Every showing starts with a site visit
We read the websites of 133 independent real estate brokerages, agents and property managers in the US the way a client does: on a phone, deciding who to trust with a sale, a purchase or a rental, and asking what it will cost.
0 websites
Four kinds of business
Twelve checks
The State of Independent Real Estate Websites · Q4 2026 · edition 2026-Q4
and drawing index
of the websites in this study answer the client's question.
Clients ask eight questions. The median site answers three.
Across 133 independent real estate websites, the median site answers three of the eight client questions this edition tests. 13% state a commission or management fee; 20% show a licence number.1
Room schedule
What a client can find out before calling
We turned eight questions a buyer, a seller or a landlord asks before contacting an agent into eight checks, then read each site for an answer a visitor could find on a phone.
Room schedule · share of all websites answering each question · line length = share · dashed = under a quarter · dotted tick = half
| No. | The client asks | Answered | Sites |
|---|
Figure 1. Share of sites that answer each question on the home page or a page it links to, read from the served HTML. Sorted from most to least answered.
The seller's question
0%
Median score / 100
Four kinds of business, side by side
Independent residential brokerages (46): median score 74, a fee stated on 9%, a licence number on 17%. Solo agents and small teams (22): median score 74, a fee stated on 0%, a licence number on 27%. Independent property managers (47): median score 79, a fee stated on 28%, a licence number on 17%. Luxury boutiques (18): median score 72, a fee stated on 0%, a licence number on 22%.
Where each website scores
Overall website score out of 100, one dot per site; the cobalt rule is each group's median
Figure 2. Overall website score out of 100, one dot per site. The cobalt rule marks each group's median.
Four businesses, up close
Four real sites from this edition, one strong, two in the middle and one weak. Each photograph shows the kind of moment its findings describe; the business itself stays anonymous. The number is the overall website score; each dot is one check, filled when the site passes it.
Build Idaho (Homes of Idaho)
Solo agents and small team, Boise, ID. It answers 7 of the 8 client questions this edition tests, loads fast on phones and describes its images; like most sites in this study, it has yet to pass text contrast (WCAG 1.4.3). Its overall website score is 75/100. Named as a positive example; every other site in this report is anonymous.
What it does well
- Listings or rentals can be searched on the site
- Tappable phone plus a form or showing request
- Areas served named, or community pages
- Home valuation or rental analysis offered
- Track record shown: sales, volume or doors managed
- A real estate licence number is shown
- Reviews marked up, in a widget or quoted
- Real phone visitors see the main content in 2.3 s (Chrome UX Report, 75th percentile; good is 2.5 s or less)
- Every image has a text description (WCAG 1.1.1)
- Clikiti pillar scores of 90 or more: accessibility 98
Where it could still improve
- Not found on the home page or the pages it links to: commission or management fee stated
- Speed pillar 55/100 (driven by the throttled mobile Lighthouse run; real phone visitors load it fast)
and speed
The clients left out
A buyer using a screen reader, a landlord on a keyboard, a seller on an old phone with a weak signal: each is still a client. These checks measure whether the site lets them in.3
Table 1. Technical checks, share of the 133 sites that fail each one.
How the sites were read
Read
The home page and up to nine pages it links to (listings, home valuation, sold, agents, about, reviews, areas, fees and contact), read as a server delivers them. The client questions are answered here, by fixed published rules (Appendix A4).
Measure
Google Lighthouse (PageSpeed Insights) in a phone and a desktop render, with Chrome UX Report field data where it exists: load time, contrast and image descriptions. Repeatable.
Review
An expert usability review of each home page against Nielsen's heuristics, used only in the usability part of the score. Every issue must name the heuristic, a severity and the element, or it is dropped.
Read the full methodology Sample, definitions, scoring, precision and limitations, in Appendix A.
For agencies and freelancers
What this means for agencies
what to fix first, and how to pitch it
For small agencies and freelancers who sell websites to independent brokerages, agent teams and property managers. We scanned 133 of their websites: 2% score under 60 out of 100, and 86% leave at least three of the questions buyers, sellers and landlords ask unanswered. Here is where the winnable work is, which problems to lead a pitch with, and how to show them without days of spec design.
