would eliminate the permanent chassis requirement for manufactured homes.

“Another noteworthy focus of the bill is Sections 105, 401, and 402 – all designed to promote small-dollar mortgage loans, which are more difficult to originate,” CHLA said. 

Bob Broeksmit, President and CEO of the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA), also praised the legislation. 

“The House revisions addressed many key concerns raised by MBA and other stakeholders, strengthening the legislation while preserving important measures in the Senate’s bill to boost housing supply and expand access to affordable mortgage credit,” Broeksmit said. 

This post was originally published on here. 

For decades, the iconic gold blazer was synonymous with the CENTURY 21 Real Estate brand. From appearances in television shows like Gilmore Girls to movies like WarGames and the 1984 Ghostbusters film, the gold blazer was a hallmark of the real estate industry and a marketing calling card for real life CENTURY 21 agents, helping the company to a place on Time’s list of America’s Most Iconic Companies. 

While the gold blazer has largely disappeared in the U.S., CENTURY 21 CEO Mike Miedler says the wholesomeness, professionalism and consumer-focused experience the blazers stood for are still central to CENTURY 21’s identity over 50 years after the firm’s founding. 

“A differentiating factor for us at CENTURY 21 is that if you go into almost any market in any corner of the globe, consumers will know who CENTURY 21 is. They’ll know it is a real estate brand and that it stands for trust and confidence,” Miedler said. “People know what the experience is going to be like working with a CENTURY 21 agent.”

Although some may view CENTURY 21 as a bit “vanilla,” the community engagement and high level of customer services CENTURY 21 agents provide, Miedler feels has greatly contributed to the longevity and success of the brand. It is this reputation and legacy that Miedler is looking to preserve as he guides CENTURY 21 through its integration with Compass International Holdings. 

Agents want differentiation

“I have operated in an environment with a matrix of multiple brands since 1998, so it is second nature to me, but I do see all of the people from the outside wondering how we don’t all homogenize,” Miedler said. “I think what it comes down to is that agents want some type of differentiation, whether that is leadership, whether it’s training, whether it’s brand recognition and naming convention.” 

So while all of the Compass International Holdings brands are eventually slated to be on the Compass technology platform, Miedler does not feel this shared backbone will cause his firm to turn into another Sotheby’s International Realty or Better Homes and Gardens Real Estate. 

Miedler believes the consumer-first and trust focused approach CENTURY 21 agents and brokers are known for may be one of his brand’s primary differentiators. Due to this, Miedler feels upholding this reputation is becoming even more important in the face of industry consolidation and criticism that these larger companies are out of touch with homebuyers and sellers. 

“Every one of our agents literally lives, eats, sleeps and raises kids in the place they serve,” Miedler said. “They are more community first than large entity first and I think that is one of the things that gives CENTURY 21, as a brand, an edge.”

The leverage and scale of a platform is enticing

While he acknowledges the integration with Compass International Holdings will certainly pose its fair share of challenges, Miedler is excited by the scale and leverage being part of an even larger organization will give the CENTURY 21 team.

“Just thinking about 300,000 plus agents all working on a single platform, that isn’t just a CRM, but where the entire life cycle of the transaction lives, that is exciting and not just for the efficiency that the agent could have, but really the streamlined experience the customer will have, which is what we are always trying to strive for here at CENTURY 21,” he said. 

“A lot of the heavy lifting now is going into our integration and our adoption of the Compass technology. It is extremely important that we earn the agents’ trust in the platform and show them the value of it with how it will help with their business but also improve the consumer experience,” Miedler added.

Looking back to move forward

As Miedler and CENTURY 21 look to the future, the firm’s leadership team has decided to also take a look back and carry some of that iconic gold into the company’s next 50 years of business. 

“A few years ago we did a rebrand of the organization,” Miedler said. “It was time and something that was necessary because when we looked at the new generation of buyers and where they were looking online, we felt it was time for a refresh.” 

However, Miedler said research done by the company’s marketing department shows that the refresh may have been a bit of an overcorrection. This, Miedler said, has led the team back to a color they call “legacy gold.” 

“At our global conference this year, we re-released our legacy gold yard signs,” Miedler said. “It is going to be up to our agents if they feel using that sign is the right call for the property and client they are representing, but we found that the gold post was truly a differentiator for us.” 

For Miedler that legacy gold color is tied to joy, which is at the heart of CENTURY 21’s slogan: “Dedicated to the joy of home.” 

While the return of the iconic gold blazer may not imminently be in the cards for CENTURY 21, Miedler is grateful for the brand and business they helped create. 

“They are a bit of a throwback and a hallmark of the company, but what I think the blazers and the legacy gold stand for as hallmarks is putting the consumer first and that consumer trust we continue to strive to earn,” he said.  

This post was originally published on here. 

As part of HousingWire’s Editor’s Choice awards spotlight series, we’re spotlighting past Women of Influence honorees whose careers, leadership and insights continue to influence the industry. This series offers a closer look at the experiences and decisions that have shaped their paths.

HousingWire spoke with Charis Moreno, Chief Revenue Officer at NextHome, about leadership, industry change and staying focused on people during uncertain times.

Moreno was recognized as a 2024 Women of Influence honoree for her leadership at NextHome, her expertise across real estate business models and franchising and her role in driving the company’s national growth while fostering a culture centered on collaboration, support and long-term success.

Women of Influence recognizes the leaders like Moreno making a meaningful impact across mortgage, real estate and homebuilding. Nominations for the 2026 Women of Influence awards are open now through May 31.

HousingWire: What’s one decision that changed the trajectory of your career?

Charis Moreno: Accepting a sales position on the REALTOR.com inside sales team. This position paid a salary of $60K, less than what I was making running a regionally based shoe company, but had variable compensation of triple what I was making. Sometimes in life, you have to take a step back to go forward. Bet on yourself and use fear as fuel.

My grandfather told me to never take a job for money. If it gets you excited, it’s something you believe in, and it’s not illegal, then go for it.

HW: Looking back, what experiences most prepared you for the leadership role you’re in today?

Charis Moreno: My childhood and growing up in a small town. From a young age, I always sought stability, discipline, and calm in the storm. No matter how hard it was or how impossible it seemed, there was always a better way through.

Real estate is full of dysfunction, change, chaos, and somehow, that’s exactly why the ones who win are the ones who stay disciplined, think clearly, and execute when everyone else is distracted.

In every role, I have always started from the bottom and left in a leadership position, leaving a place better than I found it. I love taking care of people, mostly the underdogs. The ones who do not believe in themself and inspire them.

HW: What are you most focused on right now within your organization?

Charis Moreno: I am most intent on keeping everyone focused on what they can control. We cannot control rates, inventory, prices, geopolitical drama, or what may happen next in the industry.

Life is hard, and life in real estate is harder, but if you know why you are doing it, then it should make all the outside noise irrelevant.

I remind our members that one of the greatest ways you can serve this country is by creating homeownership. What a gift it is to create generational wealth and provide the opportunity for someone to own a place of their own.

I believe if we remind ourselves of this and we keep humans over houses, then noise is just that, noise.

HW: What’s one leadership lesson you’ve learned that more people in this industry should understand?

Charis Moreno: Humility.

Our industry could use much more of this trait instead of leading with ego. This business was never intended to be about the REALTOR. It’s about the client.

The role of a REALTOR should be to educate, support, and provide clarity and confidence when situations get emotional and uncertain.

HW: What advice would you give to the next generation of women working toward senior leadership roles in housing?

Charis Moreno: Having balance is a lie and anyone who says otherwise is a liar. You cannot do it all, but you can still do it.

Determine what you are willing to sacrifice and what you are not willing to sacrifice.

You have to give yourself grace. Have grit and a lot of faith. Make sacrifices. Give support when you can, and take support when it is given. Create your village.

Make the effort to find and prioritize these things, and you can achieve everything you want and maybe, just maybe, create something special in the process.

Click here to nominate a 2026 Woman of Influence.

This post was originally published on here. 

Mortgage lenders are currently wrestling with a high-stakes puzzle: how to accurately compare the new credit score models hitting the market. The differences are significant and carry major implications for risk assessment, loan pricing and secondary market returns.

In late April, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) rolled out a program allowing the exclusive use of VantageScore 4.0 for loans delivered by a group of lenders to the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The future use of FICO 10T will also act as an alternative to the long-standing FICO Classic.

Not to be left behind, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Scott Turner signaled that Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans will also adopt these alternatives in the coming months.

For now, lenders participating in the FHFA’s rollout program have a temporary workaround. They’re applying a 20-point cut from FICO to VantageScore to figure out where a loan should be priced in the grid.

While United Wholesale Mortgage (UWM) publicly announced this strategy, sources tell HousingWire it’s actually the practice among other participating lenders. These lenders are also relying on multiple models to double-check accuracy and minimize risk.

Guild Mortgage has already started to compare how the same loan scores across all three models, but it’s in the “very early stages of collecting this data,” according to David Battany, the company’s executive vice president for capital markets.

“When you see a delta between two models of 40 or 80 points, that’s pretty significant,” Battany said this week during a session on the new credit score models at the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA)’s Secondary and Capital Markets Conference in New York. “When you think of Classic FICO, every 40 points of score equals a doubling of default rate.”

But default risk isn’t the only curveball secondary market investors need to model. Economists warn that these new scores could trigger other unintended consequences.

“For us, the prepaid risk is that you have a low FICO borrower, and he scores higher on Vantage, because most Vantage scores are a little bit higher,” Jeana Curro, managing director and head of agency MBS research at Bank of America, said during a session on general market trends. “That creates a refi opportunity that you know would not be foreseen, would not be estimated by models.”

Curro stressed that the industry still has a “way to go” with implementation, as not everyone is fully prepared. In her opinion, nonbanks are driving the conversation, while traditional banks are being left behind.

Tricky calibration

FICO and VantageScore themselves warned about the nuances between their models and the potential headaches of calibration.

“I wouldn’t underscore it and make it sound too easy to do the calibration,” said Ethan Dornhelm, head of scores analytics at FICO. “Certainly, calibrations are possible, but we do see that there can be drift over time, and given that the two algorithms that are the modernized credit scores are different, they could drift slightly differently. So, it will be a case of not just calibrating one time and being done with it, but rather careful and close monitoring over time.”

VantageScore recommends probability-of-default mapping, saying that translation tables are straightforward.

“What we recommend doing is to basing it on the probability default, so you have the similar expected outcomes when you’re looking at converting the scores, and we’re about to provide some more data on that,” said Rikard Bandebo, chief strategy officer and chief economist at VantageScore.

Most lender systems are built around a single credit-score field. Adding a second introduces major operational and policy questions. A concern is with cherry-picking, since lenders might simply submit whichever score makes the loan look more affordable for the borrower and ignore the actual probability of default.

“With regards to gaming, there have been studies not commissioned by either FICO or Vantage that have expressed concerns that at a given score band, defaults may increase by as much as 30% if gaming runs completely amok, and we just don’t know at this point what the dynamics are going to look like in this two-score lender choice setting, as far as how much gaming actually occurs,” Dornhelm said.

VantageScore downplayed these fears. Bandebo acknowledged that while the potential for gaming warrants study, research from Prosperity Now indicates that “it’s actually not going to increase the risk any more than the current system.”

Secondary market jitters

Lender adoption is only chapter one. The broader mortgage ecosystem — comprising warehouse lenders, secondary investors and other key players — has largely been in a “wait-and-see” holding pattern, sources say.

In late April, Newrez originated $10 million in mortgages scored with VantageScore 4.0, which were then securitized by Freddie Mac. This pilot effectively helped federal housing agencies greenlight the broader use of modern credit scores.

Bob Johnson, head of originations at Newrez, explained that Freddie Mac approached the company to see if it could “test the plumbing.” Newrez was “able to make those deliveries and fully test out the system,” he said.

But the secondary market was not fully tested, sources said. The first multilender GSE securitization containing VantageScore-underwritten loans totaled just under $8 million within an $11 billion pool, according to Dornhelm. He added that FICO reported one single-lender securitization under FICO 10T, with more expected in the home equity line of credit (HELOC) space later this year.

VantageScore counters by pointing to its proven track record outside the mortgage realm. The model already drives roughly 10% of asset-backed securities (ABS) issuance — including credit cards and personal loans — through major issuers like Synchrony and Toyota. Bandebo added that ratings agencies are ready and view the transition as manageable.

Different models, some similarities

The new score models are similar to Classic FICO because they all predict the likelihood of default over a two-year horizon, use the 300-850 score range, and incorporate utility and telecom data when available.

What makes them different is that both FICO 10T and VantageScore 4.0 use time-series balance, payment and utilization data rather than a single point-in-time snapshot. Both new scores factor in rental payment history — although less than 5% of files currently contain it, which represents a major growth area for financial inclusion. They are also built on more recent data and better reflect modern consumer behaviors.

But points of contention remain. While FICO 10T builds bespoke models for each bureau, saying that it maximized their unique data, VantageScore 4.0 uses one algorithm across all three bureaus for score consistency.

This post was originally published on here. 

Regulators in Illinois have approved what a group of home equity investment (HEI) providers calls the most comprehensive state regulatory framework to date for shared equity products, a fast-growing alternative to traditional home equity loans and reverse mortgages.

The rule was adopted under the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (IDFPR)’s mortgage licensing regulations. It governs shared equity products, which Illinois law refers to as shared appreciation agreements, according to a recent announcement from the Coalition for Home Equity Partnership (CHEP).

The framework brings shared equity products under the state’s Residential Mortgage License Act of 1987 and is intended to balance consumer protections with continued access to the products. Home equity investments, or shared equity agreements, typically allow homeowners to access cash in exchange for a share of future home price appreciation instead of taking on new monthly debt.

Details of the Illinois rule

The rule is the result of a multistage, stakeholder-driven process in which IDFPR made more than 120 changes between the first and second public notices of the proposal, CHEP said. Participants in the process included consumer advocates, industry providers and other interested parties.

The final regulation integrates HEIs into the existing mortgage licensing framework under Public Act 103-1015. It establishes operating requirements and restrictions specific to shared equity contracts.

It also creates a new standardized disclosure form designed to show homeowners the potential costs of shared equity products through cost-scenario tables. And it introduces “fit-for-purpose” alternatives to certain traditional mortgage rules, including the ability-to-repay standard, to address structural differences between shared equity contracts and mortgage loans.

CHEP said the new disclosure form substantially incorporates its proposed model structure and approach for explaining costs and tradeoffs to homeowners.

The approach in Illinois stands in stark contrast to a recently adopted law in Maine, which received support from the state’s consumer protection bureau and the National Consumer Law Center. Jim Riccitelli, CEO of Unlock, a leading HEI provider, told HousingWire‘s Reverse Mortgage Daily (RMD) that the changes in Maine effectively bar the products from being offered there.

“Maine’s law was modeled on mortgage loan statutes without adequate adjustment for the structural differences that make shared-equity products work,” Riccitelli said. “The result is a framework that cannot be operationalized — not because the goal of consumer protection is wrong, but because the wrong tool was applied to the job. So you will not see any shared-equity products offered in Maine, and Maine homeowners will unfortunately not have the opportunity to avail themselves of the benefits they offer.”

Broader context

Shared equity and home equity investment products have grown in recent years as homeowners with significant untapped equity look for non-debt options to access cash amid higher interest rates.

The products have also drawn scrutiny from law firms and regulators concerned about consumer understanding of the complex long-term pricing and contract terms contained in HEIs.

While HEIs remain small in scope, reverse mortgage professionals have expressed caution or outright opposition to the products.

“We should have no filter to talk about these products,” REVERSE plus co-founder Dan Hultquist said earlier this month at the Reverse Mastermind Summit. “Understand what they are and do your research. If you don’t recognize how predatory these products are, do the math. …  If I have my way, those products will be banned,” he said.

Illinois joins Connecticut and Maryland, which previously adopted more limited frameworks for these arrangements. CHEP characterized the Illinois rule as the most comprehensive so far and “a regulatory beacon” for other states considering how to oversee the sector. The group expects the framework to influence development of more uniform national standards over time.

For mortgage lenders and housing finance professionals, the rule signals several key trends:

• States are moving shared equity products into existing mortgage regulatory regimes rather than treating them as unregulated alternatives.
• Regulators are prioritizing standardized consumer disclosures that clearly explain long-term cost scenarios and equity-sharing mechanics.
• Providers that operate nationally may face growing pressure to align their contracts and compliance programs with emerging state models like Illinois

A clearer regulatory structure could also impact partnerships between shared equity providers, lenders and real estate brokerages, as compliance expectations and licensing obligations become more defined.

The regulatory framework has been finalized and will move into an implementation phase under IDFPR oversight. CHEP said it plans to continue working with Illinois regulators as they put the framework into practice — and with officials in other states that are considering similar rules.

Details on effective dates, licensing impacts and operational requirements for existing shared equity providers in Illinois will be critical for compliance officers, legal teams and capital providers involved in these products.

Neil Pierson reported and wrote this article with drafting assistance from HousingWire Automation, an editorial tool that helps transform announcements and industry data into HousingWire-style news coverage.

This post was originally published on here. 

Military families navigating permanent change-of-station moves and veterans pursuing homeownership through VA-backed loans are increasingly turning to a new real estate network founded by a longtime Navy leader.

Military Operated Real Estate (MORE) was started by Travis Winfield, a 24-year U.S. Navy leadership veteran, founder of California-based The Winfield Group Real Estate Team and author of the book “Military Money & MORE.”

MORE operates as both a training academy and a national referral network designed specifically for active-duty service members, veterans and military families.

The independent, broker-agnostic program officially launched publicly Dec. 8 after incorporating earlier in 2025.

Since then, the organization has expanded rapidly — reaching nearly 100 certified agents across 32 states and supporting roughly 140 military installations nationwide.

Winfield told HousingWire that MORE was created to address a longstanding issue in the real estate industry; agents marketing themselves as military specialists without having meaningful knowledge of military life or veterans’ benefits.

“You have to have a military affiliation to walk in our front door,” he said. “What does that mean? You have to be a veteran or you have to be a military spouse or dependent who’s lived the military life. So, what’s the litmus test? You need to have been born while your parents were serving the military or be married to a service member while on active duty.

“Why did we set that standard? It’s very simple. You don’t know what it’s like to serve unless you’ve served.”

That military-first requirement became one of the core foundations of MORE Academy, the organization’s certification and education division.

Agents seeking certification must complete an extensive curriculum, demonstrate military affiliation and provide documented experience working with veteran clients before gaining access to the MORE network.

Winfield said the curriculum took nearly a year to develop and was intentionally designed to be more rigorous than many traditional industry certifications.

“We have a very robust policy and network policies that all agents are required to sign, and a lot of it’s built on ethics,” he said. “What’s interesting is we tell every one of our agents that if you have a violation, an ethics violation, I’m not going to kick you out of the network. We’re going to create a board of your peers — just like in the military, and they’re going to determine your fate.

“That kind of model of where we’re self-policing has created a culture where everybody just wants to be a part and help each other.”

The organization operates under the slogan, “Expect MORE from your agent,” and is accredited through both the U.S. Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Beyond traditional real estate training

Winfield said the program goes beyond traditional sales education by training agents to become knowledgeable about military and veterans’ benefits that may directly impact clients’ financial decisions.

He recalled one interaction with a disabled veteran family while still working in real estate production in southern California.

The family planned to sell their home to help cover college expenses for their son after rising interest rates made refinancing less attractive.

“I looked at him and asked, ‘You’re a disabled veteran, right?’ and he said yes,” Winfield said. “I told him that in California, your kids [can] go to any California state school for free. I kid you not, they literally started crying right in front of me and it gives me goosebumps to this day talking about this. Of course, they didn’t sell their house and their kid went off to college. [The family] became raving fans.”

Winfield said moments like that reinforced his belief that military-focused agents should also serve as trusted resource guides for veterans and active-duty families.

“We all know that agents are already like therapists, we’re counselors,” he said. “We’re all kinds of different people and wear different hats. Why can we not also be benefits experts? This is a piece of public information that they just were not aware of — but our agents can be that conduit for information.”

Agents drawn to higher standards

Among the first agents to complete the MORE curriculum was Jeff Schnell, a veteran and agent with Dwell Real Estate Group in Wichita, Kansas.

Schnell — who has spent decades working in real estate and VA lending — said he was initially drawn to Winfield’s focus on serious education and military experience rather than marketing alone.

“[Winfield] was online in a support group for agents that cater to military, and he was just asking questions,” said Schnell. “They were general education questions and I commented, then we went back and forth in several comments. It was very clear right away that he wasn’t there to stir the pot. He was there to ask serious questions to promote and provoke thought within our niche part of the industry.”

Schnell later became part of MORE’s first testing cohort, known internally as Alpha Company, where agents evaluated and refined the curriculum before public launch.

“It wasn’t just a basic type of certification,” he said. “You actually have to pay attention, and you actually have to study. I have my broker’s license, and I have several other certifications that were easily harder than my broker’s license. This is one of the certifications that was harder to get than my broker’s license. It’s real education from a point of view of military first by military people.”

Expanding the MORE ecosystem

Winfield said MORE ultimately aims to build a broader service array that includes advanced certifications for agents, lenders and property managers serving military clients.

He emphasized that the organization sees itself primarily as an educational institution rather than simply another referral platform.

“It’s kind of like going to Harvard,” Winfield said. “If you graduate Harvard, you now become an alumni and you get access to this network and this alumni of people and all their benefits and resources. Same concept here — you go through our certification and once you graduate, you then get access to our network.

“We’re a client-facing brand that’s here to market the agent and tell the consumer, ‘You want to hire a more certified agent because they’ve walked a mile in your shoes.”

As MORE continues expanding nationwide, Winfield said the organization’s mission remains centered on accountability and improving outcomes for military families during some of the most financially significant moments of their lives.

This post was originally published on here. 

I’ve been in this business for 50 years. My father was in it for 50 before me. And in all that time, I cannot think of a single moment when the people who actually do the work in American real estate had less say over how that work gets shared, marketed and monetized than they do right now.

We take the listings. We walk the homes. We sit at the kitchen tables. We negotiate the deals. And then, somewhere between the listing agreement and the closing table, we hand the keys to our business over to companies that have never sold a house in their lives. It’s time for an agent-owned national MLS or portal.

Maybe it’s time we stopped

I want to float an idea. It may make some powerful industry leaders uncomfortable, and that’s alright. The agents who take the listings should own the platform where those listings are shared with each other and presented to the public. Not a vendor. Not a portal. Not a tech company in Seattle. Us.

Let me be clear about something first. I have enormous respect for the MLS model. The local MLSs were built by hardworking people, and the underlying idea, agents pooling their listings so every agent and their buyer has a fair shot at every home, is one of the most beautiful cooperative ideas any American industry has ever produced. That part isn’t broken.

What’s broken is that the cooperative tool we built for ourselves has been layered, year after year, with rules we no longer set, fees we no longer control, and mandates we never voted on. And the public-facing side of our work has quietly been carried off by third parties that built billion-dollar audiences on the back of our listings and now sell that audience right back to us.

That isn’t a conspiracy. It’s just what happens when professionals stop paying attention.

Let’s pay attention

Picture this with me. One national MLS. Every listing in America in one place. Owned by the agents who take those listings. Every member an owner. Every owner a shareholder. The shareholders elect a board. The board hires the people who run it. If you’re a member, you get to use it and you get a vote in how it’s run. The cost? No more than what we already pay the MLSs and the portals that earn billions from our work.

Inside this platform, every agent in America sees every listing by every agent in America. Any city, any price point, shared within one business day of signing. From that first day forward, no agent in this country is in the dark about what’s for sale, who has it and how to reach the listing agent directly. We DM each other inside the platform, send referrals, agree on referral fees, and close the loop without ever leaving the system. AI runs underneath all of it.

Then comes the second piece. The piece that changes the industry forever.

A public-facing site, fed by us, the agents who represent the sellers and know the homes. Our listings all presented together on one website, with accurate data straight from the listing agent. No buyer inquiry diverted to a stranger who paid for leads that month. No “offer guides.” No games. Just every home in America, presented honestly, with the listing agent’s name on the door.

We all agree to share listings

All of us agree to share listings with each other inside our MLS. But each of us decides when, or whether, our listings go on the public-facing site. Immediately, in a few weeks, or never. You would have complete marketing freedom. Promote your listings anywhere you choose, whenever you choose, however you choose. The public site is yours to use, not a mandate to follow. But ask yourself why you wouldn’t use the site you own, the one place every buyer in America comes to find a home because that’s where the listings are.

Now let’s talk numbers, because visions without arithmetic are just daydreams. Between 5 and 6 million homes are listed for sale in this country every year. A modest upload fee of $100 per listing generates roughly half a billion dollars a year. Every year. To operate the platform, upgrade the technology and market the site to every homebuyer in America. Approved vendor advertising grows the number from there.

The buildout is funded by outside venture capital, with a clear agreement that the industry buys the investors out at a fair profit once revenues come in. The investors get a strong return. The agents get the platform back. Everyone wins. I already know a firm likely to fund it, provided enough of us commit in advance to using it.

What happens to the existing home search portals?

That’s their business to figure out. If they had served us well, if they hadn’t tried to dictate how we market homes, hadn’t used our listings to harvest buyers and sell them back to us, hadn’t filed lawsuits arguing we should be forced to use them, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. But they did. And we are.

What happens to the existing MLSs? That part matters to me, because the people who run them are not the villains in this story. They are colleagues. Many are friends. The vision is to offer to buy them, fairly and at full value, so the entities and individuals who own them today walk away whole, with a real return on the years and dollars they invested.

This isn’t about taking anything from anyone. It’s about an industry quietly assuming stewardship of a model it should have owned all along, because we are the ones who power it. We consolidate the MLSs we acquire into one national MLS we own, and we retain as many of their employees and managers as we can. The MLS model lives on. The MLS people keep their jobs. What changes is who answers to whom.

Mark Twain said the two most important days of a person’s life are the day they are born and the day they figure out why. I think a great many of us are about to figure out why we’re really here.

Every great shift in American industry was led by the people inside it who stopped waiting for permission.

The railroads. The airlines. The auto makers. The internet companies. None of them asked the middlemen who fed off them whether change was permitted. They simply changed, and the world changed with them.

That’s where we are. That’s what this moment is.

We are the industry. We are the ones who take the listings, walk the homes, sit at the kitchen tables, and put families into houses they love. The portals are a middleman we invited in thirty years ago and forgot to ever ask to leave. The rules we never voted on are rules we are free to outgrow. Marketing freedom is not a privilege a vendor grants us. It is ours by right.

One MLS. One affiliated home search portal. One group of owners. Every agent in America. Built by us, for us, and for the buyers and sellers we serve.

It really is that simple. And it really is up to us.

A note: The views in this article are mine alone, offered as a 50-year industry veteran. They do not represent the positions of any company I work with or any organization I am associated with. If this idea draws fire, that fire belongs to me.

Greg Hague is a 50-year real estate veteran and attorney. He is the founder of 72SOLD, named one of America’s 250 fastest-growing privately held businesses by Inc. 5000, and was recently appointed Director of Home Sales Strategy for the Compass International Holdings family of real estate brands.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners.

To contact the editor responsible for this piece: tracey@hwmedia.com

This post was originally published on here. 

MortgageOne TPO, a wholesale mortgage lender and Department of the Treasury-certified Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI), has integrated with the ARIVE platform and launched Pathway, a flagship CDFI loan program aimed at borrowers underserved by traditional mortgage guidelines, the company announced.

The dual rollout is being led by MortgageOne TPO managing directors Rich Phillips and Lisa Kocsis, along with senior operations manager Cheri Faulk.

ARIVE is a loan origination system, point-of-sale platform and lender marketplace built for mortgage brokers. The integration gives brokers access to MortgageOne TPO’s full product set from within the ARIVE ecosystem, streamlining pricing, locking and pipeline management.

“Today is a defining moment for MortgageOne TPO,” Phillips and Kocsis said in the announcement. “With ARIVE, we’re meeting brokers inside the platform they already trust. With Pathway, we’re putting the strength of our CDFI status to work for borrowers who deserve another door to homeownership.”

MortgageOne TPO’s product menu on ARIVE includes non-QM, CDFI, down payment assistance, conventional, government and jumbo solutions. The company said the connection is designed to reduce operational friction and help brokers surface products that can serve a broader range of borrowers while keeping workflows inside a single system.

