The swift closing of the Compass–Anywhere acquisition on Jan. 9 caught much of the industry off guard and reignited discussion around brokerage consolidation, competition, and the long-term structure of residential real estate.

In an in-depth conversation with Real Estate News, Howard Hanna President and CEO Howard “Hoby” Hanna IV explained why he wasn’t shocked by the deal’s speed, why regulatory fears were overstated, and why he does not believe residential brokerage will consolidate in the way many predict.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Many people were surprised by how quickly the Compass-Anywhere deal closed. What are your immediate takeaways?

I know my view may differ from others across the industry. Like everyone else, I followed the speculation — especially the idea that regulators might require divestitures due to market concentration.

My perspective was different. I never saw a clear path for regulators to step in and block or delay the transaction. Anywhere remains a portfolio of distinct brands, just as it has always been. Yes, in certain markets the combined market share is meaningful, but residential real estate doesn’t function like other heavily regulated industries.

Take banking as a comparison. Regulators can approve a merger but require branches or deposits to be sold. That approach doesn’t translate to real estate brokerage, where agents are independent contractors.

You can’t mandate that an agent work for one brokerage over another. If agents are unhappy, they can move freely — far more easily than in most industries. Because of that flexibility, consumer choice remains intact and competition still exists.

So while the timing surprised me — January was earlier than I expected; I thought it might land later in the first quarter — I never believed regulatory hurdles would slow it down.

I’ve told others it’s a bold move and likely positive for shareholders of both companies. But the new leadership team has taken on a massive challenge. Integration will be complex, there are still open questions, and even with debt restructuring, leverage remains significant. Execution now matters more than ever.

Industry leaders’ reactions have varied. Some say ‘game on,’ while others predict residential real estate will mirror commercial brokerage consolidation. What’s your view?

Residential brokerage is fundamentally different from commercial real estate. From the outside, many commercial firms look nearly identical — similar offerings, pricing structures, and diversification strategies.

When people claim there will only be three or four brokerages left, I always ask, “Three or four of what?”

Our industry supports a wide range of business models. Beyond traditional commission structures, there are 100% commission firms, low-fee franchises, independent boutiques, and revenue-share platforms. Culture and operating philosophy vary widely.

Consolidation may happen, but the real question is which models align with one another. That’s where the nuance lies.

Looking back over recent years, there have actually been very few aggressive acquirers beyond Howard Hanna and Compass. Anywhere hasn’t pursued large-scale acquisitions for quite some time, aside from limited franchise activity. Berkshire Hathaway historically expanded HomeServices through acquisitions, but that pace has slowed.

What we see instead is regional expansion. Baird & Warner acquiring Dream Town stayed within Chicago. Windermere and William Raveis have expanded selectively, including in Florida. But this isn’t a sweeping consolidation wave.

Where does that leave strong independent brokerages?

Well-positioned independents with solid market share are actually in a favorable spot — provided they meet certain criteria.

First, they must be highly focused on listings. Second, they need structured, usable data — not just collected data — to support tools like propensity modeling that help agents grow.

If an independent brokerage doesn’t control its service offerings, data, and communication channels, then it’s effectively renting its business infrastructure from third parties — whether that’s an MLS, a mortgage partner, or another vendor.

Even setting Anywhere aside, the Rocket–Redfin–Mr. Cooper transaction sent a clear message. This business is no longer just about selling homes; it’s about controlling the entire housing ecosystem. Some firms — like Windermere, Raveis, and Baird & Warner — already operate this way. Others are behind and may struggle to adapt over the next five to ten years.

The future belongs to the home services platform — one that supports agents, keeps consumers within a seamless ecosystem, preserves choice, and enables brokerages to build stronger, more integrated products.

Does the Compass-Anywhere deal change how you think about acquisitions at Howard Hanna?

Not fundamentally. Our strategy remains sound.

That said, we’ve seen a noticeable increase in conversations since the deal was announced — even starting late last year. Companies are thinking more strategically, and some want faster movement. Valuation expectations have also shifted due to what’s happening with Compass and Anywhere.

Still, discipline is critical. As a family-owned business, we acquire using our own capital. We’re not interested in excessive leverage.

In many cases, sellers become long-term partners and operators within our organization. We want them invested in growth alongside us. We’ve also structured deals where we acquire majority ownership while retaining strong local leadership, creating expansion opportunities through mortgage, title, insurance, and property management.

That approach has served us well, and we intend to stay the course.