7 Best Commission Plans for 2026: Fees, Caps, and Splits
An agent comparing a flat fee with a traditional split after a slow quarter faces a different calculation after a strong one. A percentage split takes a larger share of each closing, while a flat-fee plan makes transaction and recurring charges more important as production changes. The same gross commission can therefore leave very different amounts in the agent's pocket, depending on the cap, per-transaction fees, and fixed costs.
The best commission plans aren't the ones advertising the highest split. They're the ones whose total costs fit an agent's deal volume, support needs, and tolerance for uneven income. The seven options below are ranked by model and production profile, with attention to the costs an agent should confirm before signing. For a useful distinction between the money a business earns and what remains after costs, see this founder's guide to revenue versus sales.
1. eXp Realty
eXp Realty's split-and-cap structure gives agents a clear transition point: the standard plan starts with an 80/20 split and moves to 100% commission after a $16,000 annual cap. That makes the model easier to assess for agents who expect steady production, while agents with lower or irregular volume may not reach the cap and will continue sharing commission under the initial split.
The brokerage's cloud-based setup combines national training and collaboration tools with opportunities for equity and revenue share. Those features may appeal to agents and teams who value virtual access and want additional ways to participate in the brokerage. They don't eliminate the need to check how the specific plan handles post-cap transaction charges, which may apply.
Best fit and cost trade-off
The headline split is only one part of the calculation. An agent should compare the amount paid toward the cap with any additional fees after the cap, then consider whether the virtual training and collaboration systems fit how they work. Agents who prefer regular office contact should ask how local mentorship and peer support are provided.
The company also offers stock and equity opportunities, including ICON recognition for qualifying production. These are potential benefits, not guaranteed earnings, and shouldn't be treated as substitutes for calculating commission after fees.
Practical rule: Compare the route to the cap with the cost of reaching it. A plan that becomes more favorable at high volume may be less suitable when closings are sporadic.
Agents comparing split structures can use this guide to real estate commission splits as a starting point, then confirm current terms directly with eXp Realty through its brokerage website.
2. Real Broker
Real Broker's standard model pairs an 85/15 split with a $12,000 cap, then pays 100% commission after the cap. It also has no monthly fee on its standard plan, a distinction that can matter to agents whose income varies from month to month. Compared with a plan that adds recurring charges, avoiding a standard monthly fee can make the fixed-cost side of the comparison simpler.
The higher initial split and lower cap than eXp's listed structure may make Real Broker worth comparing for agents who expect enough production to reach a cap. That doesn't establish which plan costs less overall: local or state fees may apply, and actual take-home depends on transaction volume and any charges outside the standard split.
National platform, local support
Real Broker is a cloud brokerage, so local office access can vary. Agents who need frequent in-person coaching should ask who provides mentorship, how often support is available, and whether experienced peers are accessible in their market. Those details can have practical value, particularly for newer agents who are still building transaction and negotiation skills.
Equity and revenue-share opportunities are also available, and a Private Label option lets qualified brokerages retain their own brand while using Real's backend. These features may be relevant to independent firms seeking infrastructure, but they don't replace a direct review of fees and support.
An advertised cap tells only part of the story. Agents should also confirm which fees remain payable before and after reaching it.
Real Broker is a stronger candidate for an agent who wants a cloud model without a standard monthly fee and has verified the availability of local support. Its current plan information is available through the Real Broker website.
3. RE/MAX
RE/MAX uses a franchise model, so the local office's plan determines the details. Some offices may offer arrangements such as a 95/5 split paired with fixed fees, but that example shouldn't be treated as a universal RE/MAX offer. Agents need the actual local schedule, including upfront, monthly, and transaction charges, before estimating what they'll keep.
That local variation makes RE/MAX harder to compare by brand-level split alone. A high split can suit a productive agent if the office's fixed costs are reasonable for that agent's deal flow. The same fixed costs can weigh more heavily on a lower-volume agent, especially when closings are uneven.
Production has to support the office costs
RE/MAX's established brand, office network, and access to training and marketing resources may matter to agents who use those services. Local mentorship and niche programs can also be part of the value, but availability and terms differ by franchise. An agent who won't use the office's resources should avoid assuming that those offerings justify higher fixed charges.
A useful comparison is the agent's projected net after all local fees, not the maximum split shown in a recruitment conversation. An office may be a fit for someone who values an in-person network and can support its fee structure; it may be less attractive to a newer or part-time agent whose production is uncertain.
Before joining, request the written plan and ask how fees change at different production levels. Review the local terms through the RE/MAX website, then confirm them with the specific franchise.