Who is realistic to win
Luxury boutiques are the most winnable: the lowest median score in this report (72 out of 100), and 0% of them score under 60. Their problems are visible, specific and fixable by a small team.
| Type | Sites | Median | Under 60 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Independent residential brokerages | 46 | 74 | 4% |
| Solo agents and small teams | 22 | 74 | 0% |
| Independent property managers | 47 | 79 | 0% |
| Luxury boutiques | 18 | 72 | 0% |
Score out of 100. "Under 60" is the share of sites that miss most of what a buyers, sellers and landlord looks for.
5 problems to lead a pitch with
- 87%What will it cost me? Content
Say plainly how the firm is paid: commission or flat fee and what it covers, or the management and leasing fees.
Since buyer agreements became the norm, clients ask what you charge first, and your site does not say.
- 87%Text contrast passes 4.5:1 Quick fix
Raise text contrast to at least 4.5:1, especially text laid over hero photos.
Parts of the site are hard to read, and it is a WCAG failure.
- 80%Are you licensed? Quick fix
Show the broker of record and each agent’s licence number in the footer and on agent pages.
A careful client checks the licence first, and your site makes them look it up elsewhere.
- 78%RealEstateAgent or listing structured data Quick fix
Add RealEstateAgent structured data with the firm’s name, address, phone and areas served.
Search engines and assistants have to guess who you are and where you work.
- 77%Loads in under 2.5 s on a phone Build
Resize and compress the hero photo, defer the listing-search scripts, aim for under 2.5 s on a phone.
Your home page takes several seconds to appear on a buyer’s phone at the curb.
Share of sites with the problem. WCAG items are accessibility failures. Every check cites a standard in the method section.
How to show a prospect their problems, and a redesign
- 1Lead with their problem, not your services
Open with one question the site fails, for example "What will it cost me?" (87% of sites in this report miss it), and show the exact page where the answer should be.
- 2Put a number on it
Compare their site with the sector: across 133 independent brokerages, agent teams and property managers sites, the median scores 75 out of 100 and answers 3 of the 8 questions buyers, sellers and landlords ask. A number travels further inside the client than an opinion.
- 3Show the fix without days of spec work
A rough redesign that answers those questions persuades better than a proposal, but it usually costs a designer a day or two per prospect. You can sketch it by hand, or use Clikiti: the scan is free and shows any site's problems in about a minute, and paid plans draft a redesign of the home page from the prospect's own brand, from about $2.33 per pitch.
Scan a prospect's site free No sign-up. You see what the prospect would see.
freelancers
Show every broker what their clients see
Clikiti reads a brokerage's site the way a buyer or a seller does, states what it found, and drafts the redesign you present before the first call.
See your market on ClikitiMethodology
How this study was designed, who was included, what was measured and how far the results can be relied on. It is written so that an agency can share it with a broker who wants to check the evidence behind a pitch.
A1. The research question
When someone wants to buy, sell or rent out a home and looks up an independent agent, brokerage or property manager online, usually on a phone, can they search what is for sale or rent, reach the business or ask for a showing, tell whether it works in their area, get a home valuation or rental analysis, see a track record, check a licence number, find out what it charges and see whether past clients vouch for it?
Population. Independently owned US residential real estate businesses with their own website, in four groups: independent residential brokerages, solo agents and small teams, independent property managers, and luxury boutiques. These are the real estate businesses a small or mid-size web agency can realistically win as clients.
A2. Who was studied
The sample was built from local search listings, city by city, then screened so that every site in it is one an independent agency could realistically win.
