Agent websites for brokerages

Agent websites for brokerages come in exactly two shapes: one brokerage-branded site where agents work as seats in a shared CRM, or a separate site for each agent under their own name and domain. Vendors blur the two because they would rather sell you whichever one they have. The shapes solve different problems, and picking wrong is expensive to unwind, so start with the difference.

Shape one: a single brokerage site with seats

One public website carries the brokerage brand, the roster, and the listings search. Agents do not get their own sites; they get seats — leads route to them, they work their pipeline in the shared CRM, and the brokerage owns the whole surface. This is the right shape when the brokerage brand is the asset you are building, when you want every lead inside one accountable system, and when most of the roster would never maintain a personal site anyway. On BrokerFold this is the Team or Brokerage plan: five or twelve seats included, $70 monthly per seat beyond that, one site, one CRM, one bill. The mechanics of who gets which lead are covered in brokerage lead routing.

Shape two: a site per agent

Each agent runs their own website — their name, their domain, their board data agreements, their leads. The brokerage’s role shifts from operator to enabler: standardize on a platform, get the broker of record signing approvals fast, and keep advertising rules in view. This is the right shape for producing agents who already market themselves, and for brokerages whose value proposition to recruits is independence rather than infrastructure. A solo BrokerFold site starts at $89 CAD monthly, each agent’s template and brand are their own, and every site runs the identical listings, sold-data and CRM stack — the brokerage never fields a “my website is different” complaint.

The paperwork is per member either way

One reality check that surprises brokerages: board data agreements are signed at the member level. An agent-named site displaying MLS® listings needs that agent’s IDX and VOW agreements, countersigned by the broker of record, regardless of who pays the platform bill. A brokerage-branded site runs on the brokerage’s own agreements instead. Neither path is hard — the signing is an online flow and verification typically takes a business day or two — but a ten-agent rollout means ten approval signatures, so brief your broker of record before the requests start arriving, not after they pile up.

Deciding: three questions, not a feature grid

First, whose name are you building equity in? If leads should say “I found you on the brokerage site,” pick shape one. Second, who answers a lead at 9 p.m.? If the honest answer is “whoever claims it,” you need shared routing, which again points to shape one. Third, what do your best recruits ask for? If they arrive with a personal brand and expect to keep it, forcing them into a seat model costs you the recruit — the dynamics are laid out in websites as a recruiting tool. Plenty of brokerages land on both at once: a brokerage site with seats for the core roster, individual sites for the top producers.

What we deliberately did not build

There is no reseller tier where a brokerage marks up hosting and resells sites under its own platform brand. Agents and brokerages buy from us directly at published prices, the public sites carry your branding rather than ours, and the brokerage’s leverage is volume and standardization, not margin on infrastructure. If what you actually want is your brand on the platform itself, read white label agent websites before you shop for one — the term hides two very different asks.