4. Realty ONE Group
Realty ONE Group's 100% commission framework shifts the comparison away from a broker split and toward the office's transaction and monthly fees. Each office sets its own costs, so the brand name alone doesn't reveal what an agent will pay. The company's “Do the Math” calculator can help compare a proposed plan with a traditional split, but the estimate is only as useful as the fee details entered.
This structure may appeal to mid- and high-volume agents who want a recognizable brand and local office support without a percentage split. For lower-volume agents, the key question is whether fixed charges continue during slow periods and whether the office provides enough support to justify them.
Get the local schedule before calculating
Realty ONE Group combines a national footprint with local broker support in many markets. That can provide a different balance from a fully virtual brokerage, but the exact experience depends on the franchise. Agents should ask what the local fee includes, which services carry separate charges, and whether training and support are available when needed.
A “100% commission” label doesn't mean an agent keeps every dollar without deductions. The overall cost depends on the office's transaction and monthly fees, along with any other required charges. For a business perspective on how expenses affect what remains, this guide to depreciation and tax changes for landlords offers related context, though an agent should verify the applicable tax treatment with a qualified professional.
Agents considering the model should compare their own expected volume against the specific office schedule, rather than relying on a general brand description. Realty ONE Group's website provides a starting point for finding the relevant local office.
5. HomeSmart
HomeSmart offers 100% commission plans with flat per-transaction fees, with plan variations designed for different production levels and top producers. Instead of evaluating a percentage split, an agent needs to check the fee charged on each closing, whether membership or royalty fees apply, and what services the office includes.
For a consistent producer, a flat transaction fee can make the economics more favorable than sharing a percentage of every commission. That advantage depends on the actual fee schedule and how often the agent closes transactions. An agent with irregular production should also consider whether any recurring charges continue during a slow stretch.
Compare the plan with its included support
HomeSmart offers tools and training, along with optional ancillary earning programs, including HomeSmart Plus. Those offerings can add value if an agent uses them, but their availability and terms should be confirmed with the local franchise. Agents should also verify what the plan includes for errors and omissions coverage, since fees and services may vary by market.
A useful way to judge the model is to separate predictable costs from optional ones. First, total the required per-transaction and membership or royalty fees at the agent's expected production. Then assess whether training, tools, and additional programs address a real need, rather than counting them as value because they're available.
Cost check: Ask the office to identify every mandatory charge and state whether it applies per month, per closing, or under another schedule.
HomeSmart's broad U.S. presence and recognizable brand may suit agents looking for a flat-fee structure with an established network. Plan details are available through the HomeSmart website, but the local office should confirm current pricing and coverage.
6. Fathom Realty
Fathom Realty offers distinct structures for agents who want to compare a flat fee with a percentage split. Under Fathom Max, the stated fee is $465 per transaction until a $9,000 annual fee cap. Fathom Share uses a 12% split with a $465 minimum per transaction, and includes revenue share as an option. These terms make the plan mechanics more explicit than a brand description that only says “100% commission.”
The Max model gives agents a per-transaction charge and a defined cap to evaluate. The Share model has both a percentage component and a minimum charge, so agents should check how the minimum affects their deals rather than assuming the percentage alone predicts the cost. The better fit depends on production, deal economics, and the current local terms.
Choose by deal frequency
Multiple plan options can help an agent match costs to an occasional or more consistent production pattern. A cost-conscious or part-time agent may value a clear per-deal charge, but should still confirm regional variations and any separate fees, including errors and omissions costs. A cap can limit fees under the stated plan, but only if the agent confirms which charges count toward it.
Fathom's cloud-based setup includes a technology package. Agents should ask what tools are included, how onboarding works, and whether local support is available when a transaction raises questions. Revenue share may matter to agents who attract others, but it shouldn't be included in a personal income forecast without a clear understanding of its terms.
Fathom's current offerings can be reviewed through its careers website. The agent should request the local fee schedule before comparing its cap with another brokerage's.
7. Ashby & Graff
Ashby & Graff's California-focused model uses flat transaction fees rather than a broker commission split. Its base plan has no monthly fee and charges $999 per transaction, plus a $145 E&O/Risk Management fee for sales up to $1 million. Optional monthly plans lower the transaction charge: one listed option is $25 per month for a $699 transaction fee, while another is $150 per month for a $399 fee.
The choice is a trade-off between recurring cost and the fee at each closing. An agent with few transactions may prefer the no-monthly-fee base structure, while someone expecting regular closings can compare whether the monthly payment is offset by the lower transaction charge. The E&O/Risk Management fee increases for homes priced above $1 million, and minimum commission rules apply, so those terms need to be included in any calculation.
Fee structure and support
Ashby & Graff offers payment processing directly from escrow, California-market support, training, and certified mentors. Those features may be useful to agents who want practical guidance alongside a zero-split structure, especially newer agents who need help with transactions and client conversations. The brokerage primarily serves California markets, so agents elsewhere should confirm whether it can support their location.