| Source | What it contributes | Sites |
|---|---|---|
| Local search, independent brokerages | Independently owned residential brokerages found in local search results and brokerage directories, city by city | 85 |
| Local search, agents and teams | Solo agents and small teams with their own website, found in local search results, city by city | 25 |
| Local search, property managers | Independently owned residential property management companies found in local search results, city by city | 45 |
| Local search, luxury boutiques | Independent brokerages and teams that market themselves as luxury or fine homes specialists, found in local search results, city by city | 17 |
Included
- An independently owned brokerage, team or property manager with its own website (not a directory, portal or social profile)
- Based in the United States
- Home page responds and shows the business it claims to be (each home page title was checked before scanning)
Excluded
- Franchise and national brokerages and their affiliates and agents (for example Keller Williams, RE/MAX, Coldwell Banker, Century 21, ERA, Better Homes and Gardens Real Estate, Compass, eXp, Real Brokerage, Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices, Sotheby's International Realty, Engel & Völkers, Howard Hanna, Douglas Elliman, Weichert, Redfin), whose agents' sites are templates
- Portals and lead-generation sites (Zillow, Realtor.com, Homes.com, Trulia)
- National and franchised property managers (for example Real Property Management, Mynd, Evernest, Greystar, Pathlight, Renters Warehouse, Mavis) and any business with offices in several states
- Agent pages hosted on a franchise or portal domain
- Parked, placeholder, password-protected or unreachable sites, and duplicates
| From list to sample | Sites |
|---|---|
| Candidates listed (each home page answered automated visitors when listed) | 151 |
| Removed at editorial review: offices in several states or very large (3) | −3 |
| Removed at editorial review: brokerage services provided by a franchise (1) | −1 |
| Removed at editorial review: a hijacked domain serving hidden gambling links (1) | −1 |
| Removed at screening: a bot check or an empty page served instead of the site (4) | −4 |
| Cohort | 142 |
| Not scanned: one site refused the scanner and one could not be scanned (2) | −2 |
| Removed because Google returned no phone speed test for the site (7) | −7 |
| Studied in this edition | 133 |
| Region (US Census) | Independent residential brokerages | Solo agents and small teams | Independent property managers | Luxury boutiques | All |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Northeast | 13 | 6 | 12 | 4 | 35 |
| Midwest | 10 | 6 | 10 | 5 | 31 |
| South | 10 | 6 | 14 | 5 | 35 |
| West | 13 | 4 | 11 | 4 | 32 |
| All regions | 46 | 22 | 47 | 18 | 133 |
A3. How the sites were read
Pages. The home page, then for each of nine topics (listings or rentals, home valuation, sold or track record, agents or team, about, reviews, areas or communities, fees or services, contact) the best-matching link on the home page.
Speed and accessibility. Google PageSpeed Insights (Lighthouse) on a mid-range phone profile and on desktop, plus Chrome UX Report data from real visitors over the previous 28 days where Google publishes it for the site.
Crawler conduct. One request at a time to each site, at least 400 ms apart, at most ten pages per site; robots.txt is read and obeyed for every page requested; a site that refuses is left out and never retried. The crawler identifies itself as Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; ClikitiResearch/1.0; +https://clikiti.com).
A4. What was measured
8 questions home buyers, sellers and landlords ask before they call an agent, answered from what each site publishes, and 4 technical checks against published standards. A check passes only when the rule below is met; anything the crawler cannot confirm counts as not answered.
| Question | Counts as answered when | Standard |
|---|---|---|
| Can I see what you have for sale or rent?Listings or rentals can be searched on the site | Listings or available rentals can be searched or browsed on the business's own site: a link to a listings, property search or rentals page on its own domain or on its branded listing-search (IDX) or rental-listing service, or such a search embedded in a page. A link that sends the visitor to a portal (Zillow, Realtor.com, Homes.com) does not count. | Clikiti customer question 1 of 8 |
| How do I reach you or book a showing?Tappable phone plus a form or showing request | The home page has a tappable phone link, and the home or contact page carries a contact form, or a link that requests a showing, a tour or a consultation online. | Clikiti customer question 2 of 8 |
| Do you work where I live?Areas served named, or community pages | The site links to community, neighbourhood or areas-served pages, or names three or more towns or neighbourhoods it serves. | Clikiti customer question 3 of 8 |
| What's my home worth, or what will it rent for?Home valuation or rental analysis offered | The site offers a home valuation (what's my home worth, a market analysis or a home value estimate) or, for property managers, a rental analysis or rent estimate. | Clikiti customer question 4 of 8 |
