Real estate is filled with successful women. Women lead top teams, run brokerages, drive transactions, build brands, manage operations and negotiate deals worth millions of dollars every single day.

TAKE THE INMAN INTEL INDEX SURVEY

But success and leadership are not always judged the same way. The industry has made a lot of progress over the years, but women in leadership still operate under a different level of scrutiny. Sometimes it’s subtle, and sometimes it’s more obvious. Often, it comes from places you least expect.

Women agents are often expected to balance confidence with likability

Real estate is one of the only industries where your personality is part of the product.

Women agents are expected to negotiate aggressively, protect their clients, command authority and drive business while still remaining warm, approachable and agreeable throughout the process.

A male agent pushing hard in a negotiation is often seen as strategic. But a woman pushing equally hard can quickly be labeled difficult.

My advice? Stop confusing professionalism with passivity. You do not need to shrink your communication style to make other people comfortable during a transaction. You can be respectful, composed and collaborative while still advocating strongly for your client.

Women in real estate constantly navigate perception during transactions

Every deal involves emotion, personalities, money and pressure. I think that many women in this business spend time thinking not only about what they need to say, but how it will be interpreted coming from them specifically. The same direct communication can land very differently depending on who is delivering it.

That balancing act is real.

One thing I have learned is that clarity matters more than overexplaining. The strongest agents are usually the ones who communicate clearly, stay calm under pressure and stop apologizing for having expertise.

Women leaders face a similar dynamic internally

The same thing happens at the leadership level. Women executives and brokerage leaders are often expected to make difficult business decisions while somehow maintaining a level of likability rarely expected of men in leadership.

Directness gets analyzed differently. Standards get interpreted differently. Assertiveness gets interpreted differently. Sometimes, women spend as much energy managing perception as they do managing the actual business. My advice to women stepping into leadership is simple: Stop waiting until you feel completely ready.

Most leadership growth happens while you are uncomfortable. Confidence is usually built after the decision, not before it.

The pressure doesn’t only come from men

Sometimes the harshest judgment comes from other women.

I have seen women agents criticize other women for being too ambitious, too polished, too visible or too confident. I have seen women leaders held to impossible standards by other women in the industry. And I think part of that comes from years of women feeling like there were only a limited number of seats available at the table.

I often recall a time, years ago, when a female executive visited our office for a meeting. Before she even really began speaking, the energy in the room shifted. Instead of simply allowing her to own the room and introduce herself naturally, there was this uncomfortable undercurrent — somehow, it felt like she needed to be saved, that someone needed to jump in and help her carry the moment.

What struck me was not necessarily her discomfort, as leadership can be uncomfortable for anyone. What stayed with me, however, was how quickly people reacted to a woman appearing uncertain while in a position of authority.

A man in that same situation might have simply been viewed as having an off moment. But for women, there is often this immediate instinct to overanalyze the interaction, the confidence level, the delivery, the presence.

Women in leadership are often expected to appear polished and composed at all times. If they are too strong, people react. If they are too uncertain, people react. There is very little room in the middle.

Competition among women is changing, but slowly

What gives me hope is that I am also seeing more women support one another openly.

More mentorship. More collaboration. More women sharing opportunities, referrals and advice instead of guarding them.

That shift matters because real estate can already feel isolating enough. Leadership should not feel lonelier simply because you are a woman. The strongest women in this business are usually not the ones trying to outshine everyone else. They are the ones confident enough to build alongside other successful women without feeling threatened by them.

Clients still perceive authority differently

This shows up in transactions more than people realize. I have watched women agents walk into listing presentations overprepared because they know they may need to establish credibility faster. I have watched women brokers be questioned more aggressively on pricing strategy, market knowledge or negotiation tactics in situations where male counterparts may not face the same scrutiny.

Not every client behaves this way, but women notice it. The best response? Preparation and consistency. Confidence without preparation falls apart quickly, but when knowledge, execution and results consistently show up, the conversation eventually changes.

Real estate creates the illusion that this problem no longer exists

Because there are so many successful women agents, people sometimes assume women are equally accepted in positions of authority. That is not always true. Being celebrated as a top producer and being fully comfortable with women holding power are two very different things.

