Commitments and Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2023
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Legal Proceedings From time to time, the Company may be involved in disputes or regulatory inquiries that arise in the ordinary course of business. When the Company determines that a loss is both probable and reasonably estimable, a liability is recorded and disclosed if the amount is material to the Company’s business taken as a whole. When a material loss contingency is only reasonably possible, the Company does not record a liability, but instead discloses the nature and the amount of the claim and an estimate of the loss or range of loss, if such an estimate can reasonably be made. Legal costs related to the defense of loss contingencies are expensed as incurred. Claims or regulatory actions against the Company, whether meritorious or not, could have an adverse impact on the Company due to legal costs, diversion of management resources and other elements. Except as identified with respect to the matters below, the Company does not believe that the outcome of any individual existing legal or regulatory proceeding to which it is a party will have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial condition or overall business in each case, taken as a whole. The Company and its subsidiaries have been named as defendants in ten putative class action lawsuits (the "Antitrust Lawsuits") that allege, among other things, violations of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1. Five of the putative class action lawsuits, captioned Gibson, et al. v. National Association of Realtors, et al., No. 4:23-cv-00788-FJG (W.D. Mo.) (“Gibson”), filed on October 31, 2023, Grace v. National Association of Realtors, et al., No. 3:23-cv-06352 (N.D. Cal.) (“Grace”), filed on December 8, 2023, Umpa, et al. v. National Association of Realtors, et al., 4:23-cv-00945 (W.D. Mo.) (“Umpa”), filed on December 27, 2023, Fierro, et al. v. National Association of Realtors, et al., Case No. 2:24-cv-00449 (C.D. Cal.) (“Fierro”), filed on January 17, 2024, and Boykin v. National Association of Realtors, et al., No. 2:24-cv-00340 (D. Nev.) (“Boykin”), filed on February 16, 2024, name the Company as a defendant and allege, among other things, that certain trade associations, including the National Association of Realtors, multiple listing services, and real estate brokerages engaged in a continuing contract, combination, or conspiracy to unreasonably restrain interstate trade and commerce in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 by entering into a continuing agreement to require sellers of residential property to make inflated payments to brokers representing buyers. The plaintiffs in the Gibson and Umpa matters allege a nationwide scope, while the Grace and Fierro matters are limited in scope to Northern California and Southern California, respectively. The Company and the defendants in the Gibson and Umpa matter filed a series of motions to dismiss those complaints on February 26, 2024. The plaintiffs’ opposition to those motions are due on March 25, 2024, and replies are due on April 22, 2024. Two of the putative class action lawsuits, March v. Real Estate Board of New York, et al., No. 1:23-cv-09995 (S.D.N.Y.) (“March”), filed on November 13, 2023, and Friedman v. Real Estate Board of New York, et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-09601 (S.D.N.Y.) (“Friedman”), filed on January 18, 2024, name the Company as a defendant and allege, among other things, that the Real Estate Board of New York, and a number of real estate brokerages engaged in a continuing contract, combination, or conspiracy to unreasonably restrain interstate trade and commerce in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 by entering into a continuing agreement to require sellers of residential property to make inflated payments to brokers representing buyers. The Friedman and March matters also allege violations of the Donnelly Act, N.Y. Gen. Bus. § 340, and the March matter further seeks injunctive relief pursuant to Section 16 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 26. The Friedman and March matters are limited in scope to the New York City boroughs of Brooklyn, and Manhattan, respectively. Two of the putative class action lawsuits, QJ Team, LLC, et al. v. Texas Association of Realtors, Inc., et al., No. 4:23-cv-01013 (E.D. Tx.) (“QJ Team”), filed on November 13, 2023, and Martin, et al. v. Texas Association of Realtors, Inc., et al., No. 423-cv-01104 (E.D. Tx.) (“Martin”), filed on December 14, 2023, name Realty Austin, LLC, a subsidiary of the Company, as a defendant and allege, among other things, that certain trade associations, including the Texas Association of Realtors, and a number of real estate brokerages engaged in a continuing contract, combination, or conspiracy to unreasonably restrain interstate trade and commerce in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 by entering into a continuing agreement to require sellers of residential property to make inflated payments to brokers representing buyers. Batton, et al. v. Compass, Inc., et al., No. 1:23-cv-15618 (N.D. Ill.) (“Batton II”), filed on November 2, 2023, names the Company and seven other brokerages as defendants and alleges that the defendants entered into a continuing contract, combination, or conspiracy to unreasonably restrain interstate trade and commerce in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 and state law antitrust statutes, violated state consumer protection statutes, and were unjustly enriched by industry rules that set the manner by which buyer’s brokers are compensated. The deadline to respond to the Batton II complaint is April 5, 2024. The allegations in Batton II are substantially similar to those contained in the case captioned Batton, et al. v. National Association of Realtors, et al., No. 1:21-cv-00430 (N.D. Ill.) (“Batton I”), filed on January 25, 2021, which does not name the Company but names the National Association of Realtors and seven other brokerages. On February 20, 2024, in Batton I, the Court granted the defendants’ Motion to Dismiss in part and denied in part, allowing most of the case to proceed. On December 27, 2023, plaintiffs in the Gibson and Umpa matters filed a motion before the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”), captioned In re Real Estate Commission Litigation, No. 48 (J.P.M.L.), seeking to transfer and consolidate for pretrial proceedings the Gibson, Umpa, Grace, March, QJ Team, Martin, and three additional putative class actions to which the Company has not been named as a party, to one multidistrict litigation. The deadline to respond to the complaints in the Martin, QJ Team, and March matters have been stayed pending a decision from the JPML on consolidation. The Company is unable to predict the outcome of this action or to reasonably estimate the possible loss or range of loss, if any, arising from the claim asserted therein. The Company plans to vigorously defend itself against all claims. The ultimate resolution of these matters could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, and cash flow. Letter of Credit Agreements The Company has irrevocable letters of credit with various financial institutions, primarily related to security deposits for leased facilities. As of December 31, 2023 and 2022, the Company was contingently liable for $44.4 million and $48.0 million, respectively, under these letters of credit. As of December 31, 2023, $43.8 million and $0.6 million of these letters of credit were collateralized by the Company’s Revolving Credit Facility and cash and cash equivalents, respectively. As of December 31, 2022, $33.0 million and $15.0 million of these letters of credit were collateralized by the Company’s Revolving Credit Facility and cash and cash equivalents, respectively. Escrow and Trust Deposits As a service to its home buyers and home seller clients, the Company administers escrow and trust deposits which represent undistributed amounts for the settlement of real estate transactions. The escrow and trust deposits totaled $120.0 million and $136.7 million as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively. These deposits are not assets of the Company and therefore are excluded from the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. However, the Company remains contingently liable for the disposition of these deposits.

