Trends 2026: New brokerage models reflect broader industry shifts
Residential real estate is changing. Technology is evolving, new leaders are bringing new visions, and brokerages are embracing novel ways of doing business.
Editor's note: Since 2006, the Swanepoel Trends Report has provided in-depth research and analysis to help leaders understand the forces shaping residential real estate. This exclusive series of excerpts highlights each trend featured in the 2026 report, which was released in November 2025.
Profile of an Industry in Flux: The real estate industry is undergoing foundational changes going into 2026. Brokerage models are shifting, NAR is working to chart a new path, AI is becoming more sophisticated and prolific, and litigation continues to loom over several key players.
The following excerpt, taken from T3 Sixty's 2026 Trends Report, explores that first change — shifting brokerage models — with a look at how newer models are chipping away at the Traditional model (but not overtaking it).
The power and decline of the Traditional model
The brokerage business model makeup is evolving. Once predominant, the Traditional brokerage model — in which brokerages share transaction commissions with agents on splits that range from approximately 90-10 to 60-40 depending on the model and services provided — has become less prevalent among the US's largest brokerages.
In 2025, brokerages practicing this model represent slightly over half of the US's 100 largest brokerages (53), down from nearly three quarters (72) in 2018, according to T3 Sixty's analysis of Mega 1000 data.
This reflects a trend of newer brokerage models — Capped, Fee-based and Business Generation — competing with the Traditional model among the nation's largest brokerages.
Although brokerages with a Traditional model have declined in number, T3 Sixty's analysis finds they provide more absolute revenue margin to brokerages and more revenue for agents.
Evaluating brokerage and agent revenue by model
While agents take a relatively high percentage of gross commission income (GCI) at Fee-Based brokerages, the typical agent keeps more at Traditional brokerages than any other model, considering that Traditional models have much higher average price points.
To conduct this analysis, T3 Sixty identified the business model of every brokerage in the top 100 of the 2025 Mega 1000 and then applied the above economics by the average price point and the average number of sides per agent for each model.
Looking at the brokerages in the top 100, the Traditional brokerage model sees the highest average price point ($892,242), while the Business Generation model has the lowest average price point.
When considering the average price point and the average sides per agent by model among the nation's 100 largest brokerages, Traditional firms earn more revenue from each agent, and their agents take home more than those at Capped and Fee-Based brokerages.
Because Business Generation models have compensation plans that involve significant in-house operations, they are excluded from this comparison. Note: the Capped calculation does not include supplemental income agents can earn through revenue-sharing and equity grant programs at some firms deploying a Capped model.
Among the largest brokerages, the data reveals that brokerages and agents earn more on average each year on each transaction at Traditional brokerages than at brokerages with Capped and Fee-Based models. While Traditional brokerages may earn more, they also often have more expenses, which means profitability rates among the models may be closer than GCI earnings.
Read the full chapter: Digital and printed copies of the 2026 Swanepoel Trends Report are available for purchase at T3 Trends.
Real Estate News is an editorially independent division of T3 Sixty.