---
title: "Zillow and Redfin settle with the FTC over a $100 million rentals deal"
description: "Regulators said Zillow paid Redfin to stop competing in rental advertising, an arrangement that could have kept it out for up to nine years. The settlement, announced as the trial was due to start, requires Redfin to compete again."
category: "Business"
category_url: https://newsparlor.com/category/business
author: "Noah Andersen"
published: 2026-08-25T01:37:22.000Z
updated: 2026-08-25T01:37:22.000Z
canonical: https://newsparlor.com/article/zillow-and-redfin-settle-with-the-ftc-over-a-100-million-dollar-rentals-deal
tags: ["antitrust", "ftc", "zillow", "redfin", "housing"]
---
# Zillow and Redfin settle with the FTC over a $100 million rentals deal

Regulators said Zillow paid Redfin to stop competing in rental advertising, an arrangement that could have kept it out for up to nine years. The settlement, announced as the trial was due to start, requires Redfin to compete again.

Zillow and Redfin have settled an antitrust case brought by the Federal Trade Commission and the attorneys general of Arizona, Connecticut, New York, Virginia and Washington, [TechCrunch reports](https://techcrunch.com/2026/08/24/zillow-and-redfin-settle-ftc-antitrust-case/). The settlement was announced on Monday, as the trial was scheduled to begin.

The regulators alleged that "Zillow agreed to pay Redfin $100 million to keep Redfin from competing with Zillow" in rental advertising, in an arrangement that could have kept Redfin out of that market for as long as nine years.

## The two descriptions of the same deal

Under the 2025 agreement, Redfin displayed Zillow's rental listings rather than competing directly. Redfin owns Rent.com and ApartmentGuide.com.

The companies said the partnership gave renters access to a larger pool of listings, which is true as far as it goes: a renter browsing Redfin saw more properties than Redfin alone carried.

The regulators' account is about who was left in the market. With Redfin no longer selling rental advertising, Zillow could, they alleged, charge property managers more and offer less favourable terms, and listing quality for consumers would decline. Both descriptions can hold at once, which is what makes these cases difficult: the immediate effect on users looked like more choice, while the effect on the market was one fewer seller.

## What the settlement actually requires

Redfin must return to the rental advertising business on its own account. The order removes the restrictions on it competing for property-management customers.

In practice, Redfin can keep displaying Zillow's listings while also selling its own advertising, showing listings from its own clients and pursuing new rental customers, without having to share commercially sensitive information with Zillow.

That is a conduct remedy rather than a punishment. The article mentions no fine. The regulators' objective, on this evidence, was to restore a competitor rather than to extract a penalty, which is a common shape for a settlement reached on the courthouse steps: the companies avoid a trial and a finding of liability, and the agency gets the market structure it was arguing for.

## What we could not establish

We could not establish whether either company admitted wrongdoing, whether the $100 million is repayable, how long the order runs, what the companies said in response, or whether a judge must approve the terms. We verified this account from a single publication, and the allegations described are the regulators'.

## Sources

- [Zillow and Redfin settle FTC antitrust case](https://techcrunch.com/2026/08/24/zillow-and-redfin-settle-ftc-antitrust-case/)