Redfin, Zillow Defend Rental Partnership In Ftc Antitrust Suit

Redfin and Zillow are doubling down on their motion to dismiss the antitrust lawsuit filed against them by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and attorneys general from Virginia, Arizona, New York, Connecticut and Washington. The two defendants filed a reply to the regulators’ opposition to their motion late last week. 

In their filing, Redfin and Zillow claim the the plaintiffs’ arguments pushing back against the motion to dismiss are “meritless” and that the argument that the partnership harms consumers “undermines the very purpose of antitrust laws,” as the defendants argue that consumers “benefit from increased listings from the partnership.” 

Originally filed as two separate lawsuits in late September 2025 before being consolidated in late November, the lawsuit claims that the multifamily rental syndication deal executed by Zillow and Redfin was tantamount to Zillow simply paying Redfin $100 million in exchange for it no longer competing in the multifamily rental listing space. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit in mid-January. A hearing on this motion is scheduled for Feb. 25. 

In their most recent filing, Redfin and Zillow argue that the regulator plaintiffs are ignoring half of the market Zillow and Redfin serve, as both platforms serve both consumers and property managers. The defendants argue that the regulators’ complaint only focuses on how the partnership could harm property managers and landlords and it ignores how it benefits renters. 

Additionally, Zillow and Redfin pushback against the regulators’ claim that there is a nationwide market for paid internet listing service advertising, arguing instead that rental advertising is local and that property managers advertise in specific cities. The defendants also contend that the plaintiffs have ignored other advertising options property managers and landlords can take advantage of, like social media or even other online platforms. 

The companies also argue that the regulators have failed to show that they have enough power to raise prices or control the market. In the filing, Redfin and Zillow note that in their complaint, the regulators didn’t provide specific market share numbers, nor did they show that the two companies together dominate the market. According to Redfin and Zillow, all of this combined means that the regulators did not show any evidence of actual harm, but instead only predict possible future harm, which they argue is not enough for the lawsuit to proceed. 

While the parties wait for the court’s ruling on this motion to dismiss, they have been engaged in discovery. In a separate status update filed on Monday, the parties disclosed that they have been working together to meet the discovery deadlines set by the court. So far in the discovery process, Zillow has produced roughly 240,000 custodial and 1,100 noncustodial documents, while Redfin has  produced approximately 91,000 custodial and 500 noncustodial documents. They also told the court that they are working together to coordinate and schedule defendant depositions. 

This update comes after the court settled a discovery dispute between the parties earlier this month, ordering that they must produce a variety of internal and external communications and documents, as well as declarations from several executives including Rich Barton, Lloyd Frink and Zillow CEO Jeremy Waksman.