Women often carry an invisible mental load in this business

Many women agents and leaders are constantly calculating how they will be perceived before they even speak. Not because they lack confidence, but because experience has taught them that women are often remembered differently for the same behavior. That mental load is exhausting over time.

One thing I wish more women understood earlier is that not every room requires you to prove yourself endlessly. Sometimes confidence is simply walking into a room and not immediately trying to earn permission to be there.

The irony: Women already possess many of the qualities modern real estate demands

Emotional intelligence. Adaptability. Communication. Resilience. Crisis management.

Those are not soft skills in real estate. Those are business skills. The ability to manage personalities, navigate conflict, read emotion during negotiations and keep deals together is often what separates average agents from exceptional ones.

Younger women deserve honesty about this business

Real estate can create incredible opportunities for women, but leadership is not always easy.

There will be moments where confidence changes how people perceive you. Moments where direct communication suddenly becomes “too much.” Moments where your competence makes other people uncomfortable.

Do it anyway. Do not spend your career trying to become more digestible for other people.

Women do not need to lead smaller

The answer is not for women agents or leaders to soften themselves to fit outdated expectations. The goal should be getting to a place where women can lead without every decision, reaction or communication style being analyzed differently simply because they are women in positions of authority.

The conversation is still necessary

Real estate has evolved tremendously. More women are leading than ever before.

But there is still a difference between being included in the business and being judged by the exact same standards once you rise inside of it. And I think the industry is finally ready to talk about that honestly.

Kevelyn Guzman serves as regional vice president at Coldwell Banker Warburg. Connect with her on Instagram and LinkedIn.

In the feast or famine world of real estate, it can be easy to myopically focus on the bottom line (closing the deal and your commission). But a recent deep dive into a seemingly unrelated pop culture phenomenon offers a stark reminder that how we achieve success is just as important as the success itself.⁣

⁣A new Netflix documentary, pulling back the curtain on America’s Next Top Model (ANTM), serves as a tragically “perfect” case study for why every business leader (including real estate brokers, loan officers, appraisers, and realty firm owners) should revisit their foundational business ethics courses.⁣

⁣

At first glance, the worlds of high fashion and real estate seem miles apart. However, the documentary highlights the failure of three critical pillars of sustainable business management, courses that I teach to MBA students, and that translate directly to the housing industry: 

1. Business Ethics, 
2. Change Management, and 
3. Leadership/Team Dynamics.⁣

Let’s delve deeper into the business ethics aspect.

⁣

The show’s creator and host, Tyra Banks, has proudly name-dropped over the years her management certification from Harvard Business School, which is a significant achievement that speaks to her drive and business acumen. She built a platform with an undeniably admirable vision, which was to democratize access and opportunity for women who didn’t fit the traditional modeling mold.⁣ Tyra’s savvy and commendable vision saved a network and became a global success after its first season.

⁣

However, as the Netflix documentary (Netflix’s Reality Check Inside: America’s Next Top Model) illustrates, two things can be true at once. While making history and building an empire, the narrative suggests a disconnect between the academic theory of ethical leadership and the on-the-ground reality. It begs the question for us as professionals: 

Are we so focused on the numbers that we become ethically impervious to the impact of our methods on our team, our clients, our communities, and our reputation?⁣

⁣

The documentary alleges that fundamental business course objectives, such as accountability, effective communication, transparency, and balancing profit with social responsibility, were absent. For real estate professionals, these aren’t just buzzwords; they are the bedrock of client trust and team cohesion.⁣

⁣

Accountability means owning an appraisal faux pas or a delayed closing when you dropped the ball.⁣

Effective communication means clearly explaining complex negotiating terms and strict deadlines to a nervous first-time homebuyer.⁣

Transparency means disclosing all fees upfront, ensuring your client knows exactly what they are signing.⁣

When these elements are missing, even the most profitable deal can cause long-term harm to your reputation, your team’s morale, your community’s homeownership opportunity, and may trigger lawsuits (yes, with an “s”).⁣

⁣

This situation brings to mind the profound wisdom of Audre Lorde: “The Master’s Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master’s House.”⁣

Tyra’s business vision was to dismantle the exclusionary standards of the modeling industry. Yet, based on the accounts alleged in the documentary, the tools she used (fostering insecurity, a lack of transparency, and exerting unilateral control because why does anyone need to widen a gap between teeth!) mirrored the very dehumanizing practices she sought to overthrow.⁣

This is the ultimate ethical challenge. 

