Private, or "off-market," listings have been building into one of the biggest fights in real estate for over a year. This month it stopped being just an industry argument. Both sides started publishing their own data to prove who's right, and the numbers themselves became part of the story.
What's actually happening
A private listing is a home marketed without going on the MLS, sometimes shown to a small pool of buyers inside one brokerage, sometimes shared through a private network. NAR's Clear Cooperation Policy says a publicly marketed home has to hit the MLS within a business day. Compass is the name attached to most of the headlines, but "off-market exclusive" has become a pitch a lot of brokerages use with clients, not just one company.
The fight picked up a political layer this month too. Two members of Congress from opposite parties sent letters calling private networks bad for first-time and lower-income buyers, and a state law requiring sellers to sign a disclosure about it is close to passing in New York. That side of it will run its course in Washington and Albany regardless of anything happening here. What actually matters for someone buying or selling a home is the data underneath it.
The dueling data
In late July, Compass released its own study claiming pre-marketed homes sold for 4.6% more than homes that went straight to the MLS. Days later, Zillow filed a court analysis showing the opposite: Compass private listings selling for 4.8% less nationally, 4% less in the Chicago market specifically. Compass's study also quietly excluded any listing that expired or got withdrawn before it sold, exactly the kind of exclusion that would make a struggling private listing look like a success story once it finally sells on the open market.
The one study actually worth trusting is the one with no financial stake in the outcome. A University of Georgia professor studied 700,000 listings in Dallas-Fort Worth over 20 years and found a real premium for private listings, but only 1.7%, less than half of what Compass claims. Zillow also found sellers in dual agency deals, where the same agent represents both sides, lost a combined $1.49 billion over three years compared to sellers who didn't.
So no, it's not a 100% fact that the MLS gets you the best price. It's also not a fact that going private does. The honest answer is it depends on the home, and depends a lot on who's actually steering the deal.
What this means if you're buying or selling in Phoenix
A seller should get to decide if their home goes private, as long as the agent actually explains the tradeoffs instead of just pitching it as a perk. Where I think it holds up: unique, high-end properties in Scottsdale, Arcadia, and Paradise Valley that don't have clean comps and don't need a bidding war. Distressed properties headed for a teardown or full gut, where a public listing full of showings doesn't help anyone. And new construction, builders have sold off-market through their own marketing every day, at every price point, for as long as I've been in this business. None of that is new and none of it looks like a problem.
Where it doesn't hold up: some agents and brokerages pitch this because it helps them win the listing, not because it actually helps the buyer or seller. That happens in every industry, but real estate has more money riding on the decision than most. I don't personally know anyone locally who went through a private sale and came away feeling burned, so I don't think it's happening often here. But if a brokerage has a real pattern of dual agency deals where sellers didn't get accurate pricing, that Zillow number above says the damage is real, and it should get enforced against.
ARMLS enforcing Clear Cooperation here doesn't mean this isn't happening in Phoenix. It is, just concentrated in that smaller slice: luxury, distressed, and builder deals. Pull enough sales out of what's publicly reported and it still tightens visible inventory, and that alone is enough to keep prices elevated and affordability tighter for everyone else. What I'd actually want to see going forward isn't a ban, it's real disclosure and better tracking so buyers and agents know how much of the market is actually happening off the MLS. Nobody has a clean number on that today, and that's the part worth fixing.
Sources: Compass Private Listing Study (July 2026); Zillow Research expert court filing analysis (July 2026); Dr. Darren Hayunga, University of Georgia, Dallas-Fort Worth listing study; Zillow Research dual agency seller impact study (May 2026); ARMLS NAR Clear Cooperation policy.
