HomeSmart–loanDepot: Lender Choice

HomeSmart and loanDepot announced a marketing-services agreement on September 14, 2026, connecting the brokerage’s network of more than 25,000 agents with the lender’s loan officers and products. The announcement does not establish common ownership, required lender use or improved approval and closing results. HomeSmart announcement

On lender choice, HomeSmart chief business development officer Carol Perry told HousingWire that the partnership is nonexclusive and that HomeSmart also has a national agreement with Guild Mortgage. Her comments appeared in its September 14 report. HousingWire’s original reporting

For brokerage leaders, the practical assessment has two parts: whether the relationship makes introductions easier, and whether a particular loan offer fits the buyer.

Which service and payment terms remain undisclosed?

The companies say they expect a smoother borrowing experience. The release gives no response-time standards or underwriting and closing deadlines. It also omits compensation amounts and formulas, marketing deliverables and borrower discounts. These omissions do not establish what the private contract contains. Published release

Perry’s description of a nonexclusive partnership addresses the broad exclusivity question. It does not disclose detailed contract provisions or borrower-specific conditions. Operators evaluating the relationship should request written terms that identify who delivers each promised service and how performance will be documented.

When assessing this and other brokerage business developments, confirm which arrangements apply to the particular office and market before training agents on them.

Marketing, ownership and referral payments differ

A mortgage marketing services agreement does not, by its label alone, establish an ownership affiliation. Regulation X’s definition of an affiliate relationship concerns control, common control and certain parent–subsidiary relationships. That classification requires evidence about the actual entities and their interests. Section 1024.15(c)

For an affiliated arrangement to qualify for the federal Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act’s exemption, the conditions include written disclosure of the relationship and estimated charges, generally no required use, and limits on benefits received beyond permitted payments and ownership or franchise returns. Specific exceptions apply; disclosure alone does not satisfy every condition. Section 1024.15(b)

Compensation requires a separate review. For federally related mortgage loans, Regulation X prohibits giving or accepting value under an agreement to refer settlement-service business. It permits bona fide compensation for goods, facilities or services actually provided. The value of referrals cannot be included when assessing the reasonable value of those goods or services. Sections 1024.14(b) and (g)

Brokerage counsel should review the payment schedule and evidence of completed marketing work alongside the agreement and applicable disclosure obligations. Neither the announcement nor the reported nonexclusive status is sufficient to conclude compliance or a violation.

Test service promises with comparable files

Treat easier introductions as an access objective. Evaluate financing performance separately: time to first substantive response, time from a complete file to an underwriting decision, and whether funding meets the agreed closing date. Define each starting point before collecting results.

In a hypothetical office review, one lender measures turnaround from first contact while another starts after receiving a complete application file. Comparing their reported times would confuse document collection with underwriting speed. Use the same definition and reporting period before drawing a service conclusion.

Specify which files enter each measure, and include withdrawn and denied applications when reviewing outcomes. For closing performance, record changes to the target date and the reason for delay. These are proposed evaluation methods, not reported findings about loanDepot. They give operators a basis for assessing lenders and mortgage distribution beyond the availability of an introduction.

What agents should explain about lender choice

Present loanDepot as an option, explain the verified business relationship and provide any applicable disclosures. Give clients room to compare providers before asking them to proceed. Avoid promising preferred pricing, approval or a closing date without written support specific to the borrower.

Encourage buyers to request Loan Estimates for the same loan type and features and check whether each rate is locked. Receiving a Loan Estimate does not mean the loan has been approved or that the borrower has committed to that lender. CFPB guidance on requesting estimates

Compare interest rates alongside origination charges, other loan costs, lender credits and cash needed at closing. Check the dates of competing estimates, since rates can change daily. A lower estimate for taxes or insurance does not establish cheaper lender pricing. CFPB guidance on comparing offers

Before making an introduction, an agent should be able to name the receiving loan officer, explain the next step and tell the client how to pursue another option.