Agents should compare each available plan using their anticipated transaction count and confirm current fees, E&O terms, and eligibility directly with the brokerage. The company's commission-plan overview provides additional context, while the Ashby & Graff website is the place to verify current offerings.
Top 7 Real Estate Commission Plans Compared
| Brokerage | Commission Model | Cost and Resource Requirements | Support and Complexity | Expected Outcome and Key Advantages | Ideal Use Case |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| eXp Realty | 80/20 split; $16,000 annual cap, then 100% commission | Possible post-cap transaction fees; equity and revenue-share programs available | Cloud-based training and collaboration tools; virtual systems may require adjustment | Clear path to post-cap commissions, with potential equity and revenue-share income | Agents and teams seeking national virtual support and additional earning opportunities |
| Real Broker | 85/15 split; $12,000 cap, then 100% commission | No monthly fee on standard plan; local or state fees may apply | Cloud-based; local mentorship and peer support vary | Higher starting split and lower cap than many national peers; Private Label option for qualified brokerages | Agents seeking a cloud model with no standard monthly fee |
| RE/MAX | High-split plans, sometimes 95/5, with local office fees | Fixed fees vary by franchise and may be significant for lower-volume agents | Local offices, training, and marketing resources; terms vary by office | Brand recognition and office network, with high-split potential | Agents whose production supports local fees and who value in-person resources |
| Realty ONE Group | 100% commission framework with office-set fees | Transaction and monthly fees vary by franchise | Local office support; agents must review the specific plan | Potentially strong take-home income with a recognizable brand and local infrastructure | Agents seeking a flat-fee model and local office support |
| HomeSmart | 100% commission with flat-fee plans | Transaction, membership, or royalty fees vary by plan and market | Tools and training offered; confirm local services and E&O coverage | Flat fees may benefit consistent producers; multiple plans support different production levels | Agents wanting a flat-fee structure with plan options |
| Fathom Realty | Fathom Max: $465 per transaction up to a $9,000 annual fee cap; Fathom Share: 12% split with a $465 minimum | Local fees and E&O costs may apply; technology package included | Cloud-based with multiple plan choices; verify current regional terms | Clear flat-fee option or split-based alternative; revenue share available on Share | Cost-conscious agents, including part-time or occasional producers |
| Ashby & Graff | Flat transaction fees; optional monthly plans reduce per-transaction costs | Base plan: $999 per transaction plus $145 E&O/Risk fee for sales up to $1 million | California-focused training and mentorship; fees increase above $1 million | Predictable zero-split costs, escrow payment processing, and California-market support | California agents seeking flat fees and market-specific guidance |
Matching a Commission Plan to Your Production Numbers
A plan comparison starts with a realistic view of the agent's business, not the advertised split. Commission rates have historically been negotiable rather than legally fixed, and compensation practices changed after the 2024 settlement, including requirements for written buyer-agent agreements before home tours and clearer disclosure of compensation. Agents should confirm current brokerage procedures for documenting fees and discussing compensation with clients, rather than relying on old assumptions about how a transaction is paid.
The National Association of REALTORS® reported median REALTOR® gross income of $58,100 in 2024 and median annual business expenses of $8,010. That difference underscores why a plan's recurring costs matter alongside its commission split. The same NAR source reported a wide experience-related income gap: agents with two years or less had median gross income of $8,100, compared with $78,900 for agents with 16 or more years. NAR's agent income data is useful context, but each agent still needs an individualized estimate.
A simple worksheet can make the comparison concrete:
- Gross commission per deal: Estimate the typical gross commission the agent expects from a closing.
- Expected annual deals: Use a realistic production estimate, and consider how uneven timing could affect cash flow.
- Fixed and per-transaction costs: Record monthly charges, transaction fees, E&O costs, technology fees, and any required support charges.
- Caps and payment timing: Note what counts toward the cap, when the cap resets, and how fees are deducted or collected.
Use those inputs to compare annual take-home under two or three models, including a slower-production scenario and a stronger one. A plan with a low fee per closing can be attractive at higher volume, while recurring charges may weigh more heavily when closings are sparse. For the broader accounting distinction between sales and what remains after deductions, see this explanation of net sales revenue.
Before deciding, verify every current fee, cap, E&O charge, and support commitment directly with the brokerage and local office. Then check that the plan's training, technology, and client-agreement support match the agent's actual needs, not just the recruitment pitch.
Ashby & Graff offers flexible commission plans, including a no-monthly-fee option and plans that exchange a monthly payment for lower per-transaction costs, along with California-focused training and mentor support. Agents comparing zero-split structures can review the current terms and reach out through Ashby and Graff.