“Joining ARIVE is a strategic move for MortgageOne TPO,” Kocsis and Phillips said. “Our brokers expect speed, clarity and technology that works the way they work. Integrating with ARIVE allows us to deliver our full product mix within a system brokers already trust, while improving the overall submission and lock experience.”

From ARIVE’s perspective, adding a CDFI lender with a wide nonagency and specialty product mix can help brokers differentiate themselves a purchase market still constrained by affordability and inventory.

“ARIVE was built to empower brokers with flexibility and control,” said Harish Tejwani, CEO of ARIVE. “We’re excited to welcome MortgageOne TPO to the platform. Their broad product offerings and broker-focused approach align perfectly with our mission to simplify the wholesale lending experience.”

Launched alongside the ARIVE integration, Pathway is positioned as MortgageOne TPO’s flagship CDFI offering in the wholesale channel. Because MortgageOne TPO is a U.S. Treasury-certified CDFI, it can structure products aimed at borrowers who have difficulty qualifying under standard agency or non-QM rules, while still operating within CDFI and fair lending requirements.

The Pathway program is designed to expand financing access for borrowers underserved by traditional qualification standards, offering mortgages without income documentation, employment verification or debt-to-income requirements.

The program is available to borrowers with a minimum 620 credit score and supports loan amounts up to $2.5 million for home purchases, rate-and-term refinances and cash-out refinances.

The program is available exclusively through MortgageOne TPO’s wholesale channel. The company framed Pathway as a way for brokers to serve creditworthy borrowers whose financial profiles do not fit traditional documentation standards, such as self-employed borrowers, gig-economy workers or those with nontraditional income sources.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication. The system helps convert company announcements and industry data into HousingWire-style news coverage.

This post was originally published on here. 

A federal judge has granted final approval to a $110 million shareholder derivative settlement resolving claims that Wells Fargo directors and senior executives failed to properly oversee the bank’s mortgage lending practices.

The final approval, announced May 15, paves the way for expanded mortgage assistance programs for low- and moderate-income borrowers in more than 50 metropolitan areas nationwide.

Under the settlement, Wells Fargo will provide $100 million to establish a borrower assistance program to support communities disproportionately affected by barriers to mortgage lending. The program includes grant and closing cost assistance for eligible borrowers purchasing or residing in designated metro areas.

According to the approval, the program “will remain in existence for a minimum of three years after the final approval of the settlement.”

The lead counsel also requested $27.5 million in attorneys’ fees and litigation costs. Court filings said the amount would be paid separately from the settlement’s $100 million borrower assistance program and a separate $10 million directors and officers insurance payment.

The litigation, filed in 2022 on behalf of Wells Fargo shareholders, alleged the bank’s board failed to maintain adequate oversight and lacked a functioning committee to monitor fairness in mortgage lending practices.

Plaintiffs said the governance shortcomings exposed the company to regulatory scrutiny, civil and criminal investigations, and significant compliance costs.

Law firms Motley Rice LLC, Cotchett Pitre & McCarthy LLP and Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP served as co-lead counsel for the plaintiffs, helping to negotiate the settlement and develop the borrower assistance framework.

“Often, the largest asset a person or family has is a home,” attorney Marlon Kimpson of Motley Rice said. “This settlement delivers real, tangible benefits for low- to moderate-income borrowers in census tracts that mirror the people allegedly discriminated against.”

Motley Rice attorney Josh Littlejohn called the agreement “a positive step toward needed change,” adding that it would provide assistance for borrowers who have historically faced barriers to homeownership.

Attorney Bill Norton said the settlement reinforces the importance of board-level accountability and compliance with fair lending laws.

“In a shareholder derivative action, the shareholders stand in the shoes of the company and seek to address its directors’ and officers’ alleged breaches of fiduciary duty,” Norton said. “This settlement strengthens Wells Fargo for all of its shareholders by reaffirming the bank’s commitment to lend to low- and moderate-income borrowers in communities throughout the country.”

The borrower assistance programs will be available in dozens of metropolitan areas, including markets in California, Texas, Florida, Georgia, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Washington, D.C.

Additional markets, including Houston, Las Vegas and Salt Lake City, will be eligible for closing cost credit assistance only.

This post was originally published on here. 

Midwest Real Estate Data (MRED) has suspended listing data feeds to Zillow Group after the portal allegedly refused to cure what the MLS calls a “material breach” of its license agreements, the company announced Wednesday.

The suspension means Zillow no longer has access to MRED’s licensed listing data for display on consumer sites including Zillow.com and Trulia.com, according to the announcement. The MLS has asked Zillow to remove listings from their websites that Zillow no longer has a license to display. If Zillow continues to display MRED’s listings, MRED said the portal would be in violation of Zillow’s license agreement and federal copyright law.

MRED, based in Lisle, Illinois, is the multiple listing service that covers much of the Chicago area and surrounding Midwest markets and handles about 250,000 new listings annually. In late April, MRED also announced that it was opening its MLS and its private listing network to brokers and agents nationwide. 

MRED said the conflict centers on Zillow’s selective removal of nine listings that the MLS maintains are being marketed lawfully under its rules. According to the announcement, Zillow’s stance prompted MRED to shut off a feed covering roughly 43,000 active listings, or 99.98% of the MLS’s inventory, from the portal’s consumer-facing platforms.

“Rules enforcement is the most important and difficult responsibility an MLS undertakes on behalf of the cooperative marketplace,” Rebecca Jensen, president and CEO of MRED, said in the announcement. “Our rules apply equally to every participant, and we have a duty to educate our participants and vendors, counsel them when they are out of compliance and require that breaches be cured.”

MRED notified Zillow to fix the issue

MRED said it notified Zillow two weeks ago that selectively excluding listings from participating brokers violated Zillow’s license agreements with the MLS. MRED gave Zillow until 11:59 p.m. Central time on May 19, 2026, to fix the issue. Zillow did not do so, the MLS said.

MRED stressed that the suspension is limited to Zillow’s right to publicly display licensed MRED listing data. Zillow’s broker and agent licensees can still access MRED services to input listings and facilitate transactions through the MLS systems, according to the announcement.

Zillow-owned software products used by brokers and agents, including ShowingTime and dotloop, are not affected at this time, MRED said.

MRED said its listings will remain broadly distributed across other consumer sites, allowing sellers to keep “significant exposure” for their properties and buyers to maintain access to a wide range of homes for sale.

The MLS framed its action as part of a broader commitment to “protecting the integrity of the cooperative marketplace” and enforcing rules consistently across participants and vendors.

Lawsuits filed

Last week, Zillow filed an antitrust lawsuit against MRED and Compass, accusing the two defendants of conspiring to threaten Zillow’s access to the Chicagoland listing feed unless the portal agreed to display Compass private listings across the United States.

MRED said it views the lawsuit as Zillow seeking the right to exclude the nine disputed listings while maintaining access to the broader MRED data set. MRED characterized Zillow’s claimed harm as “self-inflicted” and said the portal could restore access to MRED data by returning to compliance with long-standing license terms.

In the release, MRED said Zillow argued that the excluded listings are “stale” and inconsistent with its “brand promise” unless sellers terminate their existing listing broker and hire another firm whose marketing practices Zillow prefers. MRED framed that position as an effort by Zillow to impose its own rules on listings that comply with MLS policies and seller instructions.

On Monday, Zillow filed a motion for a preliminary injunction asking the court to prevent MRED from terminating its listing access while its antitrust lawsuit proceeds. As of Wednesday morning the court has not ruled on Zillow’s motion, however, MRED filed a motion to compel arbitration, as the MLS claims that in the licensing agreement Zillow signed for access to these data feeds, it agreed to arbitration in regard to any disputes. 

In an emailed statement, a Zillow spokesperson told HousingWire that MRED’s decision to pull its listing data feeds means that “Chicagoland home buyers and sellers have far worse access to the housing market than they had yesterday, because their local MLS decided one megabrokerage’s profits mattered more than their ability to achieve the American Dream.”

“The people paying the price today are real. Sellers who listed their homes expecting to reach every buyer on Zillow. Buyers who just want to see every home available to them,” the spokesperson wrote. “Thousands of independent agents who had no voice in this decision and nothing to gain from it. MRED sacrificed them all to protect the hidden listing scheme of the largest brokerage in the country.” 

The spokesperson added that “MRED and Compass have colluded to turn back the clock on consumer transparency” and “engineering a market that extracts more from buyers and sellers so Compass can pocket more on every deal.” In addition, the spokesperson claimed that MRED was seeking to compel arbitration so it would not have to “defend its conspiracy in court.” 

“This isn’t a disagreement over rules; it’s an antitrust case. MRED should have to answer for its illegal actions in a court of law,” the spokesperson added.

This article was written by Brooklee Han and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation. It was reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication. The system helps convert company announcements and industry data into HousingWire-style news coverage.

This post was originally published on here. 

Maryland’s legislative and executive branches are about to tell cities and counties what they can – and cannot – do with parcels of land sitting next to their rail stations.

Gov. Wes Moore is expected to sign the Maryland Transit and Housing Opportunity Act, a bill that overrides local zoning rules near rail transit.

It eliminates parking minimums and unlocks state-owned land for housing. His administration says unlocking 300 acres of state-owned land will lead to the development of more than 7,000 new housing units and nearly $1.4 billion in new tax revenue.

The bill reflects a broader override of local zoning impediments to new housing production – and a series of retaliatory skirmishes among local jurisdictions – playing out in statehouses across the country.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed legislation last October requiring higher densities near transit in the state’s densest urban counties. Colorado, Montana and Florida have passed similar zoning preemption measures in recent years. Policymakers in both parties increasingly blame local zoning restrictions for the national housing shortage.

Moore introduced the bill in January, along with two other zoning reform measures, as part of a broad housing package. His administration has pegged Maryland’s housing shortage at a “conservative” 96,000 units.

It overcame a challenge from a competing bill introduced by the Maryland Association of Counties – dubbed BAMBY, for Build Affordably in My Backyard.

The other two bills met with mixed outcomes. The Starter and Silver Homes Act died in committee – a quiet but significant win for local resistance. It would have legalized smaller single-family homes on smaller lots and permitted townhouses statewide.

Moore’s Housing Certainty Act also awaits his signature.

This bill locks in zoning rules in effect when a complete development application is submitted, shielding approved projects from later rule changes. It also defers the collection of impact fees until a certificate of occupancy is issued, giving would-be residential developers the regulatory certainty that developer- and investor-side backers say will lower costs and attract investment.

Unlocking transit land

Moore’s transit-oriented development bill takes effect Oct. 1, 2026. It bans local governments from imposing minimum off-street parking requirements on residential or mixed-use projects within a quarter-mile of a qualifying rail transit station – one that provides at least hourly service Monday through Friday between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. Within a half-mile, local zoning must permit mixed-use development on land designated for residential or appropriate commercial use.

The bill auto-designates qualifying transit-oriented development areas as enterprise zones, unlocking a 10-year local property tax credit. Developers pay local development impact fees only after receiving a certificate of occupancy.

A Maryland Department of Transportation analysis found that restrictive zoning on state-owned, transit-adjacent land in the Baltimore region alone effectively blocks the construction of thousands of housing units.

Moore made Baltimore a centerpiece of his TOD push. He held a joint press conference in April with Mayor Brandon Scott to unveil a Baltimore Region Transit-Oriented Development Strategy. They also announced the first step toward finding a development partner for nine acres near a transit station currently used as a parking lot.

“We have said from the beginning that if this is going to be Maryland’s Decade, it has to be Baltimore’s Time,” Moore said. “Part of making that real means making sure our investments in Baltimore’s Metro and Light Rail System lead to opportunity — opportunity to live near transit, opportunity to strengthen communities near transit, and opportunity to create work, wages, and wealth near transit.”

Scott said the effort is a deliberate reversal of decades of disinvestment.

“For generations, restrictive housing and transportation policies were intentionally used to limit opportunity and investment in so many of our neighborhoods,” he said. “Today, the opposite is true.”

Counties push back – then pull back

The Maryland Municipal League supported the goal of transit-oriented development and the growth of rail-adjacent housing. But it warned that automatic enterprise zone designation forces a 10-year property tax break on municipalities without their consent.

“We also expressed concern that delaying impact fee collection shifts infrastructure financing risk to local governments,” MML wrote.

It submitted amendments for consideration.

The Maryland Association of Counties pushed its own alternative. BAMBY would have preserved significant local zoning control while still boosting production. The association framed the legislation as a middle path between “not-in-my-backyard” resistance and full state preemption. It proposed bundling tax tools along with land-use changes and landlord-tenant rules that kept counties in the driver’s seat.

A standoff never fully materialized. By late March, counties had narrowed BAMBY to two provisions. It would create a registry for landlords and an accelerated approval process for routine permits in jurisdictions that have identified a housing shortage. It passed the Senate overwhelmingly but stalled in a House committee.

MACo also pushed for clarifying amendments to the transit bill “to ensure proper implementation and recognize on-the-ground realities of infrastructure capacity, local planning consistency, and predictable administration.”

Next year’s legislative session could bring changes. Other states have revised similar laws as implementation realities emerge – or local resistance resurfaces.

This post was originally published on here. 

REMAX State Line + Elite didn’t just grow over the past four years — it accelerated.

The Kansas City metro-based brokerage recorded 110% transaction-side growth between 2021 and 2025, a surge that landed the firm high on RealTrends Verified’s annual GameChanger rankings.

The numbers behind the ascent are striking.

According to RealTrends, REMAX State Line + Elite posted $563.2 million in volume across 1,558 transactions in 2025.

 For broker-owner David Nichols, the growth didn’t happen by accident. — but rather by spreadsheet.

“Part of it was the acquisition of a second location, that’s been a big part of it, but we’ve consistently outperformed our local real estate community, even without that,” he told HousingWire. “I track every month, I’m a numbers nerd, so I look at how the MLS is going.

“We have about a three-year run where every single month, without the added office, we’re outperforming the MLS, and that’s huge. That’s a cultural thing for us.”

Nichols merged his REMAX Elite firm with Kansas neighbor REMAX State Line roughly two years ago — creating a bi-state operation with physical locations in Lee’s Summit, Missouri and Leawood, Kansas.

A 40-year foundation, a 2014 turning point

REMAX Elite was founded more than 40 years ago by T. David Rogers, who remains Nichols’ business partner, mentor and close friend. Nichols became a broker-owner in 2014.

The opportunity to merge with State Line came when that office’s ownership group — which ran the oldest continuously operating REMAX office in Kansas City — decided it was time for a change.

Instead of immediately pouncing on the acquisition, Nichols spent eight months coaching at the location before committing.

“I was going over once a week, spending a whole day over there coaching and teaching,” he said. “I was training, mentoring people and trying to decide if it would be a cultural fit for us. At the end of that eight-month period, it got to the point where the agents were like, ‘Are you buying us or not?’

“We said, ‘Yeah, we’re going to do this thing.’ The agents leaned in hard to the culture that we preach within our organization.”

Two states, two markets, one strategy

Kansas City’s geography presents a unique challenge.

With the metro split between Kansas and Missouri, regulations, tax structures and inventory patterns come with more variance than what’s typically seen in similar regions.  

For Nichols, expanding into the Kansas market was a deliberate strategic move — and having a physical Leawood location changed the game.

“There are people who live in Kansas that say, ‘No, I want a Kansas agent,’ and for our people to be like, ‘Our office is right here in Kansas, in Leawood,’ we were able to see a pretty big pickup in the volume of transactions that we were doing across state lines,” he said. “The Leawood zip code is the most affluent area in our city.

“The average price points over there are exponentially higher than they are anywhere else, so it’s a higher price point and a more affluent consumer.”

Work sessions, not just workshops

When it comes to technology and artificial intelligence (AI), Nichols takes a hands-on approach.

He had spent two hours in a work session with agents just before speaking with HousingWire.

“Becoming discoverable by AI is a big thing for us,” Nichols said. “That means teaching agents how to use AI to audit their digital footprint, and then how to clean up that digital footprint so you look consistent to any AI. Google is a big part of the kind of things we do. I’m a nerd, a tech tool nerd.”

Nichols also served as president of Heartland MLS and is currently president of the Kansas City Regional Association of Realtors — which has nearly 13,000 subscriber members.

“We make sure to follow up [education sessions] with work sessions, where all those cool things that we showed you in the class, you’re going to do it live,” he said. “We’re here to help you do it. It’s no longer writing it on your notebook. Now it’s about doing it live with our laptops open, and we are using that to move the needle, which I love.”

Cutting through the noise

Looking ahead, Nichols is unbothered by industry chatter about consolidation, private listing networks and perceived threats to traditional real estate business models.

“To me, it feels like a lot of noise,” he said. “I’ve been doing this for 25 years, and I believe that as long as agents pour themselves into relationships and provide great value to the consumer, that the consumer will remain loyal to that agent.

“I tell agents, ‘Let us worry about the other stuff, and you guys sell houses and make money and take care of people and pour into people when they need it, when they’re most vulnerable — which is all these life-changing things that happen.’”

Nichols sees a return to fundamentals as the winning strategy.

“If a broker is going to be successful today, if an agent is going to be successful today, it’s going back to the things that we were all taught 20 years ago,” he said. “What’s old is new, which is just taking care of people.”

This post was originally published on here. 

For years, the housing industry has treated inventory levels as one of the clearest signals of market strength.

Historically, tight supply often coincided with stronger pricing power, elevated buyer competition and faster-moving transactions.

But in today’s higher-rate environment, low inventory can also reflect something very different: constrained seller participation, affordability pressure and homeowners unwilling to give up historically low mortgage rates.

That distinction is becoming increasingly important.

The pandemic housing market rewarded scarcity. Today’s housing market increasingly rewards functionality.

The latest HousingWire market data suggests some markets are maintaining transaction flow through active negotiation and realistic pricing, while others are preserving “tightness” through resistance and limited participation.

Mortgage rates are testing market behavior

Mortgage rates remain the defining pressure shaping housing behavior.

As HousingWire Lead Analyst Logan Mohtashami wrote this week, housing demand indicators have remained positive even as mortgage rates moved higher. But he also noted that demand has slowed in recent years when mortgage rates move above key affordability thresholds.

That tension is important.

Higher rates are not producing the same response in every market. Instead, they are acting more like a stress test, exposing which markets are adapting through negotiation and which markets remain anchored to pricing expectations that buyers can no longer absorb.

A new market classification framework

The rise of false tightness

The more dangerous market signal may be what HousingWire data is beginning to show as “false tightness.”

These markets appear healthy on the surface because inventory remains limited. But beneath that surface, transaction efficiency is weaker.

California, Los Angeles and New York show elements of this pattern. Inventory remains relatively constrained, but price-cut activity is lower and the gap between list prices and pending prices remains elevated in some metros.

Los Angeles, for example, has a 35.9% pricing acceptance gap between list prices and pending prices. That suggests a meaningful disconnect between seller expectations and buyer acceptance.

In these markets, scarcity may be maintained less by strong demand and more by seller non-participation.

That creates risk for housing professionals who rely only on inventory as a market-health signal. Low inventory still matters, but it does not automatically mean a market is functioning efficiently.

Market myth: Price cuts signal weakness

Myth: Price cuts signal market weakness.

Reality: In many markets, strategic price reductions are improving transaction efficiency and supporting liquidity.

Florida is one of the clearest examples.

Statewide, 44% of listings are taking price cuts. Yet Florida markets are clearing inventory at some of the strongest rates in the country. The state’s clearing rate is 132%, meaning homes are being absorbed faster than new supply is coming to market.

Cape Coral-Fort Myers has 47.4% of listings taking price cuts and a 145% clearing rate. Tampa has 50.3% of listings taking price cuts and a 121% clearing rate.

Those are not signs of a market that has stopped functioning.

They are signs of sellers adjusting expectations, buyers responding and transactions continuing to move.

Austin is the repricing laboratory

Austin offers a different kind of signal.

At first glance, Austin’s softer pricing and elevated price cuts could look like weakness. But the underlying data suggests something more useful for operators: aggressive repricing.

Austin’s pricing acceptance gap narrowed from 22.2% to 10.3% year over year, the largest gap closure among the major markets analyzed. At the same time, 46.4% of listings are taking price cuts and list prices have adjusted lower.

That is not simply demand stalling. It is a market processing correction faster than many peer metros.

Austin may be showing what post-correction normalization looks like: sellers accepting the new pricing reality, buyers responding to more realistic values and the market working toward a more functional equilibrium.

What housing professionals should watch next

The next phase of the housing market may be driven less by inventory alone and more by behavioral signals.

For agents and brokers, that means watching whether sellers are pricing to transact or pricing to test the market.

For lenders, it means understanding which markets are still producing viable buyer activity under higher-rate conditions.

For builders, it means tracking where pricing transparency is supporting absorption and where additional supply could meet buyer resistance.

For investors, it means looking beyond headline softness to identify markets where repricing is creating clearer entry points and faster execution.

The key signals to watch include:

• Pricing acceptance gaps narrowing or widening
• Price-cut activity
• Inventory clearing rates
• Seller participation
• Pending conversion efficiency
• Absorption relative to new supply

The new competitive advantage is adaptability

The housing market is no longer simply hot or cold.

It is negotiating or resisting.

That distinction is becoming more important as mortgage rates continue to pressure affordability and buyers remain selective.

The markets that embraced negotiation earlier are beginning to show more stable transaction velocity, more accurate price discovery and stronger buyer engagement.

The markets still resisting repricing may look healthier on the surface, but they risk slower volume, lower participation and sharper adjustments later.

The counterintuitive reality of the 2026 housing market is this: Some of the healthiest markets now have the highest percentage of price cuts.

Not because they are weak.

Because they are functioning.

To track real-time pricing, demand and market signals at the national, metro and ZIP-code level, explore HousingWire Intelligence. For deeper context on rates, demand signals and the macro backdrop shaping housing activity, read HousingWire’s Housing Market Tracker weekly analysis.

HousingWire used HousingWire Data to source this story. This article is based on single-family residence data through May 15, 2026. For enterprise clients looking to license the same market data at a larger scale, visit HousingWire Data.

This post was originally published on here. 

Even as interest rates rose at a record setting rate and the pace of existing home sales continued to slide, Los Angeles-based Equity Union Real Estate continued to grow. Between 2021 and 2025, Equity Union Real Estate recorded 239% transaction side percentage growth, earning the firm the top-spot in the 2026 RealTrends Verified GameChanger rankings, after the company closed 5,670 transaction sides in 2025. 

Harma Hartouni, the CEO of Equity Union Real Estate, attributes the continued growth of his firm to the strong belief that his clients are their real estate agents.

“Looking at the greater market and industry, so much is changing, there is all of this consolidation happening, but I am not paying attention to that — I am focusing on our agents,” Hartouni said. 

A prime example of this, Hartouni said, is how quickly his brokers and staff respond to agent questions and queries. 

“We have a 15 minute rule that all of my brokers have to abide by, so they have 15 minutes to respond to agents and that way no one, the agent or their client, has to wait,” he said.

Pillars of support

In addition to this, Hartouni said his firm provides agents with three pillars of support: technology and marketing, compliance and education and coaching. 

While the compliance pillar is focused on helping agents manage risk, with technology and marketing, Hartouni noted that not all agents like to market in the same way. This means the firm’s marketing department customizes its offerings to the needs of each agent. Similarly, agents also have different education and coaching needs and while the majority of agents at Equity Union are well-established in the industry, not all of them have the same goals.

“Our education is based on the needs of higher level agents, so for some that is hiring an assistant and for others it is how to build and start a team,” he said. 

Hartouni believes a key to his firm’s ability to support its agents is the fact that they have physical offices agents can go to get the help they need. 

“I’m a big fan of having a physical space agents can go into. If you look at our statistics, it shows that it has helped them increase productivity and it also helps them really feel supported, part of a community and that their hard work is appreciated,” Hartouni said. 

These agents then go out and tell other agents about the culture and the support they receive, creating a natural recruiting pipeline for the firm, Hartouni said.

Old school organic growth

“All of our growth has been organic, one agent at a time,” Hartouni said. “We aren’t out there doing any big mergers or recruiting gigantic teams with hundreds of agents or anything like that.”  

While Hartouni acknowledges his role in helping establish the supportive, agent-first culture of Equity Union, he says most of this largely comes down to the rest of the leadership team.

“We believe in earning leadership roles by contributing. My entire team, from the vice president of marketing to education leaders to our brokers, truly wants to serve and help our agents grow their businesses and that desire in the invisible string that brings everything and everyone together,” Hartouni said. 

The leadership and the culture it has helped create at Equity Union, Hartouni says has helped the company with agent retention. 

“We celebrate their personal and professional successes and milestones and we hold masterminds that put agents in a room with peers that they respect and they feel have the same integrity and work ethic,” Hartouni said. “It is all about being around their colleagues who are striving for their own goals and success and it creates a sense of community for them.” 

Even with a strong sense of community, navigating the macroeconomic and legal challenges of the past five years has not been easy. As Hartouni and his team looked to help agents find their way through high interest rates and the commission lawsuit business practice changes, he said they focused on removing fear by preparing their agents for these challenges early. 

“Go head first into fear. If there is something I am afraid of and it needs to be addressed, I don’t procrastinate, I dive in, fix it and move on,” Hartouni said. “With the settlement, there was all this noise and fear out there, so at every meeting, I brought agents back to the core idea that their relationship with their clients still matters and that they are still going to get paid for the expertise and services they provide.” 

Due to this preparation, Hartouni said that when the business practice changes went into effect, his agents barely noticed because they had been working towards implementing these changes for three months. 

As Hartouni looks ahead, despite the success of his company, he knows there are still areas where things can be improved, including improving the efficiency and effectiveness of support staff through the strategic implementation of AI tools and providing agents with more education and tools to help them get more listings. 

“We are focusing on those things because we truly believe that it is about the agents — that people work with our agents because of them, not because of us,” Hartouni said. “I know a lot of companies think they are the brand, but for me, the agents are the brand.”

This post was originally published on here. 

Mortgage quality control defects declined sharply in the fourth quarter of 2025, even as lenders continued to grapple with a rise in eligibility-related issues tied to affordability pressures and increased refinance activity, according to a new report released Wednesday by ACES Quality Management.

In its quarterly Mortgage QC Industry Trends Report, the company found that the overall critical defect rate fell to 1.38% of all loans in the fourth quarter, down from 1.79% in the third quarter of 2025. The decline marked the first quarterly improvement after three straight quarters of rising defect rates.

For 2025 as a whole, the average critical defect rate was 1.5%, essentially unchanged from 1.52% in 2024, suggesting the industry maintained relatively stable manufacturing quality despite affordability pressures and market volatility.

“Lenders ended 2025 on a strong note, with Q4 delivering a meaningful drop in the critical defect rate and the full-year average holding essentially flat versus 2024,” Nick Volpe, executive vice president at ACES Quality Management, said in a statement.

“But the year’s defining shift toward eligibility-driven defects as refinance activity returned indicates that disciplined documentation and consistent eligibility decisioning will define quality in 2026.”

The report, which analyzed tens of thousands of post-closing quality control reviews through the ACES benchmarking platform, said the Q4 improvement reflected broad improvement across underwriting categories — including declines in income and employment, credit and insurance defects.

Still, legal, regulatory and compliance issues climbed to 24.66% of all defects, reclaiming the top defect category for the second time since late 2024. The report attributed the increase largely to operational pressures tied to the return of refinance lending, including disclosure timing issues, documentation gaps and compliance checks tied to qualified mortgage and anti-predatory lending rules.

Income and employment defects, which had previously led all categories, fell to a share of 21.52% in the fourth quarter. The credit defect share declined to 5.38%, while the insurance defect share dropped to 1.35%.

The report identified borrower eligibility as one of the industry’s fastest-growing quality concerns. Borrower and mortgage eligibility defects rose 291.58% year over year in 2025, while credit defects increased 166.13%.

ACES said the shift reflected borrowers “stretching to qualify” in an affordability-constrained housing market, with lenders increasingly encountering loans near program eligibility thresholds.

Refinance lending became a larger share of the market during the year as mortgage rates eased. The refinance review share nearly doubled from 11.14% in 2024 to 21.04% in 2025, while the refinance defect share more than doubled, rising from 15.3% to 32.2%.

ACES said refinance originations industrywide surpassed purchase originations in the fourth quarter for the first time in about four years, as mortgage rates fell to 6.15% by the end of 2025 and dipped below 6% in early 2026.

