Zillow has removed climate-risk scores from over one million home listings after real estate agents and the California Regional Multiple Listing Service (CRMLS) complained the information was driving down sales. What began in September 2024 as a feature meant to help buyers assess flood, wildfire, heat, wind, and air-quality risks — using data from climate-analytics firm First Street — has now been replaced with a simple link to First Street’s website. In their defense, First Street argued that hiding the scores doesn’t reduce actual climate risks, only shifts the burden of awareness onto buyers. Meanwhile, Zillow contends the change reflects compliance with varying MLS data requirements and maintains that climate-risk information remains accessible.
Sources: The Guardian, The Verge
Key Takeaways
– Removing climate-risk scores likely improves short-term house-sale prospects for agents, but reduces transparency for buyers evaluating long-term hazards.
– The decision underscores tension between letting consumers see environmental risks and protecting real-estate market values.
– While Zillow dropped the scores, risk data from First Street remains available — shifting rather than erasing the information, but making it less visible and possibly less used.
In-Depth
Last fall, Zillow attempted something ambitious: it began displaying climate-risk scores on its home-listing pages, using data from the climate analytics firm First Street. The idea was simple — earthquakes are hard to predict, but floods, wildfires, heat stress and deteriorating air quality are increasingly relevant risks thanks to climate change. By showing a property’s “climate score,” Zillow aimed to give prospective homebuyers a clearer view of long-term liabilities tied to the property. Over 80 percent of buyers reportedly considered climate risks important when deciding where to live.
But the results didn’t align with expectations. Real estate agents started pushing back hard. Agents and the CRMLS argued that the climate scores — which relied on probabilistic modeling of future hazards — often underrated or overstated risk in ways that didn’t reflect local historical experience. In particular, they pointed out cases where neighborhoods with no prior flooding or fire history got high-risk flags. Many believed the scores drove down buyer interest and stalled deals. Homeowners with high-risk flags complained their properties became harder to sell.
Faced with mounting complaints, Zillow quietly reversed field: over one million listings lost their climate-risk scores. Instead, buyers now only see a link to First Street’s website if they want to dig into risk details. According to Zillow, the change was necessary “to comply with varying MLS requirements and maintain a consistent experience for consumers.”
First Street pushed back — and not softly. A spokesperson warned that removing visible risk data doesn’t make the dangers go away; it merely pushes the risk from a buyer’s decision point to after the home is purchased. In other words, blindsiding homeowners with climate-induced costs later — whether higher insurance premiums, mitigation, or severe damage — makes the whole system more fragile.
This move underscores a larger tension in today’s real estate market and climate discourse: the conflict between market liquidity and long-term risk transparency. On one side, agents fear that climate-risk tags could collapse property values or scuttle deals in a tight housing market. On the other, climate analysts and risk-modelers view such tags as essential for protecting future homeowners and aligning real estate decisions with long-term realities. Zillow’s rollback doesn’t eliminate climate risk — just the visibility of it. And with risk details tucked behind a link, many buyers may never bother to check.
Ultimately, this episode illustrates the growing pains of incorporating climate science into mainstream real estate. Risk models — inherently probabilistic — often clash with conventional expectations of certainty and caution in property markets. Until there’s a broadly accepted, standard way to evaluate and communicate long-term climate risk, expect more such pushbacks.