| Have you sold or managed homes like mine?Track record shown: sales, volume or doors managed | The site shows a track record: a sold or past-sales page, a count of homes sold or closed, a sales volume, or, for property managers, a count of homes, doors or units managed. | Clikiti customer question 5 of 8 |
| Are you licensed?A real estate licence number is shown | A real estate licence number is shown (for example 'DRE #01234567', 'License #', 'Lic. No.') on the home, about, agents or contact page. | Clikiti customer question 6 of 8 |
| What will it cost me?Commission or management fee stated | A fee is stated: a commission or listing fee as a percentage or dollar amount, or, for property managers, a management, leasing or tenant-placement fee. | Clikiti customer question 7 of 8 |
| Do past clients vouch for you?Reviews marked up, in a widget or quoted | Client reviews are marked up for search engines (Review or AggregateRating structured data), shown through a review widget, or at least two client testimonials are quoted. | Clikiti customer question 8 of 8 |
| Technical checks | ||
| Loads in under 2.5 s on a phoneLoads in under 2.5 s on a phone | Real visitors on phones see the main content within 2.5 seconds (Chrome UX Report, 75th percentile). Where Google publishes no visitor data, the phone lab test is used. | Core Web Vitals · LCP |
| Text contrast passes 4.5:1Text contrast passes 4.5:1 | No text on the home page fails the WCAG 1.4.3 minimum contrast of 4.5:1, in either the phone or desktop test. | WCAG 1.4.3 |
| Images have text descriptionsImages have text descriptions | Every meaningful image on the home page has a text description (WCAG 1.1.1). | WCAG 1.1.1 |
| RealEstateAgent or listing structured dataRealEstateAgent or listing structured data | The site describes the business to search engines with RealEstateAgent, RealEstateListing or a similar real estate structured-data type. | Schema.org · RealEstateAgent |
A5. The website score
Each site's overall score (0 to 100) is Clikiti's website score, rubric 2.0.0. It measures the website, not the business, and the client questions above do not feed it. It is a weighted mean of five pillars:
| Pillar | Weight | Based on |
|---|---|---|
| Usability | 30% | Checks of the home page for broken links and images, and an expert review of the page as rendered on a phone and on a desktop screen, against Jakob Nielsen's ten usability heuristics. Each issue must name the heuristic, a severity on the Nielsen Norman Group scale and the exact element or wording; issues without all three are discarded, and two independent passes must agree. |
| Speed | 25% | Google Lighthouse on a mid-range phone (60%) and on desktop (20%), and real-visitor Core Web Vitals from the Chrome UX Report (20%) where available. |
| Accessibility | 25% | Google Lighthouse accessibility audits (70%) and Clikiti's own WCAG checks of the served page (30%). |
| Search | 10% | Google Lighthouse SEO audits (60%) and Clikiti's own search checks of the served page (40%). |
| Trust | 10% | Google Lighthouse best-practice audits (40%) and security header checks (60%). |
Within a pillar, each issue costs points by severity (critical, high, medium, low) and by how many times it occurs; issues based on judgement count at 70% of measured ones, and duplicates of the same root cause count once. On the four business profiles, the number out of 100 is this overall score, and each dot is one check in its group: filled when the site passes it, hollow when it does not.
A6. Precision
With 133 sites, a share reported for the whole sample is precise to within ±8.5 percentage points at 95% confidence (worst case, a 50% share; 1.96 × √(0.25/n)). By type: independent residential brokerages ±14.4 (n = 46); solo agents and small teams ±20.9 (n = 22); independent property managers ±14.3 (n = 47); luxury boutiques ±23.1 (n = 18). Differences between types smaller than these margins should be read as similar. Percentages are rounded to whole numbers; medians are the middle value of the sites in a group.
A7. Quality control
- Every home page in the cohort was fetched and its title checked against the listed business before scanning
- Every home page was checked for gambling, pharmacy, adult and crypto spam (hijacked domains) before scanning
- Detection rules were checked against the evidence they record for a sample of businesses in every group, and revised before the final run
- Every published figure is recomputed from the data at build time, and a statement in the text that the data does not support stops the build
- Results are published only after automated checks for missing data, anonymity, accessibility of the report itself and the margin of error statement pass
A8. Limitations
- A point-in-time snapshot: sites change, and a site may have improved or declined since it was read.
- Only public pages were read: the home page and pages it links to. Listing-search tools, saved searches, chat widgets and multi-step valuation forms were not tested.
- Answers are read from the page as a server delivers it. Content that only appears after scripts run in the browser (many listing searches, valuation tools and review widgets) is not seen unless the page links to it or loads it by name, which the study counts as a gap a search engine or a slow phone would also meet.
- Licence-number display rules differ by state; the study reports whether a number is shown, not whether a business meets its state's advertising rules.
