O
n Oct. 1, the attorneys general of Arizona, Connecticut, New York, Virginia and Washington filed a lawsuit against Zillow and Redfin, alleging that the two real‑estate giants conspired to eliminate competition in the rental‑listing market. The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for Eastern Virginia and follows the FTC’s own antitrust complaint, which was lodged the day before.

    The dispute centers on a deal announced on Feb. 11 in which Zillow would become the exclusive provider of multifamily rental listings for Redfin’s network, which includes Rent.com and ApartmentGuide.com. The companies claimed the partnership would broaden the inventory available to renters and give property owners a wider audience across multiple platforms.

    FTC investigators determined that the $100 million agreement violated federal antitrust rules, arguing that it was part of Zillow’s strategy to eliminate “critical” competition. The federal agency filed its lawsuit on Sept. 30, accusing the companies of colluding to suppress rivals in an already concentrated market.

    The state complaint echoes the FTC’s allegations, asserting that Zillow has no incentive to compete with Redfin and that the partnership constitutes an unlawful agreement to remove competition. AG Kris Mayes (Arizona), William Tong (Connecticut) and Nicholas Brown (Washington) highlighted the rising cost of living, warning that the deal would drive rents higher and burden property managers who would pass costs onto tenants.

    Zillow defended the arrangement, stating that the syndication benefits both renters and property managers by connecting managers with high‑intent prospects and expanding access to multifamily listings. Redfin countered, saying it disagrees with the claims and expects to be vindicated in court. The company noted that the partnership reduced the need for a large rental sales force, freeing resources to invest in search innovations that directly help apartment seekers.