The report also found the refinance defect share and review share reached near parity during the quarter, suggesting lenders were beginning to adjust operationally to the resurgence in refinance activity.

By loan type, Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans continued to account for a disproportionately high share of defects relative to review volume, representing 30.86% of defects for the year.

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) defect share also rose for the second consecutive quarter in Q4 2025, with ACES noting that this warrants additional scrutiny due to the compliance risks associated with serving active-duty military borrowers.

The report also pointed to broader economic and industry changes shaping mortgage quality trends. Publicly traded lenders posted higher origination volumes in 2025, led by United Wholesale Mortgage (UWM) at $163 billion and Rocket Mortgage at $130 billion.

ACES said lender consolidation and acquisitions aimed at building refinance “recapture” platforms may have contributed to some of the compliance and eligibility variability seen during the year as lenders integrated systems, vendors and workflows.

This post was originally published on here. 

For many real estate brokerage owners, selling the business is not just a transaction. It’s the result of years spent building a company, recruiting real estate agents, serving clients, carrying risk, managing payroll, protecting your brand and pushing through market cycles that weren’t always easy. By the time you start seriously thinking about selling, the decision usually carries real financial and personal weight, which is why the structure around the deal matters as much as the offer itself.

That structure is where guardrails matter. In real estate M&A, guardrails come down to the deal terms, deadlines, confidentiality and responsibilities that keep the transaction moving in the right direction. They help both sides understand what’s being reviewed, what’s being protected, what’s being promised and what has to happen before the deal is closed. Without guardrails, even a strong offer can turn into a stressful and confusing process.

Protecting confidentiality during due diligence

Your brokerage sale moves forward once there is real buyer interest, and the buyer needs to understand what they may be acquiring before making a serious commitment. The review usually includes financials, agent count, production, retention, revenue sources, expenses, office structure, legal exposure, systems, leadership and the strength of the brand in the market.

Everyone expects that during due diligence. The risk begins when sensitive information is shared without clear boundaries around who’s seeing it, how it will be used, what stage the buyer is in and whether the buyer is actually qualified to move the deal forward.

Confidentiality is one of the most important guardrails because a brokerage exposed as being for sale too early in the process can run into problems quickly. Agents, employees, clients, lenders, vendors and competitors don’t need to hear about a possible sale before there is a serious buyer at the table. If information gets out too soon, it can create fear, confusion and attrition, which can make a deal fall apart quickly. Strong confidentiality doesn’t prevent a buyer from conducting proper due diligence. It protects you, the seller, while the buyer reviews the opportunity.

Why professional seller representation matters

This is why professional seller representation matters. You, as the seller, should not be the only one trying to manage the offer, protect confidentiality, review the terms, answer diligence requests, watch the payment structure and think through transition risk all at the same time. A serious buyer may have advisors, attorneys, analysts, lenders or internal deal people looking at the transaction from their side. You need someone on your side making sure the guardrails are actually in place. The right seller representation helps control what gets shared, when it gets shared, how the deal is structured and whether the terms protect you after closing.

A brokerage is not a simple asset. Your business is tied to people, production, systems, leadership, reputation and future performance. Buyers need enough access to confirm that the numbers are real, whether the agents are likely to stay after the sale, whether the revenue is stable and whether the company can transfer without losing the value they are about to pay for.

Setting clear deal terms and payment structures

The letter of intent sets the terms for deeper diligence to begin. It should clearly outline the proposed price, payment structure, timeline, exclusivity period, financing terms, earn-out terms, transition expectations and any major conditions that need to be satisfied before closing. This matters because you can spend weeks in conversations that feel productive but don’t go anywhere. Without defined terms, a buyer may keep asking for more information while you give up time, energy and confidentiality without knowing whether there is a real path to a closing.

Due diligence is another place where setting guardrails matters. You should know what the buyer is requesting, why they’re requesting it, when it’s due, and whether the request fits the stage of the deal. There’s a difference between providing enough information to support a serious offer and turning over sensitive business details before the buyer has shown the ability and intent to close. A guided diligence process keeps the deal moving, keeps the request list organized, and helps prevent you from being overwhelmed or overexposed.

Payment structure also matters. A strong sale price doesn’t always mean a strong offer. The real value depends on how and when the money is paid. An offer with more cash at closing is very different from an offer built around deferred payments, holdbacks, seller financing, or an earn-out. None of those structures are better than the other, but they need to fit what you as the seller need for the deal to go through and what the deal can realistically support. 

Earn-outs can be useful in real estate brokerage transactions because they can help bridge the gap between what you believe your company is worth and what the buyer is willing to pay upfront. You should know what performance is being measured, how it’s being calculated, who controls the business after closing, and what happens if agents leave.

Agent retention may be the most sensitive guardrail in many brokerage deals because the value of your company is often tied directly to the agents and their production. That’s why the transition plan should be discussed before closing, not after. The timing, message, leadership role, agent communication, and rollout all matter.

Securing the right offer for a successful close

For brokers looking to sell, the goal is not just to get an offer. It is to get the right offer, from the right buyer, with the right structure and protections in place. Professional seller representation helps make sure those guardrails are met before too much is shared, agreed to or left open to interpretation. Guardrails do not slow the deal down. They keep both sides from going off course, and in real estate M&A, that can define the outcome long before the closing table.

Mark Lukes is the CEO of Real Estate Mergers & Acquisitions Co.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners. To contact the editor responsible for this piece: zeb@hwmedia.com.

This post was originally published on here. 

We’re guessing that escrow audits aren’t necessarily your favorite part of the job. The reality is that they’re unavoidable. And when title agencies find themselves scrambling, it’s usually because reconciliation and documentation have fallen behind.

The good news is that escrow audit readiness doesn’t have to be stressful. While escrow audit requirements vary by state, regulator and underwriter, there are several consistent expectations auditors typically share. This article outlines practical steps you can take to stay prepared year-round.

What auditors expect to see

An audit begins with an auditor’s request for documentation, typically the last two to three months of monthly reconciliation reports.

At a minimum, you should be prepared to provide a complete set of core documents. This usually includes the bank statements for the reconciliation period, your reconciliation summary, trial balance, statement proofing register, bank adjustments and book balance, along with the report of outstanding receipts and disbursements. Auditors will also confirm that escrow trust accounts are properly labeled on bank statements, checks and deposit tickets, as required by ALTA Best Practices.

Beyond documentation, auditors focus on issues that signal potential problems in escrow accounting. This includes true money errors, such as negative file balances, as well as aged or unresolved items, such as deposits in transit, outstanding wires, stale payoff or tax checks, aged outstanding checks and unidentified ledger balances. These all indicate potential process gaps or breakdowns in oversight.

Agencies that review these areas regularly are far better positioned for a smooth audit.

Three-way reconciliations

Because ALTA Best Practices require a complete three‑way reconciliation each month and underwriters rely on it as the primary measure of escrow account accuracy, it remains the central foundation of audit readiness for every title agency.

A three-way reconciliation confirms that three key figures are in alignment: the bank balance, the book balance and the escrow trial ledger balance. When those three match, it shows that what’s in your bank account ties directly to what’s in your system and down to each individual file.

Because escrow reconciliation is cumulative, falling behind even one or two months can create downstream inaccuracies in future reconciliations. If these go unresolved, you may find yourself unable to quickly produce reliable reports when an audit notice arrives – meaning significant catch‑up work under a very tight deadline.

ALTA Best Practices recommend completing reconciliations within 10 business days of the bank statement closing date (unless stricter state requirements apply). And just as important, the person performing the reconciliation shouldn’t have signing authority, and management is responsible for reviewing and approving the final results each month.

Daily and monthly best practices

Some agencies also adopt daily reconciliation as a best practice to reduce month‑end pressure and maintain continuous escrow audit readiness. By matching incoming and outgoing transactions to escrow books each day, you can quickly identify discrepancies while they’re still manageable. As part of these efforts, you should also match and clear routine items that don’t require further investigation, review exception reports for irregularities and monitor for stale or aging items that could create issues later.

In addition, you should make it a monthly priority to investigate and resolve unidentified or negative file balances, review aged deposits and outstanding wires and confirm that all disbursements have cleared as expected. This all helps ensure that lingering issues don’t carry forward into the future.

When these practices are performed consistently, you’re effectively audit-ready at any point in time.

Your audit preparation checklist

Audit preparation is far more manageable when you follow a consistent, structured approach. Use the checklist below to stay organized and on track whenever you’re notified of your next audit:

• Review the audit letter and instructions as soon as they arrive.
• Ask questions early to clarify expectations, ideally as soon as the audit request is received.
• Communicate proactively with any third-party reconcilers or bookkeepers involved.
• Gather your recent monthly reconciliation reports, including the most current month and any additional documentation the auditor requests.
• Ensure all accounts are reconciled through the last day of the prior month.
• Identify and resolve aged deposits, wires and outstanding checks.
• Investigate and resolve any unidentified files or ledger balances.
• Prepare clear documentation showing how discrepancies were researched and resolved.
• Keep monthly reconciliation folders organized, complete and easy to navigate.
• Ensure former employees are promptly removed from all bank signatory and authorization lists to maintain proper internal controls.

And throughout the process, be as responsive and collaborative as possible. Remember, auditors are people too (not your enemies), and a cooperative approach makes everything go much more smoothly. 

The bottom line for escrow audit readiness

Now, for many agencies, the challenge isn’t understanding these requirements. It’s finding the time to manage them alongside daily operations. Reconciliation is essential, but it’s also not work that directly drives revenue, so it can easily get pushed down the priority list.

This is where SoftPro can help. Our reconciliation services support ALTA Best Practice #2 and provide accurate and timely three-way reconciliations monthly. We also offer an optional daily reconciliation support service. You’ll benefit from clear exception identification and complete reporting aligned with underwriter and regulatory expectations. Most importantly, you’ll have a dedicated reconciler assigned to your accounts.

Whether you choose to perform your reconciliations in-house or with a trusted third party, keeping your trust accounts consistently in sync with bank activity allows you to approach any audit with greater confidence and readiness.

Click Here

This post was originally published on here. 

The land-light model has fundamentally reshaped the homebuilding industry. What began as a post-Great Recession correction has become a structural shift in how builders capitalize their businesses. Today, builders of every size, ranging from the top-ten publics to regional privates, are using land and lot bankers to move land off their balance sheets, preserve capital and concentrate on building and selling homes.

The scale of this transformation is difficult to overstate. Lennar’s creation of Millrose Properties, a publicly traded REIT externally managed by Kennedy Lewis Investment Management, moved $5.5 billion in land assets and $1 billion in cash off Lennar’s books in a single transaction. Lennar went from 19% optioned homesites in 2013 to 82% by the end of 2024 to manage takedown schedules on a just-in-time basis.

D.R. Horton’s relationship with Forestar and the rapid growth of institutional lot bankers have pushed the entire industry in the same direction. Stuart Miller has described the goal as becoming “a pure-play, asset-light, new home manufacturing company,” and CFO Diane Bessette has noted the lower cost of capital Millrose offers versus the industry norm of approximately 12% through private land bank funds.

The model works; however, a question that the industry has been slow to ask: If the land/lots are banked and the capital structure is optimized, is there a second layer of financial engineering that can further improve the economics, not just for the builder, but for the land/lot banker as well?

In our experience, the answer is “yes,” and the opportunity is in infrastructure finance.

How infrastructure costs flow through the land banking structure

To understand why infrastructure finance matters to land banking, you have to understand the mechanics of how a finished lot price is determined. In a typical structure, the land banker underwrites the total development budget: land acquisition, entitlement costs and the full scope of infrastructure required to deliver a finished lot. That budget, plus the land banker’s required return, determines the takedown price the builder pays when they exercise their option.

Infrastructure is almost always the largest variable in that budget. Grading, roads, water, sewer, drainage, parks and community facilities represent a huge percentage of the total finished lot cost, depending on the jurisdiction and scope of required improvements. If those costs can be reduced, financed and/or reimbursed through bond proceeds or other reimbursement mechanisms, the development budget is reduced, and the finished lot price at takedown drops proportionally.

This is the mechanical connection that most conversations about land banking overlook. Reducing the infrastructure cost doesn’t just improve the overall economics. It can lower the total capital the land banker must deploy, reduce the risk exposure in the land banker’s portfolio and deliver a lower-cost lot to the builder. Every party in the capital stack benefits. The details lie in how the land/lot banking transaction is structured.

Where infrastructure finance adds value

There are several strategies that builders and their land banking partners should evaluate for every deal. No conflict with the land banking structure, but rather enhances it.

Special district formation, whether through a Community Facilities District, Public Improvement District, Municipal Utility District (MUD), Community Development District, Metro District or other district type, depending on the state the project is located in, allows eligible public infrastructure to be financed through tax-exempt municipal bonds. These bonds are secured by assessments or ad valorem taxes on the benefiting properties.

When a district is formed early in the entitlement process, costs that would otherwise be funded by the developer and embedded in the lot price can, depending upon district type, be financed through the bond market. This directly reduces the capital required from both the builder and the land/lot banker.

Development impact fee credits allow the parties to recover costs for infrastructure they construct that the jurisdiction would otherwise fund through its fee program. These credits reduce the net infrastructure cost and, by extension, the development budget the land/lot banker underwrites.

Cost-sharing agreements allocate infrastructure costs among multiple benefiting landowners, ensuring the parties aren’t bearing the full burden of improvements that serve adjacent properties. Latecomers’ fees formalize this recovery over time as neighboring parcels develop and connect to the infrastructure.

Additionally, if available, tax increment financing captures the property tax uplift from new development and redirects it to fund eligible infrastructure, creating another source of capital recovery that, over time, reduces direct spend.

The timing gap and how to bridge it

One of the practical challenges in layering infrastructure finance onto a land/lot banking structure is timing. In many structures, the infrastructure must be built before the special district bonds are issued. The district needs to demonstrate that improvements are in place or under construction, or a significant number of homes have been constructed and are on the tax rolls, before the bond market will price the debt. This creates a gap-financing need: Someone has to fund the infrastructure construction between the start of work and the receipt of bond proceeds.

This is a solvable problem, but it is dependent on the specifics of the project and the state’s specific district-enabling statutes. Many such statutes allow the issuance of land-secured tax-exempt bond financing that provides up-front capital for infrastructure construction, secured by the land itself, with no guarantees required.

Additionally, in 2023, the professionals at Launch DFA created an innovative method to fund this gap for development projects in Texas using MUDs, called The Launch Bond®. Launch Bonds are non-recourse, tax-exempt bonds secured only by the pledge of future MUD reimbursements, require no financial guarantees and do not encumber the project’s lands. As of the date of this writing, more than $1 billion in Launch Bonds have been issued to accelerate the funding of MUD-eligible improvements.

Not all land bankers are the same

It’s worth noting that land/lot bankers operate across a wide spectrum of operational strategies. Some are pure capital providers; they fund the development budget and collect their return at takedown. Others are active operators who manage entitlements and infrastructure construction as part of their platform. The degree to which infrastructure finance is integrated into the land banking process varies enormously from one partner to the next.

For builders evaluating land banking relationships, the question worth asking is not just “what is the cost of capital?” but “how does this potential partner approach the infrastructure budget?” A land/lot banker who understands special districts, fee credits, cost-sharing agreements and land-secured gap financing has the ability to deliver a lower finished lot cost than one who simply underwrites the full infrastructure budget at face value.

The multiplier effect

The land-light model has earned its place as a permanent feature of the homebuilding business. But optimizing the capital structure alone is not enough. The builders and land/lot bankers who also optimize the cost structure, who treat infrastructure not as a fixed input but as a variable they can engineer through districts, credits, cost sharing and other strategic financing sources, are the ones who will sustain superior operational results through market cycles.

The opportunity is to bring infrastructure finance into the land/lot banking conversation from the very first term sheet. The question should not just be “what does this infrastructure cost?” It should be “what portion of this cost can be financed or reimbursed, and how does that change the economics for everyone in the transaction?”

Click Here

This post was originally published on here. 

The home search now starts online, but many real estate and housing professionals still do not fully own their own digital presence. Instead, they often rely only on brokerage-provided pages or third-party portals to represent their business online. While relying on these pages alone may seem easy and sufficient, it can create long-term challenges around visibility, branding and lead ownership.

As competition for online attention intensifies, digital brand ownership is becoming increasingly important for agents looking to establish a recognizable brand and maintain direct relationships with consumers throughout their careers.

Why relying only on brokerage platforms can create long-term challenges

Many housing professionals view brokerage websites and portal profiles as enough to establish an online presence for leads. But relying entirely on those platforms can limit control over branding, messaging and discoverability.

That issue becomes more significant as professionals change brokerages every few years. According to Colleen Doyle, Vice President, RIN and Strategic Initiatives at NAR , the average realtor changes companies around every four to six years. So when an agent’s online presence is tied primarily to a company platform, that visibility may not carry over during a transition. Consumers searching for agents they previously worked with may instead encounter brokerage branding or broken, outdated profiles rather than the individual they are trying to find.

A centralized digital presence tied directly to an individual’s brand can help create consistency across career moves and market cycles. The conversation around digital branding for agents is increasingly shifting toward long-term ownership, with professionals seeking ways to maintain a recognizable online identity that remains consistent wherever they work.

The difference between having tools and having a strategy

Many real estate agents already use websites, CRMs and marketing tools, but those systems can be disconnected. A website may not integrate with lead management tools, while portal profiles and social channels may operate independently. That fragmentation can make it harder to build a cohesive online brand or create a consistent consumer experience.

The discussion increasingly centers on creating a single destination where consumers can find accurate information, connect directly with a professional and engage with content specifically tied to that individual’s expertise and market presence.

Owning a branded website and domain, in addition to the brokerage-owned website and other third-party platforms, creates more opportunities to strengthen real estate SEO and improve long-term discoverability. Personalized domains tied directly to an agent’s name can help reinforce brand recognition while making it easier for consumers to search for and return to that professional later.

In conjunction with third-party platforms, professionals are increasingly prioritizing digital ecosystems that centralize branding, lead capture and consumer engagement.

Missed visibility often happens quietly

One of the biggest challenges with a weak online presence is that missed opportunities are often invisible. When potential clients search online and cannot quickly find a credible or professional digital presence, they may simply move on to another option without ever making contact. That directly links digital visibility to real estate lead generation.

Consumers evaluating agents online are often comparing multiple professionals at once. If every profile looks identical through shared brokerage templates or generic portal pages, differentiation becomes difficult. A personalized website and domain can help establish credibility earlier in the buyer journey by creating a stronger first impression and reinforcing professionalism through consistent branding and messaging.

The ability to maintain that visibility over time may also influence repeat and referral business. Consumers returning years later often expect to find professionals in the same place they originally discovered them online.

Simplifying digital branding for agents

The challenge is not understanding the importance of digital branding for agents. The larger concern is time and complexity. Building and managing a website has traditionally been viewed as time-consuming, expensive or overly technical, especially for professionals focused on serving clients and closing transactions. That is driving interest in more integrated digital branding platforms that combine websites, domains, SEO functionality and lead management tools into a single experience.

The .RealEstate Digital Branding Packages, backed by the National Association of REALTORS®, are designed around that centralized model. The packages combine personalized domains, website templates and built-in optimization tools specifically tailored to real estate professionals.

Digital branding needs differ depending on where professionals are in their careers. The platforms are designed to reduce onboarding friction through simplified setup processes, customizable templates and integrated SEO functionality. The goal is to help professionals establish an owned online presence without requiring advanced technical expertise or large time commitments.

For newer agents, establishing a personal brand early can create consistency from the beginning rather than rebuilding visibility later. Many templates and onboarding tools are designed to help first-time professionals launch quickly while still maintaining a polished online presence. As for more experienced professionals, they are increasingly reevaluating older “set it and forget it” digital strategies as competition becomes more crowded and consumer expectations continue to evolve.

AI and search are changing discoverability

The discussion also pointed to how AI is reshaping online search behavior and digital visibility. As search evolves beyond traditional rankings, discoverability is becoming more closely tied to authority, credibility and optimized digital content. That shift is increasing the importance of maintaining a centralized online presence with SEO-focused content, branded domains and integrated digital tools.

The .RealEstate Digital Branding Packages incorporate SEO optimization and AI-enabled features directly into the platform experience, helping professionals create searchable, discoverable online profiles tailored to the housing industry.

As digital competition continues to grow, the ability to own and control an online presence may increasingly shape how consumers discover, evaluate and reconnect with real estate professionals.

The long-term value of owning your digital brand

The real estate industry continues to become more digitally driven, and consumers are spending more time researching online before engaging directly with professionals. That shift is changing how trust and visibility are established.

For agents and housing industry professionals, owning a website, domain and centralized digital presence is becoming less about marketing alone and more about protecting long-term brand equity, discoverability and lead ownership.

Agents need to rely on all available resources to build a consistent brand across platforms. Those investing in owned digital branding, real estate SEO and centralized online experiences are increasingly positioning themselves to remain visible throughout changing markets, evolving technologies and future career moves.

Click Here

This post was originally published on here. 

As part of HousingWire’s Editor’s Choice awards spotlight series, we’re spotlighting past Women of Influence honorees whose careers, leadership and insights continue to influence the industry. This series offers a closer look at the experiences and decisions that have shaped their paths.

In this feature, Kevelyn Guzman, Regional Vice President at Coldwell Banker Warburg, reflects on the leadership lessons, career decisions and moments of uncertainty that shaped her path in real estate.

Guzman was selected as a 2024 Women of Influence honoree for her leadership as the first female Regional Vice President of Coldwell Banker Warburg, her role in driving agent growth and innovation across the firm and her commitment to empowering the next generation of women leaders in real estate.

Women of Influence recognizes the leaders making a meaningful impact across mortgage, real estate and homebuilding. Nominations for the 2026 Women of Influence awards are open now through May 31.

HousingWire: What are you most focused on right now in response to broader industry shifts?

Kevelyn Guzman: Clarity and momentum. The industry is shifting how we transact, how we show value, and how agents build their businesses. I’m focused on making sure our agents feel equipped, not overwhelmed. That means simplifying where we can, leaning into smart growth, and being very intentional about where we spend our time and energy.

HW: What’s one leadership lesson you’ve learned that more people in this industry should understand?

Kevelyn Guzman: You can’t lead from a distance. You have to be in it with your people, understanding what they’re actually dealing with day to day. Titles don’t build trust. Consistency does. Showing up does. Saying the hard thing, even when it’s uncomfortable, that’s what builds credibility.

HW: What’s one decision that changed the trajectory of your career?

Kevelyn Guzman: If I’m honest, it wasn’t just one decision; it was a pattern I had to learn from. There were moments I stayed longer than I should have, moments I didn’t fully trust my intuition, even when it was speaking pretty clearly. And that comes with a cost.

What changed things for me was finally betting on myself before I felt completely ready—choosing growth over comfort. Letting go of the idea that the timing had to be perfect. Career trajectories aren’t clean or linear; they’re layered, sometimes messy, and shaped just as much by the moves you delay as the ones you make.

Looking back, I probably would have moved sooner. But I also believe those pauses taught me something I needed: clarity, resilience, and conviction. So while I didn’t always get the timing right, I got there. And that shift, trusting myself enough to move forward anyway, is what changed everything.

HW: Looking back, what experiences most prepared you for the leadership role you’re in today?

Kevelyn Guzman: Being in the middle of the hard stuff. Navigating market shifts, managing through uncertainty, having tough conversations, and building teams with very different personalities and expectations. I learned early that leadership isn’t about having all the answers; it’s about staying steady when things feel uncertain and making decisions anyway.

HW: What advice would you give to the next generation of women working toward senior leadership roles in housing?

Kevelyn Guzman: Don’t shrink yourself to fit into spaces that weren’t built with you in mind. Your perspective is the value. Speak up, even when your voice shakes. Get comfortable making decisions without over-explaining them. And surround yourself with people who push you forward, not people who make you question your worth.

Click here to nominate a 2026 Woman of Influence.

This post was originally published on here. 

“Top-five-ranked U.S. homebuilding companies don’t happen overnight.

Except when they do.

These two lines almost wrote themselves in early 2024 when Sekisui House skyrocketed into the top tier of U.S. homebuilding with its $4.9 billion acquisition of MDC Holdings. 

Sumitomo Forestry’s announced $4.5 billion acquisition of Tri Pointe Homes closed last week, triggering a similar shake-up in the power dynamics of the U.S. homebuilding industry. The Tri Pointe acquisition signals Sumitomo’s intent to scale nationally.

But for years – over a decade – a subtler, arguably more important story of capability-building has been shaping Sumitomo’s game-changing strategy for its 2026 peak. DRB Group.

Long before Sumitomo Forestry made its move on Tri Pointe, it was already patiently laying the foundation for the 330-year-old company’s U.S. strategy – an operating model. 

DRB Group – under CEO Ronny Salameh’s leadership and in partnership with Sumitomo business leaders – has become one of the most valuable learning and proving grounds for the global enterprise based in Tokyo, Japan, in the U.S.

A decade of compounding – without breaking the machine

When Salameh reflects on the early years, the headline figures – doubling twice over 10 years and expanding from a 300-home private builder into a $3 billion, top-20 company – only tell part of the story.

The harder part lay in one of homebuilding’s fundamental paradoxes.

“The real question wasn’t ‘Can we grow?’” Salameh says. “It was ‘Can we grow and still feel like DRB Group?’”

That quandary – easy to grasp but hard to do – runs as a throughline in DRB’s 10-year journey.

From early organic expansions into Raleigh (2011) and Washington Metro (2013), to later moves into Northern Virginia and Orlando, to a steady cadence of acquisitions – Fielding Homes, Knight Homes, Biscayne Homes, and ultimately the Brightland Homes combination – DRB’s growth has been deliberate, steady, humility-fueled, not impulsive.

Salameh’s approach to scaling while staying true to the enterprise’s entrepreneurial DNA is straightforward:

• Build the culture first
• Invest in the right people
• Plan strategically
• Execute a clear integration roadmap

Then comes the real hard part, striking that balance that many builders talk about as the Holy Grail of operating cultures – but few manage to sustain at scale:

Fire-in-the-belly autonomy with accountability across the strategic and operational value chain.

The operating model: Local muscle, enterprise spine

At DRB Group, those intricate balances run as a double helix in how decisions get made. Division leaders operate with genuine authority – on land, product, pricing and execution – while enterprise systems standardize financial controls, reporting and capital allocation rigor.

“Integration must strengthen – not suffocate – local performance,” Salameh says.

That philosophy is not Harvard Business Review-style enterprise theory. It has woven ever-stronger operational sinews through acquisitions and integrations, including the 2025 Brightland Homes consolidation – arguably the clearest sign yet of DRB’s strategic role in Sumitomo Forestry’s U.S. strategy.

And that was exactly what Sumitomo Forestry recognized early on.

“The strength of the organization stood out most,” says Atsushi Iwasaki, Managing Executive Officer at Sumitomo Forestry. “A powerful support system by tenured corporate leaders allows divisions to focus on selling and building quality homes… while corporate finance oversight ensures strong governance.”

That combination – field-level entrepreneurship supported by disciplined enterprise oversight – has become the connective fabric binding DRB’s growth to Sumitomo Forestry’s ambitions as a leading U.S. residential real estate player.

From capital partner to operating enterprise

Ten years ago, Sumitomo Forestry’s U.S. strategy was effectively a holding company portfolio game plan – with stakes in regional builders, each operating with significant independence, as long as they met mutually agreed-upon operational and financial performance goals aligned with strategic objectives.

Today, that model is developing into something different.

“Sumitomo is no longer simply an investor in American homebuilding businesses,” as we wrote last year following the Brightland consolidation. “It is now an American homebuilding enterprise – with one name, one leadership team, and one flagship that is evolving in prominence.”

DRB Group has quietly strived to become the flagship.

And the shift is not just structural – rather, it’s the bedrock of purpose.

Sumitomo Forestry measures success in its operating partners across three areas: customer satisfaction, employee satisfaction, and alignment with its long-term strategic vision, Mission TREEING 2030. That framework closely aligns with Salameh’s description of leadership – not as authority, but as stewardship.

“When you understand that what you’re building will outlive you – communities, careers, partnerships – you start thinking differently,” he says. “Stewardship means protecting the brand, the people, and the culture for the next chapter – not just the next quarter.”

