Core Insights - A Zillow analysis indicates that a mortgage rate drop to 4.43% is necessary for median-income U.S. homebuyers to afford the median-priced home, assuming a 20% down payment, which many first-time buyers cannot afford [2][5] - In high-cost coastal metros like New York, Los Angeles, and Miami, even a 0% mortgage rate would not make homes affordable for median-income households due to high associated costs [3][4] - Conversely, in many Midwestern markets, current mortgage rates are already low enough for median-income buyers to afford median-priced homes [4] Affordability Challenges - The analysis suggests that mortgage rates would need to decline significantly for typical homes to be affordable for median-income buyers, which is currently deemed unrealistic [5][6] - Zillow's economic analyst warns that expectations for substantial drops in mortgage rates or home prices may lead to disappointment, as such corrections would require a significant economic slowdown [6]

Zillow Group TodayZGZillow Group$68.11 -0.78 (-1.14%) 52-Week Range$55.08▼$90.22Price Target$86.92Add to WatchlistZillow Group Inc. NASDAQ: ZG is on track for its first profitable year since 2012. The company has cited increased revenue from its mortgage business and a focus on closely managing headcount as reasons for the spike in profitability. However, the real estate technology company may still need some help, in the form of lower interest rates, to reverse the bearish momentum from recent events. On ...

An analyst who has been neutral on Zillow's stock for years just turned bullish after the recent selloff, saying it now offers potential 20% upside. ...

Core Viewpoint - The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has filed an antitrust lawsuit against Zillow and Rocket Companies' subsidiary Redfin, alleging an unlawful agreement to suppress competition in the online rental housing advertising market, leading to a decline in Zillow's shares by 4.3% [1][2]. Summary by Sections Antitrust Allegations - The FTC's complaint details a $100 million agreement between Zillow and Redfin, executed in February, where Redfin agreed to terminate contracts with advertising customers and syndicate only Zillow rental listings, granting Zillow exclusive control over multifamily rental listings on Redfin's platforms [2][3]. - The complaint also states that Redfin downsized its workforce significantly after the agreement, with some employees being hired by Zillow [2]. Market Impact - The FTC argues that the agreement could lead to higher prices, fewer options, and poorer service for renters and property managers due to the concentration of rental listing services [3][4]. - Zillow's stock has shown volatility, with 12 stock moves greater than 5% in the past year, indicating that the market views the lawsuit as significant but not fundamentally altering the perception of the business [6]. Analyst Ratings and Stock Performance - Zillow has a 'moderate buy' consensus rating from analysts, with an average 12-month stock price target of $90.14, suggesting a potential upside of 20% from current levels [5]. - Year-to-date, Zillow's shares have gained approximately 0.5%, trading at $71.18, significantly below its 52-week high of $86.76, and reflecting a decline of over 33% over the past five years [7]. - In contrast, Rocket Companies has a 'hold' consensus rating, with a 12-month average stock price target of $13.83, indicating a downside risk of over 25% from current trading levels [8].

Core Viewpoint - Redfin and Zillow assert that their partnership does not violate antitrust laws despite facing legal challenges from multiple states and the FTC [1][2]. Group 1: Legal Allegations - Five states, including Arizona, Connecticut, New York, Virginia, and Washington, have filed an antitrust lawsuit against Redfin and Zillow [2]. - The lawsuit claims that the companies unlawfully eliminated competition by agreeing that Zillow would pay Redfin $100 million to cease competing for multifamily housing listings [3]. - Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares stated that this arrangement harms renters and property owners by undermining market incentives for quality services [4]. Group 2: Company Responses - Redfin has publicly disagreed with the allegations and anticipates being vindicated in court [5]. - Redfin argues that its partnership with Zillow enhances the number of rental listings available to website visitors and provides advertisers with access to more potential renters [6]. - Zillow claims that the partnership is beneficial for both renters and property managers, increasing access to multifamily listings across platforms [7].

Core Viewpoint - Zillow Group and Redfin are facing antitrust lawsuits from five states for allegedly conspiring to limit competition in online rental listings, including a $100 million payment from Zillow to Redfin to cease apartment advertising [1][3]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The antitrust lawsuit was filed by the attorneys general of Virginia, Arizona, Connecticut, New York, and Washington in federal court [1]. - The Federal Trade Commission has also filed a similar lawsuit against the companies [1]. - The lawsuits are based on a February agreement between Zillow and Redfin, which, along with Apartments.com owner CoStar, dominate the revenue from US online rental ads [2][6]. Group 2: Allegations and Implications - In return for the $100 million, Redfin allegedly agreed to terminate advertising contracts with larger apartment building managers, refrain from entering that market for nine years, and only display rentals that Zillow also lists [3][8]. - The attorneys general argue that this agreement would result in higher prices and worse terms for advertisers, negatively impacting renters by reducing competition [3]. - Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares stated that the arrangement harms both renters and property owners by undermining market incentives for quality services [4]. Group 3: Company Responses and Context - Zillow and Redfin maintain that their agreement enhances access for property managers and advertisers to a broader renter base, ultimately benefiting renters by providing more listings [5]. - Redfin expressed confidence in prevailing in court [7]. - Zillow is also facing a separate lawsuit from Compass, which accuses it of attempting to monopolize private home listings [7].

