Which brokerage models are winning over the best agents? 

In the battle for agent recruiting and retention, identifying what agents look for in brokerages can help firms navigate a slow housing market.

Sometimes agent churn increases when markets flourish, because brokerages have more money to spend on recruiting efforts. But movement is also common in down markets as agents seek out better compensation or more support, such as marketing and technology tools. 

Last year, 13% of active agents switched brokerages, according to Recruiting Insight, signaling "a significant talent shift within the industry." The Agent Migration and Brokerage Model report, which assessed data from four major MLSs representing over 30% of all U.S. agents, found that one brokerage model in particular appeared to attract some of the highest-producing agents.

"The high mobility of agents suggests that brokerages need to constantly adapt and innovate to attract and retain top talent," the report noted, adding that technology offerings were among the factors that likely played "a significant role in agent migration."

Tech attracts top producers: Tech-enabled firms, defined in the report as those that use technology to boost both agent productivity and client service offerings, took home the "win," attracting agents with nearly double the median sales volume compared to agents moving to other types of brokerages, the report found. 

"This suggests that tech-savvy agents who prioritize efficiency and innovation are drawn to these models," the report added. Compass and Real — two brokerages that emphasize their tech offerings — saw significant agent count gains last year. Compass leaders have noted that its technology platform is cited as a key factor by many of the agents moving to the firm, while Real has invested heavily in developing agent tech tools.

While tech-enabled brokerages only accounted for 8% of the firms analyzed, they were the only brokerage type to avoid net agent losses in 2024. 

Rev share popular, but churn is high: Brokerages that operate under a capped revenue sharing model are "highly popular" and attract agents that look for "a balance of risk and reward," the report said. While this kind of firm only accounted for 9% of those assessed, the agent turnover was high, with 39% of all agent movement arising from capped revenue share brokerage models — which also accounted for 41% of total agent loss. 

"The high agent churn in this model suggests potential dissatisfaction with the experience of onboarding, culture or support," the report noted, advising brokerage leaders to discern why agents leave and improve retention efforts.

Traditional firms hold strong: Brokerages with traditional agent commission structures and in-office environments are still "relevant" for agents who appreciate brand recognition and the support those brands can provide, according to the report. After tech-enabled models, traditional brokerages accounted for the second-largest median sales volume among active agents who moved in 2024.

Nearly 4 in 10 (39%) of all brokerages fell into this category, and their net gain of 28% of moving agents indicated "a strong ability to attract and retain talent," the report said, with traditional firms remaining competitive because they offer "strong brands, established networks, and comprehensive support systems."

Movement patterns reflect brokerage consolidation: Big brokerages are increasingly capturing more market share, and the movement data appeared to align with that trend.

Most of the agent migration last year occurred within a small subset of brokerages. Just 75 firms (2% of those assessed) — largely well known national brands — accounted for more than half of both agent gains and losses, pointing to "a concentration of market share among major players," the report said.