It’s a perspective, he notes, reinforced by Sumitomo Forestry’s over 330-year heritage.

Patient capital, selective growth

One of the most consequential decisions in DRB’s evolution, Salameh says, was choosing long-term capital over a sugar-high, short-term sprint out of the gate.

“Choosing long-term capital over short-term acceleration changed everything,” he says. “It allowed us to invest in infrastructure, people development, portfolio diversification, and land strategy – before those investments showed up in margins.”

That patience shows up in how DRB approaches growth today.

“We don’t chase cycles. We build through them,” Salameh says.

From Sumitomo Forestry’s side, that discipline is intentional.

The company works with DRB leadership on annual, three-year, and 10-year planning horizons – while allowing earnings to remain in the business and supplementing capital through shareholder loans to support long-term expansion.

In other words, growth is financed to persist as a smooth upward arc through times of turbulence.

The inflection point – and what comes next

If the first phase of Sumitomo Forestry’s U.S. strategy was about assembling a portfolio of geographically-specific capabilities, and the second phase was about consolidating and aligning it, the phase currently taking shape looks decidedly more ambitious:

Operationalizing the enterprise.

The Brightland integration demonstrated DRB Group’s ability to absorb and scale.

And within that strategy, DRB’s role is becoming clearer.

“DRB Group is the only and the largest platform… that can turn into an even larger entity which can host further acquisition and integration,” Iwasaki says.

Our takeaway from Iwasaki’s vision is that Salameh understands the imperative and the opportunity as a dual mission: a launching pad and amplifier of a systemic culture of capability.

“Ten years ago, DRB Group was a strong regional builder with ambition. Today… we are a scaled, nationally respected platform – still entrepreneurial at heart.”

Vertical integration: the next layer of advantage

If scale is the headline, vertical integration is the storyline – and increasingly, the determining operational factor.

For Sumitomo Forestry, that strategy is clear. Its U.S. platform includes homebuilding, building materials, component manufacturing, land development and investment. The goal is to connect these capabilities into a unified system –a global value chain centered on wood, construction and long-term asset performance.

DRB Group has become the real-world, market-tested, operational footprint for carrying out, learning, improving and excelling in this strategy in real time.

“We have served as a proving ground for vertical integration strategies that strengthen supply chain reliability,” Salameh says. “The key lesson: integration must enhance local agility.”

Agility, not in the abstract, but in an on-the-ground operational sense.

Because integration, done poorly, creates friction. It slows decision-making. It disrupts local market responsiveness. It introduces bureaucracy into what is, at its core, a relationship-driven business.

Sumitomo Forestry appears to understand that risk – and to be managing it deliberately.

“We carefully choose the company,” Iwasaki says of acquisition targets. “It needs to have cultural similarity and be run by a likeminded founder/operator.”

That cultural filter is not incidental. It’s intentionally a load-bearing, internalized core. It’s what allows integration to be accepted at the field level – not imposed from above.

And it helps explain why DRB Group has been able to integrate multiple acquisitions without the kind of organizational disruption that often follows scale.

“The fact there wasn’t any voluntary turnover after integration shows the business combination succeeded,” Iwasaki notes.

In a business where talent retention is often the first casualty of M&A, that outcome stands out.

Beyond for-sale: expanding the revenue model

At the same time, DRB’s evolution has not been limited to traditional for-sale homebuilding.

The company moved early into build-for-rent and fee-build development, creating additional revenue streams and positioning itself across multiple housing demand channels.

From Sumitomo Forestry’s perspective, that entrepreneurial expansion is not only accepted—it’s encouraged.

“DRB Group’s senior management has a proven track record of expansion success through rapid integration and scaling size to drive quicker profitability,” Iwasaki says. “Entrepreneurship is built into DRB Group’s DNA.”

That combination – entrepreneurial initiative supported by patient capital – has allowed DRB to move into adjacent business lines without compromising its core.

It also reinforces a broader strategic point:

Diversification is no longer optional.

It’s a hedge against volatility, a driver of margin resilience, and increasingly, a prerequisite for scale.

The industry signal: scale, structure, and staying power

That brings the story back to where it began – with Sumitomo Forestry’s acquisition in February of Tri Pointe Homes.

On its surface, that deal is about scale. It moves Sumitomo Forestry’s U.S. platform into the top tier of homebuilders by volume and adds geographic reach, product diversity, and a premium positioning in markets like California.

Underneath, it points to something more structural.

It reflects a convergence of three forces now reshaping U.S. homebuilding:

• Global capital seeking long-term exposure to housing fundamentals
• Operating models built on local execution with enterprise discipline
• Increasing control over the value chain – from materials to finished homes

Tony Avila, Chairman of Builder Advisor Group, puts it this way:

“This transaction highlights several important trends… international capital continues to view the U.S. housing market as an attractive long-term investment opportunity… [and] scale and geographic & product diversification matters… to better navigate volatility and potential disruptions.”

Another long-time analyst’s observation sharpens the implication:

“The acquisition of TPH again raises the bar in terms of minimum scale/volume for public builders.”

In other words, the competitive threshold is moving.

And it’s moving in a direction that favors platforms that can combine:

• Size
• Diversification
• Operational discipline
• And increasingly, vertical integration

DRB’s role: platform, not portfolio

Within that shifting landscape, DRB Group’s position inside Sumitomo Forestry’s U.S. strategy may be becoming clearer over time. Not as one of several operating companies. But as the platform.

“DRB Group is the only and the largest platform… that can turn into an even larger entity which can host further acquisition and integration,” Iwasaki says.

It suggests that future growth – whether organic or acquisitive – will increasingly flow through DRB’s operating model, leadership structure, and cultural framework.

And it underscores the importance of what Salameh has built over the past decade.

A company that can grow. A company that can integrate. A company that can scale – and, at the same time, remain essentially and recognizably itself.

What the next decade will test

If the past 10 years have been about growth and alignment, the next 10 will be about something more difficult: Refinement.

“Growth remains important,” Salameh says. “But excellence at scale is the focus. Deeper vertical integration. Smarter revenue generation and land strategy.”

That shift – from expansion to optimization – is where many organizations stumble. It requires discipline in the face of opportunity. Restraint in the face of capital. And clarity about what should – and should not – change.

“The tension is knowing when to accelerate and when to preserve capital,” Salameh says.

That tension is not unique to DRB.

It’s becoming the defining challenge for the entire homebuilding sector.

From growth to legacy

DRB Group still runs on its origin-story DNA.

“Ten years ago… we were a strong regional builder with ambition,” Salameh says. “Today… we are a scaled, nationally respected platform – still entrepreneurial at heart.”

The distinction – for a nationally respected platform at the center of one of the most deliberate and long-term strategic plays in U.S. housing – matters. What’s being built now – across DRB Group, across Sumitomo Forestry’s U.S. platform, and across the broader competitive landscape – goes beyond size.

It is durability and resiliency, a core that is future-proof.

“The next decade won’t just be about size,” Salameh says. “It will be about legacy.”

In a business characterized by cycles, constraints, and constant change, that may be the factor that counts most because it makes these first 10 years only the beginning.

This post was originally published on here. 

A high-profile proposal to borrow $1.5 trillion and invest the money in stocks to salvage Social Security’s finances would likely leave taxpayers saddled with enormous debt, even under optimistic market conditions, according to a new analysis from the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.

The brief is critical of a plan championed by Sens. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) and Tim Kaine (D-Va.), who have sought middle ground between raising taxes and cutting benefits.

The Social Security trust fund is projected to run dry by 2034, after which incoming payroll taxes can cover only about 80% of scheduled benefits.

Cassidy’s and Kaine’s proposal would borrow a total of $26.6 trillion over 75 years, while $1.5 trillion would seed a separate investment fund placed into equities and other risky assets.

The rest would cover annual benefit gaps. After 75 years, investment proceeds would repay the Department of the Treasury, with leftover gains helping to offset the total tab borrowed, according to the plan.

But a simulation of 10,000 possible market scenarios, detailed in the brief, found that even assuming a robust 6.5% real annual return on stocks — matching historic highs — the investment fund would fully cover the amount borrowed roughly 64% of the time.

Under a more modest 4% real return forecast by many financial firms, the fund would reportedly offset just 19% of the $26.6 trillion at the median outcome.

Room for reverse?

A potential shortfall in Social Security benefits could also drive older homeowners toward reverse mortgages.

If trust fund insolvency forces across-the-board benefit cuts, and if annual cost-of-living adjustments continue to lag real inflation experienced by seniors — particularly for health care and housing — millions may find their monthly income falling well short of basic expenses.

Reverse mortgages could become an essential lifeline. Demand for these loans may accelerate sharply as retirees seek to replace lost or eroded Social Security income.

Equity investment needs paired with other fixes

The researchers do not rule out a role for stocks.

“Alternatively, equity investments could help Social Security’s finances if paired with a tax increase or benefit cut that restores solvency,” the brief explained.

In simulations where lawmakers immediately raise payroll taxes enough to close the 75-year shortfall — a 3.82% increase under current law — and then invest up to 40% of trust fund assets in equities, the outcome shifts dramatically.

At the median projection with 6.5% real returns, the trust fund would hold assets equal to 10.1 times annual outlays in 75 years, compared with just 0.7 times if left entirely in special-issue Treasury bonds.

Even with lower 4% returns, the ratio stabilizes around 4, enough to pay full benefits indefinitely without further cuts or tax hikes.

“But the window of opportunity is closing; waiting until 2034 to introduce equities would be too late to offer a permanent fix,” the brief warns.

Under a delayed 2034 start — requiring a 4.53% tax increase — median trust fund ratios fall to 3.4 with 6.5% returns, and below sustainable levels with 4% returns. In the latter scenario, the fund would not remain solvent indefinitely even at the 50th percentile of outcomes.

“If equity investment is to play any constructive role in Social Security reform, it must be considered early, alongside a comprehensive solvency package that restores balance between revenues and benefits and rebuilds reserves,” the authors concluded.

The analysis assumes equity allocations phased in over 15 years and capped at 40% of trust fund assets to limit market distortion — a level that would still leave the government owning less than 7% of the U.S. stock market today.

This post was originally published on here. 

Real estate professionals spend a lot of time talking about interest rates, inventory, concessions and price reductions. We should, of course. Those factors shape affordability and timing in every market. But, homebuying has never been only a financial decision.

For many buyers, a home is also emotional, generational and cultural. It is where children will grow up, where aging parents may one day live, where a family will gather, celebrate and build wealth. For some households, that decision-making process includes traditions and beliefs that many in the industry still underestimate, including feng shui and broader cultural symbolism.

This conversation feels especially timely in 2026, the Year of the Fire Horse, a rare point in the Chinese zodiac cycle that began with the Lunar New Year on February 17, 2026, and runs until February 5, 2027. In the zodiac’s 60-year cycle, the Fire Horse appears only once every six decades.

As an Asian American real estate leader in Denver, I see this as more than a lifestyle trend or social media curiosity. For some buyers, cultural beliefs influence how they interpret a home’s energy, layout and long-term potential.

What buyers may be noticing this year

The Year of the Fire Horse is often associated with movement, boldness, intensity and momentum. That symbolism alone does not dictate a home purchase. But it can amplify interest in themes many buyers already care about: prosperity, flow, balance, energy and how a home “feels” the moment they step inside.

For buyers who value feng shui, a few details tend to stand out.

One is the front entry. In feng shui, the front door is often described as the main portal through which energy enters the home. If the entry feels cramped, chaotic or poorly aligned, that can shape first impressions quickly. Likewise, if a staircase sits directly in line with the front door, some buyers may see that as a sign that energy, and symbolically money, moves out too quickly.

The kitchen, which many traditions connect to nourishment, health and abundance. Buyers who follow feng shui may pay close attention to the relationship between the stove and sink, since fire and water are seen as opposing elements. A direct clash between them may feel less harmonious to those buyers, even if the kitchen is beautiful by conventional design standards.

Then there is the issue some agents may encounter more often than they admit: numbers. In Chinese cultural contexts, the number 8 is widely associated with prosperity, while 4 is often avoided because of its phonetic association with death in several Chinese languages. That can affect how some buyers react to a property address, floor number or unit number before they have even toured the home.

Bedroom placement can matter, too. Some buyers want the primary suite to feel protected, private and calm rather than exposed to heavy traffic or positioned in a way that feels unsettled. More broadly, feng shui-minded buyers often respond strongly to whether a home feels balanced rather than merely updated.

Why this matters professionally

It is easy to dismiss these preferences if they are not your own. But the best Realtors do not decide for clients what should matter. They listen to what does matter. If a buyer tells you an address is a concern, or hesitates because the stairs face the entry, or asks questions about bedroom placement, the worst response is to roll your eyes and reduce it to superstition. The better response is curiosity, respect and problem-solving.

It means asking better questions:

• What feels off to you about this layout?
• Are there specific features you want to avoid?
• Would a different configuration feel more aligned for your family?

Those questions build trust. And trust is often the difference between a client who feels seen and one who feels managed. In a diverse area like Denver, cultural fluency is not extra credit. It is part of modern representation. Buyers bring many frameworks into a transaction: faith, family structure, accessibility needs, multigenerational priorities, school considerations and, yes, cultural beliefs about luck, harmony and home. Our job is to navigate them with professionalism.

A smarter way to talk about home

There is also an opportunity here for the industry to broaden how we talk about housing itself. Buyers are often trying to assess something much harder to quantify than price per square foot: whether a space supports the life they want to build.

That may show up as a desire for natural light, a calmer entry, better room placement, more visual balance or a stronger feeling of ease. Sometimes buyers will describe that in design language.

Sometimes they will describe it through culture and symbolism. The Year of the Fire Horse gives us a timely reason to acknowledge that truth. It reminds us that buyers do not enter the market as spreadsheets. They arrive with values, histories, rituals and hopes.Real estate professionals who understand that will not just be more culturally aware.

They will be more effective.

Because when clients feel understood, they make decisions with more confidence. And when an industry learns to respect what matters to different communities, it becomes better at serving all of them.

Lisa Nguyen is President of the Denver Metro Association of Realtors.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners.

To contact the editor responsible for this piece: tracey@hwmedia.com

This post was originally published on here. 

Last July, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a landmark law shielding apartment and residential projects from lengthy environmental review processes to boost the state’s housing supply and improve affordability.

It’s working – but not without a fight.

Developers wasted no time seizing the opportunity. A growing list of housing developments are securing exemptions from reviews under the 1970 California Environmental Quality Act, which environmentalists and “not-in-my-backyard” groups used to stall or stop projects.

What that does not mean, however, is that local opposition to such projects has no remaining means to ensnare them in a host of other delay tactics and obstructive gambits.

California’s experience offers a preview of what other states exploring similar reforms should expect. New York lawmakers are in the final stages of revamping the state’s 50-year-old State Environmental Quality Review Act, but have faced stiff opposition from the same types of groups that fought the California reform.

A legal fight over zoning

In La Cañada Flintridge, Cedar Street Partners used the new exemption for its 600 Foothill mixed-use project as early as July 3, 2025 – just three days after Newsom signed the bill – with city planning staff confirming it applied.

The project had been tied up in court for several years. Its legal course began in November 2022 when Cedar Street submitted a preliminary application for an 80-unit, mixed-use project, invoking what’s known as “the builder’s remedy” – a state provision that allows developers to bypass local zoning restrictions when a city lacks a compliant housing element.

La Cañada Flintridge pushed back. In May 2023, the City Council rejected the proposal, arguing the city had come into compliance with its housing element before Cedar Street filed. Cedar Street sued that July, alleging violations of the Housing Accountability Act. The California Housing Defense Fund and Californians for Homeownership filed separate suits.

Courts were not sympathetic. In November 2023, an L.A. County judge rejected the city’s attempt to get the case thrown out. Four months later, Judge Mitchell Beckloff ruled the city violated the HAA and ordered it to process the application under the builders’ remedy – the first such ruling in California history.

Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta had intervened on the developer’s side.

“La Cañada Flintridge is the latest community that has failed in their effort to override state housing laws,” Newsom said after the ruling. He added the decision should “serve as a warning to other NIMBY jurisdictions that the state will hold every community accountable in planning for their fair share of housing.”

The cost of fighting

Facing a $14 million appeal bond, the City Council voted in March 2025 to drop its challenge. “While this was a difficult decision, prolonged litigation of these issues would have cost significantly more and created an increasing financial burden on the City,” Mayor Mike Davitt said. So far, the city has settled legal fees with the California Housing Defense Fund for $1.26 million.

The law change also removed a potential obstacle opponents could have used to further delay the project. Jonathon Curtis, managing partner at Cedar Street Partners, told The Builder’s Daily that he is now in the capital-raising phase for the project, seeking equity and debt.

Fighting the state capitol’s backyard

The new exemption faced one of its earliest high-profile challenges in East Sacramento, where two neighborhood groups contested a city decision to shield a proposed six-story, 332-unit apartment project on Alhambra Boulevard from environmental review.

The city’s Planning and Design Commission voted unanimously in February to grant the CEQA exemption – the first time Sacramento had used AB 130 – finding the project met the law’s infill criteria. Two groups quickly appealed: Citizens for Positive Growth & Preservation, which has filed three CEQA-based lawsuits against Sacramento since 2015, and a coalition called Save East Sac! Their appeal argued the project conflicted with the city’s general plan and zoning, which, if proven, would disqualify it from the exemption.

“It’s a bad argument that is going to lose,” Chris Farrell with YIMBY Law told the Sacramento Bee. He was right. The council denied both appeals and upheld the exemption April 29, clearing the project to move forward.

A church chooses a CEQA exemption

California’s 2024 law allowed faith-based organizations to build on property they own by right, spurring projects throughout the state. In Danville, Community Presbyterian Church is pursuing a 68-unit townhouse development town planning staff determined was exempt from CEQA under AB 130.

The master plan, designed by Dahlin Architecture, would replace 19 church-owned single-family homes with 49 townhomes and 19 accessory dwelling units. The church selected Tri Pointe Homes as the builder in March after reviewing bids from multiple developers, and the land will be sold to Tri Pointe for development.

The project cleared the town’s Design Review Board unanimously in April and is scheduled for Planning Commission hearings beginning May 26.

Glendale’s near legal battle

In Glendale, the City Council voted 4-1 last October to reject Trammell Crow Residential‘s plan to redevelop a former Sears department store into an eight-story, 682-unit mixed-use complex — including 72 very low-income units — despite the project carrying a CEQA exemption. City staff, the Design Review Board, the Planning Commission and the city’s Planning Hearing Officer had all recommended approval.

The council’s objections centered on scale, design and what members described as a failure to honor the Art Deco character of the historic Sears building. The lone dissenting vote, Mayor Ara Najarian, warned colleagues they were inviting legal and financial consequences. He was right.

Trammell Crow’s attorney called the potential case a “slam dunk” under the Housing Accountability Act. On Dec. 30, the state Department of Housing and Community Development issued a formal notice of violation. It said Glendale was legally required to approve the project and gave the city a deadline to reverse course. If the city didn’t, it faced fines of up to $34 million.

The City Council reversed its denial in late January and approved the project — three months after voting it down. No lawsuit was filed, but Trammell Crow had made clear one was waiting if the council held firm.

The road ahead

The law has shifted the arena of conflict. Under the old system, opponents used the CEQA process itself as a delay tactic – filing challenges, demanding studies and running out the clock.

Now those fights are moving to city councils and the courts, where elected officials have begun to learn the hard way that rejecting exemption-eligible projects could carry a steep price.

“They’ve done an unbelievable job changing the landscape,” he said, but added that judges remain a problem. “Some are still in the mindset that cities can do no wrong.”

This post was originally published on here. 

Ohio-based M/I Homes, Inc. announced that Eugene D. Smith, former senior vice president and director of athletics at The Ohio State University and current president of Gene Smith Consulting, LLC, has been elected to the company’s board of directors.

Shareholders approved Smith’s appointment at the 2026 annual meeting on May 13, 2026. He succeeds longtime director Norman L. Traeger, who retired from the board at the meeting.

“We are very pleased to have Gene join our Board. He is a highly respected and accomplished leader, and his experience leading large, complex organizations, strategic perspective and sound judgment will benefit our Board and our Company. We also want to thank Norm Traeger for his many years of dedicated service and significant contributions to M/I Homes,” Chairman and CEO Robert H. Schottenstein said in the company announcement.

Smith’s consulting firm provides leadership training, with an emphasis on supporting athletic conference commissioners, athletic directors and coaches in the college sports sector. Before launching Gene Smith Consulting, LLC, he served as director of athletics at Ohio State, Arizona State University, Iowa State University and Eastern Michigan University.

Smith is also a director of Under Armour, Inc., and sits on the boards of the Big Ten Network, Arizona Sports Foundation, National Football Foundation and National Coalition of Minority Football. Before starting his administrative and business career, Smith won the college football national championship in 1973 as a player for the Notre Dame Fighting Irish.

M/I Homes, Inc., which marks its 50th year in business in 2026, builds single-family homes throughout the country. The company operates in Columbus and Cincinnati, Ohio; Indianapolis, Indiana; Chicago, Illinois; Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota; Detroit, Michigan; Tampa, Sarasota, Fort Myers/Naples and Orlando, Florida; Austin, Dallas/Fort Worth, Houston and San Antonio, Texas; Charlotte and Raleigh, North Carolina; and Nashville, Tennessee.

This post was originally published on here. 

For years, the MLS was something agents barely thought about. It was simply part of the landscape. You entered listings. You searched homes. You scheduled showings. Deals got done. Now suddenly, everyone is fighting over listings.

• Compass is pushing private exclusives.
• Bright MLS is striking nationwide data-sharing agreements.
• Realtracs is expanding nationally.
• Cotality launched Broker Listing Exchange with Keller Williams and HomeServices.
• Google is quietly testing direct home-search experiences.
• Zillow is fighting over listing visibility rules.
• Brokerages are building private inventory strategies.

Most agents hear about these moves and think: “What does any of this actually mean to me?”

The answer is surprisingly simple.

The industry is beginning to realize that artificial intelligence is going to change the value of listing access itself. And once that happens, much of the current strategy around private inventory may become a lot less durable than people think.

The industry is trying to control inventory

For the past several years, many brokerages have increasingly leaned into the idea of exclusive inventory.

The pitch is obvious. If consumers cannot easily find certain listings elsewhere, then buyers need your agents. Sellers perceive added value. Agents have a reason to join your company. Competitors lose leverage.

It is not a crazy strategy. In fact, it is probably one of the strongest recruiting tools brokerages currently have.

Compass understood this early. Their private exclusives strategy was never just about listings. It is about positioning and creates the perception that certain inventory lived inside their ecosystem first.

That matters. Agents want access. Consumers want advantages. Sellers like the idea of exclusivity.

But there is a major problem forming underneath this entire strategy. AI changes how information moves.

Most people still think about search the old way

Most agents still think of search as something humans do manually.

• You open websites.
• You log in.
• You type criteria.
• You save searches.
• You wait for alerts.

That model is already starting to break. Modern AI systems are becoming capable of operating tools that interact with websites the same way humans do. If a consumer authorizes an AI assistant to use their login credentials for approved platforms, the AI can potentially search those systems on their behalf — simply by acting as the authorized user.

That distinction matters, because once AI can operate across multiple approved systems simultaneously, the idea of maintaining long-term information silos becomes much harder.

The moat problem

Many brokerages think they are building moats around inventory. AI may be building bridges across those moats. That is the part of this conversation the industry still does not fully appreciate.

Imagine where this goes in the next few years. A buyer simply tells an AI assistant: “Monitor every source I have access to and notify me instantly when a home matching these exact criteria appears.”

That AI could potentially monitor:

• MLS portals
• brokerage-exclusive inventory
• coming-soon listings
• brokerage apps
• Google search
• agent emails
• consumer portals
• saved searches
• private websites the consumer already has authorized access to

The consumer no longer cares where the listing originated, and the experience becomes unified.

That changes everything. Because historically, exclusivity only works when friction exists. AI removes friction.

This is why Google matters more than most agents realize

The industry is still acting as if the biggest battle is between brokerages and portals. That may already be outdated thinking. The much bigger issue is what happens if home search itself evolves.

Google entering deeper into housing search matters because consumers already begin their online behavior there. If AI-driven search becomes layered on top of real estate data, consumers will increasingly expect complete visibility.

That is why eXp’s willingness to broadly expose listings into Google’s evolving search ecosystem was strategically important. It represented a very different bet on the future. Some companies are betting on scarcity. Others are betting on ubiquity. AI historically favors ubiquity.

The industry is quietly reorganizing itself

The recent moves by Cotality, Bright MLS, Realtracs and others are not random. They are all reactions to the same pressure.

Everyone sees the market changing. Brokerages want more control over listing distribution. MLSs are trying to maintain relevance, portals want consumer traffic, Google wants search dominance and tech companies want housing data.

Everyone understands that whoever controls the consumer relationship before AI fully reshapes search behavior could become enormously powerful.

What agents should actually focus on

Many agents are worried AI will replace them. That is probably the wrong concern. AI is much more likely to commoditize access to information than it is to commoditize trust.

Consumers already have listing access. Soon, they may have AI systems capable of searching and organizing listings far faster than any human being can manually.

That means the future value of the agent shifts somewhere else.

• Pricing strategy.
• Negotiation.
• Deal structure.
• Emotional intelligence.
• Local expertise.
• Problem-solving.
• Interpretation.
• Judgment.

The agents who survive this transition will not win because they know where to click. They will win because clients trust them to make sense of increasingly intelligent systems.

The real risk nobody wants to talk about

There is another uncomfortable possibility here. If consumers eventually expect AI to search everything they are authorized to access, then the long-term value of fragmented listing ecosystems may begin collapsing.

The very thing brokerages are investing heavily in today could become less defensible tomorrow. That does not mean private exclusives disappear overnight. It does mean the shelf life of inventory silos may be shorter than many executives currently believe.

Especially once consumers realize AI can monitor dozens of systems simultaneously without requiring them to manually search each one. The technology is moving much faster than most real estate companies are prepared for.

The listing wars are not really about listings.

They are about who controls the consumer relationship before AI changes how search works entirely. Right now, many brokerages believe exclusive inventory creates a moat. Maybe it does. But history shows that whenever technology removes friction, walls tend to matter less. And AI is shaping up to be one of the most powerful friction-removal technologies the real estate industry has ever seen.

The companies building private ecosystems may eventually discover they built walls at the exact moment AI started teaching consumers how to walk around them.

Agents should pay attention. Because this is not a temporary industry debate. This is the beginning of a fundamental restructuring of how consumers discover homes — and who gets to control that process.

Tim and Julie Harris are co-founders of Tim & Julie Harris Real Estate Coaching and hosts of Real Estate Coaching Radio. A companion deep-dive on the full interview is available at Harris Real Estate Daily.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners.

To contact the editor responsible for this piece: tracey@hwmedia.com

This post was originally published on here. 

CrossCountry Mortgage has overhauled its closing operations using Blend Close, Blend’s digital closing software, allowing the company to cut average closing times to 45 minutes and eliminate post-closing signature errors across its 1,000-plus-branch network.

The independent retail lender integrated Blend Close directly with its loan origination system, replacing multiple point solutions with a single closing platform that supports traditional, hybrid, hybrid with eNote and full remote online notarization (RON) transactions.

Before the rollout, CrossCountry borrowers typically spent 1.5 to 2 hours signing more than 100 pages in front of a notary. Manual data entry, signature mistakes and incorrect dates led to frequent investor suspensions and rework after closing.

With Blend Close, borrowers access a single portal with one set of credentials from initial application through closing. They can review closing packages in advance and return to the portal to view signed documents after settlement.

“I truly love the one-stop shop for borrowers,” said Simone LaBorde, executive vice president of closing and strategic initiatives at CrossCountry Mortgage. “Borrowers have one login and can review closing packages ahead of time and still log back in to view signed documents after closing, which helps with security and scams.”

CrossCountry’s closing staff previously moved between multiple systems: one to prepare files, another for hybrid eClosings and a third for RON. That fragmentation created workflow breaks, more training time and higher risk of data and document errors.

Now, closers manage all transaction types from a single interface. Real-time status updates and completed documents are automatically pushed back into the LOS, reducing manual re-entry and reconciliation work.

The RON capability has also expanded access to closing for borrowers who cannot attend in person, including military personnel and customers dealing with emergencies. Some transactions now close in as little as 25 to 30 minutes, compared with the prior two-hour standard.

