Divergent views on what benefits buyers, what’s best for agents
A new Zillow survey found that nearly 9 in 10 agents believe independent representation is good for buyers — but less than two-thirds think it helps agents.
Most real estate agents believe buyers benefit when they receive independent representation, a new survey found — but agents still need to make a living, and they're aware that dual agency is in their own financial interest.
That's one of the findings from a Zillow Group Population Science survey conducted in July. Agents were shown five practices, and for each one, indicated whether they believed it served a buyer's interest and whether it served an agent's interest.
The online survey was unbranded and sent to agents regardless of their affiliation with the portal, according to Zillow. Findings were based on responses from 366 active real estate professionals across the U.S.
Best for the buyer: The vast majority of agents (88%) said independent representation benefits buyers, while an even higher share (89%) said buyer agreements are good for consumers.
Access to all available property listings (86%), having a choice in which agent to hire (81%) and the ability to negotiate fees (77%) were also largely considered to be in a buyer's best interest.
"The data shows agents overwhelmingly agree on what buyers deserve," Zillow Chief Economist Mischa Fisher said in the report.
Best for agents: When asked whether those same practices benefited agents, however, sentiment was more mixed.
While respondents appeared to be keen on buyer agreements — 86% said they were good for agents — just 61% said they believe independent representation is in the agent's best interest, and 70% said access to all listings benefits agents.
Only 52% of respondents considered a buyer's ability to choose who represents them to be a plus for agents, while a mere 46% said fee negotiation is in the agent's interest.
The dividing line: "Across the board, alignment [between buyer and agent interests] breaks down on practices that directly affect agent compensation or control, including the right to choose, the right to negotiate and the right to see all available homes," Zillow's report noted.
That divergence — specifically around independent representation and a buyer's ability to choose their agent — suggests some agents may be conflicted when weighing their client's interests against their own, according to the report.
Zillow pointed to a study by the Journal of Housing Economics that argued agents in dual agency transactions have an incentive to close a deal quickly, and that can potentially cloud their judgment despite their fiduciary duty to act in their client's best financial interest. A separate analysis Zillow released in May found that sellers typically lose over $2,000 in dual agency transactions.
Despite having mixed views on how buyer agency practices may benefit their bottom line, "agents know what good representation looks like, and I believe that most are motivated primarily by doing right by their clients," Fisher said. "There is no substitute, though, for an informed buyer. A buyer who knows what to expect from a great agent can tell when they have one."