From time to time, the Company may be involved in disputes or regulatory inquiries that arise in the ordinary course of business. When the Company determines that a loss is both probable and reasonably estimable, a liability is recorded and disclosed if the amount is material to the Company’s business taken as a whole. When a material loss contingency is only reasonably possible, the Company does not record a liability, but instead discloses the nature and the amount of the claim and an estimate of the loss or range of loss, if such an estimate can reasonably be made. Legal costs related to the defense of loss contingencies are expensed as incurred.

Claims or regulatory actions against the Company, whether meritorious or not, could have an adverse impact on the Company due to legal costs, diversion of management resources and other elements. Except as identified with respect to the matters below, the Company does not believe that the outcome of any individual existing legal or regulatory proceeding to which it is a party will have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial condition or overall business in each case, taken as a whole.

Five of the putative class action lawsuits, captioned Gibson, et al. v. National Association of Realtors, et al., No. 4:23-cv-00788-FJG (W.D. Mo.) (“Gibson”), filed on October 31, 2023, Grace v. National Association of Realtors, et al., No. 3:23-cv-06352 (N.D. Cal.) (“Grace”), filed on December 8, 2023, Umpa, et al. v. National Association of Realtors, et al., 4:23-cv-00945 (W.D. Mo.) (“Umpa”), filed on December 27, 2023, Fierro, et al. v. National Association of Realtors, et al., Case No. 2:24-cv-00449 (C.D. Cal.) (“Fierro”), filed on January 17, 2024, and Boykin v. National Association of Realtors, et al., No. 2:24-cv-00340 (D. Nev.) (“Boykin”), filed on February 16, 2024, name the Company as a defendant and allege, among other things, that certain trade associations, including the National Association of Realtors, multiple listing services, and real estate brokerages engaged in a continuing contract, combination, or conspiracy to unreasonably restrain interstate trade and commerce in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 by entering into a continuing agreement to require sellers of residential property to make inflated payments to brokers representing buyers. The plaintiffs in the Gibson and Umpa matters allege a nationwide scope, while the Grace and Fierro matters are limited in scope to Northern California and Southern California, respectively. The Company and the defendants in the Gibson and Umpa matter filed a series of motions to dismiss those complaints on February 26, 2024. The plaintiffs’ opposition to those motions are due on March 25, 2024, and replies are due on April 22, 2024.