“The platform is easy to navigate,” said Alex Sanchez, senior vice president and closing manager at CrossCountry Mortgage. “It’s self-explanatory, user-friendly, doesn’t take a long time to train.”

The company said its adoption of Blend Close has improved several operational metrics, including reducing average closing times to 45 minutes from 1.5 to 2 hours and cutting some transactions to as little as 25 to 30 minutes.

CrossCountry said closers now handle between 85 and 120 loans per month, while post-closing signature errors have been eliminated and settlement agent time per closing has been reduced to 45 minutes from 90 minutes.

The company also reported fewer investor suspensions, shorter training times and higher employee satisfaction among closing staff after consolidating processes into a single system.

“CrossCountry Mortgage operates at a scale that demands every step of the process work flawlessly,” said Nima Ghamsari, co-founder and head of Blend. “Partnering with a lender of their caliber to eliminate friction at the closing table, and make that final moment a great one for borrowers, is exactly what we built Blend Close to do.”

CrossCountry is now moving from hybrid eClosings to hybrid with eNote, a step that can accelerate delivery to investors and reduce collateral risk as more warehouse lenders and agencies accept electronic promissory notes.

The lender expects full RON to become the default for a growing share of loans over time, using Blend Close as the underlying platform.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication. The system helps convert company announcements and industry data into HousingWire-style news coverage.

This post was originally published on here. 

While higher interest rates pushed thousands of real estate agents out of the business, Anthony Lamacchia saw opportunity.

Lamacchia Realty — based in Worcester, Massachusetts — posted 68% growth by transaction sides percentage from 2021 through 2025, according to RealTrends Verified’s annual GameChangers rankings.

That success follows an 84% growth period from 2020 to 2024, positioning the firm as high growth brokerage across a turbulent half-decade for housing.

The 68% jump earned Lamacchia Realty the No. 68 spot by transaction sides among all brokerage firms nationwide in this year’s rankings.

“I took advantage of the down market,” said Lamacchia, broker-owner and CEO of Lamacchia Realty and Lamacchia Companies. “I knew other companies were going to be suffering given the high-interest rate environment, and I knew Realtors were going to be leaving the business, so I went out and just worked really hard to acquire other companies, and fortunately we’ve been very successful at it.”

The firm recorded $3.27 billion across 5,944 transactions in 2025, securing No. 79 by sales volume nationally on RealTrends Verified’s broader brokerage rankings.

Lamacchia Realty has grown into a regional residential brokerage serving New England and Florida — expanding through acquisitions and office openings across Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Hampshire and the Sunshine State.

Recent acquisitions incude Rosewood Realty in Massachusetts and The Briotti Group in Connecticut.

Acquisition blitz drives expansion

Lamacchia Realty has purchased 14 brokerages across the last three years.

“We’ve focused mainly on companies that have been in business a long time, because the ones that have been in business a long time have the agents that have been in business a long time, and those agents who tend to skew a bit older demographically, they have the listings,” Lamacchia said.

When the market tightens, veterans outperform because they possess the contacts and leads that sustain volume, he added.

Sellers call them directly to list homes — a dynamic that insulated Lamacchia’s acquisition targets from the worst of recent market instability.

The financial upside for acquired owners has been notable.

“A lot of these owners that we bought out, they’re making more money now than they were before we got involved, because we were able to go in and inject the company with our power,” Lamacchia said “We also share with the owners for a certain amount of years after we do the buyout.”

Lamacchia said he also deliberately targeted companies with deep roots in their communities — reasoning that longevity in business correlates directly with agent stability and listing inventory.

Affordability and first-time buyers

Lamacchia did not sugarcoat the broader market’s trajectory — pointing to the consequences of skyrocketing prices showing up in demographic data.

“It’s not good for consumers to have to wait until 40 years old to buy a home on average, and it’s because prices have gotten out of whack in this country,” he said. “Things have gotten too expensive. We saw an improvement in that last year.

“We saw rates come down a point, and then it got worse again in the last 60 days, due to the Iranian crisis, and I hope the president solves it sooner than later.”

To help agents adapt to changing buyer profiles, Lamacchia and other experts recently launch their Certified Real Estate Consultant course — including video training, planning tools and a five-step consultation system designed to increase referrals, trust and long-term business growth.

“[Artificial intelligence] will help operationally, and it will help with information, but it’s not going to take away the client relationship,” Lamacchia said. “It’s why I wanted to get this [consultant course ] out there. I’m trying to get agents to promote more than, ‘Hey, I’m a Realtor, and I’m here to help you buy and sell.’ They should be there to help people do a lot more than just buy or sell.”

Those who become trusted household advisors — involved in maintenance conversations, home equity planning and long-term financial strategy — build relationships that withstand market cycles and technological disruption, he added.

Advice for peers; no shortcuts

Asked what advice he would offer other brokerage leaders navigating a turbulent housing environment, Lamacchia kept his answer direct.

“You’ve got to work,” he said. “You’re not going to find a shortcut. You have to put the work in, and you need to have the relationships. Make the relationships, and don’t be afraid to take chances.”

While other brokerages cut costs and retreated, Lamacchia Realty expanded — and GameChangers rankings confirm the strategy worked.

Whether the firm can sustain that momentum through another interest rate cycle remains an open question. But if the past five years are any indicator, Lamacchia is unlikely to wait for conditions to improve on their own.

He will go out and acquire the answer.

This post was originally published on here. 

Mortgage rates continued to move higher in the past week as geopolitical turmoil caused the 10-year Treasury yield to soar, although mortgage spreads remain well below their levels of 2024 and 2025.

At HousingWire‘s Mortgage Rates Center, rates for 30-year conforming loans were at 6.77%, their highest point of the year. Rates for 30-year loans through the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) averaged 6.33% and rates for 30-year jumbo loans averaged 6.89%. HousingWire Data is benchmarked across a base of retail lenders using a standardized borrower scenario with a 75% loan-to-value ratio and a 780 FICO score.

Last week, loan officers told HousingWire that they’re turning to seller credits, recalibrated home search criteria and faster closings as solutions to keep deals afloat.

“The quicker the closing, the better, because I don’t think the market is going to get better,” said Adam Neft, an Ohio-based LO at Ultimate Mortgage Brokers. “The conflict in Iran, from what little I know, doesn’t look like there’s an easy resolution. The longer it takes, the longer the chance of interest rates going up is. Hopefully, it’s a short-term thing.”

Higher rates are ‘here to stay’

Melissa Cohn, regional vice president at William Raveis Mortgage, pointed to rising inflation data tied to the ongoing war in Iran as the key culprit for higher rates.

“Higher prices are inflationary. Rising inflation causes the 10-year bond yield to rise and mortgage rates along with it,” Cohn said in a statement. “As long as oil prices remain elevated, mortgage rates will be as well. With no end in sight to the war, higher rates are here to stay for the foreseeable future.”

Kyle Bass, production business manager at Refi.com (an affiliate of Mortgage Resource Center and Veterans United Home Loans), said last week that “refinance activity is softening as borrowers continue to adjust to a higher-rate environment.” But this is simultaneously boosting demand for home equity lines of credit (HELOCs) and similar solutions that keep homeowners in their current low-rate, first-lien mortgages.

“That trend is showing up nationally. Refi.com’s recent home equity analysis found that HELOC originations increased to more than 504,000 in 2025 from roughly 456,000 in 2024, while the average approved HELOC credit limit climbed to approximately $135,000 as homeowners become increasingly strategic about using their equity while preserving favorable first-mortgage financing,” Bass said in a statement.

Last week, the Senate confirmed Kevin Warsh as the new chair of the Federal Reserve. Warsh could potentially seek looser monetary policy down the road, but market observers say that won’t happen anytime soon. In fact, a rate hike could be in the cards for late 2026 or early 2027.

“Generally, a Warsh-led Fed could be modestly more dovish on rates, anchored by productivity optimism, while still carrying a hawk’s credibility,” said Selma Hepp, chief economist at Cotality. “For housing, the key is whether he builds consensus across the Fed that reduces policy and mortgage-rate volatility, and keeps affordability from slipping further for households.”

“The Fed will not be in a position to cut rates, and it is becoming increasingly likely that the next Fed move could be a rate hike,” Cohn added. “The new Fed chair, no matter how dovish he may be, has no capacity to compel the other Fed members to think that a rate cut is the right thing to do right now.”

Housing market response

On Tuesday, the National Association of Realtors (NAR) reported that pending home sales were up 1.4% in April on a monthly basis and 3.2% higher year over year. But Sam Williamson, senior economist at First American, said that pending sales are only 1.6% ahead of their 2025 average, which suggests nothing more than slight improvements for this year’s spring housing market.

“The latest data suggest the early spring market is shaping up to be another year of modest improvement, rather than the stronger breakout many had hoped for entering the year, when lower mortgage rates and rising household incomes were boosting consumer house-buying power,” Williamson said.

“Still, underlying buyer conditions remain better than a year ago: inventory has improved, home-price growth has cooled and rising incomes have helped put buyers in a somewhat stronger purchasing position relative to last year. Those conditions could support firmer sales activity in the second half of 2026 if mortgage rates stabilize and broader economic uncertainty eases.”

This week’s HousingWire Housing Market Tracker shows that consumer demand remains positive. The 78,000 weekly pending sales represents a 6.1% increase from this time last year, while purchase mortgage application demand has been running hotter for most of 2026.

HousingWire Lead Analyst Logan Mohtashami also said that while fewer people are listing their homes, inventory growth is slightly higher on a year-over-year basis. This has put the market “in a much better spot with with inventory levels, which are at a multiyear high and far from the savagely unhealthy levels of 2020-2023.”

This post was originally published on here. 

Mortgage applications for new home purchases fell 2.4% in April 2026 compared to a year earlier, the first annual decline since October 2025, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association’s Builder Application Survey released this week.

Applications also dropped 10% from March 2026 on an unadjusted basis, MBA reported. The monthly numbers are not adjusted for typical seasonal patterns.

“Ongoing economic uncertainty and higher mortgage rates contributed to lower purchase activity for newly built homes in April,” Joel Kan, MBA’s vice president and deputy chief economist, said in the release. “Applications to purchase new homes fell below last year’s pace, the first year-over-year decline since October 2025.”

MBA estimates new single-family home sales were running at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 655,000 units in April, based on application data and assumptions about market coverage. That pace was down 8.6% from a revised March estimate of 717,000 units and below the April 2025 level, MBA said.

On an unadjusted basis, MBA estimates there were 60,000 new home sales in April, a 13% decline from 69,000 sales in March.

Kan said the slowdown comes amid “high levels of unsold inventory available in many markets” but noted MBA expects purchase activity to improve as price growth cools. For builders and lenders, elevated inventory can translate into more buyer incentives and rate buydowns as they work through standing stock.

Government-backed mortgages accounted for just over half of all applications for newly built homes in April, underscoring ongoing affordability pressures.

By product type, conventional loans made up 49.5% of applications. Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans accounted for 35.7%, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) loans 13.7% and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) loans 1.1%, MBA said.

“FHA, VA, and USDA applications accounted for a little over half of all applications in April, as many borrowers continued to rely on government programs to help with affordability,” Kan said.

The average loan size for new homes slipped to $378,384 in April from $381,938 in March. A declining average loan size can indicate buyers are shifting downmarket or that builders are delivering smaller or more moderately priced product to meet payment constraints at current mortgage rates.

MBA’s Builder Application Survey has been a leading indicator for the U.S. Census Bureau’s New Residential Sales report, which also records new home sales at contract signing. For lenders, the April pullback signals near-term weakness in new-construction pipelines and reinforces the importance of FHA and VA channels.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication. The system helps convert company announcements and industry data into HousingWire-style news coverage.

This post was originally published on here. 

Two Harbors Investment Corp. has pushed its special meeting of stockholders to May 28 to give investors more time to vote on its proposed sale to an affiliate of CrossCountry Mortgage (CCM), as a competing proposal from UWM Holdings Corp. (UWMC) looms.

The New York-based, mortgage servicing rights-focused real estate investment trust said Tuesday that its board continues to unanimously recommend stockholders vote in favor of the all-cash transaction with CrossCountry Intermediate Holdco LLC. Companies usually adjourn special meetings either to establish a quorum or to secure enough shareholder votes.

Five days ago, CCM added a pro rata quarterly dividend payment for Two Harbors stockholders, providing up to $0.34 per share in incremental cash. A second-quarter dividend and a prorated third-quarter dividend would bring the total cash value to between $12.45 and $12.68 per share, the company said.

Holders of the company’s Series A, B and C preferred stock would be redeemed at $25 per share, plus any accumulated and unpaid dividends, following the closing.

Meanwhile, UWM has offered $12.50 per share with no cap or proration, although the Two Harbors board ultimately rejected the bid.

The special meeting, originally scheduled for May 19, will reconvene virtually at 10 a.m. on May 28. Proxies that have already been submitted will carry over to the reconvened meeting unless revoked. Stockholders who already voted in favor of the CrossCountry transaction do not need to take further action.

The deal remains subject to stockholder approval, as well as customary regulatory and closing conditions.

The adjournment follows an unsuccessful court challenge regarding the timing of the vote. A plaintiff sought a temporary restraining order in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, arguing that alleged misstatements and omissions in the proxy statement required delaying Tuesday’s vote.

The court ruled from the bench in favor of Two Harbors, finding that the plaintiff had not shown a likelihood of success on the merits, and dismissed a related motion for a preliminary injunction as moot. According to a summary of the ruling provided by the company, the judge found the proxy disclosures were not materially misleading and sufficiently described the sale process.

Analysts at Keefe, Bruyette & Woods (KBW) released a note to investors on Tuesday in which it said that the “lack of votes needed suggests that CCM will likely need to raise its bid.”

“The most recent bid from UWMC is $12.50 cash with a default stock election. The most recent bid from CCM is $12, but shareholders would get a partial dividend for 3Q (the run rate quarterly dividend is $0.34),” the analysts wrote.

Flávia Furlan Nunes reported and wrote this article with drafting assistance from HousingWire Automation, an editorial tool that helps transform announcements and industry data into HousingWire-style news coverage.

This post was originally published on here. 

Rocket Mortgage and Redfin, both part of Rocket Companies, on Tuesday announced an incentive program that offers eligible home buyers and sellers up to $20,000 in combined savings when using Redfin agents and financing through Rocket Mortgage.

The program combines lender-paid credits from Rocket Mortgage with commission discounts from Redfin. The companies said the offering is designed to simplify the homebuying process while reducing transaction costs for consumers.

The announcement comes just one day after Redfin launched Redfin Early Access, a new search category on its website and app that features premarket and “coming soon” listings that are not yet widely available on other major real estate platforms.

That offer combines Redfin-exclusive “coming soon” listings with premarket inventory from Compass International Holdings brands through a national partnership announced by the companies in February.

“We brought Rocket and Redfin together to make the path to homeownership simpler, more connected and more affordable,” Heather Lovier, chief operating officer of Rocket Companies, said in a statement. “Now clients can experience that promise in a way that matters: more money staying in their pockets and an easier homebuying journey from start to finish.”

Under the program, buyers who purchase a home with a Redfin agent and finance through Rocket Mortgage can receive savings equal to 0.75% of the loan amount, capped at $6,000, through a combination of lender credits and reduced commissions.

Consumers who both buy and sell with a Redfin agent while financing with Rocket Mortgage can receive savings worth 0.75% of the loan amount, up to $12,000.

Rocket Mortgage’s servicing clients are eligible for the largest incentive. The company said its nearly 10 million serviced clients can receive savings totaling 1.5% of the loan amount, up to $20,000, when buying and selling through Redfin and financing with Rocket Mortgage.

The offering expands on Rocket Preferred Pricing, which Rocket introduced after acquiring Redfin in 2025. The companies said the latest initiative is part of Rocket’s broader push to lower the cost of homeownership.

Earlier this year, Rocket also announced its partnership with Compass, which provides borrowers with either a 100 basis-point interest rate reduction for the first year of a loan or lender credits of up to $6,000 when working with participating real estate brands and financing through Rocket Mortgage.

The new Redfin program is available on eligible purchase loans in select markets, the company said.

This post was originally published on here. 

A federal courtroom in Chicago is about to settle a question the industry has avoided for years. Who decides where a home gets advertised? Tonight at 11:59 p.m. Central, the answer may be made for us, whether the judge rules in time or not.

This is the week the Clear Cooperation debate stopped being a policy argument and became an operational one.

What’s happening?

On Monday, Zillow filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in its antitrust lawsuit against Midwest Real Estate Data (MRED) and Compass, asking the court to prevent MRED from terminating Zillow’s listing access while the suit proceeds. MRED has told Zillow it must restore display of all eligible MRED listings or face suspension of its IDX and VOW feeds by 11:59 p.m. CDT on May 19.

That antitrust case, filed May 12, alleges that Compass and MRED coordinated to use the MLS’s rule-making authority to pressure Zillow into displaying Compass private listings nationwide. Exhibits filed with the motion include emails from October 2025 in which Compass CEO Robert Reffkin allegedly urged multiple MLSs to terminate Zillow’s listing feeds if Zillow enforced its display standards.

Compass answered on LinkedIn the next day. Reffkin wrote that Compass is fighting to protect agents and home sellers with choices, while Zillow is fighting to control them. He paired the post with what he called an internal Zillow document and argued it showed pre-planned litigation against brokerages that allow off-portal marketing.

Reach is part of the story too. Inside the last several weeks, Compass has signed partnerships with MRED, Realtracs, The MLS/CLAW and BrightMLS, four of the largest MLSs in the country. The deals feed Compass private exclusives and coming-soon properties into MLS-controlled networks.

Compass has pledged to subsidize membership for up to 100,000 of its agents who join MRED, with comparable subsidies offered through the other MLS deals.

Not every MLS leader is on board. NWMLS CEO Justin Haag called the MRED-Compass partnership another step backwards for the industry, saying private listings prioritize exclusivity over transparency and create a tiered system that hides homeownership opportunities.

An analysis

Compass has built something real. The brokerage has hired ambitiously, recruited carefully and given agents a brand and a toolkit that compete on the high end of every market it operates in. That deserves acknowledgment before any criticism.

The harder question is structural. The strategy now in motion, supported by partner MLSs and accelerated by the Reffkin’s LinkedIn and Facebook campaigns, asks the industry to accept a system in which the listings a consumer sees depend on which brokerage’s agent represents the seller. That is a different proposition from anything the Clear Cooperation Policy debate has produced so far.

Power fact: Whenever the listing market fragments, the people who lose information first are the consumers who already had the least of it. Buyers without a brokerage relationship, sellers who hired the agent whose sign they saw last week and the independent practitioner who cannot subscribe to every channel — none of those people are in the room in Chicago tonight.

Notice what is missing from both campaigns. Neither company is leading with what the working agent or the seller actually wants. A California Regional MLS survey released earlier this month found that 58.3% of CRMLS subscribers actively support the Clear Cooperation Policy, another 12.5% are neutral, and only 17.24% are not supportive at all. More than 70% of practicing agents are either with the policy or open to it. Both campaigns are talking past that signal.

Power fact: When two well-resourced companies wage a public war, the trade-press cycle gives them roughly equal airtime. The market does not. Watch where the listings actually go in the next 60 days, not where the press releases land.

What agents should do

Stop carrying campaign messages into client meetings. The dollar figures, the survey numbers and the LinkedIn quotes have a sender and a purpose. Use them only when you can attribute them honestly, with the date and the publication attached, and only when they answer a question your client actually asked.

Audit your own listings this week. If the MRED feed gets cut tonight, what happens to seller exposure tomorrow morning? If you are in a Compass-partner market, ask, in writing, which portals your listings will appear on and which they will not. Then put that answer in front of the seller before the seller asks.

Write a short, plain-language marketing memo for every new listing. Include where it will syndicate and which networks carry it. What changes if a national portal and a regional MLS fall out with each other? Sellers will not remember the names of the parties to the lawsuit. They will remember which agent kept them informed and which one looked surprised.

Talk to your broker about IDX and VOW backup. Operationally, the kind of disruption that begins tonight does not warn you twice. The agent who has a backup data source already in place gets through the week. The one who does not, will not.

Tonight, watch the clock

The Clear Cooperation conversation has finally hit the floor of a federal courtroom, and the timing is not an accident. Compass spent the last several months building distribution. Zillow spent the same months tightening its display policy. Both bets have come due in the same week.

The result will shape the listing system every agent works in for the next decade. But for the working professional, the principle does not change. You serve the seller. You serve the buyer. You explain what you can do and what you cannot. The companies fighting in court do not write your listing presentation, and they do not sit at the closing table. You do.

Tonight, watch the clock. Tomorrow, do the work.

This post was originally published on here. 

Bray Real Estate Group has joined Compass in Texas, bringing with it more than 100 agents and over $475 million in 2025 sales volume according to an announcement on Monday.

The Dallas-based independent brokerage, founded and led by Chase and Melanie Bray since 2018, will now operate as Bray Real Estate Group | Compass across the Dallas-Fort Worth and Austin metropolitan areas.

“Joining Compass represents the next chapter for our team as we look at the future of real estate in Texas,” said founder Chase Bray. “By leveraging the Compass technology platform and programs like Compass 3-Phased-Marketing, we are positioned to scale our business to heights that were previously unreachable.”

Compass said the Brays were drawn to the brokerage’s proprietary end-to-end technology platform and data tools, which the couple believes will complement their agents’ local market expertise. The Brays also cited Compass as a fit for the family-oriented, team-based culture they have built since 2018, saying the move should expand opportunities for their agents while preserving a close-knit environment.

In a post on Instagram, the Brays wrote that as the real estate industry has evolved “in ways none of us could have fully anticipated” and the market continued to shift, they “felt called to align with a brokerage that not only understands where this industry is headed, but is actively shaping its future,” leading them to Compass. 

“Over the years, many companies have approached us, but this decision was about more than opportunity — it was about alignment. The marketing, resources and vision Compass offers are truly unmatched, and there is no one we would rather build with as we look toward the future,” the Brays added in their post.

Bray Real Estate Group | Compass will continue to operate its existing brick-and-mortar locations across the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex while expanding as one of the state’s largest real estate teams under the Compass platform, the companies said. The transition is effective immediately.

“We are incredibly proud to welcome Chase, Melanie and the entire Bray Real Estate Group to the Compass family,” said Gabe Richter, Compass Texas regional vice president. “Their reputation for excellence in Dallas-Fort Worth and Austin speaks for itself, and their impressive track record is a testament to their leadership and the quality of their agents.”

This move by Bray Real Estate Group comes less than three months after other Dallas-based independent Rogers Healy and Associates joined Compass in February.

This article was written by Brooklee Han and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation. It was reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication. The system helps convert company announcements and industry data into HousingWire-style news coverage.

This post was originally published on here. 

Opendoor has launched its Cash Now, More Later product nationwide through a new partnership with RealScout, making RealScout the first lead nurture platform in real estate to integrate Opendoor cash offers directly into the agent workflow.

The integration, which Opendoor calls a “grand reopening” for real estate agents, allows agents to present sellers with three options on eligible listings: a traditional Opendoor cash offer, the Cash Now, More Later program or a traditional open-market sale.

The rollout comes as housing inventory remains on the market longer and financing challenges continue to impact transaction timelines and deal certainty.

According to the companies, Cash Now, More Later is designed to give sellers immediate liquidity while allowing them to participate in potential upside when the home later resells on the open market.

Agents participating in Cash Now, More Later transactions can earn two commissions: a bonus commission between 1% and 2% when Opendoor initially purchases the home, followed by their standard commission when the property is resold. Agents also remain the listing agent of record throughout the process.

The integration is embedded directly into the RealScout platform, allowing agents to request and manage offers within their existing workflow.

Clients may also indicate interest in a cash offer through their Home Value Alert, triggering notifications for agents to initiate and present offers.

RealScout said the partnership includes safeguards designed to ensure agents maintain ownership of their client relationships and databases.

“In a market where transactions are slower, financing is tighter and more deals fall apart, the agents who win are the ones who can offer sellers more certainty and more options,” said Andrew Flachner, co-founder and CEO of RealScout. “Opendoor’s cash offer options, including Cash Now, More Later, are now part of the agent workflow, and built-in protections keep agents at the center of the transaction.”

Opendoor said the integration was designed to give agents greater flexibility in presenting solutions tailored to individual seller situations.

“RealScout agents now have a live cash offer request inside their workflow on every eligible property, and with the ability to adjust the upfront cash amount to fit each seller’s situation, they can tailor the exact right solution in real time,” said Kaz Nejatian, CEO of Opendoor. “We built this for the agents who want to go beyond lead gen and actually close deals, not just fill pipelines.”

The integration is now live across all Opendoor markets nationwide.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication. The system helps convert company announcements and industry data into HousingWire-style news coverage.

This post was originally published on here. 

Constellation1 announced a major overhaul of HouseValues, the seller lead solution from affiliate platform Market Leader — introducing what leaders call the tool’s most significant enhancement in more than 25 years.

The updated HouseValues platform expands beyond traditional lead generation by combining exclusive seller leads with monthly homeowner equity reports, behavioral insights and integrated engagement tools designed to help agents identify intent earlier and nurture long-term client relationships.

For years, seller lead generation has largely depended on broad outreach strategies, but Constellation1 said today’s homeowners often take a longer and less predictable path from initial interest to listing a home.

Leaders said the new HouseValues experience was designed to help agents better manage both immediate opportunities and long-term follow-up.

“HouseValues has been a cornerstone for seller leads for over twenty years, delivering an
industry-leading success rate when they have the right agent support,” said Brant Morwald,
president of Constellation Real Estate Group. “This update is all about making that connection
more natural. We’re giving agents the kind of intelligence they need to reach out at exactly the
right moment with information that actually matters to the homeowner. It’s a major step in our
commitment to keeping our tech as modern and effective as the agents who use it.”

The updated platform centers around the new HouseValues Equity Report, a personalized monthly financial snapshot delivered directly to homeowners and branded to the agent.

The reports allow homeowners to:

• Track estimated home values
• Monitor equity growth
• Explore refinance opportunities
• Estimate renovation returns
• Review potential selling scenarios

According to Constellation1, every interaction with the report generates behavioral insights that feed directly into the agent’s CRM, allowing agents to prioritize outreach based on actual engagement activity rather than generalized prospecting.

The platform also includes an integrated outreach strategy featuring 27 coordinated touchpoints during the first 60 days after lead generation.

Key features include:

• Exclusive seller leads assigned to a single agent
• Monthly interactive homeowner engagement reports
• Real-time behavioral and intent tracking
• CRM-integrated engagement signals
• Enhanced lead profiles with more validated phone numbers

Constellation1 said the added data quality is intended to help agents connect faster and more effectively with potential sellers.

The modernized HouseValues platform became available Monday for both new and existing Market Leader customers.

Constellation1 also said it plans to expand the enhanced seller lead and homeowner engagement capabilities across its broader real estate technology portfolio later this year.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication. The system helps convert company announcements and industry data into HousingWire-style news coverage.

This post was originally published on here. 

Point on Tuesday announced the launch of a third-party origination (TPO) channel for its home equity investment (HEI) product, expanding distribution through mortgage brokers as the company looks to broaden access to home equity without traditional monthly payments.

The new channel will be led by Samuel Bjelac, a mortgage industry executive with more than 20 years of experience across wholesale, correspondent and non-QM lending. Mortgage professionals will now be able to broker Point’s HEI product, the company confirmed in its release.

Bjelac, who will serve as Point’s head of wholesale, most recently served as senior vice president of national sales and TPO at Foundation Mortgage Corp. He has also held leadership roles at Carrington Mortgage Services, Sprout Mortgage, CoreVest Finance and Flagstar Bank.

Founded in 2015, Point has reportedly funded more than $2.5 billion in HEIs and worked with more than 25,000 homeowners. The company said the new origination channel will allow it to partner directly with established broker networks and expand the availability of its equity-sharing product.

“Launching a third-party origination channel is a natural extension of Point’s vision to make homeownership more valuable and accessible,” said Eddie Lim, co-founder and CEO of Point. “Samuel’s record of developing scalable sales organizations, opening new distribution channels, and accelerating adoption will ultimately make it possible for Point to help more homeowners access their equity when they need it most.”

