About this story

Alice Crites, Jinpeng Li, Susie Webb and Kevin Schaul contributed to this report.

The Post identified 52 property management companies named in lawsuits against RealPage in Arizona, Nashville and D.C., and then collected information on multifamily residential properties advertised on each company’s website as of June and July. (Several companies that did not list properties online were excluded from The Post’s analysis.) The Post determined the number of market-rate units at each property using apartments.com data or — for about 1,250 buildings not found in CoStar — through manual research.

Because income-based affordable housing cannot use revenue management software, properties with 100 percent income-based affordable units and property management companies with more than 80 percent of units designated as affordable were excluded from the analysis. The Post identified affordable properties through company websites, apartments.com listings and websites that advertised affordable housing. Properties with a mix of affordable and market-rate housing were treated entirely as market rate.

The Post validated the 20 of the biggest companies’ unit totals — representing 79 percent of the units in the analysis — by comparing them with market-rate unit estimates reported in the National Multifamily Housing Council’s Top 50 Apartment Managers list. Estimates of total U.S. multifamily housing units come from the 2023 one-year estimates of the American Community Survey, which includes vacant and occupied rental units, as well as condominiums, vacation homes and affordable housing.

The Post compared its findings on metropolitan areas with the highest concentration of units managed by companies allegedly using RealPage against the areas listed as the top 10 markets of concern in the Department of Justice’s lawsuit. All 10 metros named in the lawsuit were in the top 11 metros identified by The Post.

In addition to the two affordable housing provider companies, five other companies were excluded from the analysis. One was dismissed from the lawsuit. Post reporters could not find online advertisements for properties managed by Crow Holdings LP, Trammell Crow Residential Co. and CONTI Texas Organization Inc., and First Communities Management Inc. was acquired.

In alphabetical order, the companies included in the final analysis were Allied Orion Group, Air Communities, Avenue 5 Residential, Bell Partners, BH Management Services LLC, Bozzuto Management Co., Brookfield Properties Multifamily, Camden Property Trust, Cortland Management Corp., CH Real Estate Services, CONAM Management Corp., CWS Apartment Homes, Dayrise Residential, ECI Group, Equity Residential Services, Essex Property Trust, FPI Management, Gables Residential Services, Greystar Management Services, Highmark Residential, HSL Properties, Independence Realty Trust, JBG Smith Properties, Kairoi Management, Knightvest Residential, Lantower Luxury Living, Mid-America Apartments, Mission Rock Residential, Morgan Properties Management Co., Paradigm Management, Pinnacle Property Management Services, Prometheus Real Estate Group, Rose Associates, RPM Living, Sares Regis Group, Security Properties Residential, Sherman Associates, Simpson Property Group, the Related Companies, Thrive Communities, UDR Inc., Weidner Property Management, William C. Smith & Co., Willow Bridge Property Co. (formerly Lincoln Property Co.), Windsor Property Management Co. and ZRS Management LLC.

Asked to comment, some of the companies declined while others did not respond. Air Communities, said it no longer uses the software and Pinnacle Property Management Services said it does not decide whether the properties it manages use revenue management services. Cortland said it uses its own internal revenue model to determine pricing.