- The study reports what a website shows. It does not judge any agent, brokerage, property manager, listing or price, or compliance with any licensing, advertising or fair housing rule.
- Automated accessibility tests find only part of what WCAG covers; keyboard and screen-reader use need a manual audit.
- The sample is a structured list of real, independent businesses, not a random draw. Margins of error are given as a guide to precision, not as a guarantee that the results hold for every business in the country.
A9. Data, licence and corrections
The aggregate results are published as CSV and JSON beside this report under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence: you may reuse, adapt and share them, including in client proposals, with a credit to Clikiti and a link. No per-site results are published. Corrections and removal requests are reviewed and answered personally; see the end of this report.
Businesses in this study
The 133 websites in this edition, by type. This list says who was scanned and nothing more: results in this report are shown only in aggregate or anonymously.
Independent residential brokerages (46)
- Baroody Real Estate LLCManchester, NH
- Blakemore Real EstateSalt Lake City, UT
- Blue Sierra RealtyReno, NV
- Bozeman Brokers Real EstateBozeman, MT
- cityhome COLLECTIVESalt Lake City, UT
- Divine InvestmentsProvidence, RI
- Dunes PropertiesCharleston, SC
- Fridrich & Clark RealtyNashville, TN
- Future Home RealtyTampa, FL
- Gabler RealtyDelmar (Albany), NY
- Gant Hill & AssociatesLouisville, KY
- Good Living IndyIndianapolis, IN
- Gottesman ResidentialAustin, TX
- Greenridge RealtyGrand Rapids, MI
- HI Pro RealtyHonolulu, HI
- Highgarden Real EstateIndianapolis, IN
- Jamison Company Real EstateSioux Falls, SD
- JBGoodwin REALTORSAustin, TX
- Joseph Walter RealtyColumbus, OH
- Judge RealtySavannah, GA
- KC Local HomesKansas City, MO
- Kentucky Select PropertiesLouisville, KY
- Kingsway RealtyLancaster, PA
- Lifespace Real EstatePittsburgh, PA
- Living Room RealtyPortland, OR
- Locations LLCHonolulu, HI
- Maywright Property Co.Indianapolis, IN
- Myers & Myers Real EstateAlbuquerque, NM
- Northbound Realty Co.West Boylston (Worcester), MA
- One Valley RealtyAllentown, PA
- Paris Group RealtyPortland, OR
- Parsons Real Estate GroupColumbus, OH
- Peloquin Realty & Property ManagementManchester, NH
- Pilkerton RealtorsNashville, TN
- PowerHaus Real EstateBoise, ID
- Ralston Group PropertiesBoise, ID
- Rockwood Realty GroupMadison, WI
- Seabury Hill RealtorsNew Haven, CT
- Serota Real Estate LLCBuffalo, NY
- Silvercreek Realty GroupBoise, ID
- Spyglass RealtyAustin, TX
- Stanton Company RealtorsMontclair, NJ
- Stellar Realty NorthwestBend, OR
- Tea Leaf RealtyWest Hartford, CT
- Vitalius Real Estate GroupPortland, ME
- WB Realty Co.West Des Moines, IA
Solo agents and small teams (22)
- Agentry Real EstateTampa, FL
- Amy Stockberger Real EstateSioux Falls, SD
- Bainbridge Realty GroupNashville, TN
- Build Idaho (Homes of Idaho)Boise, ID
- Buyers Brokers of the SeacoastPortsmouth, NH
- Caperton RealtyLouisville, KY
- Elevate Realty GroupRochester, NY
- Epperson Realty GroupAustin, TX
- Foxway RealtyAnn Arbor, MI
- Graham RealtorsWichita, KS
- Handsome PropertiesCharleston, SC
- Hawaii Realty International (American Dream Realty)Honolulu, HI
- Jared Erhart Real Estate TeamBethlehem (Allentown), PA
- Lehigh Valley Just ListedNorthampton (Allentown), PA
- Maywalt Realty GroupBuffalo, NY
- Oak Street Real Estate GroupNashville, TN
- RealABQAlbuquerque, NM
- Steve Volkers GroupGrand Rapids, MI
- Templeton Real Estate GroupBoise, ID
- The Garlick Team Boutique Real EstateDes Moines, IA
- The Hub RealtyMadison, WI
- The Nolt Team (Kingsway Realty)Lancaster, PA
Independent property managers (47)