Bjelac said Point’s HEI product offers homeowners a way to access equity without taking on additional monthly debt obligations.

“Launching this product into the third-party origination market allows us to deliver that solution to more homeowners through trusted broker partners,” he said.

Point’s move into the third-party origination space comes just days after GO Mortgage debuted its own TPO channel built on a new wholesale platform.

This post was originally published on here. 

TurboTenant’s State of the Rental Industry Report for 2026 highlights a split in the rental property market and an interesting nuance: independent landlords and why many single-family rental owners are largely insulated from broader market trends. The split could be as simple as recognizing the different property types they operate.

On the one hand, small independent landlords generally rent single-family homes (SFHs). And on the other hand, large institutional investors typically operate sprawling apartment complexes. Just as the types of buildings they operate vary significantly, so does the broader market’s impact on their businesses.

TurboTenant’s report offers a glimpse into these two distinct markets that often get conflated and lumped into the same headlines.

A growing divide in the rental property market 

The State of the Rental Industry Report on independent landlords shows that they largely don’t feel the pressure from institutional investors. Per the survey, 68% of landlords reported no institutional competition. But if you were to just look at headlines, you might assume that all landlords are offering some type of concession to get tenants in the door.

Fast Company reports that, “Housing rental market concessions are at their highest level in over a decade.” But per TurboTenant’s independent survey, nearly 90% of independent landlords aren’t offering them. The answer to this difference likely lies in the types of properties these two different types of landlords operate.

Independent landlords operate under different market conditions

Smaller, mom-and-pop-type landlords and independent single-family rental owners would have a monopoly in the single-family rental market if they operated as a monolith. They don’t. Per Econofact, “small investors (those who own less than 5 properties) … own 85% of all investor-owned residential properties.” The same article states that large institutional investors own just 3% of SFHs available for rent.

With so much focus on reducing the impact of institutional investors in the SFH market through an executive order and the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, independent landlords, for the most part, don’t actually feel the effects of institutional investing in their markets. That’s partly because they serve a vastly different tenant base than the large corporate landlord.

People who choose to rent SFHs are often seeking a living situation that a large apartment complex can’t offer. They want more space, a yard for the dog, a garage and access to quality schools. In fact, according to a Point2Homes study, 60% of people moving into single-family homes came from apartments.

Rather than seeking to reduce days on market, independent landlords are far more interested in finding a quality tenant who will stay a long time. Susan Cheng, an independent landlord from Folsom, CA, put it succinctly: “It’s less about getting more people and more about finding the right person.” And with 16.6% of renters staying for more than 10 years, the need to quickly find new tenants isn’t as urgent.

Institutional investors confront a changing apartment market

Perhaps what’s driving much of the fear surrounding institutional landlords stems from the staggering scale of their recent purchasing. Private Equity Stakeholder reports that of the rentals private equities purchased, “almost two-thirds of the properties (63%) have been acquired since 2018.”

For added context, Blackstone has purchased more than 133,000 units since 2021. Here, the numbers come into greater focus. Pew Research Center reports that, “69.5% of properties with 25 or more units are owned by for-profit companies.” So, when we combine the fact that SFHs are largely owned by independent investors with the knowledge that larger companies tend to own larger buildings, you can see the split in how they approach vacancies.

For the institutional investor who operates hundreds of thousands of units, when a wave of new apartments hits the market (2024 saw more new apartments built than in any year since 1974), concessions act as a quick lever to attract renters and improve occupancy rates.

But on the other side of the equation, independent landlords with just a few units don’t feel these drastic swings in housing availability as institutional investors do, in part because the markets they operate in and the tenants they serve are drastically different.

In part, these differences help us explain why national headlines may feel disconnected from what individual landlords actually face. For many single-family rental owners, market conditions are often hyperlocal. So, a well-priced home in a great neighborhood is more likely to attract strong interest, even as nearby apartment operators have to offer incentives to get people in the door.

Two rental markets, one narrative

What TurboTenant’s State of the Rental Industry Report highlights is an important truth: There is no single market. Multiple markets all operate under the one umbrella of “real estate investing.” These changes within it are defined by property type, location, and renter preferences.

Of course, independent landlords aren’t shielded from economic pressure. Some 75% of landlords surveyed by TurboTenant reported rising costs but did not pass them on to their tenants. However, because of the property type they operate in, they find themselves largely insulated from concessions, oversupply and institutional competition.

In short, it matters what types of properties are examined when assessing the housing market. For now, institutional investors aren’t stepping on single-family rental owners’ toes too much yet. And if proposed legislation has its intended impact, they may remain insulated for the foreseeable future.

Click Here

This post was originally published on here. 

Our elected leaders have a unique opportunity to strengthen small businesses, sustain critical industries, combat inflation in the housing market and make homeownership more accessible for millions of Americans.

Today’s housing market remains trapped in a cycle of limited supply and elevated costs. A central challenge is homeowners’ reluctance to sell—driven largely by the financial shock of trading a historically low mortgage rate for one that remains above 6%. Mortgage rates have stayed above that threshold since 2022, fundamentally reshaping market behavior. 

The mortgage rate lock-in effect

As a result, the so-called “lock-in effect” continues to constrain inventory. As of late 2025, just over 50% of outstanding mortgages still carry rates at or below 4%, meaning millions of homeowners are financially disincentivized from moving. Even more striking, the typical homeowner would face nearly a $1,000 increase in monthly payments if they sold and purchased another home at current prices and rates. 

This dynamic has real consequences: Americans are now staying in their homes longer than at any point in decades, and housing supply remains structurally constrained. The U.S. housing shortage has grown to over 4 million homes, underscoring how far supply has fallen behind demand. 

This issue is particularly pronounced among older homeowners. A large share of Americans over 65 own their homes outright or carry very low-rate mortgages, making them especially sensitive to replacement costs. While many would consider downsizing, today’s financing environment often makes doing so financially irrational. Thoughtful policy—such as portable mortgage benefits, targeted tax incentives or federally backed transition financing—could help unlock this segment of inventory.

How outdated capital gains exemptions deter mobility

Beyond mortgage rates, capital gains taxes continue to deter mobility. The longstanding federal exemption—$250,000 for individuals and $500,000 for married couples—has not been meaningfully updated in decades, despite substantial home price appreciation. As a result, a growing share of homeowners now exceeds these thresholds, particularly in high-cost markets, further discouraging sales and limiting supply turnover.

Despite ongoing policy discussions, it is time for a fresh, common-sense approach. Rather than penalizing long-term homeowners, policymakers should incentivize housing turnover. Reducing or modernizing capital gains taxes on primary residences and offering targeted tax credits for sales to owner-occupants would help increase inventory organically—without heavy-handed market intervention.

Creating pathways from renting to owning

At the same time, demand-side realities cannot be ignored. The U.S. homeownership rate remains around 65–66%, leaving roughly one-third of households renting. A significant portion of renters—millions of whom live in single-family homes—are effectively “pre-qualified” homeowners who lack only a viable path to purchase.

Encouraging small landlords to sell to existing tenants could provide that path. Such policies would expand homeownership, stabilize neighborhoods and strengthen communities—while preserving the role of small-scale property owners rather than displacing them.

Restoring balance to the housing market 

Homeownership remains the most powerful tool for building generational wealth in America. But without addressing the structural barriers that limit housing supply—particularly the lock-in effect and tax disincentives—we will continue to fall short of that promise.

By implementing policies that encourage mobility, unlock inventory and support first-time buyers, we can create lasting economic opportunity and restore balance to the housing market.

Jesse Brewer is a local county commissioner in Boone County, Kentucky, and has been serving his constituents for 8 years. 
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners. To contact the editor responsible for this piece: zeb@hwmedia.com.

This post was originally published on here. 

Ginnie Mae President Joseph Gormley, who is also serving as acting commissioner of the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), said the counterparties participating in Ginnie Mae’s program have evolved significantly since the Great Financial Crisis, with greater exposure to independent mortgage banks (IMBs) that have invested heavily in governance and risk management.

Still, he cautioned that some “outliers” remain: “We can’t tell you how to run your business,” Gormley said during the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA)’s Secondary and Capital Markets Conference in New York on Monday. “But we can say that we like to see companies that have a balanced portfolio.”

Gormley added that recent changes to the loss-mitigation waterfall in the FHA and U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) channels have increased exposure for certain firms. Some companies, he said, acquired risk-layered portfolios with lower credit scores, higher debt-to-income (DTI) ratios and elevated loan-to-value (LTV) ratios — assets that can become difficult to finance or sell in stressed markets.

“That’s something we are keeping a careful eye on,” Gormley said.

He also said that Ginnie Mae has strengthened its oversight capabilities over the past decade through investments in technology, staffing and surveillance systems.

“We’ve made a lot of investments in technology over the last decade, and in human capital as well. … Our surveillance tools have improved; it’s easier for us to see into that activity earlier on,” Gormley said.

Ginnie Mae typically requires issuers to keep delinquencies at 5% or less of their portfolio. But changes to trial payment plan (TPP) loans were putting some issuers at risk of breaching these thresholds.

An internal analysis showed that almost the entire recent uptick in FHA delinquencies could be ascribed to loans in TPP status. In response, Ginnie Mae in April temporarily removed TPP loans from delinquency calculations — a policy Gormley expects will remain “in place for a while.”

Servicing liquidity

To bolster servicing liquidity, Ginnie Mae is accelerating a loan-level transfer initiative. Currently, issuers create pools that can range from a handful to thousands of loans. But once these pools are issued, Gormley said, there are limited circumstances when a loan would come out — including early termination, payoff, or if the loan is bought out because it becomes seriously delinquent.

“We’ve been working on an initiative to allow loan-level transfers in the program, and it’s something we’ve been increasing the velocity of change on over the last year,” he said.

While the legal and policy frameworks are clear, modernizing the technology remains the primary hurdle. Ginnie Mae must track final certifications on a loan-level basis and establish a final cutoff date across the program.

“We’ve begun some outreach to issuers to understand what burdens they would face in aligning to a single uniform standard, but that’s going to be a line of work that continues on through this year,” Gormley said.

Gormley said there is also an ongoing effort to bifurcate acknowledgment agreements — the tri-party agreements between Ginnie Mae, an issuer and its financer.

Partial claims

Ginnie Mae is also working to attach its partial claims to first-lien mortgages. Currently, a partial claim acts as a subordinate federal lien, which creates substantial hurdles. For example, subordinate liens are subject to the Show Me decision, which requires judicial foreclosures even in non-judicial states.

“No one really can figure out how that’s supposed to work,” Gormley said. “It impacts our recoveries because we find that at payoff, the partial claim that’s not attached is missed. It leads to a bunch of really unfortunate situations where the borrower forgot about this, and they’re getting chased down by collections at the end.”

Flávia Furlan Nunes reported and wrote this article with drafting assistance from HousingWire Automation, an editorial tool that helps transform announcements and industry data into HousingWire-style news coverage.

This post was originally published on here. 

The Federal Housing Administration (FHA) would like to review its anti-flipping rule and reforms to automated valuation models (AVMs), according to Matt Jones, deputy assistant secretary for the FHA’s Office of Single-Family Housing.

“We think our AVM, our valuation technology, has improved significantly since that rule was put in place a couple decades ago,” Jones said. “We’d like to take a look at getting rid of that in its entirety. Obviously, that’s a rulemaking process, so it takes a fair runway to get there, but we think that’ll be very positive for housing supply if we can get there.”

Jones, who spoke Monday during the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA)’s Secondary and Capital Markets conference in New York, said that the FHA is the only program that still enforces the anti-flipping rule, which prohibits buyers from using an FHA-insured loan to purchase a home that the seller has owned for 90 days or less. “We’d love to take a look at” the rule, he said.

According to Jones, these changes would help boost housing supply. The same goal was behind recent prohibitions for non-residents participating in the FHA program — a move that follows a fivefold increase in demand from these borrowers during the Biden administration, he added.

Another recent change occurred a few weeks ago when the FHA abandoned the International Energy Conservation Code, which would have added between $20,000 and $30,000 in construction costs per home, Jones said.

“When we’re talking about how can we help with housing supply, a lot of it starts with eliminating things that actively had harmed the ability to develop and build housing supply,” Jones said.

Overall, Jones stated that the FHA is generally on track with last year’s endorsement levels.

On the affordability side, he said the FHA has another round of rescissions coming to address the cost structure of originations, specifically under a recent executive order from President Donald Trump. Topics under review include appraisal standards, wet signature requirements, e-signatures and post-closing quality control (QC) evaluations.

Loss mitigation and delinquencies

According to Jones, the COVID-19 pandemic brought an urgent need to overhaul the agency’s loss-mitigation program, creating a “band-aid problem” that was never sunset: an increased use of rolling 90-day partial claims.

The FHA’s December Mutual Mortgage Insurance report showed that 41% of new partial claims were given to borrowers who had already received three or more partial claims. In total, 36,000 borrowers have been in and out of serious delinquency, which exacerbates housing supply problems and servicing costs, he added.

In October, the FHA implemented a rule stating that borrowers get one more opportunity for a home retention option. After that, they must be evaluated and prove they are capable of making the revised payments through a trial payment plan to qualify for another option.

“Because there is a lag between when they’re evaluated and when they ultimately would receive a home retention option, there’s that multi-month lag in the data where they’re reporting still as seriously delinquent; according to what we’ve seen, almost the entire amount of that increase in serious delinquency is attributable to that policy change,” Jones said.

“We are starting to see, though, and we think this is a positive indicator, the 30 (days) and 60 (days delinquency rates) are starting to improve.”

The policy change, according to Jones, saves taxpayers $2 billion by driving a change in borrower behavior.

This post was originally published on here. 

Prior to widespread internet usage, when consumers could only find out about homes for sale through yard signs or accessing an MLS listing book by working with a broker, agents viewed listings as a marketing asset. However, this view evolved as the internet made it easier for consumers to access information about homes for sale.

But the internet has evolved, enabling platforms to find ways to generate revenue from listings and listing data, and now many in the industry have begun to question who exactly owns listing data and how that data can be controlled. 

“Before we put listings online, having a listing was a marketing asset for the listing broker because you could put a sign on the property with your name or run a two-line ad in the newspaper listing your name and phone number. So, it brought you leads, and you didn’t just allow some other listing broker to put their sign up in the yard because everyone knew the value of having a listing,” Saul Klein, an industry veteran and the CEO of San Diego MLS, said. 

Brokers are taking back control of the listing

Listings, according to Klein, provide value to the listing broker from not only the sale of the property, but from the leads they bring in. However, once listings were made widely available online, more entities beyond the listing agent began finding ways to extract value from the listing and now some listing agents are demanding some of that control back. 

“When we first started syndicating listings, nobody thought about contracts. We would just get the listings to the brokers and then give it to the portals that wanted them,” Klein said. “But fast forward to today and brokers are waking up again and realizing that those listings are worth money because they can see that they are making other people money.” 

One of the most common ways other agents and entities are profiting off of a listing is through listing portals selling leads to agents. But now, as brokers and agents are looking for ways to differentiate themselves by providing different listing strategies, including the usage of private listings or a coming soon phase, they are looking to regain control of where their listing data appears and how it is used.

It is this desire to have a “trusted listing distribution partner,” that led Chris Kelly and HomeServices of America to team up with Cotality on its recently launched Broker Listing Exchange (BLX). 

According to Cotality, BLX is an enterprise listing management and distribution platform that gives brokerages more direct control over how listings are created, standardized and syndicated across MLSs and portals. 

The evolving landscape for data

“We were looking at this evolving landscape that’s shifting very quickly, where we have trusted listing distribution partners that are now, whether they’re deciding to do it or they’re being forced to do it, they’re making decisions and changes without us having a lot of say or involvement in the process,” Kelly, the CEO of HomeServices of America, said in an interview with HousingWire.

While Kelly said he and his team are unsure of exactly where things are going, he noted that HomeServices of America feel that it is going to “become increasingly important that we, as a brokerage on behalf of our agents and clients, have that initial degree of control over our listing content and on where it goes.”

“With everything that’s shifting and changing so quickly and the MLS making these decisions on how they’re pivoting and changing, we felt it was important that we take a step to make sure that however that kind of landscapes evolves over the next 12 to 36 months, we’re in a position to make sure that we’re not disrupting how our listing content is getting out to the public,” Kelly said. 

MLS mission creep

With the changes that some MLSs are making, some brokerage leaders are wondering if at least some MLSs are experiencing a bit of mission creep. 

“Watching my dad help create the MLS in Pittsburgh in the 1960s and 70s, they were looking to create a B2B portal where you can bring your buyers, and you can see what I have for sale. A big part of it was transparency of inventory and data, but also cooperation,” Hoby Hanna, the CEO of Howard Hanna Real Estate Services, said to HousingWire. 

Like Klein, Hanna believes that things became messier once listings moved online and different entities realized there were ways to make money off of listing data that didn’t exist in an analog world. This, in Hanna’s mind, as well as the evolution of technology and the value of data, contributed to MLSs, in some ways, stepping outside of their lane as a business-to-business platform.

“I think there may have been some MLS executives who thought they could have more control and creep into other areas, but most of them, I think the mission creep came because they thought they were offering products and services to their members and brokers, but there were a handful of those executives who were like ‘I’m going to control the future of the industry through my MLS.’ But I don’t think the creep was completely intentional, but maybe they did go a bridge too far and now it is coming back to catch them,” Hanna said.

The potential for change

In the future, Kelly believes the MLS will still be the hub of brokerage cooperation, but he does see the potential for this to change. 

“There is no reason why the MLS shouldn’t be the home of cooperation moving forward,” Kelly said. “But I think it is really going to come to each MLS and its leadership. Those that embrace their role as infrastructure for the industry and not try to be a standalone business that is only out to protect itself, I think, have a very bright future and should absolutely continue to be the backbone of where listings are aggregated, viewed and distributed out to cooperating brokers.” 

Looking ahead, Craig Cheatham, the president and CEO of The Realty Alliance, said brokers increasingly want MLSs “to evolve from rule-centric organizations into modern infrastructure and data partners focused on data quality, AI readiness, operational efficiency and measurable business value.”

“The MLS space has changed dramatically over the past year as organizations grapple with the aftermath of the commission lawsuits, the removal of compensation from the MLS environment, growing legal uncertainty, and increasing pressure to redefine their value proposition,” Cheatham wrote in an email.

“Brokers are seeing MLSs become more defensive and more cautious, while at the same time many MLSs are beginning to recognize they must evolve from primarily rulemaking bodies into modern data and technology partners. That shift is opening the door to conversations brokers have wanted for years around governance reform, financial transparency, data quality, AI usage rights and whether firms that contribute the most inventory and market data should have a greater voice in how MLSs operate.”

Advocating for a national MLS

Greg Hague, the founder of 72Sold and the director of home sale strategy at Compass International Holdings, shares a similar view. While Hague is an advocate for a national MLS, regardless of what happens with MLS consolidation in the future, he believes there will continue to be a place for MLSs that are willing to listen and adapt to broker needs and desires. 

“The MLS has, in many ways, lost its way, but I don’t think it was ill-intended,” Hague said. “I think that the MLS can play an enormously important role in the industry. I just think they need to rethink some of the rules to become as good a tool for us as they can be. I would hate to see a real estate world without the MLS, they play an incredibly foundational role in our ability to market homes and to share them with each other. I just would like them to not overreach as much as they do by telling us how we have to market homes.”

It is what Hague sees as overreach, that Cheatham believes could be the crux of the industry’s next big fight. 

“Brokers are quietly exploring whether future cooperation could occur through broker-controlled data networks if MLSs fail to adapt quickly enough. Underneath all of this is a larger strategic shift: the industry is moving away from simply asking who controls the listings and toward asking who controls the platforms, intelligence and consumer experiences built on top of those listings,” Cheatham wrote. “And that may ultimately become the defining real estate industry battle of the next decade.”

This post was originally published on here. 

Midwest Real Estate Data (MRED) is threatening to suspend its listing data feeds to Zillow Group websites, including Zillow.com and Trulia.com, unless Zillow cures what the MLS says is a material breach of its license agreements by late Tuesday.

In an announcement on Monday, the Illinois-based MLS said it will cut off Zillow’s IDX and VOW data feeds at 11:59 p.m. CDT on Tuesday, May 19, 2026, if Zillow does not restore the display of all eligible MRED broker listings in accordance with its licenses and MRED rules. MRED also said it reserves the right to terminate Zillow’s license entirely based on what it called a “material breach” tied to listing display practices.

The dispute centers on Zillow’s recent move to stop displaying certain listings submitted by MRED participants “based on the lawful marketing practices of those brokers,” according to the MLS. MRED said it notified Zillow that this selective exclusion violates Zillow’s IDX and VOW license agreements and its MLS rules, and gave Zillow a defined window to cure the alleged rule breach.

“The rules of this MLS exist to protect every participating broker and every consumer who relies on a complete and accurate picture of the market,” Rebecca Jensen, president and CEO of MRED, said in the announcement. “Those rules apply equally to every participant, regardless of the size of their audience or the reach of their platform. MRED enforces its rules consistently and fairly, and hopes that Zillow returns to operating consistent with its longstanding agreements with MRED.”

MRED said Zillow informed the MLS two weeks ago of its plan to exclude display of some listings that violate Zillow’s listing access standards policy. Since then, Zillow has filed a federal lawsuit in response to MRED’s enforcement actions, according to the MLS, but has “not yet responded” to MRED’s request that Zillow display all active MRED listings authorized for distribution in a manner consistent with the licenses and rules.

The MLS emphasized that if it moves forward with a suspension, the action would apply only to Zillow’s IDX and VOW feeds. Listings would continue to be available on “thousands of compliant consumer-facing websites,” MRED said, and any suspension would not affect listings populated in ShowingTime or dotloop, both Zillow-owned platforms that many agents and brokers rely on for showings and transaction management.

MRED framed the situation as Zillow’s decision to make: If Zillow brings its sites into compliance before the deadline, the MLS will not suspend the data feeds. “The choice to comply with MRED’s reasonable IDX and VOW rules – and avoid feed interruption – is Zillow’s to make,” the MLS said in the announcement.

On Monday, Zillow filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in its antitrust lawsuit against MRED and Compass asking the court to prevent MRED from terminating its listing access while its antitrust lawsuit proceeds. 

According to exhibits and declarations filed with the motion, Compass International Holdings CEO Robert Reffkin sent emails to several MLSs across the country urging them to cut off Zillow’s feeds. Additionally, Zillow claims that Compass is using MRED to “threaten” Zillow over listings in California, Florida and Georgia.

In the lawsuit filed last Tuesday, Zillow claims that Compass and MRED conspired to threaten Zillow’s access to the Chicagoland listing feed unless the portal agreed to display Compass private listings across the United States. Zillow said this conduct amounts to an unlawful group boycott and abuse of monopoly power under the federal Sherman Antitrust Act.

Compass International Holdings did not immediately return HousingWire’s request for comment regarding Zillow’s motion or allegations. 

This article was written by Brooklee Han and generated with the assistance of HousingWire Automation. It was reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication. The system helps convert company announcements and industry data into HousingWire-style news coverage.

This post was originally published on here. 

The forecast for the 2027 cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for Social Security benefits has risen sharply to 3.9%, driven by persistent inflation in housing, utilities and energy, according to new data released by The Senior Citizens League.

The projection — up from a steady 2.8% estimate just one month ago — would raise the average monthly benefit for retired workers to roughly $2,162, up from the current figure of $2,081, based on April 2026 figures from the Social Security Administration.

The adjustment, detailed in a report from Kiplinger, is tied to the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, which rose 3.8% in April, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Energy prices alone reportedly increased 3.8% for the month, accounting for more than 40% of the overall increase.

“For retirees living on fixed incomes, the costs that matter most — especially health care, housing, utilities and insurance — continue to rise faster than prices in the rest of the economy, silently wrenching seniors dry,” Shannon Benton, executive director of the Senior Citizens League, told Kiplinger.

The official COLA announcement is typically made in mid-October, but the advocacy group cautions that the forecast could change.

Its 2026 Loss of Buying Power study found that Social Security benefits are worth only about 86.3 cents on the dollar compared with 2016 as COLAs have been too small to keep pace with rising costs, Kiplinger reported. 

The Senior Citizens League estimates benefits would need to rise by 15.7%, or $295.85 per month for the average beneficiary, to recover lost value.

Medicare premiums, which are typically deducted from Social Security checks, are also projected to rise in 2027, partially offsetting the COLA increase.

According to the 2025 Medicare Trustees Report, the standard monthly Part B premium is projected to reach $218.60 in 2027, up from $202.90 this year.

The Part B deductible would rise to $305 from $283.

Retirees can increase their monthly benefits by delaying claims until age 70, which yields an additional 8% per year beyond full retirement age. Claiming at age 62 instead can reduce benefits by 30% for those born in 1960 or later, Kiplinger added.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication. The system helps convert company announcements and industry data into HousingWire-style news coverage.

This post was originally published on here. 

After disappearing for a time after the launch of the initial test last December, real estate listings are back in mobile Google search results in some markets. 

Just like the initial test, listings appear under sponsored search results, and they include a full property detail page, links to request a tour, contact an agent and, in some markets, a map of all available listings. The launch markets include many of the same many major cities, including Miami, New York, Cleveland, Chicago, Austin, San Francisco and Los Angeles.

The listing displays are still powered by HouseCanary’s ComeHome.com platform. However, in the California test markets, listings are provided directly from California Regional MLS (CRMLS) while listings nationwide brokered by an agent affiliated with an eXp World Holdings’ brand, are being provided directly by eXp. 

A spokesperson for HouseCanary confirmed to HousingWire that this is just a continuation of the pilot program the company launched with Google late last year. 

eXp Realty CEO Leo Pareja told HousingWire that the integration is an expansion of his firm’s previously announced syndication agreement with ComeHome.com to premarket the firm’s coming soon listings. 

“As soon as we worked out the coming soon listings, we pivoted to make sure they had all of our listings,” Pareja said. 

Pareja added that they eventually hope to see this pilot program go nationwide. 

“I believe Gemini is going to be one of the winners of the LLM race and making sure our data is on Google seems like the responsible thing for visibility and transparency,” Pareja said. “While other companies are focused on exclusivity and walled gardens, we are focused on transparency and maximum exposure for our clients.”

CRMLS did not wish to comment on the pilot program or its relationship with HouseCanary and Google. 

As real estate listing portals, including Zillow, Redfin and Realtor.com, have begun launching application integrations within LLMs like OpenAI’s ChatGPT, many in the housing industry have questioned if this usage falls within MLS data usage and IDX feed rules. In turn, this has opened a discussion surrounding both the modernization of MLS rules and listing data control.

This post was originally published on here. 

Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) president and CEO Bob Broeksmit said regulators should prioritize rolling back rules that raise costs as mortgage rates are likely to stay “stubbornly high” for the foreseeable future.

“A lot of burdensome regulations need to change,” Broeksmit said Monday at the MBA Secondary and Capital Markets Conference in New York. “Especially the ones that increase costs without providing much benefit or protection to Americans.”

Broeksmit pointed to several regulations the industry wants revisited. He said the loan officer compensation rule can limit lenders’ ability to offer better terms to borrowers who shop around, while calling for “targeted changes” to the qualified mortgage (QM) rule that would make it easier for lenders to refinance Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac loans. Broeksmit argued that TRID requirements impose compliance costs that aren’t justified by the benefits.

“Clearly, there are plenty of good ways to roll back red tape and make mortgages more affordable while still protecting borrowers,” Broeksmit said. “The White House has said that it wants to help community banks and smaller institutions. But they aren’t the only lenders who need relief from red tape. So do credit unions, IMBs, large banks, and many others.” 

On homebuyer demographics, Broeksmit pushed back on headlines suggesting the median age of first-time homebuyers has risen to 40. He said MBA research still puts the figure between 32 and 34 years old—“basically unchanged for more than a decade.”

Even so, affordability remains a major hurdle. With mortgage rates expected to remain elevated, Broeksmit said other reforms become even more important to improving access to homeownership.

He also noted that MBA has recently increased its focus on the non-agency market, including forming a non-agency forum and convening a peer roundtable for companies active in non-agency and non-QM lending—an area he said is drawing greater regulatory attention.

 Basel III and housing legislation

On Basel III bank capital requirements, Broeksmit said the current proposal is “far superior” to the prior version. He said a 250% risk weight on mortgage servicing rights (MSRs) is excessive, with MBA advocating for a return to the current 100% level. He also said the association is pushing for better treatment of warehouse lending.

