Portfolio Overview
RPME full portfolio — Apartments.com & Zillow combined across all investor groups
Key takeaway: Apartments.com CPL nearly doubled from 2024→2025 ($34 → $60) driven by package upgrades. Zillow is generating significantly more leads in 2026 YTD at lower cost — annualized lead volume is up ~4× vs 2024. RMB carries the highest cost per lease across both platforms.
Cost Per Lead (CPL) — Trend by Period
Apartments.com vs Zillow · 2024, 2025, 2026 YTD actual
Cost Per Lease (CPLS)
All three periods
Lead Volume by Period
Guest card inquiries — Apartments.com vs Zillow
Lease Volume by Period
Converted tenants
Detailed Metrics Table
Conversion Funnel
Lead → Showing → Application → Lease rates by platform and period
Lead → Lease Conversion %
Apartments.com vs Zillow across all periods
Showing → Lease Conversion %
Quality of showings that convert
By Investor Group
Select a group to view detailed CPL, CPLS, and volume metrics
Apartment List Analysis
Pay-per-lease model — excluded from CPL/CPLS analysis. Shown for lead & lease volume comparison only.
Note on Apartment List: Apartment List operates on a pay-per-lease model, so we cannot calculate a traditional cost per lead. However, it is the portfolio's 3rd largest lead source by volume. Lead-to-lease conversion has declined from 1.6% in 2024 → 0.9% in 2026 YTD, well below Apartments.com at ~6%.
Lead Volume Comparison — Apt List vs Paid Platforms
Apartment List (combined) vs Apartments.com vs Zillow
Lead → Lease Conversion %
All three sources, all periods
Apartment List Detail
All Sources
RPME full portfolio — every AppFolio-tracked source by lead & lease volume
Website is by far the top source (~26K total leads, 1,800+ leases in 2025 alone). Apartments.com is #2. Apartment List generates volume but converts poorly. Zumper and Rent. show high lead volume but very low lease conversion.
Top 10 Sources — Total Lead Volume (All Periods)
Combined 2024 + 2025 + 2026 YTD
Top 10 Sources — Lead→Lease Conversion % (2025)
Sources with ≥ 50 leads in 2025
All Sources — Complete Table
Property Detail
Weekly funnel tracker data — select a property to view lead & lease trends over time
Filter by Group
Select Property
Apartment List — Membership vs Pay-Per-Lease
2026 YTD (Jan 1 – May 31, 2026) · 7 membership properties ($289/mo) vs 19 PPL properties ($440/lease)
Conclusion: PPL generated nearly 3× the leases at less than half the cost per lease. Membership properties required 111 leads per lease vs 86 for PPL. Converting all 7 membership properties to PPL would save an estimated ~$14,000 annually at current lease velocity.
Membership CPLS
$1,113
7 properties · $289/mo each
2.5× more expensive than PPL
PPL CPLS
$440
19 properties · $440/lease
Fixed cost — only pay on results
Membership Leases
8
890 leads · 0.9% conv · $8,905 spend
3 of 7 props: zero leases
PPL Leases
23
1,971 leads · 1.2% conv · $10,120 spend
Zero risk on zero-lease months
Leads per Lease — Membership
111
Lower lead quality
Leads per Lease — PPL
86
Better lead quality
Annualized Overpayment
~$14K
Membership vs PPL at same velocity
If converted to PPL today
Period Overpayment
$5,385
Jan 1 – May 31, 2026
$8,905 spent vs $3,520 PPL equiv.
Leads vs Leases — Membership vs PPL
Total volume comparison
Cost Breakdown
Total spend vs equivalent PPL cost
Membership Property Breakdown
3 properties produced zero Apartment List leases on membership — Pinnacle Point, PowderHaus, and Village at Three Fountains — accounting for $3,816 in spend with no return from this channel.
| Property | AL Leads | AL Leases | Conv% | Membership Cost | CPLS | PPL Equivalent | Savings if PPL |
|---|
Head-to-Head Summary
| Metric | Membership (7 props) | PPL (19 props) | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| Properties | 7 | 19 | — |
| AL Leads | 890 | 1,971 | PPL +121% |
| AL Leases | 8 | 23 | PPL +188% |
| Conversion Rate | 0.9% | 1.2% | PPL better |
| Total Spend | $8,905 | $10,120 | — |
| Cost Per Lease | $1,113 | $440 | Membership 2.5× costlier |
| Leads per Lease | 111 | 86 | PPL higher quality |
| Zero-lease properties | 3 of 7 (43%) | $0 cost | PPL no-risk |