In real estate, are we trying to “change the game” by using the same old predatory tactics? 

Are we promising a “client-first” experience while still prioritizing our commission over their financial well-being and fair housing access?⁣

⁣

If our goal is to create a fairer housing market, we cannot rely on the tools of exclusion and opacity. An example includes agents secretly steering a househunter by saying in private, “Oh, that neighborhood (or school district) isn’t for someone like you.” Or, steering neophyte homebuyers to mortgage or refinance products that will cost more with worse terms simply because the commission is more lucrative.

⁣

As you move through the next quarter, let this documentary serve as a warning for your own practice. Are you balancing profit maximization with your ethical responsibilities to your clients, team, and community? Are you creating opportunities for others without forcing them to endure the same toxic environments you may have fought to escape?⁣

Tyra Banks is an undeniable icon who has allegedly harmed some of those she initially sought to uplift. Likewise, in the world of real estate, where people’s homes and life savings are on the line, we cannot afford to be ethically impervious to the human impact of our business decisions. Let’s ensure that when we post our codes of conduct, the lived reality of those behaviors is actually present in the room with us.

Dr. Lee Davenport is a fair housing advocate and educator.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners. To contact the editor responsible for this piece: [email protected].

Related

Homebuilders — many we talk with — are calling today’s selling environment one of “demand uncertainty.”

The phrase is clear. Traffic is uneven. Conversions are harder to forecast. Buyers hesitate longer, ask sharper questions, and walk away more often.

The label itself may quietly misdirect leadership’s attention toward forces builders cannot control — and away from the operational levers that, for some, matter to an existential degree.

What buyers are experiencing is not a lack of demand. It is a lack of confidence that now is the right time to commit.

That distinction is important. Demand uncertainty and buyer hesitancy may sound like they’re the same, but don’t be fooled.

Two timely data sets — the National Association of Home Builders / Wells Fargo Housing Market Index special questions and the University of Michigan Surveys of Consumers — provide simple, profound access to 2026 Spring Selling Season’s real force factor:

Today’s housing slowdown is not primarily a demand problem. It is a buyer timing-of-decisions problem, driven by anxiety, uneven confidence, and fear of regret. Fear of

And that is a challenge builders can address — if they frame it properly.

What builders say the problem is

In the NAHB’s January 2026 HMI “special questions” survey, builders ranked their most significant challenges in 2025 and those they expect to face in 2026.

The top tier is familiar:

• High interest rates: 84% (2025), easing to 65% (2026)
• Buyers expect prices or rates to decline if they wait: 81% → 74%
• Concern about employment/economic situation: 65% → 61%
• Cost/availability of developed lots: 63% → 62%
• Negative media reports making buyers cautious: 62% → 56%

Layered beneath those are persistent constraints that builders do not expect to improve meaningfully:

• Labor shortages (61% → 61%)
• Impact, hook-up, and inspection fees (57% → 60%)
• Zoning, permitting, and local/state regulations (mid-50s and rising)

Taken at face value, the picture reads like macro headwinds colliding with structural friction. From a data standpoint, that’s accurate — but it’s not telling. It’s incomplete.

Because what builders call “demand uncertainty” is actually a proxy for something more personal happening at the buyer’s kitchen table.

What buyers say the problem is

The University of Michigan’s February 2026 preliminary Consumer Sentiment Index adds the missing half of the story.

Sentiment edged up slightly to 57.3, the highest since August 2025—but remains roughly 20% below January 2025 and “very low from a historical perspective.”

More important than the headline number is who feels better—and who doesn’t.