“Under the current system, warehouse lines carried a 100% risk weight, but that defies logic,” Broeksmit said. “If an IMB fails to repay, a bank gets the whole loan, but at only a 50% risk weight. Are you kidding me? The risk weights shouldn’t improve when a counterparty fails!”

Broeksmit added that the MBA is “strongly calling on agencies to change the capital requirements for banks” that hold portfolio loans backed by private mortgage insurance.

Turning to the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, Broeksmit said much of the bill is constructive, including provisions that better recognize modular and manufactured housing. But he criticized a ban on institutional investors, arguing it would reduce housing supply.

“A ban would lead to less new rental home construction, thereby decreasing the supply of available homes overall,” he said. “But that’s a guaranteed recipe for higher prices.”

He noted that House Financial Services Committee Chairman French Hill and Ranking Member Maxine Waters reached an agreement last week to advance an amended version of the bill to the House floor. The changes would clarify and expand exemptions to the institutional investor ban for build-to-rent and attached/contiguous multifamily properties.

With lawmakers soon leaving Washington to campaign for the midterms, Broeksmit said the short window makes it unlikely Congress will take up GSE reform before the end of the year.

Flávia Furlan Nunes reported and wrote this article with drafting assistance from HousingWire Automation, an editorial tool that helps transform announcements and industry data into HousingWire-style news coverage.

This post was originally published on here. 

Mayi de la Vega and Daniel de la Vega, the leaders behind luxury brokerage ONE Sotheby’s International Realty, have announced the company’s expansion into New Jersey through the acquisition of the 80-year-old Callaway Henderson Sotheby’s International Realty.

The move connects two longtime family-led affiliates within the Sotheby’s International Realty network and creates a new luxury real estate corridor stretching from Florida’s east coast into the Northeast.

Callaway Henderson Sotheby’s International Realty operates from offices in Princeton and Lambertville and includes a team of 135 agents.

“The Callaway and Henderson families have built an exceptional business that has defined excellence in central New Jersey through decades of leadership, integrity and trusted market expertise,” said Daniel de la Vega, president and CEO of ONE Sotheby’s International Realty. “Their approach reflects the same values that guide our firm and we look forward to supporting their continued growth while strengthening the incredible synergies between the Northeast and East Coast markets.”

Callaway Henderson Sotheby’s International Realty is led by Jud Henderson, Matt Henderson and Jane Henderson Kenyon, who have overseen the brokerage’s growth and reputation throughout Central New Jersey.

“This represents a defining evolution for our family business and an incredible opportunity for our brand’s future,” said Jud Henderson, managing member at Callaway Henderson Sotheby’s International Realty. “By working together with a like-minded, family-run company, we are creating a foundation that will serve our agents, employees and clients for decades to come.”

He said the partnership will allow the brokerage to leverage the Sotheby’s International Realty network more broadly while building stronger connections between Northeast and Florida markets.

As part of the expansion, Aileen Konzelmann has been appointed president of the New Jersey brokerage for ONE Sotheby’s International Realty.

Konzelmann brings more than 30 years of leadership experience across luxury hospitality and residential real estate.

Her background includes 23 years with Marriott International, followed by leadership roles as founder and managing broker of Weichert Premier’s Moorestown and Haddonfield, New Jersey, offices.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication. The system helps convert company announcements and industry data into HousingWire-style news coverage.

This post was originally published on here. 

A buyer’s agent reached out to me recently with a situation that is happening in markets across the country — and most agents don’t realize they have both the right and the obligation to push back. 

Here’s the scenario: before our buyer’s agent — we’ll call her Susan — could present her offer, the listing agent [we’ll call her Betty] informed Susan she was required to sign a specific compensation agreement, that Betty preferred to use, as a condition of cooperation. Then came Betty’s second demand: “Produce your buyer agency agreement. Show me what you signed with your client.”

When Susan declined, Betty chided Susan, saying she hadn’t been properly trained.

However, what Betty the listing agent did isn’t just professionally overreaching, it may constitute a violation of federal antitrust law, the NAR Code of Ethics and in many states, state license law. The truth is, Betty is the one who hadn’t been properly trained.

Let’s take a look at the details.

One brokerage cannot dictate forms to another and federal law agrees

Listing agents do not have authority over the internal documentation practices of a cooperating brokerage, period, end of story. This is not a policy preference, it’s a legal boundary, enforced at the federal level.

Let’s start with NAR’s own settlement guidance, which is explicit: “NAR will not create rules that mandate listing agents to set compensation for buyer brokers.” The settlement’s two operative requirements are that a written buyer representation agreement must exist before touring homes, and that compensation cannot be advertised on the MLS. Neither provision gives a listing agent authority over which forms a cooperating brokerage uses internally. A listing agreement cannot fill that gap as it governs the seller–listing broker relationship only and cannot impose any kind of documentation obligations on a competing firm that is not a party to it.

But wait, there’s more. The more serious dimension to our scenario is federal. 15 U.S.C. § 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act prohibits every contract or arrangement that would act in restraint of trade. A specific application of this is the tying arrangement — conditioning access to one product or service on agreement to use a different, specific product or service. When a listing agent says, “you must sign my preferred form or you cannot work this transaction,” she is conditioning access to that listing on a competing brokerage’s compliance with her chosen documentation. 

The FTC describes tying arrangements as among those most harmful to fair competition. Each real estate company has the legal right to conduct its own business independently. One brokerage cannot dictate the internal practices of another. That principle has federal teeth and, in our scenario, Betty would land in some very hot water with her attempts to impose her own forms on Susan.

Then, there is the direct harm to Betty’s own seller. Every form barrier placed in front of a cooperating agent is a barrier between that seller and a qualified buyer. If Betty’s seller understood that their agent was inventing requirements — with no basis in law or policy — that made their home harder to sell to Susan’s buyers, they would rightly question whether Betty was honoring her duty of loyalty. The answer, under any reasonable reading of a listing agent’s obligations, is an emphatic no.

Demanding the buyer agency agreement is a separate violation entirely

When Betty demanded that a buyer’s agent produce her buyer representation agreement, she is not asking for a routine transaction document. She is asking for a confidential fiduciary agreement between Susan, a licensed professional, and the person they represent. That document is not for their eyes.

In every state, a buyer’s agent operates in a fiduciary relationship with their client. NAR’s own framework identifies confidentiality as a core fiduciary duty — the obligation to protect any information that could weaken the client’s bargaining position. A buyer representation agreement contains exactly that: the scope of representation, the compensation terms the buyer agreed to, and the fee structure governing the relationship. Handing Susan’s agreement with her buyer to the opposing party’s agent without the buyer’s knowledge and consent is a potential breach of fiduciary duty and, in many states, a violation of license law.

Consider the legal parallel for a minute. A plaintiff’s attorney does not demand the defense attorney’s engagement letter — the document defining the client relationship, scope of services, and fees. That document is confidential and protected. Demanding it would violate bar rules governing professional conduct, and no court would entertain the request in a million years.

The buyer’s agency agreement is the functional equivalent of that engagement letter and Betty has no right to demand it. If Susan had produced it under pressure, she may be exposing herself to a license complaint for breaching her statutory duty of confidentiality to her own client. Betty created a trap: comply and violate your duty to your buyer, or refuse and face obstruction on the transaction. That is coercion dressed as policy.

The Code of Ethics issues are serious

Article 2 of the NAR Code of Ethics requires Realtors to avoid misrepresentation of pertinent facts relating to the transaction. The terms governing cooperation — what forms are required, what the settlement mandates, what a listing contract can obligate — are pertinent transaction facts. Stating to a cooperating agent that she must provide a specific form she is not obligated to provide is a potential Article 2 violation.

Article 12 requires honesty and truthfulness in all real estate communications. A listing agent who misrepresents NAR settlement requirements to justify demands she has no authority to make is not presenting a true picture of the transaction. That is an Article 12 concern.

Article 3 requires cooperation with other brokers. Placing form-use conditions or document-production demands on that cooperation — with no basis in law or policy — runs contrary to Article 3’s mandate. By making the listing harder for cooperating agents to access, she may also be breaching her duty of loyalty to her own seller client under Article 1.

The larger issue

What happened to this buyer’s agent is not isolated. Post-settlement confusion has created an opening for some agents to assert authority they simply do not have — and agents who don’t know their rights [or the laws] are the ones who pay the price. As NAR has stated clearly, “compensation continues to be negotiable and should always be negotiated between MLS Participants and the buyers with whom they work.” No listing agent gets a veto over how that negotiation is documented.

A listing agent’s authority runs from her seller to the market. It does not run sideways into another brokerage’s office, dictate which forms a cooperating agent must use, or extend to demanding a confidential fiduciary agreement between another agent and their client.

Your buyer representation agreement belongs to you and your buyer. One company’s preference does not supersede another company’s legal right to run its own business. When a listing agent forgets that, she is not protecting her seller — she is exposing herself.

Darryl Davis, CSP, has spoken to, trained, and coached more than 600,000 real estate professionals around the globe. He is a bestselling author for McGraw-Hill Publishing, and his book, How to Become a Power Agent in Real Estate, tops Amazon’s charts for most sold book to real estate agents.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners.

To contact the editor responsible for this piece: tracey@hwmedia.com

This post was originally published on here. 

Brody Gapp LLP launched a mortgage AI governance audit practice and set a third-quarter 2026 publication date for “The Mortgage Bankers AI Governance Guide,” the firm announced Friday in conjunction with the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA)’s Secondary & Capital Markets Conference in New York.

The national mortgage banking compliance, litigation and AI governance law firm said its new practice is designed to test how well lenders and vendors can defend their use of artificial intelligence across the mortgage life cycle as regulatory and investor expectations around AI solidify.

Seattle-based Friday Harbor is the first mortgage technology provider to complete Brody Gapp’s Limited Attestation, according to the announcement.

The engagement was initiated by Friday Harbor before any regulatory requirement and evaluated the platform across fair lending, adverse action under Regulation B §1002.9, model governance, vendor risk management, data governance, internal controls and examination readiness.

The timing tracks with new AI oversight obligations for mortgage lenders.

“On one side, binding AI governance requirements are already in effect at Freddie Mac, with Fannie Mae’s own set of requirements coming online in August. On the other, very few lenders are positioned to produce defensible governance files today,” James W. Brody, managing partner at Brody Gapp, said in a statement.

“Friday Harbor stepped forward as an early example for the benefit of their lender customers and the industry before any regulator forced the question.”

“The Mortgage Bankers AI Governance Guide” was conceived by Brody and co-authored with founding partner Ronald Gapp Jr. The firm describes it as a practitioner reference mapped to a fictional independent mortgage bank that details every material AI deployment, the governance issues that can arise, and how to make the deployments defensible.

The guide includes tailored guidance for CEOs, general counsels, compliance officers, human resources, secondary marketing and other functions.

“We built the Guide around what a compliance committee needs to produce when a demand letter, an examination request, a QC self-report, or a discovery production lands,” said Gapp, a former general counsel and chief operating officer of a national multichannel lender. Reservations for the guide are now available at brodygapp.com, with publication slated for the third quarter of 2026.

The audit practice was developed with Marvin Chang, who serves as the firm’s senior fintech and AI advisor. Chang is an executive in residence for the fintech program at Duke University’s Pratt School of Engineering and previously led Caliber Home Loans’ digital transformation.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication. The system helps convert company announcements and industry data into HousingWire-style news coverage.

This post was originally published on here. 

The Clear Cooperation Policy (CCP) is not technically dead. It is still a rule in NAR’s rulebook, still officially binding on every member MLS. But now, the rule is being ignored at scale. Brokerages are operating around it. MLSs are quietly declining to enforce it. And, in the last two weeks of April and the first two weeks of May 2026, the structural alternative to CCP, the system that will replace it, came into focus.

This is not a story about CCP’s slow decline. This is a story about what is being built in its place, while most of the industry is still arguing about a policy that no longer governs anything.

A two-week window that rewrote the industry

In late April, MRED, the Chicago-based MLS, announced a national expansion with its private listing network included. Compass announced it would subsidize MRED subscriptions for up to 100,000 of its agents. On May 5, Zillow and Realtor.com announced they would advertise coming soon listings alongside private listings starting this summer. The two largest consumer-facing portals had effectively validated the very behavior the CCP was written to prevent.

On May 8, Compass terminated every direct listing feed it had with Zillow, nationwide. Within days, Realtracs in Nashville followed MRED’s template. CLAW in Los Angeles followed. The pattern is now visible: regional MLSs opening their private listing networks to national subscription, with a single major brokerage paying agent enrollment costs to populate those networks. On May 12, Zillow filed a federal antitrust suit against MRED and Compass in the Northern District of Illinois, alleging conspiracy and per se group boycott.

In 14 days, the structural map of the industry changed. CCP did not stop any of it.

The MRED model: What is actually being built

Industry leaders need to slow down and look carefully here, because the headline and the architecture are two different things.

MRED’s private listing approach, on its own merits, is not the same animal as a brokerage-controlled private network. Inside MRED, private listings are visible to all participating agents across cooperating brokerages. A buyer’s agent at any firm can see the listing exists, call the listing agent and request cooperation.

The seller still controls showings, but the existence of the listing is not hidden from the cooperating broker community. That is private listing handled inside a cooperative framework, which is the model I have been pointing to for over a year as the honest alternative to the institutional shadow market.

What is being announced now is something different.

When a single brokerage subsidizes the cost for tens of thousands of its own agents to subscribe to a regional MLS that has just gone national, the question is not whether MRED’s rules are cooperative. The rules are cooperative. The question is what happens to the cooperative balance of an MLS when one brokerage funds a disproportionate share of the subscriber base and uses that MLS to distribute its own pre-market inventory at national scale.

Agents and brokerages funded Zillow’s dominance one monthly check at a time. The dollars that built the gatekeeper came from the people the gatekeeper now charges.

Ten years ago, agents made a collective decision that looked rational at the time. Zillow had built a website consumers loved. Premier Agent gave agents a way to get in front of those consumers, for a monthly check. Agents wrote the checks, year after year. By the time the industry recognized what had been built, Zillow was no longer a service the industry hired. It was an infrastructure layer the industry depended on.

The same question is on the table now. If a single brokerage is paying the cost of MLS subscriptions for 100,000 agents, what is being purchased is participation in a national distribution platform that the subsidizing brokerage is positioned to dominate.

The MLS is the legal wrapper. The platform inside it is the asset. The agents accepting the subsidized seat are doing exactly what Premier Agent subscribers did a decade ago, with one important difference. This time the gatekeeper is a brokerage, not a portal.

What this means for industry leadership

For NAR, a rule that brokerages openly ignore and that MLSs decline to enforce is a rule in name only. A policy framework that punishes the small and ignores the large is not a policy framework. It is a liability.

For MLSs, if MRED has demonstrated that an MLS can attract a national subscriber base, every other regional MLS now has to decide whether to follow the model, build a credible alternative or accept that subscribers will leak to a national competitor. The decision to do nothing is itself a decision.

For brokerages, every brokerage that signs onto a subsidized national MLS seat is helping to fund the dominance of the firm paying the subsidy. That is not a moral judgment. It is an accurate description of how subsidized infrastructure has always worked.

For agents, the MLS is no longer the first stop. Buyers are about to discover that no single portal shows them everything available. The agents who tell sellers the truth about exposure and tell buyers the truth about representation will own the next decade.

What to do right now

Don’t lie to homeowners. There is no credible body of evidence that a private listing nets a seller more money. The Zillow research across 2.72 million transactions shows the opposite. The Bright MLS data shows the opposite. The Bright MLS and Drexel joint study found a 17.5 percent price premium for MLS-marketed properties. Any agent telling a seller that going private produces a higher sale price is repeating something that is not true.

Be honest about the trade-offs. There are legitimate reasons a seller might choose to go private. Privacy. Controlled showings. Reduced stress. One cook in the kitchen instead of two. A higher sale price is not one of them. Let the seller decide with their eyes open.

Listing agents, honor the co-broke. If another agent calls with a qualified buyer and you block the showing without your seller’s informed, written consent, you are exposed. Good luck explaining that to a licensing board or a plaintiff’s attorney.

Buyer’s agents, this is your moment. Build your listing agent relationships now. Call them. Attend their broker opens. Make the case to your buyers that they need professional representation more than ever. A fragmented market is the strongest case for a buyer’s agent the industry has had in years.

Listing agents, double down on exposure as the value proposition. If you can show a homeowner the measurable difference between limited exposure and full market exposure, you become the agent of choice. That is the only strategy that survives this fragmentation.

The road ahead

CCP may technically be on the books. The reality has moved past it. What replaces it is being built now, in the form of an MLS infrastructure layer that one brokerage is positioned to dominate, with a subsidy model that asks the rest of the industry to fund that dominance one subscription at a time.

The industry has been here before. Zillow Premier Agent was the last version of this exact pattern. The decision the industry made then shaped 15 years of agent economics. The decision the industry makes now, in the next two quarters, will shape the next 15 years. I know which side I am on. I hope you will join me there.

Darryl Davis, CSP, has spoken to, trained, and coached more than 600,000 real estate professionals around the globe. He is a bestselling author for McGraw-Hill Publishing, and his book, How to Become a Power Agent in Real Estate, tops Amazon’s charts for most sold book to real estate agents.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners.

To contact the editor responsible for this piece: tracey@hwmedia.com

This post was originally published on here. 

Rate has added Scottsdale, Arizona-based loan originator Kelsey Marquardt to the company, the Chicago-based national mortgage lender announced Friday, as competition for high-producing loan officers continues across the mortgage industry.

Marquardt, who has generated more than $85 million in loan production, joins Rate after a three-month stint at Universal Lending Corp. She previously built her production business at NFM Lending, according to Rate’s release.

Per Modex data, Marquardt’s 2025 production was $86.97 million.

Licensed in Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Oregon, Texas and Washington, Marquardt began her career as a real estate agent before transitioning into mortgage lending. Rate said that background gives her experience across both the homebuying and financing sides of the transaction.

“We’re very pleased to welcome Kelsey to Rate. She has built a strong reputation in Scottsdale through her consistent commitment to clients and partners,” Todd Heaton, divisional manager at Rate, said in a statement. “Combined with Rate’s depth of products and a process designed to create a smoother experience, this is a strong fit for everyone involved.”

Rate said Marquardt’s hiring reflects the company’s continued investment in technology, pricing and operational infrastructure aimed at helping loan officers grow their businesses.

“I’m proud to join Rate. The combination of loan programs, competitive pricing, and tools that simplify the process for clients and partners truly sets the company apart,” said Marquardt. “I’m looking forward to building on the momentum I’ve created and continuing to grow my business with the support and platform Rate provides.”

Marquardt will continue serving borrowers and real estate partners in Scottsdale and across her multistate lending footprint, the company said.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication. The system helps convert company announcements and industry data into HousingWire-style news coverage.

This post was originally published on here. 

Redfin has launched Redfin Early Access, a new search category on Redfin.com and its app that surfaces pre-market and “coming soon” listings that are not yet broadly available on other major real estate sites, the company said in an announcement Monday.

The new category aggregates two kinds of inventory: Redfin Coming Soon listings that appear only on Redfin and pre‑market listings from Compass International Holdings’ portfolio of brands, made available under the companies’ national partnership, announced in late February. 

Redfin is launching Early Access as many homeowners signal they want a lower‑pressure way to enter the market. In an April Redfin survey of 1,000 U.S. homeowners, 83% of prospective home sellers said they are interested in listing their home as “coming soon” before it goes live more broadly, according to the release.

Among homeowners who plan to list in the future, 84% said greater certainty that their home would sell would make them more likely to list and another 84% said a more private first step is appealing. Two‑thirds (66%) said having a clearer sense of what their home would actually sell for would motivate them to list, and 56% cited the ability to test pricing as a benefit of a “coming soon” approach, according to Redfin.

“A lot of homeowners want to sell, but are not ready to commit to full exposure,” Redfin’s chief of real estate services Jason Aleem said in the announcement. “Giving sellers more control over how they enter the market gives them more confidence. Redfin Early Access lets sellers test the market before going all-in, while giving buyers a first look at homes they won’t find on other major sites. That’s good for sellers, good for buyers and good for a housing market that desperately needs more inventory.”

Listings in the Early Access category do not accrue days on market and do not publicly display price‑drop history. Redfin said this structure gives listing agents and their clients room to test list prices and refine strategy without adding visible days on market or multiple price cuts that can stigmatize a listing once it goes fully live.

Early Access listings receive premium placement in Redfin search results and are flagged with special icons so buyers can distinguish them from standard active listings. Any visitor to Redfin’s site or app can browse Early Access properties in search results, favorite and share homes and connect with the listing agent to learn more or schedule a tour. Buyers can also save searches and receive instant alerts when new Early Access listings match their criteria.

Redfin said a recent internal analysis estimates that giving homeowners more flexibility to test the market with tools such as Early Access could increase housing inventory as much as 12%. 

Redfin feels this move will help formalize per-market and coming soon inventory in a distinct search category — and to plug in supply from a national partner like Compass — underscores how portal operators are trying to differentiate their listing feeds and capture earlier‑stage demand.

This article was generated using HousingWire Automation and reviewed by a HousingWire editor before publication. The system helps convert company announcements and industry data into HousingWire-style news coverage.

This post was originally published on here. 

Homebuilders maintained a subdued outlook in May, pressured by higher mortgage rates, rising inflation and affordability constraints. Ongoing conflict in Iran raises the risk of increased building material prices, further complicating an already uncertain environment.

However, according to the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB)/Wells Fargo Housing Market Index (HMI), homebuilders appear to be more confident than they were a month ago.

Builder confidence ticked up three points in May to 37. Meanwhile, the current sales conditions index rose three points to 40, the future sales index increased three points to 45, and the traffic of prospective buyers index increased three points to 25. 

Among firms navigating a hard, narrow course between doing moderately well and doing all they can to survive, there are two kinds of “more confident.” One signifies “better” and the other one, felt by many homebuilding business leaders in this market, means “better than when it was worse.”

Despite a positive uptick in sentiment, the builder confidence gauge remained negative overall. Buyers are stretched thin, and builders still have to use generous incentives to facilitate new sales. Adding to these pressures, builders could soon face higher costs for a host of essential building materials. 

In April, NAHB’s Chief Economist Robert Dietz noted that “62% of builders reported suppliers have increased building material costs due to higher fuel prices.” Dietz also flagged that 70% of builders reported material cost uncertainty made it challenging to price homes correctly. 

Additionally, the Associated Builders and Contractors released data last week indicating that construction input prices are up 6.2% so far in 2026. 

With the price of oil still elevated nearly three months after the onset of the war in Iran, many construction material suppliers have already instituted or announced price increases. While many public homebuilders say that they haven’t yet seen construction costs directly, those same builders acknowledge that there could be impacts in the latter half of the year if the conflict isn’t resolved soon. 

Suppliers announce price hikes

Over the last several weeks, many publicly traded suppliers of building products announced looming or immediate price increases, largely due to rising fuel and shipping costs. 

Paint, for example. In April, PPG announced price increases of up to 20% across its paints, coatings and specialty products portfolio. Sherwin-Williams also announced a 9% price hike on paint products and an 18% increase on thinners, reducers, and bulk solvent products, which took effect on May 1. 

Sherwin-Williams Chair, President & CEO Heidi Petz, during a Q1 2026 earnings call in April, acknowledged that the conflict in Iran impacted prices. 

“As we entered the year, we expected raw material inflation to remain relatively benign. However, the rapidly evolving tariff environment and broader geopolitical uncertainty have created a more dynamic cost backdrop than we originally anticipated,” Petz said. 

John Groton, Sector Lead for Materials, Energy and Utilities at Thrivent, told HousingWire’s The Builder’s Daily that it’s not surprising that paint was quickly impacted by rising field costs. 

“There’s a fair amount of petrochemical inputs in a bucket of paint, and so it is happening directly. What’s happening in the Gulf is affecting the polyolefins chain, and the resins and epoxies that come out of that end up in a gallon of paint. So that’s happening quickly,” Groton explained. 

Price increases for roofing materials could happen soon as well.

Owens Corning, for instance, announced that it is raising shingles prices 6% to 9% starting June 1. Malarkey Roofing Products, a division of Amrize, similarly announced in a letter in April that it would increase prices on all residential roofing products by up to 10% starting May 18 “due to rapidly escalating raw material and fuel costs.”

Prices for cement and aggregates, which refer to granular raw materials such as sand, gravel, and crushed stone, are also likely to tick up by the mid single digits in the near future, Groton said.

“Diesel is a very important cost input to an aggregates company. I mean, that’s intuitive. It’s expensive to move rocks around, and a lot of those contracts are cost pass-through. So the builders and developers will be stomaching those cost increases, and that is directly an outcome of the Persian Gulf,” Groton explained. 

Prices for Oriented strand board (OSB), a common homebuilding material, could also be impacted, as the resins and glues used to make OSB are petroleum-based. Unlike other materials, OSB pricing is already weak because new home starts have been relatively soft. However, if OSB producers keep losing money and cutting supply, prices are more likely to move higher from here than lower.

According to Groton, even if the Strait of Hormuz is fully opened with no issues overnight, it will likely take months before conditions return to normal. 

“Even if this thing resolves tonight, the supply chain angle and the inventory rebuild angle are going to keep diesel and gasoline prices up through at least the fall. There’s so much replenishment that needs to happen,” Groton explained. “That’s just getting going, and that’s going to stick for months, even if this resolves.”

How price increases could impact homebuilders

During the latest round of public homebuilder earnings calls, homebuilding executives noted that they are not yet paying higher prices for construction materials. However, they acknowledged that there could be impacts in the back half of the year if the price of oil remains elevated for much longer. 

M/I Homes CEO Robert Schottenstein, during the company’s latest earnings call on April 22, said that there hadn’t yet been an effect on material pricing. However, he acknowledged there could be impacts if supply chain issues persist for much longer. 

To counteract or blunt any price increases, M/I Homes plans to lean on its decades-long relationships with subcontractors and suppliers that the company has worked with in both strong and weak markets.

“We know that’s a two-way street, and there are times that they work with us. There are times that we’re going to have to work with them,” Schottenstein said. 

AMH CEO Bryan Smith, during an earnings call earlier this month, said that there hadn’t yet been noteworthy impacts, since they are “pretty well locked in on price” for current development projects.

“In the event that it persists, we probably wouldn’t see that play out in costs until the end of ‘26 or into ‘27,” Smith said. 

Smith Douglas Homes CEO Greg Bennett, on the company’s most recent earnings call on April 29, also indicated that higher prices for building materials could be on the horizon. 

“We know that if this fuel situation stays higher for longer, we’re going to get hit with fuel surcharges and some of those things,” Bennett said. 

Builders weigh trade-offs

The war in Iran isn’t the only factor that could push up prices for building products. Tariffs remain a concern, although the full impact is still uncertain. 

One key tariff, a levy on Canadian softwood lumber, is expected to fall from its current rate of 35.16% to 24.83% this summer, providing some relief for builders that rely on lumber from Canada. Tariffs on other products like steel, aluminum, copper, and kitchen cabinets and vanities also remain intact.  

Frank Sorrentino III, founder, chairman, and CEO of ConnectOne Bank, and a former high-end single-family homebuilder in northern New Jersey, said that many contractors and builders are considering trade-offs. 

Sorrentino has observed that builder clients are increasingly weighing whether to buy certain imported products or switch to domestically produced alternatives to navigate tariffs on foreign goods. There’s been a broader push toward U.S.-based sourcing, which Sorrentino argues has driven trade-offs in materials decisions.

Homebuilders have already worked hard to reduce their construction costs in the post-COVID era, often successfully. With higher fuel costs in the mix, builders may have to work extra hard to keep costs to a minimum, perhaps with certain trade-offs or by opting for materials that don’t need to be transported as far.

“I see a lot of substitution going on. Are we going to buy Canadian lumber? Am I going to buy a prefab product here in the United States? There’s a lot of value engineering. I think that’s going back into construction. I think a lot of that was lost over the last decade or so, because things were just, for lack of a better word, a little bit too good for everybody,” Sorrentino argued. “Well, now I think there’s a reemphasis around the price consciousness part and value-engineered part of construction.”

This post was originally published on here. 