Two of the putative class action lawsuits, March v. Real Estate Board of New York, et al., No. 1:23-cv-09995 (S.D.N.Y.) (“March”), filed on November 13, 2023, and Friedman v. Real Estate Board of New York, et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-09601 (S.D.N.Y.) (“Friedman”), filed on January 18, 2024, name the Company as a defendant and allege, among other things, that

the Real Estate Board of New York, and a number of real estate brokerages engaged in a continuing contract, combination, or conspiracy to unreasonably restrain interstate trade and commerce in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 by entering into a continuing agreement to require sellers of residential property to make inflated payments to brokers representing buyers. The Friedman and March matters also allege violations of the Donnelly Act, N.Y. Gen. Bus. § 340, and the March matter further seeks injunctive relief pursuant to Section 16 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 26. The Friedman and March matters are limited in scope to the New York City boroughs of Brooklyn, and Manhattan, respectively.

Two of the putative class action lawsuits, QJ Team, LLC, et al. v. Texas Association of Realtors, Inc., et al., No. 4:23-cv-01013 (E.D. Tx.) (“QJ Team”), filed on November 13, 2023, and Martin, et al. v. Texas Association of Realtors, Inc., et al., No. 423-cv-01104 (E.D. Tx.) (“Martin”), filed on December 14, 2023, name Realty Austin, LLC, a subsidiary of the Company, as a defendant and allege, among other things, that certain trade associations, including the Texas Association of Realtors, and a number of real estate brokerages engaged in a continuing contract, combination, or conspiracy to unreasonably restrain interstate trade and commerce in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 by entering into a continuing agreement to require sellers of residential property to make inflated payments to brokers representing buyers.

Batton, et al. v. Compass, Inc., et al., No. 1:23-cv-15618 (N.D. Ill.) (“Batton II”), filed on November 2, 2023, names the Company and seven other brokerages as defendants and alleges that the defendants entered into a continuing contract, combination, or conspiracy to unreasonably restrain interstate trade and commerce in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 and state law antitrust statutes, violated state consumer protection statutes, and were unjustly enriched by industry rules that set the manner by which buyer’s brokers are compensated. The deadline to respond to the Batton II complaint is April 5, 2024. The allegations in Batton II are substantially similar to those contained in the case captioned Batton, et al. v. National Association of Realtors, et al., No. 1:21-cv-00430 (N.D. Ill.) (“Batton I”), filed on January 25, 2021, which does not name the Company but names the National Association of Realtors and seven other brokerages. On February 20, 2024, in Batton I, the Court granted the defendants’ Motion to Dismiss in part and denied in part, allowing most of the case to proceed.

On December 27, 2023, plaintiffs in the Gibson and Umpa matters filed a motion before the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”), captioned In re Real Estate Commission Litigation, No. 48 (J.P.M.L.), seeking to transfer and consolidate for pretrial proceedings the Gibson, Umpa, Grace, March, QJ Team, Martin, and three additional putative class actions to which the Company has not been named as a party, to one multidistrict litigation. The deadline to respond to the complaints in the Martin, QJ Team, and March matters have been stayed pending a decision from the JPML on consolidation.

The Company is unable to predict the outcome of this action or to reasonably estimate the possible loss or range of loss, if any, arising from the claim asserted therein. The Company plans to vigorously defend itself against all claims. The ultimate resolution of these matters could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, and cash flow.

The Company has irrevocable letters of credit with various financial institutions, primarily related to security deposits for leased facilities. As of December 31, 2023 and 2022, the Company was contingently liable for $44.4 million and $48.0 million, respectively, under these letters of credit. As of December 31, 2023, $43.8 million and $0.6 million of these letters of credit were collateralized by the Company’s Revolving Credit Facility and cash and cash equivalents, respectively. As of December 31, 2022, $33.0 million and $15.0 million of these letters of credit were collateralized by the Company’s Revolving Credit Facility and cash and cash equivalents, respectively.

As a service to its home buyers and home seller clients, the Company administers escrow and trust deposits which represent undistributed amounts for the settlement of real estate transactions. The escrow and trust deposits totaled $120.0 million and $136.7 million as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively. These deposits are not assets of the Company and therefore are excluded from the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. However, the Company remains contingently liable for the disposition of these deposits.