• Sentiment improved primarily among households with large stock portfolios
• It stagnated at dismal levels among consumers without stock holdings

In plain English: confidence is K-shaped.

Higher-income households — those less payment-constrained — are cautiously stabilizing. Monthly-payment buyers are not.

The survey director’s language is blunt: concerns about erosion of personal finances due to high prices and the elevated risk of job loss remain widespread.

This maps almost perfectly to what builders reported — just from the other side of the coin.

Builders say:

• Buyers think they’ll get a better deal later
• Buyers are anxious about the economy and jobs

Buyers are saying:

• “I don’t trust the timing.”
• “I don’t want to regret this decision.”

That’s not a demand problem. That’s a decision-risk problem.

Why “demand uncertainty” could be a misleading frame

The phrase “demand uncertainty” subtly shifts accountability outward—to interest rates, the Fed, Washington, media narratives, or macroeconomic cycles.

Those forces are real. But the label encourages leadership teams to over-index on what they cannot control and under-invest in what they can control.

The buyer is not asking:

“Will housing demand exist in six months?”

The buyer is asking:

“Will I feel foolish or financially exposed if I buy this home right now?”

That question is answered less by macroeconomic forecasts and more by operational reality.

The real work is internal

The most telling signal in the NAHB data is not what builders expect to improve — but what they don’t expect to improve.

Labor constraints, fees, approvals, and regulatory friction are expected to persist or worsen through 2026. These are not abstract industry complaints. They directly affect:

• Cycle time
• Cost certainty
• Delivery reliability
• Customer experience friction

These variables shape buyer confidence – and become your business’s shock absorbers – far more than any rate forecast does.

If a household believes:

• The monthly payment is survivable,
• The process is transparent,
• The timeline is credible,
• The value, feeling of sanctuary, excitement, connectedness and comfort are solid,
• The builder will deliver without surprises,

they are far more likely to decide to move forward — even in an anxious environment.

Incentives help — but they can’t carry the strategy

Builders’ current response — home-by-home incentives, buydowns, and closing-cost support — is rational. These tools work.

But used without discipline, they also reinforce the buyer’s instinct to wait.

Every concession risks teaching a dangerous lesson:

“If I pause, the deal gets better.”

In a decision-anxious market, incentives must support confidence, not replace it.

That means pairing financial relief with:

• clarity
• simplicity
• speed
• proof of execution

A better leadership question for 2026

Instead of asking:

“When will demand come back?”

High-performing builders are already asking:

“What are we doing operationally to make ‘now’ feel safe enough?”

That question reframes today’s challenge from macro helplessness to managerial agency.

The data – builder-side and buyer-side – point to the same conclusion:

This is not a market without buyers. It is a market full of buyers who fear making the wrong decision at the wrong time.

Reducing that fear is not a marketing problem. It is an operational excellence problem.

That puts the work exactly where builders’ skills are strongest — when they choose to own it.

Related

“The Mayor came into office with a message of affordability, and it’s the right mesage. [On] how we get there, we’re going to disagree.”

That’s Hal Fetner, chairman, Fetner Properties, responding to the question of the most important thing for Mayor Zohran Mamdani to focus on. For his part, Gary Rosenberg, president, Rosenberg & Estis, cited taxation as a hurdle to affordability, while Peter Riguardi, chairman and president, New York region, JLL, expressed the hope that the Mayor would learn the ropes quickly.

Connect CRE interviewed numerous commercial real estate leaders at the Real Estate Board of New York’s 130th REBNY Annual. In the video below, you’ll also get insights from Kelly Mack, president, Corcoran Sunshine Marketing Group; Jay Neveloff, partner at Kramer Levin; Jason Haber, agent at Compass and co-founder of American Real Estate Association; Alexander Durst, chief development officer, The Durst Organization; Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman; and Sam Chandan, founding director, NYU Stern Chao-Hon Chen Institute for Global Real Estate Finance.

At the Real Estate Board of New York’s 130th REBNY Annual held earlier this month at the Waldorf Astoria New York, Connect CRE interviewed numerous industry leaders on the near-term outlook for commercial real estate. Continuing a theme from the first video from the event, we asked industry leaders whether the momentum that the industry saw in 2025 will carry through into 2026, and if so, where.