Las Vegas-based Panorama Mortgage Group has unified its multiple brands under a single banner — SimplyPMG — and appointed Fernando Ospina as chief production officer to oversee all channels.

The strategic rebrand aims to simplify operations, expand market reach and eliminate brand confusion among consumers, secondary market investors and warehouse lenders.

Historically, the company operated through siloed channels with different leadership and DBAs to target specific demographics. These included Travisa Financial in wholesale, Alterra Home Loans as the distributed retail arm and Panorama in the consumer-direct space. Moving forward, these divisions will operate as SimplyPMG.Pro (wholesale), SimplyPMG.net (retail) and SimplyPMG.direct (consumer-direct).

While the multibrand strategy initially served to attract different consumer bases, SimplyPMG president Hector Amendola noted that over time, it created unnecessary complexity. Consolidating the brands aligns with the company’s broader objective to drive down the cost to produce loans.

“We’ve been focused over the last few years on creating efficiencies and driving that manufacturing cost down,” Amendola said in an interview with HousingWire. “Now that we have that, we are able to offer a better price and a simpler process. That’s the eye on the future.”

As part of the restructuring, Ospina — who previously served as president of Alterra Home Loans — takes the reins as CPO across all production channels.

“Our purpose now is to simplify the journey and improve pricing, ensuring that the next generation of homeowners can build stability and long-term wealth,” Ospina said.

Founded in 2006, the lender has maintained a heavy concentration in government lending, with Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans making up 80% of its portfolio. Additionally, about 85% of its loan officers are Latino, reflecting the company’s historical footprint in underserved communities.

“Historically, Panorama Mortgage Group, especially Alterra Home Loans, has been focused on underserved markets, [specifically] Latinos,” Amendola said. “Our hope is that by going through a simpler process and better price, we’re expanding that reach to everyone.”

To support that expansion, SimplyPMG is actively growing its footprint. The company currently employs 71 loan officers and is in the process of onboarding an additional 16, Ospina said.

The lender reportedly originated $1.2 billion in 2025 and is projecting $1.5 billion in volume this year. It offers purchase loans, rate-and-term refinances, and cash-out options across a range of conventional and FHA programs. Its distributed retail channels currently dominate production, accounting for 60% of total volume.

Given its heavy FHA concentration, SimplyPMG is keeping “a close eye” on rising delinquency rates in the space, although Amendola noted the company has “been able to balance the portfolio.”

To capitalize on favorable market conditions, the company sold $1.5 billion in mortgage servicing rights (MSRs) over the past year, cashing in on the premium prices currently being paid by major buyers.

Flávia Furlan Nunes reported and wrote this article with drafting assistance from HousingWire Automation, an editorial tool that helps transform announcements and industry data into HousingWire-style news coverage.

This post was originally published on here. 

Beazer Homes is not merely rejecting a takeover bid.

It is trying to show that Dream Finders Homes is asking shareholders to cash out before Beazer’s turnaround is fully reflected in the stock.

That distinction matters because Dream Finders’ latest all-cash proposal of $25.75 per share came after earlier offers of $28.50 and $29.00, even though Beazer says its book value, land assets, and operating trajectory are still not being properly credited.

In this kind of fight, the key question is not whether a premium exists. It is whether the premium is large enough to compensate shareholders for surrendering a recovery that may still be unfolding.

The Beazer case

Beazer has given the market a real reason to believe the board’s resistance is more than reflexive. In rejecting Dream Finders’ proposals, the company said the bids represented a significant discount to its inherent and book values and that neither recent nor historical industry transactions justify the implied price.

Beazer is also pointing to its operating progress as evidence that the story is improving rather than stalling. In its fiscal 2026 second-quarter results, the company reported homebuilding revenue of $397 million, an average selling price of $525 thousand, and a homebuilding gross margin of 12.0%, or 15.6% excluding impairments, abandonments and amortized interest.

Management said the margin reset reflects price concessions, closing-cost incentives and community mix, and expects margin recovery from construction cost reductions and a more favorable mix shift ahead.

Where the Beazer shareholder dilemma may go from here

That sets up a more nuanced debate than a simple “buy or sell” headline. Dream Finders is offering roughly a 40% premium over Beazer’s May 5 closing price and arguing that the combination would create a larger homebuilder with greater scale and broader reach. That is the right language for a hostile bid because it forces shareholders to choose between immediate cash and the possibility of longer-term upside that management believes still lies ahead.

But if Beazer can persuade investors that its land bank, operating recovery and margin improvement have not yet been fully recognized, the bid starts to look less like a compelling exit and more like a premature sale.

The SG&A comparison is where the story gets even more interesting, but only if handled carefully. A raw comparison of selling, general, and administrative expenses between Beazer and Dream Finders is not very useful unless it is adjusted for geography, average selling price, and community maturity.

Dream Finders may look leaner, but its footprint is more concentrated in the Sun Belt and other markets that are generally easier to operate in than the broader mix Beazer carries, which includes California and a wider spread of higher-cost states.

That matters because operating in more expensive-to-build states can affect land costs, labor dynamics, selling expenses, and the pace at which communities absorb.

The state backdrop reinforces the point. In Texas, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee, median home prices are materially lower than in states like Colorado, California, Virginia and Maryland. Dream Finders is heavily concentrated in the core Sun Belt markets, where affordability remains a central issue, while Beazer operates in those same markets plus a broader set of more expensive geographies.

That does not mean one company is better than the other. It means the cost structure is not identical, making SG&A a misleading metric if not normalized for market mix.

Beazer’s own earnings also support the idea that the company is in the middle of a turn rather than at the end of one. The company said its second-quarter gross margin, excluding impairments and amortized interest, was 15.6%, down from 18.3% a year earlier, driven by price concessions, incentives, and product/community mix.

Timing is everything

Even so, management said it expects improvement as construction costs come down and the mix shifts toward more favorable communities and to-be-built homes. It also highlighted its higher average selling price and said it accelerated share repurchases because it believes the stock remains undervalued relative to its assets.

That is the heart of Beazer’s defense: the company is telling investors that the market is still pricing it like a static builder when it is actually a business in motion.

Dream Finders, of course, is making the opposite case. It says its proposal offers a clear and certain all-cash premium and would create a more scaled platform for future growth. It also notes that its financing is supported by highly confident letters and that regulatory risk should be limited.

That is the kind of pitch that can be compelling in a choppy housing market, especially when investors are looking for certainty. But certainty is not the same thing as full value, which is exactly why the board fights matters.

And candidly, if I were running Beazer, I would probably be fighting this thing like a rancher protecting mineral rights. Dream Finders is effectively saying:

“We agree your assets are worth materially more than the market currently recognizes; we just prefer to be the ones who benefit when everybody else figures that out.”

Takeover tactics 101

That is not irrational. It is just aggressive M&A.

The best version of the story is not that Dream Finders is “cheap” or that Beazer is “stubborn.” It is that the two companies operate from different market maps, different asset bases and different stages of the cycle.

Dream Finders may have a cleaner geographic profile and a leaner operating structure, but that alone does not mean its offer captures Beazer’s full value. Beazer, meanwhile, can credibly argue that its SG&A, margins and valuation should be viewed in the context of a broader geographic footprint, a higher-cost footprint and an earnings recovery still working through the system.

The real question for shareholders is simple: do they want the premium now, or do they believe Beazer’s turnaround will create more value later?

In hostile M&A, that is almost always the central tradeoff. Here, it is sharpened by the fact that the buyer is not just buying a builder; it is trying to buy it before the market fully recognizes the turnaround’s potential value.

Dream Finders may very well have a cleaner operating footprint and leaner structure.

But Beazer has a credible argument that its broader geography, higher cost exposure, land base and improving operations merit a valuation that reflects recovery potential rather than merely current stock sentiment.

And here, the buyer is not just trying to acquire a homebuilder. It is trying to acquire one before the market fully prices in what the recovery could become.

This post was originally published on here. 

Reverse mortgage professionals are navigating a “more labored current reality” marked by high interest rates, rising upfront costs and longer loan processing times, even as optimism grows around product innovation and technology adoption.

That’s according to Steve Irwin, president of the National Reverse Mortgage Lenders Association (NRMLA), who sat down with HousingWire‘s Reverse Mortgage Daily ahead of the association’s Western Regional Meeting that’s set for June 9.

The conference, Irwin said, is expected to focus on themes including aging-in-place technology, reverse mortgage product development, retirement planning strategies and policy modernization efforts surrounding the Home Equity Conversion Mortgage (HECM) program.

Editor’s note: This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Sarah Wolak: Let’s start by giving readers an event preview. What do you think about the state of the industry right now? What do you think the biggest themes are that will dominate conversations at the Western Regional meeting?

Steve Irwin: I think there are several. I look at it as providing a best-in-class opportunity. There are issues around social matters, technological matters, economic matters and political matters. We’ll be touching on all of that, so it seems to me to touch on a greater situational awareness. We’re going to have a great session on aging tech and how to reposition reverse mortgage products — not just exclusively as financial tools but enablers of independence, safety and dignity in the home.

We will also be bringing forth a great panel discussion designed to equip top-producing reverse mortgage originators with frameworks, language and real-world insights needed to make reverse purchase financing a primary revenue driver. We’re also going to touch on better positioning of reverse mortgages as part of broader retirement income, liquidity, housing and legacy planning.

Top originators will win, we think, in this complex market, not by selling one product better than the other, but by fully diagnosing a client’s situation and finding the right products to fit those situations.

We are also pleased to have Richard K. Green, a real estate economist and director of the University of Southern California Lusk Center for Real Estate, to speak on today’s macroeconomic environment and what this means for the reverse mortgage marketplace.

Wolak: Given that you hear from reverse lenders every day, what buzz are you hearing the most about in the current market environment compared with a year ago?

Irwin: It continues to be a grind. Fortunately, I hear from NRMLA members quite often. Things are picking up, but it’s a grind, and our hopes are to make it less of a grind and more of a flow.

Wolak: What do you think is contributing to the grind right now?

Irwin: Just getting individual cases through the pipeline is taking a lot more attention in the current interest rate environment. Upfront cost is always a concern, and getting people qualified into a variety of reverse programs is challenging. It can be done, but it’s taking a lot more effort, and therefore it’s much more of a grind.

Wolak: Do you think that people still have a cautious outlook, or is there some optimism in the space right now?

Irwin: I do not want to convey that it’s not an optimistic outlook. “Grind” does imply a slog and a bit of pessimism, but it’s not a pessimistic outlook. Day to day is more of a grind, but it’s just a more labored current reality.

Wolak: If you want one takeaway for your attendees at the Western Regional Meeting, what would that be?

Irwin: Our attendees will leave with an actionable blueprint for continued business development.

Wolak: Will that be just from the sessions or are there going to be workshops?

Irwin: The sessions will be interactive. I wouldn’t define them as workshops, per se, but the learnings coming out of these sessions will be actionable.

Wolak: Speaking of actionable, what do you think is showing the most momentum right now in the space? Is it proprietary products or is it something else?

Irwin: I think where we’re seeing a lot of interesting momentum right now is product development, which is touching on the proprietary product space a lot. I think there’s a lot of research and development going on, but I also think that we’re seeing advances made in technology implementations, whether it’s aging-in-place technologies or just the manufacturing of a reverse mortgage.

The technology tools and innovations are pretty impressive. As we work more and more with the Mortgage Industry Standards Maintenance Organization (MISMO) to get those data standards in place, we’re going to see technological interoperability efficiencies that will be most impressive.

Wolak: Switching to NRMLA’s current legislative goals, can you offer an update on HUD’s request for information (RFI) or the legislative work NRMLA is prioritizing right now?

Irwin: NRMLA has submitted to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Federal Housing Administration and Ginnie Mae a supplemental memo around our responses to the RFI. I have arranged a meeting in the very near future with the NRMLA executive committee and executive leadership at HUD to further discuss ways to modernize the HECM program.

Wolak: What is NRMLA pushing in terms of what urgently needs modernization?

Irwin: I’d rather not get ahead of this meeting with HUD and Ginnie Mae. We further expand on some of the points made in our response to the RFI. There are opportunities, we feel, with the initial mortgage insurance premium and ways to examine that, which may bring down upfront costs to reverse mortgage borrowers.

We think there are ways — without getting into too much detail — to make the whole processes around collateral assessment and second appraisals, when required, more efficient. There are efficiencies to be gained there with more modern tools that are available in the marketplace. And we think the whole process around buyouts of cases that hit 98% (of the maximum claim amount) that are in Ginnie Mae pools can be reexamined.

Wolak: Could you provide an overview of the top legislative priorities on NRMLA’s plate right now?

Irwin: At a federal level, we really just work to stay engaged with the authorizers of the FHA HECM program. We hope to advance solutions around the statutory cap of HECMs that’s in place, and we’re making a lot of progress in that regard.

Already this year, we’ve met with senior policy advisers at the House Financial Services Committee and the Senate Banking Committee. We’ve engaged with Sen. Mike Crapo’s office, Rep. Emanuel Cleaver’s office, Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s office, and Chairman French Hill. We’ve been working it pretty hard, but it’s an education and an ongoing conversation in the House and in the Senate, with both parties involved around the importance of the ability of older homeowners to be able to monetize their accumulated equity as part of a solid retirement finance plan.

We are constantly updating on program changes and marketplace dynamics. It’s not always about a legislative ask, but it is sharing of information. We think these relationships on Capitol Hill are strong, and our priority is to keep people informed and keep those relationships strong.

At the state level, the work that our members have done in Tennessee is huge. Crafting amendment language to amend that legislation in Tennessee so as to accommodate products beyond just first-lien products has been huge, and we look forward to that getting signed into law. I really thank our members in Tennessee who have done most of the heavy lifting in that regard.

Wolak: When you have conversations with Congress, do you feel like they have a good understanding of the work NRMLA is doing and the conversations that should be happening about retirement and marketplace dynamics, or is there a long way to go?

Irwin: I think there’s a solid understanding. That’s across years of building relationships on Capitol Hill, staying informed and being totally transparent about what we work on. There is general support on Capitol Hill for the HECM program, and people understand how important it is.

There can be policy differences and policy perspectives on the role the government may need to play in retirement and in housing across different administrations and different parties, but staff and legislators all understand the role that housing wealth can play in retirement finance.

This post was originally published on here. 

As many in the title industry already understand, the conversation around technology selection has become fairly sophisticated. Agents and owners are asking sharper questions before signing contracts, doing more due diligence on vendors and thinking more carefully about implementation timelines and staff readiness. All of that is real progress.

There’s one challenge, though, that we’re not talking about enough: What happens when the executive team and the operations decision-makers aren’t really communicating well about technology? When that’s the case, the odds of a successful technology initiative drop considerably. But it’s rarely the first thing anyone examines when a deployment goes sideways.

The reasons this happens are often more structural than personal.

Two different vantage points, one technology decision

Executives, particularly owners and the top decision makers, tend to evaluate technology through the lens of business outcomes. They’re thinking about cost reduction, margin improvement and what a given solution will mean for the agency twelve or eighteen months from now. That’s entirely appropriate. But those priorities can sometimes cause executives to move quickly past the operational realities their teams will face once a system is actually in use.

Operations leaders, on the other hand, are living inside the workflow every day. They know exactly where the chokepoints are—where data gets manually re-entered between systems, where a closing coordinator is spending forty-five minutes on tasks that should take five. They may not always frame those problems in business-case language, but they understand the friction in ways that rarely make it into vendor demos or executive briefings.

When those two perspectives aren’t regularly and deliberately connected, technology decisions can end up solving the wrong problems, or solving the right problems in ways the operations team never fully adopts.

How the gap actually plays out

Consider a scenario that may be more common than people admit: an agency owner decides to invest in an AI-powered order-entry solution after seeing it demonstrated at a conference. The appeal is obvious. Consolidating incoming orders from multiple sources and automating entry into the production system could recover hours of staff time each week. The decision is made, the contract gets signed and implementation begins.

What the owner may not have known, because it wasn’t surfaced in a pre-purchase conversation with the ops team, is that three of the agency’s largest referral sources send orders through a proprietary lender portal that doesn’t map cleanly to the new system’s intake process. Now the team is managing a workflow exception nobody planned for, staff is frustrated and the ROI projection is starting to look pessimistic. The technology itself may be perfectly capable, but the gap in pre-decision communication is what created the problem.

A variation plays out in the opposite direction as well. An operations manager, eager to address a specific bottleneck, advocates for a standalone tool that solves one problem neatly but creates a new data silo. Because executive leadership wasn’t part of a broader strategic conversation about where the tech stack needs to go, there’s no one in the room to ask whether this purchase fits the larger picture. A year later, the agency is paying for two solutions that don’t talk to each other, and the manual workaround looks a lot like the one they were trying to eliminate.

Practical steps toward better technology alignment

The good news is that this is a communication and process problem rather than a technology problem, which means it’s considerably more tractable than debugging a failed integration.

The most effective title businesses I’ve seen tend to approach technology decisions with something that resembles a standing protocol. Before any significant solution is evaluated in earnest, both the executive sponsor and the primary operations stakeholder are in the room, and they’re starting from a shared, plain-language description of the specific workflow problem they’re trying to address. Not a vendor’s feature sheet, but rather a concrete description of where the current process breaks down, written or reviewed by the people who work inside it daily.

That shared starting point also tends to surface constraints early, so integration requirements with the agency’s existing production environment are known before a vendor is engaged, not discovered after the contract is signed.

Beyond that pre-purchase alignment, agencies may also benefit from a lightweight governance habit around their technology portfolio. It can be as simple as a brief, recurring conversation between an executive and an operations lead: Which tools are being used as intended? Where are staff still working around systems instead of through them? What has changed in the workflow recently that a current tool isn’t handling well? Asked routinely and answered honestly, those questions tend to catch misalignments before they become expensive.

The larger stakes

Title agencies are operating in a market that doesn’t leave a lot of room for technology missteps. The pressure to do more with existing resources, to close workflow gaps that are quietly costing real money and to build a tech stack that functions as a connected system rather than a collection of separately purchased tools is real, and it’s not getting easier. The agencies that navigate it well tend to treat internal alignment as a precondition for technology investment rather than an afterthought.

Getting your executive and operations teams genuinely aligned before you go shopping may be the most underrated strategy available to a title agency right now. It won’t appear on any vendor’s product roadmap, and no one will bring it up in a demo. But it may do more to protect the return on your next technology investment than almost anything else you could do.

Hoyt Mann is the President & Co-Founder, alanna.ai
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners. To contact the editor responsible for this piece: zeb@hwmedia.com.

This post was originally published on here. 

MLS consolidation is something numerous industry executives advocate for but few have managed to successfully pull off given all of the logistical challenges of combining two distinct platforms into one. However, MIAMI Association of Realtors (MIAMI) and Broward, Palm Beaches & St. Lucie Realtors (RWorld) and their respective MLSs, MIAMI MLS and BeachesMLS, just proved it can certainly be accomplished and in record time.

On Monday, the two South Florida associations closed their previously announced merger, forming what they hope will be called Miami and South Florida Realtors, pending the approval of the National Association of Realtors (NAR). 

According to Miami and South Florida Realtors, this merger set a new record for the largest and fastest association merger in NAR history.

“I think the difference between our approach and what so many others do is we focused on what is most important and that is our members and the market and there were no questions that the merger was best for our members and the marketplace,” Teresa King Kinney, the CEO of MIAMI Realtors, who will now serve as co-CEO of the combined organization, said. “Once we decided to make the merger happen, we asked what we would need to do to close the merger. In the first meeting, we said it would be closed in five weeks and we closed it exactly on schedule.”

King Kinney and her co-CEO Dionna Hall attribute much of the success of the merger to the current volunteer leadership of the two associations. 

“Our organizations have been networking with each other at conferences and getting to know each other. The more we all got to know each other, the more we realized that we were all really after the same thing, which is a more seamless way to better serve our members and our subscribers,” Hall said. “So, when our two presidents spoke, it was the right people at the right time and it just came together, Teresa would say. beautifully.”

Now that the merger is closed, Hall and King Kinney said they are focused on all the tasks they need to do internally to truly complete the merger. 

“Doing it is huge, but now we are doing it from the inside as one organization as opposed to two organizations trying to put things together before the merger even happened,” King Kinney said. 

As for how this merger allows the organizations to better serve their agent and broker members and subscribers, Hall noted that an obvious benefit is that everyone will now have access to the same tools, services and listing information.

“We both had a very robust product offering and being able to share that across the South Florida marketplace is going to be huge for our brokers and our agents,” Hall said. “Teresa did the math, and we held over 2,800 educational seminars in a year, so that combined with roughly 300 complementary marketing tools and the unified data set that will be powering all those tools is quite phenomenal.”

King Kinney added that due to the existing overlap between the two associations, previously agents within the same office often belonged to different organizations, providing them with different data sets and tools.

“Now everybody will have everything,” King Kinney said. “And now with IDX feeds, brokers won’t have to join a second association to have all of the listings on their website.”

“We think it is really important that it creates a level playing field for all of our brokers and agents to have that same information so they can better serve their clients and consumers,” Hall added. 

Looking ahead, the organization announced plans to join the Global Data Exchange, an international initiative designed to allow MLSs and real estate organizations to share public listing data across multiple countries. In addition to this, King Kinney and Hall noted that their combined association had already signed partnership agreements with five Canadian MLSs. 

“It is all about our members, our world both locally and globally and being able to bring all of the tools and resources and strengths of each of our organizations together,” King Kinney said. 

This post was originally published on here. 

Arbor Homes, a subsidiary of Clayton, is leaning into its Arrival Series to offer entry-level buyers a home in the low $200s, addressing the growing U.S. affordability gap. 

The Indianapolis-based homebuilder recently introduced the Arrival Series to the Louisville market, with detached homes available starting at $199,995. The homes, located in a community in the Louisville suburb of Jeffersonville, Indiana, offer an increasingly rare level of attainability. 

To achieve this attainable pricing, Arbor Home carefully controls construction, land and design costs at every stage of the building process. 

A growing affordability gap

The gap between what families earn and what they must pay for a home has never been wider, and families are feeling the pinch. New polling found that housing is the biggest expense for nearly 80% of Americans, and nearly 90% say it’s never been harder to buy a home. 

This is reflected in data from the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), which found that about 65% of American households cannot afford a $400,000 home, despite the median new home selling price being $387,400 as of March. 

The NAHB data further indicates that a $300,000 home prices-out 52% of American households, but sales of new single-family homes priced under that threshold have dropped by 65% since 2020. Arbor Homes, through its Arrival Series, aims to confront that shrinking affordable home supply head-on. 

Detached homes at Trailside Landing start for as low as $199,995 for a two-bed, two-bath, 1,159-square-foot detached home, while a three-bedroom, two-bath 1,428-square-foot home starts at $226,995. The most expensive floor plan, a 3-bed, 2.5-bath, 2,186-square-foot home, sells for as low as $259,995. 

Michael Metzkes, Louisville Division President at Arbor Homes, told HousingWire’s The Builder’s Daily that the lower-priced floor plan will average around $230,000 with options, but buyers can also keep upgrades to a minimum if they choose. In comparison, the average entry-level price point for a newly constructed starter home in the Louisville market is $330,000, according to Metzkes. 

Controlling costs to maximize attainable homeownership

“For many years, Arbor was that price leader, but as inflation has kicked in, it really made us look at things from a different perspective and start questioning, how do we make the homes more affordable?” Metzkes said. 

Arbor takes several steps to cut costs and make the Arrival series affordable for median earners. For example, rather than 50-foot lots, Arbor builds a detached townhome-style product on a 40-foot lot with a 30-foot-wide platform, saving buyers money on land costs. 

The builder also standardizes first-floor layouts and the phased installation of foundations. By releasing multiple slabs simultaneously with nearly identical first-floor layouts, trades such as plumbers and framers can work far more efficiently, because every measurement, placement and installation process is repeated across each home. 

This consistency makes the construction processes quicker, more efficient and less costly, which generates savings that are ultimately passed on to buyers through lower home prices.

Arbor Homes also takes a close look at every feature in the home through the lens of affordability to determine if it should be a standard feature or an upgrade. By eliminating upfront costs tied to nonessential features, the builder can reduce the overall purchase price of a home, while giving owners a pathway to upgrading in the future when it becomes financially viable. 

For example, features often considered standard, such as mirrors, closet shelving and other finishing touches, were removed from the base package, as some buyers are comfortable installing those items themselves over time once they can afford it. However, many buyers will choose those options upfront if they can afford to. 

“We may put dimensional shingles on the house rather than a lower-level single because of the price we get when buying thousands of units. So there are some things where we didn’t take it to the extreme, lowest level, but we’re just more thoughtful on where we can control costs and still give people a great, affordably priced home. We are trying to reset that level of what is viewed as attainable.”

Metzkes stressed that this attainability is possible only when municipalities cooperate. In the case of Jeffersonville, the municipal government allowed Arbor Homes to build with smaller lot sizes, and the company used tax increment financing (TIF) dollars to develop the lots, which kept the homes at an attainable price point. 

“It takes a partnership with the municipalities. There’s a lot of talk about affordable housing, but when push comes to shove, the question is, do the mayor, the city council and the planning commission, do they really support what needs to be done?”

Pursuing attainability in an unattainable market

The Arbor Homes business model emphasizes pace over price, so the company is willing to sacrifice margins to maintain consistent home sales. As affordability challenges mount for entry-level buyers due to elevated mortgage rates and higher gas prices, Arbor Homes has turned to incentives to maintain sales momentum, mirroring broader trends across the homebuilding industry.

The geopolitical uncertainty since the beginning of March, Metzkes said, has also affected entry-level buyers psychologically. 

“I think it does impact the psyche of the buyer, but I think builders are still doing the right things. We understand what’s out there. Margins, I think, have compressed for most builders. We are doing what we can for buyers, in terms of contributing to help them with their closing costs. We are buying down rates a little bit to make them affordable. So we’re doing all the things we have to do, within reason, to get people in these homes.”

However, according to Metzkes, the Louisville market is a bit more resilient to cyclical changes. Louisville is a relatively small market with a limited supply of lots. Since there are fewer available lots, demand tends to remain relatively stable even during slowdowns, softening the impact of downturns.

However, those same constraints also limit upside potential during boom periods. If demand surges, builders may not be able to significantly increase production because lot availability becomes a limiting factor. 

“We don’t tend to have the same cyclical highs or the same lows.”

This post was originally published on here. 

Loan officers are shifting their playbooks to keep deals alive as mortgage rates climb north of 6.6%. Originators are encouraging borrowers to ask for more seller credits, recalibrate their home search criteria and rush to close deals as quickly as possible.

Rates for 30-year fixed mortgages reached 6.62% on Friday afternoon, up 5 basis points from the prior day, according to Mortgage News Daily. At HousingWire’s Mortgage Rates Center, rates for 30-year conforming loans stood at 6.63%.

“Rates rose today in response to rising oil prices. That’s not good for affordability, but in my experience, borrowers rarely change their behavior overnight due to a single rate move. It usually takes sustained news and social media coverage of rising rates before buyer confidence and behavior really start to shift,” said Brendan McKay, owner at Bethesda, Maryland-based McKay Mortgage Co.

McKay told HousingWire he has not lost any deals due to the recent rate increases. “I may lose one that locked in with a local retail lender earlier this week. I’m still able to offer better terms, but the gap has narrowed,” he added. 

While it’s too early to see the immediate fallout from Friday’s rate jump as borrowers tend to react to more sustained moves, lenders are bracing for a crucial testing period.

“In this particular case, the next two weeks look a little bit rough, because we also have a holiday coming; usually we’ll monitor foot traffic on open houses on the holiday weekend, and that’ll give us a really good indicator of what’s happening,” said Gino Fronti, executive vice president and West division president at Lower.

So far, the pipeline is holding, but it requires active management. “Over the last couple of weeks, we’ve seen no deals fall apart, but people in escrow go to the seller and request a 2-1 buydown. That’s the strategy that we’ve been using to keep the deals together,” Fronti said.

Sellers whose properties have been sitting on the market for weeks are increasingly willing to offer credits rather than risk having to relist. In the Los Angeles area, Fronti said these credits typically range from $10,000 to $20,000. That “would be equivalent to the next price reduction they would have to do to find a new buyer anyway,” he added. 

Lenders are also making efforts to save the deal, with Fronti noting that companies are “running a little bit thinner (in margins), maybe waiving a processing fee or something minimal.”