- Aishel Real EstatePittsburgh, PA
- Asheville Phoenix PropertiesAsheville, NC
- Bahia Property ManagementTampa, FL
- Baton Rouge Property ManagementBaton Rouge, LA
- Bend Property ManagementBend, OR
- Bissonette PropertiesBurlington, VT
- Bridge Home RealtyPittsburgh, PA
- CCL ManagementMadison, WI
- Charleston Property CompanyCharleston, SC
- Chase Pacific Property ManagementSan Diego, CA
- Chattanooga Property ManagementChattanooga, TN
- Chauncey Property ManagementRochester, NY
- Clarke Property ManagementPortland, ME
- Clements Property ManagementSanta Barbara, CA
- Dean & DeWitt Property ManagementTampa, FL
- Fountain City Property SolutionsKansas City, MO
- Frontier Property AdvisorsPortland, ME
- Great Plains Property ManagementSioux Falls, SD
- Great Richmond RentalsRichmond, VA
- H2 Real EstateBirmingham, AL
- HarborLight Property ManagementSouth Portland, ME
- Hudson ResidentialRaleigh, NC
- Ironclad Property ManagementHartford area, CT
- Just Right PropertiesKansas City, MO
- KEEZ Property ManagementSioux Falls, SD
- Lamplight Home RentalsAsheville, NC
- Mission City Property ManagementSanta Barbara, CA
- MSP Home RentalMinneapolis, MN
- Parkville ManagementHartford, CT
- Portland Pioneer PropertiesPortland, OR
- Portland Property Management IncPortland, OR
- Qwest Property ManagementGrand Rapids, MI
- Realty Performance GroupRochester, NY
- Robert C. White & CompanyWest Hartford, CT
- RVA Property ManagementRichmond, VA
- San Diego Professional Property ManagersSan Diego, CA
- Smart Move Property ManagementBoise, ID
- Stone Oak Property ManagementSan Antonio, TX
- Texas Best Property ManagementAustin, TX
- Tiner PropertiesSacramento, CA
- TradeMark ResidentialRaleigh, NC
- True Home Ohio Property ManagementCincinnati, OH
- United Properties of West MichiganGrand Rapids, MI
- URHome Property ManagementPortland, OR
- West Ridge Property ManagementPortland, OR
- Wilmoth GroupIndianapolis, IN
- Zona PropertiesRochester, NY
Luxury boutiques (18)
- Carriage PropertiesCharleston, SC
- Eric Moreland GroupAustin, TX
- Freeland Realty GroupColumbus, OH
- Gladys Manion Real EstateSt. Louis, MO
- Great Island RealtyPortsmouth, NH
- Janet McAfee Real EstateSt. Louis, MO
- Kopf Hunter & Haas RealtorsCincinnati, OH
- Leyendecker Luxury Real EstateMinneapolis, MN
- LUXE Forbes Global PropertiesPortland, OR
- Moreland PropertiesAustin, TX
- Pam Harrington ExclusivesCharleston, SC
- Phyllis Browning CompanySan Antonio, TX
- Pursuit Real EstateBurlington, VT
- Riskin Partners Estate GroupSanta Barbara, CA
- Santa Barbara BrokersSanta Barbara, CA
- Town & Shore Real EstatePortland, ME
- Village PropertiesSanta Barbara, CA
- Watch Hill PropertiesWesterly, RI
About this study
This report is based on automated scans of publicly available home pages, and pages they link to, run on 2026-10-14 to 2026-10-15. Its findings are a point-in-time technical snapshot of each website. They are not a judgement of any agent's service, any listing, any price or anyone's licensing status, and automated checks may contain errors. This report is not a judgement of the quality of any agent, brokerage, property manager, listing or price, and it does not assess compliance with any real estate licensing, advertising or fair housing rule. Clikiti is not affiliated with, and does not endorse, any business listed here; trademarks belong to their owners. The report is provided “as is” under CC BY 4.0, without warranty of any kind. Every person in this report's photographs is AI-generated; none is a real person. The one business screenshot is the featured business's own home page, shown unaltered.
Remove my business from this study
We review every request and reply when it's done; removed businesses are excluded from future editions.