Self-employed estate agents gain market share as flat sellers face weaker demand

What happened

Self-employed estate agents accounted for 2.8% of the sales market in 2026 so far, according to property consultancy TwentyEA. Its analysis, reported by Estate Agent Today on 15 October 2026, puts that share almost a fifth above the equivalent period in 2025. For sellers, the findings show a changing mix of agency businesses, rather than evidence that one model delivers a better sale.

TwentyEA reported a different direction for purely online agencies that do not have a substantial self-employed operation. Their market share stood at 3.6% in the year to date, down 5.4% annually. The figures therefore distinguish between online-only businesses and agencies built around self-employed agents; they do not treat every business without a high-street branch as the same model.

The consultancy recorded the strongest growth for self-employed agents in the £1m-plus price bracket, where their market share rose by 22.3%. That figure measures growth in their share, not the proportion of all £1m-plus homes they handled. The published account does not establish whether those agents secured higher prices, sold homes faster or charged less than competitors.

Wales recorded the largest regional increase, with self-employed agents gaining 0.9 percentage points to account for 4.0% of activity. TwentyEA said their share increased in every region covered except Scotland, where it declined by 0.3 percentage points. The consultancy reported no presence for the model in Northern Ireland.

TwentyEA also highlighted a weaker balance between demand and supply for flats than for houses. Its demand-to-supply ratio for flats was 55.0% in the third quarter of 2026, compared with 72.2% for houses. This is a separate finding about property types, not a comparison of how successfully different agency models sell flats.

The background

Market share describes how much of a market a business or group handles; it is not a customer satisfaction score. The published account does not specify whether TwentyEA calculated agency shares from new instructions, agreed sales or another measure. It also does not give the precise cut-off date for the year-to-date figures, so they should not be read as full-year results.

The demand-to-supply figures provide a two-year comparison for flats and houses. In the third quarter of 2024, TwentyEA put the ratio at 64.3% for flats and 75.3% for houses. Both readings were lower by the third quarter of 2026, but the decline was greater for flats, widening the difference between the two property types.

TwentyEA separately estimated that a flat listed nationally in the third quarter of 2026 had a 41.0% likelihood of selling. That is a different measure from its 55.0% demand-to-supply ratio and should not be used interchangeably. The published account does not explain the selling-probability calculation or specify the period over which a sale would need to happen.

The national figures also conceal substantial differences between locations. Scotland was the only area in Great Britain where TwentyEA assessed flats as easier to sell than houses, with selling likelihoods of 84.4% and 80.4% respectively. Inner London and Outer London recorded the lowest figures for flats, at 27.2% and 30.7%.

These distinctions matter when using broader market coverage to set an asking price. Reporting on UK house prices and buyers’ borrowing costs provides wider context, but a national price indicator does not describe demand for every property type. For an individual valuation, nearby homes of a similar size, condition and tenure offer a more directly relevant comparison.

Read moreAsking price reductions affect 38.5% of concluded listings in 2026

What people are saying

TwentyEA’s analysis presents self-employed agencies as gaining ground while the specified online-only group loses share. No individual agent, seller or buyer is quoted in the published account. The evidence therefore concerns the consultancy’s assessment of market activity, rather than first-hand accounts of service quality or the experience of changing agents.

The distinction between business models is central to that assessment. An agency can use online marketing while also operating through self-employed agents, so the two descriptions are not necessarily opposites. TwentyEA’s declining-share category specifically excludes online businesses with a substantial self-employed model; applying its findings to every digitally focused agency would go beyond the evidence.

For flats, TwentyEA points to weaker demand relative to available stock and a widening gap with houses. The reported figures do not establish why that gap has developed. Although lease terms, service charges and building condition can matter when buying a flat, this analysis does not measure their contribution to the national results.

For homeowners choosing an agent, the practical question is how the proposed service matches the property being sold. Useful checks include who will conduct viewings, provide updates and follow an agreed sale through the legal process. Those responsibilities should be clear before signing, regardless of whether the agent works independently, through a network or from a branch.

An agent’s valuation also needs a supporting explanation rather than reliance on market-share growth. Sellers can ask for evidence from comparable properties and a plan for responding if enquiries remain low. The separate Propertymark survey on homes selling below asking price is relevant to negotiations, but TwentyEA’s figures do not prescribe a particular discount.

What happens next

Further comparable data would be needed to establish whether the year-to-date shift continues through the rest of 2026. The published account gives no timetable for TwentyEA’s next update and no forecast for either agency group. A rising share also does not, by itself, establish that an agency category handled more properties in absolute terms.

Sellers comparing agencies should look at the written fee and service terms alongside evidence of local sales. Checks include when payment becomes due, what happens if the property does not sell and whether there is a minimum contract period. An agency’s business model alone does not answer those questions; the agreement sets out the obligations.

For flat owners, the regional results support checking evidence at a more local level before deciding a marketing strategy. TwentyEA’s London and Scotland figures differ too widely for the national estimate to describe both markets well. Its reported percentages are market-level assessments, not a calculation of the likelihood that a particular flat will sell.

Owners of more expensive homes should likewise separate agents’ growing market share from the ease of finding a buyer. TwentyEA’s 22.3% increase in the £1m-plus bracket does not measure sale speed or the gap between asking and agreed prices. Separate coverage of sale rates and asking-price gaps for £2m-plus homes addresses those different questions.

Once an offer is accepted, the transaction still needs to progress through the relevant legal checks and paperwork. Sellers can ask at the outset how the agent will communicate with the parties during that stage. Coverage of HM Land Registry’s push to reduce avoidable conveyancing queries explains a separate administrative issue; TwentyEA’s agency-share figures do not measure it.

Why this matters

For homeowners preparing to sell, TwentyEA’s findings offer context for comparing agencies, not a ranking of their service. The growth of self-employed agents does not establish better prices or lower fees, while the flat figures show why national averages need local checks. Sellers should compare evidence from similar homes and read contract terms carefully. Buyers should also distinguish broad demand measures from the circumstances of a particular property: these figures do not establish what discount a seller will accept.