In the video below, CRE heavyweights sounded notes of both bullishness and caution. Sam Chandan, founding director, NYU Stern Chao-Hon Chen Institute for Global Real Estate Finance, cited some of the macroeconomic headwinds the industry faces, both locally and nationally.

For his part, Jay Neveloff, partner at Kramer Levin, told Connect CRE, “[The momentum is] going to double or triple. I think the momentum is going to take us into ’26.” He expressed the hope that investors looking to expand the supply of affordable housing would not be asked by the new mayoral administration “to shoulder the full burden.”

You’ll also hear insights from Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman; Jason Haber, agent at Compass and co-founder of the American Real Estate Association; David Falk, president, Tri-State Region, Newmark; Kelly Mack, president, Corcoran Sunshine Marketing Group; Amy Rose, CEO, Rose Associates; Mark Ehrlich, president, Rose Associates; Bob Knakal, chairman and CEO, BKREA; Hal Fetner, chairman, Fetner Properties; Alexander Durst, chief development officer, The Durst Organization; and Christine Quinn, president and CEO, Women in Need.

“This is a lot of saber rattling,” Murray told HousingWire. “It’s also going to depend on who’s doing the measuring, and I’ve done a lot of research on this in years past. It hasn’t changed much. There are north of 16 million single-family homes, condos or co-ops that are owned by investors, the smaller investors. The institutions own well less than a million.

“So, 5% to 6% of investor-owned homes in the U.S. are owned by large institutions. It’s nonsense that if they stop buying it will have any material effect on the housing market.”

Trump said in a post on Truth Social that he was “immediately taking steps” to stop large institutions from buying more single-family homes and would call on Congress to codify the policy, declaring that “people live in homes, not corporations.”

How large investors fit into the housing market

Holly Mabery, chief brokerage officer at eXp Realty, said her agents see a similar small market share of large investors, although there is wide variation by region.

“What’s important to note is it absolutely varies by market,” she said. “It always has. And so, when you look nationally, less than 3% of the investment properties are owned by large corporations. With the average investment, 90% or so, are owned by my parents and your parents. It’s small, mom-and-pop, individual owners who may hold it in an LLC.”

Still, Mabery acknowledged that some metro areas are far more concentrated with institutional ownership — particularly in the Southeast.

“Now, when you get into markets like Atlanta, yes, that’s skewed a little bit more, where 25% of all investment properties are owned by a real estate trust or the large firms,” she said. “Then, you get into other larger markets like Houston, Orlando, even Charlotte, North Carolina. Those have been a little bit skewed, but Atlanta is probably the highest at 25% right now.”

A historical view

Anthony Lamacchia — founder and CEO of Lamacchia Companies — said the backlash against institutional investors must be understood in historical context.

In a social media post, Lamacchia wrote: “I distinctly remember back to around the last market crash, 2010. We had an overabundance of inventory, more than 4 million homes for sale in the United States. During that time, these institutional investors were welcome.”

Lamacchia said those firms played a critical role in stabilizing the market after the foreclosure crisis by absorbing excess inventory, particularly in hard-hit regions.

“They were applauded for getting into the market and buying up houses, particularly across the southern part of the United States, to decrease inventory,” he said. “And that was really something big that contributed to putting an end to the foreclosure crisis in the excess of excessively high inventories.”

Fifteen years later, he said, the market has flipped — from oversupply to persistent shortage — changing how those same investors are perceived.

“Now, a lot of people are getting tired of these institutional investors,” Lamacchia said. “It’s because they’re keeping inventory low, and they’ve gotten to the point that they own so much inventory in certain markets that they are actually able to control inventory levels and make sure that it doesn’t go too high, to knock pricing down.”

Affordability pressures beyond investors

eXp’s Mabery says investor activity is only one factor shaping affordability — and not necessarily the dominant one.

