About

Why this exists

Brokers make big technology decisions with no benchmark. This report is built to give them one.

Josh Harley

Josh is the founder and former CEO of Fathom Holdings. During his time with Fathom, his team lived this problem firsthand, and brokers deserve a straight answer.

Every renewal raises the same questions. Are we paying too much? Are we paying twice for the same job? Is this normal for a brokerage our size? Vendors have the answer in aggregate. Brokers don't.

Josh is a Texas-licensed broker and a USMC veteran.

The gap

NAR's 2025 REALTORS Technology Survey drew 1,241 responses from agents. It asked what agents spend, not what the brokerage pays. NAR's survey of brokerage firms stopped tracking technology more than a decade ago. The only other study we found covers about 100 brokerages and gives per-agent ranges, with nothing per closed side, by category or by vendor. That's what this study measures.

Methodology

Who's surveyed

Owners, brokers of record, managing brokers and operations or technology leads at US residential brokerages. One response per brokerage. We verify each brokerage against state license records before releasing a report.

What's measured

What the brokerage pays for technology, by category and vendor. Agent-paid tools are noted but not counted as brokerage spend. Paid leads and referral platforms are reported separately and never counted as tech spend.

How it's normalized

3 ways: per rostered agent per month, per active agent per month (closed at least 1 side in the last 12 months), and per closed transaction side.

Peer groups

By active agents: 1-5, 6-50, 51-150, 151-500, 501-1,000, 1,001-3,000 and 3,000+. Also by compensation model and franchise versus independent where cells are large enough.

Estimates

Ranges are converted to their midpoint. We also report how far gut estimates land from itemized totals.

Vendor prices

Shown as medians only. Never a single brokerage's price, never a vendor-supplied number.

Start the survey