A Robo Real Estate Agent Sounds Good to Americans, Says a New Survey
Debt.com Editor, PFE
How is this content verified?
Debt.com's content is reviewed for accuracy, clarity, and relevance by qualified financial professionals. Our editorial team and subject-matter experts ensure every article meets rigorous standards before publication.
More on our editorial policyA new survey by LendingTree shows 37% of Americans would “let AI manage a home purchase from start to finish.”
The online loan marketplace polled more than 2,000 Americans on their views of AI in real estate. Looking a decade out, 36% expect AI to bring down the cost of buying or selling a home, and just as many predict AI will handle the bulk of the homebuying process by 2036.
LendingTree’s chief consumer finance analyst, Matt Schulz, says AI’s biggest value for homebuyers is helping them get organized faster.
“It can help them find homes in their budget, understand different types of mortgages and find down payment assistance programs, among other things,” he says. “Those are time-consuming, information-heavy tasks where AI can help people ask better questions and narrow their options.”
But Schulz draws a hard line at letting it go further.
“AI should be a starting point, not the final word,” he says. “A mortgage or real estate professional can help explain trade-offs, local market realities, loan rules and risks that a chatbot or online tool may miss.”
AI and money are mixing more
Last month, Debt.com reported the headline “Millions Trust AI With Their Money, Should They?” Between May and June, two surveys were released showing that, from the U.S. to the U.K., more people are turning to artificial intelligence for financial advice.
Both studies warn that AI can be helpful, but it’s not something to trust blindly.
The first, from MIT Sloan, showed the growing popularity of seeking financial advice from AI. Its findings show solid financial advice – but not equally solid for everyone.
People with lower financial literacy and women received noticeably weaker guidance. Why? The research pointed to two things: how people phrased their questions, and how the AI responded to them.
The other study in the Journal of Financial Planning pointed out the more obvious downside of not using its services: AI hallucinations.
"GenAI-driven responses may sound confident but can still be incomplete, misleading, or incorrect," the Journal of Financial Planning paper says. "Without proper knowledge, poorly constructed prompts or misinterpretation of output could inadvertently lead clients toward financial strategies that are inconsistent with sound planning practice."
AI can be a good start, but a bad finish
The press release of MIT Sloan’s research published the headline “Half of Americans now ask AI for financial advice, but how good is it?
The research lead, Taha Choukhmane, takes the view that you should filter the financial advice to your life. What works for many may not be the best result for you.
“Generative AI has real potential to improve access to financial advice and support decision-making over a lifetime,” Choukhmane said. “At the same time, its impact is not uniform.”
It is similar to the ethical debate Schulz is wrestling with on the results of his company’s real estate survey.
“AI will likely make the mortgage process faster, cheaper and less intimidating over the next decade,” Schulz says. “That’s a big deal because buying a home is overwhelming, even for people who have done it before. However, the human touch will always be important, especially when the stakes are highest, such as when you’re deciding what you can afford or negotiating to get the best terms possible.”
