Worked example: heavy-Zillow vs sphere agent at $300k gross

Two agents at $300k gross GCI: one drawing 50% from Zillow Flex, one drawing 80% from sphere/past clients. Net delta at year-end: approximately $50k-$60k on identical production.

Detailed side-by-side at $300k gross GCI, both agents at a 75/25 brokerage with no team:

Agent A — heavy-Zillow. Source mix: 50% Zillow Flex, 25% open houses (brokerage_only), 25% past client. Take rates: Zillow 32%, open houses 0%, past client 0%.

Gross by source: Zillow $150k, opens $75k, past client $75k.

• Zillow segment: $150k × 0.68 (after Zillow 32%) × 0.75 (brokerage) = $76.5k
• Opens segment: $75k × 0.75 = $56.25k
• Past client segment: $75k × 0.75 = $56.25k
• Total take-home: $189k. Effective retention: 63%.

Agent B — sphere-driven. Source mix: 60% past client + referral, 20% open houses, 20% portal mid (20% take).

Gross by source: past/referral $180k, opens $60k, portal $60k.

• Past/referral segment: $180k × 0.75 = $135k
• Opens segment: $60k × 0.75 = $45k
• Portal segment: $60k × 0.80 × 0.75 = $36k
• Total take-home: $216k. Effective retention: 72%.

Delta: $27k at $300k gross. At equivalent gross, the sphere-driven agent retains 14% more in absolute dollars from identical production. Compound that over 5 years at flat production and the cumulative delta is $135k; compounded with the sphere agent's typically faster YoY growth (sphere-driven business compounds with retention and referral) and the delta widens further.

The trade Agent A makes: lower lead-acquisition effort (Zillow delivers) for materially lower retention. Whether the trade pencils depends on (a) how much time the saved lead-gen effort actually frees up, and (b) whether Agent A can convert that saved time to additional volume that closes the dollar gap.