Core Viewpoint - Attorneys general from five states have filed a lawsuit against Zillow and Redfin, alleging anti-competitive practices in the online housing rental market, following a similar lawsuit from the Federal Trade Commission [1][2]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit claims that Zillow paid Redfin $100 million to cease its apartment rental advertising business and transfer its clients to Zillow, which is seen as a tactic to eliminate competition [2][3]. - The agreement is described as a maneuver to insulate Zillow from direct competition with Redfin, potentially harming renters by reducing options and increasing costs [3][4]. - The lawsuit seeks an injunction to prevent the alleged collusion and proposes restructuring the businesses to foster competition [5]. Group 2: Market Impact - Zillow, Redfin, and CoStar, which owns Apartments.com, dominate the market, accounting for 85% of all market revenue, indicating a significant concentration of power in the online rental space [4]. - Following the announcement of the lawsuit, shares of Zillow and Redfin's parent company, Rocket Companies, experienced a decline, reflecting investor concerns over the legal challenges [6][7]. Group 3: Company Responses - Redfin has publicly disagreed with the allegations, asserting that the partnership with Zillow has expanded access to rental listings and allowed for cost reductions, which they claim benefits apartment seekers [6]. - Zillow has not yet provided a comment on the lawsuit from the states [6].

Core Viewpoint - Five U.S. states have initiated an antitrust lawsuit against Zillow Group and Redfin Corp, alleging that the companies have engaged in an illegal scheme to eliminate competition for apartment advertisements [1] Group 1: Companies Involved - Zillow Group and Redfin Corp are the primary companies named in the antitrust lawsuit [1] Group 2: Legal Context - The lawsuit is filed by five U.S. states, indicating a significant legal challenge for the companies involved [1] - The allegations suggest that the companies are attempting to coordinate their actions to suppress competition in the apartment advertising market [1]

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is suing Zillow and Redfin for allegedly entering an illegal agreement that suppresses competition in online rental advertising [1][5]. Group 1: Allegations and Details of the Agreement - The FTC claims that the agreement began in February when Zillow paid Redfin $100 million, in exchange for Redfin ending contracts with advertising partners and stopping competing ads for multifamily properties for up to nine years [2]. - Redfin reportedly laid off hundreds of employees shortly after the announcement of this plan and allegedly assisted Zillow in hiring selected workers from these layoffs [3]. Group 2: Impact on Competition - The FTC argues that Zillow's payment to eliminate Redfin as an independent competitor in a concentrated advertising market could reduce competition, leading to higher prices and fewer choices for multifamily rental advertising customers [4][5]. - The Commission emphasizes that the actions of both companies violate federal antitrust laws and may diminish incentives for further competition in the market [5]. Group 3: Company Responses - Zillow maintains that its listing syndication with Redfin benefits both renters and property managers, claiming it has expanded access to multifamily listings and is pro-competitive [6]. - Redfin, which was recently acquired by Rocket Companies, strongly disagrees with the FTC's allegations and believes it will prevail in court, asserting that the partnership has increased access to rental listings for users [6].

Core Viewpoint - The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is suing Zillow and Redfin for allegedly conspiring to reduce competition in the online multifamily rental listing market, violating federal antitrust laws [1][2]. Summary by Sections Allegations of Antitrust Violations - The FTC claims that Zillow paid Redfin $100 million to re-host Zillow's multifamily rental listings on Redfin's platforms, which constitutes a violation of antitrust laws [2]. - Redfin agreed to terminate contracts with its existing advertising customers and assist Zillow in acquiring that business, committing to stay out of the multifamily advertising market for up to nine years [3]. Impact on Employment and Market Structure - Following the agreement, Redfin reportedly fired hundreds of employees and then helped Zillow selectively rehire many of them [4]. - The arrangement has led to a situation where Redfin's platforms became virtually identical to Zillow's, reducing competition in the market [3]. Market Reaction and Statements - Following the FTC's announcement, shares of Zillow and Redfin's parent company, Rocket Companies, experienced a sharp decline in afternoon trading [5]. - A Zillow spokesperson defended the partnership, stating it benefits both renters and property managers by expanding access to multifamily listings [6]. Legal Actions and Potential Outcomes - The FTC's lawsuit aims to unwind the agreement and may involve requirements for divestitures or restructuring to restore competition in the rental advertising market [7].