“I think it’s absolutely a piece,” she said. “I don’t know that it’s as big as many would make it out to be, especially when I look at new home development and new construction. You’re looking at the first $100,000 as basically impact fees, zoning permits and so on. That cost on top of materials and labor already sets you back as a potential buyer to build a home.”

She added that affordability must be viewed through the lens of household budgets, not just purchase prices.

“It’s not just the cost of obtaining the property,” Mabery said. “It’s also what people can afford with the cost of things people are carrying. Health care is a tremendous issue and then you have to consider student loan debt.”

Those pressures, she said, have compounded across the economy.

“I think it’s easy to say housing is too expensive, but I think the cost of a family of four operating in this world has gotten substantially more expensive,” said Mabery. “Whether it’s childcare, healthcare, school loan debt or the cost of groceries. All of that is absolutely putting the squeeze on what people determine is affordable for them and their lifestyle.”

What Trump’s move may actually accomplish

Lamacchia said he views the announcement as a familiar Trump tactic, but questioned how policymakers could define and enforce such a ban without unintended consequences.

“How do they quantify that?” he said. “How do they make that clear without punishing anyone that shouldn’t be. They’re probably going to create incentives for some of these investors to sell.”

That approach aligns with proposals already circulating in the industry.

Murray has advocated a temporary federal capital gains tax waiver to encourage landlords to sell to owner-occupants.

“The absolute thing that would work is to go to owners, all of them,” he said. “It doesn’t matter whether they’re mom and pop, like me, I own two, or somebody who owns 50 or 100. They should, with certain conditions, say to those owners, ‘If you sell that unit to a first-time homebuyer — or any buyer — in the next 12 months to be an owner occupant, we will waive the federal capital gains taxes that you may owe on that property.’”

Mabery said large brokerages also have a responsibility to engage constructively in regulation and legislation discussions.

“It’s really important to have a seat at the table to bring actual data forward,” she said. “I think it’s easy for real estate agents, for real estate brokerages, to end up being a scapegoat. We need to proactively come to the table and help put forward good policy that makes sense.”

As the title insurance industry moves into 2026, executives say it faces a complex mix of market pressures, regulatory shifts and escalating fraud risks.

Leading executives who sat down with HousingWire are focusing on technology, operational efficiency and agent support — aiming to keep operations resilient while preparing for market recovery.

Ryan Swed, group president of direct operations at Stewart Title, described the industry’s recent challenges.

“With the prolonged downturn in the market, a lot of our focus, whether that’s internally for our own operations or for title agents across the country, has been, ‘How do we create leverage, whether that’s broad AI tools, support and title production, and so on?’” he said. “Obviously, a prolonged downturn has everybody taking a look at their businesses — and how do you not overstaff when the recovery comes? It always comes at some point.”

Iain Bryant, group president of agency operations, emphasized the economic pressures agents currently face.

“This has just been a super tough environment, only slightly better than last year, which was one of the worst markets we’ve seen in 35 years,” he said. “I think because of that, and sort of the persisting economic challenges, title agents are evaluating their underwriter partnerships more critically than they ever have before.

“They’re looking at what value their partners are bringing. I take it as a good thing, both as a challenge for us at Stewart to raise our game with our current agents, as well as to get after new partnerships.”

Sally Tyler — president of First American Title and a 2024 HousingWire Vanugard — highlighted positive factors that supported 2025 performance.

“Easing mortgage rates, recovering inventory levels in some markets, and a modest improvement in affordability translated into steady improvement in the real estate market this year — lifting the title industry’s performance,” she said. “Increased residential sales, more refinance transactions and more commercial real estate transactions this year compared to last, all contributed to more transactional activity this year.

“A bigger and again growing market are beneficial for the title industry, which has significantly increased the total amount to title insurance premium written in 2025 compared to 2024.”

Industry performance solid amid headwinds

Falling mortgage rates boosted Q3 2025 performance for the nation’s four largest title insurers.

First American saw revenue rise 41% to $2.0 billion, with title revenue up 42% to $1.836 billion — while Stewart Title’s overall revenue hit $796.9 million, with title revenue up 19% to $659.9 million.

Fidelity reported $4.03 billion in total revenue, with title revenue up 8% to $2.3 billion.

