Greystar, known as the largest landlord in the United States, has agreed to a $7 million settlement to resolve accusations that it used algorithmic rent-setting technology to inflate rents across properties in nine states. This settlement marks another chapter in a broader legal challenge against what critics describe as opaque and potentially anticompetitive pricing practices rooted in advanced software algorithms. Greystar (NYSE: GYR) is a dominant player in multifamily housing, managing nearly a million apartment units nationwide, which gives significance to both the settlement and the underlying allegations.
At the heart of the case is software provided by RealPage, a Texas-based company whose rent-setting algorithms became the subject of widespread scrutiny. The technology uses data inputs from numerous landlords on real-time rental pricing, availability, and market conditions, then generates pricing recommendations intended to optimize rental income. However, federal authorities and plaintiffs in multiple lawsuits argue that these algorithms went beyond simple pricing tools and instead facilitated a form of coordinated pricing behavior that stifled competition. The allegation is that the software effectively allowed landlords to align rent increases, avoid competing on price, and push rents higher across markets. Some apartment complexes reportedly saw rent increases as high as 25% in just one year after integrating these systems.
The settlement with Greystar is part of a larger pattern of enforcement actions and lawsuits concerning algorithmic pricing in the rental market. Earlier in 2025, Greystar reached a $50 million class action settlement related to similar allegations, and separately, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) reached a landmark settlement with the company focusing on antitrust claims. The DOJ settlement required Greystar to stop using any pricing algorithms that rely on competitors’ sensitive rental data or have anticompetitive features. It also prohibits the sharing of competitive pricing information among landlords and mandates court supervision of any third-party pricing software Greystar may use. While Greystar has not admitted wrongdoing, it agreed to these terms as a step toward resolving ongoing regulatory and legal challenges.
The legal scrutiny around RealPage’s software reflects growing concerns about how technology influences housing affordability. Many renters and housing advocates worry that algorithmic pricing may exacerbate already significant housing cost pressures by enabling landlords to systematically raise rents without the usual competitive checks. The complex nature of these algorithms means their inner workings are often opaque, making it difficult for regulators to assess their fairness or legality without detailed investigation.
From a market perspective, these developments raise critical questions about the balance between technological innovation and fair competition in real estate. Landlords argue that algorithmic pricing tools help them efficiently manage large portfolios and respond to rapidly changing market conditions. Meanwhile, critics see these tools as a potential vehicle for tacit collusion, harming consumers by driving up rents across the board.
The Greystar settlement, along with related actions, could signal a shift in how landlords use data and technology for pricing decisions. The requirement to avoid anticompetitive algorithms and sharing sensitive data aims to restore a more competitive environment, potentially benefiting renters by slowing rent growth influenced by coordinated pricing strategies. However, this is only one step in an evolving landscape where technology, regulation, and housing demand intersect.
For renters, the consequences of this legal battle highlight the challenges of navigating apartment markets increasingly influenced by advanced software. The settlement itself includes monetary relief to affected renters in the involved states, but also carries a broader message about the importance of transparency and competition in housing markets. As regulators continue to monitor and intervene in cases involving algorithmic pricing, the rental industry may need to revisit how it integrates technology in ways that balance efficiency with fairness.
The implications for landlords extend beyond compliance. Companies like Greystar must now carefully manage their use of pricing technologies under heightened oversight, potentially adjusting strategies to avoid antitrust pitfalls. This could mean more cautious data handling practices and closer scrutiny of software providers’ methodologies.
Ultimately, the Greystar settlement against the backdrop of this multifaceted lawsuit illustrates the complexities that arise when technology intersects with fundamental economic markets like housing. It underscores the need for clear rules and vigilant enforcement to ensure that innovations do not undermine fair competition or inflate costs for consumers. As this story develops, it will serve as a case study for other sectors facing similar algorithmic pricing controversies.
