I charge my clients what I consider a fair and “standard” commission for the Boston area real estate market. I tell my listing clients that my commission is 5%, and that I don’t ask for more and I rarely negotiate less. Under special circumstances I may take a slightly lower commission (multiple transactions) and in no circumstances will I take less than 4.5% as a total commission.
What makes 5% “standard”?
Commissions are NOT standardized according to any governmental or non-governmental agency or body. In addition, no realtor organization makes anything approaching a “suggestion” as to actual commissions, as it is probably prohibited from doing so. Commissions are determined by the market and are technically “freely” negotiated between agents and sellers. Individual agencies can set their own standards but it would be borderline illegal for brokers from different agencies to discuss commissions. Agents are taught that just talking about commissions with agents from other brokerages can be seen as an anti-competitive violation of the Federal anti-monopoly laws. 5% is merely standard in a colloquial sense based on what I see agents charging in the metropolitan Boston area.
There is no way to track the actual commissions that agents charge. However, we can infer what they are charging by looking at what MLS shows agents are offering as a “co-broke” commission to the buyers’ agents. Agents almost universally “co-broke” or “offer to compensate” the buyer’s agent with 50% of the total commission. According to MLS for the past year:
- In Brookline, on 93.6% of the residential listings, the listing agent offered a 2.5% commission co-broke 93.6% of the time, offered less, 5.4% of time, and more, 1% of the time.
- In Newton the numbers are similar. The listing agent offered a 2.5% commission co-broke 89% of the time, offered less, 8% of time, and more, 3% of the time.
- In Boston, which involves thousands of listings, the numbers are somewhat different. On about 75% of the residential listings, the listing agent offered a 2.5% commission co-broke, offered less 22% of the time, and more, about 3% of the time.
While there are occasions when the listing agent will not compensate the buyer’s agent with 50% of the commission, based on my experience, it happens so rarely that the message here is clear: 5% is what most agents charge most of the time.
If you are a seller, you can probably negotiate for a lower commission from your agent. The statistics indicate that it happens plenty often. However, I have some questions for you to ponder before you negotiate a lower commission. With the overwhelming majority of listings offering the buyer’s agent a 2.5% commission, do you really want your property listed with only a 2.25% co-broke, or even a 2% co-broke? This puts your property at a competitive disadvantage. On the other hand, what if you negotiated a 4.5% total commission with the co-broke at 2.5% and your agent earning 2%. It is impossible to determine how often this happens but I know it happens. This is problematic for different reasons. Do you want your agent working for 20% less than the buyer’s agent and most agents in general? If your agent will so easily negotiate her own commission down, how easily will she negotiate on your behalf? What are the overall implications of having your agent working for less than most agents most of the time? I would expect the answer depends on the situation, but I also know from experience that you generally get what you pay for.