Old Republic posted $2.086 billion in total revenue and $767 million in title premiums.

Smaller players such as Investors Title Co. reported $73 million in Q3 revenue, a 6% increase.

The American Land Title Association reported industry-wide first- and second-quarter 2025 premium volumes of $3.9 billion and $4.5 billion, respectively.

Technology, fraud prevention lead priorities

Bryant stressed that technology consolidation is reshaping title operations.

“A number of players have announced their exit from the business via acquisition,” he said. “So, the number of title production systems available to an agent have gone precipitously down over the last couple of years. That’s a huge technology trend and it drives the existing players in the (title production system) market to invest in their platforms or get left behind.”

Stewart has also expanded fraud prevention.

“There’s almost any agent of any size at this point in time who has experienced a wire fraud loss of some kind,” Bryant said. “More and more are adopting (fraud prevention tools) at a rate that they never had before because of the risks that have come to bear and the amount of losses.”

Tyler described First American’s targeted automation strategy.

“In title production, the most meaningful innovations focused on improving the efficiency and consistency of quality control processes,” she said. “Automated data ingestion, standardized reviews and exception-based handling reduced manual touchpoints, rework, and defects — while improving accuracy and throughput.

In closing efficiency, the gains came from improving the closer experience by automating routine tasks and ensuring the right information is available at the right time.”

Digital closing platforms, integrated settlement workflows, eRecording and API-based integrations reduced handoffs, cycle time and cognitive load for closers, Tyler added.

“On fraud prevention, real-time wire validation, account ownership verification, identity proofing and behavioral anomaly detection significantly reduced loss exposure, while improving customer trust,” she said. “Centralized operations and shared services amplified these benefits.”

Regulatory shifts on the horizon

Swed noted the expansion of FinCEN’s Geographic Targeting Orders nationwide and upcoming reporting rule requirements.

“Stewart spent some time preparing to launch a different approach in the marketplace, to take the burden off of in-office staff with this now being countrywide,” he said. “It certainly brings a lot of compliance risk to large and small companies, starting at dollar one. This is one of the largest anti-money laundering laws to go into effect across our industry, so it’ll have a large impact on how we process the business in 2026.”

Tyler outlined potential industry effects stemming from government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) reforms and the title waiver pilot program.

“The title and settlement industry is primarily regulated at the state level and our industry actively engages with state legislatures and departments of insurance in constructive dialogue on how to help protect property rights and enhance the homebuying process,” she said. “The ongoing discussions regarding GSE reform has the potential to impact title and settlement practices, so that remains an important focus for engagement with the administration for our industry.

“While technically not regulation, Fannie and Freddie’s seller and servicing guidelines function as regulations for the title and settlement industry. Any shifts in those guidelines — including changes to the acceptance of attorney opinion letters in lieu of title insurance — has the potential to significantly increase risk to property owners with little to no cost savings in most cases.”

Strategic priorities for 2026

Both Stewart and First American are focusing on supporting agents through technology and education.

Bryant noted Stewart’s virtual underwriter platform — enhanced with AI-driven automation for low-level underwriting questions.

“We have an insurance audit capability now for our agents,” he said. “In almost every review, we find gaps that folks didn’t know were there. Then [also] have a financial advisement service to help them benchmark against the industry and stay competitive.”

Tyler emphasized First American’s “simplify and amplify” strategy.

“Our goal is to be the one place they need to go — a seamless, end-to-end experience that removes friction rather than adding to it,” she said. “Second, we’re amplifying the expertise of our agents by combining new technologies, including AI, with our deep data assets and industry insight.

“For example, our AI-powered AgentNet Assist tool gives title agents access to trusted research instantly, enhancing outcomes and helping elevate their customers’ experience, saving thousands of hours every year. Internally, we are piloting AI to improve the quality of our search product for agents while maintaining turn times.”

Title leaders agree that industry recovery remains tied to broader economic trends, regulatory clarity and operational efficiency.

Armed with smarter tools and sharper processes, the industry hopes to turn cautious optimism into measurable growth in 2026.

Related