“We already have lead source reporting.”
On the source recorded against the guest card. This adds the campaign and keyword behind it and ranks everything on billed rent.
For RealPage
Export signed leases and billed rent, and rank every demand source on the money rather than on the leads it delivered.
CloseRev reads a RealPage export of leases — resident or applicant contact detail, billed rent and the lease start — and matches it against the inquiries, calls and tours recorded elsewhere. Across a portfolio it separates the properties where a channel works from the ones where it does not, which a blended cost per lead hides completely. Unmatched leases are reported as Direct / Unknown.
Page updated September 24, 2026.
The gap
Every source in your mix reports its own performance in its own unit. None of them reports rent, which is the only unit the asset is judged in.
What was sold, to whom, and for how much.
The click, the keyword, the call, and what each one cost.
The file
Three things carry the match: who, how much, and when. Anything else is optional and only changes how the report can be sliced.
Phone or email on the guest card or the lease. Export both where available — applicants use a personal address and residents are billed at the unit.
What was actually charged, so concessions are already accounted for.
Consistent across uploads. Lease start measures acquisition; billing dates measure the tenancy.
Assets and unit types differ enough that a portfolio average is not actionable.
Step by step
Written for somebody with RealPage open in the next tab. Report names vary by edition, so each step says what to look for.
One row per lease or billing period, carrying the resident's contact detail, the amount and a date.
The applicant's phone or email is what joins the lease to a click or a call. Unit and lease numbers cannot be matched.
Twelve months minimum so renewals and the seasonal pattern are both inside the file.
Mapping is suggested and confirmed by you; manual mapping is always available.
Paid search, paid social, syndication feeds, locators and broker referrals, in one lead file with the source named on each row. All of them are ranked on rent.
What comes back
Revenue by channel, the count of sales behind each figure, and an honest bucket for the ones nobody could trace. Sample figures, from the worked example on the Apartment Communities page — not from a RealPage account.
| Channel | Share | Sales | Revenue |
|---|---|---|---|
| ILS portals | 204 | $428,400 | |
| Google Ads | 107 | $226,800 | |
| Meta Ads | 49 | $100,800 | |
| Direct / Unknown | 241 | $504,000 |
Unmatched sales stay in Direct / Unknown. They are never spread across the paid channels to make the total look better.
The argument
A multifamily marketing mix routinely carries syndication feeds, paid search, paid social, a locator service and sometimes a broker. Each reports its own performance in its own unit: impressions, inquiries, tours, leads delivered, placements.
None of those units is rent, and rent is the only unit the asset manager cares about. So the mix is optimized on five incomparable metrics and reconciled to none, and the source that shouts loudest about lead volume tends to keep its budget.
Reconciling signed leases against the source lists converts everything into one currency. A locator's placements, a feed's inquiries and a campaign's clicks are all ranked on the rent that followed, with an honest count of the leases that traced to nothing.
A feed knows how many inquiries it sent. It does not know how many signed, because the lease is in RealPage and never travels back. Lead-to-lease ratios by source are therefore either estimated or tracked by hand in a leasing office spreadsheet.
Using the inquiry export as the lead file puts each source's inquiries beside its leases, which is the lead-to-lease ratio. Per property, each import's matched-records export carries the source and the property on every lease. The sources with the best lead-to-lease need not be the ones with the best cost per lead.
Advertised rent is not billed rent once a free month is applied, and concession policy varies by property, by season and by how urgently a unit needs filling. Ranking on lease value overstates every source and does it unevenly.
Renewals cut the other way: a resident who renews twice is worth three leases to the asset and one lease to the marketing report. Matching on the resident attaches the whole tenancy to the source that produced them, which separates sources that bring residents who stay from those that do not.
A portfolio spanning markets and vintages has no useful average. The value of this report is at the property, where the leasing team and the budget actually sit.
A property column mapped as Location cuts the leased revenue by site and shows the share traced to a channel. For the channel ranking inside one property, the matched-records export carries both on every lease.
Most well-run properties already do a version of this by hand. Somebody in the leasing office keeps a sheet of where inquiries came from and which ones signed, and the regional manager asks for it monthly.
That sheet is genuinely useful and it has three problems: it depends on somebody remembering, it records the source as the leasing agent understood it rather than as the campaign, and it stops at the lease rather than following the rent.
Reconciling the exports does the same job without the dependency, at the campaign level, on billed rent — and the leasing team can stop maintaining the sheet.
Fair questions
On the source recorded against the guest card. This adds the campaign and keyword behind it and ranks everything on billed rent.
Then the report will show that on revenue, which is the first time they can be compared with paid search on a common unit.
Nothing changes. This reads exports and requires nothing new from the office.
Signed leases or the rent roll: a resident phone or email, the amount, and a date.
Yes: with the inquiry export as the lead file, the report shows each source's inquiries beside its leases.
Billed rent, because it accounts for concessions.
Yes, credited to the source that produced the resident originally.
Yes — map a property column as Location.
Yes — their placements go into the lead file under each one's name and rank on rent.
A full lease cycle, twelve months at minimum.
No. This works from a CSV export.
Reported as Direct / Unknown and never redistributed.
A leasing export with a contact detail, billed rent and a lease start. Screening data and payment records are not part of it and are not needed. Uploads are encrypted in transit and at rest, isolated per workspace, and a DPA is available before anything is sent.
It covers the same ground at campaign level and on billed rent, without anyone in the office maintaining it.
Only if tours are the lead file: then each source's tours sit beside its leases. A tour is not a sale, so it never belongs in the lease export.
Yes. Both go into the lead file under their own names and are ranked on billed rent, which is the only unit they share.
Yes, with a floor plan column. Studios and three-bedrooms rarely come from the same channels.
Yes, with a lease-type column, so a three-month corporate let is not averaged with an annual resident lease.
They are one person. The lease credits the channel that produced the original inquiry, wherever they eventually signed, which is the honest answer for a portfolio.
Not cleanly. A renewing resident already has an earlier lead in the file, and the earliest lead takes the credit, so a renewal offer added as a source rarely wins any. Map a new-or-renewal column as Product / service to see renewal revenue on its own.
By trade
What the report looks like once the export is in, written for each one.
Other systems
Running more than one system, or comparing? The method is the same and the columns are not.
RealPage and the other product names and logos on this page belong to their owners and are shown to identify the software a file comes from. CloseRev is not affiliated with or endorsed by them, and connects to none of them: it reads a file you export.
From the blog
A multi-location business that reports one national attribution number is hiding its most important finding. The same campaign performs differently in every market, and the aggregate is an average of things that should never have been averaged.
Read the articleFor a local business the Google Business Profile is often the busiest front door it has: the call button, the directions, the website link. It reports taps, not customers, and since July 2024 it no longer keeps even a list of who rang. How to find out what the listing is actually worth.
Read the articleAdd up what your agencies and platforms claim and you have sold the same thing several times over. Nobody is lying. Here is why double counting is structural, how to run the reconciliation meeting, and what to change in the contracts so it stops recurring.
Read the articleStart today
Nothing to install in RealPage, no API key, and no need to have been tracking anything until now. Last year works as well as this month.