Should more MLSs join forces, share data — or go it alone? 

In a nation with more than 500 multiple listing services, the pressure to consolidate is intense. 

Agents, brokers and even the National Association of Realtors have long pushed for fewer MLSs to avoid duplicating efforts and multiplying fees.

However, the recent trend — particularly given the big NAR settlement-driven changes taking effect — is to keep the MLSs as they are, but share data. This may seem like a dodge, but MLS leaders argue that it makes sense for them, and for their subscribers.

"It's hard to do a consolidation because there are some sacrifices that people have to make," said Daniel Jones, CEO of the North Carolina Regional MLS, citing job losses and working with a board they don't know as examples. 

Jones said the NCRMLS "cooperative wholesale" model gets subscribers what they want: data integrity across regions without having to change platforms. It also allows associations to remain distinct and provide local representation.

How data sharing has evolved

The motivations for sharing data have changed over time, said Clint Skutchan, SVP of organized real estate at T3 Sixty. It's not just about staving off consolidation — it's about bringing together larger data sets that aren't necessarily from neighboring counties (or even the same country).

"So it's an expansion-based opportunity," Skutchan said.

In June, BeachesMLS, which covers a portion of South Florida, reached a data share agreement with the California Regional MLS and has an agreement with BrightMLS. That's because those areas have a lot of movers looking toward Florida, said Dionna Hall, CEO at Broward, Palm Beach & St. Lucie Realtors, which operates BeachesMLS.

Hall has long been vocal about the benefits of MLS collaboration.

"I think part of the value of an MLS is making sure that you have built out your MLS to be responsive to the needs of those local agents," Hall said. "So what our very large data share has allowed us to do is still specialize in our marketplaces, but expand our neighbors' specialized marketplaces and what they do best and then share that data so everybody's marketplaces are very well represented to the benefit of the consumer."

Competition and control

As of June 2024, there are 535 MLSs in the U.S., according to the Real Estate Standards Organization (RESO). That's down from more than 800 in 2016 but has remained fairly stable over the past two years.

The consolidation slowdown is driven in part by a reluctance among members to increase competition in their marketplace. Skutchan said that's particularly common in resort communities where members want to limit access to listings.

"Whether that really happens or not is a different thing. But the perception is if we have our data shared at-large, we're going to invite folks into our marketplace," Skutchan said.

Maintaining local control or independence appears to be the biggest driver for pursuing data sharing instead of consolidation. In a 2017 survey about consolidation, NAR found the loss of control of MLS finances, loss of income, lack of representation and duplication of services were the biggest concerns among small MLSs.

"A number of respondents point out that geography and distance play a strong role in deciding against consolidation, since their members do not want other Realtors participating in their MLS who do not understand the local market," NAR noted in the 2017 post.

Will this trend continue?

With technology making it possible to share data while allowing members to keep their same systems or platforms, it's likely to remain a popular option. Consolidation will also continue to happen, but it's a difficult proposition when you have to do it in a transparent way, with voting among members, Skutchan said.

Consolidation is more of a battle because "somebody has to win and somebody has to lose," said Patrick LaJeunesse, chief data officer at the North Carolina Regional MLS. "If somebody has to give something up, why would I want to do that?"

Major shifts in the industry could be a reason why. Intensity around consolidation conversations has increased in the past 18 months, Skutchan said, because of the upcoming NAR settlement changes which could possibly lead to membership declines. And fewer members means fewer people contributing to MLS budgets. 

"I think the financial wherewithal and bringing the organizations together is more top of mind in this environment," Skutchan said, especially when organizations get a better understanding of what subscriber losses they may be dealing with. 

"The best solution for the country would be to have whatever number of MLSs, but that they're all integrated and have data in a single place."